Theologi Giessenses Hulsemannus Calovius and Dannhawerus as Men of Great Learning who made Faith to lye in a firm Perswasion of the Pardon of Sin and yet Affirm'd it to be the Instrumental Cause of Justification But 2. This will appear with more Conviction on an Equal Proposal of what the Reformers themselves have Deliver'd in Explicating the Notion they had of Justifying Faith whose Disquisitions for the Investigation of Truth were very Close and Profound They weighed the Difficulties on every hand and their Determinations were after much Consideration and with Great Judgment But this thing having been already done by the Learned Le Blank I must beseech my Reader to have Recourse unto him And yet for the help of such as have him not I will out of him and some other Judicious Writers on this Subject give the sense of the Reformed The Learned Robert Baronius in Le Blank Explicates the Notion about Fiducia thus First The Object of this Perswasion is not saith he only the Pardon of Sin to be Impetrated and had De objecto igitur sidei salvificae haec tenenda sunt Primo tenendum est Objectum fiduciae non solum esse Remissionem peccatorum impetrandam obtinendam sed etiam torum Remissionem jam Impetratam Secundo Fiduciam in haec duo tendere per duos distinctos actus quorum alter praecedit Justificationem ut ejus causa Instrumentalis alter eam sequitur ut ejus effectum Consequens Tertio actum fiducialem qui Justificationem praecedit ut ejus causa esse persuasionem de Christi satisfactione pro nobis in particulari deremissione peccatorum obtinendaper propter ejus satisfactionem Quarto Actum fiducialem qui Justificationem sequitur esse Persuasionem de remissiane Peccatorum jam Impetrata de nostrâ Perseverantiâ in eo statu usque ad finem vitae Baronius in Le Biank Thes de fid Justif Nat. § LXII but also as already obtain'd Secondly That this Perswasion respects these two Objects by two Distinct Acts The one of which goeth before Justification as its Instrumental Cause The other followeth it as its Effect and Consequent Thirdly The Fiducial Act which Precedes Justification as its Cause is a Perswasion of the Satisfaction of Christ for us in Particular and of the Remission of Sins to be obtain'd by and for his Satisfaction Fourthly This Fiducial Act which followeth Justification is a Perswasion of the Remission of Sins already Impetrated and of our Perseverance in that state to the end of our Lives Maresius saith That there is a Threefold Act of Faith distinctly to be Considered in our Justification The first Dispositive whereby I believe that Christ hath merited the Pardon of Sin for them that are his c. The Second is formally Justificatory whereby I who am now Sorrowing for my Sin and Purposing Amendment of Life do believe that all my Sins are at this present Forgiven The Third Consolatory whereby I Believe that all my Sins have been Pardoned and that I shall never more be in a State of Condemnation In the First sense Faith is before Justification In the Second Simultaneous with it In the Third it followeth it Paraeus expresseth himself to the same purpose Before the Act of Justification that is to say in order of Nature not of time Our Faith or Perswasion hath for its Object this Proposition de futuro My Sins shall be Forgiven me on my believing In the very Act of Justification it hath this Proposition de praesenti My Sins are Forgiven me After my Justification this de Praeterito My Sins have already been Pardoned The Authors of the Censure Omnes autem isti viz. Bellarmious Socinus Remonstrantes adversus Vmbram suam pugnant contra Chimaeram quam sibi confixerunt tela sua dirigunt supponentes nos statuere peccata nostra quoad efficaciam deleri priusquam credamus c. Censur Conf. Rem c. 11. p. 159. do on this occasion declare That the Remonstrants Fight against their own Shadow against a Chimaera of their own feigning when they insinuate as if we held that our Sins were efficaciously blotted out before we believe and that then we are Justified when we Believe that they are blotted out From which absurd Opinion 't would follow that the Remission of Sin was neither the whole nor a part of our Justification but that our Justification was somewhat after it Which cannot be allowed unless Justification be taken for the Sense of Justification in our selves or for a Manifestation or Declaration of it unto others We do not therefore say That that Perswasion by which we are Justified is of the Remission of Sins already had Or that the Object of this Perswasion is the Pardon of Sin before obtained But that Perswasion by which we all believe our Sins to be in praesenti forgiven us not properly in praeterito or in futuro altho' both belong to Justifying Faith yet not to the formal Act of Justification as we usually Express it Wherefore when the Mercy of God and the Pardon of Sin is offer'd to us in the Gospel through Christ we are not only in the General Perswaded that all who believe shall have their Sins forgiven them But he that savingly believes doth firmly perswade himself that the Promise of Pardon doth belong to him and is received by that very Act of Faith and accordingly then his Sin is forgiven him and that Blessedness spoken of in Rom. 6.7 made his Thus the Remission of Sin and a Perswasion of that Remission are in a Saving Believer at the same time But he who is Perswaded that if he believes he shall be Justified is not therefore as yet Justified Unless he doth Actually and in praesenti believe That that Righteousness is given him which he Receives with the same Act of Faith What he afterwards believes de praeterito doth not Justifie him but supposes him to be already Justified All these Acts are of one and the same Justifying Faith The First Disposes for Justification The Second Properly Justifieth The Third Quiets Conscience according to that in Rom. 5.1 2. From what hath been here said it 's apparent that there is no force at all in this Socinian and Arminian Objection against us for they oppose us as if we assign'd to Justifying Faith one only single Act whereas nothing can be more manifest than that we make them three Distinct Acts whence it 's easie enough to Conceive how Justifying Faith is a Perswasion of the special Mercy of God to be de futuro obtain'd and which in praesenti by the very Act of Believing is Perceiv'd This Fiducia or Perswasion as Described by the Remonstrants to be a firm Belief that it 's not possible for any to escape Eternal Death and attain to Everlasting Life any other way than by Jesus Christ and as he hath Prescribed is not a Justifying it is but an Historical or Dogmatick Faith It only respects
hath been Particularly Declared and yet it 's further necessary before I Proceed to the Consideration of the Socinian and those other Errors in Controversie that I do my Part to clear some Important Truths from the Reproach of Antinomianism and Vindicate the First Reformers from the Unjust Charge of Espousing so Gross an Heresie which that I may the more Convincingly do I will in several Instances shew what is not Antinomianism First then ' It is Not Antinomianism to Assert That Jesus Christ is a Second Adam a Publick Representative of a Spiritual Seed and that the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as a Second Adam and with the Elect as his Seed This is a Notion expresly affirm'd by the Westminster Assembly and not only so but directly Opposite to several main Branches of that Antinomian Error Supplying us with Invincible Arguments against it If Jesus Christ be a Second-Adam it must be granted that there is a Similitude a Resemblance and Agreement in some Third between him and the First-Adam That this Agreement lyeth in these Particulars namely As the One is a Father of an Off-spring so the other And as the Off-spring of the One bears the Image of their Father so is it with the Off-spring of the other And as the Posterity of the First Adam derive any thing from him after the same manner do the Posterity of the Second from him Thus the First Adam is a Type or Figure of the Second Rom. 5.19 who was to come And as we have born the Image of the Earthy Adam so shall we bear the Image of the Heavenly 1 Cor. 15. And as by the Disobedience of one many are made Sinners so by the Obedience of another are many made Righteous Whence it follows 1. That as Guilt the Immediate Result of Adam's Sin and not his Personal Sin was made the Guilt of all his Posterity descending from him by Ordinary Generation So the Righteousness the Immediate Result of Christ's Personal Holiness and not the Personal Holiness it self is made the Righteousness of Christ's Spiritual Off-spring 2. As the Seed of the First Adam may be be considered either as Virtually and Seminally in him or as Actually Descended from him and as Seminally in him they are only Virtually Guilty As Actually born of him are actually Guilty In like manner the Seed of the second Adam must be look'd on as Virtually and Seminally in him or as Actually born of him In the first sence they can be but Virtually Justified and not Actually till actually born of him by a Spiritual Regeneration 3. As the Imputation of Adam's Guilt to all his Off-spring is founded on a Natural and Faederal Union between Adam and his Posterity so the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to his Spiritual Off-spring is grounded on a Spiritual and Faederal or Covenant-Union between him and them Whence it follows That no Elect Person merely as Elect can be either Actually or Virtually Justified That Justification which is by Christ's Righteousness Imputed and by Faith Receiv'd doth Immediately flow from the Elect Persons being Christ's Seed The Covenant of Grace being made with Christ as Head and with the Elect not meerly as Elect but as Christ's Seed Justification the Great Covenant-Blessing belongs to none but as they are in Covenant with Christ that is as they are Christ's Seed A Decretive Justification belongs to the Elect as such But this gives no Right to the Heavenly Inheritance The utmost Import of iâ— is that God did from all Eternity â—â—urpose in himself that such and such Particular Souls should be Christ's Seed and as such be Justified This Inward and Eternâ—â—â—â—urpose tho' it be a Topick from whence the certainty of the Justification of the Elect in the Way and manner Ordained of God is clearly Inferr'd Yet doth it not give any Being thereunto So that notwithstanding the Decree which nihil ponit in esse an Elect Person may be so far from having any Right secret and hidden manifest or known that he may be the Child of the first Adam and as such Really Guilty that is obnoxious and liable to the Curse which is wholly incompatible with a Real Right to Impunity or the Reward Nothing more manifest than that a Right to an Estate results not from an Internal Purpose of giving it It is not the Purpose but the Promise that gives Right and the Promise is not to the Elect as such but to the Elect as Christ's Seed That all the Elect are given unto Christ is manifestly True but their Right Results from their being Christ's who as such have the Promise made unto them 2 Tim. 1.9 According to the Eternal Purpose Tit. 1.2 was the Promise given us in Christ before the World began The Decree not giving Being to what is Purposed it doth not hinder the Execution of that Part of the Counsel of God according unto which the Elect are the Off-spring both of the First and Second Adam which cannot be at the same time but successively it is Tho' Virtually and Seminally in different Respects an Elect Person may be considered as the Seed of the First and Second Adam and when actually a Descendant from the First Adam he may be look'd on as Virtually the Seed of the Second yet Actually he cannot be at the same time the Seed of both On his being born of Christ he ceaseth to be a Child of the first Adam and of Wrath but not till then He must be actually a Descendant from the second Adam and be by Faith United unto Christ before he can be actually Justified which is a Truth that strikes at the very Sinews of Antinomianism and therefore whatever the Arminian or Socinian may affirm of it Or how much soever the Antinomian may Abuse it 't is most Opposite unto Error 'T is Orthodox and Sound Secondly To affirm That not only the Punishment but the Guilt of Sin was laid on Christ is not Antinomianism The Papists will have it that Christ bore the Punishment of our Sin but not the Guilt The Socinians who see the Connection there is between Guilt and Punishment how that where-ever Punishment is Justly laid there Guilt must be are Positive that nor the Guilt nor the Punishment of Sin was on Christ The Guilt and Punishment are Relatives Relative enim sunt Paena Delictum ita ut ubi delictum non est ibi poena esse nullomoda possit Socin de Servat Part 3. c. 10. so that where no Guilt there saith Socinus no Punishment can be And it must be yielded That Punishment hath an Essential respect unto Sin it must be for Sin or it cannot be Punishment and it cannot be for Sin on whom no Sin is either Inhaerently Or by Imputation Sin Inherently could not be in him who knew no Sin Nor can there be the Imputation of Sin but by transferring its Guilt unto him That Christ suffer'd was wounded and bruised for our Sins is in too many
that hath Truth for its Object and therefore must be in the Mind Our Lord Jesus Christ who promises Eternal Life to Faith alone defines Faith by Knowledge This is Life Eternal to know thee the Only True God c. By the Heart then in Scripture we must understand the Mind not that which Philosophers call simply Theoretick but rather the Practick Vnderstanding which the Will cannot but follow Cam. praelect de Eccles p. 214. The same Author on Matth. 18.7 hath it thus 'Faith cannot be separated from Love and yet Faith is in the Understanding the Vnderstanding therefore draws with it and necessarily leads the Will otherwise there would be no Inconsistency between a man's being a sound Believer and a most vicious person To this it may be objected That Faith at least as to some part of it is in the Will It 's not our business at this time to dispute concerning the Subject of Faith and yet without being guilty of any impertinence we may assert that Faith as to some part of it is necessarily in the Vnderstanding Now what is that part of Faith they 'll tell you 't is Knowledge But that part of Faith which doth necessarily work Love Whatever is in the Vnderstanding most certainly is Knowledge not every Knowledge but that Knowledge by which thou dost fix it in thy Soul that the thing is thine and cannot be separated from Love Nor can it be granted that any one simple Habit should be in divers Subjects They are Distinct Habits of the Understanding and Will so that the Will and Understanding are distinguished from each other In a word who can deny that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere to believe is an Act of the Mind Certainly Belief hath Truth for its Object so that he who believeth not is said to make God a Lyar c. Amyrald in the Theses Salmurienses speaking of the Subject in which the Habit of Faith inheres affirms it to be the Vnderstanding Faculty Subjectum cui Habitus Fidei innascitur atque inhaeret facultatem eam esse quae in hemine Intellectus appellatur debet esse extra controversiam apud omnes qui saltem rem istam considerant non omnino oscitanter c. Thes Salmur de Fide par pri § 15. c. This saith he should be embrac'd by all innascitur atque but controverted by none except by such as have not closely studied this Point To have Faith imports nothing else than to Believe to believe is to be perswaded of the Truth of a thing and therefore must belong to the Vnderstanding For Truth is the Object thereof and Perswasion is no otherwise than by admitting or receiving into the Mind those Reasons and Arguments by which a thing demonstrates it self to be True Nor can any other thing be gathered from the Holy Scriptures If we consult those expressions used to represent Faith unto us whether they be Proper or Metaphorical they all direct us to conclude Faith to belong to the Mind To begin with what words are proper The Object of Faith is said to be Truth the Faculty the Heart or Mind Heart in Scripture and amongst other good Authors denotes the Vnderstanding The Effect arising from Faith is Knowledge Wisdom c. The State of them who attain unto this is such that they who are in it are said to be Intelligent and Knowing and they who are in Vnbelief are Fools and Vnwise The Metaphors which import the same Notion of Faith are numberless This and much more hath Amyrald with whom many great Divines agree Spanhemius in his Exercitations about Vniversal Grace provoking his Adversary to the National Synod of Dort Synodus profitetur Sacras Scripturas testari Deum novas Qualitates Fidei Obedientiae acsensûs amo ris sui Cordibus noshis infundere Hocâ— erâ— consistere non potest si Fidei Subjectum sit tantum intellectus ut docet vir doctus in Thes suis de Fide Span. Exercit. Grat. Univers p 1675 1676. endeavours to press him with that Synods declaring ' That from the Holy Scriptures it 's clear God infuses into our Hearts the New Qualities of Faith Obedience and the Sense of his Love which cannot saith Spanhem consist with Amyrald's making the Understanding the only Seat of Faith To this the Learned Dalley in his Apology for the two National Synods namely Abenson and Chaventon in France returns this Answer 'T is true Quod ait Synodus Fidem Obedientiam sensum Amoris Dei Cordibus nostris infundi verum esse fatentur FRATRES Fides enim Menti quae Cor est sensus item Menti sentire enim Mentis est non voluntatis Obedienna partim Menti partim Voluntati quae ipsa Cor est convenit Cor vero an Intellectu distinctum sedem esse istorum omnium Spiritus donorum accusatâ—â—s dictatum est non est Synodi Decretum Dall Apol. p. 658. the Synod declares that Faith Obedience and the sense of God's Love are infused into our hearts For Faith belongs to the Vnderstanding and so doth a sense of Love to perceive a thing being the part of the Understanding not of the Will Obedience is partly in the Mind and partly in the Will which is also the Heart But that the Heart as distinct from the Mind is the Seat of the Gifts of the Spirit is the Dictate of the Accuser not a Decree of the Synod However tho' they made Faith to lie only in the Understanding yet held it to be such a Practical Assent unto Gospel Truths as effectually engaged the Will most intensely to Love Christ and this Love to be such as influenced them to receive the Lord Jesus on his own Terms and keep his Commands asserting also Faith and Love tho' distinct Graces to be Inseparable and Saving Faith to be Prolifick of Good Works so that where these were absent there the Faith was not saving so carefully did they Fence against Antinomianism Besides by this Notion of Saving Faith they kept themselves at a great distance from the Arminian and Socinian Dogmata about Justification as will appear plainly on a fairer and just proposal of their Sentiments in these Points Crellius considering Faith as conjunct with its Effects such as Hope Love and Obedience asserts it to be Justifying as thus conjoyn'd and so makes Good Works to have the same Interest in our Justification that Faith hath That Faith saith he by which we are Justified or which on our part is the nearest and only Cause of our Justification is a Firm Hope in the Divine Promises placed in God through Christ begetting Obedience to the Commands the Fiducia or Firm Hope taken properly may be the Genus of Justifying Faith but Obedience to Christ's Commands flowing from this Firm Hope may be the Form or as St. James hath it is the Life the Soul of Faith This Faith thus defin'd is that which is required as necessary to Salvation under the New
Pleasure and Delight Rejoycing to Understand by them that your Ministers have not only most heartily Resolved to lay by their Jealousies and Bitter Invectives but to do what in them lyeth for Peace and Concord The God and Father of all Peace and Love give a Happy Issue to those Pious Resolutions according to that Promise When a Man's ways please the Lord he will make even his Enemies to be at Peace with him We must count upon it that some on both sides will Dislike our Endeavors for Concord and entertain hard thoughts and suspicions of us But if we who are Cordial and Sincere in our Desires do with Constancy and Diligence Prosecute this Design Certe quicquid ad promovendam concordiam faciet id pro virili ita agam ut ne quid in me possitis desiderare novit hoc Deus quem testem invoco per animae salutem Epist Luth Consul Helvetiâ—e Tiguri c. A.D. 1537. Our Gracious God and Father will soon give us his Assistance and in a little time the Remaining Heats will be over I humbly beseech you to believe that I shall do whatever may be expected from One that is serious and Hearty in this Matter that in this Cause of Promoting Concord I will to the utmost of my Abilities satissie your Desires and Expectations The Truth of this God knows whom I call for a Record upon my Soul For these Dissentions have neither Profited me nor any body else but have been Prejudicial to many so that not the least good could have been or can be hoped for from them Thus far Luther who gives me a fair Occasion to Consider the Mischievous Effects of Discord and Contentions among Christians How the Ignorance Rash Zeal and Peevishness of some the Selfish Designs Private Interests Pride and Malice of others have given the Devil opportunity to turn the Churches into Disorder and Confusion I will instance in the Quarrel between Peter of Alexandria and Miletius and touch the Rise and Progress of Arianism The Contest between these two tho' differently Reported by those who liv'd nearest these Times was in the esteem of all managed with that Indiscretion and Heat as brought on them all that Mischief they endured That they were both sound in the Faith and their chief difference about the time to be given for the Tryal of the Repentance of such as under the Persecution Revolted from the Truth cannot be denied Socr. Hist Eccles l. 1. c. 3. 6. Nicâ—â—h Caliist Hist. Ecclis lib. 8. c. 5. Tâ—â—dâ—r Hist. lib. 1. c. 9. Hâ—â—ret Faâ—ul lib. 4. de Meâ—â—â—is Sâ—â—om Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 23. Aust de Haeris And although Ashanasius Socrates and Nicephorus Callistus report that Meletius apostatiz'd and Epiphanius with whom St. Austin seems to agree represents the Matter quire otherwise yet it 's past doubt that the Different Opinions of these Orthodox Guides of the Church in the one Grounded on a Zeal for Truth in the other on Compassion to the Souls of the Weak occasioned a very wide Breach amongst those Christians when they were Groaning under the Violence of a Bloody Persecution For whilst in Prison the Fire brake out to that Degree as to issue in an angry Separation no wonder if it continued after Peter's Martyrdom and when Constantine gave Liberty was much Encreased It 's true Alexander who succeeded Achillas Peter's immediate Successor did during Meletius his life time carry it kindly to the Meletians but after Meletius his Death he violently Persecuted them who were thereby provoked to send some of their Bishops with a Petition to the Emperor for Liberty which being Rejected they apply themselves to Eusebius of Nicomedia then great at Court and a Favorer of Arius Eusebius refuseth to help them on any terms short of their admitting the Arians to their Communion to which that they might Escape the Cruel Persecution of their Orthodox Brethren they yielded and had the Grant of Liberty By this means the Arians gain'd so great an Advantage and grew so Strong that in some Years after they spread themselves so far as to Cover almost all the Christian Churches in the World It is amazing to consider from what a small spark the Arian Fire that turned the whole Christian World into a flame had its rise 't was only from the subtil and over curious Discourse of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria the undue Suspicion of Arius and the Indiscreet Heat of Both Hist. Eccles lib. 1. c. 3. for saith Socrates Alexander enjoying much Peace at Alexandria calls together his Priests and with them did so very nicely and subtilly Discourse of the Unity in the Trinity that Arius one of the Priests a Man of great Learning Suspecting him to be a Favorer of Sabellius who held that the Father Son and Holy Ghost were but Three Names of one and the same Person did in opposition to him affirm the Son to be so Distinct from the Father as to have a Beginning From whence it follows that he had his Subsistence from Nothing that he was a Creature not Coeternal nor Consubstantial with the Father This Controversie was managed with so much Bitterness that to use Socrates his own words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soc. Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 3. from a very little Spark a great Fire broke out disturbing the Peace of all Egypt Lybia the Upper Thebais and many other places The Flame having thus got head Alexander with the utmost Vehemence Endeavors the suppressing it He Excommunicates Arius writes to the Bishop of Constantinople complaining of his Pride and Covetousness prayeth him not to suffer Arius nor any of his Followers to Preace within his Jurisdiction He calls in the Help of his Colleagues who Approv'd of what he had done against the Arians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Arius provok'd hereby doth also write to several Bishops giving them an account of his Faith in words so very like the Orthodox Confessions Cum Alexander literas ejusmodi ad Episcopos passim in sineulis â—ivitatibus scripsisset Latius Propterea serpevat malum quòd hi qui erant illis literis certiores facti consentionis Discordiae incendiis inter ipsos conflagrare caeperunt nam alii literis suffragari iisdemque subscribere alii penitus adversari Socr. ubi sup that he is by some Grave and Judicious Bishops esteem'd sound in the Faith This nettles Alexander who sends forth his Circular Letters throughout the whole Catholick Church with a Catalogue of the Arian Errors and the Names of those who adher'd unto them by which means Arianism saith the Historian was strangely Propagated all the World over Constantine observing how the Contentions spread from one Part to another of his Empire and how much Violent Methods contributed hereunto makes use of more calm ones He writes a Letter to Alexander and Arius which he sent by Hosius Bishop of Cordovia Declaring it to be his Opinion That the Controversie being about what
Controversie being about the Great and Important Doctrines of the Gospel and managed as it hath been Not only many Weak but some Wise and Judicious Christians have been tempted to think our Differences to be Fundamental and that it 's not easie to arrive to a Certainty about the Truths most Necessary to Salvation I will therefore lay by all Prejudices and in my Search observe the Christian Rules but now mentioned if possible to Understand whether the Differences be so Momentous as by some Apprehended whether they be about the Substance of the Doctrines in Controversie or only about the Way and Manner of their Declaration It 's very clear to me as well as to Men of Great Learning and Judgment That tho' it hath Pleased God very Plainly to Reveal unto us those Doctrines that are necessary to Salvation yet such hath been the Industry and Craft of the Tempter and such the Darkness and Infirmity of our Minds that they who Consent unto their Truth have faln into Divers Mistakes about the most Proper and Exact way of Stating them Thus it hath been amongst Protestants touching Justification it self who therefore have been Represented by Bellarmine out of Osiander to hold no less than Fourteen or Twenty Distinct Opinions about it as if the many Different ways of Declaring the same Doctrine had been as many Different Doctrines Dr. O. Of Justis p. 77 78 79. But it hath been some time ago observ'd by a late Reverend and Leading Divine That as to the Way and Manner of the Declaration of this Doctrine viz. Of Justification among Protestants themselves there Ever was some Variety and Difference in Expressions Nor will it otherwise be whilst the Abilities and Capacities of Men whether in the Conceiving of things of this Nature or in the Expression of their Conceptions are so various as they are And it is acknowledged That these Differences of late have had as much Weight laid upon them as the very Substance of the Doctrine generally agreed in hath had P. 293 294. such is the humour of some In another Page the same Author very judiciously gives this Suffrage That tho' Protestants have Differ'd in the Way Manner and Methods of the Declaration of this Doctrine and too many Private Men were Addicted unto Definitions and Descriptions of their own under Pretence of Logical Accuracy in Teaching which gave an Appearance of some Contradiction among them yet they generally agreed in the Substance of the Doctrine So far this Good Dr. unto which I add That there hath not been so much Variety among us in the Terms and Expressions used in the Stating our Doctrine but there is much greater among the Papists themselves about the same Points and their Greatest Doctors mis-represented by one or another of themselves Vasquez is Positive that Merit in a strict sense is not held by the most Learned of the Roman Church but Arriaga in Express Opposition to him will have it Arriag Disp Thâ—ol in 1. Tho. Tract de Just Disp 1 31. Sect. 2 c. that the most Learned of their Communion are for the Meritoriousness of Good Works by the Rules of Commutative Justice Alfonsus à Castro who calls the Doctrine of the Reformed about Justifying Faith a Pestiferous and most Pestilential Haeresie affirms A Cast advers Haeris lib. 7. Verb. Gratia Haeres 3. lib. 12. Verb. Preadestinatio Haeres 2. Cassand Consult Artic IV. that 't was embraced only by Claudius Guilliandus and One or Two more in the Council of Trent On the other hand George Cassander Proves that the same Notion Protestants have of Faith was generally owned by Men of the Greatest Learning in their Church That 't was approv'd of by a Provincial Council at Colon as appears by their Publishing the Enchiridion of Christian Religion in which this Doctrine is asserted with the Decrees of that Council and highly applauded by their most Learned Divines throughout Italy and France Differences about Religious Matters have not been Confin'd to any one Party of Christians but have stretch'd themselves to the utmost Bounds of Christendom so that no one Party can Upbraid the other with their Divisions We are so much in the Dark that wherein we are Agreed de Re we can't always Perceive it so that many a time when a Controversie only de nomine arises we Pursue it as vehemently as if it had been Real Men of the same Particular Denomination are so Unreasonably suspitious of one another as to take it for granted That every Obscure or Unpleasing Phrase is Heterodox whereas were we more Exact in our Disquisitions more mindful of Humane Frailty and more Compassionate and Charitable we should with Greater Temper and more Justice Judge both of Persons and Things and find an Agreement much Greater than now we can Imagine it to be To come more close to the Controversie before us I am very sensible that our Contending Brethren and some others esteem the Differences among us being about the weightiest Matters indeed of the Gospel to be such that the Two Poles may as soon meet as their Doctrines be found in Substance the same The Noise I confess is That the most Important Doctrines of the Christian Faith have receiv'd a Wound almost if not altogether Incurable But I must humbly crave leave to whisper to the Reader that I think otherwise and do hold my self in Charity oblig'd to believe they mean the same thing for the Substance of it In my closest Converses with each Brother He who seems to be most for the Exaltation of Free Grace abhors nothing more than to give the Least Encouragement to an Elect Person 's Living in Sin or Expecting an Enjoyment of the Future Glory tho' he die under the Reigning Power of his Lusts Unregenerate and finally Impenitent And the other Brother who so much presses the Necessity of Faith Repentance and a Holy Life detests nothing so much as in any one Instance to Diminish the Glory of Free Grace or to add any thing of our own to Christ's Righteousness in our Justification Besides They have both Subscrib'd the same Propositions which do not only contain in them the Truths about which the Contest hath been but are so framed as to Provide fully against the Errors they have been supposed to Embrace The Errors about which many have been Apprehensive are the Antinomian Arminian Popish and Socinian Errors all which with the greatest Caution Imaginable are Really Renounced by the Subscribers Their Renunciation is so full that there is no Room left them for coming off with that Distinction of Subscribing them as Articles of Peace and not of Faith The words of the Agreement are these namely P. 2 3. That in order to the more effectual Composing of Matters in Controversie we all of us having Referr'd our selves to the Holy Scriptures and the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of England the Westminster and Savoy Confessions the Larger and Shorter Catechisms do Subscribe These
as Sinners their Comforts and Assurances must arise from the Consideration of their being Sinners and not from their Grief for Sin their Repentance or Humiliations To them as Penitent and Humbled the Promise is not but as Impenitent Unhumbled and Unbelievers and the Promise being unto them as such their Comforts and Assurances must arise from them But of what use then is the Law It is of none especially unto Believers or Regenerate Persons as is held by them in their Sixth Assertion 6. The Moral Law must not be Preached to Believers and Regenerate Persons It might have been added by them that the Preaching of the Law is of no use at all unto any For Sin and Guilt being made by them Inseparable from One another the Guilt being in Pardon Removed whil'st Unregenerate and under the Power of Unbelief there is no Sin left in them No formal Sins to Repent of which makes the Preaching of the Law to be altogether Useless unto Vnbelievers Thus Sin and Guilt being made Inseparable not only the Guilt but the Sin it self was laid on Christ and taken from the Elect and the Promise being to Sinners as Sinners all Sinners are Redeemed actually Redeemed from the Wrath to Come United unto Christ and in Covenant with him their Sins Pardoned and they Justified and may apply the Promises to themselves whil'st under the Reigning Power of Sin as well as when Believers and therefore Sorrow for Sin and Repentance arising from sights of the Law and of Deserved Punishment is not Necessary to their Comfort and that therefore the Preaching of the Moral Law is not to be allowed This is the English Antinomianism as full of Horrid Consequences naturally flowing from it as is the German and as near a kin to Libertinism as I have shown in my Remarks on their first Principle This Particular Account of the Antinomian Errors which is taken from the Reports made of them by the Greatest Adversaries to Arminianism Popery or Socinianism is as every body may see directly opposite to the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of England the Westminster and Savoy Confessions the Larger and Shorter Catechisms and Undoubtedly nothing more Detested by our Reverend Brethren than these Abominations They are far from making Sin and Guilt the same the one Inseparable from the other Or of holding that the Promise of Justification or Pardon Adoption and Glory belong to Sinners as such or that all Sinners are actually in the sight of God Pardoned and Redeemed Or that the Elect quâ Elect have a secret Hidden Right to the Heavenly Inheritance for this would be to vacate the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ which is the only foundation of their Right And this they have not merely as Elect but as Christ's Seed in which sense the Covenant of Grace is made with them Besides the Right Resulting from Christ's Righteousness and made theirs as they are Christ's Seed is theirs and no otherwise than as they themselves are Christs which is after a Twofold manner Virtually or Actually All the Elect being given to Christ their Head are Christ's Virtually ever since Christ was set up to be a Head or second Adam and as such can only have a Virtual Right But when Born again Spirit of Spirit and are actual Descendents from Christ's Loins United to him by Faith then and not till then have they an actual Right to the Heavenly Inheritance This I am perswaded is the utmost our Brethren mean and is the same Truth asserted in the subscribed Propositions where it 's express 1. That the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his Seed 2. That in this Covenant of Grace Salvation by Jesus Christ is Freely offered to Sinners He requiring of them Faith as the Condition to Interest them in Himself 3. That tho' God did from all Eternity Decree to Justifie all the Elect and Christ did in the Fulness of time die for their Sins and Rise again for their Justification yet nevertheless they are not Iustified until the Holy Spirit doth in Due time actually apply Christ unto them and the Spirit Applieth to us the Redemption Purchased by Christ by working Faith in us and thereby Vniting us to Christ in our Effectual Calling 4. That we may Escape the Wrath and Curse of God Due to Vs by reason of the Transgression of the Law He Requireth of us Repentance towards God Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ That Repentance unto Life is an Evangelical Grace the Doctrine whereof is to be Preached by every Minister of the Gospel as well as that of Faith in Christ That it is of such Necessity to all Sinners that none can Expect Pardon without it 5. That the Moral Law doth for ever bind all as well Justified Persons as others to the Obedience thereof and that not only in Regard of the Matter contained in it But also in respect of the Authority of God the Creator who gave it neither doth Christ in the Gospel any way Dissolve but much Strengthen this Obligation That this Law is of great Use to Believers as well as others in that as a Rule of Life informing them of the Will of God and their Duty it Directs and Binds them to walk accordingly Discovering also the sinful Pollutions of their Nature Hearts and Lives so as Examining themselves thereby they may come to further Conviction of Humiliation for and Hatred against Sin together with a a clearer sight of the Need they have of Christ and the Perfection of his Obedience It is likewise of Use to the Regenerate to Restrain their Corruptions in that it Forbids Sin and the Threatnings of it serve to show what even their Sins Deserve and what Afflictions in this Life they may expect for them altho' Freed from the Curse thereof Threatned in the Law The Promises of it in like manner shew them God's Approbation of Obedience and what Blessings they may Expect upon the Performance thereof altho' not as Due to them by the Law as a Covenant of Works so as a Man's Doing Good and Refraining from Evil because the Law Encourageth to the one and Deterreth from the other is no Evidence of his being under the Law and not under Grace These Propositions are so directly opposite unto the Antinomian Doctrines that it 's Impossible for an Intelligent and sincere Subscriber to Approve of Autinomianism The vacating the Law and making the Preaching thereof Vseless the actual Justification of a Sinner in the sight of God before Faith and the like are in words expresly Exploded by the Assembly and ought to be witnessed against by Sound and Faithful Ministers Thus much may suffice for the clearing our Brethren from the Charge of Antinomianism whose Principles are to be Judged by their Subscriptions and not by an Inaccurate Obscure or Perplex'd Passage in a Sermon or Polemical Discourse What Antinomianism is and How Inconsistent with the Subscribed Articles and Confessions
Pacti id est ubi à Promissario exigitur Conditio ficut inter Dominum servum ubi Dominus promittit stipendium ex Conditione servitutis adimpleuio illius Promissi est ex justitia Sic in Casâ— Sancta Clar. Deus Nat. Grat. p. 111. The Objection that lyeth against them is this If the Meritorious Act be so only from the Divine Promise or God's Gracious Acceptation then the Reward cannot be ex Justitiâ the good Work may be done and God not oblig'd in Justice to give the Reward The utmost that can be said is this God in Faithfulness is bound by his Promise to Reward the Doer but not in Justice and yet unless God be in Justice bound the Work cannot be meritorious ex Condigno To this Objection their Answer as I find it in Sancta Clara is that the fulfilling a Naked Promise is only an Act of Fidelity and Faithfulness But the fulfilling a Covenant Promise which is made on Condition as between a Master and Servant where the Master Promises a Reward on Condition of such a Service here for the Master to fulfil the Promise to his Servant on his Performing the Condition is an Act of Justice which is say they our Case Thus to make good Works meritorious they assert a Law with a Promise making the Dignity of the Work to lean on the Promise And that the Reward may be Due ex justitia the Law is turn'd into a Covenant where Obedience to the Preceptive Part is made the Condition that giveth Right to the Reward So that it is that Conditionality of the Covenant on which the Merit of Condignity is Founded All which is undoubtedly true of the Covenant given Adam For if he had but rendred the Perfect Obedience required by the Preceptive Part of the Law or which is the same if he had Perform'd the Condition of that Covenant made with him it would have given him a Right to the Reward it would have been in Justice due to him that is he would have merited it Ex Condigno Tho' his Temporary Obedience fell infinitely short of the Reward of Eternal Life yet because of the Promise made on a Covenant-Condition giving Right the Reward on his performing the Condition would have been Due to him ex justitia i. e. he would have merited it Ex Condigno In like manner if the word Condition when assign'd to the Covenant of Grace be taken in this sense viz. for that thing which being Perform'd gives Right to the Reward the Covenant of Grace is Confounded with that of Works and Merit of Condignity effectually established 'T is Confounded with the Covenant of Works and made a Covenant of the same kind with it for in both as there is a Precept enjoyning Duty and a Promise of Reward even so notwithstanding the Work falls infinitely short of the Reward yet the Reward being Promised on a Condition giving Right A Right unto it Results from the Performance of the Condition and the Reward is due ex justitia and so Merit of Condignity is also established Nor can it signifie any thing to say we exclude all Merit from our Good Works by ascribing all to the Grace of God enabling us and nothing to our own Strength making their Rewardableness to Lean on the Ordination and Promise of God That Grace is necessary to Merit the Papists industriously endeavor to Prove Gertum ex side est saith Gregory de Valentia Meritum Condignum esse Proprium effectum Gratiae Probatur 1. ex Script ad Rom. 6. Gratia Dei vita aeterna Vbi non est sensus Vitam aeternam dari GRATIS sed dari eam pro meritis quae contulit GRATIA Sine me nihil potestis facere Possemus enim sine aliquid facere si vitam aeternam promereri valeremus non insiti per gratiam Christo tanquam viti Palmites ut ipse ibi Loquitur Valent. ubi sup Suuâ—ma igitur est quod actus meâ—is dicitur meritorius quia elicitus seu Imperatus à Gratia ex Pactione Divina acceptatus ad Praemium unde ipsa acceptatio est Intrinsâ—â—a actui Sanct. Clar. ubâ— sup For the Papists make all these Necessary to Merit ex Condigno affirming That unless the Work proceed from Grace it cannot be meritorious of Eternal Life and that they give not any Dignity to their Good Works but acknowledge that in themselves considered and Precise as separate from the Ordination of God they are of no worth that their Rewardableness is founded on the Promise In these things lye the very Nature of Merit for which reason to deny our Works to be meritorious because their Rewardableness is founded on the Promise it is as if you would deny Peter to be a Man because he is a Rational Creature This being the Doctrine held by the Papists about Merit one Great Point Controverted between them and first Reformers Si quis hominem Justificatum dixerit non teneri ad Observatiam mandatorum Dei Ecclesiae sed tantum ad Credendum quasi vero Evangethum sit nuda absoluta Promissio vitae aeternae sine Conditione Observationis Mandatorum Anathema sit Concil Trid. Sâ—ss 6. Can. 20. was about Our Works being a Condition of Eternal Life and accordingly in the Council of Trent it 's Decreed with an Anathema That if any hold we are not bound to Observe the Laws of God and the Church but only to Believe as if the Gospel was but a Naked and Absolute Promise of Eternal Life without a Condition of Observing the Commands Let him be Accursed In the Scholia of the Reformed on this Canon as Lucas Osiander Represents it Epit. Hist Eccles ub sup their sense is manifest for say they The Assertion of the Council that the Gospel is a Promise of Eternal Life on Condition of keeping the Commands is altogether False the Gospel Promise of Eternal Life leans not on a Condition of keeping the Commands But Requires Faith whereby we lay hold on the Mercy of God offered to us If that Promise lean on such a Condition no Christian can be certain of his Salvation Calvin on this very Canon is Positive That the Apostles Placing the Difference between the Law and the Gospel is this Antidotum in Conc. Trid. that the Gospel doth not Promise Eternal Life on the Condition of Works as the Law did but to Faith is a standing Truth that can never be shaken What can be more clear than this Antithesis The Righteousness of the Law is such That the man that doeth these things shall live in them Rom. 10.5 But the Righteousness of Faith is after this manner Rom. 4.14 He that Believeth c. To the same Purpose is that other place If the Inheritance be of the Law then is your Faith Vain and the Promise of no Effect therefore it is of Faith that of Grace the Promise may abide Firm to every one who believeth I might give many Authorities more
but these are enough to make it Evident that the First Reformers denied the Gospel to be a Promise of Eternal Life on Condition of our keeping the Commandments which must be Understood to be in that sence in which the Papists held it that is they denied our Good Works to be such a Condition of Eternal Life as gave Right unto it as a Reward which may be done by them who are not Antinomians which is very clear from the Scholia of the Reformed on the Nineteenth Canon of the Council which is to this effect Let him be accursed who holds that nothing is Commanded in the Law but Faith That all other things are Indifferent and that the Ten Commandments belong not to Christians To which they Answer That there is no such Dogma held by the Divines who Subscrib'd the Augustane Confession that none but one Islebius was tainted with this False and Wicked Opinion that Luther oppugned and confuted this Error and brought its Author to a Recantation and that the other Divines rejected it 2. The word Condition is also taken in this very sense by the Arminians who argue so very Plausibly from the Grant of it against some Important Doctrines of the Christian Faith that many Orthodox and Judicious Divines are afraid to Use it They make it If I may use the word a Legal Condition that is Obedience to the Preceptive Part of a Law giving Right to the Reward It is that thing which being Performed gives Right to the Blessing Promised Or Conditio quatenus praestita est aliquomodo Medium sieri dici potest quo Consequimur Rem quae sub Conditione Promittitur Exam. Censur Cap. 10. P. 112. Conditio cujus Praestatio Medium sive causa salutis aliquomodo dici potest non modò est Gratiosa per se sed Gratia ad Eam praestandam perpetim necessaria est Praemium Praestanti promissum extra supra omnem Comparationem est Vb. sup Cap. 8. P. 95. it is that which being Perform'd is a means by which we attain to what was on Condition promised Again Condition whose Performance may be called a Mean or Cause of Salvation is not only in it self full of Grace but Grace is always necessary for the Enabling us to perform it and the Reward Promised thereunto Infinitely exceeds it However from the Grant that our Faith is such a Condition of Eternal Life they triumphantly oppugn some Important Truths Particularly Si enim Christus nobis meritus dicatur Fidem Regenerationem tum Fides Conditio esse non poterit quam à Peccatoribus Deus sub Comminatione Mortis exigeret imo tum Pater ex vi meriti istius obligatus fuisse dicatur necesse est ad Conferendum nobis Fidem Essiciendum in nobis omnia quae nobis sub Comminatione Mortis praescribit quo nihil absurdius Cogitari potest Exam. Cens Cap. 8. P. 59. they thus argue against Christ's Meriting Faith and Regeneration for the Elect. If Christ merited Faith and Regeneration for us say they then Faith cannot be a Condition which God exacts from Sinners under the Commination of Eternal Death They go Higher affirming That if Christ purchased the First Grace for Us then the Father by virtue thereof is obliged to give us Faith and work all these things in us which are prescribed under the Threatning of Death Than which nothing can be more absurd Such a Collation of Faith flowing from Christ's Merit doth effectually destroy the Divine Constitution by which Faith is enjoyned Sinners with a Promise of Life and Threatning of Death Thus much from the very Nature of the thing is most apparent If Christ be in this way our Saviour he can't be our Law-giver nor can our Faith or Obedience be Acts of Duty they can be but Effects of Christ's Merit Again they add That the Prescription of a Condition and an Efficacious working it in them to whom it is prescrib'd are Incompatible That Condition is not a Condition Conditio non est Conditio quae ab Eo qui Eam praescribit in Eo cui praescribitur efficitur Merus Effectus Praescribentis non potest esse Conditio Praescripta nedum Praestita Exam. ub sup P. 106. which is wrought in Him to whom it is prescribed even by the Prescriber The mere Effect of a Prescriber cannot be a prescribed much less a Performed Condition He that gives a Condition to another will that it be performed by that other If it be wrought in Him Haec Actio ludicra tota vix Scaena digna est it ceaseth to be a Condition and he that wrought it doth by that very Act null it 's being a Condition because he will not have it done by that other but will Himself work it in Him Right Reason dictates thus much unto us No Wise Man will act thus Legislator serius totam suam Legislationem ludibrio exponit cum Conditionem Praescribit iis quos irrevocabiliter Praemio afficere in quibus quam Praescribit Conditionem ipse efficere vult nor can any thing be more ludicrous these things are scarce fit for a Play That Law-giver who prescribes a Condition to them whom he has Irrevocably Designâ—d for a Reward will expose his Legislation to the utmost Contempt They carry it yet further asserting This Condition to be Inconsistent with the Particular Election of a Select Number of Persons A Condition Conditio omnis Stulte Ridicule Proponitur iis qui nominatim praecise jam ante destinati sunt saluti Exam. Cens c. 9. p 102. Destinatio Irrevocabilis ad vitam Promissio vitae sub Conditione non nisi Stulte Conjunguntur Exam. Voi sup p. 104. say they is Foolishly yea Ridiculously Proposed to them who are Particularly and by Name Ordain'd to Salvation An Irrevocable Decree of Salvation and the Promise of Life on Condition are most weakly Put together A Condition they say is that which when Performed gives Right unto a Reward That there is Grace glorified in that the Reward Excels Infinitely excels what is Requir'd of us as a Condition and that help is vouchsafed for the Enabling us to Perform it But then they add That what is a Condition of our Interest in Christ's Merits must be what was not merited for us by Christ To make that a Condition of our Interest in the Benefits merited by Christ that was merited by Christ is an Inconsistence Or to Affirm that to be a Condition Requir'd of us which is not Performed by us but wrought in us by him that Prescribes it is the Greatest Folly Or to make the Salvation of any to Depend upon a Condition that may or may not be Performed and yet assert the certainty of their Salvation flowing from the Unalterable Decree is Ridiculous This is the Improvement the Arminians make of the Gospels being a Promise of Eternal Life on Condition namely the denying Christ's meriting the first
a full Perswasion all which reside in the heart when we do not actually think of God As Scientia is by Philosophers put into the praedicament of Quality Thus a Child in whom can be no Acts of Knowledge Sense or Perswasion has yet the Spirit the Power or Habit of Faith as All the Learned do confess particularly Martin Bucer Besides they are very particular and distinct in their Endeavours to make it manifest that Faith and Fears are consistent For they suppose Faith to be oft conflicting with Doubts and Fears which they to continue the use of Zanchy's words thus solve There is no absurdity in asserting Faith to be a firm Perswasion and yet the Believer disturb'd with afflictive doubts for there being in everâ— Believer Flesh as well as Spirit when the Spirit prevails there is a sense of goodness sweetly refreshing the Soul a looking to the Gospel-Promise a relying on it an apprehending Eternal Life as prepared for him rejoycing in it But when the Flesh conquers there is a sight of sin and misery filling the Soul with the anguish of sorrow a view of its obnoxiousness to death at which he trembles fearing lest he die eternally which is occasioned by the weakness of our Faith which never whilst in this Life arrives to that degree of Perfection Zanch. Oper. Tom. 8 â—e 7. de Fide as to cure the Believer wholly of his Unbelief and Diffidence It 's true the first Believers have not explicated Justifying Faith as distinct from Assurance so clearly as our more Modern Divines have done amongst whom the Westminster Assembly in their Confession as Le Blanc hath well observ'd have excelled However they did carefully endeavour to express their Sentiments so as to prevent the despair of such who tho' sound Believers were afflicted with many fears and doubts about the pardon of their sins and their interest in the Mercy of God They insisted on a perswasion a firm belief of the forgiveness of sins but on such a perswasion as admitting of different degrees was in many so weak and feeble as not to be always perceptible A Notion as they explicated it easie enough to be understood For in other Instances what more common than to distinguish between Acts and Habits That the Acts are seen when the Habits from whence they flow lies undiscover'd Every one knows whether he believes this or the other Report loves this or the other person as well as whether he seeth this or the other Object The Acts of the Understanding and Rational Appetite when exerted are as perceivable in their way as our Sensitive Acts. But then it should be minded that these Acts are oft look'd upon in their Habits and when actuated are commonly blended with such other as are conversant about contrary Objects and their prevalence over these other so inconsiderable that it 's not at all times discernable to which if we add the consideration of the World's Allurements Satan's many subtle Temptations c. it cannot but be that true Believers fall into great perplexities about the forgiveness of their sins which tho' great destroy not their Faith nor are they inconsistent with this firm perswasion Strong fears and many doubts may consist with a moral certainty of the same Truths How many have a moral certainty of the Immortality of their Souls and yet grievously tormented with amazing frights about it This very Point the Learned Mr. Baxter in discourse with me did thus illustrate It is saith he as with a Man so firmly chain'd to the top of a high Spire as to have the Greatest Certainty of his Fastness yet looking down could not but fear a Fall We may then easily perceive that from the making Faith to lie in a perswasion of the pardon of sin it cannot be justly inferred that whoever doubts of God's Mercy in Christ is destitute of Justifying Faith for this perswasion may be in the Habit where not in the Act and is consistent enough with strong fears and many doubts as the first Reformers expresly affirmed which is enough to free them from the Reproach of driving by their Doctrine every sound Believer who hath any doubts about his being pardoned into the Horrour of Despair Nor did they so describe Justifying Faith as to give unto any an occasion to expect Heaven whilst they lived under the Reigning Power of their sins On the contrary they held III. That none who continue to live under the Reigning Power of their Lusts had or whilst so can have Saving Faith 'T was constantly asserted by them That to true Justifying Faith whether strong or weak Life and Perpetuity were too essential and inseparable Properties the first is necessary that it may be a Living Faith exciting in the Believer the Life of Christ that is to say such a Life as stirred up in his heart such new and heavenly motions thoughts and desires conform to God's Law as drove out all earthly Affections Thus much they said was the Import of those Scriptures which speak of purifying the heart mortifying the flesh quickning of the spirit crucifying and burying the Old Man putting on the New The Holy Ghost in the Sacred Scriptures doth so very much press this one thing especially in the Epistles of James and John that it must be acknowledged that this is so Essential a Property of Faith that it cannot be true Justifying Faith without it as all of us unanimoustly hold These are the words of the Learned Zanchy De Persev Sanct. Confess p. 349. who in answer to an Objection against the Perseverance of the Saints carrying in it this very Calumny That the Protestant Doctrine is such as makes Repentance of nouse le ts loose the Reins to all manner of Profaneness rendring men so very secure as to embolden them to venture on sin contrary to the convictions of their Consciences doth further declare That true Justifying Faith cannot be where sin doth reign that sound Believers altho' they sin not as the wicked do Ipsorum vid. fidelium lapsus suapte naturâ aternâ morte esse dignissimos item displicere Deo item punitum iri à Deo c. Zanch. de pers Sanct. p. 159. yet the sins they fall into are in their own nature most worthy of Eternal Death Displease God and are punished by him The Fervour of the Holy Spirit in them much abated the flames of their Faith quenched their minds troubled let them therefore repent of their sins return to the Lord as Children to their Father not cut off from Christ nor wholly forsaken of the Holy Spirit Again This is the nature of true Faith to stir up in us true Repentance Zanch. Oper. Tom. 6. loc 5. de Fide p. 43. and inflame our hearts with Love to God and a Zeal to please him and promote his Glory to provoke us sincerely to love our Neighbour that as much as in us lieth we may live peaceably with all men that it fill our Souls with a
love to true Holiness a hatred unto all sin and that in all things we walk worthy of the Gospel of Christ But the sense of the Reformed may be more fully seen in our Book of Homilies touching the Doctrine of Justification Serm 3d of Salvat highly approved of by the generality of the Reformed where it 's thus Now you shall hear the office and duty of a Christian-man unto God Our office is not to pass the time of this present Life unfruitfully and idly after that we are Baptized or Iustified not caring how few good works we do to the Glory of God and Profit of our Neighbours Much less is it our office after that we be once made Christ's Members to live contrary to the same making of our selves Members of the Devil walking after his Inticements and after the Suggestions of the World and the Flesh whereby we know that we do serve the World and the Devil and not God For that Faith which bringeth forth without Repentance either Evil Works or no Good Works is not a Right 〈◊〉 and Lively Faith but a Mean Devilish Counterfeit and Feigned Faith as St. Paul and St. James call it For the Right and True Christian Faith is not only to believe that Holy Scriptures are true but also to have a Sure Trust and Confidence in God's Merciful Promises to be saved from Everlasting Damnation by Christ whereof doth follow a loving heart to obey his Commandments And this true Christian Faith neither any Devil hath nor yet any Man which in the outward Profession of his Mouth and the outward Receiving of the Sacraments in coming to the Church and in all other outward Appearances seemeth to be a Christian-man and yet in his Living and Deeds showeth the contrary For how can a Man have this True Faith this Sure Trust and Confidence in God that by the Merits of Christ his sins be forgiven and be reconciled to the Favour of God and to be partaker of the Kingdom of Heaven by Christ when he iveth ungodly and denieth Christ in his Deeds Surely no such ungodly man can have this Faith and Trust in God For as they know Christ to be the only Saviour of the World so they know also that wicked men shall not enjoy the Kingdom of God They know that God Hateth Unrighteousness that he will destroy all those that speak untruly that those that have done good works which cannot be done without a Lively Faith in Christ shall come forth into the Resurrection of Life and those that have done Evil shall come unto the Resurrection of Judgment Very well they know also that to them that be contentious and to them that will not be obedient unto the Truth but will obey Unrighteousness shall come Indignation Wrath and Affliction c. These great and merciful Benefits of God if they be well considered do neither minister unto us Decasion to be Idle and to live without doing any good works neither yet stireth us by any means to do evil things But contrary-ways if we be not Desperate Persons and our hearts Harder than Stones they move us to render our selves unto God wholly with all our Will Heart Might and Power to serve him in all good Deeds obeying his Commandments during our Lives to seek in all things his Honour and Glory not our Sensual Pleasures Vain Glory evermore dreading willingly to offend such a Merciful God Loving Redeemer in Word Thought or Deed. Thus much and more to the same purpose in the Book of Homilies evincing how that the First Reformers were far from encouraging any to please themselves with hopes of Heaven whilst they remained lovers of their Pleasures more than lovers of God For as they oft declared that Justifying Faith was a lively working Faith that Faith without Repentance Love to God and a Holy Life was a Dead a Devilish Faith So altho they denied the meritoriousness of Good works yet asserted their necessity even such a necessity of their presence of their following Faith as made it certain that no Salvation could be had without them They who were offended with their being made necessary to Salvation fearing lest such an Assertion should introduce the merit of good works held good works necessary necessitate Pracepti as also necessitate Medii taking the means not for an Ethical but Physical or Mathematical middle between two extreams as the Aequator is between the two Tropicks and the Ecliptick Line in the Zodiak affirming them to use the words of Cromayer to be necessary Ante tho' not Ad salutem To give my Reader a clearer light into this matter I will acquaint him with a Controversie that disturb'd the Churches Peace soon after the Beginning of the Reformation George Major who as Melchior Adamus in his Life reports being an Intimate of Luther and Melancthon and chosen with Martin Bucer Brentius Sed cum nihit sit quod non made into pretando possit depravariâ— inâ—â—rrit Major in Grarislimam Inviâ—â—am Odium quod aliquando ut fuit Zelotis Sanctimoniae Commendator summus dixerat FIERI NON POSSE VT QVI NON STVDE ANY BONIS OP ERIBVS SALVTEM CONSEQVANTVR AETERNAM BONORVM OPERVM STVDIVM ESSE NECESSARIVM AD SALVTEM Adversarii enim ejus de quibus Antesignani suerunt Matthias Flacius Illvricus Nic. Gallus Nic. Amsdorffius pup sitionem hanc Bona Opera necessaria sunt ad salutem interpretari sunt ira quasi statutrat Major jurta Origenicam Pontiticiam Synecdochen BONA OPERA CVM FIDE MERERI REMISSIONEM PECCATORVM ESSE CAVSAM JVSTIFICATIONIS CORAM DEO Melch. Adam Viz. Geor. Major and Erhardus Snepsius to concert matters Religious at Ratisbone with Petrus Malvenda Eberbardus Billicus Johannes Hofmeisrerus and Johannes Cocklaus was a zealous Promoter of Holiness asterting that he who was not studious of good works could not obtain Eternal Life and that the study of good works was necessary to Salvation This Great Man tho' extraordinary useful in carrying on the Reformation having laid down these Assertions could not escape the Hatred the Malice and Rage of Good Men but soon feelingly knew what were the Fatal Effects of Evil Surmisings and Rash Censurings for no meaner persons than Flacius Illyricus Nicholaus Gallus and Nicholaus Amsdorffius affirmed that according to the Origenic and Popish Synecdoche Major meant nothing less than that Good Works with Faith do merit the pardon of sin and are the cause of our Justification in the sight of God In opposition unto Major Amsdorffius who with Hieronymus Schuffius a Lawyer and Justus Jonas a Divine accompanied Luther to Wormes held Good Works to be Noxious and Hurtful to our Salvation This Controversie in its first Appearances is great Milch Adam in Vit. Nich. Amsdorf and through a warm and peevish management in its Effects was very pernicious and yet if as in Charity we are bound we do but believe George Majors Solemn Protestations and Regard what the
Christ and apprehends the Forgiveness of Sin Justification is by the Holy Ghost ascrib'd only anto Faith However by the way it must be observ'd That no one doth certainly and seriously believe the Promise made unto him but he immediately Repents of his Sin For on his believing all occasion of Dispair is taken out of the way and such is the Excellency Beauty and Glory of the Promise as to take off the Heart from the Love of the World whence it may be truly said that we are Justifyed by Faith alone and that we are Sanctifyed by Faith alone for 't is Faith that purifyeth the Heart Act. 13.9 3. The reason why God forgives the Sins of the Penitent is this namely Because satisfaction is made to Gods Justice by Jesus Christ who has purchased this Grace for us But the satisfaction of Christ cannot be apprehended by us any other way but by Faith Justification therefore must be ascribed only unto Faith So far Camero There are other Arguments which he urgeth to this very purpose But from what he hath here delivered It 's plain that Faith not being an Act of the Will is not a Work but is distinguished from it and opposed unto it and that therefore when it is said we are Justified by Faith it cannot be that we are Justified by a work That Christs satisfaction hath purchased Pardon which can be apprehended by us no otherwise than by Faith that Faith is the Instrument or as the hand of the Soul by which we receive forgiveness That tho from this Faith Hope Love and Obedience immediately slow and are inseparable yet they are no cause at all of our Justification which is enough to make it manifest that one who is far from Antinomianism may deny Faiths being an Act of the Will and confine it wholly to the Understanding For Faith Hope and Love may be distinct Graces though whilst in this Life inseparable and so long as Hope Love and Gospel Obodience are held to be inseparable from Faith there is there can be no danger in placing Faith only in the Understanding But many Advantages against the Papist Arminian and Socinian to the Exaltation of the Glory of Free Grace are hereby obtained CHAP. VII A Summary of the Principal Antinomian Errors compared with the opposite Truths The present Controversie not with the Described Antinomians The Agreement between the Contending Brethren in Substantials suggested The Conclusion THese Doctrines I have thought meet to vindicate from the unrighteous charge of Antinomianism because by a giving them up for Antinomian not only many who abhor it are accused for being Abettors of it but some important Truths which strike at the very Root of this Error are represented to be Antinomian It hath been the care of the Papist Arminian and Socinian to insinuate into the minds of Persons less studied in these Controversies as if the Orthodox Protestant had in opposition unto them run into the Antinomian Extreme and have inserted in the Catalogue of Antinomian Errors several Gospel-Truths particularly the ensuing Assertions 1. That Jesus Christ is a Second Adam a Root Person and Publick Representative with whom the Covenant of Grace is made 2. That the Guilt as well as Punishment of Sin was laid on Christ 3. That the Covenant of Grace is not Conditional in that sense the Papists hold it 4. That Faith is a certain and a full Perswasion wrought in the heart of a man through the Holy Ghost whereby he is Assured of the Mercy of God promised in Christ that his Sins are forgiven him 5. That Iustifying Faith is not an Act of the Will but of the Understanding only Tho' the Papists for some special Reasons oppose not this Notion yet the Arminians and Socinians do to the end they may bring in Works among the Causes of our Justification These Assertions are of such a Nature as do really cut the very sinews of Popery and Socinianism as I have already in part cleared and hope more fully to evince in my Second Part But by those who deviate from the Truth all but the last have been heretofore and now the last is by men more Orthodox made the Source of Antinomianism the Spring and Fountain from whence the following Conclusions do naturally and necessarily flow Thus they infer from the First That Christ must be our Delegate or Substitute who Believed Repented and Obeyed to exempt the Elect from doing either as necessary to their Pardon and Salvation Second That Christ so took our Person and Condition on him as to have the Filth and Pollution of our Sins laid on him Third That the Promise of Pardon and Salvation is made to Sinners as Sinners Fourth That the Pardon of Sin was before Faith even whilst we are in the Heighth of Iniquity and Enemies against God and Despisers of Jesus Christ Fifth That We may have Saving Faith tho' our Wills remain onchanged and obstinately set against God These are the Antinomian Errors said to flow from the above-mentioned Assertions which if once granted we shall be necessitated to acknowledge that there will be no Vse at all of the Law nor of Faith Repentante Confession of Sin c. but we may live as we list and yet be saved But we have made it plainly to appear that these Points are so far from being Antinomian that they do carry with them a Confutation of that Error That the Reader may the more clearly see the Difference there is between the one and the other I will be very particular in shewing the opposition Assertion I. That Jesus Christ is a Second Adam a Root-Person and Publick Representative with whom the Covenant of Grace is made From this Assertion it necessarily follows that Christ must have a Spiritual Seed and be the Representative of that Seed so far as Adam would have been of his if he had perfectly obeyed And it is certain that if Adam had rendred the Required Obedience his Posterity would have been not only made Righteous and derive a Holy Nature from him but be also obliged to Personal Holiness In like manner so is it with the Posterity of the Secoud Adam The utmost then that can be fairly inferred from Christ's being a Second Adam c. is That he hath a Spiritual Off-spring That they be Justified by his Righteousness derive a New Nature from him and be obliged to a Personal Obedience The Opposition Antinomian Truth 1. Christ is our Delegate or Substitute 1. Christ is a Second Adam but not our Delegate or Substitute As the First Adam was the Head and Publick Representative of his Posterity but not their Substitute or Delegate so Christ tho' a Publick Repeesentative yet not our Substitute as D. O. doth excellently well show when he saith That Christ and Believers are neither One Natural Person nor a Legal or Political Person nor any such Person as the Laws Customs or Vsages of men do know or allow of They are One Mystical Person whereof
although there may be some Imperfect Resemblances found in Natural or Political Vnions yet the Vnion from whence that Denomination is taken between Him and Vs is of that Nature and arises from such Reasons and Causes as no Personal Union among Men or the Vnion of many Persons hath any concernment in Dr. O. of Justific p. 250. 2. Christ being our Substitute or Delegate Believed and Repented for us so as to exempt us from the necessity of doing it 2. Christ did not Repent for us nor exempt us from the necessity of doing it our selves 'T is true that Christ our Surety who Satisfied and Merited to exempt us from the necessity of doing either our selves did undertake to enable the Elect to Believe Repent and Personally Obey the Holy Commandments but never undertook to exempt them from the necessity of Believing and Repenting Assertion II. That the Guilt as well as Punishment of Sin was laid on Christ We have made it clearly to appear that though the Guilt and Punishment of Sin was laid on Christ yet the Sin it self in its formal Nature the Macula or Filth of Sin was not Guilt as I have shown is a Relation which hath a Formal Sin for its Foundation The Foundation of Guilt is Sin formally considered the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Macula the Filth and Guilt the Reatus Culpae doth immediately Result from the Sin that is a transgression of the Praecept It is not then the Sin it self the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Macula the Filth that was laid on Christ but the the Guilt which resulted from it the Macula the Filth remained in us the Guilt that immediately resulted from it as it respected the Sanction of the Law was laid on Christ but this being somewhat distinct from the Moral Filth Christ remained Pure and Spotless notwithstanding 't was transferr'd over to him The Opposition Antinomian Truth 3. Sin and Guilt are the same 3. Sin and Guilt are Not the same 4. Not only the Punishment and Guilt but the Sin it self the Filth of Sin was laid on Christ 4. The Punishment and Guilt of Sin was laid on Christ but not the Sin it self its Macula or Filth In this particular the Difference is manifest And it 's plain that tho' the Antinomian blaspheme the Son of God by making him Inherently a Sinner yet they who are against the transferring the Filth of Sin on Christ are far from it for whilst They are opposing the Papist and Socinian they do most effectually Fence against Antinomianism Assertion III. That the Covenant of Grace is not Conditional in that sense the Papists hold it to be so The sense in which the Papists are for the Conditionality of Faith and Good Works hath been already stated and the Difference between the First Reformers and Modern Protestant Divines cleared All Popish Conditions that is to say All Such Conditions in us as give Right to the Reward are excluded from having any Interest in our Justification And yet Faith is made so necessary to our Justification that without it we cannot be Justified that our Justification is suspended during its absence and that Faith is an Instrumental Cause of Justification That the Promise of Pardon and Eternal Life is not made to Sinners as Sinners but it is made to them that have Faith and are in Covenant with God and only unto such The Opposition Antinomian Truth 5. That the Covenant of Grace is without All Conditions in every sense 5 The Covenant of Grace is not without Conditions in every sense for Faith is the Condition of Pardon 6. That the Promise of Pardon is to Sinners as Sinners 6. The Promise of Pardon is not to Sinners as Sinners it is only to them that have Faith and are in Covenant Thus whilst the Popish Doctrine of Merit is opposed there is wrested out of the hands of Arminians and Socinians that by which they endeavour to destroy Particular Election Christ's meriting and the Spirit 's giving the first Grace together with the glorious Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction and a sufficient Provision is laid in against the Antinomian Doctrine of Vniversal Redemption Assertion IV. That Faith is a Certain and Full Perswasion wrought in the heart of Man through the Holy Ghost whereby he is Assured of the Mercy of God promised in Christ that his Sins are forgiven him By such as have not throughly enough search'd into this Controversie the First Reformers for holding this Assertion have been charg'd with Antinomianism But we have shown 't was unjustly For tho' of late years our Divines who have indeed rather describ'd than defin'd Faith and so for the help of Doubting Souls have put them on Enquiries after the constant Concomitants and inseparable Effects of Saving Faith to the end they might be help'd to well-grounded Evidences of their Interest in Christ yet the First Reformers in the ensuing Instances about Saving Faith differ'd very much from the Antinomians Opposition Antinomians First Reformers 7. Faith lieth in a confident Perswasion that my Sins were forgiven before I did believe 7. Faith tho' it lies in a Perswasion of the Forgiveness of Sins yet not that Sin was Pardoned before Faith but in the Instant of Believing 8. This Faith admits of no Doubtings 8. Faith admits of Fears and Doubtings 9. A Person may have this Faith and apply the Promise of Pardon as well whilst under the Power of Sin as after 9. No Man whilst under the Power of Sin can apply the Promise of Pardon as well as after Assertion V. That Justifying Faith is not an Act of the Will but of the Understanding only That Faith is only an Act of the Understanding hath not been embraced by Protestants universally the chief Defenders of it being Camero Amyrald and Dally However to do the New Methodists Justice that I might set forth this Controversie in its proper Light and shew how they hereby secure themselves from the Popish Arminian and Socinian Notions about Justification and how far they are from the Unjust Charge of Antinomianism I have added the foregoing Chapter The Opposition Antinomians The New Methodists 10. True Faith may be where no change of the Will is 10. Tho' Faith be not an Act of the Will yet is it not where the Will remains unchanged Here then we may see not only the Difference there is between the above-mentioned Assertions and Antinomianism but have set before us such a Scheme of the Antinomian Errors as makes the Law of no use at all But let us consider what manner of Persons would be brought within the Antinomian Verge if these Assertions were Antinomian Really the Reverend Assembly of Divines at Westminster and all that drew up the Savoy Confession with the whole Body of Vnited Ministers must come in for Receiving the First Assertion the Lutherans and Calvinists for holding the Second the First Reformers generally and many Learned Protestant Divines at this time particularly Dr. Witsius Divinity Professor at Vtricht who with the greatest Respect is earnestly desired to communicate his Thoughts freely on this occasion for Defending the Third All the First Reformers for the Fourth and the New-Methodists for Propugning the Fifth and none but the Papist Arminian and Socinian would be able to escape the Slander And yet according to the best of my Judgment the chief reason why some worthy Brethren have been Reflected on as Antinomians hath been their Zeal for the first Four Assertions For they do not make Christ our Delegate or Substitute who Believed and Repented for us to the end he might exempt us from the necessity of doing either our selves Nor do they make the Filth and Guilt of Sin the same and lay them on Christ making him thereby Filthy Nor do they say that the Covenant of Grace is in every respect without Conditions or that the Promise of Pardon is to Sinners as Sinners or that Faith lieth in a Perswasion that Sin was Pardoned before we Believe or that Faith is Exclusive of the Least Fears or Doubtings or that an Elect Person can apply the Promise of Pardon to it self as well before Regeneration as after nor do they make the Law useless but do hold That in reference unto the work of Regeneration it self positively considered we may observe that ordinarily there are certain Praevious and Praeparatory works Sunt quaedam effecta interna ad Conversionem PRAEVIA quae virtute verbi spiritusque in nondum Regeneratorum cordibus excitantur qualia sunt NOTITIA VOLUNTATIS DIVINAE SENSUS PECCATI TIMOR POENAE COSITATIO de LIBERATIONE spes aliqua veniae Synod Dord Suffrag Theol. Brit. and Art 4. Thes 2. or workings in and upon the Souls of Men that are Antecedent and Dispositive unto it But yet Regeneration doth not consist in them nor can it be educed out of them This is for the Substance of it the Position of the Divines of the Church of England at the Synod of Dort I speak in this Position of them only that are Adult And the Dispositions I intend are only materially so not such as contain Grace of the same Nature as is Regeneration it self A Material Disposition is that which Disposeth and some way maketh a subject fit for the Reception of that which shall be communicated added or infused into it as its Form So Wood by dryness and a due composure is made fit and ready to admit of Firing A Formal Disposition is where one degree of the same kind disposeth the subject unto further degrees of it The former we allow not the latter So far Dr. Owen in his Discourse concerning the Holy Spirit Lib. 3. c. 3. p. 191 192. And for thus much are the Accused Brethren and on no more do the other Brethren who have been charged with favouring Arminianism insist so that in all these things so far as I understand them they mean the same thing and are in the Substance Agreed My next work is to enter on the consideration of the Arminian and Socinian Notions But this Part having swoln so big and to give a just account of these Errors and shew what is not Arminianism nor Socinianism will make the Discourse too large I am content that this Part go forth by it self which shall be followed with the other as soon as God gives opportunity to finish it FINIS