keep Men from sin Now doth it not look like Malice for any to assert so gross an untruth as to say so 't is affirmed by those he opposes meaning D. Crisp That they are not under impressions of rewards or punishments as motives to Duty or preservatives against sin W. Can any thing be a clearer Proof of falsehood if not malice than this And it may be at least 100 such Expressions as this to desist from sin by motives of Rewards and sometimes of Punishment But report and we will report and I must own 't is marvellous to me that so many worthy Divines should take upon trust Mr. Williams Assertions out of Dr. Crisp and not compare them with the Book especially such a liberal charge as his that Believers are not under impressions as aforementioned and then in his next Paragraph to say to the best of my knowledge I have in nothing misrepresented Dr. Crisps Opinions Whereas to the best of my Knowledge he hath not only forged Opinions on him as this last but hath asserted plain falsities against him for which I will go but to his first charge in his Book in Fol. 1. where he saith as the Error of Dr. Crisp that Dr. Crisp saith The Elect are at no time of their lives under the Wrath of God nor are they subject to condemnation if they should dye before they believe whereas there is not one word in the Quotation of Doctor C. that he saith they are not subject to Condemnation if the die before they believe So that that is forged by Mr. Williams as the first grand Error and all the rest will seem like it Now if he be false in his first Charge compared with his Quotation any unbyast person will believe he is much more so in the following Charges but thus it pleases God to suffer prejudice to blind him that any inquirer into his Book may Judge of his Veracity by the first dash of his Pen and so seeing that unsincere may reject the whole as not worth looking into but of this more in its place Next let us see how he dresses up a Scheam for Doctor Crisp wherein if he be not very wary he must expect to be tript for 't will be found dangerous for Mr. Williams to represent him but in his own words this then I take to be his Charge in general for he saith Dr. Crisp his Scheme is this but I say 't is Mr. Ws. for him That by Gods meer Electing Decree all saving blessings are by Divine Obligation made ours and nothing more is needful to our title to these Blessings that on the Cross all the sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ and ceased ever after to be theirs that at the first moment of Conception a Title to all those decreed Blessings is personally applyed to the Elect and they invested actually therein hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of these Blessings nor ought they to intend the least good to themselves in what they do sin can do them no harm because it is none of theirs nor can God afflict them for any sin and all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the Dethroning of Christ enervating his Laws and pleadings obstructing the great Designs of Redemption opposing the very scope of the Gospel and the Ministry of Christ and his Prophets and Apostles Here 's the Charge gratis Dictum and the Consequences of it It can't be immagined the Rancour that Prejudice will make the Preaching up of Christ and Free-Grace through him is the Dethroning Christ what could Malice say worse Is crying up the King for our Deliverer from Popery and Tyranny a dethroning him Just so is crying up our Salvation only by Christ without a concurrence of our Works a dethroning him in considering this Scheme so far I take it for granted that Mr. Williams looks on it in the whole and every part of it to be false Doctrine by the contrary to which we may draw a Scheme of Mr. Williams Thus that by Gods Decree no Blessing belongs to us and that on the Cross all the sins of the Elect were not transferred to Christ that at Conception a Title to Blessings is not applyed But as it is not fair to urge upon him any thing that he doth not plainly assert so I wave fixing this on him and only touch on what may be true and what not in this Scheme First 'T is not true that Doctor Crisp saith that by Gods meer Electing Decree all saving Blessings are ours by Divine Obligation and a bare denyal is sufficient where he brings no Proof and I ground it upon that word meer for Dr. Crisp no where severs the Election of the Father from the Redemption of the Son either in Covenant or actual Performance For God blesseth with all Spiritual Blessings in Heavenly places according as he hath chosen us in him and this is more proof for what Mr. Williams advances as an Error than he hath brought or can bring to make it an Error to say by God's Decree all Blessings are ours so that this is a frivolous and false Charge 't is frivolous because the sum of the Charge is a Truth and 't is false because Dr. Crisp never asserted 't is by meer Election but I fear Mr. Williams to avoid running too high in the glorifying God for absolute Electing all his fore-Ordained ones in Christ to Salvation and all that occurs to it He I fear leaves Election as a thing to depend much on our own wills whether it shall take place or no not but that our Wills must be brought over by Gods making us a willing People but still the Election obtains and God Elected to the means as well as the end and will accomplish both The next Charge is that Doctor Crisp in the Scheme made for him holds that Nothing more is needful to our Title to these Blessings but God's meer Electing Decree If he means nothing needful as to Evidence of the Title then he wrongs the Dr. who in many places makes Faith the grand Evidence under the Holy Spirit and a Holy Conversation necessary but if he means by nothing more needful to our Title but Gods Decree taking in the redemption by Christ which Dr. Crisp never severs then I hope Mr. Williams is of the same mind or he sets up something with Christ and I would fain know why an Estate in Heaven setled in the Counsel of peace from all Eternity between the Father Son and Spirit on the Children that should be begotten in time by God and be born of God John 1.13 should not be a sufficient Title of an indeseizable Inheritance to all the Elect as an Estate in Land setled upon Marriage should be sufficient for the Heir 't is setled upon without that Heirs doing any thing in order to make it sure more than when he comes to Age to enter upon it The next is That on the
regenerate and Justified and indued with true Faith and regarding the Order of Nature it follows Faith and Justification O these are strong battering Rams against setting up mans Righteousness and in fol. 468. he gives account whence this new Doctrine of repentance having a hand in our Salvation comes viz. from Rome and saith thus The Church of Rome hath Corrupted the Antient Doctrine of Repentance saying That a Sinner hath in him a Natural disposition which being stir'd up by God's preventing Grace he may and can work together with Gods Spirit in his own Repentance But indeed all our Repentance is to be ascribed to Gods grace wholly Eph. 2.4 The Soul of man is not weak but stark dead in sin and therefore it can no more prepare it self to repentance than the body being dead in the Grave can dispose it self to the last Resurrection O these are weighty words and O that they might prevail in the hand of the Spirit of God to weaken mans apprehensions of something practicable in and by himself in order to bring about his Salvation that so we might all put our Mouths in the dust and give glory to God for of him and through him especially in the matter of our Salvation and to him be all things to whom be glory in the Churches for ever thus much for Mr. W. Sanction of the Gospel giving pardon on our Conformity to the Rule of the Promise In the next place Mr. W. asserts a profound benefit by Gospel grace and yet it carries Poyson in it I fear Hence by Gospel grace there is a great difference between imperfect Faith and utter Vnbelief The Poyson in the head of this Snake I fear is that this imperfect Faith is intended to be the upshot of Gospel Grace A little to descant upon this I would offer That if so mean a Lover of the Lord Jesus as I am should have been telling the World the benefit of Gospel Grace I should have flown a little higher in celebrating the Love of God therein than to say by it imperfect Faith differs greatly from utter Vnbelief which without Gospel Grace any Child of four Years Old will grant That can tell there is a great difference between a little mess of Milk and none at all I should have said By Gospel Grace there is a great difference between our Lord Jesus freely given us and with him all things even himself to be our Wisdom Righteousness c. And being slaves of Satan sold under sin without this gospel grace I should have invited the World to rejoyce in this Benefit by Gospel Grace That Christ was made sin for us that he might be made righteousness to us or become the Lord our Righteousness And that by Gospel Grace God comâ—s to justify the Ungodly to save Sinners of whom the Apostle saith He was chief and a Pattern of them who should afterward believe to everlasting life this is right gospel grace worthy of the Father Son and Spirit to give Purchase and Communicate I should scarce have flamm'd the World off with such a dead Carcass of Divinity as to say If you look for the glorious Priviledge and Benefit of Gospel Grace which the Father Son and Spirit have been contriving and rejoycing in from all Eternity and which the Eternal Blessed Son of God took Man's Nature for and for which he was under the Curse of God and died for which all the Angels and Saints of God for ever adore him It was that this should be published That there is by the Gospel Grace a great difference between imperfect Faith and utter Unbelief or which is much at one between an Essentiality and a Nullity between something and nothing there is so great difference as is between Heaven and Hell and this difference is eternal and so would have been without any thing of the Gospel I suppose Mr. W. means though he is unhappy in not expressing it that by Gospel Grace imperfect Faith is accepted for perfect Obedience that is to say if it be joyned with sincere Holiness true Repentance and Perseverance c. but this is still wide from the mark of Gospel Grace for the Apostle saith It brings Salvation and teaches Godliness But Mr. W. will make the World amends it may be hoped in the next Benefit by Gospel Grace which take as follows By gospel grace there is a great difference between sincere Holiness and formal Profaneness or Wickedness one would wonder how gospel grace comes to be hookt into this Difference which all the World would own to be infinitely different without any grace of God in the Gospel Did our Lord Jesus shed his Blood for this Notion to be asserted which was as true without any grace of the gospel as with it but it may be he means that by gospel grace there is a Purchase made that sincere Holiness shall stand instead of perfect Holiness which Wickedness could not do And this he must mean or nothing and if he means this he perfectly overthrows the gospel and if he do not mean it he abuses the World with an Amusement The next is True Love to God and prevailing Enmity There is by Gospel Grace he saith great difference between these But this is another great mistake which I am confident he will he ashamed to own What hath the gospel to do to make this great difference By the law is the Knowledge of sin and the gospel shews grace but to say the gospel makes this difference is to roh God of the Holiness of his righteous Law But supposing this Nonsense to be current Divinity with some that by gospel Grace there is great difference between God and the Devil or Love to God and prevailing Enmity What is this to the point Mr. Williams is labouring to make good that there is to be a Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the person to be pardoned for proof of which he saith There is great difference between Love of God and prevailing Enmity Would he have his meaning to be that love of God is conforming to the Rule of the Promise therefore an ingredient to Pardon which Enmity is not I answer Love of God is as much conforming to the Rule of the Law as of Gospel grace and so his Argument faces had he said the Law commands us to love God and the Gospel promiseth to write this Law in our hearts though not as an ingredient to our Pardon there might be some Edification by it but to assert there is a difference between these two which was ever so is of no more force for his Argument than to say Black and White differ or I and Doctor C. dâ—ffer His next is like the three former Differences viz. by Gospel grace there is a great difference between in perfect spiritual Duties and Rebellious Negleâ—ts Now he hath spun a fine Thread here 's the end of his Gospel grace it hath made this difference and would not this difference have been if
the answering the Gospel Rule and how we make this Righteousness of Christ the cause for which we are saved that is I do affirm or positively declare without any suspicion of being accounted a self Justiciary that the righteousness of God which the Apostle accounted all his Righteousness but dung for and which he saith is the righteousness through the Faith of Christ and the righteousness of God by Faith This I assume for the honour of Mans Righteousness to concur with Christs imputed Righteousness that this Expression of the Apostle intends yea it principally intends the Gospel Holiness of a person Justified by Christs righteousness that is to say though the Apostle expresly saith 't is not my own Righteousness yet I will make the Apostle mean 't is my own Holiness tho' the Apostle calls it the righteousness through the Faith of Christ I affirm 't is the Holiness of the person justified and though I do not exclude Christs Righteousness in Words yet I affirm 't is Gospel Holiness that the Apostle intends If this be not a plain contradicting the Apostle and making the Apostle contradict himself then nothing can do so The Apostle saith T' is not mine own Righteousness 't is saith Mr. Williams my Gospel Holiness this is to say and unsay it is not and yet it is I pray what great difference between my Righteousness and my Gospel Holiness the Apostle would not for a World be sound in his Righteousness of any sort but in Christ and yet Mr. Williams saith the Apostle would be found in his Gospel Holiness I believe Mr. W. consulted few Protestant Divines in that affirmation for here he goes diametrically opposite to the current stream of them of which hereafter and against the very direct words of the Apostle in which he laboured to bring forth his meaning the Holy Spirit by the Apostle uses much pains and skill to free the truth from Mr. W. his interpretation of a sinners or Saints being found in his own righteousness or holiness by varying the expressions thereby explaining the truth of our righteousness not having any thing to do in our Justification or standing at Gods bar either in our Consciences or at the great day but Mr. Williams with a bold stroke of his Pen flatly opposes it the Apostle saith that the righteousness he would be found in is that which is through the Faith of Christ How can this be Mr. Williams his Gospel Holiness By Faith Noah being warned c. became Heir of the righteousness which is by Faith which shews us that Noah had in those dealings of God with him the very same righteousness for the Object of his Faith which our Gospel now proposeth to us and which our Faith lays hold upon Which the same Apostle stiles the Righteousness of God and the Righteousness of Christ which is by Faith Phil. 3.9 Which Righteousness for Justification he more setly treateth of in Rom. 3.21 But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ He witnessed of that Righteousness which is by Faith as it hath Christ for its Object this all sound Protestants do profess Goodwin of Elect. fol. 40. The Faith of Jesus is Faith in the righteousness of Christ who is the Lord our Righteousness and the Apostle lest he should not be fully understood he explains what this through the Faith of Christ is he saith plainly 't is the righteousness of God and lest we should mistake here and turn this righteousness of God this righteousness through the Faith of Christ which is the righteousness of God to our Gospel Holiness with the Arminians or with Grotius and Mr Williams he explains it farther and saith 't is the righteousness of God by Faith as much as to say 't is that Righteousness which Christ as God wrought out for us who is made of God to us righteousness and which is made ours by Faith But though these 4 Bars be laid in the way 1. Not my own righteousness 2. But that through the Faith of Christ 3. Plainly not Gospel Holiness but the righteousness of God 4. And this Righteousness of God ours by Faith yet this Gentleman takes a Run and leaps over them all with a confidence most bold dashes out all the Apostles sense and saith I affirm it principally intends Gospel Holiness than which nothing can be a more shameless imposing on the plain Word of God I conceive and a corrupting of it which he doth by his confident affirmation that the righteousness of God ours by Faith is a persons own Gospel Holiness he may as well affirm that being justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus is being justified by our Gospel Holiness The Gospel of Salvation by Jesus would stand on ticklish terms and soon be lost if a few more such bold Attempts as this against the righteousness of God ours by Faith be allowed but the Gates of Hell shall never be able to overthrow this Truth that the righteousness of God there is Christs righteousness believed on to Justification and not our Gospel Holiness We must not lose such a glorious Star out of the Firmament of the Scriptures nay I may say 't is the Sun for take this Mr. Williams and take all the Bible away for I would as soon hope to be Justifyed by the Turkish Alkoran as by my Gospel Holiness nay it must not come in for a share or have any concurrence as to causality for a little Leven in this case will leven the whole Lump O the Cloud of Witnesses that have from this Text of Phil. 3.9 made many comfortable Conclusions that this righteousness of God by Faith is the imputed righteousness of Christ received by Faith O the famous Dr. Tuckny how would he have shamed that Man that should have enervated this Text on which he preacht many Sermons lately Printed contrary to Mr. Williams Exposition O the rich streams of Gospel Grace that flowed from solid Dr. Jacomb at Tunbridge in June 1686. In six Sermons on this Text which I took from his Lips all contrary to this puddle of Gospel Holiness Hundreds of these I pass and shall cite a few Passages out of older times as the Faith of our Protestant Forefathers not to be ravisht from us by Mr. Williams tho' he had a hundred Vouchers for his serving the Church First our Composers of the Homilies in King Edward the Sixth's time which is the Doctrine of the Church of England Confirmed by many Acts of Parliament they quote Bazil a Greek Father in fol. 16. of the Homily of Salvation on this very Text Phil. 3.9 This is saith Bazil a perfect rejoycing in God when a Man advanceth not himself for his own righteousness but acknowledgeth himself to lack true Justice and Righteousness and to be Justified by the only Faith in Christ and Paul doth glory in the contempt of his own righteousness and he
and Son and Spirit delighted in during all eternity past and will in all Eternity to come is this vanisht into nothing in present being I may say God's Decree is so far from putting nothing into present Being that it puts all things into past present and future being for if God be one Eternal act and all things past present and to come are ever in being in his Eye or knowledge so he puts every thing into present being with himself to be manifest in their proper Seasons according to his eternal purpose which he purposed in himself Ephes 1.11 And accordingly the Election of Sons to glory is in present being when there are such Sons in being This putting nothing into being by God's Election is the way these Men take to evaporate God's Election into Man's Election 't is not God doth absolutely Elect any Man to salvation except the man Christ I hope they grant that but man Elects himself to Salvation and then Election hath put somewhat into present being But though Mr. Williams say of Election it puts nothing into present being I hope all Orthodox Protestants will say that Election hath put the Elect into an happy state for Election hath obtained though the rest are blinded and nothing can be laid to the charge of God's Elect and they are loved with an everlasting love and is God's love nothing in present being So it bars not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between Benefits and Duties No but it bars man from framing a Model for God and from making God's Righteousness to be Mans Gospel Holiness and it baâ—s man from putting in any leven into the lump of being Justifyed freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus it bars man from ploughing with an Ox an Ass and from wearing a Linsey Wolsey Garment and from putting new Wine into old Bottles and from thinking a Branch can bring sorth any good Grapes except it be first in the Vine the Lord Jesus there being no gathering Grapes of Thorns or Figs of Thistles or any good work from any Soul till he is in Christ and though there is a blessed Connexion of Benefits and Duties yet no good Duty is done till the Benefit of being united to Christ be first bestowed by God God fixes a Connexion 't is true he makes the Tree good first and then the Fruit good and this was eternally in the Decree but man must not fix the connexion by making Duties Procurers of Benefits or making Gospel threats and promises to have in their own Nature a tendency to Convert Souls without the Operation of the Holy Spirit Mr. Williams saith If the Doctor had animadverted that Christs sufferings were the foundation of our Pardon but not formally our Pardon This intimates that the Dr. saith Christs sufferings were formally our Pardon I can shew how far our great Reformers went beyond Mr. Williams in asserting the vertue of the sufferings of Christ in the Pardon of sin which if Mr. Williams had consulted he would not have reflected as he doth on the Dr. they say in the Doctrine of the Church of England that which is tantamount to a formal pardon in Christs Sufferings they do not amuse the World with Mr. Williams his Rectoral distribution that he allows to God in pardoning sinners upon account of their being found in their Gospel Holiness joyning Faith and Holiness together as they entitle to Gospel Benefits which Benefits he saith are not from the conformity of Faith and Holiness c. to the Precept but from their Conformity to the rule of the Promise and so plunging poor Souls in his deeps and amazing them with his rules and Connexions But these Homilists give a certain sound of the Gospel and say upon the Sermon of the Passion of Good Fryday fol. 177 Such favour did he purchase by his Death of his heavenly Father for us that for the merit thereof we are now fully in Gods grace again and clearly discharged from our sin These are plain wholsome intelligible Gospel Truths such as suit with the Doctors Testimony they are not Bombasted with If we continue to repent and believe to our Death then our Evangelical Righteousness shall justifie us at the great day from Satans Charge of unbelief But they speak home against all Arminianism and say that by the merit of his death we are in Gods grace again nay we are now in God's grace and that fully not we shall be and we are discharged from sin nay we are clearly discharged from sin and in the next words they put it home and say to the confounding all the mincers of the vertue of the death of Christ as to the pardon of sin thus No tongue surely is able to express the worthiness of this so precious a death For in this standeth the continual pardon of our daily Offences Had such a passage as this been found in the Notes taken from Doctor Crisp that there is a continual pardon standing firm in the death of Christ of our present daily Offences this would be accounted dethroning Christ by giving more honour to him than some distinguishers can allow or if Reverend Mr. Cole had said that in Christs death stands the Pardon of our daily offences nay there stands a continual Pardon and this mentioned without naming Faith and Repentance but be our Offences what they may be there stands a continual pardon if we be Christians indeed say these holy Reformers this had been Dangerous Doctrine as an eminent Divine said of as harmless expressions of his as these in Pinners Hall I wish those worthy Gentlemen who are so exceptious against the freeness of God's Grace in and through Christ and must eke it out by our Gospel Holiness would seriously consider in the simplicity of the Gospel Spirit of these Homilists such expressions as these of theirs before they pass their hard Censures of crying dethroning Christ enervating his Laws because some who may be clearer than themselves Preach we are justified freely by his Grace through the redemption that is in Jesus without any thing of Mans works cooperating therein or thereto nothing can be plainer than these Reformers newly come out of the School Terms of Popish justification for renouncing every thing in man to have any concurrence into our Pardon But now the simplicity of the Gospel must be lost by some Mens Distinction of our Pardon by Christs death his sufferings were not our formal Pardon but the foundation of it I believe none of his Publishers of Free-Grace too freely ever said Christs sufferings were the formal Pardon of a sinner it being perfect Nonsense but I hope they may say his sufferings were a real Expiation of the sins of all the Elect without offending most of the Subscribers to Mr. Williams his Book else how could the Apostle say by one offering he for ever perfected those that are sanctified and he loved us and washed us from our sins in his blood having made
their Comforts by telling them I will be at peace if you be reconciled to me but revives their hearts by telling them that the peace is already wrought in God and for sinners by Christ at his death for that he made peace by the Blood of his Cross and by him reconciled all to himself Col. 1.20 Christ did not stay till we were reconciled to him as Mr. W. seems to intimate when he calls men to be reconciled to God upon which he knows God will be at peace with them This I take to be setting the Cart before the Horse to invite Men to be reconciled thereby to get God to be at peace whereas the sweet heavenly strain of the gospel is Come for all things are ready come to Jesus who is already made of God to you that come Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption who is the Author and finisher of your Faith O Jesus thus draw and we will run after thee and thus he hath drawn thousands by the Prophets and Apostles preaching and his faithful Servants after him to come to God and to holy Obedience in Love whereas the legal drawing of walking holily and then God will be at peace keeps poor Souls in perpetual doubts and works the Soul but to a Spirit of Bondage Next comes the Top-stone of this New system of gospel Truth which looks as if it were hewed and squared at Rome with only a little Varnish at Amsterdam viz. These things Gods promising life by forgiveness and yee insisting on some Degree of Obedience will help thy Conceptions still remembring that the merit of Christ are the cause of this gospel Ordination Can any spiritual inlightned mind read this and not blush for Mr. W. and think he is hard put to it to support his cause of laying our salvation on our gospel holiness joyned with Christs righteousness when he flies to such an Assertion as the Papists have been forced to forsake being beaten out of that Trench by our great Divines That Christ merited that we should merit this they asserted but found it would not hold water therefore Bellarmin flies to his Tutissimum and saith in his Book de Justif l. 5. ch 7. pro. 3. Propter incertitudinem propriae Justitiae periculum inanis gloriae Tutissimum est totam fiduciam in sola Dei misericordia benignitate reponere Because of the uncertainty of our own righteousness and the danger of vain glory it is safest to put all our trust in the alone mercy and bounty of God Here the Jesuit flies from the gospel Ordination that Christ merited that God should have regard to our gospel holiness and our conformity to gospel Rule for obtaining gospel promise this chimed well with him in his long arguments for Justification by works but upon his review of his strong reasons he flies from it and betakes himself to Gods meer mercy and bounty which must be in Christ and so I hope the great opposer of Dr. Crisp will do But in regard this is so broad and wide a gap to let in the whole body of self Justiciaries with their good works to come in for sharing with Christ in salvation I must make some opposition to it both from Scripture and sound Protestants The merits of Christ saith Mr. W. are the cause of this Ordination that is that our answering the gospel rule obtains us interest in the gospel Promise or which is all one Do and live Christ merited that if we do we shall live the only difference is the first doing and live was perfect Obedience to the Law and this doing and live of Mr. VV. is sincere obedience to the gospel in all its commands counsels c. which every true Christian trembles to think on Is this the upshot of Christs Death to merit that our Gospel Obedience should be the ground of our obtaining Benefit by Christ then I say again it must come to this that Christ merited that we should merit for there can be no benefit to a Sinner but by merit Christ did not absolutely merit the Benefit for us say they but merited that we doing so and so should obtain the Benefit then our doing so and so must merit it for it is injustice of God to himself and his Righteous broken Law to give a Sinner that deserves Hell any good unless that good be merited and this is left to the Sinner to obtain by Gospel Obedience which therefore must of necessity be from merit So that here it must rest or we make God unjust to himself and so say Christ purchas'd this that we should do so is Nonsense Mr. Williams can hardly assoyle himself from this Charge till he retract this Assertion That the merits of Christ are the cause of that Gospel Ordination he had laid down As for the Scriptures that oppose this Divinity those already mentioned are abundantly more than sufficient to throw down the House built on this Sandy Foundation as that God so loved the World that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life Here is nothing required but believing to everlasting life So the Apostle Acts 16. Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved Here 's complying with no other Gospel Rule for Salvation but believing in the Lord Jesus To which I may add the whole Stream of the New Testament to come and take the Water of Life freely Rev. 22. They that hunger and thirst after this Righteousness of Christ they shall be filled If God by his grace have begot a true hunger a true desire after it they shall have it Come to me if weary if laden cast your self on me and you shall find rest for your Souls But the great Scripture is Not to him that worketh not to him that thinks to obtain gospel Benefits by complying with gospel Rule of walking in holy Obedience to obtain pardon by it but to him that believes on him that justifies the Vngodly This Scripture is enough to confound the whole Scheme of the new fashion'd stating of gospel Truth The Apostle states gospel Truth thus Not to him that worketh no Works at all must come in in the business of our Salvation as concurring to it Thus the Apostle held saith Mr. Williams This lets in Licentiousness I have found a better way of staring gospel Truth that is To him that worketh to him that complies with gospel Rule to him that is godly not his Faith alone but his Faith with sincere Obedience That is his gospel Holiness which the Apostle intends when he speaks of being found in the Righteousness of God by Faith this gives right to gospel Benefits O what heart touched with love to the Lord Jesus and poor Souls but must ake to see the gospel thus mangled and the Crown upon our gospel Obedience jointly with Christ If this be not Evacuating and Invalidating the compleat Mediation and Atonement of the Lord Jesus then what can do it For he will not have any
they will bring it to at last or they say nothing Obstructing the great Design of Redemption A virulent Charge but unless obstructing man's Righteousness from eclipsing Christ's Righteousness be the Crime nothing of this can be laid to the Drs. Charge how inconsistent is this Charge with the great cry against him that Christ saves the worst of sinners that come to him even when in their blood and filth which he freely asserts and yet presses not to live in sin but to glorifie God in all holy Conversation If by the design of Redemption Mr. williams means that we are redeemed or created in Christ Jesus to good Works and Charges the Dr. to obstruct that design what can be more contrary than that in the Doctors Sermons when he saith fol. 556. The belief of this that Free Grace abounds doth certainly and effectually teach and produce an hatred of sin and a love of holiness and in fol. 557. If there be any such as say let us sin that Grace may abound let me deal plainly with them for my part I must account them the greatest Monsters upon the Face of the Earth the greatest Enemies to the Church that ever were and I say of such dishonourers of the Church and disturbers of the Consciences of Gods People that they are Carnal Sensual and Devilish they are the greatest Enemies to the Free Grace of God and the greatest Subverters of the Power and Purity of the Gospel and the greatest hinderers of the Course of it under Heaven No persons in the World do so wound the sides of Christ as he who doth profess the Gospel and yet live Wickedly and if there be any such here let me tell them their Faith is no better than the Faith of Devils for they believe and tremble and that Christ will have a heavier reckoning and account for such when they come to Judgment than for any Persons under Heaven besides Now can Mr. Williams in cold blood say this Doctrine obstructs the design of Redemption that this opposes the scope of the Gospel Next he Apoligizes for the Doctor That he had not entertained these Opinions if he had considered that God's Electing Decree is no legal grant nor a formal promise to us I suppose it may be gathered that the Doctor considered God's electing Decree as much as his Opposer when the Dr. lays all the stress of Mans happiness upon the absoluteness and irreversibleness of it and if others had as great an honour for the veracity and stedfastness of those Mountains of Brass they would not make mens Salvation that are elected so uncertain a thing as many do As for the Decree not being a legal grant Mr. Williams hath erected a new term of Art what he means I know not but if he means 't is a grant not good in Law or that 't is such a grant as no man can plead at the Barr of God either in our own Conscience or at the great day of Judgment to say Lord thou hast elected me therefore I must be saved This I suppose I may flatly deny and say provided I know my Election as the Apostle saith 1 Thes 1.4 Knowing Brethren your Election or as Christ bids us rejoyce that your Names are written in the Book of Life when this comes to be known it may be pleaded or else there would be little ground of joy in it and it may be pleaded as a grant good in Law for the discharge of every one to whom it belongs not that the Dr. or any considerate Christian is for Election going alone without Justification and Sanctification no not in Children in the Womb that are Elected and die there So that though Election be not a formal promise yet in this sense it must be a legal grant or a grant good in Law But there may be a snare in Mr. Williams his electing Decree If he means God's decreeing to Elâ—ct that 's one thing and God's act of Election that 's another 't is the last I insist on I cannot reach what he means by electing Decree but God's act of Election or God's actual choosing us in Christ before the Foundation of the World carries in it the Vertue of a legal grant or it is a frustrable Election which it is abominable to say of Gods act and yet some mens laying the stress of all Mens Salvation upon mans Holiness must reduce Gods election to The Decree includes the means and the end granted most freely yea more than Mr. Williams saith for the Decree not only includes the means and the end but the means is as well of the essence of the Decree as the end is which I suspect Mr. Williams denies for he saith in the next words willing the first in order to the last that is God wills the means in order to the end or God wills sanctification in order to Salvation But if by only willing the means he doth not make it a decreeing the means he falls short of the truth and makes election not infallible for God is spoken of often in Scripture of willing things to be done which are not done as How often would I have gathered you and you would not if he means only such a willing the means which Men may frustrate by not complying with his will then the Decree of the end which is eternal salvation that must fail and so God's Election is made a conditional one and not absolute that is God Elected such and such to eternal Life if they would repent and believe and obey the Gospel and not that he Elected them that they should repent and believe and obey the Gospel and this repenting and believing is left to the freedom of mans will so that God may be frustrate of his whole decree by their so stating Election and I thought it would come to that at last so that with Mr. Williams God's Electing Decree is only to the end Salvation and he wills the means Sanctification which will of God is rejected or obeyed as man's Free-will resists or complies with the motives offered to it and If Mr. Williams thinks the Dr. did not thus consider God's Election and therefore was led into false Opinions he bewrays his own misapprehension of Election and doth not at all invalidate the Drs. Positions concerning the Elect. His next words which he asserts concerning Election seem to make good my former suspicion that he makes Gods Election depend on man's will and for not considering which he blames the Dr. and they are these And as it the Decree puts nothing in present being so it barrs not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between benefits and Duties by his revealed will Here must be a great mistake of this learned and acute Gentleman in saying God's Decree puts nothing in present being what the Decree puts nothing in present being sure the Decree puts somewhat in present being the Decree puts the Decree in present being and is God's eternal unalterable Decree which the Father