Grace and the Spirits working it and the Doctrine of Particular Election What Strength there is in their Arguments or how Naturally these Consequences flow from the Assertion That Eternal Life is Promised us on a Condition of our own Performance and that it is the Result of our Obedience is not my Business at this time to Enquire Only thus much is Clear That they who run not to the Antinomian Extreme may to Avoid these Arminian Rocks Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace at least in the sence the Arminians use the word Condition Especially considering the Plausibleness of their Reasoning Undoubtedly Men Orthodox in the Faith may be Influenced to Conclude That the making Faith the Condition of an Interest in the Merits of Christ and yet a Part of the Merit are so Inconsistent that they cannot be both True and that therefore being Convinced that Faith is merited by Christ they cannot but Deny it's being a Condition Besides they may think that this sort of Condition must have so much of our own in it as interferes with the Spirits working the First Grace in us and they Believing the First Grace to be Absolutely Bestowed on us and effectually wrought in us by the Spirit must necessarily Deny its being such a Condition as this we are Discoursing of In fine Condition as Explained by them and as by some Jealous and Over-wary Persons suppos'd to be held by all that Use that word cannot stand with the Doctrine of Particular Election For their Condition doth necessarily Infer Salvation to be Undetermined and Uncertain it may be or it may not be Just as we our selves Determine The Socinians do not strive a little to subvert Christ's Satisfaction from this very Consideration That the Remission of Sin is offer'd on Condition A Zeal for the Advancement of Holiness and the Checking Debauchery Provokes them as they tell us to Insist on the Conditionality of our Faith and Repentance and Oppugn the Doctrine of Satisfaction This among others is one Cause why saith Smalcius we Reject the Dogma about Satisfaction Et heac una est inter alias Causa ob quam Dogma satisfactionis prorsus sit Repudiandum Quia scilicet hominibus Persuadere possit non esse opus ullâ Resipiscentiâ si quidem pro peccatis plane satisfactum est Smalc contra Smeglec c. xi p. 286. viz. Because Men are apt to Conclude That if a Full Satisfaction be made for their Sins there is no Need of their Repentance Besides they Pressing Repentance as a Condition of Pardon find themselves under a Necessity of Denying Satisfaction To evince thus much 't will be sufficient to consult once morce Smalcius who having affirm'd That to Require Repentance of them for whose Sins full Satisfaction had been made was Unnecessary Smiglecius replies That Satisfaction doth not exclude Conditions from him for whom Satisfaction was Offer'd For saith he who will Accept of Satisfaction for an Injury if he who did it Persists in his Enmity To this Smalcius Rejoinds Assuring us That Smiglecius doth not Prove nor is it Probable that Conditions may be Prescribed to him for whom a full Satisfaction is made In this case the Creditor is bound to Discharge his Debter without any Regard to his Future Demeanour Of this Smiglecius being aware changes the Terms saying Satisfaction doth not interfere with the Imposing a Condition on him for whom Satisfaction is Offer'd whereas in the present Case Satisfaction is not only offer'd but said to be Really made and Finish'd Whence it 's manifest That seeing Conditions and such a full Satisfaction are Incompatible and yet Conditions for the Obtaining the Remission of Sins are strictly Injoyned there can be no True Real Satisfaction There can be only a Free forgiveness of Sin without any Anteceding Satisfaction This Assertion excludes not but necessarily Infers Conditions God freely offering us the Forgiveness of Sins we must Repent and be Servants to our Lusts no longer for if we Repent not the Offer'd Pardon will not be Given us So far Smalcius whose Argument can be of no force unless the Condition Import somewhat that Gives Right to Pardon If the Pardon of Sin be not the Immediate Result of Christ's Satisfaction only but somewhat in us is moreover necessary to Give Right unto it the Satisfaction is not Full and if not full it 's none at all If it be Adequate and Full the Right Results only from it and not from any thing â—n us not from our Faith Repentance or any other Good Works The Right â—o Impunity must Result from Christ's Satisfaction only or not at all If there be somewhat else from which it must Result then hath not Christ made Full Satisfaction a Condition therefore giving Right Or Christ's Satisfaction must be laid aside They can never be together The setting up the One is a casting down the other This being the true State of the Case the Socinians Unable to see how the Necessity of our Holiness and Good Works can be maintain'd consistently with the laying aside Conditions chose rather to part with the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction than deny Faith Repentance c. to be the Conditions giving Right to Pardon If there be a full Satisfaction made by Christ for any Sinners a Discharge say the Socinians must be immediately given them They can't see any middle Way between themselves and the Antinomian Justification must flow either Immediately from Christ's Satisfaction to the Elect whil'st in the Heigth of Iniquity or from a Condition Perform'd by them Giving Right thereunto If the former that's Antinomianism If the latter then no Satisfaction which is Socinianism Thus you see in what sense the word Condition is taken by the Papist Arminian and Socinian and diversly Urged to Establish the Doctrine of our Merit and Destroying those other about Christ's Meriting the First Grace his Spirits working it Particular Election and Christ's Satisfaction which Considerations may frighten Men sound in the Faith from the Vse of the word and Provoke the Generation of the Just to Reject it unless when Used it be with an Explication What the Learned Dr. O. hath on this Occasion is worthy of our weightiest thoughts who speaking of the Term Condition is Express That the word is no where used in the Scripture in this matter which I argue no farther saith he but that we have no certain Rule or Standard to try and measure its Signification by Wherefore it cannot first be introduced in what sense Men please and then that sense turned into Argument for other Ends. For thus on a Supposed Concession that it is the Condition of our Justification some heighten it into a Subordinate Righteousness imputed unto us antecedently as I suppose unto the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ in any sense whereof it is the Condition And some who pretend to lessen its Efficiency or Dignity in the use of it in our Justification say it is only Causa sine quâ
Recantation in a Publick Auditory at Wittiberge and Prints it However after Luther's Death he Returns to his Vomit reassumes his old Errors and drew some Learned Men to close with them Labouring to get Countenance to them by wresting some Passages in Luther's Writings so that whereas Luther had in his Commentary on the Galatians said That the Penitent Sinner ought not to hear Moses by the Law accusing him of Sin but should rather cast his Eye on Jesus Christ his Saviour who by the Gospel heals the Broken and Contrite heart Islebius and his Followers would from hence infer That the Law was not at all to be Taught and thus would they Palliate their Own Errors by fathering them on Luther So far Lucas Osiander Luther on Genesis doth in several Places show what the Antinomians are Cap. 19.21 affirming That they throw the Law out of the Church and will have it that Repentance is to be taught by the Gospel That they Darken Paul's Doctrine about the Remission of Sin and so magnifie Grace as utterly to Extinguish it and expose Men to the Wrath of God by Perswading them to such a Security concerning the Divine Displeasure and Judgement as if there had been no Sin no fear of Death and Hell These Antinomians seem to be the followers of Muntzer who teach that all Sin is wholly taken away nor are we to Endeavor the convincing any of Sin or terrifie them by the Law They like the Ishmaelites who because the Thigh of their Father Abraham was Holy believe Every thing to to be Holy Tho' they carefully endeavor to conceal thus much yet are they not afraid to entertain such Monstrous Opinions Sin being forgiven there is in them nothing Damnable Sin therefore is nothing or at least 't is taken from them This Error they would fasten on the Doctrines of the Apostles He that is born of God sinneth not I believe the Remission of Sin In Gen. c. 24. by which they understand the taking away of all Sin The Papists Preach nothing but Terror In Gen c. 19. and these false Prophets will have nothing taught but the Gospel and the Promises which Error of theirs is much more hurtful than that of the Papists In the First Tome of Luther's Works to which Osiander directed me I have not only met with Luther's Six Disputations but with a Paper containing the Particulars of the Antinomian Errors drawn up by One of themselves as was then Generally believed which for the Reader 's greater Satisfaction I will faithfully Transcribe and add unto it an Abridgment of Luther's Disputations against them Unto the Antinomian Positions Luther sets this Preface Martin Luther to the Pious Reader There came to my hands Certain Positions so is the the Title of an Unknown Author scattered among the Brethren which lest I be thought to approve of them I would so Publish as to give the fullest Testimony of my Abhorring them which God willing I will soon do by my Disputations A. D. 1538. The Positions of a Certain Antinomian REpentance is not to be Taught from the Decalogue or any Law of Moses but Ex Violatione filii per Evangelium which I presume thus to Render from the Sufferings of Christ by the Gospel 2. For Christ saith Thus it behoved him to suffer and Rise again from the Dead that Repentance and Remission of Sins should be Preached in his Name among all Nations 3. And Christ in the Gospel of John saith that the Spirit shall convince the World of Sin Not the Law 4. The same is Taught in the Last Sermon of Christ Go Preach the Gospel to Every Creature 5. Paul to the Philippians saith Let the same mind be in you which is in Christ Jesus that with Fear and Trembling ye may work out your Salvation which words do fully establish this Truth viz. That Repentance which he calls Fear and Trembling is to be taught from the Mind of Christ not from the Law 6. From the Discourses of Paul and Barnabas it sufficiently appears that there is no need of the Law for any One part of Justification 7. That without which the Holy Spirit is given and Men are justified is not necessary to be Taught either for the Beginning Middle or End of Justification 8. But the Holy Ghost of Old was given and still is that Men might be Justified without the Law by the Gospel of Christ alone 9. Therefore it 's not necessary to Teach the Law of Moses either for the Beginning Middle or End of Justification 10. The Major is evident from the Experience which Paul and Barnabas mention 11. And we must Judge the Minor to be true 11. Idem Judicabimus de Minore nam Spiritus Sanctus cecidio visibili specie super Gentes because the Holy Ghost in a visible shape fell on the Gentiles 12. What shall we then say of some who without the Word yea Contrary to it and the Example of the Apostles do make the Law the first Part yea a Necessary one to the Doctrine of Justification 13. For which reason that we may maintain the Purity of Doctrine we must oppose them who Teach That the Gospel must not be Preached but to those who are convinced by the Law 14. For they that put on the words of Christ an Improper sence and say that first the Law then the Gospel is to be taught and do Pervert the words of Christ nor is their Interpretation consistent with the Simplicity of Christ 15. As we are to adhere unto the simple sence of Christ's word when he saith This is my Body so must we abide by the Simplicity city of those words Go Preach the Gospel Baptizing c. 16. The Law doth only convince of Sin and that without the Holy Spirit and therefore convinceth to Damnation 17. But there is need of that Doctrine which is Efficacious not only to Condemn but also to Save Thus the Gospel doth conjunctly Teach Repentance and Pardon of Sin 18. For the Gospel of Christ doth make known the Wrath of God from Heaven together with the Righteousness of God Rom. 1. for it is the Preaching of Repentance in Conjunction with the Promise which our Reason doth not Naturally but by Divine Revelation Receive These are the Antinomian Positions unto which Luther in his Disputations has a respect The first Disputation of D. Martin Luther against the Antinomians about Repentance 1. Repentance by the Testimony of all and by what is undoubtedly True is a Grief for Sin with an adjoyned Purpose of a better Life 2. This Grief Properly is not nor can it be any thing else than a deep sence of the Law in the Heart or Conscience 3. For tho' many hear the Law yet because they have not that sense nor feel the force of the Law they Grieve not nor Repent 4. The first Part of Repentance to wit Grief is Only from the Law The other part namely a Good Purpose cannot be from the Law 5. For
Places throughout the Holy Scriptures asserted to admit of a Denial But Christ could not justly suffer for our Sins unless in a sound sence he bore the Guilt of them To Punish the Innocent as Innocent is Injustice Jesus Christ therefore tho' Innocent in himself voluntarily becoming our Surety took on him the Guilt of Sin and suffer'd Justly because as being Guilty To clear this is the Difficulty and many in the Attempt fall into dangerous Mistakes They who make Sin and Guilt the same thing by asserting the Guilt to be laid on Christ Quantum in se do make Christ Inherently a Sinner which is Antinomianism and they who say the Punishment of Sin was laid on Christ but not the Guilt give up the Cause to the Socicinian For if not the Guilt then nor the Punishment whence no Satisfaction The Guilt lyeth between the Sin and its Punishment It is an Obnoxiousness unto Punishment for Sin which as it Results from the Sin or Fault is called the Guilt of the Fault But as it respects the Punishment being an Obligation thereunto 't is Guilt of Punishment This Guilt is not Intrinsick to the Sin The Sin is Entire without it It is only an External respect of it to the Sanction of the Law and Separable from the Sin it self the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that tho' the Sin Remain in us the Guilt Passeth from us to Christ The Entire Nature of Sin lyeth in a Respect unto the Preceptive Part of the Law being as hath been already Observed a Transgression or a Want of Conformity unto it The Sin is in its Formal Nature Entire without any Regard to the Sanction From this Sin as it respects the Threatning Results Guilt which is an Obnoxiousness unto Punishment or the Dignitas Paenae propter Culpam and is Extrinsick to the Sin separable from it and may be laid on him who never transgress'd the Commandment Nor can it morally Defile or Pollute the Person on whom it is laid Christ therefore tho' in him there was no Sin might bear the Guilt of our Sins and nevertheless remain Pure Harmless Vndefiled and without Spot which is sufficient to Vindicate this Doctrine from Antinomianism and those other Absurdities that flow from the making Sin and Guilt the same thing and yet hold it to have been laid on Christ What I have here deliver'd amounts to no more than what is carried in that Common Distinction of our Sins being laid on Christ not Inherently but by Imputation If the Sin in its formal Nature had been on Christ there would have been Ground enough for that Charge of Blasphemous Consequences which Bellarmine and the Socinians load us with That would indeed be to make Christ Inherently a Sinner â—ay Filius Diaboli But to deny this and affirm that Christ was made Sin Duly by Imputation that is by the laying the Guilt of our Sins not only the Punishment but the Guilt on him is consistent with his Freedom from all Moral Filth or Defilement and is necessary to Defend the Gospel Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction against the Socinian for Kromayer Theol. Pol. Pos Art xi De Justif p. 631. as KROMAYERUS well expresses it Absque Peccatorum Imputatione Paenarum Perpessione Satisfactionem hic nullam cogitariposse CHAP. IV. What Antinomianism is not in some other Instances Cleared To Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace not Antinomian The State of this Controversie as managed by the Papists and First Reformers The sence of the Arminians and Socinians about Condition Faith a Condition Asserted In what sence IT is not Antinomianism to Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace There is not it may be any one Point in the Body of Divinity of greater Difficulty than this about the Covenant of Grace and its Conditionality They that search deeply into the many Controversies agitated between us the Papist Arminian Socinian and Antinomian will find that the most Important Parts of it Turn on this Hinge The Papist Arminian and Socinian cannot see how the Covenant of Grace could be made with Jesus Christ as a Second Adam and with the Elect as his Seed which is One Reason of their many Mistakes And the Antinomian fixeth his thoughts so very much on the Covenant of Grace's being made with Christ that there is no Room left him to Consider how it can be made also with his Seed which occasions their Asserting That Christ perform'd the whole requir'd of us in order to our being actually Interested in him and his Benefits as well as make Satisfaction by his Sufferings and Merit by his Righteousness for them that Believe That Christ Believed and Repented for us as if there had been no other Reason for our Doing either than to Obtain the Knowledge of our having what actually was ours whilst under the Power of Unbelief and Impenitency But it not being my Province to enter on a Large Debate of these things I will only show that there are such Senses in which the word Condition is used by the Papists Arminian and Socinian as do Confound Gospel Grace with the Law of Works and establish Merit Destroy the Doctrine of the Spirits working the First Grace and subvert Christ's satisfaction and so make it Evident That One who Detests Antinomianism may yet Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace If the word Condition when spoken of the Two Covenants namely of Works and Grace be taken in the same sence in both the one will be Confounded with the other To Evince thus much I will show the Import of the Condition of the Covenant of Works and how it agrees with the Popish Doctrine of Merit and leave it to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader to consider the Truth of my Assertion The Condition of the Covenant of Works is ea res quae Praestita dat Jus ad Praemium It is that Obedience to which the Promise was made and from the Performance of which a Right to the Reward immediately Results and for which in Justice it is due This Condition being Perfect Obedience was to a Law enforc'd with Rewards and Punishments which Obedience the Reward becoming due to it ex Justitia is Meritorious And as on the Rendring the Required Obedience the Reward is Justly Due so seeing the Performance of the Condition is the same with the Render of Perfect Obedience the Blessing Promised is thereon Justly due unto it and the Performing the Condition is meritorious for Merit is nothing but that Actio quâ Justum est ut Agenti aliquid Detur There is much much variety I must confess amongst the Papists in stating their Doctrine of Merit but the Prevailing Opinion is Meritum Mercâ—s ad Idem referuntur Tho. 1 a 2. e. Q. 114. Art 1. That Merit and Reward Essentially Respect one another That Merit is a Good Work freely done Exhibitio at MERITI Redditio MERCEDIS actus ad alterum sunt secundum aqualitatem Rei
sub modo signifieth nothing until the Condition or Mode be perform'd Tho' it hath no Causality in Producing the Effect yet is the Effect as Really suspended thereby as if it had Thus it has Pleased the Testator to dispose and his Disposition none can disannul In this sense seeing Justification is Promised in the Last Will and Testament of our Lord Jesus to Him that Believeth Faith is the Modus Promissionis vel Donationis So that altho' Justification be not the Result of our Faith but of Christ's Righteousness alone yet Faith being made by the Testator a Modus of the Disposition or Donation there can be no Justification without it The Operation of Christ's Righteousness which in this Case is the Negotium or Principal Cause of our Justification is by the Non-Performance of Faith suspended and so long we remain Unjustified It hath pleased God to fix such an Order in the Dispensation of his Blessings that the one necessarily antecedes the other and what goeth before another hath an Influence upon that other as it is so setled and establish'd by the Ordinance of God Not that the former gives Right unto the latter but so it is appointed of God that such an Order be observed in the disposing of these Blessings that he who has not the first shall not have the second He that hath not Faith shall not be Justified But whether it be a Condition of the Covenant of Grace Or a Condition in this Covenant Or only a Condition of our Justification tho' our Divines have different Sentiments about it yet 't is generally held that Faith is a Condition of Justification They that scruple the use of the Word own the thing signified thereby The Learned Author of Anti-sozzo saith that Faith is a Condition in the Covenant of Grace tho' not of it and they who hold that the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as a Second Adam do assert that it is also made with the Faithful the Members of Christ Discourse of the two Covenants lib. 3. c. 3. p. 162. for which the Judicious Mr Strong gives several Reasons namely That the Saints may see that they are as strictly bound to Obedience in their own Persons under the Second Covenant as they were under the First And that the Doctrine of the Gospel tho' it be a Doctrine of Liberty is not a Doctrine of Licentiousness and that they may stand in awe of the Threats of God This Doctrine saith he I do the rather pitch upon in Opposition to the Licentious Tenent of the Antinomians who say that all is Required of Christ and nothing of Us. This Notion of a Condition as it doth most fully Provide against Antinomianism by Inferring the Necessity of Faith's being in Order of Nature before Justification so it doth as effecctually secure us from the Popish Arminian and Socinian Rocks in that it is not a Legal but a Testamentary Condition that cannot Establish the Merit of Good Works nor Interfere with Christ's meriting or the Spirits working the First Grace nor Subvert the Doctrine of Satisfaction or Particular Election All Testamentary Dispositions whatever be the Modes of Donation are of Free Grace not of Metit and being Given to us as the Children of a Testator the Merit and Gift of the First Grace which is necessary to our being such Children cannot be Destroyed by such a Modus or Condition These things will Appear with much more Clearness if we consider that the Holy Scriptures Represent Christ as a Second-Adam the Father of a Spiritual Off-spring Two things Christ did as a Second-Adam He undertook to beget a Seed and Raise that Seed unto Glory This Seed Christ Purchased and on his Purchase they are given him by the Father according to the terms Agreed on between the Father and the Son in the Eternal Compact That Christ begets a Seed and by his Word and Spirit Governs and Raises them unto Glory is so far from being inconsistent with his Meriting and Giving the First Grace that it is in Pursuance of it Christ merited a Seed and that he may have what he merited a Seed is Given him which is by the Fathers drawing the Sons gathering and the Spirits working Grace in them Christ also as a Second-Adam made satisfaction for his Children who as soon as they do spiritually by Regeneration Descend from him have a Right to Impunity If the Satisfaction had been made by Christ as a Mediator for the Elect as such then indeed as soon as they had any Being they would have been Discharg'd from the Debt But Christ making Satisfaction for the Elect as his Seed they cannot partake of the Right resulting from it but as they become his Seed As they are his Seed Virtually they have a Virtual Discharge but an Actual Discharge they cannot have till they are Actually born again Moreover the Covenant of Grace being made with Christ as a Second-Adam the Promises are made unto Christ as the Reward of his Obedience but for his Seed so that in Christ you must be by Faith that you may be Pardoned and Saved and yet your Pardon and Salvation Results not from your Faith but from Christ's Righteousness whereby it 's manifest that Gospel-Promises are Powerful Motives to Engage us to do our utmost to Believe and Repent and must be Preached to this Very-End and Purpose Thus the Doctrine of our Merit is laid by Christ's meriting and working the First Grace and his making Satisfaction to God's Justice and the necessity of our Faith Repentance and Sanctification are abundantly cleared by this Gospel-Representation that is made of Christ as he is a Second Adam with whom the Covenant of Grace is made and with his Seed as such which is so far from destroying Particular Election that it establisheth it For the Elect were Promised unto Christ merited by him and given unto him as the Reward of his Sufferings whereby it is made sure that the Death of Christ shall not be altogether in vain He shall see the Elect as the Travel of his Soul and be satisfied Thus as in Opposition to Popery Arminianism and Socinianism Legal Conditions are Justly Rejected so in Contradiction to the Antinomian Error Testamentary Conditions are here explicated and asserted CHAP. V. The Notion the first Reformers had of Justifying Faith not Antinomian Their Dectrine in Opposition to the Papist Arminian and Socinian Described That they did not hold Justification to be before Faith Nor did they Exclude all Doubtings from Faith nor hold that we might live as we list and whilst so Believe and be Justified To Assert That Faith is a Certain and Full Perswasion wrought in the Heart of Man through the Holy Ghost whereby he is Assured of the Mercy of God Promised in Christ that his Sins are Forgiven him is not Antinomianism THE Antinomians I mean such as are really so have had too much Honour given them by such as Grant that their Notion about Faith is supported by
a full Perswasion all which reside in the heart when we do not actually think of God As Scientia is by Philosophers put into the praedicament of Quality Thus a Child in whom can be no Acts of Knowledge Sense or Perswasion has yet the Spirit the Power or Habit of Faith as All the Learned do confess particularly Martin Bucer Besides they are very particular and distinct in their Endeavours to make it manifest that Faith and Fears are consistent For they suppose Faith to be oft conflicting with Doubts and Fears which they to continue the use of Zanchy's words thus solve There is no absurdity in asserting Faith to be a firm Perswasion and yet the Believer disturb'd with afflictive doubts for there being in everâ— Believer Flesh as well as Spirit when the Spirit prevails there is a sense of goodness sweetly refreshing the Soul a looking to the Gospel-Promise a relying on it an apprehending Eternal Life as prepared for him rejoycing in it But when the Flesh conquers there is a sight of sin and misery filling the Soul with the anguish of sorrow a view of its obnoxiousness to death at which he trembles fearing lest he die eternally which is occasioned by the weakness of our Faith which never whilst in this Life arrives to that degree of Perfection Zanch. Oper. Tom. 8 â—e 7. de Fide as to cure the Believer wholly of his Unbelief and Diffidence It 's true the first Believers have not explicated Justifying Faith as distinct from Assurance so clearly as our more Modern Divines have done amongst whom the Westminster Assembly in their Confession as Le Blanc hath well observ'd have excelled However they did carefully endeavour to express their Sentiments so as to prevent the despair of such who tho' sound Believers were afflicted with many fears and doubts about the pardon of their sins and their interest in the Mercy of God They insisted on a perswasion a firm belief of the forgiveness of sins but on such a perswasion as admitting of different degrees was in many so weak and feeble as not to be always perceptible A Notion as they explicated it easie enough to be understood For in other Instances what more common than to distinguish between Acts and Habits That the Acts are seen when the Habits from whence they flow lies undiscover'd Every one knows whether he believes this or the other Report loves this or the other person as well as whether he seeth this or the other Object The Acts of the Understanding and Rational Appetite when exerted are as perceivable in their way as our Sensitive Acts. But then it should be minded that these Acts are oft look'd upon in their Habits and when actuated are commonly blended with such other as are conversant about contrary Objects and their prevalence over these other so inconsiderable that it 's not at all times discernable to which if we add the consideration of the World's Allurements Satan's many subtle Temptations c. it cannot but be that true Believers fall into great perplexities about the forgiveness of their sins which tho' great destroy not their Faith nor are they inconsistent with this firm perswasion Strong fears and many doubts may consist with a moral certainty of the same Truths How many have a moral certainty of the Immortality of their Souls and yet grievously tormented with amazing frights about it This very Point the Learned Mr. Baxter in discourse with me did thus illustrate It is saith he as with a Man so firmly chain'd to the top of a high Spire as to have the Greatest Certainty of his Fastness yet looking down could not but fear a Fall We may then easily perceive that from the making Faith to lie in a perswasion of the pardon of sin it cannot be justly inferred that whoever doubts of God's Mercy in Christ is destitute of Justifying Faith for this perswasion may be in the Habit where not in the Act and is consistent enough with strong fears and many doubts as the first Reformers expresly affirmed which is enough to free them from the Reproach of driving by their Doctrine every sound Believer who hath any doubts about his being pardoned into the Horrour of Despair Nor did they so describe Justifying Faith as to give unto any an occasion to expect Heaven whilst they lived under the Reigning Power of their sins On the contrary they held III. That none who continue to live under the Reigning Power of their Lusts had or whilst so can have Saving Faith 'T was constantly asserted by them That to true Justifying Faith whether strong or weak Life and Perpetuity were too essential and inseparable Properties the first is necessary that it may be a Living Faith exciting in the Believer the Life of Christ that is to say such a Life as stirred up in his heart such new and heavenly motions thoughts and desires conform to God's Law as drove out all earthly Affections Thus much they said was the Import of those Scriptures which speak of purifying the heart mortifying the flesh quickning of the spirit crucifying and burying the Old Man putting on the New The Holy Ghost in the Sacred Scriptures doth so very much press this one thing especially in the Epistles of James and John that it must be acknowledged that this is so Essential a Property of Faith that it cannot be true Justifying Faith without it as all of us unanimoustly hold These are the words of the Learned Zanchy De Persev Sanct. Confess p. 349. who in answer to an Objection against the Perseverance of the Saints carrying in it this very Calumny That the Protestant Doctrine is such as makes Repentance of nouse le ts loose the Reins to all manner of Profaneness rendring men so very secure as to embolden them to venture on sin contrary to the convictions of their Consciences doth further declare That true Justifying Faith cannot be where sin doth reign that sound Believers altho' they sin not as the wicked do Ipsorum vid. fidelium lapsus suapte naturâ aternâ morte esse dignissimos item displicere Deo item punitum iri à Deo c. Zanch. de pers Sanct. p. 159. yet the sins they fall into are in their own nature most worthy of Eternal Death Displease God and are punished by him The Fervour of the Holy Spirit in them much abated the flames of their Faith quenched their minds troubled let them therefore repent of their sins return to the Lord as Children to their Father not cut off from Christ nor wholly forsaken of the Holy Spirit Again This is the nature of true Faith to stir up in us true Repentance Zanch. Oper. Tom. 6. loc 5. de Fide p. 43. and inflame our hearts with Love to God and a Zeal to please him and promote his Glory to provoke us sincerely to love our Neighbour that as much as in us lieth we may live peaceably with all men that it fill our Souls with a
more moderate judged of Amsdorffius we shall see enough to oblige us to think they meant the same thing and that the Controversie was more owing unto the mistakes and misrepresentations made of one another than to any Real Differences amongst them George Major to vindicate himself from the Charge brought against him Major in Confessione Publicè editâ Disputationibus testatus est nunquam se ita sensisse nunquam ita docuisse sed totum Justificationis nostrae negotium salutis Beneficium in solidum acceptum retulisse referre miserecordiae Divinae atque unici Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi merito idque solâ fide aâ—cipi quam bona opera ut fructus certissimi sequantur Quin imò disertè testatus est se positione illâ quâ videret aliquos offende deinceps non usurum Melch. Adam Vit. Major emits a Confession of his Faith and at Publick Disputations declares He never taught as Illyrious c. suggested nor ever held any such Doctrimes but always believ'd That the whole of our Justification and Salvation must be ascribed to the Mercy of God and Merit of Jesus Christ our only Saviour and that it is receiv'd only by Faith attended with Good Works as indubitable Fruits thereof further protesting that seeing this Proposition Good Works are necessary to Salvation was offensive he would never use it more On the other hand Kromayer mentions some excusing Amsdorffius they being of Opinion Sunt qui Amsdorffium excusant ac si bona opera perniciosa dixtrit ad salutem per accidens quatenus Fiducia in Operions collocetur Krom Theol. Pos Po. Art 12. de bon oper he held Good Works to be pernicious to Salvation only by Accident as men place their Trust and Confidence in them And adds that Amsdorffe in a Book written in the German Tongue against George Major complains of his being unrighteously reproached by Major George Major saith he so interprets me as if I had taught that Good Works are a hinderance to Salvation and a shame to a Christian God forgive him I never believed nor so much as thought that our Opinion should have been so falsly and untrully reprepresented Such ungodly words should not be mentioned or heard in a Christian Church Thus they both complain of Misrepresentation which gave little or no Relief for there being amongst 'em many Forming of Parties and Factions what he who best understands his own sense avers is not to be regarded The Accuser tho' under the Government of his Passions and knows least of his Adversary obtains the greatest Credit with the generality which occasioned Adamus to say Sed quae est hominum Credulitas ac calumniae efficacitas effugere suspicionem Doctrime diversae nunquam potnit Adeo verum est illud Calumniare Audacter semper aliquid haeret Melch Adam Vit. Maj. That such is the Credulity of most such the power of Calumny that Major could never wholly free himself from unjust suspicions So true is that saying Calumniare audacter semper aliquid haeret However tho' there were different Opinions amongst them managed with most violent Heats they were rather about words and lesser matters than about what was substantial Kromayer ubi supra as the Formula Concordiae in Kromayerus has it The first Schism amongst certain Divines was occasioned by some mens asserting Good Works to be necessary to Salvation that it 's impossible for any to be saved without them and no one ever was And others taught that Good Works were hurtful Another Schism arose amongst some about the words Necessary and Free one Party holding that the word Necessary is not to be affirm'd of our New Obedience for that is not to proceed from Necessity or Constraint but from a Free Spirit Others plead for the Retaining this word because New Obedience is not left to our pleasure to render it as we list for the Regenerate themselves are bound to New Obedience This being the true state of the several Controversies about Good Works which were held to be Necessary to Salvation by George Major to be Free by Andreas Musculus and to be Hurtful by Amsdorffius The Formula proceeds to a Decision thus We reject and condemn these following Phrases Good Works are necessary to Salvation No one was ever sav'd without them It is impossible to be saved without Good Works We do also reject and condem that most offensive Phrase as pernicious to Christian Discipline That Good Works hinder our Salvation We Believe Teachâ— and Confess Credimus docemus proficemur omnes quidem homines praecipuè vero eos qui per Spiritum Sanctum Regenerati sunt Renovati ad BONA OPERA facienda DEBITORES esse Et in hâc sententiâ vocabula illa NECESSARIVM DEBERE OPORIERE recte usuâ—pantur c. that all men more especially they who are Regenerated and Renewed by the Holy Spirit are bound to do Good Works And that in this case these words Necessary Ought Obliged are rightly used even with respect to them that are Renewed and are agreeable to the Form of sound words And yet nevertheless these words Necessity Necessary when spoken of the Regenerate must not be understood as if they imported the same with Coaction or Force but only of that Obedience which is Due to which we are Bound and Obliged which true Believers as Renewed do perform not by the Compulsion and Force of the Law but spontaneously with a Free Spirit in as much as they are no longer under the Law but Grace They condemn not the men as Embracers of Unsound Doctrine but reject and condemn the usage of some unsafe and hurtful Phrases all holding Good Works to be a Duty to which we are obliged by the holy Commandment not to be perform'd by Force and Constraint but freely not to be trusted in for our Justification or Salvation and yet springing out necessarily of a True and Lively Faith are acceptable unto God From what hath been collected out of the Writings of the first Reformers we may see that the Antinomians can find no place to shelter themselves under their shadow for tho' they asserted that Justifying Faith lay in the perswasion of the forgiveness of sin yet they did consistently enough with this Notion deny that Pardon was before Faith or that Fears and Doubts and Justifying Faith could not stand together or that a man whilst remaining under the Reigning Power of his sins could have Faith They were positive that the Justifying Act of Faith was in order of Nature as most antecedent or at least simultaneous as others with Justification that true Believers were continually conflicting with Fears and Doubts and that that Faith which was not fruitful in producing Good Works was not a Saving 't was a Devilish Faith Nor did they make it the duty of all men in the World immediately to believe their sins were pardoned But held convictions of sin arising from the Knowledge of the Law to be