Superfine Distinctions of Christ's Assuming our Nature being another Thing than his Conception the Thing and the Manner of the Thing though that Manner was a Cause of it the Conception and the being Conceived being Self-conscious that he had offered no Arguments fit to Proselite any his Admirers not being able to understand them and such as could guess at what they did signifie being sure to despise if not abhor them he comes down to offer a Proposal from his own Choice For my own part I would chuse to refer Christ's Conception to the Things that made him allied in Blood to us and so fit to act as our Surety rather than to his actual performing the Work of Suretiship as antecedently standing in that Relation to us P. 75. Reply Designeth he by this to leave others to chuse for themselves without a Damning Sentence That 's unlike the Heighth and Heat of the Man But what can we make of this Jargon as connected with what past before Was not Eve allied in Blood to Adam though she was not Conceived a Daughter of Man or Woman And therefore Christ might have been allied without Conception Again was not Christ allied in Blood to us by his Incarnation which he saith is another thing than Christ's Conception It seems by our Author's words That his abstracted Incarnation was Christ's taking the Humane Nature or Flesh but not Specifically our Humane Nature or Flesh Or was his Assuming the Humane Nature as distinct from Conception an Assuming a Humane Soul not allied to our Souls as he is allied to us in Blood by Conception and he doth here confine it thereto Here we meet with another Distinction sufficient to argue him still a Designing Man but not a very Distinct or Discerning one Here 's a Humane Nature and yet not a Humane Nature allied to us a Humane Flesh and Blood and not a Flesh and Blood allied to ours By Christ's Incarnation he took a Humane Nature a Flesh and Blood not allied to us By Conception he became allied to us in Flesh and Blood and in Nature too unless he hath it in his Mind that Christ hath not a Humane Soul allied to ours Those words also are very uncertain Antecedently standing in that Relation to us Doth he mean that Christ was not related to Men as their Surety before his Incarnation How then were all the Saints Saved before his Coming Or is it that the Son of God did not perform any Suretiship-Act in Assuming our Nature or being Conceived If so then he had not undertaken to Assume our Nature before he took it though all that he did or suffered had it been possible would not have availed us unless so done and suffered in our very Nature And can you suppose he engaged not that as a Surety or Sponsor without which nothing had been Payment Or doth he intend that Christ wa◠not allied to us in Blood before his Conception It 's true and yet as true That he was allied to us in Blood by his very Incarnation as well and as soon as by his Conception Christ did not Assume a Humane Nature before nor otherwise than as he was by his Conception allied to us in Blood and Soul too At last we are gotten out of this Labyrinth made up of nothing but ripe blown Thistles His Authorities when examined avail him little I have but room to examine one yet he is at the Front of them Ames Medulla Cap. 20. P. 94. Humiliatio est qua subditus est justitiae Dei ad illa omnia perficienda c. The Humiliation of Christ as Mediator is that whereby he was subject to the Justice of God for finishing all those things which were required for Man's Redemption Phil. 2.8 Here he confineth Humiliation to one part viz. a subjection to Justice not Authority and this to finishing not beginning what was necessary to the Redemption of Man which by the Text he quotes refers to his Death or Passion on the Cross of which besure he was not capable as God But that he confined not all Christ's Humiliation to this which excludes his Incarnation is not evident for the next words are Humiliatio ista non fuit c. that Humiliation was not properly of the Divine Nature or Person considered in themselves but of the Mediator God-Man Therefore the Assumption of the Humane Nature simply and in it self considered non est Humiliationis hujus pace is not a part of this Humiliation That Humiliation and of this Humiliation do indicate that he had an Eye to somewhat else that might be called by this Name Humiliation at least it doth not prove that Christ's Incarnation was not a part of any Humiliation of the Son of God because it was not a part of this Humiliation Dr. Ames limits it to this part Mr. M. concludes against any other Our Author at last having bungled so at Demonstration he falls to suspicion-work which I confess his Talent renders him much more expert in as if thinking no Evil were no part of Charity or at least want of Charity were no Challenge to Faith But what hath his Jealous Head brought forth after so oft tumbling the word Conception Even this his own Doctrin of Imputation is lost if Christ's Incarnation be a part of his Humiliation Well it 's a point I never thought of before and it 's a comfort to me the Gospel Doctrin of Imputation will suffer nothing but be availed thereby I hope to find much more of Christ imputed to me as done for me than what I was personally obliged to do by the Law or was esteemed legally to perform though I own as well as Mr. M. that Christ died in my stead yea and so obeyed too as you 'll see in this Book But with him farewell all Christ's Obedience or Humiliation if we did not legally do and endure all the very same and if so he must take his leave of the greatest part of the price of Redemption viz. the value given to all Christ's Obedience by the Divine Nature for I hope the Law never required that in Man's Obedience And since he lays such stress on his point of the Incarnation being no part of Humiliation let us Appeal to Competent Judges Phil. 2.6 7 8. Christ Iesus who being in the form of God thought it no robbery to be equal with God but be emptied himself of his Glory taking on him the Form of a Servant being made in the Likness of Man And being found in Fashion as a Man he humbled himself and became obedient unto Death even the Death of the Cross. I have rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 emptied himself of his Glory and left out the two Copulatives which are not in the Original The main Matter is reducible to these 1. Is emptying himself of his Glory any Humiliation I answer it signifies more Humiliation than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is rendred humbled Vers. 8. The Word is as much as rendring all Glory
the Law which we had frustrated But this will not make him such a Surety in this broken Bond as shall make us legally accounted to do all and suffer and answer all and be as righteous as he that did it though it be in his very Righteousness that we are saved notwithstanding we have failed in all this For I ask when he put his Name in this broken Bond Sure not before it was broken then he was Surety before Again when he did put his Name did he do it to the same very purpose as we were originally bound viz. that we might live by our Innocency and Obedience as our Righteousness No it was to redeem us from the Effects of our own Disobedience Did he engage that we should do and suffer what would be a Price of our Redemption and Salvation No he was to do it himself in his own legal Person I say legal because the divine Dignity of his Person gave the legal yea supralegal Value in God's Account to what he did and suffered for one meer Man's doing and suffering what the meer Law injoined would not have satisfied for Millions and the broken Bond it self did not require a divine Person 's obeying any more than the whole Bond did though the Attainment of its Ends did so Again if Christ's Suretiship was so limited within this broken Bond than as he was bound to do and suffer no more than it required so neither he nor we are entitled by that Obedience to any more than this broken Bond at first covenanted to give Yea further Mr. M. faith P. 57. The elect were constituted at first under another Head and under another Covenant which had nothing in it of Christ and his Righteousness either to be brought in for them or to be applied to them Reply But if Christ's Righteousness be no higher than that Covenant did require before it was broken the Righteousness of perfect Adam had been as great as Christ's And if the unbroken Covenant was the same as the broken Bond How should the unbroken Covenant neither have nor require any Righteousness of Christs and yet the broken Bond measure and limit Christ's Righteousness and Sentence us legally Righteous for it But if as Mr. M. saith the Covenant with Adam and the Elect was another Covenant from the broken-Bond then we are not under the Covenant requiring what at first it injoyned and being federating Parties only in the first and subjected to Penalty only by it as it 's broken Here 's no Obedience-work for a Surety nor place for a proper Surety in bearing the Penalties But I have elsewhere enlarged and therefore conclude That such Confusion about the Suretiship should abate Mens regard to his Censures against such as will not own he himself knows not what and proveth none sees how 6. I find after all that this Equality of Righteousness between Christ and us is not so much from Legal Union or Judicial Imputation but from a Coalescence of Believers into one mystical Person with Christ by Vital Union Thus p. 55. Between our believing and our being justified there comes in our Coalescing into one mystical Person with Christ by this Vital Vnion and our having his Righteousness upon us unto the Iustification of Life and so our being justified is not the next or immediate effect of our Believing c. Here indeed if I understand what one person is he may well argue we are as Righteous as Christ for we are Christified with Christ not in Name or on Account of his undertaking or his being the Head of the Church as his mystical Body But as being one mystical Person opposed to a Legal Person than by pointing at any Believer you may avoid the danger of Ioh. 8.24 If you believe not that I am he you shall die in your sins Mr. M. may rise higher than that we are as Rightâ—â—us as Christ and say we are as Holy as Christ as Honorable as Christ as Wise as Christ and so interpret his proof 1 Cor. 1.30 Nay are we not assumed into a Personal Union with the Eternal Word as the Humane Nature of Christ is which I think is unavoidable unless Christ hath more Persons than one Besides his being a legal Person which he opposeth this mystical Person to And that he means something like this hear him p. 60. It 's called a Vital Vnion because in effecting it there is a Vital Touch as I may say between Christ and us and a clasping each on other Compare this with P. 63. The Humane Nature of Christ leans on the Godhead in the Son and hath the Eternal Power of the Deity clasping about it and holding it in that Vnion c. The Eternal Power of the Godhead in Christ and not so much the strength of any created Principle of Grace in us holding our Hearts unto him and causing them for ever to live upon him Can you find much difference though he pretend a Disproportion The Awfulness of the Subject restrains me from exposing this affected Cant which is the only Gospel with these Men because its Mystery i. e. unintelligible Nonsence fitted to a Rosocrucian or Behemist It is not enough that Christ is the Author of all in us and the Securer of all promised Good to us and that he condescended to confirm this and comfort our Souls by such gracious Instances of a Mystical Union as that between Vine and Branches Head and Members Husband and Wife yea that the same Spirit dwells in Christ and us each of which inform and assure to us the Blessing designed to be signified thereby but not whatever our Profane Fancies may wrest a Metaphor or force an Expression to Must Men strain it to one Person whereby Christ's Prerogatives and our Vile Defects are in common to Christ and us Is this to let Christ in all things have the Preheminence Col. 1. 18. The Scriptures needed not so many Metaphors to represent to us the several Benefits we have by Union with Christ This one would have served for all yea far exceeded all only that one Person would consist but with few of them nay with none Head and Members do not make one Person but one Body yea one Spirit in Christ and us doth not make one Person unless you 'll make the Holy Ghost to be an animating Soul to the Body and so be the chief constitive part of the whole Person What will a deluded vain Fancy expose Men to at last Exceptions against some more Passages in Mr. M's Book I Have been already engaged to hint at some yet among many obnoxious enough let 's consider some more of his Stamina 1. That God hath ordained Christ to do all with God for the Elect and that he shall be aâ—â— from God to them c. All I say that in this ruined Condition they need to bring them to that heighth of Happiness c. P. 56 58. Reply If he had meant only that Christ was to do all with God in
dangerous to exclude the Holy Ghost from an Efficiency in framing Sinners for the participating of Blessings in Christ's Right as it is to exclude Christ from the sole Impetration Many little think what a Dishonour and Offence they are to the Holy Ghost in denying an Authoritative Connexion between Duties and Benefits and allowing him no hand in making them the Objects to whom Gospel Benefits are appropriated by its Sanction The Language of such to the Spirit is We are without any Operation of thine on us the Persons entitled to all Benefits Christ hath not only a Right to all these Blessings but we also are fully and constantly invested in that Right without any dependance on thee or Obligation to thee though we own thou workest some of those things after we have a full Right to them and because we have that full Right yet we are at no time indebted to thee for any ways rendring us the Persons to whom that Right is applied or belongs the vilest Wretch in Hell oweth thee as much Thanks on that account I would tremble to hold a Principle whereof this is the Native Language when I see that though the Promises are made in Christ's Right and the Benefits contained in them are his Purchase yet as they require Conditions in such as shall be Partakers of Christ's Right to those Benefits to the Glory of the Son and of the Father who gave his Son so there is a wise Contrivance for the Honour of the Holy Ghost also as it is he who enableth Men to perform those Conditions for a Gospel-Interest in those Benefits A REPLY TO Mr. Mather's Postscript I Shall first consider the Errors Mr. M. chargeth me with and then his Defence of his own The Errors he loads with no lighter Epithets than Damning and Blasphemouâ— Terms agreeable to his long known Temper and Charity He introduceth his Charge with an Ecee This is he he is the Man Would he infer that I am the only Man No the body of Divines except Antinomians affirm as I do And in his Preface it 's his Moan the Number is so great Is it that I am the Man that eminently defend these Alas I can shew him Volumes of the Dead and many are yet Alive whose Defence of my Positions is so Nervous as renders mine truly Inconsiderable as his Opposition thereto Contemptible Sure then it 's either to leave a Mark that his Factious Design may more succeed or to point me the Person designed by him in his Sermons Page 22.64 in words indeed too blunt for a Man of his own Sagacity to need another Comment Yet after all his labour to make the Man sure he hath assigned the Charge so falsly that an Ingenuous Reader will sooner charge him for a base Trick in his Insinuations than me the Patron of the Opinions he would ascribe 1 Charge He is one that makes Vnion to Christ our having this Righteousness upon us and our being Iustified by it to be given us in way of Reward of something done by us Reply My words which he refers to here and Page 46. are these Gospel-Benefits are no Reward of Debt and yet they are given in a way of Reward The Benefits are given not for our Faith yet upon Believing not upon it as a Meriting Consideration yet upon it as that the Presence whereof is made necessary by the Gospel this having required Faith and confined the Benefit to him that believes If a Man saith I 'll give you a Thousand Pounds if you will come to my House and fetch it It is not a Free Gift though the Poor Man must come if he will have it and the Giver is yet bound by his Promise to give it if he come and not bound to give it if he refuse to come Defence of Gospel-Truth P. 25. These are my very words he pretends to mention and no where in my Books can he find the least shadow for more You see 1. I mention only Gospel-Benefits and not Union with Christ or Justification 2. It 's Faith only which I mention and not something done by us by which he would insinuate that other good Works are meant 3. I say it 's upon Believing and not for Faith upon it not as a Meriting Consideration but upon it as that the Presence whereof is made necessary by the Gospel Doth not this sound lower than his Reward of something done by us Vpon it as a thing present and of it as a thing Meriting are very different 4. The occasion of my using these words was this to prove that God by the Gospel injoyns Faith as a Condition of our having those good things which yet he freely gives and that Christ shews his governing Authority in his displays of Grace and excites to Duties by Motives from Benefits freely given and that Gospel-Conditions have no Merit of Condignity or Congruity And 5. I laid the Vmbrage of the way of Reward wholly on the Gospel-Promise and not upon the least Dignity of the Act done God who is our Ruler commands Faith and promiseth as a Motive to Faith the Benefits purchased by Christ as good things Here 's the whole of this Damning Error as far as he could justly call it mine And by this time you 'll discern as little Danger to me by my Opinion as to him by his False and Malicious Attempt to expose my Ministry and Person not to say truth it self yea and the generality of Ministers and Christians who will not stoop to him as Dictator 2. I shall descend into the Merit of the Cause truly stated which is resolved into two Questions 1 Q. When may a Benefit be said to be given in a way of Reward when yet it is not in a way of Debt or Merit or a Reward for the thing done Ans. A thing is thus given in a way of Reward when a Benefit is given in a way of Encouragement of something required yea or desired to be done however small or unvaluable the thing done is or however great the Benefit is If you say to your Child If you 'll make a Bow and Thank me I 'll give you such an Estate When you give him such an Estate upon his so Bowing and Thanking you do give it him in a way of Reward It 's a Gift because that Bow and Thanks deserve not that Estate it 's yet given in a way of Reward since you promised it in a way of Encouragement to his Bow and Thanks Indeed all Gospel-Conditions are but a meet receiving of the Benefits 2 Quest. Whether God doth give Gospel-Benefits in a way of Encouragement to our performing of any Gospel-Duties Ans. Can any one read the Bible and not cease to doubt that the Scope of it were vain in its Proposals and Promises if the thing be otherwise For 1. Are not the Promises of the Gospel Motives to Duty Acts 13.19 Repent and be converted that your Iniquities may be blotted out Matt. 11.28 Come unto me and I
a way of Satisfaction Impetration Merit or Intercession it were true but as he words it it may be very Erronious and it is to Scrue an Error he doth thus express it Hence because he finds Repentance and Faith are so necessary to our Salvation he hath in his Pulpit endeavoured to inform Men how Christ repented and that he repented for us and though he doth not-publish it in this Sermon as he did elsewhere That Christ believed for us yet you 'll see presently how much he endeavours to convince us that he did so for if he believed whilst humbled it was for us and it 's imputed to us as he oft in this Book affirms Had I Mr. M's liberty what would I call this Error for though it 's in Christ's Strength and Grace that we Repent Believe turn to God and do good Works yet if we do not these as our Personal Acts Misery will be our Portion If you not I believe not you shall die in you Sins John 8. 24. Except you not I repent you shall all perish saith Christ Luke 13. 3. I say Except your Righteousness not mine exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees you shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 5.20 Had Mr. M. been an Auditor he had not said Lord thou understandest not the Gospel it 's thou art to do these things this is the deep Counsel of God however legally thou speakest He might as well say it 's thou Christ shall perish as thou Christ art to repent 2. Faith is a prime and principal part of our Being conformable to the Image of Christ c. He is the first Pattern and original Copy of Believing P. 62 63. Reply Is Christ's Faith the Pattern of Faith in Christ I remember somewhere Dr. Goodwin speaks of God's trusting Christ till he was Incarnate and of Christ's trusting the Father since the time of his Sufferings Yea we may easily grant that Christ believed God's Promise and as a Man depended and relied on God's Power and Truth But this is no other Faith than Adam in Innocency acted than the Law of Works directed to By this account we may think better of the State of Pagans than most do for without Gospel-Revelation they may believe in God trust him and depend on him But what is this to the account the Scripture gives of Faith in Christ Did Christ come to himself as a Saviour Did he receive himself as a Crucified Redeemer Did he eat his own Flesh and drink his own Blood for Eternal Life Did he plead his own Merits and rely on his own Righteousness for Pardon and restored Peace Did he consent to be married to himself Did he look to himself for Healing Or to use Mr. M's account of Faith in this very Page Did he go out of himself unto himself for all Yea take part of his Description of Faith in Christ p. 39 40.1 The Subject of Faith is the Heart of a convinced broken-hearted Sinner c. The very Nature of Faith and the acting of the Soul in it is such as doth imply and include a Sight and Sense of Sin and Misery and a lively heart-influencing Conviction of utter Helplesness in a Man's self and unworthiness to be helped by God c. Reader Doth Christ's Faith in the Nature of it imply a Sense of utter Helplesness and Unworthiness in himself or of his Sin and Misery The Reason he gives for Justling out such as Abram and setting up Christ for the original Copy of believing in himself is this The Humane Nature of Christ lives and subsists in the second Person leaning on the Eternal Deity of the Son of God it hath its Subsistence in the Bosom of the Godhead c. and hath the Eternal Power of the Deity clasping about it P. 63. The Apostle did not know this Faith when he said that Charity was greater than Faith Well as Sublime as this Reason seems to be I will venture to say This is not that Faith in Christ which the Gospel requires of Sinners 1. I will give you a Reason of Mr. M's which besure is none of the best P. 7. Christ's dwelling in our Nature is no part of the Punishment of Sin for then the Divine Nature only is punished and not the Humane at all nor the Person It 's a bad one for what he brings it since that Assuming the Nature and dwelling in it differ and I have answered it before and it needs a great Allowance to keep it from But if the Sufferings or Acts of only one Nature be not the Sufferings or the Acts of the Person of Christ then the acting of Faith of the one Nature on the other Nature is not acting of Faith upon the Person of Christ and consequently not Gospel-Faith which is to be acted on the Person of Christ here the Humane Nature believes but that is not with him Christ that believes it believes on the Divine Nature and that with him is not Christ who is believed on What now is become of Christ's Believing even by his own Reasoning 2. The Object of Faith in Christ is God-Man Mediator a Crucified Christ c. but the Deity of the Son of God abstractedly considered is not God-Man Mediator c. Truly if our Gospel-Faith is specified by this I see not the need of Christ's Incarnation or Death yea or regard thereto 3. This leaning and especially to the purposes assigned to this Act of Christ's Humane Nature is not all that which is Essential to the Faith in Christ which the Gospel requires But why should I Scribble the little Paper left It 's like the Reasons he gave for Christ's Repenting viz. The reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me and he was a Man of Sorrows and acquainted with Grief 3. He plainly discovers his Mind to be that Faith is an Act of the Soul whilst spiritually dead and unregenerate P. 61. He joins with such as say Faith is the means and way of our being made spiritually alive rather than our acting Life as being already brought into a state of Life as the Bodies Clasping hold on the Soul by the animal Spirits which are Corporeal things is rather the means of Life than an act of Life c. P. 62. Suppose that the principle of Grace begotten and created in us in Regeneration contain in it the Habit of Faith which I will not now call in question Yet c. P. 32. All our new Obedience and all the Graces of the Spirit comprized under that one word Love are the Effects and Fruits of our being justified P. 60. In Vnion by Faith which is the cause of this Union we are brought immediately into a state of Spiritual Life first Relative then Qualitative c. Repl. Here with the Arminians he denieth the habit of Faith necessary to the actings of Faith He is contrary to the Assembly of Divines who tell us That God in effectual Vocation takes away