the nâ—â—â—ssary qualification of the Patient or Reâ—â—iver i. e. naturally and legally necessary such as dispositio materiae is said to be in Physicks 3. And as for the notion of an Instrumental Cause of Justification it is past doubt that properly taken neither Faith nor any act of ours is any such nor doth justifie us efficiently at all But if any be so fond of the invented notion of an Instrument as that they will use it though unaptly they must say 1. That it is not an Efficient but a Recipient Instrument Dr. Kendall calls it like Boys catching the Ball in their Hats or as a Spoon is in eating But it is not an Instrument of Physical Reception but Moral To Trust is no more a Reception than to Love The active Acceptance of a Saviour given with his benefits is a Moral Receiving of him which disposeth us as the Condition of the Covenant to receive Justification that is to be justified And in this lax sense you may call it all these if you please viz. a Condition a Dispositive Cause and a Receiving Instrument 4. A Meritorious Cause it is not in a Commutative or strict sense But if you will call that meritorious which is pleasing to God as congruous to his free gift and design of grace whence some are called Worthy in the Gospel so the thing is not to be denied and so all are reconciled Contr. 17. Is justifying Faith an act of the understanding or will Ans Both and therefore it is no one Physical act only nor Instrumental in a strict Physical sense Contr. 18. What act of Faith is it that justifieth as to the Object whether only the belief of the truth of the Promise or of the whole Gospel also or the affiance on Christs Righteousness or on his Truth or on his Intercession or taking him wholly for our Saviour Prophet Priest and King And whether Faith in God the Father and the Holy Ghost do justifie or all these And if but one which is it and wheâ—her all the rest are the works which Paul excludeth from Justification Ans To say that only one Physical act of Faith is it that we are justified by and all the rest are those works is a perverse corrupting of Christianity and not to be heard without detestation For it will utterly confound all persons to find out which that one act is which they indeed can never do And it will contradict the substance of all the Gospel There is no such thing as Faith in Christ which containeth not or includeth not Faith in God as God both as he is our Creator and as reconciled by Christ and as the Giver of Christ to us John 3.16 and as the end of all the work of Redemption Nor is there any such thing as Faith in Christ which is true and saving that includeth not or connoteth not the Knowledge of Christ and Love and Desire and Thankfulness and Consent Nor did ever God tell us of a Faith in Christs Imputed Righteousness only that must justifie us which is not also a Faith in his Person Doctrine Law Promise and Example and his Intercession in the Heavens And to say that only the Act of Recumbency on Christs Righteousness as imputed to our Justification is that act of Faith by which we are justified and that Believing in God his Majesty Truth Wisdom Goodness and the believing in Christ as he is the Prophet Teacher King of the Church and the Resurrection Life and Judge of all and believing in the Holy Ghost as the Sanctifier Comforter and Witness and Advocate of Christ and believing and trusting the Promise of God for Life Eternal or for any grace except Christs Righteousness imputed that all this Faith in God in Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and all our Love to Christ and desire after him and prayer for his grace and thankfulness for it c. are all none of the Faith which Justification is promised to but are the Works by which no man is justified and that he is faln from grace that seeketh to be justified by such works that is by true Faith in God as God and in Christ as Christ This is a new Gospel subverting Christs Gospel and making Christianity another thing and this without any countenance from the Scripture and contrary to its very scope The Faith by which we are justified is one Moral act containing many Physical acts even our fiducial Consent to the Baptismal Covenant and dedication of our selves to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost to be our Reconciled God our Saviour and our Sanctifier to give us Pardon Adoption Holiness and Glory which is our Christianity it self as such Contr. 18. But though this be the Faith quae justificat which justifieth us is it not only Recumbency on Christs Imputed Righteousness quâ— talis which hath the Office of Instrumentality and is â—ides quâ— justificans Ans Such quibbling and jingling of a meer sound of words is usual in ludicrous Disputations of Lads But it 's pity it should pass as the last remedy against plain truth in so great a matter First it must be remembred that no Faith justifieth efficiently and therefore neither quae nor quâ justificans is to signifie any such thing but a meer Moral qualification of the recipient subject so that to be justified by Faith is but to be justified by it as that which God hath promised Justification on as the qualifying Condition But if it be not the same thing that is here called Fides quae and quâ but in the first part they speak of the Habit and in the second of the Act had it not been plainer to say The same Habit of Faith hath several Acts as believing in God in Christs Intercession Kingdom c. but none of these Acts do justifie us but one only viz. trusting to the Imputation of his Righteousness And so both the quae and quâ is â—denied to all Acts save that one This is their plain meaning which is denied to be truth and is a human dangerous invention Yet it 's granted them that it is not every Act of Faith that is made the Condition of Justification or Salvation It is necessary that the formal Object Gods Veracitâ— be believed to make it true Faith and that the Gospel or Covenant of Grace be believed with Consent as aforesaid to make it to be the true Christian Faith in essence and it 's of necessity that every thing be believed which we know that God revealeth But it is the Christian Faith that hath the Promise of Justification and that not any one single Act of it but all that is essential to it and that which belongeth but to its Integrity ad bene esse when it existeth is also so far conducible to our Justification as Abrahams believing that Isaac should live and have seed when he went to sacrifice him yet Justification may be without some Acts as Salvation may without many due Acts of Obedience
word It was strictest Justice as upon Christ It was perfect Justice as to the ends of Government But it was not strictest Justice as to us nor as strictest signifieth the strict fulfilling or executing of the threatning of the Law For it was not so executed but the sinner mercifully pardoned § 6. You note that Christ must take our guilt on him or else he could not take our punishment Ans 1. He took not the Reatum facti or the Reatum â—ulpae For 1. Our guilt was the accident of one Subject and that which Christ took of another Therefore the accidents were not the same 2. Else sin however taken in its reatus culpae would have made him culpable and formally a sinner and hateful to God and like to Satan Which he was not 2. He took upon him the Reatum poena seu obligationem ad â—oenam But not ours individually the same but one of his own instead of ours Christs guilt and ours were divers accidents of divers persons The obligations nor the Subjects were not the same Our obligation to punishment was an act of the Law which we broke So was not Christs That Law never bound him to punishment But his own voluntary undertaking and his Fathers imposition Our guilt was the occasion and reason of Christs assumed guilt As our punishment individually was not it that he suffered but his own punishment to prevent ours He suffered the just for the unjust to redeem us to God God tells us plainly that Christ suffered for our sins and was made sin that is a Curse or Sacrifice for sin for us that we might not suffer And cannot we receive this plain Gospel without spinning so many additional webs of our own Christs taking our guilt and puniâ—hment is no more but his voluntary suffering in our stead that we might be pardoned not by that suffering immediately but by his free donation in the Law of Grace in his time and on his terms § 7. You note that though we are justified by our own Faith Repentance and Obedience to the Gospel against the false charge of being unbelievers impenitent and ungodly Yet to be free from the curse of the Law and obtaining right to life it is Christs Righteousness that we must plead Ans Very true thus 1. It is only Christs Righteousness that we must plead as the Satisfying and meriting cause 2. It is only the free Donation of the New Covenant which we must plead as our Title or Fundamentum juris and conveying cause of right 3. It is our Faith and Repentance in various respects which we must plead as the conditio tituli praesâ—iâ—a which is the necessary moral receptive disposition of the Subject receiving These things are all very plain and sure § 8. You seem to doubt whether by the Law of Works Paul meant not the Law of Innocency And first you seem to mistake me as if I had said that he meant only the Ceremonial Law I say no such thing But the whole Law of Moses considered meerly as a law and by the Jews ill separated from Faith and Grace was an operous Yoak and of severe penalties to the transgressours and though it gave pardon for some faults it was not meerly for the task of sacrificing but for the great Sacrifice typified The Law as a Law doth only Command and threaten and promise life to them that do all things written but gave not grace to do it The Jews left out the true sence of the types and promise which intended the Messiah in whom it was that the promissory part of the Law was made and thought the very task of duty or works would procure their acceptance and pardon when they failed If you are not satisfied with this reason why Paul calleth it the Law of Works find out a better if you can But most certainly that is a great mistake that Moses and Paul describe the Law of Innocency It 's tedious to recite the proof 1. It 's enough that the Law of Innocency as a Covenant was before ceased cessante capacitate subditorum When all men had 2000 years been Originally and Actually sinners will you feign God with all that solemnity to make such a Law as this I know and you must know that no Son of Adam is Innocent And I make now a Law that if you â—re and will continue innocent you shall live Else you shall die This is too gross to be feigned of God 2. It is enough that when the Law was made they were all under actual mercy which was the grace of the new pardoned Covenant 3. Yea that the Covenant of Grace had so long before been made with all fallen mankind in Adam â—nd Noah and renewed to Abraham with speâ—ial promises And doth God now repeal or hide it 4. What need we more proof than so many Laws about Sacrificing and Confessing for forgiveness Which the Law of Innocency knew not And why else did God deliver the Law as a God of Redeeming mercy I am the Lord thy God that brought thee out of Egypt proclaiming his name Exod. 34.6 7. The Lord the Lord God Merciful and Gracious forgiving Iniquity Transgression and Sin 6. Peruse all the Contexts in Pauâ— and you will be satisfied See Camero de triplice faedere which Dr. Bolton of Liberty was so taken with and magnifieth and Anthony Burges of the Law proving Moses Law to belong to a Covenant of Grace But I have more fully opened all thiâ— in my Methodus Theologiae No doubt but Pauls dâ—sputes have great difficulty but this much is very plain § 9. Your next question is about the nature of Faith whether if it be placed in the will and include consent it be not confounded with Love whose object is goodness I have answered this oft and largely in divers Books and therefore must here be excused from saying any more than this viz. 1. You must distinguish between Faith Physically taken and Faith morally taken 2. Between its formal act and its material I. Physically some one natural act constituted by one Object is called Faith But morally taken it comprehendeth divers Physical Acts both of the Intellect and Will And as it is Justifying and Saving it is so taken Yea morally it is sometime in Scripture taken largelier for our Christian Faith as God the Father Son and Holy Ghost the Promise Grace and Glory are all the constituting Objects of it in their truth and goodness and sometime more narrowly as altogether distinct from Hope and Love It is taken in the first sense when it is said to be the condition of Justification and Salvation And here what you said of the necessity of conjoyning the many similitudes which express Christs Office to us when but one of them in a Text is named the same must be said of Faith in Christ A Moral act which hath many Physical acts must be named by some one the rest being connoted or implied for it would be uncomely to name
them all in every mention of it Note also that the name is varied according to what is specially noted in the Object sometime Truth sometime Goodness So Christ saith The Father hath loved you because ye have loved me And Paul Grace be to all them that love the Lord Jesus in sincerity If any man love not the Lord Jesus let him be Anathema Maranatha And Christ Luke 14.26 and Mat. 10. He that loveth any better than Christ cannot be his Disciple And to be a Disciple a Christian and a Believer are all one in Scripture But when it is the Goodness of another Object that is mentioned the Act is another thing I suppose you will confess that no Faith in Christ and the Promise justifieth us which doth not in that same instant include 1. A belief of the Goodness as well as the Truth of both 2. A willingness to receive Christ and Grace as good and a consent to the offer And if these must concur in the same instant as necessary Conditions of our Justification or Reception of Christ and Grace call them how you will and say Consent is an Effect of Faith or a part of it all 's one to me But I will say that Consent is an Effect of one Act of Faith strictly taken viz. Assent but a part of it taken for Justifying Saving Faith II. After many and long thoughts of this matter I think they that will pretend to exactness must say that Trust is the Formal Act of Faith as Trustiness or Fidelity is the Formal Object And that the Material Act is threefold Assent Consent and Practice and none of these no not Assent is the Formal Act. Both 〈◊〉 and Fides signifie Trust yea and Credere too And so Fides as it signifieth Fidelity and Fides as it signifieth Faith or Trust are the Formal Object and Act. I Assent to the Truth of the Gospel because I Trust the Veracity or Fidelity of the Author I Coâ—â—â—nt to the Covenant because I Trust the Revealer Offerer and Promiser I actually give up my self to Christ because I Trust him Mr. Pemble Vindicat. Grat. hath accurately opened this I have in my Aphorisms and oft said that a Christian should rather try his Faith by the Consenting act than the Trusting act because many a one cannot find that they can Trust Christ that yet find Consent But I explain this or recall it as not well spoken For indeed though it be Consent by which we may surely know our Interest in the Justifying Covenant specially when practically exprest yet Assâ—ance or Trust is the Formal Act of Faith and that Consent is but the Material For if we Trust not Christs Fidelity we can neither Assent Consent or Practiâ—e But when I spake as aforesaid I followed the sense of most complaining Christians who say They cannot Trust Christ meaning by Trust that Quieting of the mind which is but an effect of Trust Whereas at that time they take Christ to be Trusty and a suâ—â—â—cient Saviour but are hindered from the applying and quieting Effect by Ignorance or doubting of their own Trustiness and not of the Trusâ—iness of Christ If I be tedious in repeating again my old similitudes you must blame your self that are the câ—use Only one Physician can cure the Plague Sâ—me slander him as a deceiver He promiseth to câ—re all that will take him for their Physician and trust him Trusting or believing him here inâ—ludeth materially Believing his Word Consenting to be his Patienâ—s and coming to him for Physick A Prince in India buyeth the Irish Rebels that had forfeited their lives of the King that they may laâ— down Arms and go with him and become his Subjects He promiseth to every one of them a Lordship in India a safe Ship thither and pardon here some call him a Deceiver and distrust him He tells them if they Trust him he will perform all this Here Trust the Formal Act includeth as the Material Acts 1. Assenting to his Word as True 2. Consenting to his Offâ—r and Terms 3. Practically venturing to lay down Arms and go with him in the Ship and forsake their own Countrey Such is Faith in Christ when it is made the Condition of Justification and Life The Formal and Materiâ—l Acts together constitute Faith and not the Formal or one of the Material Assent alone Nor hath Bishop Downame well confuted Mr. Pemble about the Formal Act. In a word true and plâ—in Baptism our â—hristening best tells us the Essence of Justiâ—yinâ— Faith For that is the Sealing to us the â—uâ—â—â—fying Covenant that it may actually and solemnly deliver to us our part in Christ and riâ—ht to Pardon and Life which is given us on no lower terms than the Fiducial Assent Consent and Dedication professed by us essentially in Baptism § 10. Your next doubt is about the various Objects of Faith in exercise Gods Omnipotency Truth c. and the various uses of Faith accordingly This is the point which Mr. Lawson and I seemed somewhat to differ about And I have in my Treatise of Justification said so much of it that you shall now excuse me from any more than telling you that in Sanctification where one act really produceth one effect on our hearts and another act another effect each effect must be ascribed to its proper act But you must not think it is so in our Justification or Adoption where that which we receive is a RIGHT Jus impunitatis vitae which is not the Immediate Effect of our Act no nor any Effect of it at all but of Gods Donative Covenant of which our Faith is but a Condition and no Efficient Cause of our Right And therefore I doubt not still to say that we are thus justified as much by a Consenting to Christs Teaching and Sanctifying Grace as by Consenting to be justified by his Righteousness or by fiducial taking him for our Teacher Intercessor and King as taking him for a Satisfier and Meriter for us Indeed it is undivided Taking Christ as Christ that is the Justifying Condition John 1.10 11 12. 1 John 5.10 11 12. § 11. In the end you desire me to answer What Rightâ—ousness is meant Rom. 5. By the obedience of one many are made righteous Ans The meaning is By the Merit of Christs Active and Passive yea Habitual Righteousness also exalted in dignity by his Divine Perfection all faln Mankind is Conditionally pardoned and hath the gift of Life enacted in the Law or Covenant of Grace and all true Believers have by that Covenant actually given them a Right of Vnion with Christ and with him Pardon and Adoption or Right to Grace and Glory and have the Spirit of Holiness as the first fruits All this is included in that Righteousness § 12. Lastly you ask What Righteousness Faith is imputed to Whether that which is by Christs obedience and by Faith be the same and perfect or unperfect Ans Here also you may take the blame that I say things
either the Objectiors speak de nomine or de re If but of the Name One they shall call it One if that will please them and let them only distinguish the Parts of that One If they â—ill say that the Covenant made by the Father with the Mediator and the Law made for him are one and the same with the Covenant made by the Fatâ—â—â— and Son and Holy Spirit with us and that our Baptismal Covenant is no Covenant but only a part of the Covenant of which that with Christ aforesaid is another part I will not use their phrase but let me understand them that it is only the Name of One or Two that they contend about and we will fit our words accordingly I think on several accounts they are to be called Divers Covenants If they dislike it let us enquire whether the various Precepts of one Covenant make not various duties to Christ and to us and whether the various Promises of it have not various Conditions some to be performed by Christ and some by us Our present Question is Whether that part of the Covenant which promiseth and giveth Pardon of sin Justification Adoption and right to Glory have any Condition as the Modus of the gift We will rather follow them in unmeet terms than leave them thence a pretence to confound names and things and hide their errour by the confusion All Divines ancient and modern reformed and and unreformed that I know of agreed with us in the conditionality of the said Promise and by the form of Baptism shewed the Churches consent till Maccovius in Holland and Dr. Crispe and other Antinomians in England began to subvert the Gospel on pretence of magnifying the freeness of Grace and yet they durst never attempt to alter the Form of Baptism as this Opinion will require Contr. 4. By what hath been said the fourth Controversie is already resolved viz. Whether our performance of the Condition of Justification doth efficiently justifie us Some say because we say that Christ doth not justifie us till we perform the condition by believing that therefore we make our own Faith or performance to justifie proximately and Christ but remotely and so to do more than Christ to our Justification Ans 1. As to the phrase Scripture saith that we are justified by Faith that word not signifying an eâ—â—â—ciency but a receptive qualifying condition but it never saith that Faith doth jusâ—ifie us much less thâ—t we by it justifie our selves Our performance or Faith is no efficient cause but as to two parts of our Justification it hath a twofold Office 1. As to our Justification by the Merits of Christs Righteousness against this charge that damnation is due to us for sin our Faith is the Condition of our Pardon and Justification that is the moral qualification which God hath made necessary to make us capable receivers of it As laying down Arms and taking his Pardon thankfully may make a Rebel capable of Pardon but doth not pardon him if the pardoning Act say This shall be the Condition And by his Pardon he is justifiable against the charge of being liable to death 2. But as to the subordinate part of Justification against the falâ—e charge that we are no believers nor repent and so have no part in Christ here our own Faith is the very Matter of Righteousness by which we must be in tantum so farâ— justified As truth and innocency is against every false accusation And to say that because Christs Merits justifie us not before and without our Faith and performance of the Condition therefore our Act justifieth us more than Christ or efficiently at all is a thing unworthy of an answer being below the thoughts of an intelligent Disputer How much the capacity or incapacity of the Receiver doth as to all the various changes in the world both physical and moral when yet efficiently it doth nothing is not wholly unknown to any sober thinking man As the same sun-shine maketh a Weed stink and a Rose sweet so the same Act of Oblivion or conditional Justifying Law or Covenant doth justifie the capable and not the uncapable though no mans Faith doth effect any part of his own Justification Mr. Troughton and such others denying Faith to be the Condition of our Justification by the Promise hath drawn me to speak the largelier of this Contr. 5. Whether we are justified by Christs Righteousness imputed to us and whether the Scripture say so Ans The Scripture oft saith that Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and that is Faith in Christ And it saith that Righteousness is imputed or reckoned to us that is we are reckoned or reputed righteous Rom. 4.11 22.6 And that sin is not imputed that is not charged on us to punishment or damnation Rom. 5.13 4.8 Psal 32. v. 2. 2 Cor. 5.10 The words of Imputing Christs Righteousness to us I find not in Gods Word and therefore think them not necessary to the Churches peace or safety But as for the sense of those words no doubt but it may be good the Papists themselves own them in the same sense as many Protestant Divines profess to use them as I have proved Contr. 6. In what sense is Christs Righteousness imputed to us Answ It is accounted of God the valuable consideration satisfaction and merit attaining Gods ends for which we are when we consent to the Covenant of Grace forgiven and justified against the condemning Sentence of the Law of Innocency and reconciled and accepted of God to Grace and Glory Q. But did not Christ represent our persons in his Righteousness so that it is imputed to us as ours as if we our selves had been and done what he was and did as righteous Ans This being the very heart of all the Controversie should be decided only by Scripture and nothing added or diminished That Christ is the second Adam and called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Sponsor Surety or Interposer and a Mediator between God and Man that suffered for us the just for the unjust a price and a sacrifice is all found in scripture Wise and peaceable men here will be as fearful of humane Inventions and Additions as in Discipline or Ceremonies at least But because all are not such we must speak to men as they are There are several sorts of Sureties or Sponsors Few represent the very person at least not all If men will needs impose on us their own word of Representation for peace sake we accept it in a sound sense In a limited sense it is true that Christ represented us that is he suffered in our stead that we might not suffer He obeyed and was perfectly righteous as Mediator in our Natures and so far in our stead as that such perfect Righteousness should not in our selves be necessary to our Justification But he did not absolutely represent us he was not our Delegate Our persons did not in a Law-sense do in and by Christ what he
Obj. As a sign Ans Of what and why Is it as a sign of Election But Holiness the Love of God and man c. are signs of Election and yet not prerequisite to baptism and pardon And whence is it that this sign of Election is prerequisite but that Gods precept made it a duty and the promise a condition Grant it a sign the question is still of the reason of this signs necessity to Justification 3. If Signification be the thing necessary it must be either to God to the Sinner or to the Baptizer Not to God that needs no notice by signs and so it would follow that before God Elect Infidels are justified which is false as is oft proved And to the Minister it is not certainly known Nor may he baptize any meerly as Elect if he could know it by revelation before Faith Nor might such a person claim it Nor do believers usually at the very first know their Election It 's pity that any catechized person should be so ignorant as to deny so plain a Truth as it is that the Promise maketh Faith antecedently necessary to Justification under the form of an apt condition when no used phrase can speak the thing to us so intelligibly and truly as this doth Obj It is prerequisite as an Instrument Ans Of this I shall speak by it self anon By an Instrument I hope when considered they will not mean any proper efficient Instrument of Justification Though in exciting the acts of Sanctification in us it may be called our Instrument and Gods by us But justifying is wholly and only Gods Act and the Covenant as an Act of oblivion and Grace is his Instrumentâ— giving us our Right to impunity and Life in which our Constitutive Justification doth consist But they mean a Metaphorical Receiving Instrument and to â—eceive Christ is but the very essence of Faith which they call the Tò credere and so to be justified by Faith as it receiveâ—h Christ and as a receiving Instrument and as it is the Tò credere in specie are all one And all this is true if you ask but for what Natural aptitude God made Faith the Condition of Justification And it 's more aptly called by the foresaid Dr. Causa dispositiva and yet more aptly dispositio receptiva moralis necessary and successful aptitudinally in its Nature and Actually by the tenor of Gods Promise or Donation making it a Condition that is saying He that believeth shall be justified and saved and he that doth not shall be damned if God had not given Christ and Life by a Promise of this Tenor If thou believe thou shalt have Christ and Life it's aptitude would have had no use If the King by an Act of Oblivion say All Rebels and Malefactors that thankfully come and take out their pardon and lay down arms shall live and the rest shall be unpardonable Here 1. The Act of Oblivion is the pardoning Instrument and the receivers Title and fundamentum juris 2. The Reception is made a Condition by the Act being the modus donandi seu condonandi 3. Next this Condition is performed 4. And next the effect followeth from it's proper efficient causes e. g. suppose 1. The Kings Clemency 2. His Sons Intercession 3. The Act of Oblivions Instrumentality 4. The Offenders performing the Condition which doth but make him a capable Receiver of the Effect 5. And lastly the Ministers instrumental applicatory sealing delivering and investiture This is all plain to men that by prejudice fight not against the light And that the Promises of Salvation or Glory and perseverance have their Conditions I will not for shame and tediousness stand to prove to such as you Obj. But he that performeth a Condition may boast and ascribe somewhat to himself Ans. 1. I find many that thus argue the pronest of most Christians to boast of or to defend their honour and the honour of their party against any that would vilifie them and â—o ascribe something to them even to be the best sort of men 2. God boasteth of his Servants and ascribeth much to them viz. to have his Image the divine nature to be the Salt and Lights of the Earth his Jewels the Apple of his Eye c. He bids them turn themselves save themselves and work out their Salvation and keep themselves in his Love and continue in his Love c. 3. If saying that they believe and repent and give up themselves to God in Christ be culpable boasting then all that have been baptized on such a required profession have thereby sinned and all the Christian baptism hath been sin 4. No man is a Christian justified or can be saved that cannot so boast that he is not an Infidel but a Penitent Believer 5. Is it a matter of boasting that God commandeth when he commandeth us to repent and believe the Gospel If he freely pardon condemned Sinners for the sake of Christs Sacrifice Righteousness and Intercession on Condition that they do not finally refuse the gift but believingly accept it according to it's Nature and all this by his Grace is this matter of boasting May a pardoned Traytor boast of his Merit to the King if the Condition of his pardon be that he shall not refuse it and spit in the Kings face or continue a rebel Obj. Where all is of Grace and Faith it self given and promised by the Covenant there the Covenant is not Conditional Ans 1. As to the giving of Faith it well stands with Gods method both to Command it as a duty and to make it a Condition of his Promise and to give his Word and Spirit to cause us to perform it It is a fiction that these may not consist and he subverteth the Gospel that saith they do not consist 2. As to the Promise God indeed hath promised to Christ to give him a seed and to draw them to him c. But the Covenant made with particular men and sealed and solemnized in baptism doth not promise Faith and Repentance which are first given but prerequire them as the necessary qualification of the adult And this is the Covenant that we speak of 3. It is a Condition of Pardon Justification and Acceptance that we enquire of Therefore it is the Promise of these that we must mean Now I ask whether the Promise of Pardon and Justification be a Promise of Faith or whether it be not a Promise to pardon and justifie Believers only and their Seed and so prerequireth Faith Obj. But you call the many parts of one Covenant by the name of many Covenants Ans I hope we shall not be called in matters of Catechism to Metaphysical or Logical quibbles de Vnitate Individuatione Which is too hard for mens wits about things natural or moral That is one in some respect which is many in others There is some sort of Unity of all the Universe even of all Creatures And so there is of all Gods Laws and Covenants
Christ for our sins the curse threatned to us and as the last objecter saith eternal damnation equivalently And so we had sin and no sin And Christ must die and we must pray for the pardon of that sin which in Gods account or imputation we never had VI. When the Text tells us that Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness that Righteousness is imputed to believers that is They are accounted righteous according to the justifying Covenant of Grace upon their believing in Christ for his meritorious Righteousness and Sacrifice giving them by the new Covenant their gracious relation to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost with right to further Grace and Glory they tell us that by Faith is not meant Faith but Christs Righteousness and by Righteousness imputed to us is meant God 's accounting us to have done all that Righteousness by Christ which he did for us Many more such humane inventions corrupting our Faith at least in notion too many fight for as if they were necessary truths of God Postscript REader the Author of the following objections is Mr. Stephen Lob I had thought not to have named him till I saw but Yesterday his Books of Free Grace which I never before heard of though it was printed almost ten year ago It is so considerable a confutation of Antinomian errours that I commend it to thy reading And being my self in great pain expecting death and like to write in these Controversies no more that I have once more as a Speculator or Watchman blown the Trumpet to warn men of the danger of the Other Gospel that subverteth the Gospel of Christ I have this Peace of Conscience that the blood of the seduced will not be required at my hands And if that M.S. of Mr. Stone of New-England which Mr. Lob so praiseth may by him be yet recovered I intreat his endeavour In which I cannot doubt but Mr. Increase Mather will assist him tho his name be prefixt among the twelve And I commend to some honest Bookseller to reprint Mr. Thomas Welds History of the New-England Antinomian Libertinism it being out of press And I hereby intreat Mr. William Manning of Suffolk if living to Print the excellent Treatise of Justification of his which I have long ago read And Mr. Samuel Clerk Author of the Annot. to Print his sound Treatise which I long ago read on the same Subject And though my own Judgment be for the Imputation of Christs Passive Active and Habitual righteousness dignified by the Divine as the full and the sole meritorious cause of all Grace and Glory as making up the condition of his Mediatorial Covenant imposed on him by God Yet I intreat the Learned Reader to peruse the Writings of those great Divines that are for the Imputation of the Passive only Ursine Olevan Paraeus Scultetus Wendeline Beckman and the rest with Camero Placaeus and all that party of famous French Divines who all effectually confute the false sense of Imputation of the Active Righteousness which Mr. Bradshaw confuteth with many others as if we had done it by Christ and were our selves the Subjects of it and are justified by that Law that condemneth us Jan. 20. 1690. R.B. An Answer to some Animadversions of a Friend tending to the further explication of some passages which through brevity were not understood § 1. SIR Your notes have so much Judgment and moderation and so little if any thing contrary to what I assert that they require nothing from me but a repeated explication of that which you observed not as before explained But when it is enough for me to explain my own Words and Doctrine you put me on another task to seek after the explication of another mans which I am not obliged to on any account but for your Satisfaction It is enough for me to speak true Doctrine in the most intelligible manner that I can without examining whether other mens expressions be sound or apt § 2. I begin with your own Notes And 1. I hope that few are so ignorant that meddle in these matters as to doubt of what you say that no one term much less one Metaphor or similitude can adequately express any of the Mysteries of Grace and no one Metaphor must be carried too far Omne simile est etiam dissimile And all set together so far as they are thereto intended must instruct us § 3. I know none but the Socinians that think a Mediator and a Sponsor inconsistent or deny Christ to be a Sponsor And methinks your words for their consistency import a greater difference between them than there is It is part of Christs Mediation to be a Sponsor These terms therefore express no difference but between the whole and the part But what a Sponsor Christ is is all the doubt which I a little opened and you pass by It is not agreed by expositors what the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth in that one only place of Scripture where it is used Very learned expositors think that as Moses was called Gods Mediator or Sponsor to the people as being his Spokesman and in his name assuring them that this was Gods Covenant which he would perform and returning the peoples answer to God and praying for them but not undertaking for them and personating them so Christ is here likened to him and called the Mediator and Sponsor of the new and better Covenant not as he personateth or undertaketh for Covenanting Subjects but only as he representeth God the Father to man and is his Sponsor to us But as Paul saith he is not a Mediator of one so I see not but though chiefly he be Gods Sponsor to man yet withal he be there called a Sponsor also as well as a Mediator for man to God But all the doubt is what a Sponsor for man he is And first we must enquire what Covenant he is a Sponsor of No doubt but Gods Covenant with the Mediator as such is one and Gods and the Mediators Covenant with man solemnized in baptism is another And yet no doubt but these two have such relation as that in some sort or respect they may be called one He that saith they are not two is plainly confuted by the constitutive defining parts the Divers Parties Matter Terms and Ends. It was not said to Christ but by Christ Repent and believe in Christ or be damned Pardon and Salvation are not offered to Christ to be received by Faith in himself Yet as the Laws of the Land though several are One Instrumentum Regiminis So we call all the Laws of Nature usually singularly The Law of Nature and so we say The Civil Law the Canon Law Gods Law c. Now the question is what Covenant Christ was the Sponsor of 1. In his own proper Covenant he did Spondere praestare to suffer for us and to obey for us in the just sence in due place explained to rise and ascend for us to intercede for us to