signs of Regeneration And he adds such Power to the Testimony of Conscience for the Truth and In-being of these Graces as begets in the Soul a joyful sense of its reconciled State and some comfortable freedom from those Fears which accompany a doubting Christian and according to the Evidence of these Graces Assurance is ordinarily strong or weak Error Assurance is not attained by the Evidence of Scripture-Marks of Signs of Grace or by the Spirit 's discovering to us that he hath wrought in our Hearts any holy Qualifications But Assurance comes only by an inward Voice of the Spirit saying Thy Sins are forgiven thee and our believing thereupon that our Sins are forgiven Truth 16. The Sins of Believers have the loathsomness of Sin adhering to them which God seeth and accounteth the Committers guilty thereby and they ought to charge themselves therewith so as to stir up themselves to Repentance and renew their Actings of Faith on Christ for Forgiveness Nevertheless they ought not thereby to fear their being out of a justified State further than their Falls give them just cause of suspecting that Sin hath Dominion over them and that their first believing on Christ was not sincere Error God seeth no Sin in Believers tho he see the Fact neither doth He charge them with any Sin nor ought they to charge themselves with any Sin nor be at all sad for them nor confess repent or do any thing as a Means of their Pardon no nor in order to assuring themselves of Pardon even when they commit Murder Adultery or the grossest Wickedness Truth 17. It 's true of Believers that if Sin should have Dominion over them they would thereby be subject to Condemnation And tho the Grace of God will prevent the Dominion of Sin in every elect Believer and so keep them from eternal Death yet true Believers may by Sin bring great hurt upon themselves in Soul and Body which they ought to fear and they may expect a share in National Judgments according as they have contributed to common Guilt Error The grossest Sins that Believers can commit cannot do them the least harm neither ought they to fear the least hurt by their own Sins nor by National Sins yea tho themselves have had a hand therein Truth 18. Tho God is not so angry with his People for their Sins as to cast them out of his Covenant-favour yet by their Sins he is so displeased as for them to correct his Children tho he speaks Instructions by his Rebukes Error None of the Afflictions of Believers have in them the least of God's Displeasure against their Persons for their Sins Truth 19. Tho the present sincere Holiness of Believers be not perfect according to the Precepts of the Word nor valuable by the Sanction of the Law of Innocency nor any Atonement for our Defects and we still need Forgiveness and the Merits of Christ for Acceptance thereof yet as far as it prevails it's lovely in it self and pleasing to God and is not Dung or Filth Error The greatest Holiness in Believers tho wrought in them by the Holy Ghost is meer Dung Rottenness and Filthiness as in them Truth 20. Gospel-preaching is when the Messengers of Christ do publish to fallen Sinners the good News of Salvation by Christ to be obtained in the way which he hath appointed in his Word freely offering Salvation on his Terms earnestly perswading and commanding Men in the Name of Christ to comply with those Terms as ever they would escape the Misery they are under and possess the Benefits he hath purchased directing all to look to him for Strength and acknowledg him as the only Mediator and his Obedience and Sufferings as the sole Atonement for Sin and meriting Cause of all Blessings instructing them in all revealed Truth and by Gospel-Motives urging them to obey the whole Will of God as a Rule of Duty but especially to be sincere and upright pressing after Perfection Error Gospel-Preaching is to teach Men they were as much pardoned and as acceptable to God always as when they are regenerate and while they were ungodly they had the same Interest in God and Christ as when they believe neither can Sin any way hinder their Salvation or their Peace nor have they any thing to do to further either of them Christ having done all for them and given himself to them before any holy Qualification or Endeavour Truth 21. Legal Preaching is to preach the Law as a Covenant of Innocency or Works or to preach the Mosaick or Jewish Covenant of Peculiarity But it is not Legal Preaching to require and perswade to Faith Holiness or Duties by Promises and Threatnings according to the Grace of the Gospel and direct Men to fear and hope accordingly Error Legal Preaching is to call People to act any Grace or do any Duty as a required Means of Salvation or inward Peace or to threaten them with Death or any Affliction to cause Fear if they commit the grossest Sins and backslide and fall away or to promise them any Blessing upon their Obedience to the Commandments of Christ or urge the Threatnings to perswade Sinners to believe and repent CHAP. II. A Renunciation of sundry Errors Anno 1696. A Paper called The second Paper 1696. A Proposal made by us 1697. ALtho we hoped the Caution used in the foresaid State of Truth and Error would prevent the Imputation of Socinianism and other hurtful Errors yet finding our Brethren dissatisfied we subscribed with them Anno 1692. about seven Months after the State of Truth was published certain Doctrinal Propositions collected out of the Assembly's Confession which we printed Anno 1693. with this Title An Agreement in Doctrinals c. but that being too long to be here inserted we shall confine our selves to the more material Parts of what further Account we have given of our Judgment concerning the Doctrines of Satisfaction and Iustification which may be seen at large in our Answer to the Report p. 3 11 27 33 c. Anno 1694. In a Paper sent to our Congregational Brethren it 's thus declared We the united Ministers in and about London do renounce and testify against these following Opinions 1. That there is no definite number of Persons elected from all Eternity whom God will by his appointed Means certainly save and bring to Eternal Life leaving the rest who fall under a just Condemnation for their Original and Actual Sins especially for their Neglect and Contempt of the Means of Salvation 2. That Christ died equally for all Men not intending the final Salvation of some more than others 3. That Men have in their own Power by the use of the natural Faculties of their Reason and Will unassisted by the special Light and Grace of the Holy Ghost to perform all that is necessary to Salvation or that his special efficacious Light and Grace is not necessary to their Conversion Perseverance and final Salvation 4. That any of them whom God hath
depends not on any such mere words But was Christ appointed and did he consent to endure what the Sinner was to suffer that in virtue thereof the offended God might be appeased and the Sinner delivered This is the thing they oppose Crell Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. par 14. explaining this very Phrase 3. Nor is with them the Question Whether Christ's Sufferings were in part the Idem and in other respects a full Equivalent to the Punishments the Sinner deserved No their Arguments run against the Equivalency and on that account deny that his Sufferings could be a full Price of Redemption or a Satisfaction and well they may when they call him a mere Creature Crell Resp. ad Grot. c. 4. par 2. c. 6. par 18. It 's the Proportion in the Value they most directly militate against 4. Nor whether Christ was a Sinner in judicial Esteem or was he reputed the innocent Mediator making amends to Iustice for our Sins that we the Offendors might be redeemed by his merits who to make Satisfaction submitted to be dealt with as if he had been a Sinner The last is enough for their Abhorrence and tho Socinus took all Advantages to expose the Orthodox in representing their Opinion as to the Imputation of Sin to Christ yet grants they hold that Christ was truly innocent and reputed so by God even when he was punished as if an Offender De Servat cap. 6. It 's true sometimes they would force some such Consequence on the words of the Orthodox as if Christ must be legally reputed a Sinner but that is to furnish themselves with an Argument to ridicule the true Doctrine of Satisfaction And note they deny that 2 Cor. 5. 21. Christ was made Sin to be Christ was made a Sacrifice for Sin yea some render it he was made a Sinner as Slicht c. God dealt with him as a Sinner Socin in loc 5. It 's far enough from the Socinian Controversy whether Christ was immediately obliged by the Law of Works to die i. e. Did God thus sentence him Thou Christ hast sinned and therefore thou shalt die Or was he immediately obliged to die by the Govenant of Redemption and mediately by the Law of Works i. e. the Sentence is to be thus apprehended Whereas thou my Son the Mediator hast with my Consent declared thy willingness to expiate Sin and ransom Sinners justly condemned by the Curse of my Law to die And whereas my Vindictive Iustice the Honour of my Law and Government required that I the Rector should exact Satisfaction and Reparation for the Crimes of these Sinners by thy Death if I agreed to thy redeeming and saving them and thou hast obliged thy self to die in their stead to redeem them therefore thou shalt die this accursed shameful Death This I say is no part of the Dispute with the Socinians for the last account doth as directly oppose their Notions as the former nay much more for it asserts the Compact before his Incarnation and consequently the Divinity at least Preexistence of Christ. 6. Nor yet is it of any moment with them whether Men say Sin would be in a more proper sense the immediate meritorious Cause of the Sinner's dying who committed the Sin than of Christ's dying who did not commit the Sin tho he obliged himself to make Satisfaction for it in the Sinner's stead that the provoked God might be reconciled to him The Point with them being this Did our Sins notwithstanding God's merciful Disposition retain that Demerit in his account as rendered Satisfaction for it by Death necessary to reconcile him to Sinners and consequently did Christ suffer Death to make that Satisfaction which was become thus necessary by Sin and yet impossible for the Sinner to make 7. It 's true the Socinians usually say our Sins were the occasion of Christ's Death yet oft they call them the antecedent Cause but occasion being more common and agreeable to their Hypothesis I wish others had waved that word to prevent Abuse Nevertheless the mere using of that word is far from arguing any Man to Socinianize so that he apply it to a sense opposite to what Socinians do This will appear if we consider in what sense the Socinians use it they say our Sin was an occasion of Christ's Death as Sin was that which we were to be reclaimed from and our hope supported against And the Death of Christ was that way in which God who was not unreconciled before did appoint Christ to reclaim us from our Sins as his Death assureth us of the Truth of his Doctrine and Promises manifesteth God's prior Reconciliation and so his Death became an Argument to encline us to believe and repent and also a causa sine qua non both of a strong Motive to Holiness viz. the endless Glory designed in Heaven for us which was before shut up and of that Power Authority and Care of Christ at God's Right-hand to bring us into the Possession of it But when others shall call our Sins an occasion of Christ's Death and explain it thus That it was an occasion of Christ's Death as a penal Satisfaction to the Iustice of God and that he endured it to pacify God to Sinners that God's hatred of Sin and his Justice yea punitive Justice might be no less demonstrated in Christ's Satisfaction than if the Sinners had been damned And his Obedience and his Punishments wherein Vindictive Iustice was thus glorified did merit the Pardon of our Sins and eternal Life such an Explication doth as much oppose Socinianism as if they had used the word meritorious Cause instead of occasion That no Person may pretend the Reverend Mr. Baxter's Authority in favour of Socinianism because he sometimes calls our Sins an occasion of Christ's Death I do assure the Reader that he explains the word occasion in the last sense and in the most direct opposition to Socinianism nor can any pretend but the reason he useth this word as also pro causa meritoria or instead of a meritorious Cause is only to distinguish Christ the Sponsor making Satisfaction to Justice for our Sins from the Sinner himself when suffering for his own Sins To evidence which I have repeated his own Assertions under this seventh Head and could easily cite his own words which agree exactly to what 's Antisocinian in the six foregoing Heads See Method Theol. par 3. cap. 1. determ 11 12 15. Need I add that he says God declared to the feeling of Christ his Displeasure against Sin which was the Cause of all the Miseries which he endured i. e. saith he Christ bare those Punishments which the Anger and Displeasure of God against Sin and Sinners caused to be inflicted on him our Sponsor Vbi sup Disp. 4. and all this in our stead Det. 10. He made Satisfaction for our Sins to God as Rector and as the injured Party Determ 14. Christ's Death answered all the Ends of the most proper Punishments and
of the Threatning of the Law Determ 12. When he calls Sin an occasion of Christ's Death he there calls it also a remote meritorious Cause Determ 5. And as for a proper meritorious Cause as when Children are punished for their Parents Sins Determ 5. His Safaction yielded to our most just Rector a sufficient ground on which to forgive penitent Believers spiritual and eternal Punishments Disâ— 2. Nay he sees not supposing the Law of Works how God could forgive our Sins without the Penal Satisfaction of Christ Disp. 2. Determ 15. It were endless to produce the Instances demonstrating the Orthodoxness of this great Man as to the Satisfaction of Christ against Socinianism And by the way such as say Christ's penal Satisfaction was not necessary to the forgiveness of our Sins do a thousand times more favour Socinianism than Mr. Baxter's Notions or Words can be wrested to Perhaps others who follow Episcopius and some other Arminians when all must acquit him of Socinianism may surmise he favoureth their Notion of Christ's Death as if it were a Satisfaction only to the Will of God and not a full Satisfaction to the Iustice of God To this I answer Mr. B. distinguisheth Satisfaction into that which is the fulfilling the Will of a Person and that which is the Payment of what was owing by an Equivalent otherwise not due And he affirms that Christ's Satisfaction was not a mere fulfilling the Will of God tho it supposeth his Consent but it was a full Equivalent to what Punishments we deserved in that it better answered the Ends of Divine Government than the Sinner's Punishment would have done it more fully demonstrated the vindictive Justice of God than if the Sinner had been damned and it was a full Satisfaction to governing Justice and the End of the Law Vbi supra Determ 10 11 12 15. I thought this account necessary not only for the forementioned End but also that our Agreement in opposition to Socinianism might not exclude Mr. B. and such as approve of his Scheme which would add strength to that Heresy and be injurious to many worthy Persons nor ought a few words so fully explained be pressed to brand them with that odious Title who could more plausibly fix the same Character on Persons from things plainly asserted in the Socinian sense and subserving their Hypothesis As Christ's Death was not necessary to the remission of Sin the Promise of Forgiveness is no Effect of Christ's Death Repentance under the Gospel is an Effect of justifying Faith in Christ. The preaching of Reconciliation to Sinners is only to publish to them that God is already reconciled to them and to call them to be reconciled to God Many others might be instanced but I think it were unjust even upon such grounds to call any of these Socinians CHAP. VII An Enquiry into what Difference seems to remain concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Iustification of a Sinner And this Difference reduced below any Cause of Discord I Think both sides are acquitted from all dangerous Errors concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Justification of a Sinner nor can I doubt but the impartial Reader must apprehend the remaining Difference doth not lie in Opinions about these Doctrines themselves but in accommodating some words in opposition to other Errors which either Side have more especially applied their Minds to confute unless he should also ascribe it to a Zeal for sundry received Phrases on the one part and an apprehension in the other part that more accuracy is become needful since those Phrases were received 1. In both these Doctrines the visible Spring of what Difference remains is a different Notion of Christ's Suretiship For by this the word Imputation as used in both these Doctrines is governed viz. how our Sins were imputed to Christ when he satisfied and how Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us when we are justified both which depend upon the various Conceptions of the Suretiship of Christ and the manner of his representing us which I will begin with One Side thinks him a mediating Surety and distinguishing both as to the matter engaged and Instrument wherein he voluntarily engaged himself as also the respect he had to us therein 1. In the Covenant of Redemption they consider Christ agreeing with his Father the Terms of Satisfaction to Justice and Impetration of Life for Sinners and obliging himself to assume our Nature and therein perfectly to obey the Law die an accursed Death with whatever was equivalent to what by the Covenant of Works our Sins deserved Here they think Christ did not covenant strictly in our stead or as our Proxy tho he covenanted to die in our stead even strictly so He transacted as a free Interposer tho for our Salvation we were no federating Party tho we were the Persons whose Salvation was his promised Reward And therefore we have more reason since we are become his Members to say we intercede in Christ now than to say that we covenanted in Christ then Finally they account his Act of engaging so peculiar to himself that his non-performance of what he engaged which was impossible had not made us more guilty tho it would have left us miserable for our own Sins there being no other way to redeem us 2. They find Christ called a Surety in the Gospel-Covenant made with fallen Man Heb. 7. 22. and no where else This Covenant supposeth the former yea supposeth Christ's having executed his Engagements by the Covenant of Redemption to make Satisfaction to Justice i. e. it was at first accepted as if executed for this Covenant with Man doth not adjust the terms of Redemption but the way of conveying the Effects of that Redemption and is called the Testament of our Lord Jesus whereby he bequeaths the Blessings he acquired by his atoning Death In this Covenant Christ is such a Surety as not only assures us all will be performed which is promised to us on God's part but that undertakes to bring in the Elect and for the Perseverance of Believers unto eternal Life by his exerting that Power and Authority he hath received But here also they apprehend Christ a distinct federating Party A Mediator treating and obliging himself to make the Covenant stand sure and effect the Ends it was designed for but he binds not himself to believe repent or persevere for us but that we shall repent believe and persevere nor doth his Engagement that we should do so prevent our personal Engagement by Covenant to do it our selves tho in his Strength Now our Act of engaging is not his engaging Act but an Effect of it nor is our repenting his repenting Act but the Effect of his engaged Assistance nor is that Assistance of his reckoned to be legally our assisting our selves nor can we say that we covenanted in Christ to bring in the Elect or that Believers shall persevere By which with other Reasons we are induced to think that in covenanting he
imputed to us in Justification against the Popish Doctrine the generality of the Learned among them do only exclude every thing besides that Righteousness of Christ from being meritorious of Acceptance Pardon Life and any other Blessing and from being any Satisfaction or Compensation for any Sin affirming that this alone can atone the Anger of God for the sake of this alone will he absolve us and nothing below this is perfect enough for us to stand in before the Bar of his Justice And therefore the Work of Faith it self can be no justifying Righteousness in that sense they took justifying Righteousness all which we heartily own and hence they oft appropriate the justifying Aptitude and Office of Faith mostly to a Reliance on that sole meriting Righteousness of Christ and its receiving Forgiveness Acceptance and a Right to Life of meer Mercy for the sake of Christ's alone Merits All which is justly and truly spoken as they accommodate it to the defence of Christ's Righteousness as the only thing appointed or fit for the fore-described Purposes and in opposition to the Popish Doctrine of Merit The Dispute they had with the Popish Church was about this meriting atoning satisfying Righteousness and you I find them often propose that if the Papists would grant that this Righteousness was that of Christ alone the great Controversy about Justification was at an end But at the same time most Protestants and our Homilies do fully grant that Repentance was necessary and required to Forgiveness and Faith to Justification and these Blessings promised to those Graces tho they were not led to dispute whether these were to be called a Righteousness as qualifying the Subject on whom God's justifying Act terminated But whether in that Act God regarded any thing as a meriting absolving satisfying Righteousness any thing as a Satisfaction to Justice any thing as an impelling Motive or valuable Consideration besides the Righteousness of Christ. To this their Debates were confined in their day and this they were intent to maintain as all Christians ought to be Whereas the reason of debating the Name of that by which the Subject of Justification was determined in opposition to such whom God did not justify was not so much before them as before others of later years assaulted by such as went into another Extreme from the Doctrine of Popish Merit Nor was this matter otherwise stated by our able Divines who contend against such Arminians as affirmed the Tò credere to be our justifying Righteousness for by Righteousness such Arminians mean the Righteousness which is part of Payment and stands in the place of and answers the same Ends in our Justification as perfect Obedience served for to sinless Man which we have before stated and renounced Were there need abundant Testimonies offer by which this Head is easily proved tho I grant some Men may be found to vent some Inconsistent Expressions Having premised these things I reassume the Difference about Justification that seems to continue which lies 1. In the manner of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Both agree it is imputed but how is not so universally assented to One side thinks the sense of imputing Christ's Righteousness to be that God reckons us to have legally done and suffered what Christ did and this to the full Satisfaction of Justice and the Law of Works and therefore are reputed to have perfectly obeyed the Precepts of this Law and fully endured its Curse and for our legally doing so God judgeth and pronounceth us righteous in full Conformity to the Law and therefore entituled to Pardon Adoption and eternal Life If you ask Is this justifying Sentence the Sentence of the Law of Works viz. it s premiant Sanction applied to us by God as the righteous Judg judging us by the Law of Works They answer It is the Sentence of the Law of Works but it is of Gospel-Grace that God allowed Christ to be one Person with us in the Covenant of Works whereby we are thus accounted to obey and suffer in him But others think that the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in the following manner viz. 1. They consider that the Father promised to Christ in Reward of his Obedience and Suffering that they who believed on him should be pardoned adopted dealt with as righteous Persons who had not sinned and be eternally sav'd Hence the Lord Iesus has a right to Believers obtaining these things And as Faith describes the Persons in this Covenant who shall obtain them so when we become Believers we are accounted and adjudged to be such Believers and such as are to obtain those Blessings in Christ's Right 2. They consider God in Christ for sapiential Ends making in the Gospel an Offer of Pardon Adoption and eternal Life to poor Sinners if they believe and promising these Blessings when they believe and still as Blessings bought by Christ's Obedience and Sufferings and promised to him for Believers tho withal used in his Gospel as Motives to inforce his Command of Faith and Calls to it These things thus considered we apprehend that when God in Christ justifieth us he doth not only give us Pardon Adoption and Life but he adjudgeth and sentenceth us to be the Persons that by the Covenant of Redemption were to be pardoned adopted and saved in the right of Christ and to whom the Gospel by its Promise gives a personal Right to that Pardon Adoption and Life as purchased by Christ And he esteems and adjudgeth that the Obedience and Sufferings of Christ in their full virtue is our pleadable Security for the enjoyment of them whereby we have a right to plead his Death and Merits with God as what procured these for us as well as God's Fidelity who promised them to us in his Gospel You see by this account that we rise not so high as to say we are accounted to do and suffer what Christ did and to be absolved immediately by the Sentence of the Law of Works nor fall we so low as a mere Participation of the Effects of Christ's Righteousness but assert an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness it self relatively to those Effects Christ's Right is applied and his very Obedience reckoned to us as what pleads with God for those Effects and secures us against all condemning Obstacles and Challenges The justifying Sentence is not the Sentence of the Law God saith not You have perfectly obeyed therefore you shall live you have satisfied the Curse therefore you shall not die Yet the Righteousness which procured our Salvation and is our adjudged pleadable Security of enjoying this promised Salvation includes an Obedience as perfect as that to which the Law promised Life if we had not sinned and Sufferings equivalent to what the Curse pronounced against us when we sinned But because we apprehend not where this Law includes such a Sentence as this viz. because Christ obeyed you shall live tho you obeyed not and because Christ who sinned not did suffer for your Sins you
way we apprehend an ascribing much more to Faith than we dare because it makes Faith efficacious from its natural Aptitude and Activity without a Divine Ordination of it to that end by any Promise The Reason of any Debate concerning these Expressions lies in this Our Brethren consider all the Gospel-Duties and Benefits as a mere physical Order of Blessings decreed by God to the Elect and so one is given before the other according as the Gospel describeth that Order We grant the said Order and should insist on no more were not the Benefits offered to more besides the Elect and still used as Motives to induce Men to submit to those Duties and this by Promises of the Benefits if the Duty be performed and Threatnings of withholding the Benefits with additional Misery to be inflicted if they be not performed with an account of judicial Proceedings towards Men with respect to their performance or non-performance of the said official Terms But things being thus and so very apparently the Indications of governing Methods and the Aptitude of our Ministry for Conversion and Perseverance so much depending upon the affecting of Mens hopes and fears we are forced to own that the Gospel is not only a description of the foresaid Order but that it is a Law of Grace subordinate to the Covenant of Redemption Yet that none may suspect the difference above what it is I shall recite what our Brethren grant in their Declaration They say p. 13. We are true Owners of Iustification at the instant when we believe P. 15. It must be said that even in foro Dei in God's Court and according to the Iudgment in that open Court which God hath set up in his Word and according to the Proceedings of his Word which is the Rule he professeth to judg Men by and therein he keeps to the Rule of his Word as Christ saith I judg no Man but the Word that I speak shall judg you Ioh. 12. 47 48. God doth judg and pronounce his Elect ungodly and unjustified till they believe All these are the words of Dr. Goodwin which they approve of and note that he in vol. 2. of the Creatures lib. 2. cap. 7. p. 51 to 63. proves at large that Faith in Christ is of another kind than the Faith required by the Law of Works They also say p. 46. God in the Covenant of Grace freely offereth unto Sinners Life and Salvation by Iesus Christ requiring of them Faith in him that they may be saved Note the Assembly of Divines in Westminsier larger Catech. Q. 32. add requiring Faith as the Condition to interest them in Christ. And less Cat. to escape the Wrath and Curse of God due to us for Sin God requireth Faith in Iesus Christ Repentance unto Life c. And in the Savoy Confession as well as theirs Cap. 18. S. 2. The true Believer's Certainty of Salvation is not a bare conjectural and probable Perswasion grounded upon a fallible hope but an infallible assurance of Faith founded upon the Divine Truth of the Promises of Salvation the inward Evidences of those Graces unto which these Promises are made c. Of all which our Brethren have approved To add no more they declare p. 47. it 's an Error That continued Repentance and Holiness are not in the nature of the thing nor by the Constitution of the Gospel necessary to our being possessed of eternal Life And may it not be supposed that nor is put for and Also that necessary by Constitution of the Gospel as distinguished from necessary in the nature of the thing Some of them may mean an authoritative or rectoral Constitution i. e. this Order is appointed by Christ as our Ruler wherein he hath enacted this Connexion and requireth our Compliance These things being put together must acquit our Brethren from the imputation of rendering Faith Repentance or Holiness needless or useless to Salvation tho they scruple to call it a Gospel-Righteousness and we hope it may encline them to a forbearance towards us who think these Concessions contain for substance all that we intend by the Terms Condition and Gospel-Righteousness which we make use of as 〈◊〉 do more exactly comprehensively and to some purposes more safely express what we conceive to be the true import of these Passages when connected and which we approve of Yet to put things in a fuller Light I shall represent the matter as it stands by the forecited Passages to all which they declare their Assent p. 63. The Brethren affirm God in his Covenant offering Life and Salvation to Sinners and requiring Faith in him that they may be saved and this Faith in a Mediator commanded by the Gospel and not by the Law of Works as Dr. Goodwin saith with Gospel-Promises of an Interest in Christ and his Benefits and these are made to this Faith as a Condition saith the Assembly of Divines and this in such a manner that the Believer may have an infallible assurance of the Benefits upon an inward evidence of his having this Faith as that Grace to which the Promise was made wherein the said Benefits were included And also that this Gospel includes that Word which is the Rule of Iudgment by which Rule God judgeth that Man tho Elect who hath not this Faith to be a Christless unpardoned Child of Wrath and him who hath this Faith to be a true Owner of Christ and Pardon Also that Repentance is of such necessity to all Sinners that it as well as Faith is required that they may escape and none may expect to be pardoned in a state of Unbelief and Impenitence yea continued Repentance and Holiness are necessary to our possession of eternal Life And all this to be necessary not only from the nature of the thing but also by the Constitution of the Gospel I apprehend this Account is so equivalent to a Gospel-Law of Grace for all its great purposes that I shall not be offended at what name they please to give it and did not a fear of offending them prevent me I would prove it to be all the Law of Grace which we assert especially if they would allow that when they say God requireth Faith that Sinners under Offers of Life may be saved it 's upon his Throne tho a Throne of Grace that God in Christ requireth it and from thence directs his Offers of Salvation to Sinners and thence sentenceth them who live under Gospel-Offers by their asserted Rule of Iudgment However we have no reason to contend especially when both agree the Debate is about the Instrument of Donation and the Qualification of the Subject to receive a Gift and not about any thing that meriteth the Gift freely bestowed on God's part and thankfully and humbly received on our part A low degree of Charity would make allowances on both hands when the Difference is so minute They seem jealous of the Honour of Free-Grace yet owning Christ's Merits we are for Free-Grace in opposition to
always have access to God and obtain eternal Life Socin Tom. 1. 788. Truth Jesus Christ was by Divine Adjustment a middle Person between God and Sinners and as such laid his hand on both undertaking to appease God's Wrath and procure Salvation for us at his hand and also to make God and the way of Salvation known to us for our Reconciliation and Obedience to God and by him God still imparts his Blessings to us and admits us free access to himself Error 5. Christ is called a Surety as a Sponsor or Messenger on God's part to us but he promised nothing to God for us Crell vol. 1. p. 612. Truth Tho Christ was not a joint federating Party with us in the Covenant of Works yet he was not only a Surety on God's part to us but he was a mediating Surety on both parts and as such he engaged in the Covenant of Redemption to make Atonement for us and in the Gospel-Covenant that all true Believers shall persevere to the obtaining of eternal Life Error 6. Christ was not an High-Priest while on Earth nor was his Blood offered by him to God but it was himself was offered and that not on the Cross but when he entred into Heaven yet the Death of Christ so far belongs to his Priesthood that he was prepared by his Death to become a High-Priest and to offer himself a perfect Sacrifice for Sin in Heaven neither of which could be according to the Decree of God if his Death had not intervened Crell vol. 2. Resp. ad Grot. cap. 10. vol. 1. 613. vol. 2. par 1. 162. Socin Tom. 1. Praelect Theol. cap. 23. Truth Christ was an High-Priest while he was on Earth and as such upon the Cross offered up himself by his bloody Death a perfect Sacrifice whereby his Blood was a propitiatory offering at the very time it was shed and tho in the virtue thereof the Saints were saved before his Incarnation and Christ for ever intercedeth in the Heavens yet the presenting of himself or it there makes no addition to the Perfection of it as a Sacrifice Error 7. There is no use nor place in the Priesthood of Christ for appeasing God's Wrath or offering any Sacrifice no not in Heaven as a Condition of obtaining Remission properly as from God or impetrating the same but Christ's Death is a means of our enjoying that Remission from God and it was indirectly a Condition thereof as to be given to us i. e. it was a Condition imposed on Christ without which by the Divine Decree he was not to obtain Authority from God to forgive us our Sins and it may be called a Sacrifice to God's Mercy as of his own free Grace reconciled but not as offended with Sinners Socin Tom. 2. 665 666. Crell vol. 1. 612. Wolzog. in Ioh. 3. 16. Truth The first and principal use of Christ's Priesthood was to offer on the Cross a Sacrifice to appease God's Wrath against Sinners and to impetrate Remission and eternal Life that so God the offended Governor might consistently with the Honour of his Law and of all his Divine Perfections be at liberty and inclined as well to give the said Blessings as that we might become actual Partakers of them from Christ as authorized to apply them to us And all the other Sacerdotal Acts of Christ do refer to this Error 8. Redemption mentioned in the New Testament signifies no more nor other than a freeing us from the Punishment of Sin without any proper Price intervening And when it 's said Redemption is obtained by the Blood of Christ it 's not meant that the Blood of Christ could move God or that God was thereby obliged to grant us Deliverance from the Punishment of our Sins but that the shedding of his Blood ought to intervene that we might be moved thereby to accept that Deliverance when offered to us Neither did Christ buy us but God by Christ asserted his Right to us and tho our Deliverance from Punishment is gotten as if by a Price yet this is not as if the Blood of Christ were paid to any Socin Tom. 〈◊〉 Prael Theol. cap. 19. Tom. 2. 145 147. Slicht in Rom. cap. 5. v. 10. Truth Redemption by the Blood of Christ is that we are bought by his Blood as a proper Price and delivered from the Curse of the Law and Captivity under Sin and Satan as by a proper Ransom paid to the just Governor of the World Error 9. Christ by his Death did not reconcile God to us but he reconcileth us to God by his Death i. e. we come thereby to be converted to God and cease to offend him yea God's Anger was so far from being appeased by the Death of Christ that thereby it was declared that God was before pacified to us Socin Tom. 1. 144 145 665 666. Crell vol. 3. Resp. ad Grot. 154 155 107. Slicht Tom. 2. 214 401. in Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5. Truth We being Children of Wrath because of our Sin the Lord Jesus did by his Death atone our offended God who became thereby so reconciled that he offereth Peace to Sinners and requireth and urgeth us by believing aright to accept thereof and upon our penitent believing he becomes actually reconciled to us delighting in us and dealing with us as Objects of his restored Favour Note 1. Crellius Resp. ad Grot. cap. 8. part 3. disputes against this as the Error of Grotius and the rest of the Orthodox stating it in these words God was before angry but being appeased by the Death of Christ he determined to lay aside his Anger and upon our believing and repenting he doth actually lay aside his Anger 2. Grotius de Satisf cap. 7. distinguisheth the Actings of the Divine Will 1. As before Christ's Death is decreed c. then God is angry with the Sinner yet so as not to be averse to all methods of Reconciliation 2. Vpon Christ's Death as well when fixed as when undergone then God not only appoints the way but promiseth to be reconciled 3. When a Man believes in Christ with a right Faith and Christ according to the Tenor of the Covenant presents the Believer to God then God lays aside his Anger and receives the Person into Favour or is actually reconciled 3. How little do well-meaning Antinomians consider that not only in the third Error c. but in this last Error they agree with the Socinians and that in a Point whence most of their false Notions about Christ's Satisfaction proceed For see you not they hold that after God's absolute Decree to justify us there 's no Wrath in God to appease the change is only on our part And no Reconciliation but on our side whom God begs to be reconciled to him he being already at Peace with us Error 10. By Christ's dying for our Sins as being laid on him is not meant that Christ according to his Sponsion satisfied Divine Iustice for our Sins or that he paid to God
transacts still as Mediator but he obliging himself to these great Performances in order to our doing what we are personally obliged to do and our receiving what we are necessitated to receive if ever we be saved even in a Gospel-way tho it supposeth him already crucified he is properly called a Surety of the New Covenant yet still connoting him a Mediator I need not suggest that if in this new Covenant Christ's Suretyship will not infer our being one foederating Party with Christ and hence that we covenanted in him it will far less follow we did so in the Covenant of Redemption which treated of things so improper to be once propos'd to us as undertaking Parties much less as Principals which to strictly legal Sureties always are supposed But of this I have treated in Man made righteous and in Answer to the Report and P. S. to Gospel-Truth THE OTHER SIDE think Christ with the Father's consent came into the Covenant of Works considered as a Bond as unviolated say some as violated say others and therein became one foederating Party with us as Elect some say as Believers say others even such a Surety as made the Covenant of Works run thus If thou Christ my Son or you the Elect or Believers do obey all the Law you shall live But if they sin thou or they shall die or they having sinned thou shalt die And they conceiving Christ to be as a strict pecuniary Surety in this one Bond with us they esteem him one legal Person and Representative in such a sense as that we did covenant in him and are legally esteemed to do and suffer what he did and not only secured of Salvation in his right and for his sake This may be accounted by some a dangerous Difference and so it were on our part if we did not own that Christ's fulfilling of the Law was an Article in the Covenant of Redemption and that we are as fully assured of Salvation if we accept of Christ as if we had covenanted in him and that he hath engaged the Elect should accept of him tho they did not covenant in him and that Believers have as inviolable an Interest in the Benefits of Christ's Death both in his right and by the Gospel-promise as if they were legally esteemed to suffer what he did suffer But all this we acknowledg It would be as dangerous on our Brethrens part to say we covenanted in Christ and obeyed in him if they did not renounce all proud assuming Boasts as if they were as righteous as Christ or stood on terms with God needing no more Acts of Mercy than that one of appointing Christ to be Mediator but after that they are on terms of strict Justice and above Forgiveness c. The like Danger would ensue their Position if they did not acknowledg the necessity of Faith to Justification and this Faith to be always accompanied with Repentance and persevering Holiness But our Brethren renounce the former and own the latter Matters standing thus will afford no ground to hereticate each other We think a mediating Surety obliged in a distinct Bond to perform the utmost which our Brethren affirm Christ to have done doth as well secure our State and support our Faith as if in the same Bond and better account for the sapiential Methods of Divine Government towards Man since the Fall with God's judicial Procedures towards Man as under Gospel-offers and his suspending Christ's merited Benefits till Men believe as also his recorded Pleadings with Sinners The Brethren think not that Christ did more for our Salvation than we allow but that we did more in Christ and thence judge our Faith more supported and the Law of Works more honoured in their way But did each side perceive all the aforesaid respective Ends alike provided for and evil Consequences equally avoided the Notion in debate could for its own sake admit no Dispute on either side And is it not pity to hate each other for mistaking the best Scheme to avoid the same Evils which both would prevent and secure that same Good which both honestly aim at by their respective Hypotheses Forbearance is the juster in this point because it turns upon a Solution of this Question When Adam is called a Figure of Christ Rom. 5. 18. is there not some disparity in their Representation of Men as well as in those other things there instanced Our Brethren think Christ so fully prefigured by Adam as a Representative that we as truly obeyed and suffered in Christ as we sinned in Adam We think the Figure as to Representation is to be explained thus As no man becomes a Sinner or dieth whose Depravedness and Death were not procured and merited by Adam's first Sin and tho the Pagan Sinners who died did not actually sin against a revealed positive Law as Adam did yet he was the Root of Death to them as well as to the Jews under Moses's Law So no men are quickned justified sanctified or saved but Christ is a Root of Life Grace Justification Holiness and Glory to them in all these by his Merits in some also by his Spirit and Power But yet we conceive Christ may as well answer Adam's Figure here intended by our being quickned justified and saved by Christ's Obedience imputed to us without our being esteemed to have obeyed and suffered in him as Christ was condemned and died for Adam's Sins imputed to him tho he was not esteemed to have sinned in Adam As he was condemned by our Disobedience so we are justified by his Obedience viz. the first by his own Compact with the Father the last by that and the Gospel too He was not condemned by any imputation that made him by the Law a Sinner unless he sinned in Adam neither are we justified by being legally judged Sufferers or Obeyers in him It avails not to say Christ was legally a Sinner and yet not reputed to sin in Adam because Christ was our Root for tho he was our Root as to Grace Acceptance Pardon and Glory and whatever else did proceed from him to us as our Saviour nevertheless if he was a Sinner he could not as to this be our Root unless we derive Sin from him but surely that Denomination must have its Root not in him but in those that were Sinners before him and whose Sins were imputed to him they must denominate that one legal Person into which he came a sinful guilty Person as he doth that one obeying satisfying Person into which we are admitted which Terms our Brethren espousing I argue from Finally we are enclined to set the foresaid Limit to Christ's Representation by this among many other Reasons for in that Rom. 5. 18. where Adam is called a Figure the Death of those Heathens was merited by their own personal Transgressions as well as by Adam's Disobedience But the Elect even when Believers do not merit Life by their own personal Obedience and therefore we are not represented altogether in the
atoning Righteousness 2. They who say it 's by Faith alone that we apply this Righteousness do also grant that Faith is not alone in the person to whom God applies the Righteousness of Christ and when they apply it to themselves Repentance Love c. are Concomitants with Faith And they who think we are justified by Works as they think its God's applying Christ's Righteousness to us and not our applying it to our selves that is the great justifying Act so they grant God justifieth us as soon as we repent and believe with the heart and suspends not a justified State till Works meet for Repentance or the Effects of Faith are produced yea should a man dy then he would be certainly saved 3. They who say it s by Faith alone acknowledg that justifying Faith will certainly produce good Works and if good Works and persevering Holiness do not follow it was a dead Faith and because dead it never was a justifying Faith however men flatter'd themselves Also that Mens Faith tho not their Persons is justified by their Works yea the most Judicious own that if Sin should reign in Believers and they apostatize they would be condemned tho the Promise of Perseverance make that impossible and therefore persevering Holiness and good Works so far continue their justification as they prevent what would bring them into Condemnation and Faith is the Condition of the Continuation of Justification See Dr. Owen of Iustification p. 207 208 306. On the other hand they who say we are justified by Works do account Works to be no more but the executing the foederal consenting Act of Faith and so its Faith exerting it self by various occasions and considering that the Believer's not only forgiving his Enemies but his persevering in Faith and Holiness are plain Conditions in many Promises made thereto and God pronounceth to Believers that he will have no pleasure in any Man who drawerh back and he shall die if Sin reigneth in him Heb. 10. 38. Rom. 8. 13. Mat. 6. 14 15. They conceive that by Perseverance in Faith and true Holiness they are kept from being chargeable with final and total Apostacy and from Obnoxiousness to the Evils denounced by the Gospel against Apostates as such and are adjudged to be under the Influence and Safeguard of the Promises made to Believers as persevering nevertheless they abhor a thought that Perseverance in Faith and Holiness or any good Work is any meriting Righteousness or the least Compensation for Sin or entitling Price of the least Benefit nor exclude they the need of multiplied and continued Pardon or make they any Blessing due of Debt but they rely wholly on Christ's Merits for these things as the only procuring Cause tho they are affected and governed by these places of God's Word which are directed to Believers as part of his Rule of Iudgment well knowing that whatever Sentence the said Words pass in this Life God executes in part now and more at Death but at the great Day it will be solemnly pronounced and perfectly executed These respective Concessions duly weighed secure those who say we are justified by Faith alone from the danger of Licentiousness and those who say we are justified by Works also from detracting from the Honour of Christ's Righteousness as having the sole meriting atoning Virtue and Efficacy in Justification and do not only grant Perseverance but think these conditional Promises and Comminations are apt and designed means of it in Subjects capable of moral Government and whose Warfare is unaccomplished However such different Sentiments may appear to others I lay so little stress upon them that I had not thought it worth my labour to have printed a Sheet against any man who confessed the necessity of saving Faith as described in the Gospel to Justification Repentance and Love still accompanying that Faith in the Object on whom God's justifying Act doth terminate and the Uneffectualness of Faith to save any who neglected to perform good Works and to persevere in Faith and Holiness Such as granted but these things I had never wrote against for scrupling the conditional respect of them to the Gospel-Law But Dr. Crisp's Notions I apprehended dangerous and they so greatly prevailing my Brethren thought my confuting them necessary at that time whereas I had no purpose when I wrote against Dr. Crisp to intermeddle with these other points but some Congregational Brethren in their Attempts against my Book did from a very few occasional Expressions therein accuse us of Socinianism Arminianism and Popery and that they might have some pretence to fix that Charge they turned the Controversy into these lesser Matters whereby I was necessitated either to insist on them however against my Will or else abide under the foresaid severe Imputation to the prejudice not only of my own Ministry but also of most of my Brethren CHAP. VIII An Attempt to accommodate the difference between such as say Christ's Righteousness is imputed only as to Effects and not in se and those of us who think it is imputed in se. FOreseeing an Objection that will be improved against a peaceable Forbearance towards a number however small and that Rigidness may include in that number whomever the Objectors shall disaffect it 's of use to state it Object Granting the forementioned Points to be reduced below a Cause of Dissention yet the Difference cannot be compromised between such as say the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in se for Justification and them who say it is not imputed in se but quoad effectus Answ. I think it may be accommodated at least so far as to cut off just Pretences for hereticating and dividing from each other To which end I will consider these several Opinions and then reduce the difference First Among them who say Christ's Righteousness is imputed in se there be two Opinions most noted and whereto all others are reducible Of both these I have already treated so much that little more is needful 1. Some think the Elect are judicially according to the Law of Works accounted to have done and suffered in Christ all the Law demanded both as the Punishment of Sin and the Merit of eternal Life Such must hold that Christ's Death and Obedience are the formal Righteousness of the Elect and the formal Cause of Justification and that from the first moment of their personal Subsistence yea and except making Christ to be their Representative without any Gift of that Righteousness it being imputed not of Grace but of Legal Iustice as Adam's Obedience had been if he had finally obeyed and his Offence now is upon his sinning There are others who are for this judicial reckoning Sinners to obey and suffer in Christ but they hold they are not adjudged to have done this till they are Believers and then they are legally just before God and as such entitled to eternal Life These speak more safely but less consistently they limit the time from a Conviction that the