in its convinced Conscience before the tribunal of God and then seeth in the Gospel a well contrived way of absolution closeth with it How will all this shine forth unto them with a heavenly Lustre and Majestie And how sweetly will their hearts acquiesce in this Sure and Saife way of obtaining life Secondly This may discover unto us what a manifold wisdom of God is to be seen observed in the Gospel dispensation that even Principalities and powers may look into and wonder at as it is said to be made known unto them by the Church Ephes. 3 10. That is by what they see and observe in the administration thereof in the Church And in this part of Gospel-device there are several things remarkable that may give us ground to wonder at this manifold Wisdom of God The whole is a mysterie and this is a prime part of the mysterie and in this mysterie there are many mysteries a short view of which may be of some use to us 1. What a mysterious and wonderful thing is it That such as are dead by Law lying under the sentence thereof so bound over to the wrath of God according to the threatning of the Law which is just and righteous in all points and such as have nothing to defend themselves by from the threatned death unto which they are obnoxious nor any thing whereby to make Satisfaction to the demandes of the Law or to the offended Law-maker or where with to appease Him should notwithstanding hereof be Really Formally and Effectually absolved from the sentence of the Law by the sentence of the Judge and so made and declared to live juridically in Law-sense and to be as free of the curse and penalty of the Law as if they had never been guilty of the transgression thereof And thus is it here indeed Such as were dead in trespasses and sinnes and in the uncircumcision of the flesh are quickened together with Christ Ephes. 2 1 5. Col. 2 13. He who before had the wrath of God on him and abiding on him by beleeving on the Son of God hath everlasting life Ioh. 3 36. And they who were in a manner condemned already yet by beleeving on Him are not condemned yea have eternal life Ioh. 3 15 18. 2. What a mysterie is this That God who is righteous and just and the righteous Judge of the World and who hath declared that he looketh upon it as an abomination for any man to justifie the wicked Prov. 17 15. And whose judgement is alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. Should be one that justifieth the Ungodly And yet so is He said to be and so is He stiled and so is He held forth as the object of faith Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but beleeveth on Him that justifieth the Ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness Papists others who will not suffer their Reason to follow Revelation but will measure all the mysteries of the Gospel by the corrupt rule of Reason and wiredraw those according to the dictats of this pretend an Inconsistency here and therefore will rather pervert the whole nature of Gospel-justification than yeeld to the Spirits Revelation of the matter Hence it is that they say a person cannot be justified by God untill he be a Godly man and have a Righteousness within him upon the account of which he must be justified little adverting That by their own principles it would follow that no man should ever be justified for seing God is a God of righteousness and it is a sure and certaine thing that His judgment is alwayes according to truth He could not absolve a Person as righteous that were not perfectly righteous and void of all sin where is the man not out of his wits that dar say this remembering what David said Psal. 130. 3. 143. 2. But here lyeth the truth the mystery Such as are really and truely Ungodly in themselves and have nothing of their own but unrighteousness within them and whose righteousnesses are but as filthy rags Esai 64 6. are yet justified by God upon the account of a perfect righteousness imputed to them received by faith In the judgment of God such as in themselves are Ungodly are considered as clothed with the perfect righteousness of the Mediator Christ that Head publik person which free grace putteth on them they receive stand under by faith and so are justified declared to be righteous by God whose judgment herein and sentence is most righteous most consonant to truth for he justifieth such as are righteous though not with their own inherent righteousness yet with the righteousness of their cautioner now made theirs 3. Here is another piece of this mystery That Transgressours of the Law shall be Absolved and Justified yet the Law established which threatneth death to Transgressours and promiseth life only to such as observe it in all points Who can reconcile this seeming Contradiction that is not acquanted with the glorious mystery of the Gospel Paul a man well acquanted with this mystery tels us expresly that the Gospel-way of justification which he preached and fully cleared in his Epistles derogateth nothing from the Law but establisheth it Rom. 3 31. Where after he had cleared confirmed the Nature and Causes of Gospel-justification had said vers 30. that He was one God who would justifie the circumcision or Jewes by faith and the uncircumcision that is the Gentiles through faith hy obvâateth this objection that some might have proposed said What shall then become of the Law you make it void by speaking of faith ascribing justification to it as a mean in opposition contradiction to works he answereth Do we then make void the Law through faith That be far from us yea we establish the Law So that there is nothing in this Gospel justification that weakeneth or maketh void the Law but on the contrary it is thereby more fully confirmed and established for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the righteouness of the Law might be fulfilled in us Rom. 8 2 3. Here is then the mysterie Transgressours of the Law are justified upon the account of what their Mediator and Surety their publik person Representer did suffered for Satisfaction to Law Justice the Law-giver by what He did suffered the Law is more established then it would have been by any thing that we did or could suffer for He made Satisfaction to all its demands there was perfect obedience given thereunto its commands answered in all points by our Lord Jesus Christ who knew no sin nor was deceite found in His mouth 2 Cor. 5 21. Esai 53 9. And because it was violated by sinners the Curse threatned was due therefore He did also
of nature if not also in order of time And if matters be thus sins are first forgiven and then Faith is imputed 2 If the supposing of a righteousness will follow to wit Remission of sins then there is no answere to the argument for the argument speaketh of a Righteousness anterior to Justification and in order there unto 3 It is againe said but was never proved that to forgive sins is to give a Righteousness And I would ask what for a Righteousness this pardon of sins is is it a Righteousness perperly so called But that cannot be for all such Righteousness consisteth in obedience to the Law therefore it must be a Righteousness improperly so called if so it cannot be called our formal righteousness as he said it was 4 When he saith we are made righteous in justification yet will not grant an Imputed Righteousness and his Remission of sins is not yet found to be a proper Righteousness the sense must either be Popish or none at all I shall not here adde other reasons against this Assertion whereby it might be made manifest how dangerous this Opinion is if it be put in practice how it tendeth to alter the Nature of the Covenant of Grace It may suffice at present that we have vindicated these few reasons against it that we have found it in the foregoing Chapter inconsistent with the doctrine of grace in the New Testament repugnant to the Nature of Justification as declared explained to us by the Apostle and that we shall finde it in the next Chapter without any footing in the Apostles discourse Rom. 4. which is the only place adduced for its confirmation CHAP. XXIV The imputation of Faith it self is not Proved from Rom. IV. THe maine if not only ground whereupon our Adversaries build their Assertion of the Imputation of our act of Beleeving is Rom. 4. where they tell us the Apostle doth frequently expresly say that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness We must therefore in order the vindication of truth vindicate this place from their corrupt glosses to this end we shall first show that that can not be the meaning of the Apostle in this place which our Adversaries contend for next we shall examine what they say to enforce their Exposition of the place That the meaning of the Apostle Rom. 4. where it is said Abraham beleeved God and it was counted unto him for righteousness afterward his faith is counted for righteousness and faith was counted to Abraham for righteousness c. is not that Abraham's act of beleeving was accounted the Righteousness whereupon he was accepted was imputed unto him as a Righteousness in order to his justification and consequently that the act of Beleeving is now imputed to Beleevers for their Righteousness as said Servetus Socinus his followers Arminius his followers Papists others that I say this is not the true meaning of the place may appear from these particulars 1. If the act of Beleeving be accounted a Righteousness it must either be accounted a Perfect Righteousness or an Imperfect Righteousness If it be accounted for an Imperfect Righteousness no man can be thereupon Justified But Paul is speaking of a righteousness that was accounted to Abraham the father of the faithful in order to Justification that behoved to be a perfect righteousness for all his works wherein was an Imperfect Righteousness were rejected It cannot be accounted for a perfect righteousness because then it should be accounted to be what it is not and this accounting being an act of God's judgment it would follow that the judgment of God were not according to truth contrare to Rom. 2 2. The reason is because our faith is not perfect in it self there being much drosse admixed many degrees wanting in it far lesse can it be a Perfect Righteousness seing a Perfect Righteousness must comprehend full Obedience to the whole Law of God 2. The Imputation whereof the Apostle speaketh is of some thing to be made the Beleevers by the Imputation of God which the Beleever had not before But this cannot be Faith or the work of Beleeving because Faith is ours before this Imputation for Abraham beleeved God then followed this Imputation and vers 24. it is said that it to wit some other thing than the act of beleeving shall be imputed to us if we beleeve therefore it is not the act of Beleeving properly taken that is imputed or accounted here 3. Faith being antecedent to this Imputation if the act of Beleeving be imputed the word impute or account here must not signifie to Bestow Grant or Reckon upon their score but simply to Esteem Judge or Repute and thus Faith or the act of beleeving shall be in a beleever and yet not be a Righteousness till God repute it to be so But when God esteemeth judgeth or reputeth any thing to be in us he doth not change it nor make it something that it was not before but judgeth it to be what it is indeed for his judgment is according to truth Rom. 2 2. 4. This sense glosse is quite opposite unto and inconsistent with the Apostles maine scope in the first part of that Epistle which is to prove that Righteousness is now revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1 17. and that we are not Justified by the works of the Law but freely by grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3 24 25. And therefore not through the Imputation of Faith the act of Beleeving or any work of Righteousness which we have done for that should not exclude boasting or glorying but through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ received by Faith 5. That which was accounted to Abraham for righteousness did exclude all works and that to the end that all ground of boasting even before men might be take away vers 2. 3. Therefore Faith as a work or the act of beleeving can not be it which is here said to be reckoned or accounted to Abraham for righteousness for this is a work and being made the Ground Formal Objective Cause of justification can not but give ground of glorving before men 6. This glosse maketh the Apostles discourse wholly incoherent for he saith vers 4 5. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned ef grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeveth on him that justifieth tht ungodly his faith is counted for Righteousnese Now if Faith properly taken be imputed the reckoning shall be of just debt for to reckon a men righteous who is righteous antecedent to that act of accounting is no act of grace but of just debt but Faiths being accounted for Righteousness is an act of grace and therefore it must be the Object of Faith or the Righteousness that Faith laith hold on that is here said to be counted upon
the Substance of them all for they either hold forth his Person or his Work or some thing of Him or some thing from Him according to the Various Exigencies Necessities of his people 4. He is received as the grand meane of declaring setting forth the glorious Attributes of God which the Lord will have manifested in and by this noble designe of the Gospel for Faith sweetly acquiesceth in this designe of God's to preach forth his Excellencies Vertues in this manner and therefore receiveth Christ as offered held forth in the Gospel for such a glorious End so receiveth him as the great Gift of Love Ioh. 3 16. as the mean whereby the Righteousness of God is declared Rom. 3 25. and his Grace Ephes. 1 5 6. and as the Power of God and the Wisdom of God 1 Cor. 1 24 Ephes. 3 10. Thus Faith seeth the glory of God shining with a peculiar splendour in the face of Jesus Christ 2. Cor. 4 6. 5. So is he received as the grand only Meane to bring about all the great Ends designed of God and desired by them so that in the receiving of him all these ends are closed with and expected such as Remission of sins Justification Acceptation Adoption Sanctification Peace of Conscience Joy in the Holy Ghost yea life and Immortality full Redemption Ephes. 1 7. Col. 1 14. Act. 26 18. Rom. 3 25. 4 6 7 8. Ephes. 1 11 12 13 14. Rom. 5 1 2 3. 1. Pet. 1 3 4. So that Faith eyeth here by way of end all that Grace Glory they would have and can desire to make them up 6. And in a word He is received as the grand meane to Interest them in God Father Son Holy Ghost as theirs to bring them nigh unto God and in Covenant with Him and to enjoy the several Effects Benefites of their Workings They come to God through Him as the only way to the Father Ioh. 14 6. They close with the Father as their God and Father through Him and with the Holy Ghost as their Sanctifier and comforter through Him who sendeth the Spirit from the Father Ioh. 15 26. 14 26. All these several things belong unto the adequate full Object of that faith whereby beleevers become Justified Adopted Sanctified shall be at length finally Saved for they shall receive the end of their faith the Salvation of their souls 1. Pet. 1 9. Yet to prevent mistakes we would adde some few considerations 1. By all this we do not meane that all these Objects or Various parts or Considerations of the one adequate compleet Object are expresly and distinctly conceived laid hold on by every Beleever when they act faith on Christ or come unto God through him according to the Gospel-command But that these things belong to the full Object of Saving faith and are implied therein so that whoever beleeveth savingly beleeveth these several truthes according to the measure of the Revelation of God and of their Capacity Information So that a more full explicite beleefe of these particulars is now required under the Gospel than was required under the Old Testament when âhis Revelation was not so full and plaine as now and more is required of such who have had clear information of Gospel truthes than of others who have wanted that Advantage and more also is required of such as have large Capacities Understandings than of others who are more Rude of a narrower Reach 2. Wherever any of these truthes are rightly beleeved and heartily closed with all the rest are implicitly also received for they cannot be separated the whole contrivance is such a noble piece af divine art of infinite wisdom that all the several pieces are indissolubly knit together Hence what ever piece it be that the beleever first doth directly explicitly close with or under whatsoever notion Christ at first be embraced according us the beleever cometh to more distinct apprehensions of other pieces or parts of this contrivance so his heart complyeth with and he cordially embraceth the same 3. We may be hereby helped to understand the several and various expressions used in Scripture to pointe forth faith acting on its object for however these be not alwayes one and the same but different yet the same whole object is implicitly understood and these particulars expresly mentioned must not be considered abstractly or alone but according to their several place in the grand designe and with respect thereto as when the object of faith is said to be He who justifieth the ungodly Rom. 4 5. and to be Him who raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead vers 24. and in that same Chap. the object of Abraham's faith whereby he was justified is the Promise that God would make him a Father of many Nations c. vers 17 18. c. all these must be considered with respect unto Christ the grand medium who was appointed to be a Saviour to all Nations and was to die rise againe after satisfaction made to Justice and in and through whom alone God will Justifie the poor sinner that is ungodly in himself With reference here unto must we understand the Publicans saying God be merciful to me a sinner and the saints under the Old Testam their so frequent fleeing to the Grace Mercy Bounty of God for all this was with respect to the only Soveraigne way that the Lord had condescended upon whereby to shew forth and manifest his Mercy Goodness Grace to sinners In the New Test. we finde more express mention made of Christ as the object of faith as Iesus of Nazareth the true Messiah who was promised Ioh. 20 31. 1. Ioh. 5 9 10 20. Ioh. 1 45. Act. 13 38. or as Lord God Ioh. 20 28. as the Son of David Mat. 15 21. 9 27 20 30. 21 42. As the Son of God Ioh. 9 35. as the Christ the Son of God Ioh. 11 27. Act. 8 37. as come forth from God Ioh. 16 30 27. as the Lord Iesus Act. 16. 31. as raised by God from the dead Rom. 10 9 as one that died rose againe 1. Thes. 1 14. as sent of God Ioh. 17 8. that Iesus is the Christ. 1. Ioh. 5 1. So that under all these and the like one and the same thing for substance is pointed forth though some particular in that grand designe of grace is more expresly immediatly pointed at yet that particular is to be understood with reference to the whole and the whole is to be included So also when God is mentioned as the object of faith either absolutely 1. Pet. 1 2. Tit. 3 8. Heb. 5 1. 1. Thes. 1 8. or in Reference to Christ whom he sent Ioh. 5 24. or through whom he is beleeved in 1. Pet. 1 21. or the like the matter must be thus understood 4. Hereby also may the Various Explications of this object of faith given
is with Him alone that the poor convinced wakened Sinner hath to do And this is the justification that we are most concerned to know the nature of to understand what way it is brought about or to be had This is the justification which the Apostle alwayes denieth to be by works asserteth alwayes to be by faith in opposition to works As for a justification of our selves against the false Accusations of Satan the unjust Surmises of our own treacherous Hearts mis-informed Consciences the groundless Alleigances of men judging not according to truth but according to their owne mis-apprehensions whereof Iob's friends were guilty in an high measure It is not that justification whereof the Apostle treateth And whatever Interest good works may have herein as real fruites of an upright working faith consequenly as evidences of our Interest in Christ of our being in a state of justification Yet they are utterly excluded from having an Interest in that justification which is before God in His sight here Christ's Righteousness Laid hold on by faith only taketh place The Argument whereby the Apostle disproveth this justification by the works of Law in the sight of God is in the following words where he ushereth-in the argument with an It is Manifest ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to shew That the Argument was irrefragable that the truth thereby was certaine beyond Contradiction Now the Argument is taken from the opposition that is betwixt Faith the Law or the works of the Law in the matter of justification A ground whereupon the Apostle goeth in his whole Disput upon this matter as we see Rom. 3 27 28. 4 1 2 3 4 5. 9 32. Gal. 2 16. and therefore it must be a certaine truth That if justification before God be by faith it can not be by works consequently whoever assert justification by works destroy Gospel-justification by faith and hence it is also Manifest That justification cannot be by both together Faith works conjoined because what is of faith cannot be of works these two being here inconsistent Rom. 11 6. That Gospel-justification is by faith the Apostle proveth from that known sentence the just shall live by faith a sentence which the Apostle adduced first of all when he was to handle this question in his Epistle to the Romans Chap. 1. vers 17. saying for therein i.e. in the Gospel is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith as it is written the just shall live by faith Where we see that this Sentence confirmeth the whole nature contents of the Gospel that is That the Righteousness of God i.e. the Righteousness which only will stand in Gods Court be accepted of him in order to the justifying of sinners which is the Righteousness of one who is God is revealed from faith to saith that is to say is hold forth to be embraced bysinners through faith first last this Righteousness thus embraced laid hold on by faith is the onely ground of the life of justification so that beleevers their living by faith saith their faith laith hold on the Righteousness of God revealed in the Gospel as the onely ground of their life As to the passage it self it is cited our of Habakuk chap. 2. vers 4. where the Prophet being told vers 3. that howbeit sometime would passe ere the promised delivery should come Yet it would come that therefore he all the People of God should waite for it live in the certaine expectation thereof addeth these words as being told him of the Lord that his Soul which is lifted up is not upright in him how variously these words are rendered by diverse we need not mentione the meaning is this That such as will not in faith patience waite with confidence upon the Lords promise that shall be made good in His good time but in their pride impatience of heart will think to anticipate their delivery by sinistrous sinful meanes declare that their heart is not upright that they are void of true faith Upon the other hand it is said the just shall live by his faith that is Such as are real true beleevers will waite in the exercise of faith till God's time come by this faith trusting leaning to the faithful promise of God through the Messiah in whom all the promises are yea amen 2 Cor. 1 20. they shall have a life of it they shall be carried thorow supported strengthened comâorted And much to this same Purpose is this passage cited by the Apostle Hebr. 10 37 38. For yet a little while he that shall come will come will not tarry now the just shall live by faith c. of which we have spoken elsewhere in all these places the Apostle leaveth out the pronoun his which the Prophet useth but that maketh no great alteration the matter being clear that sufficiently understood The Septuagints make a great alteration when they render the words thus The just shall live by my faith The great difficulty is how these words of the Prophet spoken of such as were already justified beleevers his saying of them that they shall live by their faith for we need not owne that sense of the words which some think may not improbably be given to wit That he who is by his faith just or justified shall live can be applicable to the Apostl'es purpose to prove justification by faith Not to mentione what others say to this nor judging it very necessary to enquire anxiously into this matter seing the Spirit of the Lord 's moving inspireing of Paul to alleige apply this passage of Old Testament truth for confirmation of what he was about to prove may fully satisfie us as to its pertinency though we should not satisfie all by proprosing our thoughts concernin it â Conceive the ground may be this That this being a general truth universally true that even beleevers who are already changed have a life begun in them must all their life long make use of faith gripping to the promises as yea amen in Christ promised come who is the Substance Kirnel of them all to the end they may be supported Strengthened Upheld carried thorow Difficulties Distresses Darknesses Temptations the like without fainting or doing what is unbeseeming a living Beleever in the day of trial so that their whole life even unto the end is kept-in continued by faith bringing new supplies influences from the head through the promises it will hence follow that without faith no man can at first attaine to this life change from death yea that in this case faith is much more necessarily requisite yea faith only without works is must be the only way to justification of life for if the progress continuance of this life or renewing of it after decayes be had by faith drawing
sap life influence from the head much more must this be the way of getting the first change made from death to life And this way or not much different of argueing in this same debate we see the Apostle followeth Rom. 4. where from what was said of Abraham a considerable time after he was a beleever he proveth justification by faith without works or that Abraham was justified by faith not by works The Import then of the Testimony is that this life whereof beleevers are made partakers is begun continued carried on by faith therefore it is not by the works of the Law but by faith that they are justified brought into a state of life If it be true that without faith even belevers cannot be supported nor in case to live as becometh to the glory of God to their own peace Comforth in new Trials Difficulties much more is it true that without faith those who are in nature in state of Enmity to God cannot live the life of justification with it alone they can shall Before we come to speak particularly to any Truthes deducable from the words we shall premise some few things considerable CHAP. II. Naturally we are inclined to cry up Selff in Justification THe Apostle as we see in all his writtings about this matter is very carefull to cleare the question of justification so as Man may have no cause of boasting or of glorying in himself upon the account of any thing he hath or he hath done in order to justification that hereby he might cast a copie unto all such as would approve themselves faithful unto the Lord in being co-workers with Him in the Gospel that he might so much the more set himself against that innatelusting of heart that is in all naturally unto an exalting crying up of Self in the matter of their justification before Acceptance with God and especially we finde how zealously how frequently with what strength multitude of Arguments he setteth himself against cryeth down that which men do so naturally with such a vehement byasse incline unto to wit justification by their own works or by their own obedience to the Law to the end their innate pride may have ground of venting it self in boasting glorying before men From this we may premit in short the consideration of these Three things to prepare our way unto the clearing-up of the Gospel-Doctrine in this matter First That there is a corrupt byasse in the heart of men by nature a strong Inclination to reject the Gospel-Doctrine of free justification through faith in Christ to ascribe too much to themselves in that affaire as if they would hold the life of justification not purely of the free grace rich mercy of God through Jesus Christ but of themselves either in whole or in part in one measure or another Secondly That it is the duty of all who would be found faithful Ambassadours for Christ after the example of the Apostle so to preach forth the Grace of God in this mystery to explaine the same as corrupt Nature within such without as are byassed with mistakes about this matter are led away with proud carnal self conceits may have no apparent or seeming ground of boasting nor be confirmed in their natural prejudices Mistakes therein Thirdly That in very deed free Gospel-justification is so contrived ordered as that none have any real ground of boasting or of glorying in themselves or of ascribing any part of the glory thereof unto themselves as if they by their deeds works did contribute any thing to the procuring thereof It will not be necessary to speak to these at any length but only briefly to touch upon them to make way unto what followeth to be said on this weighty subject which is of so much concernment to us all As to the First of these to which we shall speak little in this Chapter thereafter of the rest in their due order it is too too apparent to be a truth from these grounds following I. This is most manifest from the many Errours false opinions that are Vented Owned Maintained with so much Violence corrupt zeal all to cry-up Self in less or in more to cry down Grace Hence so many do plead with great confidence for an Interest of our works in our justification Such as Papists who quite mistake the nature of true justification Socinians Arminians Others who side with these in less or in more will plead for a justification by our inherent Righteousnoss or works of Righteousness which we do Others that will not plead for such an early Interest of our works in this matter will plead for faith as our Gospel-Righteousness affirme that the very act of our Obedience in us is imputed for a Righteousness to us is accounted such by God so hath the same place in the New Covenant that compleet perfect obedience had in the Old Covenant of works made with Adam which as shall hereafter appear driveth us upon the same rock II. It is manifest likewise from the large frequent Disputes about this matter that we have in Paul's Epistles If there had not been a great pronness in man by nature to cry-up himself to set up his own Righteousness in matter of justification why would the Spirit of the Lord have been at so much paines to speak so to cry down Self our works in this matter as He is in these Epistles of Paul if He had not seen the great necessity thereof by reason of this strong Inclination that men Naturally have hereunto We must not think that any thing is there spoken in vaine or that the Spirit of the Lord would have left that Doctrine so fully cleared wherein our works are so expresly excluded if there had not been a necessity for it if it had not been as necessary in all after ages of the Church as at that time when first written Whatever the truth be that is so frequently pungently inculcated in the Scriptures we may saifly suppose that as the faith practice of that truth is necessary so there must be much reluctancy of Soul in us to receive the same to close with it and a strong Inclination to beleeve practise the contrary III. In the Infancy of Christianity we see what a strong Inclination there was to cry-up works what we do the Law as the only ground of justification or at least to have a share with Christ in that Interest which gave occasion to the penning of these Epistles of Paul where this matter is so fully clearly handled particularly that to the Romans that to the Galatias unto the speaking less or more hereunto in almost all his other Epistles And this Inclination to the crying up of works the Law in Opposition to the pure Gospel-way of
death keep the law therefore reason requireth that what is first purchased should be first received applied Ans. I see no necessity of distinguishing after this manner the Effects of Christ's active passive obedience but judge it best to keep as conjoined what divine wisdom hath firmerly inseparably joined together But though we should thus needlesly distinguish these effects yet there is no necessity of saying That Christ's obedience because first existing should be first imputed unto justification and then His death to Remission for neither do we assigne justification to His active obedience only nor is the same order to be observed in the application of the Effects that was observed in Christ's performance of what was laid upon Him and required of Him as our Sponsor for the Nature of the thing required that Christ should first have obeyed before He died on the other hand the condition of sinners requireth that they be first justified and pardoned before they have a right to all the Effects of Christ's active obedience imputed 2. He saith If a man hath once sinned it is not any legal righteousness what so ever imputed that can justifie him Ans. This is granted But in order to justification we say That Christ's whole Surety-righteousness is imputed this comprehendeth both His active His passive obedience so usually distinguished 3. He saith If a mans sins be once forgiven him he hath no need of any further righteousness for his justification because forgiveness of sins reacheth home amounteth unto a full justification with God Ans. If justification were nothing else but forgiveness of sins there would be some colour for this but in justification there is also an accepting of the man as righteous to this a meer pardon of sins will not serve for a Righteousness is hereunto requisite pardon of sins and Righteousness are not one thing It is false then to say as he addeth That this is all the justification the Scripture knowes or speaks of the forgiveness of sins or acquiting from condemnation For both according to Scripture and the native import and universal usage of the word justification denoteth a constituting legally and declaring solemnely a person to be righteous or free of the accusation given in against him or a pronouncing of an accused man to be righteous therefore supposeth when the sentence is just that the person is a righteous person in our case the sentence of God being according to truth the person justified having no righteousness of his own must be clothed with the Surety-righteousness of Christ as Surety Head Husband imputed to him received by faith He addeth That righteousness which we have by Christ and where with we are said to be justified is only a negative righteousness not a positive It is nothing else but a non-Imputation of sin which I therefore call a Righteousness by Imputation as having the privileges but not the nature substance of a perfect legal righteousness Ans. A Righteousness not positive but meerly negative is no righteousness at all for a true Righteousness is a positive conformity unto the law the Rule of Righteousness and as the Righteousness is but negative and Interpretatively such so must the justification be that is founded thereupon He thinketh to prove this from Rom. 4 6 7 8. addeth a Righteousness without works must needs be a negative or privative Righteousness The Imputation of righteousness vers 6. is interpreted vers 7 8. to be a not imputing of sin Ans. The place cited as we declared above giveth no countenance unto this sense of the word justification but evinceth rather the contrary A righteousness without our works which is the Apostles meaning may be is no negative nor privative Righteousness but a positive full and compleat Righteousness being the Surety-righteousnes of Christ the Sponsor and the Text saith not That this Righteousness is nothing else than a non-Imputation of sin but inferreth rather the Imputation of Righteousness as the cause from the Non-Imputation of sin as the Effect and all this to prove that justification is not by the works of the law He tels us that we have the like description of this Righteousnes 2 Cor. 5. that which vers 19. he calls in God the not imputing of our sins unto us he calls in us vers 21. a being made the righteousness of God in Him Ans. This is a plaine perversion of the scope of the meaning of the words for vers 21. the Apostle is giving the ground reason of what was said vers 19. showing how this Reconciliation Non-Imputation of sin is founded what is the special ground thereof as appeareth by the particle for vers 21. for He hath made Him sin c. He saith This is most plaine Act. 13 38 39. where forgiveness of sins is immediatly thereafter called justification Ans. All that can be hence inferred is that in justification sins are pardoned or that such as have forgiveness of sins are justified or that these do inseparably go together But no appearance of proof here that they are both one thing or that in justification there is no more but pardon of sins He prosecuteth this purpose yet further saying This is the most usual proper signification of the word justifie not to signify the giving or bestowing of a compleat positive righteousness but only an acquiting or discharging setting a man free from guilt penalty due unto such things as were laid to his charge Ans. 1 Nor do we say that justification signifieth such a giving bestowing of a compleat positive Righteousness but that it signifieth a declaring pronouncing of a person to be righteous therefore presupposeth this giving or be stowing of a compleat Righteousness for the man whom God declareth pronounceth to be Righteous must be Righteous seing he hath no Righteousness of his own he must have his Suretie's Righteousness imputed to him 2 And so in this sense justification is an acquitting or setting a man free from the guilt penalty due to such things as were laid to his charge for he is pronounced Righteous But it is not a simple discharge of the person from the guilt and penalty upon a pardon Remission for a pardoned man is not a justified man but rather is supposed to be guilty is pardoned because guilty He proceedeth In the Scripture it is usually opposed to condemning Prov. 17 15. Where by justifying the wicked nothing is meart but the making of them just in the rights privileges of just men which are freedom from censure punishment c. So that by justifying the wicked nothing else is meant but the not condemning of him Rom. 8 33 34 5 19. Therefore by justifying nothing else is meant but acquitting from condemnation so to be justified live are equipollent Gal. 3 11 21. Esai 53 11. Ans. 1 That justifying is opposed to condemning is granted but this
is justified is justified out of the inherent dignity of that which justifieth him but he that is justified by faith is justified by the free gracious acceptation of it by God for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its inherent worth dignity Ans. What God Imputeth reputeth to be a Righteousness in order to justification must be accounted such or a man shall be justified without all consideration of a Righteousness and so be pronounced declared Righteous though he be not Righteous upon any account or in any manner of way And if faith be not accounted for the self same thing or for the equivalent with the Righteousness of the Law how shall it be accounted a Righteousness in order to the justification of a sinner who is under the Curse of the Law who because of the breach of the Law hath no right to life wherefore faith must have that inherent worth that the Righteousness of the Law should have had else it cannot be a Righteousness whereupon a sinner can be justified before God who is Just and Righteous and will not pronounce such to be Righteous as are not Righteous 2 If God upon a man's faith will as fully justify a man as if he had fulfilled the Law either that faith must be a Righteousness and so accounted which he here denieth or the man must be declared Righteous who hath no Righteousness and so the judgment of God should not be according to truth or upon his beleeving he must be justified as being Righteous by an Imputed Righteousness which is the thing he peremptorily denieth 3 When one is justified by faith by God's free gracious Acceptation of it this act of grace must either import that faith is accepted as a Righteousness so accounted of God or still the beleever shall be declared and pronounced Righteous though he hath no Righteousness or the meaning of this Acceptation must be that God hath graciously condescended to appoint this mean way of sinners having an Interest in the Righteousness of Christ whereby he may be accounted Righteous justified as really as is he had performed that Righteousness himself in his own person in this sense it is most true but utterly destructive of his designe 4 If faith be accepted for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its Inherent worth dignity it must either be that which is of such inherent worth or it must be accepted for that which it is not so a man must be judged by God to have that which he hath not He concludeth thus Wherefore the Imputation of faith for righteousness may well stand with personal sins in him to whom this Imputation is made in respect of which sins he remaines obliged to repent but the Imputation of a perfect legal Righteousness makes a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it Ans. Then it seemeth that by the Imputation of faith for Righteousness a man standeth not invested possessed of a full entire right unto life for that he said before was a privilege wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin 2 If by a perfect legal Righteousness he meane a Righteousness required of the Law performed by us personally we plead not for the Imputation of any such but if he mean a Righteousness consisting in full conformity to the Law performed by Christ graciously imputed to us received by faith that is well consistent with inherent personal sins What he meaneth by making a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it I know not till some be pleased to explaine it Obj. 6. Another argum he prosecuteth pag. 149. c. thus If men be as Righteous as Christ himself was in his life there was no more necessity of His death for them than for himself then the just should not have died for the unjust but for the just Ans. If we had not transgressed the Law there had been no necessity that either we or any for us should have died but having transgressed the Law thereby fallen under the Curse wanting all right to life we must have a Surety-righteousness whereby not only the Curse shall be taken away but the blessing of Abraham may come upon us we may have a full right to life therefore both the Active passive Righteousness of Christ is necessary 2 Christ died for the unjust because His death which was the period terminating act of His obedience and Surety righteousness which He undertook to performe in our room and Law-place was for sinners lying under the Curse void of all right title to life He imagineth that first Christ's Active Righteousness is imputed thereby the person is constituted Righteous then inferreth the nonâ necessity of Christ's death By we say that Christ's whole Surety-righteousness consisting in what He did suffered in His state of Humiliation in our room and as Cautioner is at once imputed and not in parts that so the necessity of sinners may be answered in all points He thinks to prove this consequence by these words Gal. 2 21. If righteousness be by the Law then Christ died in vaine rejecting the sense of the word Law viz. as importing the works of the Law as performed by us in our own person thereby doing violence to the whole Scope of the place to the constant acceptation of the expression supposing that the Consequence will be strong though the works of the Law as performed by Christ be here understood that meerly upon this false ground Because the Righteousness of Christ's life imputed had been a Sufficient every wayes a compleat Righteousness for us Nor need we say as he saith in our name That there was a Necessity that Cbrist should did that so the righteousness of His life might be imputed to ãâã For the necessity of His death arose from our transgressing of the Law being under the Curse Obj. 7. Chap. 14. pag. 151. He alleigeth that this Imputation evaniateth Remission of Sins saying for if men be righteous with the same righteousness wherewith Christ was righteous they have no more need of pardon than He had Ans. We spoke to this above Chap. 6. Mystery 11. therefore need say no more here then that the Consequence is null that the probation is insufficient for though we be constituted Righteous through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness it is but a Surety-righteousness not our own inherently the Surety not being of our appointing or fitting furnishing our pardon is a Consequent Effect of this Imputation 2 The consequence is no more valide from the Imputation of the Active Righteousness of Christ than from His passive and Satisfaction and so with Sociâians he must also hereby deny Christ's Satisfaction that he may establish his free Remission But Gospel free forgiveness is rather established than any
Right to the reward as to this State whatever we shall conceive as the forme thereof it must be a Righteousness consequently the Righteousness of Christ imputed for sinners can have no other Obj. 12. If the meritorious cause of our justification be imputed unto us thon the Effects themselves of this cause may be imputed to us also so we may be said to have merited both our own justification salvation for if I may be accounted or reputed to have wrought that Righteousness which is meritorious why may I not be conceived as well to have merited Nay further if I may be conceived to have wrought that Righteousness in Christ whereby I am justified my self I may as well be conceived to have wrought that Righteousness by which the whole world is justified Ans. This is but a meer sophisme founded upon a mistake The consequence is false the proof thereof standeth only upon this rotten bottome That to say That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us is to say that we are reputed esteemed or accounted to have done or wrought that Righteousness our selves whileas the true meaning of Imputation is this That the Righteousness of Christ is made over by grace unto Beleevers reckoned upon their score where by they are dealt with now no other wayes than if they had fulfilled all Righteousness in their own person Whence it is clear that the Effects cannot be said to be imputed to us but only that we partake of the Effects thereofs so far as our own Necessity requireth As the Ransom payed for the Redemption of so many captives is imputed to each of the captives in order to his owne Redemption to none of them as Redemption of others without this Imputation or reckoning it upon their score as the price of their Redemption no man could have right to the Effects thereof in reference to himself or could be redeemed thereby So that it is manifest that through the meritorious cause or the righteousnes of Christ imputed to us we obtaine justification Salvation but do not merite them our Redeemer Surety meriteth them for us we enjoy what He merited for our own happiness It is false then to say That by Imputation we are conceived to have wrought that righteousness in Christ whereby we are justified therefore it cannot but be most false to think That we may be conceived to have wrought that righteousness also by which others are justified for it was only our Head Husband Surety Redeemer who wrought it free grace imputed it to or reckoneth it upon the score of Beleevers Obj 13. chap. 18. pag. 165. If the active Righteousness of Christ be in the letter formality of it imputed unto me in my justification then I am reputed before God to have wrought that righteousness in Christ. But this is false c. Ans. Neither proposition is true The Major is denied unless by these word letter and formality he understand such an Imputation as we do not acknowledge his words would seem to import this for saith he in confirmation of the Major to have any thing imputed to a man in the letter of it is to be reputed the doer of what is so imputed to him And if this be the only sense of his proposition the conclusion maketh not against us for we asserte no such Imputation as inferreth such a Reputation Nay to say That God should repute things so were to destroy all Imputation for what God whose judgment is according to truth âeputeth us to have done we must have done it if we have really done it be reputed to have done it by the Lord it cannot be said to be imputed to us in the sense we take Imputation for Imputation with us is of that which we have not or did not which God knoweth judgeth we did not yet is by Imputation so made over to us put upon our score reckoned upon our account as that we are as really made partakers of the Effects thereof that is of justification c. As if we had done it ourselves or it had been ours without before any Imputation Hence the beleever is made the righteousness of God in Christ not reputed or esteemed to have been the righteousness of God but now through the gracious Imputation of God through faith made to be so Hence we see that the proof of his Minor goeth upon the same Mistake if saith he I be reputed before God to have wrought Righteousness in Christ in my justification then is Christ in His Sufferings reputed before God to have sinned in me Ans. We say neither the one nor the other Christ did not sinne in us nor did the Lord repute Him to have done so But he was made sin by Imputation the guilt of sin being laid upon Him or our sinnes as to their guilt being caused to meet on Him Whence it came to passe that He suffered as really the punishment of sin as if He had sinned in us whileas as to His own person He knew no sin neither was deceit found in His mouth Obj. 14. pag. 166. If the Active obedience of Christ be imputed then His Passive is imputed also Ans. And why not If the death Sufferings of Christ saith he be imputed unto me then may I be accounted or reputed to have died or suffered in Christ. But this cannot be because in Christ we are justified absolved from punishment therefore cannot be said to have been punished in Him Ans. This whole Argument is of a piece with the foregoing Though therefore it be upon the matter answered already Yet we shall adde this word further That though in one sense it is false to say That we are reputed to have died Suffered in Christ viz physically yet in a legal sense it may be admitted as a truth that Beleevers who now by faith are in Christ of His Body are accounted reputed to have suffered in Christ their Head Surety Publick person therefore are now dealt with as such Hence they are said to be crucified with Christ to be dead buried with Him to be risen with Him Rom. 6 4 5 6. Ephes. 2 5 6. Col. 2 12. Yet it will not follow hence that in a legal sense Christ can be said to have sinned in us for we were not His Representative or Head Though the debtor may be said in Law sense to have paid his creditor in his Suretys payment Yet the Surety cannot be said to be contracting debt in the debtor for the debtor's deed cannot affect him untill he voluntarily submit himself to be Surety where may be after the debt is already contracted by the debtor And to say in this Law sense that Beleevers Suffered in Christ doth not weaken the ground of our justification absolution Acceptation Healing as is manifested above unless we turn Socinians then upon this same ground we
for his Right to Impunity and life it is no Righteousness beside I hope he will not say that that is given before justification of a Righteousness preceeding in order of Nature at least justification we are speaking enquireing after it What he answereth to this Objection in the first place because it only concerneth Papistes their Misapprehensions in the matter I passe But 2. he saith If any of them do as you say no wonder if they you contend If one say we are Innocent or sinless in reality the other we are so by Imputation when we are so no way at all but sinners really so reputed Ans. If by Innocent or sinless he mean such as never sinned never Man Protestant or Papist dreamed of such a thing If by these termes he meane such are now not guilty legally of the charge brought in against them this we acknowledge and must acknowledge or we know not how any shall ever be justified for God will not pronounce sinners as such really and legally to be righteous His judgment being according to truth therefore because we have no righteousness within us whereupon we can be pronounced not guilty we must have a Righteousness imputed to us even the Surety-righteousness of Christ. But Mr. Baxter it seemeth will not understand what this legal non-guiltiness is yet in matters among men it is very clear and manifest If Paul had fully Satisfied according as he undertook Philemon for the wrongs and injuries done him by Onesimus If Onesimus had been convented before a judge for these same crimes and Injuries had produced the Satisfaction made by his Surety Paul accepted by the creditor Philemon would not the judge have had ground in Law equity to pronounce Onesimus not guilty therefore not to be punished according as was libelled against him And yet though Onesimus had been pronounced Innocent that is not-guilty as to Crimes and Injuries alleiged against him in this case in a legal sense it would not follow that he had never committed these wrongs nor had the evincing of that been necessary to his Absolution and justification His Legal Innocency or Righteousness by vertue of the Satisfaction made by his Surety now judicially accounted reputed his being Sufficient These things are plaine to such as will but open their eyes but all the world cannot make them plaine to such as will understand nothing but what is cast into Aristotelian Metaphysical Mould Were it not lost laboure for any to enquire what is the Matter Forme of this legal Righteousness of Onesimus Whereof is it constitute How came Paul's righteousness to be his and so one accident to go from subject to subject whether was Paul's satisfaction the Efficient or Constitutive cause of Onesimus his Innocency or non-guiltiness and the like The 5. Object is How can God accept him as just who is really reputedly a sinner This dishonoureth His Holiness and Justice To this he saith Not so cannot God pardon sin upon a valuable Merite Satisfaction of a Mediator though He judge us not perfect now accept us not as such Yet 1. Now he judgeth us holy 2. And the members of a perfect Saviour 3. And will make us perfect and spotless and then so judge us having washed us from our sins in the bloud of the Lamb. Ans. All this giveth no satisfaction to the objection for the objection speaketh of acceptance in Justification consequently of that acceptation that preceedeth Sanctification 2. It is true God can doth pardon sins but meer pardon of sins is not justification the person must be accepted as righteous and yet by Mr. Baxter's way the man hath no righteousness to ground such a judgment and acceptation and God's judgment being alwayes according to truth the justified man must be righteous that he may be accounted accepted as Righteous in Justification Therefore either Mr. Baxter must grant that he is Righteous through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ or that he is Righteous inherently by his faith or by his fulfilling of the Conditions of the New Covenant for there is not a third or that he is prononnced Righteous without a Righteousness The 6. object Thus you make the Reatus culpae not pardoned at all but only the Reatus poenae To this he saith 1. If by Reatus culprae be meaned the Relation of a sinner as he is revera peccator so to be reus is to be revera ipse qui peccavit then we must consider what you meane by Pardon for if you mean the nullifying of such a guilt or Reality it is impossible because necessitate existentiae he that hath once sinned will be still the person that sinned while he is a person the relation of one that sinned will cleave to him It will eternally be a true proposition Peter Paul did sin But if by pardon you mean the pardoning of all the penalty which for that sin is due damni vel sensus so it is pardoned this is indeed the Reatus poenae not only the penalty but the dueness of that penalty or the obligation to it is remitted and nullified Ans. The nullifying of the Reatus culpa physically or metaphysically is indeed Impossible for it will be alwayes true that such such persons did sinne but this Reatus culpae may and must be nullified legally and juridically otherwise never shall man be justified for in justification this Reatus culpae is declared to be taken away for the man is declared non reus accepted as not-guilty or Righteous not physically or Metaphyâically but legally a man must be legally Righteous before he be justified according to equity he cannot be legally Righteous as long as the Reatus culpae doth legally remaine for a man legally guilty is not legally Righteous Now Mr. Baxter must yeeld to this or he shall destroy his own ground and take away all pardon as well as justification for as it will be eternally true that Peter Paul did sinne so were rei culpae so it will be eternally true that punishment was due unto them that is they were rei poenae therefore if because it will be eternally true that Peter Paul sinned therefore the Reatus culpae cannot be annulled so because it will be eternally true that Peter Paul were obnoxious liable to punishment therefore also the Reatus poenae cannot be annulled But the truth lyeth here that though neither the Reatus culpae nor poenae can be annulled physically or metaphysically that is so taken away as if they never had been yet both are taken away legally juridically and a pardoned man is legally and juridically non puniendus thus the Reatus poenae is taken away and a justified man is legally and juridically not-guilty of the offence charged against him thus the Reatus culpae is taken away As it is inconsistent with pardon to say that
abstracto i. e. without the receiving subject thereof in concreto i. e. together with the beleever The first which signifieth Remission of sins and Righteousness to Acceptation prepared though not yet conferred upon the Elect he saith hath a being before Faith and so the object is before the act though the ather be after faith But I conceive there is no great necessitie of this for answering of the argument if any should propose it to evince justification before faith and Bellarm. adduceth it not to this end as we saw for I see no ground to assert justification to be the object of justifying faith as if in order to justification we were called to beleeve that we are justified and that our sins are pardoned as was said above And as for this justification considered in the abstract which is said to have a being not only in the Purpose of God but also in the Covenant between the Father the Mediator in the Purchase of Christ not only is it not called justification in Scripture but also in so far as it is the object of faith as all other revealed truthes are it is of the elect in general and not of this or that particular person so that though justifying faith may beleeve that God Purposed Christ Purchased the Covenant of Redemption did expresly containe the justification of the Elect yet it doth not beleeve in order to the mans justification that he in particular so was justified either in the Purpose of God or in the Purchase of Christ or in the Covenant betwixt Iehovah the Mediator nor is this Faith called for because this object is not a revealed truth Yet this same justifying Faith is of that Nature as to produce afterward reflecting acts whereby the man may see his own justification be perswaded of it in truth hence also be perswaded that the Lord Purposed to justifie him in particular that Christ Purchased his justification in particular and that it was an article of the Covenant of Redemption that he in particular should be justified 2. While it is said That the just liveth by faith we see that faith is the way whereby persons come actually to live the life of justification and hence it can not it self be the matter of their life What interest properly faith hath in this affaire must be debated afterward to wit whether it be properly imputed as the matter of our Righteousness or only be to be considered as an Instrument or as a Condition how so 3. We see That this living by Faith proveth that there is no justification by works in the sight of God whence it is manifest that faith here cannot be considered as a work of the Law or as a duty enjoined by the Law or under any such consideration 2 That works have no interest as a cause or condition with Faith in justification 3 That the life of justification as to its continnation is by faith and by faith as opposite to works for the just or the man already justified liveth by faith This being also questioned we will have occasion to speak more to it afterward 4. While it is said the just liveth by faith it is considerable That this faith in its kinde and not in such or such measure is here said to be the meane whereby persons come to live the life of justification So that this true Faith how weak so ever is the only mean of interessing a soul in this privilege of justification This will give occasion to speak of the object of this justifying faith which will help to cleare the nature of it Our larger Catechisme qu. 72. giveth us such a definition or description of justifying faith that may satisfy us as to most of these difficulties The answere is this justifying faith is a saving grace Heb. 10 39. wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit 2 Cor. 4 13. Ephes. 1 17 18 19. word of God Rom. 10 14 17. whereby he being convinced of his sin misery of the disability in himself all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition Act. 2 37. 16 30. Ioh. 16 8 9. Rom. 5 6. Eph. 2 1. Act. 4 12. not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the Gosspel Ephes. 1 13. but receiveth resteth upon Christ and his Righteousness therein hold forth for pardon of sin Ioh. 1 12. Act. 16 31. 10 43. for the accepting and accounting of his person Righteous in the sight of God for salvation Phil. 3 9. Act. 15 11. And this question is none of these particulars wherein Mr. Baxter in his Confess desireth to dissent from the said Catechisme as the next Question is as we shall hear We may hence take notice of these particulars concerning this faith ' whereby it may be known distinguished from what some may mistake for it 1. As to its nature kinde it is saving for all such as have this grace of justifying faith are in the sure way of salvation whatever faith persons may have if they have not this they are not in the sure path of life There is a faith of miracles both Active Passive as we may say that is a faith to do miracles and a faith to receive miracles wrought upon them The first was that which the Apostles had and others who wrought Miracles and is to be understood Mat. 17 20 21. Luk. 17 6. The other is that which some of those had who received miraculous cures as the woman Mal. 9 21 21. and that Man who cried out I beleeve help mine unbeleefe Mark 9 24. and the man of lystra Act. 14 9. and others This in it self considered is not a saving grace Iudas had this faith whereby he cast our devils and had commission to work miracles with the rest Mat. 10 8. Luk. 9 1 6 10. So also the Seventy disciples Luk. 10 9 17 19. And how great a privilege so ever this was yet Christ told them vers 20. that it was a far greater matter and much greater ground of joy to have their names written in heaven whereby he giveth us also to understand that these are distinct different from other and also separable Many saith Christ Mat. 7 22 23. will say to me in that day Lord Lord have we not prophesied in thy name in thy name have cast out devils in thy name have done many wonderful works And then will I professe unto them I never knew you depart from me ye that work iniquity And it is of this Faith that Paul speaketh 1. Cor. 13 2. though I have all faith so that I could remove mountains and have no charity I am nothing Importing that this Faith may be where there is no saving Christian Love There is an Historiâal faith that is a beleeving not only of the histories recorded in the word of God but of the whole Revelation of God's minde there yet only
as things historically recorded working up the man in whom it is unto a voluntary profession of that truth This though true in its kinde yet is not saving seing many may have this who are strangers to true saving Faith Simon Magns beleeved thus Act. 8 13. who yet was but in the gall of bitterness in the bond of iniquity vers 23. Many beleeved in the name of Christ when they saw the miracles which he did to whom notwithstanding Christ did not commit himself Ioh. 2 23 24. Christ had many disciples who professed the truth and yet went back walked no more with him Ioh. 6 66. This faith when it cometh no further is but such a Faith as devils have who beleeve there is a God tremble Iam. 2 19. This is the fruitless workless Faith that iames speaketh of Iam. 2 14. that cannot save which he calleth a dead faith vers 17 20. a faith that cannot work with works vers 22. There is a Temporary faith which whether we look upon as distinct from the preceeding historical faith or as an higher measure degree thereof the matter is not much is also different from far short of this saving Faith whereby a man cometh to live the life of Iustification though it hath some effect wrought upon the affections this is the stonie-ground that receiveth the sowen seed Mat. 13 20 21. These are they who hear the word and anon with joy receive it yet have no root in themselves but endure for a while only for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word by by they are offended 2. Every act of saving Faith is not the justifying act of faith or that act thereof whereby we are Justified before God Saving Faith hath many several acts as we may see Heb. 11. Though where ever there are any of the real acts of saving faith that man hath also acted justifying faith yet we may look on Justifying Faith or on the act of faith whereby the soul becometh Justified as some way distinct from other acts of Saving Faith Though by saving Faith we come to understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God Heb. 11 3. not in a meer historical manner but savingly yet that act of saving Faith is not the Justifying act thereof to speak so Though the same Faith by which the Ancients subdued kingdomes stopped the mouthes of Lions quenched the violence of fire c. was that by which they were justified yet these were not justifying acts of that faith that is in order to justification faith acteth in another peculier manner Though it be one the same saving faith whereby a beleever is united unto Christ in order to answer the Challenges Accusations of the Law to free him from guilt condemnation and maketh use of Christ's Right Strength Support c. in times of Darkness Temptations Difficulties yet these acts of the same faith are not the same but may be looked upon as distinct Faith acteth one way on Christ in order to Justification another way in order to Sanctification Faith acteth one way when it receiveth in and another way when it giveth out as it were Faith acteth one way on Christ as Priest and it acteth another way upon him as Prophet as King yet we would know that in all these actings of faith whole Christ is laid hold upon though more expresly explicitly in the uniting act whereby the soul is married unto Jesus thereby becometh one spirit with him There can be no use making of Christ for any end whatsomever untill the soul be united with himself and in every act of faith whereby Christ is made use of for what ever particular mercy the Beleever would have be it Pardon Light Strength Comfort or such like Christ himself is gripped to laid hold on for there is no separating of Him his favours yet the Beleever while gripping laying hold on whole Christ taketh him up under that Relation and eyeth that Office that most neerly answereth to and correspondeth with his present necessity and pointeth forth that good which he is now desirous of so acteth faith suitablie or putteth forth faith in suitable acts as for example when the beleever is troubled with conscience of guilt he runneth to Christ yet in a special manner he goeth to him as Priest eyeth that Blood that only can purge consciences from dead works Heb. 9 14. When he is troubled with Raging Corruptions would have them subdued or would have his hard Rebellious Heart made more soft pliable to God's will he goeth to Christ yet in special manner he eyeth Christ as a King acteth Faith upon him accordingly So when he is troubled with Ignorance Doubts and Darkness he goeth to Christ yet he eyeth him thân especially as a Prophet accordingly acteth Faith upon him Yet we would know that when the Beleever acteth thus in this different manner upon Christ whether as a Prophet or as a Priest or as a King there is no exclusion far less any denyal of the other offices which cannot be because Christ himself consequently whole Christ is alwayes He to whom the beleever goeth though with a more express explicite special application to usemaking of that office work of Christ which most suiteth the beleevers present necessity Now though all these acts of faith be acts of saving faith yet they are not all that act of faith which is or may be for distinctions sake called the Justifying act of faith for this is that act of faith only which the soul exerteth in order to Justification and Absolution from the Curse of the Law 3. This Faith is no product of the power of Nature accompanied with all its advantages elevated to its highest pitch to the highest measure of accomplishments Nature as now corrupted depraved not only will not willingly complye with the designe of Grace in the Gospel but it cannot being nothing but pure enmity to the holy Wayes Counsels of God all its mindings are of the flesh and all the minding of the flesh or the carnal mind is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Rom. 8 7. Persons deluded by Satan may imagine suppose with themselves that it is so wholly in their power to beleeve that they can exerte that Faith at what time so ever they will But howbeit out of their own mouths such unbeleevers stand convinced condemned for their not beleeving yet the mighty power of God's Spirit must be exerted ere they be brought unto a beleeving frame or their souls be made to look towards Jesus in earnest so as to lay hold on him by Faith Therefore is Faith called the gift of God Ephes. 2 8. There is the working of the might of God's power requisite unto beleeving Ephes. 1 19. Such then as have not the workings of the
by others to the same end from the Exceptions of Iohn Goodwine in his Treatise of Iustification part 2. Ch. 6. The first Argum. is thus framed That which impeacheth the truth or justice of God can have no agreement with the truth This is undeniable But the imputation of our act of Beleeving for Righteousness doth so because then he should esteem account that to be a Righteousness which is not Therefore c. He excepteth against the Assumption its probation thus 1. This was in effect the plea of Swencfeâdus as recorded by Zanchy Epist. lib. 1. p. 215. likewise of the Councel of Trent as Calv. hath observed Antidot ad Sess. 6. p. 324. to prove that the word Justification in the Scripture was not to be taken in a juridical sense to wit for absolution but in a physical or moral sense for making of a man compleetly just righteous Ans. What Swencfeldus said I finde not recorded by Zanchie in the place cited in my edition if his words be rightly repeeted in the margine he hath had the same judgment that Papists have which is sufficiently known with whom none in reason will say we conspire upon the account of this argument who but observeth this which abundantly discovereth the impertinency of this Exception That the minor its Probation speak not of the act of God Justifying but of his simple act of Estimating or Judging which must alwayes be according to truth therefore we cannot think or say that God judgeth or estimateth that to be a compleat Righteousness which is nothing so And beside though Justification it self were here understood yet it might be said without any ground of imputation either of Popery or of Swencfeldianisme that God who is the just Righteous Judge will not absolve a person as Righteous who is not Righteous nor pronunce him Righteous who hath not a Righteousness as he hath not who hath nothing but his act of Beleeving imputed to him Except 2. Any action conformable to a righteous Law may be is called Righteousness as that fact of Phineas Psal. 106 30. And faith being an obedience to a special commandement 1 Ioh. 3 23. 2 Pet. 2 21. Rom. 1 5. it may be with truth sufficient propriety of speach called a righteousness Ans. But of a particular Righteousness we are not here speaking nor of a particular Justification of such an act but of a Justification as to State and of a corresponding Righteousness which must be universal answerable to the challenge of the Law and no particular act of Obedience will be accounted such a Righteousness by God who is Truth Justice it self in order to the condemned mans Justification Beside himself tels us in end that this exception is nothing to the purpose for he doth not conceive that by Faith when it is said to be imputed is meaned an act of conformity to any particular precept of God And therefore he Excepteth 3. That which we meane is this that God looks upon a man who truely beleeveth with as much grace favour intends to do as bountifully by him as if he were a man of perfect righteousness Ans. But this Excepter should have said that Faith in the letter formality of it is imputed for thus he disputes against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and he should have said that God looketh upon the simple act of Faith as Perfect Obedience to all the Law for when we plead for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness he said that thereby we make God to look upon us as performing that Righteousness in our own persons Neither will he others understand any other Imputation and yet we see how they can speak when explaining the imputation of faith that they may think to evite the force of an argument But 2 though it be true that God dealeth thus as is said with Beleevers Yet that can give no ground to think that he imputeth Faith for Righteousness because it is not upon the account of Faith taken as an act of their obedience that the Lord dealeth so with them but upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to them and received by faith 3 A Justified person is accounted Righteous not inherently but imputativly and is accepted as such and pronunced such and therefore must be righteous indeed for the judgment of God is according to truth And if nothing be imputed to the justified but his faith unto Righteousness that faith must be accounted to be a Perfect Righteousness which yet it is denied to be He Excepteth 4. Nothing is more frequent with the best writers than that God accounts those just who in strickness of speach are not such but only have their sinnes forgiven them Ans. And their ground is good because they alwayes suppose that such as have their sins pardoned have a perfect Righteousness imputed to them and received by Faith without which their could be no Pardon Argum. 2. If faith should be imputed for Righteousness then should Justification be by worksâ or by some what in our selves But the Scripture every where rejecteth works all things in our selves from having any thing to do in Justification He excepteth That by works or some what in ourselves may be understood either by way of merite and in this sense the Consequence of the Proposition is false or by way of simple performance then the Assumption is false for the Scripture expresly requireth faith or a work of us in order to Iustification When Faith is required in order to Justification in way of simple performance it is not required as our Righteousness far less as all the Righteousness which the Justified soul must have but only as a mean or Instrument laying hold upon and putting on the Righteousness of Christ which is offered and imputed and whereby the beleever resteth upon and wrappeth himself in that Righteousness as the only Righteousness wherein he can think to appeare before God's tribunal and thus Faith is not considered as our act making up our Righteousness but as bringing in with a begger 's hand a Righteousness from without But when faith or Beleeving is purely considered as our work and as an act of obedience in us and yet is called our Righteousness said to be all that Righteousness which is had is imputed in order to Justification it justifieth as a work upon the account of it as something in our selves we are said to be justified all this in perfect opposition to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness 2 It is but a Popish evasion to say that by Iustification by works the Scripture only meaneth justification by works that are meritorious as if either any work of ours what somever could be meritorious or as if such against whom Paul disputed did meane a meritoriousness in their works or as if the Scripture did not inferre merite from every work that is ours and that we do to make up a
Righteousness by upon the account of which we might be justified Saith not the Apostle Rom. 4 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt inferring debt so merite from all works that we do whereby to patch up a Righteousness in order to Iustification He doth not distinguish betwixt works that are by way of merite other works but meaneth even such works as were performed by Abraham who was far from imagineing any merite is his works 3. And sure if any work be accounted meritorius in this case that must be so accounted which is made the whole of our Righteousness upon which we are justified is said to be the only Righteousness that is imputed to us for that end that we may be Justified Is not that beleeving made our Righteousness thereby declared to be no less meritorious than Adam's perfect Obedience would have been Argum. 3. That which maketh justification not to be of grace cannot stand with the truth of the Gospel But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness maketh Justification not to be of Grace He excepteth The Scripture still maketh a perfect consistency of free grace with the condition of saith Eph. 2 8. Rom. 3 24 25. Nay the work of beleeving is purposely required that the freeness of his grace might have place Rom. 4 16. How can a gift be conceived to be more freely given than when nothing more is required than that it be received now beleeving is nothing else but a receiving of that righteousness or justification which God giveth in with his Son Iesus Christ Iob. 1 12. Ans. Here are good words but nothing to loose the argument for Faith receiving a Righteousness or the gift of Righteousness or the Atonement or Christ his Righteousness is but the instrument as it were of the soul laying hold on in law presenting to speak so the fidejussorie-righteousness of the Surety Christ as the Righteousness upon the account of which for which alone he is to be justified But beleeving considered in it self as our work made to be our Righteousness all our Righteousness said to be imputed for our Righteousness is not considered as a receiving of a gift of Righteousness which is distinct from Justification howbeit he confound them but really is made a price in our hand wherewith to purchase the gift of Justification the reckoning of this work to us which is our work as our Righteousness in order to justification maketh Justification not of grace but of debt as the Apostle argueth Rom. 4 4. maketh our Justification to be of works if it be of works it is no more of grace as the Apostle asserteth Rom. 11 6. The consideration of Faith as the act of the soul receiving laying hold upon a Righteousness or on Christ his Righteousness establisheth the Imputation of Christs Righteousness but the Imputation of Faith properly taken doth quite extrude it these two are made incompatible by our adversaries the one is asserted that the other may be denied for which there were no necessity if Faith were considered in the Scripture sense as it ought to be that is an Instrument laying hold on bringing in a Righteousness from without even the Surety-Righteousness of Christ. So that this exception if it be ingenuous must overthrow the Position maintained Arg. 4. That which ministereth occasion to the flesh of boasting in it self is not consonant to the tenor of the Gospel But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness doth minister occasion to the flesh of boasting Therefore c. He excepteth Suppose the act of beleeving which is so imputed for righteousness be a mans own work yet it is so by the meer gift of God Ephes. 2 8. Phil. 1 29. 1 Cor. 2 12. 3 6. and this cuttech off all groud of boasting 1. Cor. 4 7. Ans. 1 Though there be no true ground of boasting of that which is freely given yet the flesh can take occasion therefrom to boast as the Pharisee did Luk. 18. when yet he acknowledged all to be gives for he thanked God for what he was not for what he did so acknowledged all to be given and all to be given freely 2 The Apostle saith expresly that boasting is not excluded by the Law of works Rom. 3 27. and yet all works are given are not absolutely of from our selves 3 Saith not the Apostle expresly Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath to glory And yet I hope Abraham did acknowledge that all these works of his were of grace of God's free gift and not absolutly every way his own 4 The works required in the old Covenant of works were not absolutely Adam's own but were in some sense also given of God yet by that way of Justification there had been ground of boasting 5 Though now there should be no ground of boasting before God as neither would there have been ground of boasting before him by the way of works for the Apostle addeth Rom. 4 2. but not before God yet there is ground laid for boasting before men when our Beleeving is made our Righteousness upon the account of which we are justified pronunced righteous in order to Absolution from what was brought in against us 6 Therefore is the way of Justification now so contrived that man should have ground or coloure of ground of boasting even before men for all that Righteousness which is required unto Justification as that Righteousness upon the account of which they are to be justified and by which only they are to be declared pronunced Righteous is not in them but in another and imputed unto them it is the Righteousness of Christ made over unto them of God's free grace received by Faith which receiving hand is also given so that the Righteousness upon which all are justified is one the same is a Righteousness without them therefore the flesh hath no seeming occasion of boasting in this matter He excepteth 2. Suppose the act of beleeving were from a mans self yet there were no cause of boasting because that weight of glory is not given to faith for any worth in it but by the most free gracious good pleasure of God If a King for taking a Pin of a Mans sleeve should raise his house make him honourable in the State were it not a ridiculous thing for such a man to brag of the Pin of his sleeve c. Ans. 1 Can we think that those against whom the Apostle disputed in this matter did think that there was worth excellency in all their works to merite the exceeding great eternal weight of glory did Abraham think so And yet though we cannot say that he thought so Paul not withstanding denieth that he was justified by his works 2 If the act of Beleeving were from a Mans self made all that Righteousness which he
words and termes be laid aside because the terme itself by which we express our Conceptions of the truth is not in so many letters syllabs to be found in Scripture if so indeed we had quickly lost a fundamental point of our Religion and yeelded the cause unto the Socinians If the Scripture may be explained we may make use of such expressions termes sentences as will according to their usual acceptation contribute to make the truthes revealed in Scripture intelligible to such as heare us And when some termes have been innocently used in Theologie for explication of truthes whether to the more learned or to the more unlearned have pâ ssed among the orthodox without controll or contradiction beyond the ordinary time of prescriptions it cannot but give ground of suspicion for any now to remove these old Land-marks especially when it is attempted to be done by such meanes arguments as will equally enforce a rejection of many Scriptural expressions for should all the Metaphorical expressions sentences which are in âature be so canvassed rejected because every thing agreeing properly to them when used in their own native soile doth not quadrate with them as used in the Scriptures in things divine where should we Land If these divine mysteries had been expressed to us only in termes adequatly corresponding with suiting the matter how should we have understood the same Therefore we finde the Lord condescending in the Scriptures to our low Capacities and expressing sublime high mysteries by low borrowed expressions to the end we might be in case to understand so much thereof as may prove through the Lord's blessing saving unto us And thereby hath allowed such as would explaine these matters unto the capacity of others to use such ordinary expressions as may contribute some light understanding to them in the truthes themselves Now when the orthodox have according to their allowed liberty made use of the word Instrument in this matter and maintained that Faith was was nothing more then an Instrument in Justification it is not faire to reject it altogether because improper though fit enough to signifie what they did intend thereby because all the properties that agree to proper Physical or artificial Instruments do not agree to it and because if the same be strickly examined according to the rules of Philosophie concerning Instrumental Causes it will be found to differ from them Mr. Baxter himself writting against D. Kendal § 47. tels us that the thing which he denieth is that Faith is an Instrument in the strick logical sense that is an Instrumental efficient cause of our Iustification that he expresly disclaâmeth contending de nomine or contradicting any that only use the word instrument in an improper large sense as Mechanicks Rhetoricians do So that the question saith he is de re Whether it efficiently cause our Iustification as an Instrument But it may be conceived to have some efficient Influence in our Justification not as that is taken simply strickly for God's act justifying but as taken largely comprehending the whole benefite as activly coming from God as Passively received by or terminated on us that as an Instrument though not in that proper sense that Logicians or Metaphysicians take Instrumental causes and explaine them in order to physical natural Effects We know that Justification is a supernatural work effect and therefore though in explaining of it in its Causes we may make use of such termes as are used about the expressing of the Causes of Natural or Artificial Works Effects yet no Law can force us to understand by these borrowed expressions the same proper Formal Efficacy Efficiency and influence which is imported by these Expressions when used about Natural Causes Effects But Mr. Baxter against Mr. Blake § 5. tels us what great reasons he had to move him to quarrel with this calling of faith an Instrument viz. he found that many learned divines did not only assert this Instrumentality but they laid so great a stress upon it as if the maine difference betwixt us the Papists lay here And yet any might think that they had reason so to do when Papist's on the other hand laid as great stresse upon the denying of Faiths Instrumentality He tels us moreover that our divines judged Papists to erre in Justification fundamentally in these points 1. about the formal Cause which is the formal Righteousness of Christ as suffering perfectly obeying for us 2. About the way of our participation herein which as to God's act is Imputation that in this sense that legaliter we are esteemed to have fulfilled the Law in Christ. 3. About the nature of that faith which justifieth 4. About the formal reason of faiths interest in justification which is as the Instrument thereof I doubt not saith Mr. Baxter but all these four are great errors But we neither may nor can call all errors which Mr. Baxter calleth errors We have seen above how necessary truthes the two first are and have explained in part the third wherein I confesse too many yet not all of the forraigne divines have as to expression missed the explication of true Justifying faith it may be it was not their designe to describe it so as it might agree to the faith of every sincere though weak beleever but rather to shew its true nature grounds tendency when at its best yet what Papists hold on the contrare is more false absurd But as to this fourth it seemes that it hath a necessary dependance upon the foregoing and this to me seemes to be the maine reason why our Divines did owne plead for Faiths Instrumentality in the matter of Justification viz. because the Righteousness which they called the Formal or others the Material Cause thereof was not any Righteousness inherent in us as Papists said but the Surety-Righteousness of the Cautioner Christ without us And therefore they behoved to look on Faith in this matter otherwayes then Papists did and not account it a part of our Formal Righteousness but only look upon it as an hand to lay hold on bring-in the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ and therefore judged it most fit to call it only an Instrumental Cause And how ever Mr. Baxter exaggerat this matter as complying with Papist's in condemning us as to all these controversies and think it no wonder they judge the whole Protestant cause naught because we erre in these and yet make this the maine pairt of the Protestant cause yet we must not be scarred from these truthes Yea because this point hath such a connexion with the other concerning that Righteousness upon the account of which we are to be Justified in the sight of God we are called to contend also for this that so much the rather that though Papist's do utterly mistake the Nature of Justification and confound it with Sanctification yet Mr. Baxter
Faith to distinguish it from that Historical Faith which though true in its kind yet is not from the saving grace of God nor hath it effects accompanying Salvation 3. Though this Faith be one the same by which the Beleever liveth first last and which proveth serviceable useful to him on all occasions to all ends uses that his several necessities call for Yet in reference to these various ends uses it acteth not after one the same manner in all points Faith acteth not every way after one the same manner in order to get Strength for Duties that it acteth in order to get Sin Pardoned It acteth not the same way for Subdueing the reigning power of sin that it acteth for Justification nor doth it act the same way for Comfort and upholding strength in a day of trial that it acteth in order to Justification And yet we need not say that it acteth distinctly differently according to every distinct benefite and blessing that is had thereby The diffeâent natures of the necessities we stand into with the different wayes of the âord's communicating what we stand in need of according to the various Relations he standeth in various offices he hath taken on in reference to his peoples good may satisfie us herein according as these several particular necessities may come under one head reliefe may be conveyed to them after one the same manner All which will be best discerned by the understanding Christian in his application to Christ according to his Condition wants which he would have helped supplied 4. Hence though the Principal Object of this Faith be alwayes one and the same Yet there may be some peculiarities in that object which Faith eyeth more in one case than in another As we finde the Saints in their adresses to God in their several straits necessities sometimes pitching upon one attribute of God sometimes upon another according as thereby Faith presented God to the soul in a sutablness to the present case it was in and so when dispensations seemed to crosse the promises Faith eyed God as Faithful Unchangable when enemies appeared strong difficulties invincible and the like Faith took hold on God as the Almighty to whom nothing was impossible when sin appeared as a discouragment to drive them from their hopes Faith took hold of the mercy of God c. So when a poor sinner is under the convictions of sin threatnings of the Law Faith must take up Christ in a sutableness thereto eye something in Him that peculiarly suiteth that case when againe the beleever hath need of Light Instruction Strength Comfort Throwbearing the like he fixeth his eye on some thing in Christ that suiteth that particular necessity and so Faith acteth accordingly And thus though the object remaine the same and Christ be alwayes made use of Yet Faith may and doth act more immediatly on Christ as Prophet when in one case whereunto this office carrieth a respect and at another time more immediatly directly on Christ as a King when the present necessity calleth for help from Christ as King againe faith acteth on him as a Priest when only that which Christ as a Priest did can answere their present necessitie Yet which is carefully to be observed to prevent Mr. Baxter's challenge I do not say nor see I any necessity to say that these several acts of Faith are as so many several Conditions unto the receiving of the several favours taking the terme Condition in his sense I do not say that Faith acting one way on Christ is a proper Condition of Justification Faith as acting another way on Christ is the proper Condition of Adoption that Faith acting a third way on Christ is the proper Condition of Sanctification c. but that as the effects benefiâes which sinners stand in need of are ascribed unto several effectuating acts of Christ to the several Relations offices he hath taken on so Faith in order to the receiving of these benefites acteth suitably on Christ the Beleever is taught so to do by the Spirit of the Lord to his Comfort Hope Encouragment 5. I presuppose here the Formal Object of all divine faith which is the Truth Veracity of God for all divine faith giveth credite unto divine Revelations upon the Credite the Truth Veracity of the Revealer Thus saith the Lord who is true who is Truth itself is the sole Formal ground Ratio of this Faith 6. I presuppose here also that Comprehensive Material Object of all divine Faith which is the whole will mind of God concerning whatsomever thing it be revealed whether by the Scriptures or by the Light of Nature If the Truth Veracity of God be the only Formal Ground of this Faith then all that this God revealeth must be beleeved received as true when known to be revealed by Him By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God Heb. 11 3. we beleeve all things which are written in the Law the Prophets Act. 24 14. Yea in the whole word of God I do not here determine what particular Truthes revealed in the word are necessarily to be expresly explicitly beleeved by every one that hath a true Saving Faith what not only this I say that many particular truthes are revealed whereof a true Beleever may be ignorant yet have a true Saving Faith receiving all which he knoweth to be revealed by the Lord rejecting no one Truth whatsomever that he knoweth to be revealed But we are here to speak of that Object of Faith which immediatly directly concerneth our delivery from our natural state of sin and miserie and our eternal Salvation And this we judge to be whole Christ Iesus as he is hold forth and revealed in the Gospel We say Christ Jesus 1 wholly and 2 as he is held forth and revealed in the Gospel And both these for explications sake may be branched out in several particulars I say then first That whole Christ is the object of Saving or Justifying Faith Hence are we so often times commanded to Receive him to Beleeve in on Him in his name Faith is expressed by a Coming to him Eating Drinking of Him Receiving of him c. Ioh. 1 12. 3 16 36. 6 29 35 37 40 44 47 51 54 55 58. 7 38. Act. 10 41 13 38 39. 26 18. Rom 3 22. Gal. 2 16. and many moe places Hence this Faith is called the Faith of Christ Gal. 2 16. and the Faith of the Son of God Gal. 2 20. So then Saving and Justifying Faith taketh whole Christ. 1. Faith taketh him closeth with him wholly as to his Natures Faith receiveth him as Mediator God Man in one person though it be formally terminated on him as God Ioh. 14 1. as the Son
justification which is the hinge ground work as it were of his doctrine of the Gospel and to shew how poor sinners standing under the Curse for sin come to be justified before God as in his Epistle to the Romans And to Vindicate the same doctrine of the Gospel from the corrupt pervesions of false teachers as in his Epistle to the Galatians as also to commend the free grace of God in that noble contrivance both in the places mentioned and Ephes. 2. Phil. 3. Tit. 3. and elsewhere when he mentioneth the same Now as to the scope of the Apostle Iames there is nothing to declare unto us that it was his Intent or designe to explaine make known the way how poor convinced sinners standing under the sentence of the Law come to be justified before God and to receive pardon of their sins No such question proposeth he to be discussed No such point of truth doth he lay down to be cleared or Vindicated But his whole scope drift is to press the reall study of holiness in several points particularly spoken to through the Epistle And in that second Chapt. from vers 14. forward as will appear more fully in the explication vindication of the several verses in particular he is particularly obviating that grosse mistake of some who thought that a bare outward profession of the Gospel Faith or of Christian Religion was sufficient to save them and evidence them to be in a justified state and that therefore they needed not trouble themselves with any study of holiness And therefore sheweth that all such hopes of Salvation were built on the sand for they had no ground to suppose that they were truely justified so were in any faire way unto salvation so long as all their faith was no other than a general assent unto the doctrine of the Gospel to truthes revealed not that true lively faith hold forth in the Gospel whereby sinners become justified before God Mr. Baxter tels Cath. Theol. part 2. n. 364. that St. James having to do with some who thought that the bare profession of Christianity was Christianity that faith was a meer assent to the Truth that to beleeve that the Gospel is true trust to be justified by Christ was enough to justification without Holiness fruitful Lives that their sin barrenness hindered not their justification so that they thus beleeved perhaps misunderstanding Paul's Epistles doth convince them that they were mistaken that when God spake of justification by faith without the works of the Law he never meaned a faith that containeth not a resolution to obey him in whom we beleeve nor that is separate from actual obedience in the prosecution But that as we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being Insidels so must we be justified by our Gospel personal holiness and sincere obedience against the charge that we are unholy wicked or impenitent or hypocrites or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation that is justified by God Ans. 1 It is true for it is manifest and undeniable that Iames had to do with some who thought that the bare profession of Christianity was enough that an assent unto the truth was that faith that would prove justifying saving But 2 it is not so manifest that Iames had to do with such as thought that to trust to be justified by Christ was enough to justification without holiness fruitful lives that their sin barrenness hindered not their justification for whatever Mr. Baxter imagine we finde not in Scripture that justification followeth lives that is that there is no justification before this fruitfulness of life appear And himself useth to say that in order to the first justification this holiness of life is not requisite And beside this which he calleth the first we know no other unless he mean glorification But then 3 as to glorification final Salvation we grant that Iames hath to do with such as thought a meer assent to the truth without holiness was sufficient hereunto but that their beleeving thus could flow from their misunderstanding of Paul's Epistles is not any way probable seing Paul in all his Epistles even where he speaks most of justification by Faith without the deeds of the Law presseth the necessity of holiness in order to Salvation so as no imaginable ground hereof can with the least of shewes be pretended 4 That when Paul said justification was by Faith without the works of the Law he meant a true lively faith which only is to be found in that soul in which the seed of grace is sown and which is made partaker of the holy Ghost and of the divine Nature is true but yet justifying faith doth not formally containe in it a resolution to obey him in whom we beleeve as was shown elsewhere 5 Then we see that the faith whereof Iames speaketh is not the same with that Faith whereby Paul said we are justâfied And seing both do not speak of the same Faith there can be no appearance of discrepance 6 When he saith we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being infidels I would know what he meaneth by this charge of infidelity If he meane the charge of not beleeving the Gospel he knoweth that a meer assent to the truth will âustifie from that Charge If he meane the charge of not receiving resting upon Christ according to the Gospel even that will be but a particular justification from that particular charge and is not that justification from the sentence of the Law whereof Paul speaketh 7 That we must be justified as he saith by our Gospel personal holiness sincere obedience against the charge that we are unholy wicked or impenitent hypocrites is true but what can all this say for a justification from the sentence of the Law under which we are all lying by Nature and of which the Apostle Paul speaketh And if Iames speak of justification by works in reference to this accusation he speaketh of no other kind of justification than that which the most wicked wreatch yea the devils are capable of when to wit they are falsely accused of having done some evil which they have not done And how can Mr. Baxter inferre from what Iames saith if he speak of no other kind of justification that works are required unto our justification as to state or unto our general justification from the sentence of the Law adjudging us to death because of transgression 8 But he addeth or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation that is justified by God Then the Justification that Iames speaketh of that Mr. Baxter meaneth is final Salvation And we willingly grant that there must be personal holiness sincere obedience before this and that no wicked or impenitent person or hypocrite shall be adjudged to Salvation But the justification which Paul treateth of is different from
will not do it but works of Faith or Faith proving it self lively by works 2 The very Instance of Abraham which he adduceth cleareth this for he saith vers 21. Was not Abraham our Father justified by works when he had offered his Son upon the altar Now twentie five yeers or as some compute Thirtie yeers or thereby before this time the Scriptures say that Abraham beleeved God it was reckoned to him unto Righteousness Gen. 15. hence Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by Faith Therefore if now he was justified when he offered his Son he must have been twice justified that in the same sense with the same kind of justification which can not be said Nor will it avail to say That Gen. 15. he was justified by the first justification which was by Faith of which Paul speaketh Rom. 4. But Gen. 22. he was justified with the second justification which is by works of this Iames speaketh for this distinction of justification into First Second is but a meer device of the Papist's having no ground in nor countenance from the Scriptures and beside it would follow that a meer historical dead Faith is sufficient unto the first justification and that Paul understandeth such a faith only when he said Rom. 4. that Abraham beleeved God it was counted to him unto Righteousness the contrary whereof is manifest Nor will it serve here to say that Paul speaketh of justification as begun but Iames speaketh of justification as continued for then it would follow that justification at first or as begun is by a dead faith and by such a kind of faith as devils may have consequently that of such a faith as this Paul speaketh because of such a faith Iames speaketh as we have seen But this cannot be said for it was a true lively faith that Abraham had when he beleeved the promise of the Messiah a dead faith is not the faith that justifieth first or last Yea because Iames maketh an opposition betwixt faith works in reference to justification in the sense wherein he speaketh of it it will follow that faith should not be requisite unto the Continuance of justification 3 Iames said vers 20. that Faith without works was dead and to confirme this he addeth vers 21. was not Abraham our Father justified by works c. As if he had said The faith by which Abraham was brought into an estate of justification life was a lively faith having works of obedience attending it and his obedience declared that his faith was lively and that he was truely justified by faith Ergo a faith that is lifeless and wholly without works of obedience is but dead can give no ground to conclude one justified in the way to life So that what mention he maketh of justification by works is but to prove the reality of lively faith by works true justification by faith is evidenced demonstrated not by a bare idle vaine fruitless profession 4 When Abraham was justified by his works the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God it was imputed unto him for Righteousness as is manifest from vers 22 23. Now by this mentioned of Abraham in the Scripture Gen. 15 6. Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by faith But if Iames were here speaking of the way of our becoming justified before God as Paul doth there could be no connexion here yea the proof should contradict the thing to be proved for to say that Abraham was justified by faith will not prove that he was justified by works nor could his being justified by works be a fulfilling a clearing confirming of that truth that faith he was justified by faith for faith works in the matter of justification are inconsistent perfectly opposite as Paul teacheth us as here Iames also teacheth us But taking justification here for its declaration manifestation it can be by works and a declaration of justification by works can be is a very signal confirmation clearing of that Testimony which saith that Abraham was justified by faith 5 By that work of offering up his son at a the command of God Abraham declared that he was no hypocrite but a true beleever and thus was he justified as Mr. Baxter will have it as we heard lately from any such accusation But a Justification from this accusation is but a justification of the truth sinceritie of faith so a confirmation evidence of justification or justification as evidenced declared and not justification as produced by its causes 6 When Iames saith vers 23. That the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God it was imputed to him unto Righteousness when he was justified by offering up his son vers 21. this fulfilling of the Scripture-testimony was either because at that time when he offered up his Son Righteousness was imputed unto him he was justified or because it was then manifest to be a truth that he was justified indeed But the former can not be said because Righteousness was imputed unto him and he was justified long before this Therefore it can be only understood as to its manifestation 7 This is also clear from what the Lord spoke at that time Gen. 22 12. Now I know that thou fearest God seing thou hast not witheld thy Son thine only Son from me No word here of imputing Righteousness unto him or of his being brought into a justified state but only God's solemne declaration that he was a true fearer of God so one that had true faith was really justified 8 Vers. 22. he saith Seest thou how faith wrought with his works by works was faith made perfect But how could this follow upon what he had said vers 21 Justification by works if justification be taken absolutely here not for its declaration manifestation will not prove faith's working with works But if justification be here taken for justification declared manifested the sense is plaine for such works as do evidence declare that a person is justified will manifestly prove that faith is working with these works because justification presupposeth alwayes a true lively faith that will work with works of obedience 9 Far less could it follow from justification taken absolutly by works that faith was made perfect by works but from such a work as will evidence a man to be justified it is manifest to every one that that work is a clear evidence of a true lively faith by it faith is perfected that is declared evidenced demonstrated to be faith indeed as the word perfected is used 2. Cor. 12 9. for my strength is made perfect in weakness 10 That other Inference vers 24. ye see then how that by works a man is justified not by Faith only will not follow from what went before if justification be here taken absolutely for the command so Abraham
Sun that the poor Church might for ever abide in darkness if the Church her Head and Husband had not provided a Remedie and had not effectually dispelled these Cloudes And he had no small advantage of the corrupt Iewes who had a zeal of God but not according to knowledg and had a very Specious pretext of crying up the Law prescribed by God himself and of Obedience thereunto and constant observation thereof in all points to the prejudice of the gospel-Gospel-truth in the matter of Justification And though the first rise of this difference and debate was upon occasion of the Ceremonial Law which was the dispensation of the Grace of God which the ancient Church was under while under Tutors Governours and in her Non-age state and was never rightly obeyed or improven but when in led them unto the promised Messiah Christ the end of that law in a peculiar manner the Substance thereof and vailed thereunder and which they might have known was to be done away when Christ the Substance of all those shadowes came in to the world in the due time appointed and foretold and which contrare to its very Nature End to the many prophecies of old to the signal dispensations of God giving clear significations of his mind touching the evanishing of these shadowes the Iewes principled with false Conceptions about that Law with prejudices against the truth of the Gospel and animated and encouraged by false Teachers raised up of Satan to corrupt the Doctrine of the Grace of God did strenuously contend for the constant Observation thereof either Solely as a Sufficient ground of their Justification or in conjunction with the Gospel Yet because this tookalongs with it the observation of all that Law which God had prescribed of old as the only ground in their mistaken apprehension of their Justification acceptance with God therefore we finde the Apostle Paul who was especially stirred up immediatly inspired of the Spirit to vindicat the Gospel-way of justification from this corruption after he had been singularly fitted thereunto by being in so signal a manner brought to embrace this Truth who was formerly so zealous for the Law against the Gospel in all points prosecuting the controversie to the full not only handling it in reference to the immediat Rise occasion thereof but in reference to that also where-unto of necessity it must have come where it must have landed at length And though there have been few since those dayes none at present who will contend for the Observation of the ceremonial Law in the sense for Ends urged by the jewes jewish false Apostles in the primitive times yet we must not think that therefore all the Doctrine of the Apostle hereanent is if no use to us Many debates discourses had the Apostle beside what we have recorded of him in Scripture to think that his Disputes Discourses in his Epistles concerning Justification are of no more concernment to us as to the question about justification because none now adaies plead for justification by the observation of the ceremonial Law as did the jewes against whom Paul Disputed is in my judgment no small imputation upon the Spirit of the Lord inspireing the Apostle to write these Epistles putting them into our Canon and of this such in my apprehension must be guilty who think to wave all the Apostles Discourses in this matter with this that he is only to be understood as speaking Disputing against such as cried-up the constant observation of the Ceremonial Law as such But whatever circumstantial differences whether as to the Rise or occasion or as to other things of the like Import there may seem to be or may really be betwixt the Disput as then stated as now prosecuted Yet all the Disputes Differences about the Maine Essentials of justification as also about inferiour subordinat Questions in so far as they depend upon or are influenced by the Maine will be found to be upon the matter one the same whether managed of late or of old For different Termes Expressions may be where the matter thing so expressed is really one the same And therefore as we are to observe with thankfulness the Lords love to care of His Church in providing preserving for the use Edification of the same in all ages to the end of the world such a necessary Depositum His wonderful wisdome in inspireing His Amanueâses so to write as not only to refell the Errour in all its Circumstances Branches as it was then broached to the darkning of Gospel-light but so also as the Truth might remaine full cleared confirmed saifguared against all the assaults of Satan in all time coming by whatever Instruments under whatsomever new Notions Distinctions Termes of art Expressions and pretences the same may come ãâã be attacqued So are we to acquaint our selves well with the Doctrine of the Spirit of the Lord in this matter to the end we may be fully instructed in the Truth enabled to maintaine the same fortified against all new Assaults or rather old Assaults renewed howbeit mannaged by seemingly new weapons new filed Instruments Arguments It would prove long tedious to handle at length to touch in short upon them may seem to some to be but superficiary work all the various controversies that are on foot this day about the matter of justification a short discovery of the truth in this matter as to the most principal things controverted to which others may be so reduced as a Scriptural discovery of the truth as to those may serve for a discussion of the rest at least so pave the way that a solution of these Inferiour Controversies may be the more easie may therefore be sufficient to such at least whose Edification and Instruction we mostly Intend here that is Such as are not in case to improve what is written of Controversies in Scholastick abstruse termes And I judge who ever handle this Controversie in such termes only or mostly as are above the reach of ordinary Christians who are herein as much concerned as others misse that mark which they should mainely aime at that is Edification Instruction of such whose high concernment this is who have most need to be plainely instructed in this foundamental point of Truth a Practical mistake in which may prove to them deadly destructive especially of such who when under the pangs of an awakened Conscience under the convictions of sin fears of wrath pursueing for sin are then most ready to take any course that may seem to promise present ease reliefe to be led away from Christ the onely peace-maker through the slight of Satan the deceitfulness of their own heart through Ignorance of or Mis-information about the true Gospel-way of Justification peace with God whereby their Ease
justification was not only among the Gentiles who had been without God without Christ all the Meanes of understanding any thing of Salvation through a slaine Saviour but even amongst the Jewes who by the Dispensation of the New Covenant which they were under might have been better principled for it was they who most urged the Interest of the Law of works therebyâ laboured to corrupt the Gentiles to lead them off the simplicity of the gospel-Gospel-truth and of them saith the Apostle Rom. 10 3. that being ignorant of God's Righteousness going about to establish their own righteousness they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God They sought after a Righteousness another way than by faith in Christ who is the end of the Law for righteouness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 4. but as it were by the works of the Law Rom. 9 32. IV. The Pharisee who went up to the Temple Luk. 18 11 12. prayed thus with himself God I thank thee that I am not as other men are Extortioners Unjust adulterers or even as this Publican I fast twice in the week I give Tithes of all that I possesse c. hath many followers Many there are who will have confidence in the flesh in what they do Nature never taught Paul to account all his great Privileges Attainments loss dung but rather to account them gaine for he saith they were gaine to him that is while he was a stranger to the Gospel to the Grace of God manifested therein Hence is it that the last are first the first are last such as thought themselves far advanced to have attained a great measure of righteousness so to be children of the Kingdom are shut out Publicanes Harlots are preferred as being willing to renounce themselves their own righteousness more than such Legalists Iusticiaries who confide in something which they themselves do have attained V. This is also manifest from the great difficulty of prevaling with such as seem to themselves to have in them something more than ordinary to relinquish renounce these things to betake themselves only unto Jesus to rest on Him alone for Righteousness Life Salvation from the little fruit that the Gospel Doctrine findeth among them How many subterfuges finde they out under which they think to shelter themselves from the wrath of God How many fig-leaves do they sowe together that they may cover the shame of their nakedness withall And at what cost paines charges are they in seeking to establish their own Righteousness And all to fortifie themselves in their own delusions to keep our the pure Doctrine of the Gospel And how ready are some to take hold of the smallest wig that they may hang upon it finde reliefe if it can yeeld but the least ground of hop in their imaginations ere they betake themselves to Christ according to the Gospel How many Fetches Turnings Windings hath a Soul pursued with wrath the apprehension of death ere it be willing to close heartily with Christ offered in the Gospel Yea if such as have had some wakenings come so far as to change something of their former outward sinful courses be not so loose prophane as formerly how ready are they to sit down even upon that bit of negative righteousness Much more if they be brought the length to go about some religious duties how will they then sit down sing as if all were well All which do plainly evince that there is a strong Inclination in us by nature to follow the way of works that we may have some share of the honour of our own justification VI. This sad truth is hence apparent likewise That when any Opinion is broached that but seemeth to give more to works than ought to be given though possibly upon the matter there be but little said that may make any real Difference how ready are many to close therewith to entertaine that Doctrine to cry it up commend it to improve the Advantages real or supposed there had to the furâer Confirmation of that Anti-evangelik errour which their Soul 's fully comply with when upon the other hand there is such a nauseating in many too too manifest at the Simplicity of the Gospel of the Doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ. If it be enquired whence doth this proceed or what can be the true causes hereof I answer Many things have a powerful Influence into this as I. The Natural Enmity unto all the wayes of God that each hath as a piece of his heirship from Adam What ever God willeth we will not yea we will nill though our nilling of it be against ourselves we have no reason for it There is a Spirit of Contradiction Enmity to God in us all by nature that we neither can nor will comply with God's wayes with what tendeth to set forth His Glory It is marked of the Iewes that they stumbled at that stumbling stone Jesus Christ who was the end of the Law for righteousness to all such as beleeve Rom. 10 4. 9 32. They had such a prejudice at Christ at the way of Salvation through Him that they brake their necks upon Him who onely was the rock of Salvation II. The innate darkness of Mens mindes touching themselves all the things of God especially the Mysteries of Salvation is another cause of this Opposition to the Gospel-way of justification They neither know their own hearts nor their own wayes doings nor are they acquainted with the holy righteous Nature of God nor with the nature of His Lawes Commandments c. They know not I say the Corruption of their own Natures the innate wickedness which is there which neither is nor can be subject to the Law of God Hence ordinarily such as erre in this matter of justification do intertaine erroneous apprehensions about Original sin our innate Pravity as do all the Sâcinians Papists many Arminians others So they are ignorant of the Law of God not knowing how Holy Good Spiritual it is how it obligeth the whole man Spirit Soul Judgment Understanding Will Affections Memory all the out ward Man condemning the least sin in Thought word or deed commanding the highest pitch of holy duties right Principles Ends Motives c. And hence they see neither Omissions of what is commanded not their Commissions of what is prohibited whether as to their Nature Multitude or other Aggravations and the ignorance of this maketh them to see less the necessity of a Righteousness without them to seek for it with less earnestness zeal whence it cometh to passe ordinarily as is to be seen among Papists that such as are most for works in justification shape the Law according to their minde curtaile it as did the Pharisees of old that
first to convince them of their Sin and Misery by setting home the Law wekening their Consciences as Paul doth Doctrinally follow this method when he is about to cleare-up explaine the truth about Gospel-justification in his Epistle to the Romans where in the first place he convinceth all of Sin both jewes Gentiles Chap. 1. 2. 3. concluding vers 23. That all have sinned come short of the glory of God vers 9. he giveth an account of his foregoing Discourse saying we have before proved both jewes Gentiles that they are all under sin And againe vers 19. that every mouth may be stopped all the world may become guilty before God Now this work of Conviction layeth the sinner low before God for thereby the Man is discovered to himself to be undone in himself to be under Sin Wrath under the Sentence of the Law having his mouth stopped having nothing to plead for himself neither by way of Extenuation nor of Apology having nothing in himself wherewith he can come before the Lord to make Atonement for his Transgressions to make Satisfaction to justice And thus the man is made to despare in himself as being irremediably gone undone if free grace prevent him not II. Whereupon the man is made to renounce all his former grounds of Hop Confidence all his former Duties good works civility Negative Holiness what else he placed his Confidence in formerly Yea all his Righteousnesses are as filthy rags accounted as loss dung So that he hath nothing within himself as a Righteousness that he can expect to be justified by before God but on the contrary he findeth himself under the Curse that what he thought before to be his Righteousness is now by the light of the Law the discovery he hath of his natural condition founde to be sin iniquity before God therefore to be so far from bringing any reliefe unto him that thereby his anxiety is made greater his case more desperat III. The way of Gospel-justification is so contrived the wakened man whom God is about to justifie is now convinced of it that Man must be abased for he is now made to see that he is empty poor hath nothing to commend him to God no Righteousness of his own to produce nothing within him or without him except the alone Righteousness of Christ the Mediator Cautioner that can stand him in stead Nothing of his own must here come in reckoning neither alone nor in conjunction with the Righteousness of Christ for what is of Grace must not be of works otherwise Grace is no more Grace Rom. 11 6. Christ must have all the glory he who glorieth must glory alone in the Lord. And therefore is Christ made Righteousness unto us 2. Cor. 1 30. is become the Lord our Righteousness Ier. 23 6. And all His must say That in the Lord they have righteousness Esai 45 24. IV. Nothing that preceedeth faith no motions or workings of the Law no legal Repentance the like have any infallible connexion with justification nor are they any congruous disposition thereunto or a Condition thereof there being no promise made that all such as are convinced awakened have some legal terrours works of the Law upon their Spirites shall certainely be justified experience proving that several who have had deep convictions Humiliations have with the dog returned to their vomite become afterward worse than ever doth also confirme this So that after the deepest legal Humiliations works of Terrour outward Changes the like Effects of the Law though when they are wrought by the Lord intending bringing about the Elect sinner's Conversion justification they have this kindly work upon the heart to cause the Soul more readily willingly listen to the offers of Salvation Mercy in the Gospel to submit to the termes Method which God hath in His great wisdom mercy condescended unto as to the actual Conferring bestowing of the blessings purchased by Christ for His own chosen ones justification is an Act purely of God's free Grace undeserved of them on any account an act of His meer mercy Love So that they are justified freely by His grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Rom. 3 24. V. Unto this justification their good Works are not required upon what somever account for good works must follow justification not preceed it They must be first accepted through Christ before their works of holiness can be accepted The whole Gospel doth most plainely exclude works of the Law under whatsoever Notion Qualification or Restriction as we manifested above shall more manifest hereafter Yea all works upon what somever account are excluded as opposite to justification by faith through Jesus Christ. The man who had no more to say but God be merciful to me a sinner went home justified when he who said God I thank thee I am not as other men nor as this Publican c. did miss that Privilege Paul hath so directly plentifully proved that no man is justified by works that we need say no more of it and therefore in this matter of justification man hath no ground of boasting but must glory in the Lord alone VI. As without a Righteousness no man can be justified before God because His judgment is alwayes according to truth He will pronunce no man Righteous who is not so or who hath no Righteousness And as no man hath a Righteousness of his own in himself that will abide the trial of God's judgment for if He should enter into judgment with any that liveth they should not be able to stand before His judgment seat be justified but all who are justified are in themselves ungodly void of all Righteousness that can ground a sentence of absolution from the Condemnation of the Law So it is the Righteousness of Christ as Mediator Cautioner which is to them the only ground of their absolution justification this Surety-Righteousness of Christ is imputed to them by God they are clothed therewith being considered as clothed there with are pronounced Righteous by the Lord the righteous judge dealt with as such So that all the Righteousness which is the ground of their absolution from the Condemnation of the Law is without them in another who was appointed their Cautioner therefore all appearance of any ground of boasting in themselves is quite taken away by the Law of faith Rom. 3 27. the reward is now wholly of grace not of debt Rom. 4 4. VII Though faith faith only be required of us in order to our having Interest in Christ His Righteousness to justification therethrough Yet this leaveth no ground of boasting unto man or of glorying in himself for it is in it self a plaine solemne Declaration of the Beleevers Sense
death destruction if the Lord should enter with them in jugdment and mark iniquity Psal. 130 3. 143. 2. Yet the judgment of the Lord being alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. Such as He pronunceth Righteous and absolveth from the sententence of the Law as such must be Righteous for to justifie the wicked is an abomination to the Lord Prov. 17 15. And seing they are not neither can be Righteous in themselves nor have a Righteousness of their own which they can present to justice and in which they can appear before God who is a righteous Judge they must needs have a righteousness from some other and this is a Surety-righteousness the righteousness of the Mediator and Cautioner Jesus Christ Imputed to them and received by faith and being clothed with this noble rob of Rigteousness with Christ who is the Lord our Righteousness and beareth this Name and Title Ier. 23 6. And who is made of God unto us Righteousness 1. Cor. 1 30. They may be looked upon as living indeed In the Lord have they righteousness and upon this account in the Lord are they justified and shall glory Esai 45 24 25. This is the Righteousness of God without the Law which is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets the righteousness of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve Rom. 3 21 22. This is that faith or object of faith that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness Rom. 4 3 5 9. And the righteousness that God imputeth without works vers 6 11. This is the righteousness of faith through which the promise is vers 13. This is the righteousness that shall be imputed to all who beleeve on Him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the deed vers 24. This is the free gift by grace which is by one man Iesus Christ that hath abounded unto many Rom. 5 15. This is that aboundance of grace and gift of righteousness which beleevers receive whereby they reigne in life by one Iesus Christ vers 17. And that righteousness of one by which the free gift come upon all beleevers unto justification of life vers 18. And the obedience of one by which many are made righteous vers 19. And that righteousness through which grace reigneth unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord vers 21. This is the righteousness of the Law fulfilled in us by Gods own Son whom He sent in the likeness of sinful flesh Rom. 8 2 3. This is Gods righteousness to which the Jewes would not submit but went about to establish their own righteousness for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 3 4. It is that righteousness which is of faith which the Gentiles have attained who followed not after righteousness which Israel did not attaine to though they followed after the Law of righteousness because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the works of the Law for they stumbled at that stumbling stone Rom. 9 30 31 32. By this are Believers made the righteousness of God in Him who though He knew no sin yet was made sin for us 2 Cor. 5 21. This is that righteousness which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith Phil. 3 7 8 9. which Paul desired only to be found in and that in opposition to his own righteousness which is of the Law and for which he did account all things which formerly were gaine to him to be loss dung Now what a noble life of faisty and Security is this for a poor naked sinner void of all righteousness and thereby exposed to the lash of the Law to the Curse and wrath of God to be covered with a compleet and perfect righteousness consisting in full satisfaction to all the demandes of the Law both for doing and suffering with which the Self condemned sinner may now with boldness and confidence think of approaching unto and appearing before the Tribunal of God who can express the Serenity of Soul the inward peace calmness and Quietness of mind the Joy Cheerfulness and Exulting of heart that followeth here upon How is the Drooping Sincking Dead and discouraged Soul that hath any sense or feeling of this revived quickened And how beit the sense of it be away as oft it happeneth yet the change that is hereby made when the Lord imputeth this righteousness of Christ causeth the Soul by faith to embrace it and accept of it is as a Resurrection from the dead 5. They have as a benefite necessarily following upon and inseparably accompanying this justification the noble and rich privilege of Adoption For to as many as received Him to them gave He power to become the Sones of God Joh. 1 12. And all those that are justified receive Him and His righteousness and rest upon it Being thus redeemed from under the Law they receive the Adoption of Sones Gal. 4 5. And being justified by His grace they are made heirs according to the hop of eternal life Tit. 3 7. And by this as their State is demonstrated to be a State of life so the many and exceeding great and rich yea incomprehensibly glorius and excellent favours Advantages and Privileges that lye in the womb of this comprehensive Privilege shew their life to be an excellent life for 1 Being thus adopted they have a new Relation unto God as their Father and they are His Children taken into His Family they have His name put upon them they are called by His name or His name is called upon them Ier. 14 9. Then is that word make good 2 Cor. 6. 18. I will be a Father unto you and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters saith the Lord God Almighty Then is He their God in a peculiar manner and they are His People Ier. 31. 1. Then have they written upon them the name of Christs God and the name of the City of His God and His own new name in its earnest and beginnings Revel 3 12. O! what a life is here to stand thus related unto the great God what an honourable life and Privilege is this for such who were by Nature Children of the Devil 2 Being thus Adopted they have a Relation to all the Children of the Family and are united unto them as members of the same Familie as Brethren or Sisters of the chosen Family They are then among those whom Christ hath gathered together in one Ephes. 1 10. And belong to that Church which is His Body the fulness of Him that filleth all in all vers 22 23. They have a relation now unto the Church Triumphant as well as to the Church Militant whence that is in part verified Heb. 12 22 23. But ye are come unto Mount Zion and unto the living God the heavenly Ierusalem to an innumerable company of Angels to the General Assembly Church of the first born which are written in
state of humiliation by both imputed by God and received by faith the beleever receiveth the whole Effect that is both Immunity from punishment a Right to the reward promised to obedience or to the Crown As Christ the Messias made an end of sins made reconciliation for iniquity so He brought in an everlastingh righteousness Dan. 9 24. And beleevers have the benefite of both for as they receive the grace of God the gift by grace aboundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness so they shall reigne in life and grace through righteousness reigneth unto eternal life Rom. 5 15 17 21. 5. Upon the other hand this mystery is also observable That Christs Satisfaction taketh not away the necessity of the Imputation of Christs Righteousness obedience as some do say who think that because we have full pardon of all sinnes by vertue of the Satisfaction of Christ therefore we need no more a person who is pardoned being therefore one that is not unrighteous one that is not unrighteous being righteous for say they there is no mids betwixt just or righteous and not unjust or not unrighteous he who is righteous having done all his duty so having a right to the promised reward of life So that upon this ground they suppose there is need of no more in order to obtaining of life beside say they the Scripture saith that the man is blessed to whom the Lord imputeth not sin he who is blessed upon this account needeth no righteousness to be added to render him blessed and to give a right unto glory But 1 we were as was said guilty of the breach of the Law so liable to punishment were also under obligation to give perfect obedience unto the Law Satisfaction therefore for our breach our pardon upon Satisfaction faith not that we have not broken the Law and if we have broken the Law we cannot be said to have yeelded perfect obedience unto the Law when God pardoneth upon a Satisfaction made He doth not judge or suppose that the person pardoned hath perfectly kept the Law for His judgment is according to truth and the very pardon supposeth a Transgression and a Transgression taketh away perfect obedience as perfect obedience destroyeth or rendereth useless all pardon Wherefore neither before God nor man can a person meerly because of Pardon be said or be accounted to have all that was required Upon Pardon it is true he is as much exeemed from the obligation to punishment as if he had kept the whole Law but yet by that pardon he is not made nor accounted to be one who never broke the Law there upon hath a right unto the reward promised As supposing for illustrations sake when a Prince maketh a Law commandeth such such persons to obey the same under the paine of death with all promiseth to such as observe the Law and do what is commanded that they shall enjoy a rich reward become heirs of a great Kingdom and the persons after they have broken the Law and become guilty of death are pardoned upon the Interposition of some great person Satisfaction made by the same for the failure they cannot upon the account of this Satisfaction their pardon thereupon be said to have done what was commanded nor to have right unto the reward to the Inheritance promised to such as obeyed the Law 2 Therefore though a person that is pardoned be one that is not unrighteous that is obnoxious to the penalty yet he is not one that is righteous positively or in reference to the reward but only one that is negatively righteous that is one that though he hath no right to the reward yet he is not liable to the punishment and therefore though he be thus negatively not unrighteous that is one that is freed from the punishment yet he cannot be accounted one that hath done all that was commanded so he cannot be accounted Righteous in reference to the reward 3 So that there is a manifest mids betwixt being righteous that is one having a right to the reward and being not unrighteous that is not obnoxious to the punishment as is clear by the Instance of Adam before his fall for during that time how long or how short so ever it was he could not be said to be untighteous because he had not yet sinned nor could he be said to be righteous in reference to the reward that was promised on condition of perfect obedience to the end that is such as had done all his duty for if he had then done all his duty or all that was required in order to the reward he had then had a full and compleat right to the reward of life promised God would have given it to him according to the Covenant and Promise But we know it was not so for he was to finish his course run his race to the end before he could have challenged a right to the promised inheritance and this he did not So that before he fell by transgression it might have been said of him that he was not unrighteous that is that he was one that had not yet transgressed and deserved the punishment-threatned but he could not be said to have been fully positively righteous that is one that had done all his duty and therefore had now a full compleat right unto the reward 4 It is true the Scripture saith that the man is blessed to whom the Lord doth not impute sin but it doth not say That he is blessed to whom the Lord only imputeth not sin or to whom He giveth no more nor doth the Scripture say that this pardoning or not imputing of sin purely abstractively considered that is considered alone without any more as it must be considered by such as oppose us here is that compleat blessedness whereof the Scripture speaketh But the reason why such are said to be blessed to whom the Lord doth not impute sin is because Imputation of âighteousness is inseparebly annexed with non-imputation of sin therefore in that same place of Scripture to wit Rom. 4. 6. It is said that David Psal. 32 1 2. describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness while he saith blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin c. Whereby we see that both these are so firmly connected by the Lord that the one cleareth and confirmeth the other that who ever hath the one hath the other also and upon that account are blessed enjoying the whole Effect of the Imputation of Christs whole Surety-righteousness and these two to wit pardon of sins and the Right to the Inheritance flowing from the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction of His obedience though they are never separated yet they are distinguished spoken of distinctly in Scripture It is one thing to be delivered from under the Law another thing to
the Lord. Against that passage Rev. 19 8. which was adduced for clearing of the place now under hand he excepteth thus These words only pointe forth the honour and dignity which Christ now conferreth upon the Church in remembrance of her Righteousness for it is parallel to that other place Rev. 3 4. Ans. This is nothing but a plaine perversion of the Scriptures for it is not said for her Righteousness nor for the Righteousness of the Saints but in these words a reason is given why by this araying in fine Linen the bride is said to be made ready and withall hereby the signification and Import of that fine-linen is held forth when it is said for the fine linen is the Righteousness of the Saints The Spirit of the Lord is here speaking of the returne of the jewes and of their marrying of new with their former husband from whom they had so long departed by playing the harlot as worthy and judicious M. Durham sheweth in his comment on the place and of this new Bride it is said that she is arayed in fine linen clean and white and this linen is explained to be the Righteousness of Saints or justifications of Saints the word is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the same that is used Rom. 5 16 18. Where it is translated justification and it is called here the Righteousness or justifications of Saints because it is no other than that which is common to all Saints whereby is signified that the jewes at their conversion shall be accepted and justified after the same manner that all the Saints have been even after that self same manner at which they formerly stumbled and which wickedly and peremptorily they refused and rejected This Righteousness therefore can be nothing else than the Righteousness of Christ imputed for this only is cleane and white all other having spots and defilements This is not within but from without and is put on is granted to the Church and so imputed Against that saying of putting on Christ twice mentioned he excepteth saying That none of them speak of justification but that Rom. 13 14. speaketh of Sanstification and that Gal. 3 27. of profession Ans. If we are said to put on Christ in Sanctification and as to a profession much more may we be said to put Him on in justification which is the basis and ground work of Sanctification and the truth reality of that which is professed Without justification there is no Sanctification and except we be clothed with Christ and put Him on in order to justification we cannot put Him on in order to Sanctification And as such as are baptized in Christ have declared that they have put on Christ so such have done it in truth and reality who are the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus and are Christ's and are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise Gal. 3 26 29. Not could they be said to do this outwardly as to a profession in their Baptisme if a real putting on of Christ were not to be found in such as had the Spiritual and inward thing Imported signified by outward Baptisme Thirely a 3 passage is Ier. 23 5 6. Bohold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will raise unto David a Righteous Branch and a King shall reigne prosper and shall execute judgment justice in the earth In his dayes judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell saifly and this is His name whereby He shall becalled the Lord our Righteousness It is undeniable and manifest that this is spoken of Christ who was the Branch raised up unto David and the King that should reigne and prosper and it is through Him that judah is saved and Israel made to dwell saiâly Now of this Righteous Branch it is said that His name shall be called Jehovah our Righteousness He shall be owned and embraced as such whereby it is declared that as we have need of a Righteousuess and have none of our owne so this Righteous Branch shall become a Righteousness to us in Him and in Him alone shall all His people have a Righteousness He and His Righteousness shall be made over unto them And as they shall glory in Him acknowledging all their Righteousness to be in and from Him so He shall glory in that stile and Title which shall be given to Him upon that account and He shall owne it as His glorious Title and Name for their further refreshment and Consolation He shall look upon that as His greatest honour to be called the Lord our Righteousness Jehovah that purchaseth and prepareth for and bestoweth a sufficient Righteousness on His people This passage with its forcible light so opened the eyes of Bellarmine the popish adversary to the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ that he was forced to confess That Christ is said to be our Righteousness because he hath made Satisfaction for us to the Father and doth so give and communicat that Satisfastion unto us when He justifieth us that it may be said to be our Satisfaction Righteousness and in this sense it would not be absurd if any should say that the Righteousness of Christ His merites are imputed unti us as if we our selves had satisfied De justif lib. 2. cap. 10. Fourthly adde to this Ier. 33 15 16. where as Iunius the Dutch translation have it this same Title is repeated as given unto the righteous Branch but if we take the words as they are rendered by others as they are in our Translation as the Stile name of the Church they willcon tribute not a little to our present purpose And this wherewith she shall be called THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNES for hereby is clearly Imported the Churches glorying in that Title in having all her righteousness in through her Head Husband that as she owned herself to be the Spouse of Christ had His name called upon her so this would be all the name that she would owne as her greatest glory by that alone would she be called thereby professing with glorying satisfaction that she had no righteousness of her own if any would know her aright give her her highest titles they should know her under that notion give her that Name that should openly declare that she were void of Righteousness in her self were ungodly had all her Righteousness from her husband would appear before God in no righteousness but in her husbands So that she would owne that Title alone which should be a proclamation to all the world that she was covered with her Husbands righteousness with that alone a constant Memorandum to keep her in the fresh conviction Faith Profession of this Against these clear pregnant passages Ioh. Goodwine excepteth pag. 127. saying It is not here said the righteousness of the Lord shall be our righteousness or shall be imputed to us for righteousness Avs. Though this be not said
in so many words syllabs yet that same is said in a more clear convinceing emphatick manner so that he who seeth not this lying in these words must be more blinde than Bellarmine was When this righteous Branch is raised up by Jehovah gotteth this name the Lord our Righteousness what can be more manifest than that He is made Righteousness to His people Yea all their Righteousness that this Righteousness is made over to them so that He is in a manner wholly theirs nothing but theirs all that He hath is theirs particularly that His Righteousness is all the Righteousness they owne as their Righteousness He excepteth 2 That in no tolerable sense can Christ being a person be said to be imputed to us Ans. Do we not hear that a childe was born to us a Son was given to us Esai 9 6. was not that child Son a person And may not a person be as well said to be Imputed as given seing imputation upon the matter is nothing but a giving or bestowing Yet we do not say that Christ is Imputed but that this expression here used doth manifestly evince that we are righteous through the righteousness of Christ made ours that Christ is become the Lord our righteousness that true beleevers receive owne Him as such rest upon His righteousness alone by faith He excepteth 3. The plaine direct meaning is that He shall be generally acknowledged celebrated by his people of the jewes as the great author procurer of that righteousness or justification in the sight of God upon which aboundance of outward glory peace prosperity should be cast upon them Ans. 1. That this is not to be restricted to the jewes is manifest seing it is spoken of the Gospel times when the righteous Branch shall be raised up unto David a King shall reigne prosper 2. It is too carnal an Interpretation to think the text speaketh only of such a justification as is followed with aboundance of outward Glory peace Prosperity whileas the whole Gospel informeth us of something more spiritual attending upon following justification 3. Righteousness justification are here made Synonymous which ought not to be though these two be inseparably lincked together yet they are formally different 4. Wherein standeth this righteousness justification He tels us in the place to which he here referreth us that it standeth in Remission of sins But pardon of sins is no righteousness though a man pardoned hath freedom from the obnoxiousness to punishment yet righteousness is another thing respecteth the obligation to duty required in the Law 5. Though it is true Christ is indeed the author of our justification pardon which is an effect of God's pronouncing us righteous of His accepting of us as righteous in justification as of our peace yet that needeth not destroy what we assert there being no inconsistency here but a necessary essentiall agreement betwixt the Imputation of Christ ' righteousness justification but it rather contributeth to the establishment of our Assertion Yet it is obvious that when Christ is called the Lord our Righteousness there is more Imported than His being the author of our peace justification even the way also how He bringeth about our peace justification is here denoted to wit His being made of God righteousness to His people so that His righteousness becometh theirs in order to their peace justification But to confirme his Interpretation he tels us 1. That the Imposition of name upon either thing or person often notes the quality or proprity in either or same benefite redounding from either answereable thereunto as Esai 9. his name shall be called wonderfull that is he shall be acknowledged looked upon by men as a doer of things very strange Ans. Seing all these names given to Christ Esai 9. cannot be so interpreted as to have this import mentioned for who will say that the name everlasting Father the mighty God can be so interpreted as to denote only some answerable benefite redounding there from who seeth not how little this can satisfie But 2. be it so that this name shall denote some benefite redounding therefrom why may it not denote this Effect which is only answerable hereunto to wit that His people shall be made partaker of His Surety-righteousness have the same made over unto them as they become united unto Him have His name called upon them He tels us 2. That it is familiar to attribute the Effect to its Cause or Author by a verbe substantive only as when Christ is called our Hop our life Resurrection peace Glory meaning that he is the author purchaser of all these Ans. Yet this proveth not that He is the author of all these Effects after one the same way He is otherwise our hope of which He is the Object as well as the Author than He is our life And He is otherwise our life and peace which He worketh createth in us than He is our Resurrection and Glory So He is our Righteousness by making us partaker of His Surety-righteousness imputing it unto us that it may be reckoned on our Score for this the nature of the thing requireth seing a Righteousness we must have ere we be justified and a Righteousness of our owne we have not and therefore must have one imputed to us and what Righteousness can suite us better than His who is THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS He tels us 3. That by Righteousness is meaned that justification which standeth in Remission of Sinnes and the meaning is that through Him God would be reconceled to them and pacified with them Ans. Justification is something else than pardon of sins for a justified man is one that is declared and pronunced Righteous in order to pardon of Sins and in order to a persons being declared such by God who alway judgeth according to truth he must be Righteous Righteous can no man be in the sight of God in order to his justification by what is in himself therefore he must have a Righteousness from some other seing Christ is called the Lord our Righteousness it must be His Righteousness which must be bestowed upon them in order to God's being reconciled to them pacified with them Fiftly another passage is Dan. 9 24. to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins to make reconciliation for iniquity and to bring in everlasting Righteousness That all this is to be understood of the grâat spiritual effects of power Grace which are to be brought about by the Messiah no Christian candeny and among the rest we see He is to bring in a Righteousness and a Righteousness of ages an everlasting Righteousness that shall endure for ever shall have everlasting effects and this Righteousness is something more than Remission of Sins is distinct from it which is
sinners before He can be looked upon as a Righteous person or be dealt with as a Righteous person He must first have a Righteousness imputed to him and bestowed upon him for how can God whose judgement is according to truth look upon a person as Righteous and conferre privileges upon him due only to such as are Righteous who is not Righteous indeed Must He not first bestow a Righteousness upon him reckon a Righteousness upon his Score to the end He may be just and Righteous when He is the justifier of him that beleeveth Lastly He said Here is neither peer nor peep of the least ground or reason to perceive that by Righteousness in this Scripture should be meant the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. It is enough that the Text saith Righteousness is imputed for the man here spoken of hath not a Righteousness of his own as the Apostle hath proved in the preceeding Chapters doth here take for granted And therefore this Imputed Righteousness must be the Righteousness of another and it must be such a Righteousness of another as can found free Remission of Sins And whose Righteousness else can this be if it be not Christ's Is there any third competitour here imaginable must it not be the Righteousness of Him whom faith goeth out unto laith hold on in order to justification Must it not be His Righteousness who was the Mediator who laid down the price of Redemption was a propitiation as He told us in the preceeding Chapter Some men in alleiging a difference betwixt a Righteousness imputed to us Sinners and the Righteousness of Christ as if there could be any other Righteousness imputable to us except the Surety-righteousness of Christ as they expresly in this joine with Socinians See Volkel de vera Relig. lib. 5. cap. 21. p. 565. with Papists Arminians so they declare themselves utter strangers to the Gospel yea greater strangers than those were against whom the Apostle wrote who took it for granted that if any Righteousness from without or that was not by any thing which we do were imputed it behoved to be the Righteousness of the Mediator And this we may conceive is the reason why the Apostle doth not say in so many express words that it was the Righteousness of Christ for who could have thought of another Fourthly Rom. 5 19. a place with its whole contexture pregnant for our purpose for the Apostle is not onely here confirming but also illustrating this whole matter from the Imputation of Adam's Sin unto his posterity after many various and emphatick expressions used there-anent from vers 12. and forward he saith here vers 19 for as by one mans disobedience many were made Sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous Socinus de Servat lib. 4. cap. 6. is so bold as to tell us That he supposeth there is nothing written in the Scriptures that hath given us a greater occasion of erring than that comparison betwixt Adam Christ which Paul made did prosecute at length here And he would cleare to us the comparison thus That as by Adam's Sin disobedience it came to passe that all men were condemned and died so by Christ's righteousness and obedience it came to passe that they wero absolvod and did live for Christ by His own Righteousness and Obedience by vertue of the decree of God did penetrate the heavens there to reigne for ever and there he begote eternal life and everlasting blessedness both to Himself and to His. How aliene this is from the whole of the Apostle's discourse needs not be declared seing there is not one word giving the least hint of the Apostle's designe to be to declare how what way Christ obtained power and authority to save Yet He goeth on to tell us That as Adam's fault made him guilty of death whence it came to passe that all mankind that are procreat of him after that guilt is obnoxious to death so Christ by His Righteousness purchased to Himself eternal life whence it cometh te passe that who ever are procreat of him partake of this life But He never once taketh notice that Paul giveth for the ground of all mankind's becoming guilty of death their sinning in him vers 12. even such as had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression vers 14. yea in every verse this cause is noted or pointed at it being Notour of it self that ifall mankind did sin in Adan Adam's sin must be imputed unto them so Christ's Righteousness must be imputed unto all His inreference to their justification that with a much more Let us now see what Iohn Goodwine excepteth pag. 142. c. It is not here said He said that by the Imputation of Adam's disobedience men are made formally Sinners but simply sinners that is either obnoxious to death and condemnation or else sinners by propagation not Imputation Ans. This is the same upon the matter with Bellarmin's answer de justif lib. 2. cap. 9. here we have a distinction proposed without any explication to wit betwixt simply sinners and formally sinners And what can he meane by formally sinners possibly he meaneth that which otherwise is expressed by inherently sinners And if so though Adam's posterity so soon as they come to have a being have an universal corruption of Nature convoyed by propagation yet that is not it which is properly said to be Imputed for that which is imputed is the guilt of Adam's sin whereby they become sinners that is guilty legally and so obnoxious to punishment death condemnation this is enough for us for as the posterity of Adam have the sin of Adam so imputed to them that they become guilty and obnoxious to wrath so Beleevers have the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto them and they thereupon are accounted legally righteous 2 Whileas he will not grant that Adam's posterity are sinners by imputation he joineth with the Socinians who turne these words vers 12. ãâã not in whom but because or whereas which the Ethiopick version doth better sense saying Because that sin is imputed unto all men even unto them who know not what is that sin And the Arabick turne thus seing all have now sinned and the Syriack word is Behi or Bhi which may as well be interpreted in whom as because And in several other places this praeposition so construed as here in the Greek hath this same import as Mark 2. 4. Luk 5 25. 11 22. Rom. 6 21. Phil. 4 10. 1. Thes. 3 7. But enough of this here seing that matter is sufficiently cleared by the orthodox writting against the Socinians and we have also spoken of it against the Quakers Againe saith He Neither doth the Apostle here oppose unto or compare the Obedience of Christ with the disobedience of Adam as one Act unto or with another but as Satisfaction to and with the provocation or the Remedie to and with the
of the righteousness of the law is taken out of the heart of Ceremonials seing in the place cited both before and after the words morals are mentioned yea that whole Chapt. is taken up in rehearsing morals Except 2. Neiter is it any wayes agreable to truth that the Righteousness of Christ imputed to beleevers should be called the end of the moral Law for no Law considered simply as such is any cause or meanes of justifing a person than by the observation of it self consequently justification by Christ cannot be conceived to be the end of the moral Law for nothing can properly be said to be the intent or end of a thing but that which in likelyhood may be obtained by it Now it is impossible that justification by Christ should be procured by the moral Law It may be said with a for more favourable aspect to truth that Christ is the end of the Ceremonial Law yet not simply considered as a Law but as comprehending in it such such usages rites typifying Christ. Ans. 1. This whole Exception looketh with a very ill favoured aspect both to truth modesty For its scope drift is not so much against the truth which we maintaine as against the Apostle Paul himself against the language of the Spirit of Lord for it faith this in effect that either the Apostle spoke not truth or spoke not good sense when he said that Christ was the end of the Law for to use Mr. Goodwin's reason as nothing can be properly said to be the Intent or end of a thing but that which in likelihood may be obtained by it so nothing can be said to be the Intent end of a Law but what in likelihood may be obtained by it But how can any think that Christ can be in any likelihood obtained by the Law 2. But we say not that justification by Christ is had by the moral Law yet why the righteousness of Christ consisting in perfect obedience to the Law in full answering of the same in all its demands may not be called the end or fulfulling of the Law I see not especially seing the Apostle saith expresly that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness The question being moved about a Righteousness required by the Law this not being to be found in Man's obedience but in Christ's who was the end of the Law for righteousness the Law hath its full accomplissement in him also when He suffered satisfied the Sanction of the Law the Law had satisfaction or the Law-giver rather the Law its end accomplishement Now this Righteousness of Christ being imputed to beleevers they are thereupon justified the Law is satisfied And though the Law because it was weak throuw the flesh could not bring about this righteousness this end in us yet Christ having answered all the demands of the Law given full Satisfaction both in point of obedience in point of Suffering the Law hath its full accomplishment in Him that End which is here meaned 3 We do not say that the Righteousness of Christ imputed to beleeleevers is or is called the end of the moral Law but that Christ came was made under the Law that He might answer all the demands thereof both satisfie for its violation yeeld perfect obedience unto its commands so fulfill it in all points So that it had its end accomplishment in through Him what He did suffered that He submitted Himself hereunto that He might make up a righteousness wherewith the Law should be satisfied for the justification of Believers 4. Though the Moral Law nor no Law considered in it self can be any cause or meanes of justifying a person otherwise than by the observation of it self though justification by Christ cannot be conceived to be the end of moral Law yet in Christ's obedience Suffering the Law may be said to have received its Accomplishment and Satisfaction thereby a compleat Righteousness may be said to be obtained for all Believers Except 3. The Greek Expositors make Christ in this sense to be called the end of the law for righteousness because he performed or exhibited unto them that which the law propounded to it self as its end would have performed but could not to wit their justification Ans. Seing the law ptopounded their justification as its end only by the perfect observation of it self or by a full perfect conformity unto it Christ cannot be called the end or accomplishment of the law unless He had performed all that which the law required nor could He be called the end of the law for righteousness unless He had fully satisfied the law and thereby made up a Righteousness in the behalfe for the behove of Believers to whom it being Imputed they might be accepted justified upon the account thereof And this righteousness where with the law was satisfied wherin it had its full accomplishment is I grant exhibited in the Gospel to the end that all who would be justified may lay hold on it receive it rest upon it as the only righteousness in and through which they desire to be accepted and to stand before God the righteous judge Except 4. Some conceive that Christ is said to be the end of the law c. Because the law by convinceing men of sin and exacting of them a Righteousness which it doth not enable them to performe againe by threatning condemning them for the want of it it doth as good as lead them by hand to Christ by whom they are freely justified But neither doth this seem to be the meaning of the place Ans. Seing he himself is not satisfied with this interpretation he might have forborne to have added it But as for the interpretation it self I judge the thing said to be true and that it hath a subordinat aspect unto what we have said holdeth forth part of the truth though it be not a plaine and full exposition of the place for there is mention made here of a Righteousness of God which the jewes neither understood not would submit unto but in opposition to this they went about to establish their own righteousness that is to seek after a righteousness by their own works or by their own obedience to the law therefore did misse their end for this righteousness which they were seeking after which they could not attaine unto by all their own acts of obedience that is a righteousness that was a perfect obedience conformity to the law withall a Sufficient compensation Satisfaction for the breaches of the law already committed was only to be found in Christ who is the end of the law for righteousness that is made full Satisfaction for the breaches committed and performed compleat and perfect obedience which the law did principally require what ever other accidental ends it might have had or the law-giver in promulgating
that denote Beleevers Union with Him as the ground of their Interest in His Righteousness should not be asserted to Import this Imputation yet this words that we might be made the Righteousness of God will be a rock whereupon Imputation may stand for they hold this forth unto us That as God made Christ sin by Imputation so He maketh us righteous yea the Righteousness of God by Imputation Except 5. The clear meaning is this that God for that end made Christ sin that is an offering or Sacrifice for sin for us that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him that is that we might be justified or made a Society or Remnant of Righteous ones after that peculiar manner of justification which God hath established through that Sacrifice of His Son Ans. When Christ was made an offering for sin the guilt of sin was laid upon Him even the guilt of our sin And if we be justified or made a Society of justified ones we must be made a Society of righteous ones and if we be made a Society of Righteous ones we must first have a Righteousness seing we have not a Righteousness of our own we must have a Righteousness made over to us and seing we have this Righteousness made over to us as being in Christ it must be the Righteousness of God So that though this Interpretation be very far fetched and hath no countenance from the words and destroyeth the cohesion of these words with the former as also the reason that is contained in them adduced for confirmation of what was said vers 19. yet it cannot destroy the doctrine of Imputation but must contribute to its support though a little more remotely He laboureth to give strength to this his Interpretation by alleiging 1. That it is a frequent Scripture expression to call the sin-offering or the Sacrifice for sin by the name of sin simply as Exod. 29 14. and 30 10. Levit. 5 6 16 18 19 7 1 2 7 9 7. Ezek. 44 27. 45 19. 23. Hos. 4 8. Ans. Though it be true that the Hebrew words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã do sometimes signify sin sometimes an offering for sin yet the Greek word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã doth alwayes signify sin in the New Test. and the 70 do not use this Greek word in the places cited except Exod. 29 14. there in the version that is in the Biblia Polyglot Lond. It is in the Genitive case ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of sin the chald-paraph calleth it an Expiation Targ. Ionath Hierof say it is a sin so doth the persik version the Samaritan Version turneth it that is for sin the Arabik an Expiation But further though it were granted to be so taken here yet our cause would hereby suffer no prejudice but be rather confirmed as was lately shown And when the same word used to express a Sacrifice for sin which signifieth sin it self we may hence be confirmed in this that that Sacrifice for sin hath guilt laid upon it before it can be Sacrifice for sin it must be sin in respect of this before it be a due Sacrifice or oblation for sin And therefore Christ must have been sin in law by Imputation or have the guilt of sin laid upon Him before He could be a fit Sacrifice for sin He alleigeth 2. To express a Number of justified or righteous persons by the abstract terme of Righteousness is very agreable to the Scripture dialect in other places as poverty for poor captivity for captives Ans. 1 Yet no one instance can be given where the word Righteousness hath this Import 2 But how ever as was said these justified or righteous persons must be righteous else they cannot make up such a company as captivity can never signify a company of men that are not captives nor poverty a company of persons that are not poor So that this company of righteous ones must needs be righteous and that in order to justification seing they have no Righteousness of their own for in themselves they are ungodly they must have a Righteousness by Imputation 3 Why should they be called the Righteousness of God according to this Interpretation And how is the opposition here observed betwixt Christs being made sin their being made the Righteousness of God in Him But this man by this Interpretation transgresseth all lines of Correspondence He alleigeth 3. That addition of God imports that that righteousness or justification which beleevers obtaine by the Sacrifice of Christ is not only Righteousness of Gods free donation but of His special procurement and contrivement for them Ans. 1 Righteousness and justification are not one the same how oft so ever he name them as Synonymous 2 We grant that the Righteousness the Iustification which Beleevers obtaine are both Gods free gift His contrivement But notwithstanding hereof yea so much the rather is there a Righteousness imputed to them the Righteousness of Christ who is God and a Righteousness which will be accepted of God whose judgment is according to truth as a sufficient ground whereupon to pronounce such as in themselves are ungodly to be Righteous so to justifie them He alleigeth 4. That by the grammatical construction dependance of the latter clause our being made the Righteousness of God in Christ upon the former it is evident that in the latter such an Effect must of necessity be signified which may answere that cause to wit the death of Christ for us this is deliverance from the guilt punishment of sin not the Imputation of His active obedience Ans. As Christs death could not be separated from His Obedience which is thereby presupposed His death being the Sacrifice of one who is made under the law and was obedient thereunto unto death that in the room stead of His own So the Imputation of Righteousness to us should not be separated from the Imputation of His Sufferings both being necessarily required unto sinners who had sinned yet remained under the obligation of the law in order to their acceptance with God and Justification He alleigeth 5. The Scriptures when they speak of the Sufferings of Christ as a cause inrespect of justification never ascribe any other effect unto them but only either the Remission of sins deliverance from wrath Redemption or the like Ans. As the Scriptures making so frequent mention of the Sufferings of Christ do not exclude His Obedience so neither do they exclude the Imputation of His Obedience in order to our justification and receiving a Right to glory yea they make our being constitute Righteous an Effect of His Obedience Righteousness or Righteous-making is accompanied with Justification So that though the Scriptures speak sometimes more expresly of the Sufferings sometimes more expresly of the obedience of Christ according to the exigence of the cause handled yet both are inseparable
way unto Salvation or as the actual possession of Salvation is had by Confession And as Confession it self is not Salvation but the way thereto and the mean thereof so faith it self is not the Righteousness but the way thereunto and the meane or medium thereof 5. Gal. 2 21. I do not frustrat the grace of God for if Righteousness come by the law Christ is dead in vaine Whence we see that a Righteousness must be had and that this cannot be had by the law or by our obedience to the law but by Christ to deny this is in plaine termes to frustrat the grace of God to say that Christ is dead in vaine And if we look back to vers 16. forward we shall see that the Apostle is speaking of justification by faith in opposition to the works of the law that is by faith in Jesus Christ receiving a Righteousness which He hath wrought in His estate of Humiliation 6. Gal. 3 21 22. For if there had been a law given which could have given life verily righteousness should have been by the law but the Scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by faith of Iesus Christ might be given to them that beleeve Whence we see that Righteousness is required unto life viz. the life of justification and by whatever way life is had by the same is Righteousness had and that neither life nor Righteousness is had by the law but by the faith of Jesus Christ and both are held forth in a free promise given to the Beleever in Christ. 7. Gal. 4 4 5. But when the fulness of the time was come God sent forth His Son made of a Woman made under the law to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the Adoption of sones Christ we see was made under the law that to redeem such as were under the law that they might be freed from what they were liable to by the law and by being under the law and withall receive the Adoption of sones which necessarily taketh in His Obedience as the Aethiopik Version explaineth it saying He was begotten of a Woman was a doer of the command in the law And that His Sufferings are here included is plaine from the one end assigned that he might redeem them who were under the law or under the lawes curse The end therefore here being twofold viz. Deliverance from under the law and receiving the Adoption of sones the Cause must have a subtableness thereunto and say That this compleat Righteousness comprehending both must be Imputed unto us for the ends mentioned 8. Gal. 5 5. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of Righteousness by faith Whether we take here the hope of Righteousness for justification as the Aethiopick Version doth translating the words thus and we in the Holy Spirit and in faith hope to be justified to which also the scope may give some countenance or for the Recompence of glory which is the thing hoped for that which we intend will be equally confirmed for if Justification be immediatly here spoken of it is manifest that hereunto a Righteousness is requisite and that this Righteousness is had by faith and so is not in our selves and therefore must be the Righteousness of Christs unto whom faith carrieth forth the soul of whom he spoke vers 4. Saying Christ is become of none effect unto you who soever of you are justified by the law If glory be here immediatly intended we may see that the Apostle to perswade the Galatians not to seek after a Righteousness by the law tels them what he others did and were resolved to do to wit how they ventured their whole Salvation on the truth he delivered for they waited and looked for heaven and happiness which is here called hop by a Metonymy not by the works of the law for heaven with them was not the hop of the law or of the works of the law but by the Righteousness of faith that is by through that Righteousness which is by faith therefore it is called the hope of Righteousness by faith that is that which they hope for through the help of the Spirit and expect in through the Righteousness of Christ which Righteousness is had by faith in Christ that this Righteousness is none else but the Righteousness of Christ the following verse cleareth where he saith for in Iesus Christ c. 9. Philipp 3 8 9. That I may win Christ be found in Him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith This place is so clear and full that by speaking much of it we may rather darken it than explaine it We see what was the maine thing Paul designed in opposition to what he once intended and sought after what he did formerly look upon as gaine and was hote in the pursuite of he now had no better account of than of as much loss dung yea he had no better esteem of all things beside Christ in this judgment he persisted accounting all but dung that he might win Christ have Him for all his gaine And what would he make of Christ He would be found in Him hid in Him covered with Him and united to Him In opposition to this he desireth not to be found in or having on his own righteousness which is of the law thereby showing us That it was the Righteousness of Christ he desired to be clothed with and found in therefore addeth but that i. e. that Righteousness which is through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith The he was seeking is the Righteousness of God and which is of God by faith and is had through the faith of Christ and all this was said in opposition to the way that the dogs the evil workers the concision mentioned vers 2. were crying up and following viz. the observation of the law in order to justification 10. Hebr. 11 7. By faith Noah became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Where there is a Metonymy the Cause puth for the Effect Righteousness put for that life which is had by this righteousness which sheweth âhat a righteousness is necessarily required unto the life of acceptance with God and unto Salvation and that this righteousness is not in or of our selves but in and from another for it is had by faith and therefore is called the Righteousness which is by faith and faith layeth hold on no Righteousness but on that which is Christs These and other passages which might be mentioned are evident proofs of the Truth we are asserting with all such as are unprejudiced in the point beside all those passages which prove justification not to be by the works of the law but by faith for they also confirme this truth That in order to our justification and
Gods act the person justified must be righteous ere God can judge pronounce him to be such for the judgment of God is alwayes according to truth no person having a righteousness of his own all that are justified must have a Righteousness imputed to them and there is no Righteousness that can be said to be imputed but the Surety righteousness of Christ and particularly in satisfying all the demands of the law He Excepteth pag. 211. against the Minor 1. That however it be true that justification cannot take place without a perfect Righteousness being nothing else than the making of a man perfectly Righteous yet a Righteousness consisting determinatly of such a tale of righteous acts as Christ performed unto the Moral law is not absolutely necessary for in reference to the jewes there must have been righteous acts performed unto the ceremonial law also Ans. 1 Justification is not the making of a man perfectly righteous but the judicial pronouncing declaring of a man to be so through the Righteouseness of Christ imputed to him received by faith 2 A perfect Righteousness consisting in compleat obedience the law is required we urge not such a determination of acts in number tale to the moral or to the Ceremonial law only we assert the necessity of a full obedience to the Rule of Righteousness which God prescribed unto men this was the Moral law Though as to the jewes there were other prescriptions proposed than were to others of the world yet these same prescriptions consisting in Ceremonials or in Judicials were reduced to the Moral law were enjoined thereby so long as they stood in force and were not repealed by the Supream Law giver Except 2. Neither is it so absolutly true that there is no perfect Righteousness to be found beside Christs There is a Righteousness in the law as absolut compleat And it is much more probable that if God Imputes a legal Righteousness unto Men in justification He fournisheth them this way out of the law Ans. But what is that Righteousness in the law doth the law hold forth any Righteousness but perfect obedience and how can God furnish them with this but by Imputing unto them the perfect obedience of Christ seing He hath not so ordered matters as they shall be in case while here perfectly to keep the law themselves 2 He remitteth us to what he said formerly in the same Treatise and in that place he maketh this compleat Righteousness to consist in Remission of sinnes And yet it is certaine that Remission is no obedience nor is it a Righteousness held forth in the law not is it any Satisfaction to the law yea it agreeth noth with common sense nor with Reason to say that by Remission of sins men are made formally Righteous Except 3. That perfect Righteousness wherein justification consisteth and where with men are made formally Righteous when they are justified is nothing else but Remission of sins Rom. 4 6 7. Ans. Remission of sins is not a perfect Righteousness This hath no countenance from Scripture nor from Reason or common sense Who ever thought or said that a pardoned Thiefe or Murderer was a Righteous man or that his pardon made him formally Rightheous and an observer of the law Though thereupon he be freed from the penalty or from the punishment threatned in the law against such transgressours yet is he nor thereupon either made or declared to be Righteous but his pardon is a virtual declaration that he is not Righteous but a Transgressour How that place Rom. 4 6 7. is perverted when adduced to give countenance to this fiction is declared already He addeth pag. 215. two Reasons for this the first is That remission of sins is equivalent unto and virtually containeth comprehendeth in it the most absolute and entire obedience unto the law Ans. Remission of sins as such is so far from being equivalent to this or from comprehending this in it that it is a plaine declaration of the contrary for where entire obedience is there Remission hath no place and Remission must presuppose a Transgression The next is Because swaith he it hath all these great and high privileges annexed to it and depending upon it which a Righteousness most strickly so called could have as the Love Favour acceptation and approbation of God Ans. If we speak of Remission of sinnes in it self and abstractly considered this is also false for though a pardoned man be freed from the punishment due to Transgressours yet as meerly pardoned he hath no right to Reward promised to the perfect observers of the law Nothwithstanding hereof we grant that the man pardoned of God hath all these high and great privileges but not by vertue of his meer pardon but because there is a Righteousness imputed to him upon which these privileges do depend and Exemption from punishment dependeth upon his pardon He hath two other Reasons elsewhere pag. 5 6. to this purpose as 1. That Remission includeth the acknowledgment of the observation of the whole law even as the Imputation of the law fulfilled necessarily includeth the non-imputation of sin Ans. Though in our justification this might be granted to be true upon the matter because there is an Imputation of the whole Surety-righteousness of Christ together and the one part is not separated from the other so that the one consequently inferreth the other But when it is thus reasoned against the Imputation of the one the Inference here must be understood of a formal Inference and so it is false that Remission includeth the acknowledgment of the observation of the whole law for it only includeth the non-Imputation of guilt notwithstanding that the law was broken yea as is said it manifestly supposeth the contrary viz. That the law was not perfectly observed for had the law been perfectly observed there had been no place for pardon Moreover Remission as such giveth no Right to the reward promised unto perfect obedience but only impunity from the punishment threatned for disobedience 2. saith he He cannot be said to have all this sinnes fully forgiven who is yet looked vpon as one that hath transgressed either by Omission or Commission intended to be dealt with all as such Ans. Though he whose sinnes are fully forgiven cannot be dealt with as one guilty of sin that is as one liable to the punishment yet he may be looked on as one that was guilty and so did not give full and perfect obedience and therefore though he cannot be dealt with as a Transgressour yet neither can he be dealt with upon the account of his Remission as one that hath yeelded perfect obedience did never transgress Wherefore seing he cannot be looked upon as one that never transgressed he cannot be looked upon as one that hath a perfect Righteousness and so a Right to the Reward The similitudes taken from a phisician restoreing his patient to health by recovering him from his sickness and
obvious Sense of the whole purpose and of every sentence used by the Spirit of the Lord in that matter is to usurpe a Supra-papal power and Authority over the Scriptures of truth and a most ready way to render them wholly useless 2 As for our sense of this Expression who that will willingly be ruled by the Scriptures cannot submit unto it Let us but look to the very first place cited by himself Rom. 3. consider the whole preceeding discourse of the Apostle from Chap. I 18. forward particularly Chap. 3 19. Where the Apostle closeth his discourse tending to evince both jewes Gentils to be under the Curse by saying Now we know that what things so ever the law saith it saith to them who are under the law that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God Is not this to be understood in respect of their own personal deeds works See then his conclusion vers 20. Therefore by the deeds of of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight Can any man that hath not renounced common sense understand this otherwise than that no man shall be justified in the sight of God by his own personal works seing this is the only native conclusion that floweth from the premisses seing by their own personal works they can be justified before men seing the following words for by the law is the knowledge of sin that is the law proveth evinceth all that we do to be short sinful enforce this likewise Is not this also enforced by these words vers 23. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God Is it imaginable that justification through the Imputed obedience of Christ to the law can evince that we are not justified freely by His grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ vers 24 If this general sense were the true meaning what ground was there for that vers 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works no by the law of faith Would Justification by Christs obedience give ground of boasting And what ground were there for that objection vers 31. Do we then make void the law c. in the following Chapter when speaking of Abraham doth he or can any man imagine that the Apostle doth mean any other works when be denieth that Abraham was justified by works than Abraham's own personal works And meaneth he or can he meane any other works when he saith vers 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt But it were tedious to prosecute this matter further that is so clear in it self to every ordinary Reader that it must needs argue a desperat designe together with unpasrallel'd boldness thus with confidence peremptoriness to assert the contrary He saith 2. If the Apostles charge had been in delivering of this doctrine either to have made or to have given allowance for any such distinction certainly he should have been unfaithful in his trust in giving the honour due to the works of Christ unto a thing of a far inferiour nature viz to faith as he doth Gal. 2 16. Where he saith not but by the works of Jesus Christ but by faith Ans. This answere is in a great measure sick of the same distemper of presumption with the former We must not think that the Apostle is still to be blamed for unfaithfulness when he speaketh not as we would have him speak Christian sobrâety should reach us to search for Gods mind in the expressions He hath thought good to use for signifying of His mind These against whom the Apostle here wrote whose errour in the matter of justification he was confuting never had a thought of such a general groundless sense as we have here obtruded upon us nor can it come into the thought of any rational man when then should we suppose that the Apoââle should have spoken to such a thing 2 Paul giveth not the honour due to the works of Christs unto any thing of an Inferiour Nature no not to faith whatever this Author misunderstanding the Apostle's mind perverting his words would make his Reader beleeve as we shall have occasion to shew hereafter This Author setreth Christ and Faith at variance whileas the Apostle every where sheweth their agreement indissoluble union 3 Taking faith in this Authors sense we see That by his own Confession the ascribing of that unto faith which he doth ascribe to it in the matter of âustification is a giving of that honour unto it which we say is due to Christs obedience So that the question betwixt him and us is whether Christ and His obedience or Faith of a far inferiour Nature must have that honour We see no ground to imagine that Paul would give the honour that Universal obedience might call for unto one act of obedience or think that he would cry up one act of obedience that is faith cry down all other acts of obedience far less that he would cry up faith in prejudice of the full perfect obedience of Jesus Christ the Redeemer and Surety He saith 3. If Paul's intent had been to have reserved a place in Iustification for the works of the law as performed by Christ his indefinite expression would have been as a snare upon men to cause them passe over the great things of their Iustification Ans. Paul's indefinite expression neither was nor could have been a snare unto any nor came such an imagination ever in the head of any man but such an one as can stumble in the most even path being blinded with prejudice at the truth drunk with love to his own Inventions which he cannot otherwise maintaine but by new and unheard-of fictions What great things of justification could I pray Paul's expressions cause any passe over Why are not some of these great things mentioned He saith 4. If this had been Paul's meaning it cannot be once imagined but that he would have made use of such a distinction or reservation would have been glad if without trenching upon some gospel-Gospel-truth he could have come over so neer unto the jewes who where chiefly incensed against Paul for passing over the law in justification Now had he said that be did not exclude the righteousness of the law by faith but advance it rather only he preached that they could not be justified by their own observation of it who seeth not how this would have taken off great part of their opposition Ans. It is a wonder to see how some men can shut their eyes that they should not see what is most obvious and what is in plaine termes asserted in the Scriptures Did not Paul say expresly enough Rom. 3. ult That he did not make void the law through faith but did establish it doth he not also plainly tell us where the difference lay betwixt him the jewes what it was especially
if it were necessary but we said enough of this in answere to the foregoing objection He saith 3. The works of the law are never the less the works of the law because performed by Christ. Ans. Yet when performed by Christ they are not the works of the law done by us who did lye under the obligation and by the Imputation of such an obedience as was performed by Christ we have no ground of boasting or of glorying either before God or Man and it is against such an obedience to the law as the ground of justification as doth not exclude glorying or boasting and such as consisteth in works of Righteousness which we have done is exclusive offree grace that the Apostle disputeth He saith 4. This righteousness is said to receive testimony from the law that is from that part of Scripture which is often called the law and from the Propheââ Now neither of these give any testimony to such a Righteousness but to a Righteousness procured or derived upon a man by faith Gen. 15 6. Hab. 2 4. Ans. It is true this Righteousness receiveth testimony from the law and from the writtings of the Prophets we plead for no other Righteousness but such as is so testified of hath the concurrent consent both of the O. and of the N. Testament Both law Prophets that spoke of the seed of the Woman of the Messiah of His being the Lord our Righteousness or spoke of the peoples duty in reference to Him as such did bear witness to this Truth 2 What is that Righteousness which is here said to be procured or derived upon a Man by faith Is it the Righteousness of Christ Then the cause is yeelded Is it the Righteousness of men themselves Then justification by works is established the whole Gospel is overthrown And how I pray can this besaid to be procured or derived upon a man by faith The places cited speak of no such thing but have a far contrary Import as may hereafter appear He saith 5. This Righteousness of God is said to be unto all upon all ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by or through faith by way of opposition to the works of the law Now between Faith the works of the law there is a constant opposition but between the law and the works of righteousness of Christ there is no opposition Ans. 1 If this Righteousness be unto and upon all by or through faith it must of necessity be the Righteousness of another in bringing home and applying of which faith is an Instrument to this way of bringing in the Righteousness of God by faith from without is the seeking of Righteousness by our own works or by our own acts of obedience to the law manifestly opposite irreconcilable this is the opposition which the Scripture alwayes maketh betwixt justification by the law by faith as the very Scriptures cited by himself make manifest to wit Rom. 3 27 28. 4 13 14. 9 32. 10 5 6. Gal. 2 16. 3 5 11 12. c. 2 This argument all the steps of its prosecution make against himself who will have our act of faith to be the Righteousness of God though it be no where so called cannot be that which is by or through faith for faith is not by or through faith nor doth faith become a Righteousness by or through faith nor is faith as our act against the law otherwise it should be no act of obedience but a piece of willworship and consequently no righteousness at all but an unrighteousness a plaine disobedience or a work of Supererogation nor do the law or Prophets any where testify to this as our Righteousness Thirdly Chap. 5. pag. 73. He reasoneth from Rom. 5 16 17. thus The gift of righteousness as it is called vers 17. which is by Christ in the Gospel is said vers 16. to be a free gift of many offences unto justification that is the forgiveness of many offences cannot be a perfect legal righteousnes imputed unto vs or made ours by Imputation but the righteousness which is by Christ in the Gospel is the gift of many offences Ergo c. The Major he thus confirmeth That righteousness which extends unto a mans justification by the forginess of sins can be no perfect legal righteousness imputed But the righteousness of Christ in the Gospel by which we are justified extendeth unto a mans justification by the forgiveness of sins Ergo c. The Major of this he thus proveth Because a legal or perfect righteousness doth not proceed to justifie a mans person by way of forgiveness of sinnes but is of it self intrinsecally essenâially a man's justification ât yea such a justification with which forgiveness of sins is not competible for what need hath he that is legally righteous or hath a legal righteousness imputed to him of forgiveness of sins when as such a rightousness excluded all sin all guilt of sin from his person To all which I ans 1 The Major propos of the two Syllogisâes is true only of a perfect righteousness wrought by our selves in conformity to the law and not of the Righteousness of another imputed to us which though it may be called legal as to Christ as consisting in perfect obedience conformity to the law yet is rather to be called Evangelical as to us upon the account of its discovery and revelation and manner of communication unto us 2 The confirmation of the Major is likewise only true of a righteousness performed by our selves for that indeed excludeth all Remission and therefore if our faith be accounted our righteousness as he faith it must be our justification so inconsistent with free forgiveness 3 As to the Scripture where upon all this founded I say The text saith not that our righteousness is only free forgiveness but that in reference to pardon free forgiveness there is a gift bestowed that this gift by grace which aboundeth unto many is attended with free forgiveness as a necessary consequent It is the free gift that cometh upon all men unto justification vers 18. that by which many are made righteous vers 19. therefore is called the gift of righteousness vers 17. He objecteth against himself thus A man's sins are first forgiven him and then this perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed unto him and so he is justified But this is not the thing we would say but on the contrary That first the perfect Righteousness of Christ is imputed whereupon the beleever is justified pardoned Let us hear his answer 1. He saith If we will needs distinguish the effects of the active passive obedience of Christ so as from the active part to fetch a perfect righteousness for Imputation from the passive remission of sins yet whether it be any wayes reasonable to invert the order I leave to sober consideration Christ did not first die after
cause of the formal objective cause which some call the Formal others the Material cause and the Inferiour Meane or Instrumental cause Here also these two are confounded made one viz. We are justified by faith faith is Imputed unto Righteousness That these are far different shall be cleared hereafter But what answereth he He saith 1. If their meaning be simply so that we are justified by that which faith apprehendeth they speak more truth than they are aware of But that whatsoever faith apprehendeth should justify is not true Ans. Who speaketh thus I know not yet I see little danger in it their meaning being only this in that expression we are justified by that which faith apprendeth that Christ His Righteousness which justifying faith in the act of justifying laith hold on is the formal objective cause or that upon the account of which we are justified this no way saith that our faith is that Righteousness for which we are justified Next he saith If men ascribe justification in every respect to that which faith apprehendeth they destroy the Instrumental Iustification of faith Ans. No man that I know doth or will ascribe Justification in every respect unto that which faith apprehendeth so they need not destroy the Instrumental use of faith in Justification for as to the Instrumental justification of faith I understand it not it seemeth to be a very catachrestick expression In end he addeth If faith justifieth any way it must of necessity be by Imputation or account from God for righteousness because it is all that God requires of men to their justification in stead of the righteousness of the law Therefore if God shall not impute or account it to them for this righteousness it would stand them in no stead at all to their justification because there is nothing useful or available to any holy or saving purpose but only to that whereunto God hath assigned it If God in the New Covenant requires faith in Christ for our justification in stead of the righteousness of the law in the old this faith will not passe in account with him for such righteousness but his command and Covenant for beleeving and the obedience it self of beleeving will both become void of none effect the intire benefite of them being suspended upon the gracious pleasure purpose of God in the designation of them to their end Ans. Whatever interest or place Faith hath in the New Cov. in the matter of justification it hath it from Gods sole appointment designation it is all that which is now required of us in order to our justification entering into Covenant with God yet unless we change alter its true nature and assigne another place power to it that God hath the Crown is keeped on the head of the Mediator His Righteousness is only owned received produced by the sinner as it were in face of Court rested upon by faith in order to justification But when faith is said to be imputed for Righteousness that is when our act of beleeving is made our Righteousness said to be so accounted esteemed by God all this to shoot out the Righteousness of Christ and to take away the Imputation thereof to us as the only ground of our justification not only are the native kindly actings of justifying faith destroyed but the very nature gentus of the New Covenant is altered it is made to be the same in kinde with the first Covenant with this gradual difference that the first Covenant required full perfect obedience the second one act of obedience only viz. Faith as a Peppercorn as some speak in stead of a great rent our whole Righteousness for no other Righteousness will our adversaries grant to be really imputed to us save what they grant of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness only as to Effects and thus they make the Lord to repute for that is the meaning of imputing with them that to be a Righteousness which at best is but imperfect not every way conforme to the command of God enjoining it Whereby thus one imperfect act of obedience viz. Faith is made that whereupon the wakened sinner is to rest and lay his whole weight wherein he is to refuge himself from the wrath of God which he is to hold up as his legal defence against all accusations coming in against him and all this use is to be made of faith immediatly in stead of Christ His Surety-righteousness Whence we see that it is false to say 1 That if faith justifieth any way it must of necessity be by Imputation for righteousness For it justifieth as the mean appointed of God to lay hold on an Imputed Righteousness and to carry the soul forth thereunto The reason added is vaine for though it be all that God requires of men to their justification it is not that Rightheousness which is imputed unto Justification or the ground thereof but the Mean or Instrument of a soul 's partaking of that Righteousness of Christ which is the only ground or formal objective reason 2 It is false to say That if God shall not account it to them for righteousness it shall stand them in no stead to justification For it is required as the meane whereby the Sinner is married unto Christ partaketh of His Righteousness in order to justification and is as the legal production of the righteousness of the Surety in face of court as the ground of absolution to be pleaded stood unto The reason he here addeth is of no force because faith is assigned of God to this end purpose as the Gospel cleareth only to this end that so the Mediator alone may weare the Crown beare the weight of sinners nothing in us or from us may share with Him in that glory It is false 3 to say or suppose as his following words intimate That faith in the New Covenant hath the same place force efficacy which the righteousness of the law had in the old Covenant For then Faith should be Meritorious ex pacto should give ground of glorying before men It is 4 false to say That if faith hath not this place force efficacy in the New Covenant the command for beleeving beleeving it self shall be vaine Seing it hath another use designed to it of God and it is required for another end as is said according to the gracious pleasure purpose of God Lastly Chap. 8. pag. 93. c. he argueth from Gal. 3 12. thus If the Scriptures do not only no where establish but in any place absolutely deny a possibility of the translation or removing of the Righteousness of Christ from one person to another then there is no Imputation of Christ's Righteousness But the former is emphatically true from this place Ergo c. Ans. This upon the matter is but what Socinus said lib. 3. cap. 3. viz.
That one mans deed can no more be the deed of another than one mans death or paine can be the death or paine of another that in deeds of the law the deed it self is not simply called for but the proper deed of every one who is under the law that nothing can be more ridiculous than to say that one mans righteousness can be the righteousness of another who is unrighteous in himself that it is against common sense to say that one may obey for another But howbeit we easily grant there neither is nor can be any physical translation or removing of Righteousness from one to another yet to deny all legal translation is to deny all Suretiship cautionry yea and all Satisfection therefore the Socinians who see the force of this consequence do peremptorily deny that Christ made any Satisfaction to justice or payed the debt of the chosen ones as their Surety such as deny this legal translation of Christ's Righteousness would do well to consider if they do not hereby weaken the truth concerning Christ's Satisfa ion His dying in the Room place Stead of the Elect. As for the thing it self every one that knoweth what a Surety is knoweth that his payment of the debt is by law reckoned on the score of the principal debtor so transferred upon him as he is no more liable to the charge of the Creditor or to the execution of the law against him for non-payment than if he himself had laid down the full Summe He would prove what he alleigeth thus This Scripture doth not barely and simply deny a possibility of translation of the Righteousness of the law from one person to another but denieth it emphatically Ans. Howbeit it be a truth that no meer-mans righteousness is derivable from him to another set this Text proveth no such thing but only telleth us the nature ãâã of the Covenant of works viz. that it required personal and perfect obedience of him that would have right to the promised reward Which speaketh nothing against the new contrivance of the Gospel wherein the Supream God and Law-giver the great Rector of the world did in Mercy Love appoint Jesus Christ to be the Mediator Surety for the chosen ones to pay their debt suffer for them did ordaine a way how they should in due time come to have an Interest in to partake of that Surety-righteousness of Christ Jesus that so they might be justified dealt with as Righteous persons having Christ's Surety-righteousness imputed to them reckoned upon their score when by faith they close with Him and lay hold on it He addeth for proof for it denies a possibility of it to be done even by faith which was the likeliest hand to have done it if the nature of the thing had not resisted the doing of it Ans. The meaning of these werds the law is not of faith is only to shew That the way of justification by faith by the law are so far different that they cannot agree together but not to show that by faith Beleevers are not made partakers of the Righteousness of Christ or have it not imputed unto them reckoned upon their score as the whole scope circumstances of the place show That therefore is not true which he addeth By which it appeareth also that be i.e. the Apostle had an Intent particularly to make the righteousness of the law as performed by Christ himself uncapable of this translation or Imputation For though the law should be against the Imputation of the Righteousness of one man who is Naturally and every way under the law obliged by his being to obey the law unto another yet it is not against the Imputation of the Righteousness of one who is God so under the law only by voluntary Submission is appointed thereunto by the Supream Law-giver Rector unto all such as were committed given to Him to save that way in a way condescended upon by Jehovah and the Mediator He proceedeth The meaning of these words the law is not of faith must be this that the righteousness of the law doth not arise or come upon any man out of his faith or by his beleeving this is proved because the very doer shall live in or by them Ans. It is true the law-way of justification or the way of justification revealed in and by the law and hold forth in the old Covenant saith only that the man that doth these things shall live in them and doth not prescribe the way of justification through faith But the Gospel revealeth how the righteousness of the law which was part of our debt being performed and payed by the Lord Jesus the Surety appointed of God is transferred and imputed unto those He did represent He addeth further The word law here is put for the Righteousness or fulfilling of the law Ans. And why also shall not the word be taken in that sense in the following vers where it is said Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law so the meaning will be from the curse of the righteousness or fulfilling of the law Againe what though the word had that Import here can any thing more hence follow than that personal Righteousness is not derivable now from one man to another so as to stand for his personal righteousness But how shall this sense of the words make them a proof or confirmation of what was said in the former verse He answereth to this saying The Apostle in the former verse had delivered it for a truth that no man could be justified by the law i.e. by the righteousness or works of the law because the Scripture saith the just shall live by faith Now because this consequence might seem doubtful upon this account that it might be said why may not the just live by faith by the works of the law too may not the righteousness of the law be made over to them by faith No saith the Apostle The law is not of faith there can be no legal rigteousness drawn upon men by faith c. Ans. This confirmation is manifestly perverted for there was no occasion for that question whether the righteousness of the law could be made over by faith whether it be taken in his sense viz. Whether the Righteousness of Christ performed to the law could be made over and received by faith as appeareth from what he had said of the Gospel-way vers 8 9. Or whether it be taken in this sense that the righteousness of the law performed by a meer-man only for himself according to his obligation can be now made over to another by faith for no man over dreamed of such a thing But enough of this froathy trash What he talketh afterward of the opposition betwixt the law and faith in the matter of justification is utterly impertinent because quite mistaken and misunderstood by him for he only
way weakened by our Assertion of the Imputation of Christ's whole Surety-righteousness He addeth Christ hath taught us to pray for forgiveness of Sins now to pray for that and yet to conceite ourselves as righteous as Christ was is rather to mock than to worship Ans. This expression to conceite ourselves as righteous as Christ was is none of ours though it may admit of a good sense as being true quoad veritatem though not quoad modum yet because it is so ambiguous liable to misconstruction I chose rather to forbear it seeing no necessity touse it And to conceite our selves legally juridically righteous with the Imputed Surety-righteousness of Christ is very consistent with praying for pardon for Christ's Surety-righteousness is not nor yet said to be imputed for this end immediatly that all our after actions should be sinless but to this end rather that we may have actual pardon of by past sinnes of future sins too after the methode of the Gospel and that none of our sins should actually procure our Condemnation or prejudge us of eternal Felicity but that notwithstanding thereof we should not come into condemnation but enter into life He saw that what he here objecteth against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will militat as much against the Imputation of Faith which must derive a righteousness upon the person as perfect and compleat as the Righteousness of the Law so can leave as little place for Remission as what we plead for and therefore to obviat this he tels us That when faith is imputed another thing is imputed then the righteousness of the Law it self to wit faith by name in stead of it Now any other righteousness or any other thing imputed for righteousness besides the righteousness of the Law will bear a consistency of sin with it of remission Ans. If by the righteousness of the Law here he only meaneth that which we performe in our own persons it is true that is inconsistent with sin or pardon but it is false if he understand thereby the righteousness of the Law performed by another Christ our Surety And sure if his faith be accounted a Righteousness it must be a Righteousness or God's estimation is not just if it be a Righteousness it must be accompanied with all the privileges of a Righteousness as himself saith and consequently exclude all Sin Remission if these be such concomitans of an Imputed righteousness He addeth when a perfect Sanctification is imputed to a man for his justification that man can be no more reputed to have sin in him than to be obnoxious to death which is opposite to justification Ans. And no wonder for perfect Sanctification being a perfect inherent holiness cannot without a contradiction but exclude sin But who speak of such an Imputation of Sanctification We know no such thing for Sanctification is wrought inherent in us not imputed to us If he meane by this perfect Sanctification the perfect Obedience and Righteousness of Christ imputed to us we say though that perfect Sanctification or Righteousness could be consistent with no sin in Christ yet when imputed to us it can consist with sin inherent in us with pardon of sin also as we have already cleared Further saith he But when that which either is no Sanctification or at most but an imperfect Sanctification is imputed for Righteousness in a mans justification place is left for inherencie of sin consequently for the forgiveness of it Ans. That which is no Sanctification or at most but an imperfect Sanctification must either be no Righteousness or at most an imperfect righteousness and therefore cannot be reputed or accounted a perfect righteousness and so cannot be imputed to a person in order to justification Or if we should suppose that God did make it really repute it to be a righteousness it must be a compleat righteousness consequently inconsistent with pardon because it shall hereby become a compleat inherent Holiness Righteousness Obj. 8. Chap. 15. pag. 153. c. Whoseever is perfectly righteous or as righteous as Christ is in him God can see no sin But every beleever saith this opinion which we impugne is as perfectly compleatly righteous as Christ himself is Therefore c. Ans. How false this consequence is was manifested above Chap. 6. Mystery 15. And now waving that expression of being as righteous as Christ himself is I distinguish the Major thus Whosoever is perfectly righteous with an inherent Righteousness taking perfection here not for kind but for degrees in him God can see no sin true but in this sense the Minor is false Whosoever is perfectly Righteous with an Imputed righteousness in him God can see no sin or order to actual condemnation it is true but then the Conclusion containeth nothing but truth It is true God could see no sin in Christ because there was no sin existing in Him yet He can see sin in beleeves in whom sin existeth notwithstanding they be clothed with the perfect Righteousness of Christ which only maketh that God can see no sin in them for which He will actually bring them into condemnation and this is consonant to Scripture Rom. 8 1. Obj. 9. Another Reason he proposeth Chap. 16. pag. 154. c. alleiging That by this Imputation of Christ's Righteousness we confound the two Covenants of Works of Grace But as to this we have cleared the truth above Chap. 6. Mystery 16. Nor need we be much troubled at his bold alleigance foâ not we but he others with him by his opinion in pleading for the sole Imputation of faith as our Gospel Righteousness to which some adde other works of obedience do turne the Gospel into a new Covenant of Works for if faith properly taken alone or conjunct with other works of Righteousness which we do be all our Gospel-righteousness we are justified by our own personal obedience righteousness and this was the plaine tenor of the Covenant of works The variation of the obedience now required from what was of old though now it be but as a pepper corne in comparison of the greater rent formerly required doth make no alteration in the Nature and Essence of the Covenant for justification life is still by works of righteousness which we do and which are our owne But when the Righteousness of a Surety is imputed we are upon that account accepted though the righteousness wrought by the Surety be obedience to the same Law that was in force under the first Covenant which we were obliged unto lying under the Curse of as it must needs have been seing He did substitute himself in our place took our debt upon Him the Covenant is altered for the first Covenant knew no Righteousness but what was our owne personal did not admit of a Surety Thus these two Covenants are not confounded by us but kept manifestly distinct we cannot owne their
may deny all the Satisfaction of Christ. Obj. 15. pag. 168. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us then are we justified at least in part by the ceremonial Law because part of that Righteousness which Christ wrought stood in obedience to the ceremonial Law But this is not true Ergo c. Ans. We are not said to be justified either by the Moral or by the Ceremonial Law But by the righteousness of Christ which consisted in yeelding perfect obedience to the Law of God in answering all the demands of the Law in the behalf of His owne And so though the Law doth not justifie us because we are sinners yet neither can the Law now condemne us because Christ our Surety hath perfectly fulfilled it given full Satisfaction to the Law given for our violation thereof And in this matter the Ceremonial Law is not to be separated from the Moral it being but a branch or an Appendix thereof enjoined thereby for the Moral Law saith that God must be worshipped only that way which Himself hath prescribed that Ceremonial worship being the then Instituted worship of God whosoever knowing this did not worship God after that manner did violat the Second of the Moral Law which became not Him to do who came to fulfill all righteousness And thus the righteousness of obedience that is Imputed is Moral or righteousness consisting in obedience to the Moral Law And this is wholly imputed to all beleevers whether of Jewes or of Gentiles in reference to their own Redemption or delivery The objection which he frameth against himself viz. That the Moral Righteousness is Sufficient the other needeth not be imputed is none of ours as appeareth by what is said for we do not exclude the Ceremonial But reduce it to the Moral obedience to that being enjoined by this Obj. 16. Chap. 19. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us then are our sinnes imputed to Christ the same manner But this is not so Ergo. The Minor he proveth thus If the sinnes of Men be imputed to Christ then God looks upon Him reputes Him in His Sufferings as one that truly really had provoked Him sinned against Him Ans. This consequence is denied for no such Reputation or Estimation followeth upon the Imputation which we assert as hath been already cleared only this will follow that Christ being through His own willing consent in our Law-place as our Surety having undertaken to pay our debt He was exacted upon dealt with by Justice as if He had been the true sinner though He knew no sin as Beleevers having Christ's righteousness imputed to them are dealt with as if they had kept the Law made Satisfaction by themselves But as God doth not look upon them nor esteem nor consider them nor repute them as having really fulfilled the Law in their own Physical persons so nor doth He look upon esteem consider or repute Christ to have been truely really a Transgressour of the Law in His person Hence we see that his proof that God did not look upon Christ so is impertinent for we do not say so knowing that to look upon Christ as one that had truely sinned were to look upon Him as deserving in Himself what was inflicted upon Him that God's judgment is alwayes according to truth that Christ knew no sin in Himself but was made sin as having the guilt of our sinnes imputed to Him when He put Himself in our room Law-place so He died Suffered for us in our stead became a Sacrifice for sin having the guilt thereof laid on Him Obj. 17. pag. 173. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed unto us in our justification then God doth look upon us as worthy of that justification But this is an unclean saying Ergo. The Major he thus proveth If God reputes me to have kept the Law as perfectly as Christ did He must conceive of me as worthy of my justification for as the fulfilling of the Law deserving justification are the same Rom. 4 4. So the reputing of a man to have done the one is the reputing of him to have deserved the other The Minor he thus confirmeth Because then God should show us no grace or favour in our justification Rom. 4 4. with Rom. 11 6 But if any favour be shewed it is only in this that He reputeth us worthy to be justified or puts a worthiness upon us for justification whereas the Scripture expresly affirmeth that God justifieth the ungodly that is the unworthy Rom. 4 5. Ans. Unto all this I say 1. We say not that God imputeth to us the righteousness of Christ in justification But that He doth it in order to justification 2. Though Christ's Righteousness be imputed to us Yet it will not follow that God looketh upon us as worthy of our justification viz in ourselves it may be yeelded that He looketh on us when clothed with Christ's righteousness a worthy of justification viz in Christ our Surety ãâã with whose righteousness we are now covered when it is imputed unto us But then the conclusion will make nothing against us 3. If the meaning be that therefore God looketh upon us as worthy of justification in our selves the consequence is false the Reason adduced for confirmation is invalide for the Text Rom. 4 4. speaketh of him that worketh so hath the ground of the merite in himself he indeed that fulfilleth the Law in himself deserveth to be justified And let our Adversaries see to this who will have no Righteousness imputed but our own faith which is in us is our own is in their account as good as the fulfilling of the Law is accepted for that end for Sure such as have this faith which is in them reputed for their righteousness upon the account of which they are justified must have the reward reckoned to them not of grace but of debt so must merite deserve their justification in full proper sense 4. It is not to be admitted as a truth without the forementioned distinction to say that the reputing of a man to have done the one is the reputing of him to have deserved the other for to repute a man to have done the one in his own person is indeed a reputing of him to have deserved the other But we assert no such Reputation in God for His judgment is according to truth But only assert an Imputation which taketh away this Reputation these two being inconsistent from this Imputation can no such thing be inferred 5. It is true if we deserved justification justification should be no act grace but we deserve no such thing being in our selves as to ourselves indeed ungodly yet when justified we are looked upon as clothed with the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us received by faith so though our justification be merited by Christ be an Act
the grounds of necessity requiring this that we should receive it close with it and embrace it with all thankfulness as a Mystery of Love free Grace wisdom that Angels may wonder at 3 Yet accrding to the Scriptures we may say that the Truth Justice of God require this for His judgment is alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. and it would be an abomination in His eyes to justifie one every way wicked Therefore if He pronounce a person righteous in His sight which He doth when He justifieth a person that person must be a Righteous person but when no man can be justified or pronounced Righteous as being inherently Righteous Psal. 130 3. 143 2. all who are justified must be clothed with an Imputed Righteousness for God must be just even when he justifieth him which beleeveth in Jesus Rom. 3 26. In reference to the justice of God he saith That there is nothing at all necessary to be done either by God himself or by man about justification of a sinner by way of Satisfaction to the justice of God since that one offering of Christ of himself upon the cross Ans. We plead not for Imputation upon any such account nor do we see the least ground to think that this should derogat any thing from the full compleat Satisfaction of Christ made to justice or from the price laid down by Him as if this Imputation were required to supply some thing wanting there Yea our doctrine of Imputation doth rather confirme establish the same it being an application of the Sponsor's Surety-righteousness or payment Satisfaction unto the debtors in order to their Absolution freedome from the sentence Though the Surety hath paid the creditor yet the Law may require that when the debtor is charged or challenged for the debt the payment of his Surety be instructed made manifest unto the judges And yet it will not hence follow thaâ the Satisfaction or payment made by the Surety was defective and insufficient He further saith That God can as well and as truely pronounce that Man righteous that wants a literal or legal Righteousness especially supposing he hath another Righteousness holding any Analogy or proportion thereto as he may account any Mans uncircumcision circumcision Rom. 2 26. Ans. That the Lord may deal with one uncircumcised that keepeth the Law no less than if he were circumcised and so thereby declare that He valueth not outward circumcision so much as the jewes were ready to dream who questieneth But what is this to the business in hand shall we therefore think that the Lord whose judgment is according to truth shall account any Righteous who have no righteousness Shall we think that the Righteous judge shall pronounce declare him to be Righteous who is not so 2. He may think to warde this of by his parenthesis But I pray what is that other righteousness that holds any analogy or proportion to the righteousness required by the Law of God Is that the single Act of faith Sure that must hold a very unproportionable proportion a poor analogy unto Obedience to all commands of God! I need not take notice of that word legall righteousness literally so called for he hath many such of little other use than to amuse the Reader darken the matter 3. If by this proportionable righteousness he mean the righteousness of Christ which may be said to hold an analogy to the righteousness of the Law which man was obliged to performe which possibly he understandeth by a legal righteousness literally properly so called he speaketh truth yeeldeth the cause for that is it we contend for But afterward he seemeth to tell us what he meaneth by analogical righteousness saying So may God with as much righteousness truth pronounce call or account a man righteous that is not strickly properly or literally such if he hath any qualification upon him that any way answereth or holdeth proportion in any point with such a Righteousness as he should do in case this man had this legal righteousness upon him in the absolutest perfection of the letter Ans. And who may not see the folly of this Reddition to inferre this from the Lord's calling Iohn Baptist Elias the like Will he make the Lord 's pronouncing sentence in judgment as a righteous judge as He doth in the matter of justification to be such a figurative speach as when Iohn Baptist was called Elias because he had some resemblance to Elias when he came in his Spirit power Will he be accounted a righteous judge upon earth who in judgment should pronounce that man righteous who in stead of the righteousness he should have had hath only one poor qualification upon him that some way or other holdeth proportion with it in any point If so it will be a great question if ever any wicked man can be condemned seing it will be rare to finde one that hath never all his dayes done some thing that answereth to the Law in some poor way or measure as to same one point or other Yea if we might drive this further it might be made probable that hence it would follow that all the world should be justified even in the sight of God But enough of this which is too too gross Yet wo heare not what that qualification is He saith when God pronounceth a man righteous it is sufficient to beare out the justice truth of God if his person be under any such relation condition as belongeth to a legal righteousness or which a legal righteousness would cast upon him Ans. What before was called a Qualification is here called a Relation or condition these seem not to be one the same thing But what if that Relation or condition have no foundation how shall the Lord upon that account pronounce such a person righteous or though it be not founded upon a legal righteousness performed by the mans self in his own person yet may it not be founded upon a Surety-righteousness imputed But what is this He addeth Now one special privilege or benefite belonging to a perfect legal righteousness is to free the person in whom it is found from death condemnation he that hath his sins forgiven him is partaker with him in the fulness of this privilege is as free of condemnation as he Ans. But he hath not yet proved that any man is pardoned without the Imputed righteousness of Christ beside righteousness bringeth with it as a special privilege or benefite right to the promised Inheritance of Glory But a pardoned man as such hath not this Right nor yet can challenge it as was showne above Moreover if God pronounce a Man righteous because he is pardoned then the man must be pardoned before he be justified for in justification he is declared pronounced Righteous not made such if he be pardoned before he be justified pardon is not the forme of justification nor
Impossible way when the Law is already now broken The meaning of these words Rom. 2 13. The doers of the Law shall be justified is not what he imagineth pag. 184. viz. That God will accept justifie save only such who out of a sincere sound faith to wards Him by His Christ address themselves to serve please Him in a way of obedience to His Lawes for this sense of the words keepeth no correspondence with the scope of the Apostle there nor with the Circumstances of the place Obj. 23. If God requires only faith of men to their justification then He imputes this faith unto them there-unto But God requires only faith to justification Ergo c. Ans. 1. The conclusion is not directly the thing that is now in question but another question of which hereafter in due time 2. The Minor is false to some of his own party who joine works with faith 3. The Major is denied for though God require faith of men to their justification Yet that faith is not imputed unto them viz. as their Righteousness It may be he meaneth no more by the word Impute here but to accept of it when performed according as it is prescribed and indeed his proof annexed can evince nothing else because saith he to impute unto justification to accept unto justification are nothing differing at all in sense signification Now if God should require faith of Men only faith to their justification not accept it thereunto he should make a bargaine not stand to it for hereby it is manifest that to Impute faith unto justification is but to accept it in order to justification in the place for the end which God hath fixed to it required it for that is to be a Mean Instrument in the business to be the way of Interessing us in the Righteousness of Christ the sole Righteousness for which ground upon which we are justified This then being the meaning of his Major Proposition for any thing that yet appeareth his whole Argument is but a meer sophistical evasion 4 It is true God requireth of us only faith as an Instrument mean to lay hold upon the Righteousness of Christ in order to our justification but this is so far from proving that therefore there is no necessity for the Righteousness of Christ that on the contrary it establisheth that truth more firmly for the faith that is required unto justification is not a bare historical faith but such a faith as carrieth the beleever out of himself to seek a Righteousness in Christ declareth his full Satisfaction therewith his resting thereupon in order to his Acceptance with God being justified absolved from the sentence of the Law under the conviction of which he was lying 5 The scope and drift of this Objection is to separat these things that God hath most firmly and manifestly conjoined viz. God's Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ and our Receiving that gift of Righteousness by faith and the atonement through faith But as was shown above the Scripture holdeth forth the necessity of both and what God hath conjoined let no man separate To this he saith If the Righteousness of Christ be that which is imputed not the faith that is required of them then may this Righteousness be Imputed to this end before yea without the faith of any man for this faith adds no vertue or value to that Righteousness Ans. This being God's free Constitution His will should serve us for a Law and in stead of too curious enquiring whether this might be or not be without the other or before the other we should rest satisfied with God's Method therein carry more like Christians than in making such objections against His express determinations What though it were granted that God might if it had so pleased Him impute the Righteousness of Christ unto sinners before or without their faith will it therefore follow that now faith is unnecessary or if faith be asserted to be necessary that therefore the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness must be denied Why what ground can be given for such fictions Nay will not this be as strong against the objecters if Christ made full Satisfaction to Justice what necessity is there for the Imputation of faith unto Righteousness Thus we see the objecter must either turne fully Socinian or reject this way of argueing But he will not rest satisfied with the good pleasure of God in this matter for he addeth pag. 186. If the will pleasure of God be to make no Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ but upon the Condition of faith interveening then it is evident that this Righteousness is not imputed unto justification to any man because the Condition of faith must necessarily interveen so that if this Righteousness of Christ were imputed unto men yet it must be only towards justification not unto it for faith hath the next most immediat connexion therewith Ans. Not to trouble our selves with that fonde fooliâ distinction betwixt towards unto which rather renders the Adversaries Cause desperat himself faine to shelter himself under such fig leaves to cover his nakedness than evidenceth any apparent probability of a real ground of Scrupling here We say That the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness which is God's Act hath as immediat a connexion with justification as Faith hath which is our Act for there is no priority or posteriority here as to time for whensoever a Man beleeveth in that same instant Righteousness is imputed and in that same Instant the beleever is justified We cannot say a Man is a beleever and yet hath not the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him or is not justified as we cannot say a Man hath the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him and yet is not justified Nay the very Argument will conclude as well that the Imputation of Righteousness hath a more neer connexion with justification than faith hath for we may likewise say though a man beleeve yet without imputation cannot be justified But the truth is all such argueings are but the Cavils of men seeking to darken that which they cannot destroy are meer sophismes unbeseeming Christians in such a concerning business Then saith he further faith doth not take hold of the Righteousness of Christ Imputed but first takes hold of it then the Imputation followeth then a man may have the Righteousness of Christ upon him by faith yet not be justified by it Ans. Though faith at first doth not take hold of the Righteousness of Christ already imputed but of the Righteousness of Christ hold forth in the Gospel yet faith may leane to that Righteousness imputed and rest upon it 2 We assert no such Conditions as this argument would say are the Conditions understood by our Adversaries that is such Conditions as are like a price that may be for some time in the buyers hand
posterity after him into the same condemnation And how could they be punished for that same guilt if it was not some way theirs by the just righteous Judge Governour of the world The posterity can no more be justly punished for the great hainous sins of their progenitors than for their lesser sinnes if they have no interest in these sinnes nor partake of the guilt thereof But as to Original sin the Scripture giveth the Sin as the ground of the punishment maketh the one to reach all as well as the other telling us Rom. 5 12. that by one Man sin ântered in to the world death by sin so death passed upon all Men for that all have sinned or in whom all have sinned See vers 19. 2. The Narrownese or scantisness of Adam's Person who could not beat that fulness of punishment which God might require for that great sin we cannot think that God should sit down with loss Ans. This is his second pillar But neither is it sufficient for God could have punished Adam condingly for his sin but when the posterity is punished for that sin also that sin must be theirs Though for great crimes as Treason the like the Posterity suffeâeth when the guilty is forfeited I yet the posterity are not properly punished for that sin nor can be said to be so as we are punished for Original sin because it is ours we sinned in Adam 3. His 3d. maine pillar is the peculir near relation of the posterity of Adam to his person for then they were in it as it were a part or some what of it so that Adam was us all we were all that one Adam as Augustine speaketh the whole generation of mankind is but Adam or Adam's person expounded at large Ans. This is sufficient for us for it will hold forth the Covenant relation wherein Adam stood as representing all his posterity so they were as well in him a part of him in his sin as in his punishment which is all we desire for hence it appeareth that all sinned in that one Adam as well as they were all punished in him Then he tels us that all these three are jointly intimat Rââ 5 12. Where first there is the demerito Imported when death is said to enter the scantiness of Adam's person when it is said to have passed upon all men the relation of his posterity to him in that all are said to have sinned in him Ans. But the maine thing which he denieth is there also imported when it is said that all men sinned in him or became guilty of his sin for thereby it is manifest that only they had an interest in his person but that they had such an Interest in relation to his person as so stated as standing in a Covenant-relation to God that they sinned in him or became guilty of his sin therefore suffered with him the demerite thereof Whence it is evident howbeit he seemeth confident of the contrary pag. 207. That the Imputation of Adam's sin or of his sinful Act as sinful or as it was a sin not of the act as such for that himself faith once againe was directly efficiently from God himself therefore was good is the ground or cause of punishment that cometh on his posterity But he saith pag. 208. If any Imputation be in this case it is of every mans own sin in Adam for is was Adam alone that sinned but all sinned in him It is not said that Adam's sin is Imputed to his posterity but rather that his posterity themselves sinned in Adam Ans. If he wil stand to this we need not contend with him about the word Impute this expression of Scripture comprehending plainely holding forth all that we would say And if he will grant as much in reference to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as is here said of Adam who was the type of him that was to come he must I judge retract all that he hath said against the same What followeth in that Chapter being but founded upon what is already mentioned examined needeth not here againe be repeated or expressed considered Thus we have taken notice of all which this voluminous Adversary hath said upon this matter both against the Truth for his own Errour no doubt he hath scraped together all that he could finde giving any seeming contribution unto the Notion which he hugged hath laboured after his usual manner to set of with a more than ordinary measure of confidence with an affected pedantrie of language supplying with bombast expressions the want of reality of truth solidity of reasoning What remaineth in that book concerning the Imputation of faith in opposition to the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ shall be examined when we come to the second part of our Text to speak of the matter of justification And as for other things we may take notice of them elsewhere CHAP. XIII M. Baxter's opinion Concerning Imputation examined THere being so frequent mention made in Scripture of Imputation of Righteousness or of Righteousness Imputed of Christ's being our Righteousness or of our being Righteousness or Righteous in Him the like many that even plead much against the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ maintained by the orthodox must yet yeeld to it in some sense or other at least in such a sense as may in their apprehensions not cross their other Hypotheses Dogmes Yea sometimes grant this Imputation in that sense at least in words which overthroweth or weakeneth all their Disputations to the contrary Schlightingius in defence of Socinus against Meisnerus pag. 250. will grant That Christ's Righteousness may be called accounted ours in so far as it redoundeth to our good righteousness is the cause of our justification And Bellarmin will also say de just lib. 2. cap. 10. That Christ is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the father for us so giveth communicateth that Satisfaction to us when He justifieth us that it may be said to be our Satisfaction Righteousness Mr. Baxter though he seemeth not satisfied with what is commonly hold by the Orthodox anent the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ yet will not professe himself an Enemie to all Imputation but on the contrary saith he owneth it in a right sense And it is true men have their own liberty in expressing their sense meaning of Truths where there seemeth to be some considerable difference as to words expressions yet there may be little or none upon the matter And it is not good I confess to make real differences of these that are but verbal nor is it good to be so tenacious of our own expressions as to exaggerat the expressions of others whose meaning may be good because not complying with our own in all points Let us
and the termes thereof I am far deceived He that would understand this plaine discovery of the Question must understand what Relations are what Reatus culpae poenae what poena damni sensus what cessante capacitate Subdut what pro-legal Righteousness what quoad valorem quoad ordinem conferendi rationem comparativam What is Terminus fundamentum in relations what is Titulus fundamentum juris what causa fundamenti donationis the like And if all Unexercised Readers shall be able to understand this I doubt And sure I am many a poor soul that understands nothing of these termes gets grace of God to understand the thing better than all this explication how plaine so ever it be called shall ever make him do And if this be the plainest way that Mr. Baxter can chose to make us understand this so necessary and fundamental a truth I shall never choose him for my Teacher as to this It could therefore tend o no edification at least unto his Unexperienced Readers whose edification I judge should be sought by us all in handling of this matter to fall upon any examination of or debate with him about what he hath here said seing it would necessarily end in a debate about logical and Law termes which I shall rather leave to others who have delight therein And beside the matter it self delivered by him in more plaine intelligible termes as I judge both to exercised more unexercised Readers is already examined Notwithstanding as we have seen his opinion be different from what the orthodox do commonly hold in this question yet Chap 4. he stateth the question against which he purposeth to disput so as he may be sure none of these will oppose him yea and it may be doubted if Antinomians themselves will contradict him for thus he proposeth what he denieth That God did so impute Christ's Righteousness to us as to repute or account us to have been holy with all that habitual holiness which was in Christ or to have done all that He did in obedience to His Father or in fulfilling the Law or to have suffered all that He suffered to have made Satisfaction for our sins merited our own Salvation justification in by Christ or that He was did suffered merited all this strickly in the person of every sinner that is saved Or that Christ's very individual Righteousness material or formal is so made ours in a strick sense as that we are Proprietors Subjects or Agents of the very thing it self simply and absolutely as it is distinct from the effects or that Christ's individual formal Righteousness is made our formal personal Righteousness or that as to the Effects we have any such Righteousness imputed to us as formally ours which consisteth in perfect Habitual and Actual conformity to the Law of Innocency that is that we are reputed perfectly holy and sinless and such as shall be justified by the Law of Innocency which saith perfectly obey and live or sin dye And the more to secure himself from all opposition from the orthodox ãâã proposeth this Law which is but equitable to all that will answere him I suppose he meaneth the Arguments that there follow that he must keep to his words not alter the sense by leaving any out I shall therefore be none of his Opposites here on these termes but shall consider what he saith elsewhere CHAP. XIV How Christ is our Surety and what Mr. Baxter saith as to this is examined OUr Lord Jesus being called a Surety in the Scriptures may give us much satisfaction and clear light anent the Doctrine of the Imputation of His Righteousness if prejudice and Love to our own particular hypothesis do not blinde us The Apostle tels us Heb. 7 22. that Iesus was made a Surety of a better Testament or Covenant rather and though the greek word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã rendered Surety be only in this place found in the N. Testam yet that can give no colourable ground of Exception against the true Native import of the word and the truth thereby hold forth seing one sentence of divine Revelation should captivat our faith judgment as well as Twenty otherwise all divine Revelation though never sooft reiterated will hereby at length come to be questioned And beside the word properly signifieth a Surety Cautioner Praes Sponsor fide jussor ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is sponsio expromissio fidejussio hence ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sub fide sponsionis trade as it were to deliver into hands ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã spondeo ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fidejussio Vadimonium ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fidejussor vas sponsor and whether the word come from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã prope or from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã appropinquo or from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in manibus the same import and signification is hold forth and the conjunction and neerness betwixt the Sponsor or Surety and the person for whom He is sponsor with the ends for which he engageth himself who is a Sponsor is manifestly hold forth for the word Importeth one who of his own accord engageth for another taking upon him the Cause and Condition of that other promising to do or pay what the other was obliged unto or to see it done and thus engaging and promising becometh the just legal debtor for what he hath engaged and obliged unto the performance And this sense is both obvious and generally received by all men which should Satisfie us as to the acceptation of the word here untill it be demonstrat that of necessity it must be taken in a peculiar distinct sense in this place which yet the scope and circumstances of the place will not admit but rather confirme the usuall and generally received signification Import of the word This is also confirmed by the Hebrew ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which hath many significations all or most of which as some think may be reduced to two general heads one is of mixing things together or agreeing things or persons together by compacts Merchandice pledges or Caution Hence it signifieth to become Surety Gen. 43 9. 44 22. Prov. 11 15. 6. 1. 17 18. 22 26. Psal. 119 122. as also to oppignorat or give in pledge Neh. 5 3. 2. King 18 23. Esai 36.8 Iob. 17 3. Hence ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã arrabon a pleage Gen. 38 17 20. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fidejussion sponsio pignus suretiship a pledge 1. Sam. 17 18. 2 King 14 14. This word then denoteth the Conjunction Mixture that is between a Surety him for whom he is Surety for the word signifieth to mix or mingle together so that they become hereby one person in Law an engaging Ier. 30 21. to shew that the Surety standeth engaged to performe what he hath promised become Surety for having ãâã stricken hands as it is rendered Prov. 22 26. Whence we see
will not cordially close herewith must resolve to abide in that estate of enmity whereinto they are by Nature 10. This way of Justification as it is the only way of Peace Reconciliation with God so it layeth the ground of solide Joy Rejoyceing in hope of the glory of God of Glorying in tribulation also as Paul informeth us Rom. 5 1 2 3 4 5. Being justified by faith through Jesus Christ we have through him accesse by faith in to this grace wherein we stand rejoyce in hope of the glory of God not only so but we glory in tribulations also knowing that tribulation worketh patience patience experience experience hope hope maketh not ashamed because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts c. Men may I know promise to themselves much Peace Joy and Consolation in their own false way may also deceive themselves as the Phaâisee did when he thanked God he was not like the publican but how had will the discovery of the deceite and cheatry prove in end God's way is the only way that will yeeld all these desirable things in truth reality and therefore we would do well to follow this way alone 11. Moreover this way of Justification will only lay the sure unfailing foundation of true Holiness and Sanctification and hence are the most spiritual convincing moving Arguments unto the study of holiness only to be taken as we see the Apostle clearing it in his Epistle to the Romans Chap 6. 7. 8. having laid down in the preceeding Chapters as a sure ba. sis thereunto the only Gospel-way of Iustification Men may think that the pressing of Justification by our own works should prove the most effectual Meane Perswasive unto the real study of holiness a most infallible Argument to set people awork to follow holiness with all their might But experience sufficiently proveth that all such who by their doctrine lay more or less of their weight upon their owne works in their Justification are so far from outstriping others in the spiritual exercise of true holiness that for the most part the very contrary is too too manifest and howbeit Adversaries to Gospel-Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ object to the Asserters thereof that thereby they are Enemies to the study of holiness give way to laziness negligence in that exercise yet not only is their alleigance groundless seing we press holiness upon the same grounds that the Apostle doth who oft times meeteth with this objection in his way of declaring pressing the Gospel-way of justification but also experience showeth that such as have fled to Christ for Righteousness have another way of Communion with God in all holy conversation their walkeing in all the wayes of God hath a spiritual lustre heavenly beauty being compared with the walk of others strangers in practice and in opinion to the Gospel-way of being Justified through Faith in Christ. 12. Whoso ever reject this truth and do not accepte of this way of justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ received leaned to by faith do interpretativly say as much as that Christ is dead in vaine for the Apostle tels us Gal. 2 21. that he did not frustrat the grace of God for if righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vaine thereby teaching us that the crying up of the Law the Righteousness thereof and urging people to seek after a Righteousness by which they may be justified in their Obedience to the Law is a real frustrating of the grace of God a declaring that Christ is dead in vaine and consequently whoever seek after a Righteousness consisting in their personal obedience to the Law will not accepte of nor heartily practically close with the Gospel-way of justification through faith in Christ do really frustrate so far as in them lyeth all the grace of God manifested in brought to light by the Gospel where this noble way of recovering sinners is revealed more clearly fully explained than it was formerly And it is a saying upon the matter that Christ hath died in vaine for if he died not to satisfie for sinners after he had finished his course of Obedience so to make up a compleat Righteousness which might answere all the necessities of sinners lying under the sentence of a broken Law and having no way without Christ to obtaine the Crown of life but by perfect personal Obedience to the whole Law which was is to them utterly impossible If I say Christ died not for this end he died in vaine all such as will not heartily imbrace this way do on the matter say he died not for this end so as far as they can they make him to have died in vaine 13. This Consideration might also have force with us that what Paul taught as to this matter he did also practise sweetly complye with thereby casting us a copie in his own practice for thus he speaketh Phil. 3 8 9. Yea doubtless I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledg of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things do count them but dung that I may win Christ be found in him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith So Gal. 2 16. knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ even we have beleeved in Jesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ c. If therefore we would be sure in this matter we must take this course which is so corresponding in all points with the Gospel-doctrine in this matter Therefore who ever would expect to have it going well with them for evermore must resolve upon this course to be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ and get on that rob of Righteousness which is had through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith CHAP. XVIII Some of the duties of such as live the life of Justification proposed IN the last place we shall mentione this Use of the Truth formerly cleared confirmed in reference to such as have attained unto this life of justification through faith which every one may readily see That it is the duty of such as are made partakers of this life to beware of such things as may will provoke the Lord to anger will be unsutable for them who are thus graciously advanced to such an high State Privilege of grace to minde such duties as do most suite such as are so highly advanced and so greatly obliged to him that hath thus called them effectually by his grace and hath wrought up their hearts unto a full compliance with the Gospel-contrivance of free grace
our concernment to enquire after know the way how adult persones come to partake of these Privileges 5. We do not here speak of that Justification which some call a Iustification of the cause and distinguish from that which they call a justification of the person for that is but the justification of a person falsly accused as to some particular as David was frequently accused of many things by his Adversaries of which he was Innocent laying to his charge crimes he knew not about which he was in case as we finde he did several times in his Psalmes to appeal unto God the righteous Iudge being conscious to himself of no guilt in the particulars alledged knowing his own innocency in the sight of God who knew all things Such was the matter of that question concerning Job's sinceritie so much agitated betwixt him his friends in the book of Iob and at length decided in Iob's favours by God himself for though this was not concerning one or a few particular acts but concerning his whole deportment and concerning his State before God upon the account of his deportment and the Lord's dispensations with him yet it was a justification of his Cause rather than of his Person for in the justification of our Persons we have to do immediatly with God and not with man and the question was properly about a matter of fact to wit whether he had been a real beleever or an hypocrite though such a matter of fact as meerly concerned his whole State 6. Nor do we here speak of that justification even as to our state which is before men or in the judgment of men which oft proceedeth upon mistakes and unsure grounds as the now-mentioned instance of Iob's friends evidenceth and so varieth according to the various judgments apprehensions of men yea and of the same Man at several times according as the grounds whereupon he judgeth are to him clear or dark Neither is this sentence or judgment of men who are but fallible and judge by outward appearance not being able to see into the heart and judge how matters are there alwayes according to truth even though according to that judgment of Charity which the Law of God requireth Nor is it Constant and equable 7. Nor do we speak of that Iustification whereof the Apostle Iames speaketh Chap. 2. which is not the justification before God whereof the Apostle Paul speaketh in his Epistles but the evidencing proving and demonstrating thereof by effects and works obvious to the eyes of others and demonstrative of the cause Those I grant will oft admit of an intercision through Temptation and the prevalency of Corruption and so the cause or true justification may as to this manifestation he eclipsed though not in it self 8. Far less do we here speak of a groundless fancied supposed justification whether in the apprehension of deluded persons themselves or of others for this is no true Iustification but a meer delusion as to themselves and a conjecture as to others and the sooner this be quite cast away and renunced the better 9. Nor do we here speak of that Iustification which is in the court of mans own conscience or as it is there and opposed to that Iustification which is in God's court for it is certaing this Iustification which is said to be in the court of conscience is but a manifestation of the other unto the mans conscience and is some times had sometimes missed sometimes it is more clear some times more dark and therefore can be oft repeated and reiterated and intended and remitted yea and some may for a long time if not their whole life time be wholly without it Walking in darkness without all light as to this some may once get a cleare sight thereof and never see more of it till nigh the landing in eternity yet all this while the Iustification which is in the court of God remaine fixed invariable and without any interuption 10. By Justification here we meane not that which some call a Particular justification and do distinguish it from an Universal Iustification by this understanding an universal pardon of all sins past and committed and by the other understanding a particular pardon of this or that sin that is committed after the man hath been universally pardoned and accepted of God and now pardoned after a new act of faith in Christ Though it be needless to debate whether this Particular Pardon can be called a Iustification or not yet it is certaine it is not that Iustification whereof Paul speaketh so much and explaineth in all its causes in his Epistles nor that Iustification which connoteth a change of State before God and the translation of a person out of an estate of Enmity into an estate of Favour and Friedshipe in reference to which there must be a juridical sentence passed in the favours of the man through the impured Righteousness of Christ received by Faith while as this posterior act of pardon of a particular transgression is rather a Fatherly act pardoning the failing of his Son receiving him againe into his Fatherly embracements 11. Nor finally do we here speak of that sentence of Absolution that shall be pronunced at the last day for howbeit that may be called a Iustification yet it is not that Iustification whereof we are now speaking it doth not make such a change in the state of such as are thereby absolved as this doth and therefore in respect of this it is rather a publick Declaration and Manifestation before Angels and Men of their Iustification or being in a Iustified state who shall be adjudged unto eternal life than any Iustification connoteing a change of state seing none in that day will be justified but such as have been here partakers of this Iustification whereof we speak they who have been in heaven will need none such as have been in hell will expect none none of the living who have not by faith laid hold on Christ will hear any other sentence then depart from me ye cursed 12. The justification then whereof we here speak is That change of state before God which such are made partakers of as lay hold on Christ by faith through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ whereby they are brought into an estate of Favour Reconciliation with God who were before under his Wrath Curse and upon which they have all their iniquities whereof they are guilty actually pardoned are accepted of as Righteous and pronunced such through the Surety-Righteousness of Christ imputed to them and freed from the sentence Curse of the Law under which they were lying That we may cleare the nature of this life of Justification as to its continuance we shall lay down these few Propositions Propos. 1. Justification denoteth a State wherein the beleever is brought a real change as to state as a man accused of some crime keeped in prison till he be tryed
charity Concil Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 10. whereby we see this Justification whereof they say Iames speaketh Chap. 2. is manifestly nothing else but the very grouth of Sanctification and so they know no Iustification at all distinct from Sanctification wherefore we need say no more against the same it being Justification formerly explained which we treat of and not of Sanctification whereof they seem only to speak when they mentione Iustification and indeed this their Iustification which is true Sanctification admitteth of various and different degrees of this they may imagine not only a first and a second but according to the various degrees thereof a third and a fourth yea a Tenth Twentieth if they please The Scripture it is true maketh mention of twosold Iustification one by the Works of the Law another by Faith but it asserteth with all that these are inconsistent and that no man living can be justified the first way by the works of the Law Mr. Baxter beside the difference he maketh betwixt Justification as Begun and as Continued in reference to the different conditions required to the one and to the other imagineth a twosold Iustifieation or two Iustifications or as he saith against D. Tullie pag. 167. rather two parts of one yet in his last Reply to Mr. Cartwright pag. 46. he maketh them as distinct as are the two lawes he speaketh of the first he saith is by God the Creatour the second by Christ the Redeemer and in order to the vindication clearing of this he speaketh much of a twosold Righteousness In his writtings against Mr. Cartwright pag. 70. giving us several to the number of thirteen differences betwixt them making the one to consist in out Non-obligation to punishment by the Law of works because of its dissolution upon Satisfaction made by Christ to be without us in the merite satisfaction of Christ to be in substance the same with Pardon to be opposite to that guilt which sin in general procureth to be but the tantundem of what the Law required to justify us from a true Accusation that we by sin deserve death c. And the other to consist in our Non-obligation to the far greater punishment to be within us done by us to consist in innocency or notguiltiness to be opposite to that guilt which one particular sin procureth to be the idem required in the new Law to justifie us from a false Accusation that we have not performed the Conditions of the new Covenant c. all which to examine is not my present purpose only I shall say as to this two sold Justification that it is an explication of the matter which we have not in Scripture which I judge should only regulat both our Conceptions Expressions in this affaire and what ever pleasure men may take to give way to their Luxuriant phancies yet it will be safest for us to follow the threed of the Word and to speak of this mysterie according to Revelation and not according to our Apprehensions And of all men I judge Mr. Baxter should be most averse from creating new Termes Words Expressions in these divine things who expresseth himself so angry-like especially in his later writtings in words which to some may seem to favour little of sobâiety or of modesty against such as contend about words when it may be they are but defending the received orthodox doctrine from his new Notions and Expressions as being Censorious dividers Word-souldiers I know not what But as to the matter in hand in particular as to this second Iustificaâion or rather first for it is supposed to be first in order of nature if not in time also which is founded upon our Innocency or performance of the Conditions of the new Covenant Faith Repentance New Obedience so is a declaring of us Righteous because of our inherent Righteousness I shall only say these few things 1. That I finde not this new Iustification explained expressed nor so much as hinted by the Apostle in all his discourses and disputes about this subject though he hath spoken very much of Iustification and on all occasions did vindicate clear up the gospel-gospel-truth thereanent If it be said That all this is sufficiently hinted more then hinted by the Apostle when he tels that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness I answere What the proper meaning of this Expression is shall be shown hereafter where it shall also be manifested that the Faith here said to be imputed is not our act of Faith but Christ his Righteousness laid hold on by faith or the object of Faith held forth in the Gospel received by Faith And for answere to this I judge it sufficient to say That the Apostle is manifestly there speaking of that other Iustification which we owne for the only Iustification hold forth in the Gospel whereby Remission of sins is had Peace with God through a Righteousness without of that Iustification which taketh away all glorying both before God man and wherein God is hold forth to be laid hold on by Faith as one that justifieth the ungodly and of that Justification which is from the Accusation of the Law by all which many other Particulars observable in the Apostles discourse there it is undeniable that he is speaking of that other Iustification which we asserte If it be said That all this is sufficiently imported when Faith is made the Condition of Justification we are said to be justified by faith I answer What way Faith is the Condition of Justification is so to be called shall be seen afterward only I say that what the Scripture speaketh of this can give no ground for a new distinct Justification because this new Iustification is rather a Iustification of Faith or of the Beleever because of his faith purely upon the account of his Faith for it is a sentence of judgment pronunceing the man to be a Beleever because he is so his faith to be right Faith because it is so than any Iustification of him by faith Not to mentione this that together with faith as the Condition Repentance New Obedience is joyned then there must be a Iustification of works or of the man by yea because of works which cannot be imported by being Iustified by faith because that is alwayes opposed to Iustification by works Beside that even in mens courts there are not two distinct sentences of the judge required in deciding of a Controversie depending upon the clearing of a Condition one anent the truth of the Condition the other anent the thing depending upon that Condition but the Condition being instructed to be performed the one sentence is given out much less is this requisito here where we have to do with God who knoweth whether the Condition be performed or not and needeth not that we instruct the same against the Accusations of Satan or of the
we never read that we are said to be justified by Love or by Patience or by Hope or any other but alwayes by Faith This certanely must instruct us that Faith here hath a peculiar and singular interest must be considered as looking to Christ in a different way from Hop Love which also have Christ for their object or Christ must be the object of Faith in another manner under some other consideration than he is the object of other graces 12. It is also considerable that it is simply said the just man liveth by faith or we are justified by faith and not the just man liveth or we are justified by a strong faith or by a faith continueing to the end Though it be true that a true lively Faith is of that Nature that it will continue to the end and will grow yet we may not say that only a strong Faith or a Faith as continueing to the end is the condition of the Covenant or of Justification for hence it would follow that as no man of a weak yet true and sincere Faith could be said to be Justified so no man could be said to be Justified untill his Faith had endured to the end which is contrary to Scripture speaking of beleevers while in their infancy as justified adopted as partakers of or at least as having a Right to the consequences of Justification such as Pardon Peace Glorying in Tribulation and Comfort c. The promise granteth Justification and Adoption to Faith that is of the right kinde no mention is made of that Qualification thereof He that beleeveth is passed from death to life and shall never die c. Ioh. 3 36. Ioh. 3 16 18. Ioh. 1 12. If the meaning of such as make Faith as continneing to the end the condition of the Covenant and of Justification were this That Faith as continued in to the end is the Mean of Continuance in the Covenant and in the state of Justification they should speak truth for the just liveth by faith first last as by Faith they are brought into the estate so by faith they are continued therein Faith maketh the first Union Faith continueth it But of this we shall have occasion to speak more afterward 13. This faith is not one single act of the soul nor seated in one faculty The various things spoken of it in Scripture and the various objects it acteth upon and is exercised about and the various and different necessities which beleevers stand into with the corresponding uses which faith serveth for in these necessities cleare it to be no one single act of the Soul I would rather call it the act of the whole Soul than the act of any faculty whatsomever CHAP. XXII Our act of Faith is not imputed to us a Righteousness Wproceed now to cleare at some further length several Particulars touched in the foregoing Chapt. contributing to the explication of our Justification by Faith The first great Question anent Faith is whether it be imputed unto the Beleever as his Righteousness whereupon he is justified Adversaries to the truth both Socinians Arminians do plainly assert that our faith or that grace of faith is the very thing which is imputed to the Beleever for his Righteousness They are all convinced that the sinner must be clothed with a Righteousness some way or other in some sense or other ere he can be Justified for the Lord is Righteous will not justifie the wicled that is such as have no Righteousness and being willing to yeeld to the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ they substitute in place of Christ's Righteousness Faith properly taken or our act of Beleeving as is it performed by us in obedience to the Gospel-command Socinus de Serv. lib. 4. c. 4. Cum igitur c. i.e. seing he teacheth by the example of Abraham that Righteousness is imputed when can doubt that nothing else can hereby be under stood but that we arerighteous before God because it hath seemed good to the Lord to account our faith in place of Righteousness And thereafter That faith is imputed unto righteousness is nothing else than that faith is accounted to us in place of Righteousness but not that the Righteousness of christ is imputed to us cap. 11. Themselves say that that saith justifieth not by its proper worth but because it apprehendeth Christ But that apprehension of Christ of yours is a meer humane fiction a most vaine dream And when we read that faith was imputed to Abraham for Righteousness or unto Righteousness we have no reason to think that mention is there made of the Righteousness of another when it is manifest that he is speaking of his own In his dial de Justis f. 14 15. he tels us that faith is by God imputed to us for Righteousness he accounteth that in place of Righteousness faith is in very deed that whereby the Scripture witnesseth that we are justified that is accounted Righteous before God have our sinnes pardoned This faith maketh us acceptable unto God unto eternal life And in not ad dial f. 27. Nothing else was said than that faith is accounted to us of God imputed for Righteousness that that faith is truely in us who will deny seing these words are said to exclude the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness The Arminians do homologate with the Socinians in this Arminius himself cont Perkins faith expresly that faith it self is imputed to us in Praf ad Hyppolit this faith he is my opinion about justification that faith that alone is imputed unto Righteousness that by it we are justified before God absolved from our sins and accounted righteous pronunced declared by God giving sentence from the tribunal of grace Some blaine ine for saying that the act of faith it self the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã credere is imputed unto Righteousness that in a proper sense not metonymically I say faith is imputed unto us unto righteousness for Christ for his righteousness sake He owneth the same decl Sent. ad Ord. f. 65. 66. in Resp. ad 31. Artic. f. 152-154 John Goodwine in his Treatise of Justification Part. 1. Ch. 2. asserteth the same most considently from Rom. 4. whose reasons hereafter shall be examied The same purpose he prosecuteth Part. 2. Ch. 6. answering the arguments of the orthodox against that imputation which shall be considered in due time Mr. Baxter in his Confess pag. 18 19. Excepteth against some words in our larger Catechisme Confession of faith to wit that it is denied that the grace of faith or any act thereof is imputed for Justification unless it be thus understood that our faith is not imputed to us as being in stead of a perfect Righteousness of Obedience to the ends as it was required by the Law of works nor is our faith the matter or the meritorious cause of the remission of our sin or of our right to
proper a sense as can be spoken of or applied to a Creature And even though we speak of Faith in the orthodox sense as being the gift of God yet seing it floweth nativly from the new Nature given in Regeneration is said to be mans faith his act all this difference will not exclude all occasion of boasting glorying before men more then Abraham's works would have done if he had been justified by them And yet the Gospel-way of Justification perfectly excludeth all boasting being so contrived in all points as that he who glorieth may only glory in the Lord. Argum. 5. If Faith be imputed unto us for Righteousness then are we justified by that which is Imperfect which it self needeth a Pardon seing no mans Faith is perfect in this life But there is no Justification to be looked for before God by that which is Imperfect but by that which is Perfect Therefore c. He excepteth These words then we are Iustified by that which is imperfect may either have this sense that we are justified without the concurrence of any thing that is simply perfect to our justification or that somewhat that is comparativly imperfect may some wayes concurre contribute towards our justification In the first sense the proposition is false in the later sense the assumption goeth to wreck Ans. This distinction is to no purpose for it doth not loose the difficulty in regard that the argument speaketh of a Righteousness as the formal cause or as the formal objective cause of Justification or as that upon the account of which the person is Pronunced Declared to be Righteous and Justified and so is levelled against Faith concluding that it cannot be our Righteousness or the formal Objective cause of our justification as it is said and supposed to be by such as say that it is imputed to us for Righteousness for it is made by them to be all the Righteousness that is imputed to us that because of its Weakness Imperfection He addeth in application of this distinction The truth is that the Imputation of faith for Righteousness presupposeth somewhat that absolutely perfect as absolutly necessary unto justification Had not the Lord Christ who is perfect himself made a perfect atonement for sin there had been no place for the Imputation of faith for righteousness for it is through this that either we beleeve in him or in God through him it is through the same atonement also that God justifieth us upon our beleeving that is imputes our faith unto us for righteousness Ans. This presupposal doth not helpe the matter for notwithstanding thereof Faith it self is made the only Imputed Righteousness and faith is not considered as an Instrument receiving Christ's Righteousness and the Atonement there through but as a work making the reward of the Atonement to be of debt ex pacto and not of free grace and so to have a worth a merite in it Our Adversaries will not grant that this presupposed Righteousness of Christ whereby the perfect Atonement was made is imputed unto us for this is expresly denied and beside they say that it was equally made for all and so is equally imputed to all so far as that thereby all are put into such a state as notwitstanding of the former breach made they may now upon the new termes of Faith receive the promised reward And thus it is manifest that with them this imperfect thing saith is that for upon the account of which they are justified As for example that we may hereby illustrate cleare the matter if we should suppose that Christ had by his Atonement delivered all from wrath due for the former transgression of the Covenant and had put them into the former state wherein Adam was before he fell procured that God should take a new essay of them and make promise of life unto them upon the old termes as some who plead for Universal Redemption say God might have done had he so pleased after the Atonement was made in this case might it not be said that every person that should now be Justified upon the performance of these termes were justified by the performance of the Condition as by his own Righteousness that this new Obedience were all the Righteousness he had declared to have when justified should he not be justified upon the account thereof solely And was he more obliged unto the Atonement of Christ than others who did violate of new these Conditions And seing now Faith is put in the same place and made to have the same Force Efficacy shall we not now be Justified by this one act of Obedience as we would have been in the other case by perfect Obedience And if it be so is it not manifest that we are justified by a Righteousness that is Imperfect that all the presupposal of a perfect Atonement doth not availe 2 When it is said that it is through the Atonement made by Christ that we beleeve in him or in God through him it must be granted that Christ hath purchased Faith that either to all or to some and if to all then either absolutly or upon condition if to all that absolutly then all should have faith if upon condition we desire to know what that condition is If not to all but to some only then Christ cannot be said to have died alike for all 3 as to that he faith viz. That it is through the same atonement that God imputeth our faith to us for righteousness justifieth us upon our beleeving it being the same that others say who tell us that Christ hath procured faith to be the condition termes of the new Covenant we shall say no more now than that we see no ground to asserte any such thing here after we shall give our reasons Argum. 6. If faith be imputed to us for Righteousness then God should rather receive a Righteousness from us then we from him in our Iustification But God doth not receive a righteousness from us but we from him in Iustification Therefore c. He excepteth by denying the consequence upon these reasons 1 Because God's imputing Faith for righteousness doth no wayes implye that faith is a righteousness properly so called but only that God by the meanes thereof upon the tender of it looks upon us as righteous yet not as made either meritoriously or formally righteous by it but as having performed that condition or Covenant upon the performance whereof he hath promised to make us righteous meritoriously by the death sufferings of his owne son formally with the pardon of all our sins Ans. All this can give no satisfaction for 1 If no Righteousness be imputed to us in order to Justification but Faith and if faith it self be hereby made no Righteousness then we are justified without any Righteousness at all God shall be said to pronunce them Righteous who have no Righteousness
at all or Justification must be some other thing than a pronunceing or declaring of a man Righteous 2 Why have we heard so much above said for Faiths being Righteousness why have there been so many passages of Scripture adduced to confirme this particuiarly such as mention the Righteousness of faith or the Righteousness of God by faith But it may be this salvo is added a Righteousness properly so called Yet then it will follow that it must be at least a Righteousness improperly so called and that must be an improper speach faith is imputed for righteousness and if that be an improper speech why is there so much noise made about the impropriety of the speech when we take Faith for the object of faith in that sentence faith imputed unto righteousness All that great clamoure must now recurre upon the excepter and his followers 3 If this which he hath given be the meaning of these words faith imputed unto righteousness let any judge whether our sense of them or this be most genuine freest of trops figures which of the two is apparently farthest fetched 4 Faith then it seemeth is tendered unto God faith being but a Righteousness improperly so called we tender unto God in our Justification a Righteousness only that is improper thereupon are declared Righteous whether properly or improperly I know not 5 If upon the tender of Faith God look upon us as Righteous then we mâst be righteous for we must be what he seeth acknowledgeth us to be And then I ask whether doth he look upon us as properly Righteous or as improperly Righteous 6 If God look upon us as having fulfilled the condition of the Covenant as Righteous upon that account then he must look upon us as properly righteous faith must be a proper righteousness or he must say that Christ hath purchased that an improper Righteousness shall be the Condition of the Covenant for we heard he said that Christ had purchased that Faith should be the condition But the performance of the Condition of God's Covenant must be hold for a proper Righteousness as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant And we heard lately that Faith was truely properly called a Righteousness that it might be so called with truth in sufficient propriety of speech in his answere to the first argument 7 If we be righteous by faith be looked upon as such by God having performed the condition of the Covenant it is not imaginable how we shall not be if not meritoriously yet at least formally Righteous seing as Adam by Perfect Obedience would have performed the Condition of that Covenant under which he was and thereby had been both Meritoriously formally Righteous so must it be now in respect of faith which is made to have the same place force efficacy in the new Covenant and that through the procurment of Christ that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant 8 He saith we are made meritoriously righteous by Christ's sufferings But what is the meaning of this Is this the meaning thereof that Christ's sufferings hath merited a Righteousness to us Then hereby nothing is spoken to the point for we are not now speaking of Christ's Righteousness but of ours And againe I would enquire what Righteousness hath it merited unto us Whether a meritorious Righseousness or a formal Righteousness as he distinguishad or both Or is the meaning this That through Christ's merites sufferings we have a Righteousness which is meritorious If so I enquire what is that Righteousness Whether is it Christ's Righteousness imputed to us made ours or is it our Faith that becometh meritorious If this last be said that is granted which was denied Faith must be accounted our meritorious Righteousness If the former be said imputation of Christ's Righteousness will be granted more than we dar say 9 He saith we are made formally righteous with the pardon of sins But this is never proved and it hath been often asserted And how will he make this a Formal Righteousness Righteousness properly so called Is this any conformity to a Law in whole or in part Did not himself insinuat in his answere to the first Argum. that nothing can with truth and in sufficient propriety of speech be called a Righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of God And sure I am Pardon of sins is not any such conformitie 10 The summe of this answere is this Faith is not imputed as a Righteousness but it is said to be imputed unto Righteousness because it is the fulfilling of the Condition of the new Covenant whereby we come to be made Righteous meritoriously by Christ's death Righteous formally with the pardon of sins And what a wiredrawn untelligible self-contradictory sense this is let every one judge He denieth the consequence 2. Because suppose that this inference lay in the bowels of what we hold that faith were a proper righteousness yet neither would this argue that therefore God should receive a righteousness from us in our justification for we rather receive our faith from God for our justification shen God from us in our justification though I grant that in a sense a far off with much adoe it may haply be made a truth that God receives our faith from us in our justification Ans. But sure though Adam's obedience was originally from God efficiently he being the First Cause yet had Adam been justified according to that Old Covenant he had been justified by his own works not by the Righteousness of another bestowed on him by God so he had been said to have presented his own Righteousness unto God in order to his justification and God might have been said to have received it from him in his justification or rather in order thereunto Now just so is it here as to Faith for faith is our work we come with it to God he taketh it from us thereupon justifieth us according to our Adversaries opinion not in a sense a far off or made with much ado as he supposeth but in a sense most plaine obvious He saith lastly That that imputation of faith for righteousness which he protecteth supposeth a righteousness given unto received by men because it could not be truely said that God doth impute faith for righteousness unto any man except he should make him righteous upon his beleeving Now as it is impossible that a man should be made righteous without a righteousness in one kinde or other so is it impossible also that that righteousness wherewith a man is made righteous in justification should be derived upon him from any other but from God alone for this righteousness can be none other but forgiveness of sins Ans. 1 How can the Imputation of Faith suppose a Righteousness given unless the Righteousness be given before Faith be imputed seing what is supposed is alwayes first in order
the Beleevers score and this indeed is no act of just debt but of grace 7. Againe as was said above if Faith properly taken or the act of Beleeving be imputed for Righteousness God should not be the justifier of the ungodly nor could Faith act upon God as such with truth And yet the Apostle tels us here expresly that Faith acteth upon God as one that Justifieth the ungodly He who hath a Righteousness in himself is no ungodly man and God justifying a righteous man could not be said to justifie the ungodly But if we take faith here for the object of faith or for the Righteousness of Christ which faith fleeth unto and layth hold on all is clear harmonious for then that man is not a worker but beleeveth he beleeveth on God that justifieth the ungodly that is one that hath no Righteousness in himself but must have it elsewhere even imputed to him and bestowed upon him through Faith when he thus heleeveth or layelh hold on Christ's Righteousness this Righteousness which by faith he leaneth to is counted on his score for Righteousness he is thereupon justified 8. Leaving what was formerly adduced against this glosse from vers 6 7. 8. of this Chapter Chap. XVIII we shall see what other passages in this chapter will say against it The Faith that was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness when he was in uncircumcision vers 9 10. is the same with the Righteousness of faith which he had being uncircumcised vers 11. But this Righteousness of faith is not his act of Beleeving nor Faith taken properly as an act of Obedience but the Righteousness of the promised seed of the woman in whom all Nations of the earth should be blessed embraced by faith for it is this and not the meer act of beleeving that was sealed by the signe of Circumcision vers 11. for this Sacrament was a seal of the Covenant we know Sacraments seal the whole Covenant all the promises thereof to such as beleeve never seal our Faith or the like to be our Righteousness 9. The same that was imputed to Abraham for Righteousness will be imputed to all beleevers vers 11. But that is not the pure act of Beleeving for Abrahamt act of Beleeving was a strong act and is declared and explained to be such but every beleever who yet must be justified hath not such a strong act of faith as Abraham had And we cannot say that some are lesse some are more justified because the faith of some is weak and the faith of others is strong and yet this must be said if the act of Beleeving be imputed for a Righteousness for the Righteousness of one shall be greater than the Righteousness of another their Justification must hold correspondence with the ground thereof 10. That which was imputed to Abraham will be imputed to all beleevers for a Righteousness vers 11. must be a Righteousness which such have imputed unto them who do beleeve for it is added that he might be the father of all them that beleeve though they be not circumcised that righteousness might be imputed unto them also Abraham had Righteousness imputed to him or reckoned upon his score through faith while he was uncircumcised that he might be the Father of Beleevers among the Gentiles to whom also when they beleeve a Righteousness will be imputed as it was to Father Abraham 11. It is againe called vers 13. the Righteousness of faith through it he sais the promise was to Abraham to his seed but the promise is not through faith as an act of virtue obedience in us for then it should be through the Law but as the promise was made upon the account of the Righteousness of the promised seed our faith can not be said to procure or purchase the promise so its application is by Faith laying hold on gripping to that Righteousness 12. If faith properly taken were imputed it should be made void the promise of none effect they that are of the Law should be heires for faith taken properly for the act of Beleeving belongeth to the Law when it is made our Righteousness it is opposite to the free promise for what is promised or given upon the account of Righteousness or any thing within us is not a free gracious promise And when a free gracious promise is taken away all the right use of Faith is taken away so Faith is made void for the very essence of justifying faith lyeth in looking to laying hold on leaning to a free gracious promise 13. The Apostle vers 15. proveth that they who are of the Law cannot be heirs consequently that Faith or the act of Beleeving cannot be imputed for Righteousness as it is our act done in obedience to the Law by this reason because the Law worketh wrath c. And this also maketh against the Imputation of faith properly taken because that is an act of obedience to the Law cannot become our Righteousness being Imperfect consequently not conforme to the Law which requireth Perfection in all duties or other wayes threatneth wrath And if any shall deny this of faith viz. that it belongeth to the Law they must say that there is no Law for it consequently that not to beleeve is no sin for the Apostle addeth where no Law is there is no transgression 14. The ground of the free promise is that which must be Imputed and laid hold on by Faith But that cannot be Faith properly taken as our act for then the promise should not be of grace as it is expresly said to be vers 16. nor should it be sure if it depended upon our faith not upon that which faith laith hold on These things beside what was mentioned before from this same Chapter vers 6 7 8 23 24. may satisfie us in this matter and sufficiently evince that it is not the Apostles meaning that Faith properly taken as our act or our act of Beleeving is imputed unto Righteousness but that the Object of Faith or the Righteousness of Christ laid hold on and applied by Faith is that Righteousness which is reckoned upon the beleevers score Let us now in the next place see what the Adversaries say to make us beleeve that Paul saith Rom. 4. That our very act of Beleeving is imputed to us for Righteousness that thus the Apostle must be understood not as meaning the object of faith or the righteousness of Christ. The forecited Author Iohn Goodwin of Iustifie Part. 1 Ch. 2. adduceth some grounds for his glosse which must be examined His first ground is the letter of the Scripture that speaks it once twice yea a third a fourth time vers 3 9 22 23 24. Certanely saith he there is not any truth in Religion not any article of âhe Christian beleefe that can boast of the letter of the Scripture more full expresse
pregnant for it Ans. We finde it only twice said in express termes that faith is counted for Righteousness vers 5. and againe vers 9. that faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness It is then too widely spoken when he saith that there is not any truth in Religion nor any article of the Christian Faith that can boast of more full expresse pregnant letter of Scripture yea even though it were as oft as expresse as he allegeth but we must let many such confidente expressions passe with him 2 The question is not touching the letter or the words but the true meaning if a truth be but once delivered in the Scriptures it is sufficient to command our faith but words never so oft repeated when corruptly glossed yeeld no foundation to faith We know what Papists say of these words This is my body which with them is as full expresse and pregnant a proof of their dream as this passage of Paul's is of our Adversaries fancies And we know what Arrians say of these words My Father is greater than I And yet their false glosses cannot be embraced for truthes let them boast of expresse Scriptures never so much And what errour I pray or heresie is it that doth not pretend to the like Let us see his next ground 2. Saith he The scope of the place rejoiceth in the Interpretation given I grant indeed that this is a good rule or interpreting of Scriptures for it is as a sure threed to lead us through many labyrinths But which is the miserie many imagine that to be the scope of the place which is not so indeed thus pervârting or mistaking the scope they must needs pervert all Yet let us see how he would make the scope contribute to his Notions The Apostles maine drift saith he was to hedge up with thornes that false way of Iustification which lay through works legal performances with all to open and discover the true way of justification that is to make known what they must do what God requireth of them to their justification that is as Ioh. 6 28 29. faith or to beleeve in the proper formal signification not the righteousness of Christ this he required of Christ himself he requireth our faith in Christ himself nos in his righteousness Ans. Paul's scope is indeed to hedge up all Justification by the Law or by the works thereof in subordination to this other of shewing that in the Gospel the Righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1 17. And therefore he cannot speak for the Imputation of Faith in its proper formal signification for that is a work commanded by the Law of God the Imputation thereof is expresly alledged by our adversaries to shoot out the Righteousness of God which is revealed from faith to faith 2 To say that the Apostle here only requireth faith in Christ and not faith in his Righteousness in order to Justification is either to divide Christ his Righteousness or to give us an Historical Faith in stead of justifying Faith that is such a faith in Christ as is the faith of any other truth revealed in the Scriptures such as the creation of the world And this is indeed to make a fundamental Alteration in the Gospel Covenant to destroy the true Nature of Justifying faith 3 It is true the Apostle is withall shewing what we must do in order to our Justification but this no way impeacheth the interest of Christ's Righteousness as the formal ground of the Justification of the ungodly but rather establisheth it for he sheweth that we are not now Justified by our doing or working but by the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us received by Faith 4 Though God doth not require of us the performance of the Righteousness of Christ yet he requireth of is that we lay hold thereupon and be covered therewith by faith that under that rob we may appear before our judge for to this end is Christ made of God unto us Righteousness and is become the Lord our Righteousness 1. Cor. 1 30. Ier. 23 6. And he requireth of us that we renunce all our own Righteousness in this affaire acknowledge the Righteousness of Christ the only Righteousness upon which we are to be justified and therefore he willeth us to say that in the Lord have we Righteousness Esai 45 24. He is pleased to add Therefore for Paul to have said that the righteousness of Christ should be imputed unto them had been quite beside his scope Why so His telling them what was required of themselves maketh nothing against this but doth rather confirme it for when faith is pressed upon us it is clearly supposed that the Righteousness of Christ is Imputed this being the peculiar work of faith as justifying to bring in put on Christ's Righteousness and so where our Redemption or Justification by Christ is mentioned faith though it be not expresly mentioned is to be understood as the Mean or Instrument whereby the same is applied to us as also the Redemption Righteousness of Christ is to be understood where Justification by faith is only expressed And as sometimes we finde both expresly mentioned so both are most emphatically comprehended and included in that expression now under consideration Such a glorious firme connexion is betwixt all these Causes of our Justification such a beautiful harmonie of grace that as they cannot be separated so the deforming misplaceing or any way altering of any one piece thereof destroyeth the harmonie darkeneth the beauty of the whole In the third place he argueth against faiths being here taken Tropically or Metonymically to this end adduceth these confiderations 1. It is not likely that the Apostle in this great weighty point should time after time in one place after another without ever explaining himself through out the whole disputation use such an harsh uncouth expression or figure of speach as is not to be found in all his writting beside nor in all the Scriptures Ans. Figurative expressions are neither harsh in themselves being rather emphatically explicative and more forcible upon the understanding as to the uptaking of these mysteries nor are they strange uncouth to the Apostle even in this matter as might be abundantly evinced almost as to every expression used in this matter or at least as to such expressions as are about the maine parts thereof Let any read Paul's writtings on this subject here his Epistle to the Gallatians he shall finde this true almost in every Chapter But it should satisfie us that the Holy Ghost hath thought fit to expresse the matter thus that to prevent mistakes he hath given both here elsewhere abundance of clear plaine and down right expressions for a supply as hath been shown above so as none may mistake but such as will wilfully step aside to follow their own wayes And it is not
Righteousness imputed 2 It is also to be considered that in that clause Abraham beleeved God it was counted to him for Righteousness it is not said that Faith or his Beleeving was counted to him for Righteousness but that it was counted c. and that is not his Faith but the marrow of the Gospel which God at that time preached unto him and so there is nothing in this clause immediatly ascribed to this act but a third thing is understood Lastly he saith The righteousness of Christ is not the object of faith as justifying only the Scriptures propose his Righâeousness or obedience to the Law as that which is to be beleeved so it may be termed a partial object as is the creation of the world that Cain was Adam's son But the object of faith as justifying properly is either Christ himself or the promise of God concerning the Redemption of the world by him Ans. 1 Hereby we see that in stead of a justifying faith he giveth us a meer historical faith and indeed such as deny the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness must of necessity substitute a new sort of faith in room of that which we owne for the only Justifying faith But though justifying faith containe in it that historical faith presuppose it yet it includeth more hath other peculiar actings of soul upon and towards Christ his Righteousness which here we cannot separate far less oppose to other as our Adversary doth in reference to the mans liberation from the sentence of the Law the Curse due to him for the breach thereof now charged home upon him by the Lord an awakened conscience 2 By Christ's Righteousness we do not understand his simple innocency or freedom from the transgression of the Law but his whole Mediatory work in his state of humiliation as satisfying the offended Law-giver answering all the demands of the Law both as to doing suffering which debt we were lying under 3 Justifying Faith eyeth him thus runneth to him accepteth of him as he is thus set forth by God to be a Propitiation through Faith in his blood Rom. 3 25. and as making Reconciliation for faith receiveth the atonement Rom. 5 11. and it receiveth abundance of grace of the gift of Righteousness vers 17. Justifying faith must receive him as the Lord our Righteousness as made of God to us Righteousness Therefore is this Righteousness of God called also the Righteousness of Faith or the Righteousness of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve Rom. 3 22. A Righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ or the Righteousness which is of God by Faith Phil. 3 9. Thus have we examined all that this Man hath brought by way of Reason for as for Authorities on the one hand or other I purposely wave them in this whole discourse to prove that Faith properly taken is imputed for Righteousness that the tropical sense commonly received by the orthodox which we have also chosen to follow notwithstanding that there is another sense given of the words by some to evite in part this tropical sense and by which the Adversaries against whom we here deal can receive no advantage is to be utterly laid aside rejected in answering him we have answered others also who do but-urge the same things Yet if any should enquire If the Apostle doth not meane that faith properly taken is our Righteonsness is imputed to us accounted our Righteousness why would he say so plainly that Faith is imputed or counted for Righteousness I Answere The expressions which the Holy Ghost hath used should satisfie us though we should know no reason beside his good pleasure why he did express the matter so It is our part to search into his meaning according unto the surest rules of finding out the sense of the Scriptures among which this is to be reckoned as a ââite one not to be rejected viz. to attend the scope with the connexion cohesion of the words as they lye contribute unto that scope together with the common plaine frequently reiterated expressions assertions of the Spirit of God in other places where the same matter is treated of for to the end that we may be exercised in the study of the Scriptures in comparing Scripture with Scripture for finding out the mind of the Lord hath he thought good to express the same matter in diverse places in various wayes in some places more plainly what in other places appeareth more obscure And it cannot be judged a saife way of interpreting Scripture to fix upon one expression give it a sense or take it in such a sense as tendeth manifestly to darken the whole doctrine of the Spirit of the Lord concerning that truth and to crosse the scope to mat the connexion and to contradict multitudes of other passages of Scripture It is not unusual for the Apostle to use several expressions in a figurative sense How oft is the word Law taken for obedience to the Law What sense could be made of Gal. 3 25. if the word Faith should be there taken properly not for its object as also vers 2 5. of that same Chapter And what sense shall we put upon these expressions They which are of faith Gal. 3 7 9. as many as are of the works of the Law vers 10. upon many such like if all these words must be taken properly Nay how little of this whole matter of Justification is expressed to us without Trops figures which yet do not darken but give a more special divine lustre unto the Truthes so expressed How oft is the word Hop put for its object for the thing hoped for And though this might satisfie us herein yet further if I might adventure to give a reason of this manner of expression here ot rather to pointe forth what this expression should signifie hold forth to us I would say That Paul is not handling this Controversie about Justification in a meer speculative manner therefore doth not use such Philosophical Metaphysical Notions expressions there about as some now think so necessary that without the same they judge themselves not in case to explaine the matter to the capacity of the meanest which would rather have darkened then explained the matter to the ordinary capacity of Christians as I judge the way that some of latetake in explicating this matter contributeth much more to the darkning of the same at least to me But the Apostle is handling this matter in a practical manner so as both such he wrote unto the Church of Christ to the end of the world might so understand this necessary fundamental truth as to put the same in practice And therefore doth say that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness to shew that it is not the Righteousness of Christ conceived in our heads that
this occasion trouble the Reader with some more of their expressions that we may see that the doctrine which is now so much cried up followed after is nothing but old Socinianisme so owned professed by such as do not deserve to be called Christians Socin de Servat lib. 4. c. 4 7 11. God justifieth the ungodly but now converted penitent after he hath left off to be ungodly the justified are not ungodly in themselves neither are they so called yea they are not sinners which is more they do not now sinne And so faith works that is obedience to the commands of Christ as the forme of faith doth justifie us before God by them through them per illa ex illis he justifieth us Smalcius disp 4. c. Frantzium Regeneration all other good works Love Prayer Obedience Faith Charity c. are so far from being effects of justification that without them justification can no way really exist for God justifieth no man but him who is compleetly adorned with all these vertues â yea the study of good works walkeing before God were the cause though not the chiefe of the justification of Noah Abraham others who are said to be justified by faith Socin ubi supra de Serv. lib. 1. c. 4. Faith doth not justifie by its proper vertue but by the mercy goâd will of God who justifieth such as do such a work imputeth it for righteousness With Paul to have righteousness imputed is nothing else but to have faith imputed to be accounted just faith is so imputed to us as that because of faith we howbeit guilty of many unrighteousness are esteemed perfectly righteous or God so dealeth with us as if we were perfectly righteous who can doubt that the Apostle meaneth no other thing than that we are not righteous before God because our works require that as a due reward but because it hath so seemed good to the Lord to take our faith in place of righteousness so that we receive the reward of grace by which we are declared righteous before him More might be adduced for this end as it might be shown also how herein the Arminians conspire with them against the orthodox And as for the judgment of Papists in this point it is likewise known It will not be necessary that we insist in disproving that which hath been so much witnessed against by the orthodox writting against Papists Socinians Arminians upon these heads It will suffice I suppose if we give a few reasons why we cannot acquiesce in the doctrine proposed by the forenamed Author 1. Hereby works of obedience are exalted to the same place are allowed the same Force Influence Efficacy into Justification with Faith whereby all the Apostles disputes for Faith against Works for faith as inconsistent with exclusive of works are evacuated rendered useless So that the Apostle hath either not spoken to the purpose or hath not spoken truth either of which to say is blasphemie The Apostle argueth thus we are Justified by faith therefore we are not Justified by works This man reasoneth on the contrary we are justified by faith therefore we are justified by works because by a faith that includeth works as if the Apostle had meaned a Faith that was dead had no affinity with works 2. Hereby he confoundeth all these duties which are required of Beleevers or of such as are in Covenant with God with that which is solely required of them in order to their first entering in Covenant or into a state of Justification as â one should say that all the marriag-duties required of such as were already in that marriage state were conditions of entering into the marriag-state 3. Hereby he confoundeth Justification with Glorification making all that Faith sincere obedience which is required in order to actual Salvation Glorification to be necessary before Justification And thereby must say that no man hath his sins pardoned so long as he liveth but if he be sincerely obedient he is in the way to a Pardon to Justification He cannot say that by a practical Faith he only meaneth such a true and lively Faith as will in due time produce these effects for as that will not consist with his explication of that practical Faith so it would crosse his whole designe The just man in the eye of this new Law as he saith p. 49. is every one that rightly beleeves repents sincerely obeyes because that is all that it requires of a man himself to his Iustification Salvation Where we see that with him Justification Salvation go together have the same conditions and he that is just must be one that hath these Conditions and he who hath not these Conditions is not just in the eye of that new Law and if he be not just in the eye of that new Law his faith cannot be accounted to him for Righteousness nor he Justified 4. The man hereby confoundeth the two Covenants or giveth us a new Covenant of Works in stead of the Covenant of Grace for this practical Faith which includeth all obedience hath the same place force efficacy in the new Covenant that compleet Obedience had in the old And this Gospel is but the old Law of works only with this change that where as the old Law required Perfect Obedience to the end in order to Justification Salvation this new Covenant of works requireth Sincere Obedience to the end in order to Justification Salvation And so thus we are Justified saved as really by upon the account of our works as Adam would have been if he had continued in obedience to the end this Faith and sincere Obedience is as really to all ends purposes as effectually and formally our Righteousness as Perfect Obedience would have been the Righteousness of Adam And thus the reward must as really be reckoned to us of debt not of grace as it would have been to Adam if he had stood And as faire a ground is laid for us to boast glory though not before God as had been for Adam if he had continned to the end The evasion he hath to make all this of grace saying p. 49 50. And yet every beleevers justification will be all of grace because the Law by which they are justified is wholly of grace was enaâed in meer grace favour to undone man is not able to help him for it was wholly of undeserved grace love that God did so far condescend to Adam to all mankinde in him as to strick a Covenant with him a promise of such an ample reward upon his performance of the condition of Perfect Obedience to the end yet notwithstanding this Law was wholly of grace was enacted in meer grace favoure for neither was the Lord necessitated thereunto nor could Adam say he had deserved any such thing at God's hand the reward
had been reckoned to Adam if he had stood of debt not simplie and absolutly but ex pacto by reason of the compact So that we see the cases run parallel the Covenant is of the same nature kinde The difference betwixt the Power granted to Adam now to man to performe the conditions required is with him the same upon the matter for if man will go the length he can may he may be sure of God's help to convoy him all the length he should And what had Adam more And as for the diversitie of the conditions which then were Perfect Obedience now only Sincere that can make no alteration in the Nature of the Covenant and beside I see not why this Man can not as well say that if man now will go as far as he may can by his own stock of power unto the performance of Perfect Obedience God will certainly give him his help to carry him forward as he saith that if man will now go all the length he can unto the performance of Faith Repentance new sincere obedience God is ready willing to contribute his help to carry him forward thereunto 5. He confoundeth the right to with the possession of life eternal as to their Causes Antecedents for as new holy Obedience is by us made the way to the possession of the Kingdom so by him it is made the way or cause of the Right jus to the Kingdom for he requireth it as antecedent to a mans Justification first being brought into a Covenant state with God when he first receiveth the Right to the inheritance And thus the Inheritance is made to be of the Law not of promise contrare to Gal. 3 18 for the whole and sure Right thereunto is had by Obedience to the Law with him I shall say no more to this here because there is a sufficient confutation of this to be found in Mr. Durham on the Revel pag. 234. c. where that digression is handled concerning the way of Covenanting with God of a sinner obtaining of Iustification before him And in all such as write against Papists and Sociniant on this head But if it be asked may not faith be called our Gospel-Righteousness be said to be imputed to beleevers as such a Righteousness without any wrong done to the Righteousness of Christ which keepeth still its own place of being our legal or pro legal Righteousness I Ans. Though it be true that Faith is now required of all that would be Justified yet I no where finde that it is called our Gospel Righteousness and I judge it not saife to admit expressions without warrand of the word in this tender matter especially such expressions as have a manifest tendency to corrupt rather then explicate the truth in this particular as I judge will be found true of this expression for how beit it be said by the Asserters thereof that Faith is but a less principal Subordinat Righteousness Yet in effect according to their explication of the whole doctrine as may be seen by this Treatise last mentioned answered it is made the Principal only Righteousness that is imputed to us for Christ's Righteousness say they is only imputed as to is effects or in its causality See Baxter against D. Tully p. 70. just as Suarez said de divin gr lib. 7. de sanct hom c. 7. § 39. cited by Mr. Rutherfoord Exercie Apel. Exerc. I. c 2. pag. mihi 64. the merites of Christ are not given to us that we might be formally justified but that they may be a price wherewith we may buy a Righteousness whereby we may be formally justified as he who giveth a price to another whereby he may buy clothes is said to clothe him not foomally but effectivly morally as is manifest And even as to these effets it dependeth wholly upon Faith and this Faith is only said to be properly imputed for our Righteousness And beside they tell us that the Righteousness of Christ is alike common to all to the Reprobat as well as to the Elect and so it can be imputed properly to none And as to its effective âmputation as Suarez calleth it or Imputation as to its effects or in its causality as others speak after that it is offered held forth to all hath the same common effects unto all untill the condition be performed that dependeth wholly upon mans performance of the Condition And as to its antecedent effects it is equally absolutly imputed to all that is it is imputed to none but the effects thereof are equally made common to all in making Salvation possible the condition to be faith and the like And as to the special effects as they may be called which depend on faith when one beleeveth so fulfilleth the Condition he hath thereby a Gospel-Righteousness or this Faith of his is reckoned upon his score for a Gospel-Righteousness thereupon he receiveth Pardon Justification c. Now let any Judge whether or not these effects are not more the effects at least more immediatly of their own Gospel-Righteousness than of Christ's for Christ by all his Righteousness did purchase these effects to all a like that conditionally and now they themselves by their own personal Gospel Righteousness of Faith do make an actual purchase of these effects according to the Covenant ex pacto And to say That Christ did by his merites purchase the New Covenant doth but confirme what I have now said towit That all that which Christ procured was That all such as should acquire a Gospel-Righteousness of their owne shonld be justified c. And thus Christ died to purchase a vertue merite to our faith that to this end it should become a Gospel-Righteousness whereby they might have whereof to boast to glory before men at least Hence we see that Christ's Righteousness might rather be called the Subservient ours the Principal And further which may justly make Christians ab horre this opinion Thus this poor convinced sinner pursued by justice for a broken Law is called to leane his whole weight of Acceptance with God found all his hope of Pardon Justification upon his own Faith or Gospel Righteousness as the only Righteousness wherewith he is to be covered the only Righteousness which is imputed unto him not upon Christ his Righteousness for what Christ did or purchased was common to all had only a conditional vertue which the personal Righteousness reduceth into act so must have a principal share of the glory for as to what Christ did Iudas had the same ground of thankfulness praise that Peter had Peter no more then Iudas and thus Peter was to sing the song of praise for his Justification Pardon unto his own personal Faith Gospel-Righteousness If this be not the Native result of this doctrine let any put it in to practice which I shall be
Grevinchovius ag Amesius But it is true they yeeld more who grant that he purchased the New Covenant Yet by this purchase they can not say that Christ died to redeem us from our sinnes from the wrath of God from a vaine conversation to save us And indeed the same person last named saith expresly that Christ died not properly to saye any one And what can else be said by such as make this the whole of what Christ did purchase And how-rational is that consequence which the same person hath when he saith it might so have come to passe that Christ had had the end of his death that no one had fulfilled the new Covenant had been saved for they will not grant that Christ did purchase faith 3. Hence we see that such as say that this was all which Christ procured by his Death Merites do manifestly spoile us of all the rich Benefites which Christ hath purchased as being no immediat fruites of his death such as Faith Justification Adoption Sanctification Grace Glory thus evacuat the whole vertue of the death of Christ And this do Mr. Allen's words p. 54. import while he saith that all the benefites of the Covenant accrue to us upon our beleeving obeying upon his account for his sake and so they do not accrue to us upon his account for his sake immediately but immediatly upon the account for the sake of our Beleeving Obeying only for Christ's sake is this connexion made 4. Who ever assert that Christ hath purchased the framing Constitution of this Covenant in its termes conditions ought to confirme this their assertion out of Scripture till this be done we are a liberty to deny it how confidently so ever it be affirmed It is certane that such a principal point ground article of our Religion would not be darkly expressed in the Scriptures far less wholly passed over in silence as for any thing that yet is made to appear it is for as for 1. Cor. 1 30. Ier. 23 6. which Mr. Allen citeth any may see how impertinent they are that we say no more 5. If so then we must say with Papists that Christ hath procured a worth to our Faith Obedience to merite ex pacto the good things promised unto such as are beleevers obedient Yea hereby there would be more of merite in our Faith then in Christ's obedience 6. We mnst say that Christ hath purchased that we might be Justified by an Imperfect Righteousness For sure our faith new Obedience is not perfect even when sincere they laboure of many Imperfections have drosse faultiness admixed As also that he hath purchased that an Imperfect Righteousness should be accounted estemed a perfect Righteousness consequently that the judgment of God shnuld not be according to truth which were blasphemeous iniquous to imagine 7. Thus in effect Christ should be made the minister of sin by changing the conditions of the old Law which were perfect compleet Obedience into an obedience far short of that thus he must be come either to dissolve the Obligation of the Law that it should not exact now what it did exact of old or to loose us from the Obligation thereof that we should be in part Law less neither of which can be asserted yet this Position maketh clear way for either or for both 8. Then we must say that Christ hath purchased such a way of Justification as leaveth ground to men to glory boast though not before God yet before men for hereby he is made to purchase the renewing of the old Covenant of works with some mitigation as to tht termes though with little mitigation as to the persons unless we say with these Arminians that Man is as able to beleeve obey sinâerely if he will as Adam was to obey perfectly But sure Christ came for a far other end than to leave man any ground of boaâting or of glorying in himself for his Justification Salvation as having made himself to differ 9. Then Christ hath purchased a way whereby man might hold his Pardon Justification Adoption c. more of himself than of Christ for Christ by this way cannot be said to have purchased our Pardon Justification c. but only that we should have these favoures upon our Faith or have such such a reward of our Faith Obedience As he who procureth that a person shall have such a benefite upon condition he performe such a piece of service cannot be said to have procured that reward for notwithstanding of this procurement if it may be so called which is at best but a conditional uncertain thing the person might never have gote the reward 10. Then the making of the New Covenant and the making of it on these termes should be an act of meer Justice in God and not an act of his free Grace Love good Pleasure Will Kindness for it is Justice Righteousness in God to do that which Christ hath purchased procured to be done though it is true it may thus be accounted a meer favoure that it was of God's free will to enter into such termes of agreement with the Mediator to yeeld to the making of such a condition upon Christ's purchase But the Apostle tels us Ephes. 1 9. that God made known unto us âhe mysterie of his will according to his good pleasure which he purposed in himself Which mysterie of his will is the New Covenant dispensation of grace in the Gospel it is ascribed not to the merites of Christ but to God's good Pleasure to the Purpose which he purposed in himself So the saving of such as beleeve floweth from the love of God as well as no less then the sending of Christ Ioh. 3 16. God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son that every beleever in him should not perish but have everlasting life So Ephes. 3 9 10 11. the fellowshipe of the mysterie was hid in God the manifold wisdom of God which shineth forth in the New Covenant was according to the eternal Purpose which he had purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord. This is ascribed to God's Love Ioh. 3 16. will Ioh. 6 40. 11. I grant it may be said that as Christ hath purchased to his own Pardon Justification Adoption Salvation so as a consequence of this he hath purposed the Meanes or rather the Application of the meanes thereunto that so the good things purchased may be actually conferred according to the manner methode condescended upon by Jehovah and the Mediator in the Coveuant of Redemption for He hath chosen us in himself having predestinat us unto the Adoption of children by Iesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us acctpted in the beloved in whom we have redemption
closed entered into this âs denied and abundantly confuted by Mr. Durham in the forecited Digression 4. But the Question is if Repentance hath the same Place Office Use Consideration in Justification that Faith hath so that it may be every way as well as fully called the Coudition of Justification as Faith is so that it is called for in order to Justification upon the same account and under the same formality that Faith is called for Socinians Arminians as we heard above joine Repentance Faith in the same Order Place ascribe the same Office Use Power unto both in order to Justification And Mr. Baxter tels us Confess pag. 37. n. 19. That Repentance is made by God in the Gospel a proper Condition of our first general pardon of sin as well as Faith is And he laith down a ground for this interest of Repentance which I suppose will reach to the including of other works also in the foregoing n. 18. saying a quatenus ad omne valeâ consequentia If faiths formal interest in pardon be as it is the Condition of the act of pardon then whatsoever is such a Condition must have the same Kind of formal interest as faith By the first general purdon of sin here he meaneth Justification for with him Remission of sins Justification is all one thing And yet afterward pag. 96. Concl. 29. he hath words which would seem to give some peculiar interest unto Faith so contradict what is here said for he saith If any say that seing faith hath a peculiar aptitude to this office therefore it must have a peculiar Interest I answere so it hath For I it doth alone without merites or any positive Gospel works of obedience as such at least procure as far as belongs to its office our first full Justification 2. The love of Christ received Gratitude c. are but as modification of Faith which is called the receiving itself Though some of them be distinct physical acts yet all the rest morally considered are but as it were the modification of faith I mean of that act which is the acceptance of Christ life freely given c. Now I suppose he will grant as he doth above as we may see that Repentance hath not that peculiar aptitude to this office that Faith hath consequently cannot have that peculiar Interest as he confesseth I suppose also that he will put Repentance in the same rank with Gospel-Works of Obedience consequently it must no more share of that special Interest that belongeth to Faith in this office than they I suppose likewise that he will grant Repentance to be but a Modification of Faith as well as Love Gratitude and then I would know how Repentance can be said to be as proper a Condition of Justification as Faith is Sure if it be as proper it must have as peculiar an interest for this peculiarity of Interest cannot respect its aptitude meerly but it s deââgned appointed state in that office otherwayes the objection which he moved and answered should have this sense seing Faith hath a peculiar aptitude to this office therefore it must have a peculiar aptitude to this office which were non sense Now that Repentance hath not the same Interest in Justification that Faith hath we judge evident from these grounds 1. The Scripture tels us that we are justified by Faith and that several times not only saith it but proveth it as we saw above But it no where saith that we are justified by Repentance And reason would require that such as say that Repentance hath the same Interest in Justification that faith hath should tell us where it is said we are justified by Repentance for when it is thus said of Faith no where thus said of Repentance there must be a vast difference as to their interest in Justification unless they can give us some Scripture expressions concerning the Interest of Repentance aequivalent to this we are justified by Repentance If it be said That this is equipollent when it is said Repent that your sins may be blotted out Repentance Remission of sins are joyned together the like I answer Leaving the particular examination of these the like passages alledged untill afterward I shall only say this at present 1 That justification Remission of sins are not every way the same Though Mr. Baxter hath several times said it yet in his Catholick Theolog. of God's Covenant c. Sect. XIII n. 203. he saith our first constitutive justification is in its own Nature a Right to impunity this as he oft elsewhere tels us is Remission to life or glory Now what is beside a Right to Impunity also a Right to life glory is more than Remission of sins And therefore the consequence from Remission to Justification cannot stand 2 In like manner because it is said Luk. 6 37 forgive it shall be forgiven you it may be inferred that for-giving of our Neighbour some fault that he hath done us is the Condition of our Constitutive Justification hath as great an interest in our Justification as Faith it seâf and by it we have as really Right to impunity and Right to life glory as by Faith It is true Mr. Allen will not think this very absurd who reasometh from this same passage not far otherwise In his discourse of the two Covenants pag. 52. Yet I suppose others will I doubt if Mr. Baxter shall make this one the same thing with Faith as he laboureth in his Catholick Theol. to make Faith Repentance one It will be said when we are said to be Justified by Faith it is all one as if we were said to be Justified by Repentance for Mr. Baxter cleareth Of God's Govern Sect. XII how Faith Repentance is all one thing I Ans. 1 if the Spirit of the Lord had but once said in his word that we were justified by Repentance we might then be allowed to think of such explications as might make either both one thing or shew how both hath the same interest in Justification but when the Scripture never once saith that we are justified by Repentance for us to devise such explications as to make the Scripture speak what it never speaketh is not faire nor is it to edification because it hath no tendency to explaine the matter as expressed in the Scriptures and is so far from clearing up the truth that it darkeneth all for hereby we are taught to understand faith wherever we hear of Repentance Repentance where mention is made of Faith so that we may ascribe all to Repentance that is spoken of Faith Heb. 11. say that Repentance is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen c. 2 Though it is true the word Repentance as we have seen is sometime taken so largely as to include faith yet that will not allow us
lest any man should boast manifestly declaring that all works were laid aside in this matter that for this end that no man should have any occasion of boasting this is not spoken as every one may see to qualifie or specifie the works that are excluded these words carry nothing of a restriction in them The same is cleare also Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory shalll the meaning be Abraham was not justified by such works as give ground of gloriation then the meaning lyeth not in the words but the words do expresly crosse contradict that sense unless we shall suppose them to have no sense to speak nothing of the following vers 3. where beleeving is mentioned not another sort of works to wit such as give no ground or occasion of boasting which in this case of justification no man can describe unto us or tell us what they are He tels us p. 122. that the meaning of these words Rom. 3 28. Therefore we conclude c. is no more but this viz. That a man is justified in the Gospel way But not only is that in the general included but that Gospel-way is particularly expressed to be by faith without the deeds of the Law And consequently his Popish Socinian way is diametrically opposite to the Gospel-way He goeth about to explaine to us p. 124. c. what is meaned by their own Righteousness that is so frequently set in opposition to the Righteousness of God tels us that it was so called upon a threefold account 1. Because they sought the pardon of their sins by their own Sacrifices Ans. And why not also by their works of Obedience Sure neither Abraham nor David sought for pardon upon any such accout they renunced other works than these Is that all the Righteousness that Paul renunceth Phil. 3 9 Was he then occupied about Sacrifices Some thing else sure is understood 1. Cor. 4 4. 2. Because saith he they did not think Regeneration or Supernatural grace necessary to the obtaining of it Ans. And truely all the Regeneration Supernatural grace which he thinks necessary is but that a Pelagian Iesuite Arminian will think necessary no more as we saw above But doth he think that Abraham or David had any such apprehensions yet even their works are excluded from justification Was that the Righteousness that Paul called his owne Phil. 3 9 I think for shame he will not say it And what meaneth Paul to say 1. Cor. 4 4. I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified This sure must include works done by supernatural Grace after Regeneration 3. Saith he Because it was a way of seeking to be justified of their own devising not of God's appointing Ans. This is very true but it is not the whole truth in this matter And his way is of the same Nature no more consistent with the Gospel methode of justification through the Righteousness of God by faith than theirs is for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ he rejecteth with contempt True justification he is ignorant of He knoweth no Faith but what is Popish Socinian His New Covenant is but a new edition of the old His Regeneration is Pelagian His Good Works are but works flowing from a Principle of Nature aided with a common divine assistance Let us now in end hear what is the result of all his discourse It is to shew That they were the works ef the Law as exclusive of Faith in Christ his death Not those which are the immediat effects of Faith in Christ in his death in his doctrine But the Gospel tels us that in the matter of Justification all the works of the Law are exclusive of faith in Christ even Abraham's works David's works Paul's works therefore they were all laid aside justification was only looked for through Faith Thus we have seen what a Gospel this is which Mr. Baxter recommendeth to us the consideration whereof may move some to say Noscitur ex socio qui non dignoscitur ex se. CHAP. XXXII Of the object of justifying Faith THough something of the Object of Faith was hinted before Chap. XX. when we were speaking of the Nature of Faith yet it will not be amisse to speak a little more of it here both in reference to what followeth and also more particularly in order to the better understanding of what it is to Live by Faith In order therefore to the explaining of this Object we would premit these few things 1. As was mentioned in the forecited place there is presupposed unto the right exercise actual exerting of Faith accepting the offered Saviour Salvation through him a Conviction of sin misery in one measure or other whereby the Sinner is brought to a desparing in himself seing he can finde no remedie or reliefe for himself within himself and to a concluding that he is an undone man if there be no other remedie than what he is able to do for himself for after all meanes assayed and a soul in that case is ready to turn to many hands to seek reliefe until preventing grace come will embrace close with any promising way how chargable troublesome so ever it be ere it sweetly comply with the only Man-abasing Grace-exalting way of Salvation through Faith in Christ revealed in the Gospel he findeth himself disappointed And further it is presupposed as necessarily requisite hereunto some knowledge of the grounds of Religion particularly of the Gospel of Christ of his offices Work c. all revealed in the Gospel 2. When we speak here of the Object of Faith we mean that Faith by which a Soul is united unto Christ closeth with Him as offered in the Gospel improveth Him to all ends uses which their case necessitie in all time coming calleth for So that it is one the same Faith whether it be called Uniting Faith Saving Faith Justifying Faith Sanctifying heart-purifying Faith or the like It is one the same radical grace receiving these or the like various denominations from the effects brought about by it or the several ends uses it hath is appointed for And the same Faith bringeth all these effects about in its way according to the Order Methode measure ordained of God the same Faith whereby the beleever is Married to Christ Covenanteth with Him as Head Husband Lord Saviour by the same is he justified adopted brought into a state of Peace Reconciliation with God By the same Faith also doth the man get his heart Purified he liveth the life of Sanctification By the same also he getteth Strength Reviving Comfort Support in times of Temptation Trial. So that the Beleevers life first last is by Faith the beginning progress all the steps of it final Salvation is by Faith whence it is called Saving
by men be some way understood reconciled when some say the Mercy of God is it others say the Promises some Remission of sins and the like some God the Father Son Holy Ghost for such as seem to restrict it most may be understood as not speaking exclusively of what else the Scripture mentioneth as belonging thereunto 5. All this notwithstanding faith may have hath a special respect to Christ as Priest and making Satisfaction to justice and laying down the Ransome-money and paying the debt according to his undertaking as Surety in order to the particular benefite of Justification and of Pardon of sins as was in part cleared above and may be more spoken to afterward in the following Chapters CHAP. XXXIII The Righteousness of Christ is the special Object of Faith in Justification COnsidering what hath been said at some length above concerning the imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ in order to Justification we needed not insist on this here Seing if what is said touching that fundamental point hold this will not endure much debate Yet because Mr. Baxter in his Apologie against Mr. Blake § 11. is pleased to tell us that Faith which is the Iustifying condition is not terminated on the Righteousness of Christ And that it is a meer fancy delusion to speak of the receiving a Righteousness that we may be justified constitutive thereby in such a sense as if the Righteousness were first to be made ours in order of nature before our Iustification then justification follow because we are Righteous But sure this eyeing of laying hold on and leaning to the Righteousness of Christ holdeth clear correspondence with the experience of the Children of God not only at their first Conversion when delivered from under the Convictions of sin and the terrours of the Law but even afterward when exercised with new assaults of Satan objecting unto them their Unworthiness Filthiness and hence inferring their exclusion from the face of God for then their maine quieting refuge is the Righteousness of Christ wherein they seek only to be found acknowledging that in themselves they are but sinners and so rejecting their own worth holiness as too ragged to cover the shame of their nakedness wherein they have the Apostle Paul going before them Phil. 3 8 9. which may also serve for a scriptural proof and ground of the truth in hand He rejected all these things wherein sometime he gloried and he did now even long after his Conversion while a prisoner at Rome after all his great Labour Paines in spreading the Gospel count all things nothing is here excepted but loss saith he for the excestency of the knowledge of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things do count them but dung that I may win Christ be found in him not having mine own Righteousness it is nor good that Mr. Baxter should carp at Writters Preachers for speaking teaching after this manner as he doth Cath. Theol. Mor. Works § 176. which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith This saith âearly that in order to Justification before God faith laith hold on a Righteousness which is of God and which is had by the Faith of Christ. And this Surety-Righteousness of Christ is that which can only prove sutable unto the case of a wakened sinner pressed with the guilt of sin and seeing justice armed against him stopping his way to life because of his Un-righteousness What can be more welcome unto such a sinner than the newes of a Righteousness and of having Christ to become the Lord his Righteousness as made of God Righteousness And what can his faith grippe to more earnestly than to this Righteousness that he may be covered therewith and think with joy of appearing before God How else shall he think to be justified by God who is just even when the justifier of a beleeving sinner He knoweth that God is Righteous and will not acquit the guilty and therefore he must have a Righteousness that he may be in case to stand before the Righteous God So that he can have no peace till by faith he have interest in the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ for he knoweth that he hath none of his owne and that there is none any where else to be had And further this way doth exceedingly serve to demonstrate upon the one hand the Righteousness of God who will not Justifie without a Righteousness or one that hath no Righteousness and upon the other hand it commendeth the riches of the free Grace Mercy of God when the sinner seeth how free Love hath provided such an alsufficient Remedie a Righteousness against which no exception can be made and a Righteousness under the wings of which he may saifly hide shelter himself being covered with which he may rest confidente of acceptance and so may with full peace of mind rest here and relye upon it As also it serveth exceedingly to abase man in his own eyes and to make him for ever keep a low saile and walk humblie before this God and give Him the Glory of all Hence this Righteousness is called the Righteousness of Faith or of Christ beleeved in and laid hold on Rom. 4 13. the Righteousness of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ Rom. 3 22. Phil. 3 9. a Righteousness through the faith of Christ ibid. All which the like expressions do manifestly say that faith laith hold on a Righteousness even on the Righteousness of God And this Righteousness is said to be unto all upon all them that beleeve Rom. 3. 22. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And imputed or reckoned upon their score Rom 4 24. Mr. Baxter in the forecited book Cath. Theol. § 131. saith that the meaning of this Rom. 4 24. is no more but that God reputeth or judgeth us Righteous But how can he repute us Righteous unless we have a Righteousness either of our own or from some other of ourselves we have not a Righteousness unless he account beleeving all our Righteousness against which we have said enough above and the very words of the text will not admit of this glosse as was also shown above If it be the Righteousness of Christ who was delivered for our Offences and was raised againe for our Justification vers 25. then it is fit object for faith to lay hold on it being Christ's Surety-Righteousness or the Righteousness which he performed wrought out when he was delivered for our offences and which was publickly declared to be accepted when he was raised againe for our Justification And whatever Mr. Baxter think this is and must be so far made our owne through the gracious Imputation of God that the Righteous God whose judgment is to according to truth may pronunce us Righteous and accept of us as such But saith he Imputing
Christ the ground meritorious cause thereof is a far other thing And when he saith Apologie ag Mr. Eyre § 4. that he is well content to call Christ's Righteousness of Satisfaction the matter of ours and that the imputation of Christ's Righteousness taken for Donation is the forme of Constitutive Iustification that sentential adjudication of Christ's Righteousness to us is the forme of our sentential Iustification That Faith in order to Justification doth in a special manner eye the Righteousness of Christ is clear from Esai 45 24 25 Surely shall one say in the Lord have I Righteousness then followeth In the Lord shall alâ the seed of Israel be justified This truth is also clearly held forth when faith in the matter of Justification is called faith in Christ's blood Rom. 3 25. for when faith laith hold on the bloud of Christ it cannot but lay hold on his Surety-Righteousness whom God set forth to be a Propitiation and in through whom there was a Redemption wrought vers 24. for this hlood was the Redemption-money the price payed in order to Redemption 1. Pet. 1 18 19. And the blessedness of Justification is through the Imputation of Righteousness without our works Rom. 4 6. and therefore faith in order to the obtaining of this blessedness must eye and relye upon this Righteousness which is the Righteousness of him who was delivered for our offences and was raised againe for our Justification vers 25. where we may also observe a manifest difference betwixt this Righteousness which consisteth in his being delivered for our offences and our Justification the one being the Cause as was said the other the Effect Moreover this same truth is clear from Râm 5 17. where we read of the receiving of the gift of righteousness which is by faith and that in order to a reigning in life by one Jesus Christ where also we see a difference put betwixt this gift of Righteousness Reigning in life which is also more cleare in the following vers 18. Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto Iustification of life this righteousness of one to wit one Jesus Christ is the Cause and the Iustification of life is the Effect And further this difference is againe held forth vers 19 20 21. Our being made Righteous is different from the obedience of one Christ Jesus and by the Imputation of this Obedience to us do we become Righteous as our being made sinners is different from Adam's act of Disobedience and we are made sinners by the Imputation of it to us And as sin death are different when it is said that sin hath reigned unto death so Eternal life is different from Righteousness when it is said so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life We need say no more of this seing it clearly followeth from what was formerly at length confirmed to wit That justification is by the Righteousness of Christ imputed CHAP. XXXIV Faith in Justification respecteth not in a special manner Christ as a King but as a Priest MR. Baxter did long ago in his Aphorismes tell us That the Accpting of Christ for Lord is as essential a part of Iustifying Faith as the accepting of him for our Saviour that is as he explained himself That faith as it accepteth Christ for Lord King doth justifie And this was asserted by him to the end he might cleare confirme how Sincere Obedience cometh in with Affiance to make up the Condition of Justification for his Thesis LXXII did run thus As the accepting of Christ for Lord which is the hearts Subjection is as essential a part of Justifying Faith as the accepting of him for our Saviour So consequently sincere obedience which is the effect of the former hath at much to do in justifying us before God as Affiance which is the fruit of the later Hence the question arose and was by some proposed thus Whether faith in Christ qua Lord be the justifying act or whether the Acceptation of Christ as a Lord and not only as a Priest doth justifie And Mr. Baxter in his Confess p. 35. § 13. saith that it is not only without any ground in God's word but fully against it to say that faith justifieth only as it apprehendeth Christ as a Ransome or Satisfier of justice or Meriter of our Iustification or his Righteousness as ours not as it receiveth him as King or as a Saviour from the staine tyranny of sin I have shewed before that the moving of this question is of little use in reference to that end for which it seemeth it was first intended to wit to prove that Sincere Obedience hath as much to do in Justification as faith or Affiance hath where I did shew the inconsequence of that consequence That because Justifying Faith receiveth Christ as King Therefore Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification yea or therefore a Purpose or a promise of Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification So that in order to the disproving of that Assertion that maketh obedience or a Purpose or a promise of obedience an essential part of the Condition of Justification we need not trouble ourselves with this question Yet in regaird that the speaking to this may contribute to the clearing of the way of Justification by faith which is our great designe we shall speak our judgment there anent And in order thereunto several things must be premitted As 1. The question is not whether Christ as a King belongeth to the compleet adequate object of that faith which is the true justifying faith for this is granted as was shown above this faith being the same faith whether it be called True Faith or Saving Faith or Uniting Covenanting faith or Justifying faith it must have one the same adequate Object 2. Nor is the Question whether Faith in order to Justification doth so act on Christ as a Priest as to exclude either virtually or expresly the consideration of any other of his offices or of Christ under any other of his offices for under whatever office Christ be considered when faith acteth upon him whole Christ is received and nothing in Christ is or can be excludeth So that there is no virtual exclusion nor can there be any express exclusion of any of his offices when he under any other of his offices is looked to a right received for such an exclusion would be an open rejection of Christ and no receiving of him 3. When we speak here of receiving of Christ as a Priest or in respect of his Sacerdotal Office it is all one as if we named his Sacerdotal work or what he did in the discharge of that office offering up himself a Satisfactory Sacrifice and giving his blood and life for that end and suffering inwardly outwardly what was laid upon him by the Father in order to the making of full Satisfaction to justice
truth we lay down these grounds both from Scripture Reason as 1. The words of the Text whereupon we are do evince this for it is said the just liveth by Faith And as was cleared at the beginning of our discourse the words as used by the Prophet Habbakuk from whom they are cited are spoken of such as were already Beleevers Justified and pointed out the way how they were to have a life in an evil time and how they were to continue or be keeped in that State of Favoure with God whereinto they were brought to wit by Faith for the just shall live by his Faith and accordingly the same words are cited by the Apostle Heb. 10 38 39. Now the just shall live by faith but if any man draw back my soul shall have no pleasure in him But we are not of them that draw back unto perdition but of them that beleeve to the saving of the soul. Where living by Faith is opposed to drawing back to wit through unbeleefe and as drawing back is unto perdition so beleeving is to the saving of the soul therefore the Continuation of this life of justification unto the end even unto the final Salvation of the soul is by Faith This life of justification as it is begun by Faith as the Apostle evinceth Rom. 1 17. and in our present Text citing in both places these same words for that end so it is continued by Faith as the only condition thereof And to say that the particle only is not here added therefore other Works of Obedience must be or may be adjoyned here in this matter notwithstanding it be said the just liveth by Faith were in effect to destroy the Apostles Argument in our Text where he useth this same expression without the addition of only to prove that we are not justified by the works of the Law Therefore as this assertion that the just liveth by faith proveth justification by faith without the works of the Law so the same proveth the Continuation of Justification without the works of the Law as the Condition thereof 2. The Grounds Causes of Justification mentioned by the Apostle Rom. 3 22 24 25 26. hold good al 's well in the Continuation as in the first beginning of justification for there as well as here the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve for there is no difference Justification first lastly is free by his grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set fort to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood And there is not the least hint given that the matter is altered in the Continuation of justification 3. As the beginning of justification is so contrived as all boasting is taken away so must the Continnance thereof be conceived to be But if works be admitted as Conditions of the Continuance of Instification though they be denied to be the Condition of the Beginning thereof all boasting shall not be excluded contrary to Rom. 3 27. for if a sinner after that he is Iustified by the merite of Christ at first should have it to say that for the Continuance of his justification he were beholden to his own Works he should surely have matter of boasting in himself in so far at least Papists think to evite this Argument against their Second Iustification by works by saving that all these good works are not of themselves but of the Father of Lights But this shift will not help for all these works are not the Righteousness of Christ but are works of Righteousness which we do are excluded in this matter as occasioning boasting or giving ground thereunto as the next Argument will more fully cleare 4. Abraham is said to have Righteousness imputed unto him Faith imputed unto Righteousness and so to be justified by faith not only when he was first justified but many yeers after even when he offered up Isaac his son Rom. 4. Iam. 2 21 23. So was he justified first last as to have no ground of glorying and therefore not by works Rom. 4 1 3 4. But it will be said that the Apostle Iames saith expresly in the place cited that our father Abraham was justified by works when he had offered his Son Isaac on the Altar I Ans. Not to engage in the whole explication vindication of that Passage of Scripture here which is of late to good purpose most satisfyingly done by the learned Doctor Owen I only say that Abraham's being justified by works was such as thereby the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed unto him for Righteousness c. vers 23. Now if Abraham had been justified by works properly so taken the Scripture had not been fulfilled which said he was justified by Faith but the contrary had been made good to wit that works were imputed to him he was justified by them as by his Righteousness But the meaning is that Abraham was justified by faith a true faith that proved itself such in time of a trial by works of obedience particularly by obedience to that command whereby the Lord tried or tempted him Gen. 22 1 2. and by such a Faith as wrought with his works was perfected or discovered manifested to be real after the trial of the fire Iam. 2 22. It is a good direction that the learned Camero giveth here Op. fol. pag. 83. That we should hóld fast the scope of the Apostle Iames to this end that we should take notice of the Apostles Proposition and of the Conclusion thereof The Proposition is set down vers 14. What doth it profite my brethren though a man say he hath faith have not works can faith or that faith save him Whereby we see that the Apostles scope is to prove that that Faith which the man supposeth he hath who hath no works is not that Faith by which we are Justified saved that because it is unprofitable to poor indigent brethren in necessity vers 15. 16. is dead vers 17. 20 it can not be shown by works vers 18. it is a Faith that devils have vers 19. All which what followeth is cleared from the Conclusion vers 26. for as the body without the Spirit is dead so faith with works is dead also 5. It will alwayes hold true that God is he who justifieth the ungodly so justifieth him that worketh not but him to whom saith is counted for Righteousness Rom. 4 5. But if the Continuance of Justification were by works works were counted for Righteoulness in order to the continuance of justification God should not continue to be the justifier of the ungodly but should justifie the ungodly at first thereafter justifie the Godly whereof the Text giveth not the least hint 6. The Instance of David cleareth this also
which is not by a dead faith or by a faith that cannot produce works of Obedience or by such a faith as devils have but by a faith that is working making the soul prompt ready to yeeld all Obedience unto the Lord and this is the true meaning of the words as was showne above and the whole scope of the place evidenceth Will Mr. Baxter say that by a dead Faith and by a Faith that cannot save and by a Faith that is in devils is attended with no Christian Love we are brought into a justified state at first No sure and yet this is the faith that Iames opposeth unto works or rather unto a working faith whereby we are justified first last as was Abraham vers 21. whose faith was such as it wrought with his works and by the same was manifest to be what it was the true saving faith of God's Elect. And sure this Faith of Abraham and the faith that wrought in Rahab was another sort of Faith than is the Faith of devils or that Faith that is but a dead carcase Mat. 6 14 15. speaketh of Remission of sins And I suppose it will not be said that every one who forgiveth his neighbour doth thereby and thereupon obtaine Remission of his own sins at the hands of God otherwayes Heathens wicked persons may be said to have their sins Pardoned before God because they may forgive others some wrongs done unto themselves If it besaid that such cannot forgive others a right not having a principle of grace and not being in Christ. True but then we see that it is not this forgiving abstractly considered that is spoken of here but a Forgiving flowing from faith principled thereby and so the meaning of the place is That without such a Faith in Christ as principleth prompteth to Pardoning of others we can expect no pardon of our own sins from God not have ground to suppose that we are indeed pardoned of God our forgiving of others then is here mentioned as the native Effect evident Signe of Faith as our Commentators manifest upon the place speaking against the Papists See Pareus Gualter others Pareus particularly disproveth the Papist's gloss sayeth that our pardoning of others must follow upon God's pardoning of us as he cleareth from Mat. 18. and will not have our forgiving of others said to be the causa sine qua non of our obtaining Remission from God This place then saith That while we cannot finde in our heart a readiness cheerfully heartily to forgive others we have no ground to imagine that our sinnes are pardoned for all such as are pardoned of God have this Christian disposition flowing from faith in Christ They may have this as to the seed root but till it grow up to yeeld this fruite they want the evidence of their faith consequently of pardon 1. Ioh. 1 9. meaneth such a Confession of sins as is accompanied with the making use by faith of the bloud of Christ that cleanseth from all sin vers 7. and with a running to the Advocat with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous who is a Propitiation for sins Chap. 2 1 2. Most wicked persons as Saul may make confession of their sins but not so as to run to the fountaine the blood of sprinkling And by a Confession that is not accompanied with this acting they can attaine to no Remission before God And therefore faith only acting in humble Confession to the glory of God to the taking of shame to themselves is the condition of Pardon of Continuance of Justification as to this Revel 22 14. is also abused by the Papists to prove their second justification to be by works The word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã hereused doth not alwayes denote right or jus for it sometimes signifieth meer freedome liberty power to do such or such a thing as 1. Cor. 9 4 5 6. And so here the words import that such as do his commandements are blessed for thereby they have free access unto the tree of life unto Christ their objective blessedness which is the same with that which is commonly said viz. that Works of Obedience are the way of the Kingdom but not the cause of reigning It will not suite with the Gospel to say that by our works of obedience we buy a right to the tree of life even in part or in subordination to Christ's blood for Christ hath purchased the whole Right nothing of ours must be joined as a part of that price otherwise must we have a proportionable share of the glory to ourselves Nor can it be said that by our works of Obedience we obtaine a Right to Christ to his Merites for before we have a Right to Christ we can do no works of Christian Obedience and Christ alone hath bought to us both Grace Glory But our works of Christian Obedience though they cannot precede our Right to yet they may go before our Possession of the Inheritance purchased now Right Possession are different things But in fine we say that this place speaking of the possession of glory is not apposite to the purpose now in hand for Justification is different from Glorification Rom. 8 30. And of justification as continued are we here speaking Ioh. 15 3 4 5 6 8 9 10. Verse 3. 9. can prove nothing in reference to what we are upon Vers. 4. sheweth that there is no fruitfulness in Grace but by a constant abiding in sucking of sap by faith from Christ the true Vine which none denieth Verse 8. sheweth that by fruitfulness in good the Father is Glorified thereby a demonstration is given to the world who are indeed the true disciples of Christ vers 6. holdeth forth the dreadful punishment that attendeth Apostates but we hope true beleevers are secured against full final Apostasie Vers. 10. proveth indeed that keeping of Christ's commands is a mean to keep the sense of our being beloved of Christ fresh in our souls to enjoy the fruites of his Love of Beneficence but saith nothing of good works being the Condition of our Continuance in the state of justification unless we will also say that Christ's obedience was the Condition of his Continueing in the State of Justification 1. Ioh. 2 24. c. proveth that full final Apostasie from the faith truth of the Gospel will indeed cutt off from all Interest in Christ from benefite by him But as true beleevers are secured from this as vers 27. cleareth So this will only prove that continuance in Faith is the Condition of continuance of Justification Mat. 18 35. Only proveth and so confirmeth what was said to Mat. 6 14. that such as do not from their hearts forgive their brethren their trespasses can have no ground of Assurance that God hath forgiven them theirs ... our Cruelty Unmercifulness towards our Brethren may give us sufficient ground to doubt of
be true lively is the sole Condition of Pardon 8. As at first so alwayes that holdeth true which Peter saith Act. 10 43. To him i. e. to Jesus give all the Prophets witness that through his name whosoever beleeveth in him shall receive Remission of sins As the stung Israelit was alwayes in order to his cure to look to the brazen serpent so is the Beleever that would be cured of the guilt of new transgressions to have his recourse by Faith unto the Mediator crucified lifted up Ioh. 3 14 15. Obj. 1. It is said that Repentance is necessary both as commanded and as a meane appointed for attaining Remission of sins And therefore must be the Condition of Remission Ans. The consequence is not good for this same may be said of Prayer and other Duties which yet cannot be called proper Conditions of Pardon That prayer is a commanded duty none will deny That a praying sinner may be said to be using the meanes to attaine unto Pardon and to be in the way of obtaining of it will also be granted and so in that respect prayer may be accounted a meane and yet it cannot be called the Condition for then every one that prayeth should have pardon though he act not faith And if it be said that it must be prayer in faith Iam. 5 15. I Ans. True but then the Condition is not Prayer but Faith exerting itself and acting in through Prayer And the same we say of Repentance and so keep it in its due place and presse it in the Gospel way methode Obj. 2. It is said That there is a kind of congruity sutablness in this order by subjoining the promise of pardon to it for it is more sutable that a penitent sinner should have Pardon than an impenitent Ans. So this same may be said of Prayer for it is also more sutable that a praying sinner be pardoned than a sinner that nevâ once asketh pardon And this tendeth more also to the exalting of free grace But the truth is in pardon there is not only a declaration exalting of Grace Mercy but also of divine Justice Rom. 3 25 26. and unto this Faith is singularly fitted because it layyeth hold on the Propitiation and on bloud for the declaration of God's Righteousness for Remission of sins and hereby is the Lord declared to be just when he is the Justifier Pardoner of the beleever So that neither prayer nor Repentance nor Self-searching c. can be properly called the Condition but Faith acting in by these Obj. 3. It is said that Repentance qualifieth the sinner in reference to the promise of pardon or putteth him within the reach of the promise so that he may take hold of the promise of pardon And it disposeth him to accept the offered Salvation freely and to rest upon Christ alone for that end Ans. 1 What disposeth to accept of Salvation c. cannot for that cause be called the Condition of Pardon unless we speak improperly as felt poverty in a beggar though it disposeth him to receive an offered almes thankfully Yet it is not the proper Condition No more self conviction in our case a Condition of Pardon 2 If it qualifieth for the receiving of the offered Salvation then it qualifieth immediatly for Faith but mediatly remotly for Pardon 3 The promise of Pardon is not made to the penitent properly as such but to the Penitent beleever that is to faith acting exerting itself in by Repentance Obj. 4. Esai 1 15 16. put away the evil of your doings cease to do evil c. this is Repentance then vers 18. full pardon is promised though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow c. Ans. Yet with all he bids them wash make cleane which could only be by the blood of the Messiah for that only cleanseth 1. Ioh. 1 7. and this they had neglected in going about their Sacrifices which therefore were abominable in the eyes of the Lord vers 11 12 13. because not accompanied with Faith that purifieth the heart Act. 15 9. Obj. 5. 2. Chron. 7 14. the Lord promiseth to forgive sin if his people would turne from their wicked wayes Ans. But with all it is required there that they seek the face of God that was in through the Messiah typified by the Temple to which their prayers were to be directed as we see Chap. 6 20 24 26 29 31 34 38. Obj. 6. Prov. 28 13. He that confesseth his sin forsaketh it shall finde mercy Ans. True because none will do that a right but the beleever who laith hold on the Merites of Christ. And so this the like places are not exclusively to be taken but principally to be understood of Faith so acting and evidencing itself to be true lively and of the right stamp by its acting so FINIS CHAP. I. Imputation both of Christs Active and Passive Obedience necessary MR. Iohn Goodwine in his Treatise of justification part 2. Ch. 2. laith down several conclusions whereby he might overturne this Truth what he saith must be examined His 1. Conclusion in this He for whose sins a plenary satisfaction hath been made either by himself or another for him hath been accepted by him against whom the transgression was committed is as just righteous as he that never sinned but had done all things that were requisite meet for him to do Ans. If by just righteous be meaned one who only hath not deserved the punishment threatned then his Conclusion is true but if by just righteous be meaned one who not only hath not deserved the punishment but hath also deserved the reward promised then his Conclusion is false for the Satisfaction if it respect only the transgression committed can only put the man for whom it is given accepted in the state of one that is under no obligation to be punished but it cannot put him in the state of one who not only is not to be punished but is also to be rewarded He addeth This is evident because there is as much justice righteousness in repairing the the wrongs injuries done to any as there is in abstaining from doing wrong Ans. True in reference to the wrong done and therefore such an one is rightly justly delivered from the obligation to punishment but is not made so righteous as to challenge the reward till a more compleet satisfaction be made to wit such as may comprehend also perfect conformitie unto the Law in all points to the end he for whom this is done may be looked upon as a fulfiller of the Law therefore to have right to the reward as he would have had if he had in his own person perfectly keeped it He that simply repaireth the wrong done doth not that which deserveth the reward The simile he annexeth confirmeth this and demonstrateth how far out he is
understand their meaning but against such as will seek knots in rushes and raise dust in the most clear aire for their own ends there is no remedie I am afraied the point of difference shall be found such here as that our agreement shall not be expected in âhaste unless our sobriety be such as well make us embrace inconsistences Let us hear what he saith No wise man can dream that we may trust to those for more than their proper part as that we may trust them to do anything proper to God to Christ to the Spirit to the promise c. And to use the phrase of Trusting to our own Faith or holiness when it soundeth absolutly or may tempt the hearers to think that they may trust them for God's part or Christ's part not only for their own is a dangerous deceiving course Ans. It is true no wise man will say that we may trust to these for more than their proper part but when we are mistaken about their proper part conceive them to have that place part which they have not and accordingly trust unto them do we not amisse And Mr. Baxter maketh it their part to be the immediat meritorious cause expacto which he otherwayes expresseth to be the Potestative Condition of Justification Salvation which we say is the part of Christ his Righteousness alone And sure who ever shall trust unto them for this part which according to the Gospel is Christ's part trust unto them for more than their proper part Neither is it any dangerous or deceiving course to speak thus when the meaning is obviously known except to such as have wit enough to darken things to be this that we must not Trust to Faith c. as the price the merite ex pacto as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant of our Justification Adoption Salvation But it is a most dangerous deceiving course to call them only Conditions or cause fine quibus non when in the meane time they are made to have the same place in the New Covenant that perfect obedience had in the old are made our Gospel-Righteousness for which we are justified yea put in the same place that the Orthodox put Christ his Surety Righteousness that is to be the immediat ground formal cause Ratio formalis objectiva of our Justification What more But that really they may be trusted for their own part and must be so no sober person will deny for so to beleeve obey pray to God c. not to trust to them in their place that is not to think that we shall be ever the better for them is unbeleefe indeed distrusting God saying it is in vain to seeke him and what profite is it that we call upon him such diffidence despair will end all endeavours Let every man prove his own work c. This is our Rejoicing c. If we are justified by Faith we may trust to be justified by it But the rare use of such a phrase in Scripture the danger of it must make us never use it without need Ans. As I said all the question is concerning what is their own part And by saying that they are not to be trusted unto we deny them to have that part or place in the matter of our Justification Salvation that others give unto them And if there were no more this is a shreud ground of presumption to us that Mr. Baxter owneth not the Orthodox doctrine in this matter viz. That he cannot with patience heare it said That we must not trust to our own Faith Repentance or Holiness but accounteth such expressions dangerous aud deceiving 2 It is but a wrong gloss put upon this expression We must not trust to our own Faith c. to make the meaning of it to be we must not think that we shall be ever the better for our Faith c. And therefore his following words are vaine and to no purpose 3 It is one thing to trust to be justified by Faith which is but beleeve God and trust in his word and a far other to trust in our Faith For this is to lay our stress lean our weight found our hopes of Justification Salvation on our weak feckless Faith in stead of trusting to relying upon Jesus Christ his Surety Righteousness as the only immediat ground as that Righteousness by upon consideration of which we are justified have a Right to Glory And if Mr. Baxter do not see a difference betwixt these two it is not because he cannot but because he will not as some may suppose 4 He talks of the rare use of such a phrase in Scripture but I would know where he findeth it used at all iu Scripture And it is well that he confesseth there is danger in it which two me thinks should be enough to make him as great an enemie to this expression as we are But the truth is according to his principles we are as much now to Trust to our Faith Repentance Holiness in order to Justification Salvation as Adam was to trust to his perfect obedience according to the Covenant of works as much as according to our doctrine we are to trust to Christ his Surety-Righteousness CHAP. IV. The Law by the works whereof Paul denyeth that we are justified is not the jewish Law WE finde the Apostle Paul directly proâessedly proving concluding that we are not justified by the Law nor by the works of the Law Yet such as differ from us about the interest of works in justification not being willing to yeeld submit unto the truth do seek what Evasions they can to evite the force of the Apostles a gueings peremptour Conclusions and therefore say that Paul is to be understood as speaking only of such or such a Law excludeth only such such works in which they think they may yeeld unto what the Apostle saith the same being limited restricted according to their own minde and yet do no prejudice to their own Hypothesis But yet what this Law in particular is and what are the works thereof our Adversaries are not at all agreed among themselves but some imagine one thing and some another as we shall heare Some by the Law and the works thereof which Paul excludeth from justification do mean the Ceremonial Law and the Observances thereof or as others express it the Iewish Law including their judaical Law so understanding hereby all that Law which is called Moses's Law this is owned by some Papist's as Bellarmine sheweth us De justif Lib. 1. Cap. 19. but he himself rejecteth it upon this ground that the Apostle Rom. 4. Ephes. 2. Tit. 3. doth simply exclude works making no mention of the Law of Moses The Socinians do chuse this way of interpreting the Apostle as perticularly may be seen in the Author of a book inââââled Consensus
Pauli Iacobi c. printed An. 1620. But this opinion doth not correspond with truth as may be manifest from these particulars 1. If Paul disput only against Justification by Ceremonial Observances he had a far shorter cut to confute that conceite than the way he took to wit to tell them that shortly that Law with all its observances was to be laid aside no more to be observed by vertue of the Gospel Administration because the end of all these observances He who was typified thereby was come and had put an end to that dispensation But we finde not the Apostle making any use of this One Onely Argument which had sured that purpose but on the contrary he useth such Mediums Arguments as suite no less if not more other Lawes beside the Ceremonial 2. Yea before the writting of these Epistles wherein the Apostle did disput against Justification by the Law at least before he wrote that to the Galatians he had by his preaching practice opposed the observation of the Ceremonial Law as himself telleth us Gal. 2. And in that same Epistle Chap. 3. 4. he condemneth the observation of that Law in most peremptory termes as being no less than a falling from grace And yet when he is treating of Justification not by the works of the Law Chap. 3. he mentioneth not this ground which would have taken away the very subject of the debate Shall we think that the Apostle would have disproved Justification only by the works of the Ceremonial Law by such Arguments and Tipicks out of Scripture when he was within a little by forcible reasons to remove the very Law itself and condemne all observation thereof 3. It is strange that Paul in writting to the Gentils should deny Justification to be by the works of the Law meaning the Ceremonial Law only and Iames writting to the Jewes should cry up the observation of that Law and plead for justification thereby This would say that Jewes Gentiles were not both to be justified one way or that Iames Paul do clearly contradict other neither of which must be said That Iames speaketh of another Law than Paul speaketh of cannot be made good And therefore when our Adversaries will prove from Iames that we are justified by works their meaning is that we are justified by the Observation of the Ceremonial Law 4. The several things mentioned of this Law whereof the Apostle speaketh sheweth that he is not speaking of the Ceremonial Law only as 1 Rom. 3 19. It is a Law that stoppeth all mouthes whereby all the world becometh guilty before God But this is not the Ceremonial Law or the jewish or Moses Law under which the Gentiles were not nor yet are 2 Rom. 3 20. It is that Law by which is the knowledge of sin but this is not by the meer Ceremonial Law as we see Paul himself professing Rom. 7 7 3 Rom. 2 13. It is that Law the döers whereof shall be justified But this can not be asserted of the meer Ceremonial Law or of Moses's Law 4 Rom. 3 27. It is that Law which doth not exclude boasting but it cannot be said that the Law of Moses is only that Law 5 Rom. 3 31. It is that Law that is not made void through Faith But this is not the Ceremonial Law The Ceremonial Law is not established by Faith 6 Rom. 3 28. It is that Law justification by which is inconsistent with opposit to justification by Faith but this is not the Ceremonial Law only 7 Rom. 4 1 2. It is that Law by the works whereof Abraham was not justified But the Apostles argument from the Instance of Abraham had not been pertinent if no Law had here been understood but Moses's Law which was not in being in Abraham's dayes 8 Rom. 4 2. It is that Law works of obedience to it that would give ground to man of glorying But this is not true only of the Ceremonial Law 9 Rom. 4 4. It is that Law obedience to which is a working and maketh the reward of debt But this cannot be said only of the Ceremonial Law 10 Rom. 4 15. It is that Law that worketh wrath But other Lawes do this than the Ceremonial Law 11 Rom. 8 3 4. It is that Law that was weak through the flesh and the Righteousness of which was to be fulfilled in us but this cannot be applied to the Ceremonial Law only 12 Gal. 3 10. It is that Lawâ of the works of which as many as are are under the Curse and of which it is said cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Law to do them But this agreeth not to the Ceremonial Law only 13 Gal. 3 12. It is that Law by the doing of which man should live But by perfect obedience to the Law of Moses alone life was not to be had 14 It is that Law that cursed all transgressours under the Curse whereof all thoselay for whom Christ died Gal. 3 13. But that is not the Ceremonial Law which laid no Curse upon the Gentiles 15 Ephes. 2 9 10. It is that Law that enjoineth those good works which God hath before ordained that we even Gentiles should walk in them But that is not the Ceremonial Law 16. It is that Law the works whereof are inconsistent with grace as the ground of Election Rom. 11 6. But this is not Ceremonial Law only else we must say that Election is for works of the Moral Law and yet is for grace 17 Phil. 3 9. It is that Law obedience to which can be called our Righteousness But this is not the Ceremonial Law only 5. If Paul's minde had been only to disput against Justification by Mosaical Observances after he had stated the question and proposed the Truth he was minded to confirme Rom. 1 17. to what purpose did he insist so much to shew how guilty the Gentiles were who were never under Moses's precepts and thereby clear what need they had of a justification by free grace through faith without the works of the Law This seemeth not to have a clear tendency unto the clearing of justification to be by Faith not by Mosaical Observances for what had the Gentiles to do with these 6. We finde like wise the Apostle to convince the Jewes themselves to be under sin in order to the necessity they had of being justified by faith holding forth their breaches of the Moral Law Rom. 2 21 22. and speaketh of a Law distinct from that to which Circumcision belonged saying vers 25. c. for Circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the Law but if thou be a breaker of the Law thy Circumcision is made uncircumcision And this Law is a Law that he by supposition saith one not circumcised might observe and so could not be the Law of Ceremonies See also Rom. 3 9 19. 7. The Arguments which the Apostle adduceth to disprove
of asserting justification by other works than perfect works required by the Covenant of works to wit by imperfect works which they say are required in the Gospel And therefore their meaning is we are not justified by perfect sinless obedience but by imperfect obedience to the Law This is the Evasion of the Socinians who say the Apostle speaketh of the works of the Law to shew that he speaketh of those works which are enjoined by the Law to wit of perpetual perfect obedience required by the Law And they say that by Faith he meaneth that confidence obedience which every one is able to performe and which is endeavoured after studied That this cannot be the meaning of the Apostles conclusion we suppose will be clear from these Considerations 1. This supposeth that they against whom the Apostle is here disputing were of opinion that men could yet be justified must be justified by perfect obedience to the Moral Law But it is hardly imaginable that men in their wits did ever so dreame or think that they were innocent could expect to be justified before God by their own perfection or perfect obedience to the Law in all points for this were to say they never had sinned 2. When the Apostle in the beginning of his disput in his Epistle to the Romans proveth that all have sinned are guilty before God both jew Gentile he thence inferreth that by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in God's sight Rom. 3 20. Whereby he giveth us to understand that there is no justification by the Law unless it be perfectly keeped And because no meer man did ever keep it perfectly or can so keep it therefore he concludeth that no man can be justified thereby There is no justification by works unless the works be perfect consequently that such as expect justification thereby be wholly sinless 3. If the Apostle had so disputed against justification by perfect works as to have granted or established justification by imperfect works he needed not have used any moe arguments to that end than what was mentioned cleared Rom. 1. 2. in the beginning of the 3. Chapter for his evincing that all had sinned come short of the Glory of God had been sufficient to this end without the addition of any one argument more seing it is impossible that sinners can be perfect obeyers And we must not think that all the Apostles further argueings are meerly superfluous for this would reflect upon the Spirit of God who acted Paul in this 4. How strange is it to imagine that the Apostle should disput against perfect works that he might establish imperfect works in the matter of justification to think that the Apostle is proving that we are not justified by the perfect works of the Law but by the imperfect works thereof that is we are not justified by such works as keep a conformity with the Law but by such works as are violations of the Law as all works are which are not conforme thereunto in all points 5. Imperfect works as to the ground of justification are not that Righteousness of God without the Law which is by Faith of Jesus Christ but opposite theâeunto and inconsistent therewith as well as perfect works for as he that perfectly keepeth the Law needeth not another Righteousness in order to his justification so neither needeth he who hath an imperfect obedience if that be made the formal objective merite cause of justification But Gospel-justification is by the Righteousness of God which is without the Law which Faith laith hold on Rom. 3 21 22. 6. Gospel justification is by Faith as the whole Gospel cleareth but faith imperfect works are not one the same Yea they are as repugnant in this affaire as faith perfect works are We are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law Rom. 3 28. Gal. 2 16. Living by faith living by works are opposite Gal. 3 11 12. 7. Justification by imperfect works is not free justification by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood as is manifest But this is the Gospel-justification Rom. 3 24 25. 8. Imperfect works exclude grace are as inconsistent therewith as perfect works are But Gospel-justification is by grace without works Rom. 3 24. Ephes. 2 8 9. Tit. 3 5 6 7. The Major is clear from the places cited as also from Rom. 11 6. If by grace then it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace But if it be of works then is it no more grace otherwise work is no more work Now if it be said that perfect works are here understood and not imperfect works it must be said also that Election of which the Apostle here speaketh is upon foresight of imperfect works 9. Imperfect works if made the Cause of Justification can give ground of boasting of glorying as we see in the Pharisee Luk. 18. But Gospel justification removeth all ground of boasting Rom. 3 27 4 2. 10. Imperfect works can not be accounted a perfect Righteousness by the Lord whose judgment is according to truth Rom. 2 2. But there is no justification without a perfect Righteousness either inherent or imputed God will pronounce no man Righteous who is not so nor justifie any as Righteous who is not so indeed But upon the account of an imperfect Righteousness can no man be justified as Righteous 11. Even this imperfect Righteousness when made the ground of justification will make the reward of debt and not of grace As Abraham's works if he had been justified by them would have done for Abraham's works were not perfect works but imperfect works as is manifest 12. If justification were not by perfect works but by imperfect works then through faith or through Gospel justification the Law should be made void contrary to Rom. 3 31. The reason of the consequence is because hereby the Law that requireth perfect obedience is laid aside another Law that requireth imperfect obedience admitted in its place or rather the same Law is pretended but it is made void as to its requireing perfect obedience must now be satisfied with an imperfect obedience But this is not to establish the Law but to destroy it when many Jotes titles are taken away from it Mat. 5 17 18. 13. The Iewes did not imagine that they were perfect without sin but followed after the Law of Righteousness that as it were âs by the works of the Law Rom. 9 31 32 And this of necessity must have been mixed with much imperfection And yet the Apostle plainly saith in the place cited that they did not attaine to a Righteousness nor to the Law of Righteousness because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the works of the Law so that seeking after Righteousness as it
expresly said to be the free gift of God 18. Then all that Paul meaned when he desired to be found of his judge not having his own Righteousness which is of the Law was that he desired not to be found puft up with a pharisaical conceite of the perfection meritoriousness of his works as meriteing his justification life ex condigno by their intrinsick value worth But no such thing appeareth Phil. 3. 9. where he utterly renunceth his own Righteousness which is of the Law that is a Righteousness consisting in his obedience conformity to the Law for in opposition to this he desireth to be found in that Righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith this is some other thing than his own works performed without that pharisaical opinion 19. We are saved by grace through faith not of works lest any man should boast Ephes. 2 8 9. consequently not of any works seing all works give ground of boasting And he meaneth such works unto which we are created in Christ Jesus as his workmanship and which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them vers 10. Now these works are certainly works done without any vaine conceite of merite and yet we see that by these works we are not brought into a state of Salvation 20. The Apostle excludeth works of Righteousness which we have done as opposed to Mercy grace Tit. 3 5 7. Now grace standeth in opposition to all works even to works performed without this conceite of merite as we see Rom. 11 6. else we must say that the Apostle there granteth Election to be for foreseen works performed without a conceite of merite and nothing must be called works but what is done with a Pharisaical conceite of merite intrinsick worth in them which is absurd CHAP. VII James 2 14. c. cleared Vindicated ALI who have been of old and are this day Adversaries to the way of justification before God which the Orthodox owne from the Scriptures have thought to shelter themselves under the wings of of some expressions of the Apostle Iames have therefore laboured so to explaine streatch forth the same expressions as they with their corrupt Notions about justification may seem at least to have some countenance therefrom yea and warrandise to hold fast the same And for this cause they have laboured so much and do still laboure so to expound the words of Paul as that they may carry no seeming difference unto the words of Iames for it is received as a known truth and it is willingly granted that there is no real Contradiction betwixt the two Apostles but what ever apparent or seeming disagreement there be betwixt their words yet all that difficulty is removable their words how contradictory soever they seem to be are yet capable of such an interpretation as shall manifest their harmonious agreement in the truth so that Iames saying Ch. 2 24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified not by faith only dot not contradict the Apostle Paul who saith concludeth that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law Rom. 3 28. But a question is here made whether we should interpret Iames's words by Paul's or Paul's by Iames's Our Adversaries are much for this later to wit that we must interpret Paul's words by the words of Iames because as they alledge Paul is obscure in his doctrine many were beginning to misinterpret pervert the same that therefore Iames was necessitate to clear up that doctrine of justification so as Paul's words might be better understood But how unreasonable this is the leamed D. Owen hath lately manifested his grounds are indeed irrefragable for 1 It is a received way of interpreting Scriptures that when two places seem to be repugnant unto other that place which treateth of the matter directly designedly expresly largely is to regulate our interpretation of the other place where the matter is only touched obiter on the bye and upon some other occasion and in order to some other ends And that therefore accordingly we must interpret Iames by Paul and not Paul by Iames seing it is undenible that Paul wrote of this Subject of Justification directly on purpose to cleare up the same and that with all expresness fulness on severall occasions disputing the same in a clear formal manner with all sorts of Arguments Artificial Inartificial and answereth objections that might be moved against the same at large and with a special accuracie But on the other hand it is as certaine that Iames hath not this for his scope to open up the Nature of Justification but only toucheth there-upon in order to the other end which he was prosecuting 2 There is no ground to suppose that it was the designe of Iames to explaine the meaning of Paul no footstep of any such purpose appeareth For then his maine business should be to explaine clear up the doctrine of justification which neither is apparent from this part of the Epistle nor from any part of it at all his designe being quite another thing as is obvious 3 Nor was there any necessitie for Iames to Vindicate the doctrine of Paul from such corrupt inferences as Adversaries suppose were made therefrom for as to any such as might be made to wit as if he had given any countenance unto such as were willing to lay aside good works he himself did fully sufficiently Vindicate his owne doctrine by showing on all occasions the necessity of good works and particularly when he is speaking of Justification not only in his Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians where he largly professedly treateth of that matter but even when he is but mentioning the same on other occasions as we see Ephes. 2 8 9 10. Phil. 3 9 10 11 c. Tit. 3 5 6 7 8. So that to imagine that Iames asserteth another interest of works in our justification than Paul doth and that to explaine Paul's meaning is not to reconcile these Apostles but to set them at further varience enmity And it cannot comport with sobriety to think or say that Iames to cleare the Apostle Paul's doctrine and to vindicate it from objections should speak to the same objections which Paul himself had spoken to fully removed and that Iames should give such answers unto these objections as Paul would not give but rather rejected And yet this must be said by our Adversaries here It will be of great use to us here to understand aright what is the plaine scope drift of the Apostle Iames for as for the designe scope of Paul in his discourses of justification it is so obviously manifest unto all that read the same that no doubt can be made thereof to wit To cleare up fully plainely the Nature Causes of this great privilege of
this though it be the sure way to this seing all who are justified shall be thus saved Thus we see that according to Mr. Baxter the meaning of Iames is the same with Paul's when he saith Heb. 12 14. Follow peace with all men holinoss without which no man shall see the Lord. And then Iames speaketh nothing of that justification whereof Paul treatch this is what we say whence it is manifest that there is no appearance of contradiction betwixt the two holy writers But that we may come to some further clearness in this matter we must see whether Paul Iames mean speak of one the same Faith for if it be found that they speak of diverse Faiths all appearance of Contradiction is removed Now that the Apostle Paul meaneth of a true lively saving Faith which is a saving fruite of the Spirit of God the special Gift of God is easily granted on all hands All the question is of that faith which Iames speaketh of Papist's say that it is true justifying that Iames speaketh of for justifying Faith with them is nothing but a real assent unto the Catholick Doctrine or to divine Revelation And indeed if Justifying Faith be nothing else it can not be well denyed that Iames meaneth here a justifying faith But the folly of this ground is obvious to all that understand the Gospel and we need not here insist in confuting the same That which Iames here saith of this Faith is enough to demonstrate of what Nature it is and the Epithets he giveth it do sufficiently manifest that it is not Faith of the Right stamp nor that true lively Faith by which Paul saith that we are justified and the discovery of this will be enough to our purpose and every verse of his discourse hereanent will help us herein for 1 vers 14. it is a profitless Faith which cannot be said of justifying Faith as the whole Scripture cleareth 2 Ibid. it is a Faith that hath no ground or reality but a mans saying nor no other evidenee or proof What doth it profite my Brethren though a man say he hath Faith There is no other proof adducable but his say so which cannot be justifying Faith 3 Ibidâcan Faith save him so that it is a Faith that hath no sure connexion with nor tendency to Salvation which cannot be supposed of the true lively justifying Faith as is known 4 vers 15 16. It is no more true Faith than that is true charity which saith to the naked destitute brother depart in peace be thou warmed filled notwithstanding giveth not those things which are needful to the body 5 vers 17. It is expresly called a dead Faith But the precious Faith of God's elect is a lively Faith 6 ibid. It is a Faith without works having no connexion therewith nor being any ground thereunto but the true Faith that justifieth worketh by Love is a living principle and floweth from the infusion of life 7 So vers 18. It is a Faith uncapable of any true evidence or demonstration as to its being from works of holiness and so is not accompanied with any real change of soul But it is not thus with true saving Faith 8 vers 19. It is such a Faith as devils may have But devils are not capable of justifying Faith 9 vers 20. It is the Faith that a Vaine man never humbled in the sense of his own lost Condition nor driven out of himself to seek reliese elsewhere in the free mercy grace of God through Jesus Christ may have But that is not the Faith of the humbled hear broken man that 's sleeing to Christ for refuge 10 vers 21 22 23. It is not such a Faith as Abraham had that made him willing to offer up his son Isaac when commanded so wrought with was evidenced demonstrated by works 11 vers 25. Nor is it like the Faith of Rahab which prompted her to receive the Messengers and send them out another way 12 vers 26. It is such a Faith that is no better than a carcase without breath which is no essential part of a living man But the Faith that justifieth is a far other thing By these particulars it is manifest that this Faith whereof James speaketh so much and which he opposeth unto works denieth justification salvation unto is not the precious faith that Paul speaketh of We have seen that Paul James speak not of one the same faith we shall now enquire whether they speak of One the same Justification And if it be found that therein they differ all ground of imaginable difference will be further removed What that justification is whereof Paul speaketh is manifest needeth not here be declared for it is plaine that he treateth of that justification whereby a poor sinner convinced of his sin misery in lying under guilt under the Curse of God because of sin is absolved before God from the sentence of the Law accepted of Him and brought into an estate of Favour reconciliation having a right unto Salvation through Faith in Jesus Christ. Upon the other hand it is as obvious cleare that James is not treating of this justification whereby a change of state is made in the man But of a justification of a far other nature even such a justification whereby the Mans Faith the reality of his Christianity his justification before God is evidenced or may be evidenced to himself or to others So that whether we take justification here as mentioned by James for the evidence demonstration of justification or for a justification of the truth of the Mans Faith Christianity it cometh all to one for where true faith true Christianity is there is justification and there only so that what demonstrats the one will demonstrat the other and a justification or manifestation of the one will be a justification of the other Nor is this sense of the word justifie or justification alien from the Scriptures as we see Psal. 51 4. Rom. 3 4. for God can not other wayes be justified but by being declared avowed proclamed to be Righteous So Ier. 3 11. Ezek. 16 51 52. Mat. 11 19. Luk. 7 35 29. 1. Tim. 3 16. Now that this is the justification whereof Iames speaketh may be furder cleared by these particulars 1 The scope that Iames here levelleth at being not to clear up the way manner how or the causes by which this change of Relation State is wrought brought about but to discover the groundlesness of the vaine pretenses of such as supposed they were justified in a sure way to be saved who had no more for their ground but a loose verbal outward profession of the preached truth without any real fruit of godliness So that this Enquirie is what can truely evidence a person to be justified indeed before God And he sheweth that an empty fruitless profession
must he said that by a work done long afterward men may see that the worker was justified But that should not sutte James's scope seing by this meanes they might think to delay for a long time their good works yet suppose themselves presently justified Ans. All this is but vaine language for it is all one to the scope of Iames whether this come to the actual knowledge of few or of many who they were to whose knowledge it came He is only shewing that such as had but a dead faith that brought forth no works of obedience when called for had no evidence or clear ground to assert their own justification seing Abraham's justification was thus declared by his signal obedience to all that came or ever should come to the knowledge of that act of obedience of his to the end of the world Yea had it been unknown to any yet hereby he had a sure proof to ascertaine his own heart conscience of his justification But say the Arminians Good works cannot be such a proof demonstration because it cannot be known to others whether these good works proceed from faith or not Ans. Nor is any infallible judgment here necessary or requisite nor doth the scope of Iames require any such thing who is only shewing that such as wrought not works of obedience when called for could not conclude themselves justified in a saife estate notwithstanding of all their faire profession Notwithstanding we cannot judge infallibly of principles motives ends of the good works of others yet by what may be seen of these God may be glorified Mat. 5 16. 1. Pet. 2 12. Thus we have seen that neither is that faith whereof Paul speaketh when he saith We are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law whereof Iames speaketh when he saith Ye see then how a man is justified by works not by faith only is not one the same Nor is it the same justification or justification in the same sense consideration that both the Apostles speak of And therefore how ever as to their words they seem to speak contrary to other Yet in their true sense meaning there is nothing but a sweet harmony agreement But now as to works whereof both make mentione the question remaineth whether they be one the same The forenamed Socinian Author saith that both do not speak of the same works and that Paul excludeth from justification only legal works not Evangelical And consequently that Iames must speak of Evangelical works only But sure we are Iames cannot be supposed to speak of Evangelical works in their sense seing they cannot say that Abraham's offering up Isaac or Rahab her receiving sending away the spies were Evangelical works James speaketh of works commanded by the Moral Law which he mentioneth both in general in its particular commands Iam. 2 9 10 11. And all the duties which he presseth them unto the sins which he disswadeth them from relate unto the Moral Law And what these works are whereof Paul speaketh we have seen before Others think that Iames by Works here meaneth a working faith so that his meaning when he saith that by works a man is justified is that by a working faith such as Abraham had a man is justified But though it be a truth that justifying faith is a working lively faith And that we are justified only by such a faith as is lively prompteth to obedience in every duty called for though this truth will follow by consequent from what the Apostle Iames here saith Yet I judge that both Paul Iames understand the same thing by works even duties of obedience performed to the Law of God that by Works here in Iames is not meant a working faith this not being the scope designe of Iames to clear up justification in its Causes or to shew by what meanes it is brought about but only to shew what way it is or may be evidenced proved demonstrated to ourselves or others so as we may not be deceived thereanent And real works of obedience as they evidence a true lively faith so they prove the reality of justification And the Apostles intention being to shew the vanity of that pretence whereby many deceived themselves thinking that their profession of the truth of the Gospel was enough to secure their Salvation to prove them to be in a justified saife state though they indulged themselves a liberty to walk loosly according to the flesh this acception of the word works in a proper sense is most contributive unto that designe no other acception how consonant so ever unto the Analogy of Faith doth so directly clearly contribute assistence thereunto Therefore he opposeth faith works denieth that to faith which he ascribed unto works though by consequence he put hereby a difference betwixt a dead faith a working faith Yet his principale Thesis vers 14. is that by works not by a bare profession of the truth we come to Salvation And the enquirie prosecuted is whether we have that faith that will indeed prove saving this can only be evidenced by works as his whole following discourse evinceth especially when he saith vers 18. shew me thy faith without thy works I will shew my faith by my works And vers 20. when he saith faith without works is dead vers 26. that it is as dead as a body is without breath or Spirit And this he fully confirmeth by the following instances of Abraham Rahab From what is said it is apparent how little ground there is to think that there is any real appearance of contradiction betwixt Paul James how needless it is in order to a reconciliation to say with Papists that Paul speaketh of a first justification Iames of a second or with others that Paul speaketh of justification as begun Iames of justification as continued or with Socinians that Paul denieth justification by the works of the Law James affirmeth justification by the works of the Gospel CHAP. VIII No countenance given to Justification by Works from Jam. 2 14. c. BEcause all who ascribe our justification in one sense or other all are not agreed in one the same sense unto our works seek countenance unto the same from these words of James Chapt. 2 14 forward notwithstanding that what was said concerning this passage in the fore going Chapter might be sufficient to discover the groundlesness of any such pretence where it was showen that the whole face of this place looked towards another airth and had not the least aspect unto any such conclusion Yet for a fuller Vindication of this place from this too ordinarie abuse perversion we shall examine every part thereof see what ground there is for any to alleige the same for confirmation of their particular opinions The Papists generally say that this place speaketh
of the Second Justification But their opinion of a first second justification is vaine having no ground in the word and the whole of their fabrick is sufficiently demolished by the Reformed writting against them so that we need not insist thereupon Others there are who suppose that James is here shewing how justification is continued therefore say though faith alone be the Condition of Justification as begun Yet unto the continuance thereof works are required as the Condition But all that speak thus think that Iames pointeth forth the Condition of Justification as continued must say that those persons who had this faith whereof James speaketh were really justified that James doth presuppose them to be justified speaketh to them of them as such But then it must be granted that the Popish faith consisting in a meer assent unto the truth revealed is justifying faith and that that faith which is no more true saving faith than that is true Christian Charity which saith to a brother or sister that is naked destitute of daily food depart in peace and giveth not those things which are needful to the body is sufficient to bring one into a justified state and that a dead faith a faith of the same nature kinde with the faith of devils a faith which a vaine man puft up with a vaine conceite a fleshly mind may have a faith that cannot will not worke with works is a justifying faith which if true it would follow that all men who beleeve that God is Devils also who beleeve this should be justified But none who understand the Gospel can think or speak thus And therefore this place carrieth no shew of proof that works are the Condition of Justification as continued Nor can this place give any countenance to such as say that Faith Works together are the Condition of Justification making no difference betwixt justification as begun as continued For 1 James'â scope as we manifested above is not to cleare up explaine the way how justification is brought about or to shew what are the Causes or Conditions thereof but to discover the vanity of that ground whereupon some professours who indulged their Lusts deceived themselves supposed that they were in a state of justification salvation notwithstanding they neglected all duties of holiness 2 James opposeth a faith here unto works a faith which he called unprofitable dead c. doth not ascribe justification hereunto as to a Condition in whole or in part But such as speak thus include faith works as making up one full compleat Condition 3 The Instances which James here adduceth should not then serve his designe if his purpose was to prove faith works to be the Condition of Justification for Abraham was long justified before that particular act of obedience in offering up his son Isaac was called for And so was Rabââ justified before she sent away the spies 4 This work by which Abraham is said to have been justified was a work that seemed contrary unto the Moral Law And therefore if this be urged as a ground of justification by works it will rather prove justification by other works then by works commanded in the Moral Law of God 5 The works mentioned in both the Instances are outward external works obvious to the eyes eares of others And hence it may as well be proved that only external works are required unto justification and no other And indeed if it had been Iames's designe to prove justification by works he had named other works then meerly external that he might have prevented a mistake But more fully to discover the vanity of this supposition let us see what can be alleiged from the several parts of this passage for justification by works from vers 14. it is said Faith alone cannot save but is unprofitable but yet faith works is profitable will save Ans. This maketh nothing for justification by works because it is denied that whatever is requisite before Salvation is requisite also before justification for if so no man could be said to be justified as long as he lived But next the faith whereof Iames here speaketh availeth not to Salvation because it is not of the right kinde we say also that this faith availeth not to justification because it is but meer empty profession deceiving puffing up it is but a faith that a man saith he hath From vers 15 16 17. It is said As charitable wishes joined with real acts of Love Alms deeds is profitable no other charitable wishes so Faith with works is available to justification but not without them Ans. These charitable wishes not accompanied with Alms deeds as they are not profitable unto the indigent brother sister so they are far from that Christian charity that is called for in the Gospel as that charity is not true Christian saving charity so neither is the Faith which he proveth to be dead true saving or justifying Faith Nor doth the Apostle say that faith with works is available unto justification but that that faith which hath not works is dead not available to prove evidence that the man that hath it is in a saife in a justified state But the maine ground of this apprehension is vers 21 22 23 c. for it is objected that it is expresly said that Abraham was justified by works Ans. That it is so said we grant but the difference is about the sense meaning in which it is said so We have shown that the meaning is That by works Abraham was declared proved manifested to be a justified person and one that had a true lively faith for it is added that hereby the Scripture was fulfilled declaring him to have been justified by faith or that he beleeved God it was accounted to him for Righteousness And this is it which others have called justification before men in opposition to justification before God that is a justification declared manifested to the mans own conscience to others not the justification before God in its causes And this Mr. Baxter seemeth to have mistaken in his Aphorismes when he argued against this justification before men as if it had been meerly a justification from Mens Accusation not the true justification before God as evidenced proved to men And when we speak of justification in this sense we do not make the world lawful judges of our Righteousness before God or in reference to the Law of God or say that they are competent or capable judges But we only say that by works of obedience Faith Justification by Faith is evidenced And where as he saith That works are no certaine medium or evidence whereby the world can know us to be Righteous for there is no outward work which an hypocrite may not performe inward works they cannot discerne nor yet
the principles from which nor the ends to which our works proceed are intended There is as much need of a divine heart-searching knowledge to discerne the sincerity of works as of faith it self He may see that all this will make as much against Christ's saying Mat. 5 16. Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works glorifie your Father which is in heaven And that Ioh. 13 35. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye love one another and that 1. Pet. 2 12. Having your Conversation honest among the Gentiles they may by your good works which they shall behold glorifie God in the day of Visitation Nor is it to the purpose to say that he was the justifier who was the imputer of Righteousness that is God for works of obedience may declare that God hath imputed Righteousness unto the person hath justified him and this is all we say that Abraham was in this sense justified by his works that he was declared to be justified indeed before God by his works Some were pleased to express their sense of Iames's words thus That Iames speaks of works as justifying our faith not as justifying our persons meaning only that the Apostle did not consider works here as the Cause or Condition of the persons being justified before God but as the effect evidence proving the mans faith to be sound saving and consequently the man thereby to have been justified which sense is the same with what we have given but Mr. Baxter saith it is as plaine as can be that it is the person not his Faith which is here said to be justified Ans. The person it is true is said here to be justified but not causatively but declaratively that is It is not said that by works his justification is effectuated but that it is declared that because it is hereby declared that the man is a true beleever thus his faith is manifested to be of the right kind which is all that was intended by that expression Yet Mr. Baxter will not say that works do effectually produce our justification for Faith doth not so But yet he will have both to justifie as Conditions or as parts of one Condition Only he addeth that they do not justifio as equal parts of the Condition for Faith is the principal but as the secondary less principal part of the Condition Ans. Yet Iames hinteth at no such thing but giveth the preference to works Yea excludeth the faith whereof he speaketh altogether from having any interest in justification as being nothing but a dead carcass a vaine fruitless unprofitable thing so hath no kind of causality or procurement in justification But he addeth as a reason 1. That when it is said we are justified by works the word by implieth more than an idle concomitanoy Ans. I shall easily grant this but withall say that this will not give unto works any causality in justification but only evince works to be an evidence of justification as the cause is said to be manifested by the effect He addeth 2. When the Apostle saith By works not by faith only he plainly makes them concomitant in procurement or in that kind of causality which they have Especially seing he saith not as he is commonly interpreted not by faith which is alone but by faith only ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ans. Then hath fruitless dead faith which devils may have a kind of causality in justification which is expresly contrary to the scope all the reasonings of the Apostle And therefore the common interpretation must be admitted But he addeth 3. Therefore he saith that faith is dead being alone becaâse it is dead as to the use purpose of justifying This appears from his comparison in the former vers 16. that this is the death he speaks of so works make faith alive as to the attainment of its end of justification Ans. If it be thus how could he then say before that faith was the principal part of the Condition can that be the principal part of the Condition which is dead useless without the other must be quickened in order to its usefulness by the other I would think that other looked rather like the principal part and most considerable necessary seing this were but a dead Cypher without it But the truth is the Apostle as is said hath a far other designe sheweth that that faith which they pretended unto as sufficient to ground their conclâsion of their justification hope of Salvation was no true saving faith at all but a dead thing so no works could make it of any use as to justification because it behoved first to flow from another principle even from a principle of saving grace and then it would evidence prove itself to be of the right kind by good works that would flow from it But saith he When the Apostle saith that faith did work in with his works it clearly aimeth at such a working in with as maketh them conjunct in the work of justifying Ans. No such matter for the Apostle is only there shewing as the whole context cleareth that Abraham's faith was another sort of faith than that whereupon they relyed even a faith that did prompt to the most difficulte duties when the call of God came so did work in with his performances but not in order to justification for he was justified already many yeers before this He addeth And when he saith that Faith was made perfect with works it is not only a manifesting to be perfect But as the habite is perfected in its acts because they are the end to which it tendeth as marriage is perfected per congressum procreationem or any Covenant when its Conditions are performed Ans. The whole of the context sheweth that faith was perfected purely as to its manifestation as by the like expression is clear 2. Cor. 12 9. Col. 4 12. Mat. 5 48. Nay though It were granted that faith were perfected by works as the end to which it tendeth that would say nothing for the interest of faith in justification but in Salvation let is be granted that justification is perfected by faith without works as marriage is by consent without what he addeth we have what we desire That works are a Condition of entering into Covenant or of the Covenant in order to justification as required before justification is still denied He saith further elsewhere against Mr. Cartwright p. 212. That by works faith was made perfect as is hath naturam medii viz. conditionis to the continuation consummation of justification Ans. That the continuation of justification hath other media or Conditions than the beginning hath is not yet made apparent far less can any such thing be drewn from this passage to continuance the same the Apostles scope not being to speak to any such thing nor
he knew before hand that these would not performe the new Condition how can he then be supposed to die for them not withstanding Thus we see what difference is among men that hold Universal Redemption about the Proper Immediat End Aime of the purpose of God in sending Christ to die and of Christ in comeing to died and how for the most part it cometh all to little or nothing for it was saith Arminius That God might save sinners what way it pleased Him his Iustice which stood in the way being satisfied or as Corvinus That God might will to save sinners That Christ intended by his death to make such satisfaction to justice as that he might obtainâ to himself power of saving upon what Condition the Father pleased And thus Christ is said to have obtained Reconciliation Redemption to all not that they should actually be partakers thereof but that God his justice now being satisfied might prescribe a Condition which when they had performed he might would actually make them partakers thereof Some say that all men are put into a new Covenant in which Adam was a common person as well as in the old by vertue whereof none shall be damned that do not sin actually against the Condition fall thereby from that new state whereunto they are borne And this opinion differeth not much from that of Iacobus Andreae at the conference at Mompelgard which afterward Huberus maintained as Kimedoncius sheweth in his refutation of the same which was this in short That Christ suffered died for all none excepted Effectually and obtained for all a Reconciliation without any respect to Faith or Unbeleefe so that all who receive this Reconciliation continue in it shall be saved but as to those who refuse it by unbeleef it is made null and they perish Others say That Christ by his satisfaction removed Original sin in all so that all Infants dying in infancy are undoubtedly saved Others that he died for all sinnes alike but conditionally Some say that after the price was payed it was absolutely undetermined what condition should be prescribed so as God might have re-established the Covenant of works Others that the procuring of a new way was part of the fruit of Christ's death As for this condition some say that man can performe it with the help of such meanes as God affordeth to all and thus establish the Diana of Freewill But others assert the necessity of grace flowing from election hereunto and so destroy Universal Redemption which yet they assert So that some say Christ died for all Conditionally if they beleeve making the Act the cause of its own object for Faith with them is a beleeving that Christ died for them Some say that he died for all Absolutely Yet so as they partake not of the benefire until they performe the Condition which was to be prescribed and thus they affirme that Christ did no more sustaine the persons of the Elect than of the Reprobat but of all alike If we enquire therefore what was the Immediat Result Product of the death of Christ they agree not to tell us whether it was a Power or a Will or a Right to God to save any he pleased However all the Arminians Camero with them agree in this That Christ did not purchase faith for any and that as to all say some or as to the most part say others Christ hath only procured a Possibility of Salvation And what is this Possibility Some call it an Exemption from that necessity of perishing under which they came by the violation of the former Covenant if a satisfaction had not interveened and by this Exemption they say it cometh to passe that Christ if he will justice being now satisfied may bring all to life And hereby also say they all may be saved if they will But what is this else then a meer Possibility What efficacy hath it seing notwithstanding thereof all may perish againe They say it is really Efficacious as to this Possibility which was not before Justice was satisfied But yet notwithstanding of this Efficacious Possibility it might come to passe that not one should have been saved for how can salvation be possible without faith So that if faith be not hereby purchased it would seem that Salvation is not possible And further it doth hereby appear that all which is procured is but some power to God to Christ But what is mans advantage They say That a way to life is opened unto man that so he may now come to God by Faith Repentance But how can he come who hath no power to Beleeve or Repent without grace Or is it in corrupt mans power to Beleeve or Repent What that truth is which we stand for is plainly fully enough set downe in several places of Our Confession of Faith as Chap. 3. § 6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory so hath he by the Eternal and most free purpose of his Will fore ordained all the meanes thereunto Wherefore they who are Elected being fallen in Adam are redeemed by Christ are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season are Justified Adopted Sanctified Keeped by his power through faith unto salvation Neither are other Redeemed by Christ effectually Called Iustified Adopted Sanctified Saved but the Elect only So Chap. 8. § 1. It pleased God in his eternal purpose to chose ordaine the Lord Iesus his only begotten Son so be the mediator between God man âUnto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed and to be by him in time Redeemed Called Iustified Sanctified Glorified And ibid. § 5. The Lord Iesus by his perfect obedience sacrifice of himself which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God hath fully satisfied the Iustice of his Father purchased not only Reconciliation but an Everlasting inheritance in the Kingdom of heaven for all those whom the Father hath given unto him So ibid. § last To all those for whom Christ hath purchased Redemption he doth certanely and effectually apply communicate the same making intercession for them revealing unto them in by the word the mysteries of salvation effectually perswading them by his Spirit to beleeve obey and governing their hearts by his word Spirit overcoming all their enemies by his Almighty power wisdom in such manner wayes as are most cansonant to his wonderful unsearchable dispensations Our judgment is this in short That Christ according to the good pleasure of his Father laid downe his life a Ransome for the Elect only who were given to him to save from Wrath and Destruction and by that price purchased Salvation all the Meanes necessary thereunto for them only to whom in due time after the method which he thinketh best doth effectually apply the same unto them actually save them Though grounds sufficient considering the
Salvation we must be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ which is that which faith grippeth to apprehendeth that the shame of our nakedness may not appear and we may be in case to stand before the Tribunal of God CHAP. X. Some Arguments for the Imputation of Christs Righteousness Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwine THe truth concerning the Imputation of Christs Righteousness hath been hitherto asserted from Scripture several of these passages have been vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. Goodwine a maine adversary thereunto For further clearing of the matter we shall see what Exceptions the same man bringeth-in against the Arguments which are made use of by the Orthodox for the truth asserted Argum. 1. If there be no standing in judgment before God unless we be endued with perfect Righteousness then must the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us in our justification But there is no standing for us in judgment before God unless we be endued with a perfect Righteousness Ergo c. Against this he excepteth pag. 192. Chap. 7. saying That the consequence of the former proposition is not good And so doth Bellar. answere de Iustific lib. 2. cap. 7. So do also the Socinians But let us hear his reasons Remissin of sins saith he which is the purchase procurement of the death of Christ is a perfect Righteousness is every way able to bear us out in judgment Ans. Remission of sins neither is nor can be called righteousness âor a pardoned person is noâ the same with one that hath kept the law though by vertue of this pardon he is freed from the punishment due to the transgressours of the law yet hath he no right to the reward promised to the keepers of the law 2 Remission of sins being the purchase of Christs death Sufferings cannot be had without the Imputation of the death Sufferings of Christ unto the Beleever so hereby one halfe of the truth must be granted But His Sufferings Obedience going together both making up one Mediatory Surety-righteousness performed by Christ in His estate of humiliation both most be Imputed made over to the Beleever to the end he may receive pardon right to Glory Arg. 2. He that is justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own must needs be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed because there is no righteousness to be found in any other for the justification of a person in the sight of God But every man that is justified is justified by the righteousness of another and not by his own Ergo c. He excepteth 1. The Major is false because the passive obedience of Christ is the Righteousness of another and men may be are throughly fully justified by the merite hereof communicated to them in the free pardon of their sinnes and so need not the imputation of His active obedience Ans. 1 We plead not for the sole Imputation of Christs active obedience but for the Imputation of all that He did and suffered for in the room stead of His owne 2 Where are Christs meer Sufferings as distinguished from His obedience called a righteousness or how can meer Sufferings as such or bearing of the punishment threatened by the law be called a righteousness doth not righteousness denote the conformity of actions unto the law 3 When it is said the merite of Christs passive obedience is communicated unto us the meaning must be one of these two either that it self is properly made over imputed to us or onely in its effect free pardon of sinnes If this latter be said Then no other Imputation is granted than what Socinians will yeeld unto how can it be said to be Imputed as to its Effects when it self is not Imputed in order to the partaking of these effects If the former be said then there is something that is in it self imputed not meerly in its Effects And if Christs Passions Sufferings be imputed abstracted from His righteousness Active obedience they shall be justified without a righteousness And it neither is nor ever will be proved that pardon of sinnes is the whole of justification or that a pardoned man is ãâã ipso that he is pardoned a righteous man or that a pardoned man meerly as such hath right to the recompence of reward promised to the fulfiller of the law Except 2. to the Minor A man may be said saith he to be justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own in a double sense Either 1. by way of merite and then it is true that every one is justified by the Righteousness of another that is by the merite of the righteousness of another or 2. by way of forme so it is altogether untrue for that Righteousness where with a man is formally made Righteous is alwayes a mans own by donation Possession Ans. 1 When a man is justified by the merite of the Righteousness of another that Righteousness of the other must be imputed to the justified person or we have no other Imputation than what Socinians yeeld to 2. If the righteousness whereby one is formally justified be his owne by donation possession no other possession be thereunto requisite then we may be said to be formally justified by the righteousness of Christ for we affirme that Beleevers are possessed thereof by Gods free donation and Imputation thus the whole is granted for nothwithstanding hereof that same righteousness which is made over to the Beleever by free donation Imputation is Christs Inherently so is the righteousness of another Whereby we see that the members of this distinction thus explained are not different Yet we must not think that this righteousness of Christ is so given to us as that it is inherent in us wrought in us as Faith Repentance are for even Remission of sinnes whereby he will have us formally justified is not so in us as Faith and Repentance are in us And through Gods Imputation and Donation the righteousness of Christ may be the Beleevers when it is received by faith as well as Remission of sinnes for to speak in his own language that which is given unto man by God may truely and properly be called his own 3 That remission of sins is formal justification will never be proved and seing he will have Remission of sins to be the pure Effect of Christs Sufferings and death so must justification be and then why saith the Apostle Rom. 4 25. Who was delivered viz. to Sufferings and death for our offences and raised againe for our justification Arg. 3. If Beleevers have a true and real communion with Christ then is his Righteousness theirs by imputation But the former is true c. It may be he proposeth the Argument in such a mode way as may be most to His own advantage for who argueth thus he nameth not Yet it is true that
Righteousness to us is a consequent act after faith of God as judge and not an antecedent donation Yet it is such a consequent act of God as necessarily presupposeth God's free antecedent Donation for it is God's reckoning that Righteousness upon the beleevers score in order to the Justifying of him thereupon and because this Righteousness must be given we not having it of ourselves there must a free donation antecede and this groundeth Faiths accepting thereof and receiving of it And himself immediatly before this saith that God giving us all the effects or Salvation merited in it self properly is said also not unfitly to give us the merit or Righteousness which procured them that is as it was paid to God for us to procure them And if so why doth he inveigh so much in the foregoing pages against the orthodox doctrine of Imputation seing he cannot but know that they do not say that God doth give us the very habits of holiness as he speaketh there which were in Christ nor the transient acts which he performed nor the very sufferings which he under-went nor the Relation of Righteous Satisfactory Meritorious as it was that numerical relation which immediatly resulted from Christ's own habits acts and sufferings They dreame of no such Translation of accidents But only say that seing as Mr. Baxter here elsewhere saith this satisfactory Righteousness was paid to God for them and accepted of God as a compleat Satisfactory Righteousness they by faith coming to be united unto Christ according to the way methode which the Lord hath wisely condescended upon have an interest in that Satisfactory Righteousness as legally made over unto them and therefore have the benefites purchased thereby as when a stranger who was not under the Obligation cometh to pay the debt of a debtor lying in prison the payment must in Law sense be made and accounted the debtors or put upon his score and received upon his account ere he can therefore be relieved out of Prison But in the fore-cited place against Mr. Blake he maketh this Righteousness Remission all one thing And indeed if it were so it could not belong to the Object of Faith other wayes than as an end intended to be obtained thereby But to us Remission is a benefite purchased by this Righteousness and followeth upon our having interest therein through Faith according to the appointment of God a Pardoned man as such is not a Righteous man But he tels us there that our divines of the Assembly do perfectly define justifying Faith to be a receiving resting on Christ alone for Salvation as he is offerest in the Gospel It is of dangerous consequence to define justifying faith to be the receiving of justification or Righteousness Ans. Here we have Justification Righteousness made one and the same which with me differ as Cause Effect our divines of the Assembly give a more full definition or description of Justifying Faith in the Larger Catechisme and there tell us that thereby the convinced sinner receiveth resteth upon Christ N.B. his Righteousness therein i.e. in the Gospel held forth for pardon of sin for the accepting accounting of his person Righteous in the sight of God for Salvation And if Mr. Baxter would say so much as is here this debate would be at an end and yet I finde not this among his exceptions against that Catechisme in his Confession And when our devines mentione this Receiving Resting upon Christ's Righteousness they make not Justifying Faith to be a receiving of Justification but the one a cause of the other And he addeth a little thereafter which is considerable to our present purpose That receptio Ethica activa of justification or of Righteousness for they are both one thing with him goeth before Iustification as a small secondary part of condition it being the accepting of Christ himself that is the maine condition And we never spoke of the receiving by Faith of Christ's Righteousness as exclusive of the receiving of himself He tels us next That Christ's Satisfaction or Redemption solvendo pretium merit cannot properly be received by us for they are not in themselves given to us We grant the price was payed to God but it being payed to God for us it may be imputed to us and reckoned upon our score and we may that way receive it by faith and Lean our soul upon it to the end that the fruit of it may be given to us And likewise he granteth ibid. that justifying faith doth as necessarily respect Christ's satisfaction merit as it doth our Iustification thereby procurea If he will grant that Justifying Faith respecteth Christ's Satisfaction Merite as the Cause in which we are to have an interest and under which we must refuge our selves and upon the account of which we are to be accepted of God and accounted Righteous in his sight all is granted that I desire But his following exceptions are founded upon a manifest mistake of his own taking this Righteousness whereof we speak and Justification for one and the same thing for he saith To say therefore that the justifying act of faith is only the receiving of Christ's Righteousness or of Iustification is to exclude the receiving of Christ himself any way even to exclude him as Satisfier from the justifying act to exclude from that act his Redemption by Bloudshed Satisfaction Merite The mistake here is palpable for we look on Righteousness which faith receiveth as the Cause and on Justification as the Effect when this Righteousness of Christ the causa procaâarctica of our Justification is received by faith it is impossible but Christ himself must be received as a Satisfier his Redemption Bloudshed Satisfaction Merite cannot be excluded for therein was the Righteousness which faith laith hold upon in order to Justification He addeth for confirmation for if it be only the receiving of Righteousness that is the justifying act than it is neither the receiving of Christ himself nor yet the acknowledgment of his Satisfaction Redemption by his blood But this is nothing but what was said repeated againe Neither do we say that the Justifying act of Faith as it is called is a receiving of Christ's Righteousness as distinct from himself nor is it imaginable how Christ's Righteousness can be received without the acknowledgment of his Satisfaction and of the Redemption by his blood How he can say that Christ's Righteousness our Justification are but one and the same thing I do not understand when as he saith himself Cath. Theol. of moral works Sect. 13. n. 208. that our first constitutive justification which is it whereof we are here speaking to wit that by which a soul is brought from an Unrighteous to a Righteous State as he speaketh n. 207. is in its nature a right to impunity to life or glory Now sure this Relation or Relative state is one thing and the Righteousness of