it being in terminis in the Text. I dare say no man that is called a Christian did ever deny it and therefore he might have spared his pains in transcribing any more places of Scripture for confirmation of it But I do much marvel That so learned a man as Mr. W. who pretends to be more then ordinarily accurate should take in hand a controverted Text and never open the Terms nor state the Question which he meant to handle for though it be a sinful curiosity for men by Dicotomies and Tricotomies Divisions and Subdivisions to mince and crumble the Scriptures till it hath lost the sense yet surely a workman that needs not to be ashamed ought rightly to divide the Word of Truth explain things that are obscure and dubious and where divers senses are given as he knows there are of this Text to disprove the false and confirm that which he conceives is true § 3. There is a vaste distance between the Apostles Proposition a man is justified by Faith and Mr. Woodbridges Inference Ergo Justification doth in no sence precede Faith Justification by Faith and Justification before Faith are not opposita but diversa though they differ yet they are not contradictory to each other The Scriptures which prove the former intend no strife or quarrel against the latter in a word The proof of the one doth not disprove the other The Scripture which he made his theam Rom. 5.1 Therefore being justified by Faith we have peace with God c concludes nothing at all against Justification before Faith For 1 we may without any violence to the Text place the Comma after justified as thus Being justified by Faith we have peace with God This reading is agreeable both to the Apostles scope and to the Context His scope here was not to shew the efficacy of Faith in our Justification but what benefits we have by the death of Christ the first of which is Justification and the consequent thereof is peace with God Again the Illative Particle Therefore shews that this place is a Corollary or Deduction from the words immediately foregoing which ascribed our Justification wholly to the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ Chap. 4 ult The Apostle thence infers Being justified q. d. Seeing we are justified freely without works by the death of Christ by Faith we have peace with God the Lord powerfully drawing our hearts to believe this we have boldness and confidence towards God the cause of fear being taken away or as the Syriack and vulgar Latin read it Let us have peace with God let us by Faith improve this Grace for the establishing of our hearts in perfect peace Now according to this reading his own Text will give in evidence against him That Faith is not the cause or antecedent but an effect and consequent of our Justification procured and obtained by the death of Christ. But 2 if we take the words as commonly they are read the sence comes all to one scil That being justified by Christ who is the sole object of our Faith we have peace with God who by the Faith which he creates in us causeth us to enjoy this reconciliation by vertue whereof our Conscience is so firmly grounded that we are not moved by any temptation or beaten down by any terror The Work of Faith is not to procure our Justification but to beget peace in our Consciences So then the words being rightly understood they neither deny Justification before Faith nor assert Justification by the act or habit of Faith which Mr. W. would conclude from thence § 4. The next Scripture whose suffrage is desired against us is Gal. 2.16 We have believed in Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ. Where sayes Mr. W. Justification is expresly made a Consequent of Faith To which I Answer 1 That this doth no more infer That we are not justified before we believe then that of our Saviour Matth. 5.44 45. Love your enemies c. that ye may be the children of your Father in Heaven infers That works do go before adoption contrary to Eph. 1.5 6. 1 Joh. 3.3 the phrase that ye may be there is as much as that ye may be manifested and declared that ye may shew your selves or that all men may know that ye are the children of God by practising a duty so much above the reach of Nature and Morality A like place we have Rom. 3.26 God set forth his Son to declare his Righteousness that he might be just Now shall we hence infer That God was not just before or that Gods justice was a consequent of his sending Christ Now if we can understand that clause that he might be just That he might be known and acknowledged to be just Why may we not as well take this of the Apostle that we might be justified in the same construction that we might know that we are justified and live in the comfort and enjoyment of it So that not the Being of our Justification but the Knowledge and Feeling of it is a consequent of Faith Things in Scripture are then said to be when they are known to be so John 15.8 our Saviour tells the Disciples That if they did bear much fruit they should be his Disciples i. e. They should be known and manifested to be his Disciples as Chap. 13.35 Our Saviour is said at his Resurrection to have become the Son of God Acts 13.33 Because then as the Apostle speaks he was powerfully declared to be the Son of God Rom. 1.3 Again things are saâ—d not to be which do not appear as Melchisedec is said to be without Father and Mother c. Heb. 7.3 Because his Linage and Pedigree is not known so we are said to be justified or not justified according as this Grace is revealed to us But 2 in the Text it is We have believed that we might be justified by Faith so that from hence it can be inferred onely That we are not justified by Faith before believing and that the sentence of Justification is not terminated in our Consciences before we do believe § 5. His next Proof is grounded upon the order of the words Rom. 8.30 As glory saith he follows Justification so doth Justification follow Vocation unto Faith Whereunto I answer 〈◊〉 That the order of words in Scripture do not shew the order and dependance of the things themselves The Jews have a Proverb Non esse prius aut posterius in Scriptura The first and last must not be strictly urged in Scripture for that is not always set first which is first in Nature If we should reason from the order of words in Scripture we should make many absurdities as 1 Sam. 6.14 It is said that they clave the Wood of the Cart and offered the Kine for a burnt offering unto the Lord And then in the next Verse it follows That the Levites took down the Ark out of the Cart as
by Justification we are to understand a Justification in the Court of Conscience or the Evidence and Declaration of a Justification already past before God So that Faith is said to justifie us not because it doth justifie us before God but because it doth declare to our Consciences that we are justified Now because this report is very imperfect I shall crave the patience of the Reader whilest I declare our Judgement a little more fully concerning this Matter together with the Grounds and Reasons that do uphold it and then I shall return to secure this Answer against the Exceptions Mr. W. hath made against it But first I shall shew the several Explications which Divines have given of his Proposition A man is justified by Faith CHAP. VI. The several Opinions of Divines touching the meaning of this Position A man is justified by Faith THe Question depending between me and Mr. W. is not Whether we are justified by Faith which the Scripture frequently affirms and no man that I know denies it Papists and Protestants Orthodox and Socinians Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants do unanimously consent That we are justified by Faith All the difference is about the Sense and Meaning of this Proposition A man is justified by Faith Whether Faith therein be to be taken Properly or Tropically For though there be great variety in Expression amongst Divines concerning this Matter yet all their several Opinions and Explications may be reduced unto these two heads The first takes Faith in sensu proprio for the act or habit of Faith the other takes Faith metonymicè relativè for the object of Faith i. e. The obedience and satisfaction of Jesus Christ. § 2. Our Protestant Divines who have hitherto been counted Orthodox do take Faith in this Proposition A man is justified by Faith in a Tropical and Fâ—gurative Sence as thus A man is justified in the sight of God from all sin and punishment by Faith i. e. By the Obedience and Righteousness of Jesus Christ in whom we believe and upon whom we relie for Life and Righteousness Nor is this any unusual Trope either in Scripture or in other Authors to put Habitum vel actum pro objecto as Rom. 8.24 Hope that is seen is not hope i. e. The thing that is seen is not hoped for Christ is oftentimes called our Hope our Joy our Love c. because he is the object of these Acts and Affections when the same thing is attributed distinctly both to the act and the object it must needs be attributed to one in a proper and to the other in an improper sence and therefore says Dr. Downham When Justification is attributed to Faith it cannot be attributed in the same sence as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of Speech but of necessity it is to be understood by a Metonymy Faith being put for the object of Faith which is the Righteousness of Christ c. And holy Pemble If we list not to be contentious it is plain enough saith he that in those places where the Apostle treats of Justification by Faith he means the Grace of God in Jesus Christ opposing Works and Faith that is the Law and the Gospel the Righteousness of the Law to the Righteousness of the Gospel which is no other but the Righteousness of Christ. Thus saith he Faith is taken Gal. 3.23 before Faith came i. e. Before Christ came and the clear exhibition of his Righteousness And in this sence as another hath observed it is used at least thirteen times in this Chapter where the Apostle expresly treats of our Justification before God Albertus Pighius though a Papist was so far convinced of this truth by reading of Calvins Institutions that he acknowledged If we speak formally and properly we are justified neither by Faith nor Charity but by the onely Righteousness of Christ communicated to us and by the onely mercy of God forgiving our sins § 3. Some of our Divines who do utterly deny That Faith in this Question is taken sensu proprio or that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of believing is imputed to us for Righteousness do yet ascribe an instrumentallity or inferior causality unto Faith it self in our Justification before God They say That we are justified by Faith instrumentally and relatively which terms I confess sound harshly in my ears but I hope I shall be excused if I do not understand them seeing a far learneder man then my self hath professed That they were not very intelligible to him That Faith is taken relatively in this Question of Justification to wit For the object it relates unto Christ and his Righteousness I do readily grant but that it justifies us Relatively I cannot assent to it for it seems to me to carry this sence with it either 1 that Faith doth procure our Justification though not by its own worth and dignity yet through the vertue and merit of its object As the Papists say of Works That they do justifie and save us tincta sanguine Christi being dipped in the Blood of Christ Or 2 that Faith together with Christ its object doth make us just in the sight of God whereby it is made a social cause with the blood of Christ which shall be sufficiently disproved anon Again that Faith is a passive Instrument of our Justification to wit such an Instrument whereby we receive and apply this benefit to our selves was shewn before but that it is an active efficacious Instrument to make us just and righteous in the sight of God is no part of my Creed For 1. it seems to me a contradiction to say That Faith is not to be taken sensu proprio but metonymicè for the object thereof and yet say That we are justified by Faith instrumentally for it is not the object but the act of Faith which is an Instrument Faith considered as an Instrument is taken sensu proprio and consequently the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere which they disclaim must be said to justifie 2. Mr. Baxter in my judgement disputes rationally against this notion If Faith saith he be the Instrument of our Justification it is the Instrument either of God or man not of man for Justification is Gods act he is the sole Justifier Rom. 3.26 man doth not justifie himself not of God for it is not God that believeth To which I adde that God neither needs nor is capable of using an Instrument in the act of justifying for though he useth Instruments to declare and reveal this Grace to sinners yet not to will it to particular persons the acts of his will are not wrought by any Organ or Instrument without himself 3. By making Faith the Instrument of our Justification Justification is made the Effect and Faith the Cause and so consequently a man shall be said to justifie himself whereas the Scripture every where ascribes our Justification unto God and Christ making us totally passive in this work Rom.
of the Act or of the Object of Faith We have shewed before that the Apostle in his disputes about Justification in these fore-mentioned Epistles where he opposeth Faith to Works he takes Faith in a Tropical sense for the Object and not the Act of Faith for else there had been no ground for him to make any opposition at all between Faith and Works and in affirming That we are justified by Faith he had contradicted himself in saying That we are not justified by Works seeing Faith or the Act of Believing is a work of ours no less then love And therefore it is evident that the Apostle when he concludes That we are justified by Faith and not by Works understands by Faith the Object thereof to wit Righteousness imputed and not inherent which by way of distinction and opposition to the other he calls the Righteousness of God because it is out of us in Christ God-man The reason why the Apostle calls the Object by the name of the Act Christs Righteousness by the name of Faith besides the elegancy of the Trope is because Faith ascribes all unto Christ it being an act of self-dereliction a kinde of holy despair a denying and renouncing of all fitness and worthiness in our selves a going unto Christ looking towards him and a roulling of our selves upon his Alsufficiency So that in the Apostles sense we deny not That Faith justifieth in the sight of God Faith I say taken objectively to wit For Christ and his Righteousness it is for his Merits and Satisfaction alone that we are accounted Just and Righteous at Gods Tribunal But if Faith be taken properly for the Act of Believing we say indeed That it onely evidenceth that Justification which we have in Christ. Nor is this any contradiction to the Holy Ghost who ascribes our Justification in the sight of God to Chrâ—st alone § 2. Next he calls it A most unsound Assertion That Faith doth evidence our Justification before Faith Is the Apostles definition of Faith Heb. 11.1 Faith is the evidence of things not seen An unsound Assertion Though some do ascribe more to Faith then an Act of evidencing yet I never met with any one before that did totally deny this use thereof All the knowledge that we have of our Justification is onely by Faith seeing it cannot be discerned by Sence or Reason either we have no evidence of our Justification and consequently do live without hope or if we have it is Faith that doth evidence it to our souls Now let our Justification be when it will if Faith doth evidence it it will follow That our Justification was before that Evidencing act of Faith for actuâ— pendet ab objecto the Object is before the Act. But I will not anticipate Mr. Woodbridges Reasons § 3. If sayes he Faith doth evidence our Justification it is either improperly as an effect doth argue the cause as laughing and crying may he said to evidence reason in a Childe c. Or else properly and thus either immediately and axiomatically or remotely and syllogistically 1 Faith doth not evidence Justification improperly as the Effect doth argue the Cause I shall readily grant him that Faith doth not justifie evidentially as a mark sign or token but as a knowledge and adherence unto Christ our Justifier as that Organ or Instrument whereby we look not upon our Faith but upon Christ our Righteousness and by the same Faith do cleave unto him They that make Faith a condition of our Justification use it but as a sign or as an argument affected to prove That a person is justified seeing that where one is the other is also where there is Faith there is Justification and for this cause innumerable other signs and marks are brought in to evidence this sign which are more obscure and difficult to be known then Faith it self nay which cannot be known to be effects of Blessedness but by Faith whereby poor souls either walk in darkness live in a doubting and uncertain condition all their days or else compass themselves about with sparks of their own kindling and walk in the light of their own fire fetching their comfort from Faith and not by Faith from Christ. Though I might fairly pass by this Branch of his Dilemma it being none of my Tenent and favored more by his own then my opinion yet I shall briefly give my fence of his Reasons That Faith doth not evidence Justification as a sign § 4. His first Reason is because then Justification by Faith would not necessarily be so much as Justification in our Consciences A Christian may have Faith and yet not have the evidence that he himself is justified Many Christians have that in them which would prove them justified whiles yet their Consciences do accuse and condemn them To which I Answer 1. That Mr. W. may be pleased to consider how well this agrees with that passage of his Pag. 15. Where he alledgeth the words of the Apostle 1 John 3.20 to prove That if our hearts do condemn us God doth much more condemn us 2. I should grant him That if Faith did evidence our Justification onely as a sign or some remote effect thereof like other works of Sanctification it would be but a dark and unsatisfying evidence 3. Whereas he sayes That doubting Christians have something in them that would prove them justified either it is something that precedes Faith or something that follows Faith or else Faith it self First Nothing that precedes Faith doth prove a man justified secondly Nothing that follows Faith is so apt to prove it as Faith it self because it is the first of all Inherent Graces it is by Faith that we know our Love Patience c. to be Fruits unto God whereas some make doubting to be a sign of Faith they may as well make darkness a sign of light it being in its own nature contrary thereunto and therefore it must be proved by Faith it self 4. Though a true Christian may have a doubting accusing Conscience as doubtless there is flesh and corruption in their Consciences as well as in their other faculties and there is no sin whereunto we have more and stronger temptations then to unbelief yet wheresoever there is Faith there is some evidence of this Grace as in the least spark of fire there is light though not so much as in a flame And the least twinkling Star gives us some light though not enough to dispel the darkness or to make it day There are several degrees of Faith there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong Faith and a weak Faith Now the least degree of Faith carries some light and evidence therewith and according to the measure of Faith is the evidence and perswasion of our Justification § 5. Secondly He urgeth If Faith did evidence Justification as an effect of it then we might as truly be said to be faithed by our Justification as to
be justified by our Faith I see no absurdity at all to say That Faith is from Justification causally and Justification by Faith evidentially That Grace which justifies us is the Cause and Fountain of all good things whatsoever both of Spiritual and Temporal Blessings and more especially of Faith 2 Pet. 1.1 Phil. 1.29 Yet doth it not follow That We must invert the order of the Gospel and instead of saying Believe and thou shalt be justified we must say hence forward Thou art justified therefore believe 1 Because it is not the priviledge of all men to whom we Preach but onely of the Elect of God And 2 because we know not who are justified no more then who are elected though Faith be an effect or sign of Election yet it doth not follow that we must say to any Thou art elected therefore believe 3 When the cause is not notior effectu we must ascend from the effect to the cause as in the present case § 6. Thirdly He loads it with this seeming absurdity That then it will unavoidably follow That we are justified by works as well as by Faith for works are an effect of Justification as well as Faith 1 It follows unavoidably from his own opinion For if Faith be taken in a proper sence for the Act of Believing it follows That we are justified by a work of our own or if Faith be the condition of Justification it will follow likewise That we are no more justified by Faith then by other works as Repentance Charity c. Which Mr. W. and others of his strain do make the conditions of their supposed Justification so that he is like to father the Childe which he hath sought to lay at our doors 2 It is not denied That Works do declare and evidence our Justification where the Apostle denies our Justification to be by Works he speaks of our real and formal Justification in the sight of God which he affirms is by Faith scil Objectively taken and not of the declaring or evidencing of our Justification which Saint James in his Epistle attributes to Works in reference to men and other Scriptures to Faith in reference to the Conscience of the person justified Romans 1.17 Galatians 2.16 3 Though works be the effect of justification as well as faith yet it will no follow that works do evidence our justificationas well as faith doth 1 Because every effect is not apt to evidence its cause especially when the same effect may proceed from severall causes as smoak is not so certaine an evidence of fire as light and heat is because steems and mists are so like to smoak so works do not evidence our justification so clearly and certainly 〈◊〉 Faith doth because works may proceed from principles of natural ingenuity and morality c. as those Heathens have performed 2 Because every effect doth not evidence to every faculty a like but this to one and that to another as for instance forme or Physiognomy doth evidence a man to sence but yet reason requires another manner of evidence so conscience requires a better evidence of our justification then works can give Workâ— do evidence it in the judgement of charity and before men but they do not evidence it in the judgement of infallibility or with that clearnesse and demonstrative certainty which the conscience requires conscience will need a better evidence then works can give Paul could plead his works before men 2 Cor. 1.12 which yet he never mentions in the pleas of his conscience towards God and that which conscience dares not plead before God can bee no good evidence unto conscience § 7. The other horn of his Dilemma will be frayd as easily as the former Faith saith he doth not evidence justification properly for then it must doe it either immediately and Axiomatically as it is an assent to this Proposition I am justified or else remotely and syllogistically by drawing a particular conclusion of our own justification out of generall propositions But Faith doth not evidence our justification Axiomatically c. For 1 There is no such thing written the Scripture doth no where say Thou Paul thou Peter or thou Thomas art justified Ergo Justification cannot be evidenced by Faith immediately Mr. W. here mistakes the nature of true justifying Faith who it seems conceives it to be a bare intellectuall assent to the truth of a Proposition such as Devils and Reprobates may attaine unto contrary to all Orthodox Divines who doe place Faith more in the Will then in the Understanding Justifying Faith essentially include 1. An assent of the understanding to the truth of the Scriptures revealing the sole-sufficiency of Christ for the reconciliation of sinners and the non-imputation of sin as also the will and command of God that all men should beleeve in him alone for life and salvation 2 a Fiduciall adherence and reliance of the will upon the same Christ the understanding being made effectually to assent and subscribe to the fore-mentioned propositions sub ratione veri the will is also powerfully drawne to accept imbrace and adhere unto Christ sub natione boni Our Divines doe include both these acts in the definition of Faith making it to be fiducialis assensus or assensus cum gustu such an assent unto the truths of the Gospell as that withall the soule tastes an ineffable sweetnesse in the same and thereupon â—esteth and relieth upon Christ for all the benefits of his death They make the principall act of Faith to be the reliance of the heart or wil upon Jesus Christ and therefore they determine that the object of Justifying Faith is not a Proposition or Axiom but Christ the mercy of God in Christ on whom whosoever rests and roules himselfe upon the call of the Gospel hath a certain evidence of his Interest in Christ and in all the treasures of righteousnesse and remission that are in him according to the degree of his affiance or his taste of sweetnesse in Christ is his evidence or assurance of his owne interest and propriety in him There is no sense that doth apprehend its object with more certainty then that of Tasting as he that tastes hony knows both the sweetnesse thereof and that he himselfe injoyes it So he that tastes the sweetnesse of the Gospell Promises and of that precious Grace which is therein revealed knows his interest and propriety therein It is observed of Jonathan 1 Sam. 14.27 When he tasted a little hony his eyes were inlightned and the Psalmist exhorts us to taste and see how good the Lord is The soule that tastes i. e. beleeves the Gospell and the goodnesse of God therein revealed to sinners sees and knowes his interest therein for all manner of sweetnesse is a consequent and effect of some propriety which we have in that good thing that causeth it unto which the nearer our interest is the greater is the sweetnesse which we find in it The Soul cannot taste
Labors in the Woâ—â— of the Gospel may be more successful unto you and to all others that do partake of them Which will be the greateâ—â— joy on â—arth unto him who is Yours in the nearest Bonds W. Eyre The Third day of the Ninth Moneth 1653. TO THE Christian Reader FRIEND IF thou knowest me and how many Burdens do lie upon me I dare say thou dost not expect an Apology for the tarriance of this little peece For though considering the work thou mightest have had it much sooner yet by reason of my much sickness daily services in the Ministry and the cares of my Family which are not ordinary though I had finished it eight moneths since it was not likely thou shouldst have had it now However If any shall upbraid me as Ecchius did Melancthon when he delayed to Answer an Argument he had put unto him It is not praise-worthy sayes he if thou dost not answer it presently I shall say to him as Melancthon to the Doctor I seek not my own praise in this matter but the truth and perhaps it may succeed more to the advantage of the truth that it was delayed I lately met with a passage which fell from the Pen of a Leading Man in these times whereof I held it necessary to give thee my thoughts to remove the prejudices which probably it hath begotten against this discourse There is says the Author a very judicious Man Mr. B. Woodbridge of Newbeâ—y hath written so excellent well against this Error sâ—il Justification before the act of believing or without conditions and in so small room being but one Sermon that I would advise all private Christians to get one of them as one of the best easiest cheapest preservatives against the contagion of this part of Antinomianism It is far from me to envy the praises of Mr. Woodbridge being ready to give a more ample Testimony to his personal worth I do freely acknowledge that in natural and acquired parts for his time he is like Saul amongst the people higher by the head and shoulders then most of his Brethren However that commends not the cause he is engaged in It is not to be wondered at that Mr. B. hath given this superlative encomium to Mr. Woodbridges Sermon he knew well enough that it would rebound upon himself Mr. W. being a son of his own Faith and this notion of his but a spark from out of Mr. Baxters forge I suppose Mr. Baxters praises or dispraises are not greatly regarded by sober-minded Christians who have observed how highly he magnifies J. Goodwin with others of his notion and how slightingly he mentions Dr. Twisse and all our Protestant Divines that differ from him How excellently Mr. W. hath written of this matter will appear to the impartial Examiner of this Surveigh Learned Men have held that the best way to demolish Error is to build up Truth as to drive out Darkness is to let in Light Now M. W. though he endeavors to prove no Justification before Faith yet throughout all his Sermon he never so much as hinted how or in what sense we are justified by Faith the Explication whereof according to the sense of our Protestant Writers would have ended the matter For the Question depending between us is not so much about the time as the terms and matter of our Justification to wit How and by what means we are made Just and Righteous in the sight of God Which we affirm to be by the perfect Righteousness of Christ alone which God doth impute unto us freely without Works and Conditions performed by us though we have not the sense and comfort of it any otherwise then by Faith The Antecedency of our Justification in foro Dei before Faith is but a Corrollary from this Position and Mr. B. acknowledgeth it to be a necessary consequence from the imputation of Christs Active Obedience which hath hitherto been the unanimous Tenent of our Protestant Divines and Mr. Norton of N. E. thinks it no less then Heresie to deny it His advice unto all private Christians to buy one of these Sermons argues rather his conceit of himself then his charity to them that he dares take upon him the office of a Universal Dictator to prescribe not onely to his Kedermisterians but to all private Christians what Books they shall read Whether Mr. Woodbridges Tract may be called the best amongst none good that are written against this Truth I shall not dispute But that it is such an easie peece for all private Christians to understand I doe very much doubt though the men of Kedermister who I fear are fed but with little better food can swallow down such choakly meat as his Paradoxes and distinctions of Faith evidencing Axiomatically or Syllogistically Of Justification Impetrated and Exemplified Of our working actively and passively Of Promises in the Covenant which are not parts of the Covenant but means to bring us into Covenant c. yet unto other private Christians I dare say they are like Herring bones in the throat and not a whit more intelligible then a Lecture of Arabeck The next motive he hath his upon probably may take with many the cheapnesse of the book which he doth commend but if the price and the profit were put together I dare say the Buyer will confesse that he hath given a great too much He buyes poison too dear who hath it for nothing As for the title of Antinomianism which he bestowes upon our Doctrine it is no great slander out of Mr. Baxters mouth with whom an Antinomian and an Anti-Papist are termini convertibles Let him shew us any one Church or single person accounted Orthodox till this present age that did not hold some yea most of those Points which he cals Antinomianism and I will openly acknowledge I have done him wrong otherwise let him bee looked upon as a Slanderer and Revilâ—r of all the Protestant Churches who under a shew of friendship hath endeavored to expose them to the scorne and obloquie of their Enemies Mr. B. the better to ingage his Reader tels him his Doctrine is of a middle straine as if all the Reformed Churches had hitherto been in an extreame in this fundamentall point of our Justification It is like he thinks the Papists are much nearer to the line of truth then any of them But in earnest is Mr. Baxters Doctrine of a middle strain I am sure he gives as much unto Works and lesse unto Christ then the Papists doe He makes Works by vertue of Gods Promise and Covenant to be the meritorious causes of Justification and Salvation and in no other sence doe the Papists affirm it I must needs say I never yet met with that Papist which calls Christ a sine qua non i. e. a cause which effects nothing of our Justification But I shall desire the Reader for his better satisfaction to paralell Mr. Baxters Doctrine with these ten Positions of Bishop Gardiner
Peace and Unity are bounded with a salva fide as that Rom. 12.18 If it be possible now Id solum possumus quod jure possumus nothing is possible but what is lawful so that if we may with a good Conscience and without treachery to the truths of Christ we ought to live peaceably with all men So Rom. 14.19 it is not barely Follow after peace but peace and the things which make for edification it must be an edifying and not a destroying peace such as may promote and not hâ—nder the building up of the Church Vid Rom. 15.2 and 1 Cor. 14.29 The unity we are bid to strive for Eph. 4.3 is the unity of the Spirit and not like that of Simeon and Levi who were Brethren in iniquity For as one observes well out of Basil the Great If we once shake the simplicity of the Faith Disputes and Contentions will prove endless 4. If Christians in their Publick Disputes do so far forget the Rules of Sobriety and Moderation as to betake themselves to those carnal Weapons of Jeering Scoffing and Reviling each other it is an iniquity to be punished by the Judge because it tends so directly to the breaking of our Civil Peace and is more scandalous in them then in any others Would the Civil Magistrate Interpose himself so far as to be the Moderator of our differences in this behalf these Publick Debates would be of singular use CHAP. III. Being a Surveigh of Mr. Woodbridges Title Page wherein the Opinion he opposeth is cleared from the Aspersion of Antinomianism IT is a common saying Fronti nulla fides We may no more judge of Books by their Titles then of Strumpets by their Foreheads or of Apothecaries Drugs by the Inscriptions of the Pots which do contain them whose out-sides many times are Remedies when the inside is stark poyson The natures of things do not always answer the Names and Inscriptions which are put upon them We read of Pompey that he built a Theater Cum titulo Templi and of Apolinarius the Heretick That he had a School Cum titulo Orthodoxi Nestorius also vailed himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Montanus who would have our Saviour to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 assumed unto himself the Title of Paracletus nay Apelles the Painter drew his filthy Strumpet Cum titulo Veneris with the Inscription of a Goddess that so he might more easily bring men to the adoration of her There is nothing more common then for men to adorn their Errors with the Robe of Truth and to deform the Truth with the Rags of Error I hope therefore that the Reader will be more wary then to judge of this mans Doctrine by the specious Title which he gives his own or that black mark wherewith he hath branded the Opinion which he doth oppose He calls his own Opinion Justification by Faith and the Doctrine he opposeth an Antinomian Error both which may be understood Per antiphrasin for Justification by Works and an Evangelical Truth As for his own Opinion he had more fitly stiled it Justification by Works taking Faith as he doth in a proper sence and attributing no more to Faith then to other works of Sanctification which in his sence do morally qualifie men for Justification and Salvation I cannot think him a hearty Advocate for Justification by Faith who holds That we are not justified till the day of judgement which I am credibly informed this Author hath Publickly maintained since he Preached this Sermon But how ill his Book doth deserve this Title shall appear in discussing the parts of it § 2. And as for the imputation he hath cast on our Doctrine which he calls an Antinomian Error I doubt not but it will redound more unto his shame then unto ours It hath been an old continued practise of Satan to blast the truths and wayes of God with odious Nick-names purposely to deter the simple from looking into them as few men will come near to a house which is marked for the Plague It were easie to fill a Volume with those opprobrious Terms and Titles which in all ages have been cast upon the Truth and the Professors of it Sure I am Satan hath gained no small advantage by these Hellish means Tertullian observes That the Christians were hated and persecuted for no other crime but the crime of their Name So there are many things in these days generally decryed that are onely guilty of an evil name I doubt not but there will be found many a precious truth in those Bundles of Errors which have been heaped together by some Godly-men in this last age 'T is but an easie Confutation to cry out Error and Heresie and this I have often observed That they who are most liberal with these loose invectives are generally sparing of solid Arguments Whether the Opinion which Mr. W. opposeth be an Error sub judice lis est How well he hath acquitted himself in the proof of his charge we shall see anon For my own part I dislike not his or any other mans Zeal against Errors and Heresies provided they will allow that liberty unto others which they assume to themselves to witness against that which they conceive Erroneous I cannot be perswaded by all that Mr. W. hath yet said That this Tenent of Justification in foro Dei without Works or Conditions performed by us is an Error much less an Antinomian Error If we may judge of it by those general Diagnosticks which Divines have given us to discern between Truth and Error I am sure it hath the complexion of a saving truth That Doctrine which gives most glory unto God in Christ is certainly true and the contrary is as certainly false Let that sayes Bradwardine be acknowledged for the true Religion which gives most glory unto God and renders God most favorable and gracious unto man Now let such as are least in the Church judge which Opinion gives most glory unto God Either 1 that which ascribes the whole Work of our Salvation to the Grace of God and the meritorious purchase of Jesus Christ or 2 that which makes men Moral causes of their own salvation which ascribes no more unto Christ then the purchasing of a new way whereby we may be saved if we perform the terms and conditions required of us If the former in his Judgement be Antinomianism I shall freely profess That by it alone though he call it Heresie I have hope of Life and Salvation § 3. I am sure he is greatly mistaken if he derives the descent of this Doctrine from the Antinomians who were a Sect of Libertines or carnal Gospellers which appeared in Germany soon after the Reformation began scil about the year 1538 The Ring-leader whereof was Islibius Agricola the Compiler of the Interim they merited this name of Antinomians by their loose Opinions and looser Practises against whom Luther wrote several Books and Calvin bitterly inveighed in
Predestination If Gods decree be absolute Nemo vigilet nemo jâ—junet nemo libidini contradicet c. The Papists say It follows That if we be justified by Faith onely then we need not do good works The Remonstrants and their followers say That if a Believer cannot fall from Grace then need he not fear to commit any sin whatsoever Nor do these Consequences flow any whit more naturally from our Tenent then they do from these Doth it follow That because all the Elect are by means of Christs death actually reconciled unto God and freed from the condemnation of the Law That therefore men may live as they list that they need not hear believe and obey the Gospel How doth this sow pillows under mens elbows or lull asleep in security more then the Doctrine of absolute Election Seeing as all men are not elected so neither are all men reconciled unto God nor can any man know That he is elected and reconciled unto God but by and thorow Faith which Faith is wrought in men by the Preaching of the Word and doth certainly produce a holy life § 7. I confess I am yet to seek of the Reason of his other Deduction That this Assertion of actual reconciliation before Faith overthrows the comfort of true Believers and destroyes the ground nature use and end of Faith Is it an uncomfortable Doctrine to tell men That we are not sharers with Christ in effecting of our peace with God and in procuring the pardon of our sins and that Christ hath finished this work before we knew it Is it not much more comfortable to poor souls that Christ hath absolutely and by himself obtained forgiveness for sinners then that he hath procured this Grâ—â—e but conditionally upon condition we perform such and such 〈◊〉 for which we have no strength or ability in our selves Whence have the Saints drawn all their comfort Surely not from Faith or any other work of theirs but by Faith from Christ and from the perfection and al-sufficiency of his Sacrifice Not onely the Protestants but the Papists themselves though in the Schools they contend for the dignity and congruity of works that they are Moral causes or necessary conditions of Justification and Salvation yet on their death beds they utterly renounce them they exhort men in distress of Conscience to roul themselves wholly upon Jesus Christ. In a form prescribed for visiting of the sick the Priest or Minister was enjoyned to put these Questions to the sick party Dost thou believe to come to glory not by thy own merits but by the vertue and merit of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ And dost thou believe That our Lord Jesus Christ did die for our salvation and that none can be saved by his own merits or by any other means but by the merit of his passion Whereunto when the sick person answered affirmatively I do believe it the Priest is bid to exhort him in this wise Go to therefore as long as thy soul remaineth in thee place thy whole confidence in his death onely have confidence in no other thing commit thy self wholly to his death with this alone cover thy self wholly intermingle thy self wholly wrap thy whole self in his death c. Dangerous saith Bernard is the habitation of those that trust in their own works And in another place Ubi tuta c. What safe â—est or security can the weak soul finde but in the wounds of his Saviour As he is mighty to save so dwell I there with most safety Parisiensis in his Book of Divine Rhetorick Thou must beware saith he in thy striving with God that thou dost not build upon a weak foundation which he doth that trusts in his own works Gerson often inculcates this That before the tribunal of God we must onely plead the merits of Christ Bishop Gardner though he would not have this gap to be opened to the people yet he acknowledged it to be the most comfortable Doctrine to such as were in his condition he being then on his death bed Which is the more to be observed because in his life time he had stickled so much for our Adversaries Conditional Justification Bellarmine himself when he had written divers Books for Justification by Inherent Righteousness in the end concludes That for fear of vain-glory and by reason of the uncertainty of our own works Tutissimum est c. It is the safest way to place all our trust in the Mercy of God and of Jesus Christ so that we may say as Moses Their rock is not as our rock our Enemies themselves being Judges Deut. 32.31 § 8. Mr. Cr. hath not the least reason to charge us with destroying the Ground of Faith for the Ground of Faith is either Fundamentum Quod or Fundamentum Quo. Material and Personal or else Doctrinal and Ministerial We say with all true Christians That the onely Material or Personal Foundation whereupon a poor soul can build securely for Life and Justification is Jesus Christ Now the Doctrinal Foundation whereby our Faith is united to the former we affirm with Calvin and many more that it is Gratuita misericordiae in Christo promissio The free promise of Mercy in opposition to those Conditional Promises which send men partly to Christ and partly to their own works and therefore our Adversaries are much more obnoxious to this Censure of Destroying the Ground of Faith who allow it no other support then Conditional Promises whereby mens hope and confidence is made to lean more upon themselves then it doth on Christ much more upon their own works then it doth upon his Righteousness The forementioned Author hath well observed That if our Faith doth relie never so little upon our own works it cannot possibly stand fast that soul will never attain to any setled assurance of his Salvation that builds his Faith upon such a sandy foundation § 9. The nature of Faith receives not the least prejudice by our Doctrine for if we define it as most of our old Protestant Divines have done Certa indubitata persuasio A firm and certain perswasion of the favor of God and the pardon of our sins it confirms our Tenent for mens sins must be pardoned before they can believe it or else of necessity they must believe a lie All men know that the object doth precede the act unless it be when the act gives a being to the object Or if we make it to be fiducia the trust or reliance of the soul upon Jesus Christ it receives no small encouragement from this consideration That Christ hath finished whatsoever was necessary by Divine appointment for the Justification of sinners not expecting the least condition to be performed by us for that end Our Faith is never so impregnable as when it rests entirely upon Jesus Christ. And as for the ends and uses of Faith which are cheifly to give us boldness and
of Grace and not those works which we do by the aid of Grace But Mr. Pemble answers well This distinction of works done without grace and works done by grace was devised by one that had neither wit nor grace being a meer trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as do indefinitely exclude all works from our Justification without distinguishing either of the time when they are done whether before or after o◠of the aid and help whereby they are done whether by Nature or by Grace Others say that when the Apostle denies That we are justified by works he means that we are not justified by the works of the Law but yet by works required in the Gospel such as are Faith and Faithful actions we may be justified To which I answer 1 That the Apostle speaks indefinitely now the rule is Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguit An indefinite Proposition is equivalent to a universal A man is not justified by works is as much as if he had said A man is not justified by any works of his own 2 The Apostle excludes all works from our Justification which do make the reward to be a due debt Rom. 4.4 5. Now the works required in the Gospel supposing it to be a Conditional Covenant when they are performed do make the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give no less then works required in the Law 3 He denies expresly that Abraham was justified by faithful actions which he performed by the help and assistance of Gods Spirit Rom 4.2 4 They are the same works for the substance which are commanded in the Law and the Gospel there is no Precept enjoyned us in the New Testament which is not also commanded us in the Moral Law though the Law doth not expresly command us to believe in Christ yet virtually and by consequence it doth The Law requires us to believe whatsoever God shall reveal or propose to us to be believed and consequently to believe in Christ when God in his Gospel shall reveal him to us There is no reason therefore to interpret this Proposition A man is not justified by works He is not justified by Legal but by Evangelical works seeing they are for substance one and the same 5 There would be no such opposition between Justification by Works and Justification by Faith as the Apostle makes if we were justified by Evangelical works of our own performing All his disputing about Justification would amount but to meer Logomachy or strife of words for there was never any man so sottish as to think that a sinner can be justified by Legal works unless the Law be mitigated and the rigor thereof be in part remitted The Apostle doth not dispute against Justification by works which we cannot perform but by works which men presume they are able to perform He excludes not onely perfect works but all manner of works that are wrought by us § 7. 2. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be a perfect Righteousness then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts But the Righteousness whereby we are justified is a perfect Righteousness Ergo. The Sequel is evident because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is imperfect and defective at least in degrees we do not believe love and obey so perfectly as we ought the best of us may say with him in the Gospel Lord I believe help thou my unbelief Mark 9.24 And when we have done our utmost that we are but unprofitable servants Luke 17.10 Now this imperfection and defect in our Faith and other vertues being defectus debiti in esse is sinful and culpable for which cause our Saviour oftentimes sharply reproved it Matth. 6.30 8.26 14.31 16.8 c. And we are oftentimes exhorted to increase our Faith to abound in duties of Obedience and to perfect holiness Luke 17.5 1 Thes. 4.1 2 Cor. 7 1. In this last place the Apostle hints that the imperfection of our holiness ariseth from the filthiness of the flesh and spirit and consequently it is a defiled and sinful imperfection The Assumption that we are not justified by an imperfect righteousness needs not I suppose any long proof for surely God will not account that for perfect justice which is not so indeed for as the Apostle sayes well The judgement of God is according to truth Rom. 2.2 It is certain God will not justifie any man without Righteousness and it is as certain That God will not account that to be perfect Righteousness which is imperfect and sinful to say That God doth not account our imperfect holiness to be Righteousness judicio justitiae but onely judicio misericordiae is a meer shift which serves but to set the attributes of God at variance between themselves which in the Justification of a sinner do kiss and embrace each other Psal. 85.10 When God judgeth according to mercy he judgeth according to truth his merciful judgement is a just and a righteous judgement the mercy of God is shewn not in accounting a sinner perfectly righteous for that Righteousness which is imperfect but in accounting to him that Righteousness which is not his own the perfect Righteousness of the Mediator In this judgement of God Justice and Mercy do both meet Justice in that he will not justifie a sinner without a perfect Righteousness Mercy in that he will accept him for such a Righteousness which is neither in him nor performed by him but by his surety the Lord Jesus Christ. Some of our Protestant Divines do call Inherent holiness Evangelical Righteousness in respect of the principle from whence it flows A heart purified by Faith and to distinguish it from that Legal Righteousness which Reprobates and Unbelievers have attained to being but the fruit of a Natural Conscience I am sure it is no Protestant Doctrine that Inherent Sanctification which on all hands is acknowledged to be imperfect and defective is that Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God which must needs be such a Righteousness as God himself sitting on the Throne of his Justice can finde no fault with at all but doth present the person that hath it just and perfect before Gods Tribunal 3. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be the Righteousness of God then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts but the Righteousness whereby we are justified is the Righteousness of God Ergo. The Sequel is clear because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness which the Scripture calls the Righteousness of God For though we receive it from God it being the gift of his Grace yet it is every where called ours as our Faith Matth. 9.2 22. Rom. 1.8 Hab. 2.4 Jam. 1.3 Our Charity 2 Cor. 8.8 24 1 Cor. 16.24 Philem. v. 1 7. Our Hope Phil. 1.20 1 Thes. 2.19 Our good Works Matth. 5.16 Revel 2.2 Our Patience Luke 21.19 2 Thes. 1.4 Revel
or adulti yet to all the Elect to whom the effects of the Covenant and Seals do onely really belong it is real and absolute It is no other then the Sentence of God himself declaring his non-imputation of sin unto them and their deliverance from death by Jesus Christ § 12. 2. Internally in foro Conscientiae at their effectual Vocation when the Lord by the Preaching of the Gospel doth powerfully perswade their hearts to believe in Christ for the Elect themselves before Faith have no knowledge or comfort either of Gods gracious volitions towards them or of Christs undertakings and purchases in their behalf In which respect they are said to be without Christ and without God in the world Eph. 2.12 and Gal. 4.1 They are compared to an Heir under age who differs nothing from a Servant though he be the Lord of all By Faith we come to see that everlasting love wherewith we were loved and that plenteous Redemption which Christ hath wrought for us for which cause Faith is called The evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 And God is said thereby to reveal his Righteousness from Heaven to us Rom. 1.17 And to reveal his Son in us Gal. 1.16 Now in this sence men are said to be justified by the act of Faith in regard Faith is the medium or Instrument whereby the Sentence of Forgiveness is terminated in their Consciences which is daily made more plain and legible by the operation of the Spirit sealing and witnessing unto them their peace and reconciliation with God Whereas unbelievers look on God as their enemy and consequently all their life time are held in bondage through the fear of wrath A true Believer hath peace liberty and boldness towards God he looks upon all the Promises as his own inheritance interprets the Providences of God even those which Reason would construe in another sence to be Fruits of Love and not of Wrath. § 12. Now because this Declarative Sentence by Faith is like the name written in the White Stone Revel 2.17 Which no man knoweth saving he that hath it Many whom the Lord doth justifie are accounted by the world to be but Hypocrites others again are justified of men who are not justified in the sight of God the Lord therefore hath another way of justifying his people to wit In foro mundi when he shall publickly and in the hearing of the whole world pronounce that gracious sentence Come ye blessed of my Father c. Matth. 25.34 Whereunto some have referred those words of the Apostle Acts 3.19 Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. But who so pleaseth to consult with Erasmus Beza and Ludovicus de Dieu upon the place shall finde there is a great mistake in our English Translators and that no such thing was intended there by the Holy Ghost I grant that the sins of the Elect may be said to be then blotted out not that the remission of their sins shall be put off or is not compleat till the last day and till they have performed all the conditions required of them but because this gracious sentence shall be then publickly declared and shall bring forth its Eternal Effect of Life and Glory And in this sence I conceive those Scriptures may be understood which speak of our Justification as a future thing as Rom. 3.30 2.13 c. § 13. Now though we have ascribed Justification unto several times or periods yet do we not make many Justifications Declared Justification whether it be in foro Ecclesiae in foro Conscientiae or in foro mundi is not another from that in the minde of God but the same variously revealed as an Acquittance in the heart of the Creditor and in a Paper a pardon in the heart of a Prince and inrolled is one and the same this manifested and the other secret and though there are never so many Copies written forth in several hands they do not make many Acquittances or many Pardons being but the Transcripts of one Original So though God doth at sundry times and in divers manners declare his well-pleasedness towards his people yet is their Justification but one and the same which is perfect and compleat at once being his fixed and immutable will not to deal with them according to their sins but as Just and Righteous Persons By that which hath been said it doth appear in what sence we assert The Justification of Gods Elect before they believe Now what little weight there is in those Objections which are commonly brought against this Assertion will be more manifest when we have examined Mr. Woodbridges Treatise Whos 's first quarrel against us is for that as he conceives we give too little unto Faith P. 2. But as it is no disparagement to the Blood of Christ that it doth not move and incline God to love us or to will not to punish us so it is no disparagement to Faith to say That it doth not concur with the Blood of Christ in obtaining our Justification but that by apprehending the Gospel it reveals and evidenceth to us that Justification which we have in Christ the proof whereof is the task of the next Chapter wherein I doubt not but I shall be able through the help of God to put by all those wretched consequences which Mr. W. hath endeavored to father upon this Position That Faith serves to evidence to us our Justification CHAP. VIII Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Exceptions against our saying That Faith or the act of believing doth justifie no otherwise then as it reveals and evidenceth our Justification are Answered THe first Charge which he brings against this Gloss as he calls it is That it is guilty of a contradiction to the Holy Ghost It is well known sayes he that the Apostle in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians sets himself on purpose to assert the Doctrine of Justification by Faith in opposition to Works The Question between him and the Jews was not Whether we are declared to be justified by Faith or Works but whether we are justified by Faith or Works in the sight of God or before God And he concludes That it is by Faith and not by Works c. Though all this be granted yet it proves no contradiction to the Holy Ghost in our Assertion We acknowledge that the Question between the Apostle and the Jews was not about the declaring of our Justification nor about the time when we are justified no nor about the condition upon which we are justified but concerning the matter of our Justification or the Righteousness whereby we are justified or by which we are accounted righteous Now the result of his dispute is That we are justified by Faith and not by Works but then the Question will be How Faith is to be taken whether sensu proprio or metonymico whether we are to understand it
this censure when he hath weighed the reasons I shall give That Faith cannot be said to Justifie by way of disposition or as a passive condition morally disposing us for Justification CHAP. IX That Faith doth not justifie as a condition required on our part to qualifie us for Justification IN regard that the main Point in difference between me and Mr. W. lyes at the bottom of this Answer I shall make it appear we are not said to be Justified by Faith in a Scripture sence because Faith is required of us as a passive condition to qualifie us for justification in the sight of God § 1. That Interpretation of the phrase which gives no more to Faith in the businesse of our Justification then to other works of sanctification cannot be true The reason is because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith and in a way of opposition to other works of sanctification Rom. 3.28 Gal. 2.16.3.11 But to interpret justification by faith meerly thus That Faith is a condition to quâ—lifie us for Justification gives no more to Faith then to other works of sanctification as to repentance charity and all other duties of new obedience which Mr. W. and others of the same affirmation make to be necessary antecedent conditions of Justification Mr. B. includes all works of obedience to evangelical precepts in the definition of Faith in which senâ—e I presume no Papist will deny that we are justified by Faiâ—h alone taking it as he doth for fides formata or faith animated with charity and other good works And therefore Bellarm. disputing against Justification by Faith alone sayes that if wee could be perswaded that Faith doth justifie impetrando promerendo suo modo inchoando Justificationem which is granted him if Faith be an antecedent federal condition disposing us for it then we would never deny that love fear hope c. did justifie as well as Faith Dr. Hammond sayes expressely That neither Paul nor James doe exclude or separate faithfull actions or the acts of faith from Faith or the condition of Justification but absolutely require them as the onely things by which we are justified Which in another place he goes about to prove by this argument That without which we are not justified and by which joyned with Faith we are justified is not by the Apostle excluded or separated from Faith or the condition of our Justification but required together with Faith as the only things by which as by a condition a man is justified But without acts of Faith or faithfull actions we are not justified and by them wee are justified and not by Faith onely Therefore faithfull actions or acts of Faith are not by the Apostle excluded or separated from Faith or the condition of our Justification but required together with Faith as the onely things by which as by a condition a man is justified It is evident that he and other abetters to this notion attribute no more to Faith in our Justification then to other works of sanctification Now this was witnessed against as an unsound opinion a pernicious error and utterly repugnant to the sacred Scriptures c. by Mr. Cranford amongst the London Subscribers Decemb. 14. 1647 and by Mr. W. himselfe if I mistake not amongst the Subscribers in other Counties It seems by Mr. W. they were bewitched when they gave their hands unto that Testimony § 2. That Interpretation of this phrase which gives no more to Faith then to workes of Nature I meane such as may be found in naturall and unregenerate men is not true The Reason is because a man may have such works and yet not be justified But to interpret Justification by Faith that Faith is a necessary antecedent condition of our Justification gives no more to Faith then to workes of Nature as to sight of sin legall sorrow c. which have been found in naturall and unregenerate men as in Cain Saul Judas c. I presume Mr. W. will say that these are necessary antecedent conditions in every one that is justified for if these be conditions disposing us to Faith and Faith a condition disposing us to Justification then are they also conditions disposing us to Justification for causae causae est causa causati if these legall works are conditions of Faith they must be according to Mr. Woodbridges Tenet conditions of Justification and consequently they are in eodem genere causae with Faith it selfe quod erat demonstrandum § 3. 3 That by which we are justified is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification but Faith considered as a meer passive condition is not in the sence of our adversaries a proper efficient meritorious cause of Justification therefore wee are not said to bee justified by Faith as a passive condition or qualification required to make us capable of Justification The assumption is granted by our opponents at least verbo tenus who doe therefore call it a meer sine qua non which Logicians make to be causa ociosa nihil efficiens and a passive condition to exclude it from all manner of causality in producing the effect though for my own part I look upon conditions in contracts and covenants as proper efficient meritorious causes of the things covenanted which do produce their effects though not by their innate worth yet by vertue of the compact and agreement made between the parties covenanting But of this we shal have occasion to speak more by and by It remains only that I should clear the major that That by which we are justified is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification which appears 1. By the use of these Propositions by and through in ordinary speech which note that the thing to which they are attributed is either a meritorious or instrumentall cause of the effect that follows as when we say a Souldier was raised by his valor it imports that his valor was the meritorious cause of his preferment and when we say a Tradesman lives by his Trade our meaning is that his Trade is the means or instrument by which he gets his living So here in the case before us when it is said a man is justified by Faith it implyes that Faith is either the meritorious or instrumentall cause of his Justification as if it be taken objectively for Christ and his merits it is the meritorious cause of our Justification in foro dei or if it be taken properly for the act of believing it is the instrumental cause of our Justification in foro conscientiae 2. From the contrary phrase as when the Apostle denies that a man is justified by Works and by the Law without doubt his intent was to exclude Works from any causal influx into our Justification Now that which he denies to Works he ascribes to Faith and therefore Justification by Faith implies that Faith in his sense hath a true causality or proper efficiency in our
Justification 3 From other parallel phrases in holy Scripture where we are said to be redeemed justified and saved per Christum per sanguinem per mortem per vulnera All which doe signifie That Christ and his sufferings are the true proper and meritorious cause of these benefits and so it must bee understood when wee are said to be Justified by Faith and not that Faith is but a sine qua non or meer cypher in our Justification Faith objectively taken is a proper meritorious cause of our Justification § 4. 4 I shall make use of my adversaries weapon of that very medium which Mr. W. last alledged page 8. That interpretation of the phrase which makes us at least concurrent causes with God and Christ in the formall act of our Justification is not true because our Justification in respect of efficiency is wholly attributed unto them Rom. 8.33.4.6.8.3 24. The internal moving cause was his owne grace and the onely externall procuring cause is the death of Christ there is no other efficient cause besides these We can be no more said to justifie our selves then that we created our selves But to make Faith a condition morally disposing us to Justification maks us at least concurrent causes with God and Christ in our Justification 1. We should not be justified freely by his grace if any condition were required of us in order to our Justification for a condition as Mr. Walker observes well whensoever it is performed makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give and then as he infers Justification should not be of grace but of debt contrary to the Apostle in Rom. 3. and 4. 2. If Faith were a condition morally disposing us for Justification we should then be concurrent causes with the merits of Christ in procuring our Justification for the merits of Christ are not a physical but a moral cause which obtain their effect by vertue of that Covenant which was made between him and the Father now by ascribing unto Faith a morall causall influx in our Justification we doe clearly put it in eodem genere causae with the blood of Christ which I hope Mr. W. will better consider of before he engageth too far in Mr. Baxters cause § 5. That interpretation of this phrase which makes Works going before Justification not onely not sinful but acceptable to God and preparatory to the grace of Justification without controversie is not according to the minde of the holy Ghost For as much as the Scripture frequently declares that no mans Works are acceptable to God before his person is accepted and justified the Tree must be good or else the fruit cannot be good Luke 6.43 44. Mat. 12.33 Joh. 15.5 That of Aug. is sufficiently known Opera non precedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum the old orthodox doctrine taught in these Churches here in England was that works before Justification are not pleasing unto God neither doe they make men meet i◠do not qualifie or morally dispose them to receive grace and we doubt not but they have the nature of sin I could muster up a legion of orthodox Writers to defend this Tenent that no qualification or act of ours before Justification doth prepare or dispose us for Justification Nay the Councel of Trent confesseth that none of those things which precede Justification whether it be Faith or other Works doe obtain the grace of Justification But to interpret Justification by Faith that Faith is a condition which doth qualifie us for Justification necessarily supposeth a Work or Works before Justification which have not the nature of sin but are acceptable to God and preparatory to grace viz. the grace of Justification which is most properly called Grace § 6. That interpretation of any phrase of Scripture which involves a contradiction is not to be admitted but to say Faith is a passive condition that doth morally qualifie us for Justification implies a contradiction Ergo The proposition is undeniable and the Assumption is to me as cleare To be both active and passive in reference to the same effect is a flat contradiction Now that is active which is effective which contributes an efficacy whether more or lesse to the production of the effect A condition though in the Logical notion of it it hath not the least efficiency and therefore Aristotle never reckoned this sine qua non in the number of causes yet in the use of the Jurists as we are now speaking of it it is a morall efficient cause which is effective of that which is promised upon condition Chamier hath well observed That omnis conditio antecedens est effectiva he that performes the least condition imaginable for having of any benefit is active and passive in obtaining of it We will look after no other instance then that which Mr. W. hath set before us An offender against our Lawes that is saved by his Clergy or by reading his Neck-verse he is not passive but active in saving of his life he may properly be said to have saved himselfe his reading being not onely a physicall act but a morall efficient cause which makes that favourable law to take effect To say he is passive because he made not the Law nor sits as Judge on the Bench to absolve himselfe is but a shift to blinde the eyes of the simple seeing that when more causes then one concur to an effect the effect may be denominated from the lowest that which doth least is an active efficient cause nay in this case the Malefactor doth more in saving of his life then either the Law or Judge for though pro forma he acknowledgeth the grace of the State and the courtesie of the Judge unto him yet as the Welch-man that was bid to cry God blesse the King and the Judge cryed God blesse her father and mother who taught her to read intimated he was more beholding to his reading then to the courtesie of the Judge for else the Judge would have been severe enough his mercy would have deserved but little thanks I must needs tell my Old Friend Non loquitur ut Clericus We say such a man is Passive in saving his life who is not required to read or perferm any other condition but receives a pardon of meer Grace In like manner he is Passive in his Justification that doth nothing at all towards the procuring of i◠he that performs the least condition in order thereunto is not onely Physically but Morally active in obtaining this priviledge For though he did not make the Law by and according to which he is justified nor pronounce the sentence of Absolution upon himself yet he hath a subordinate or less principal efficiency in producing the effect nay a learned man whom I hope Mr. W. will not think more worthy to be derided then disputed with tells us That he that performs conditions for Justification doth more to his
us before we believe For first if we take Justification pro volitione Dei for the Will of God not to punish he cannot but know there is not the same reason of an immanent act of God which is Eternal and of a transient act which is in time or secondly if we take it pro re volita as it is the fruit and effect of Christs death it will not follow that because we have not Glorification before believing we have not Justification For though all the Blessings of the Covenant are given us freely and not upon conditions performed by us yet God hath his order and method in bestowing of them He first gives us Grace imputed then Grace inherent and afterwards Eternal Glory And thus some Benefits of the Covenant are by some though improperly made conditions of the rest because they are first enjoyed § 10. That which Mr. W. addes Pag. 10. and wisheth may be seriously considered hath been considered already more then once If saith he Justification by Faith must be understood of Justification in our Consciences then is not the word Justification taken properly for a Justification before God in all the Scriptures from the beginning to the end we read of no Justification in Scripture but by Faith or Works Mr. E. sayes he when the Scripture speaks of Justification by Works understands it of Justification before men when it speaks of Justification by Faith he understands it of Justification in our Consciences Now neither of these is Justification in the sight of God and verily neither of them of much worth in the Apostles judgement 1 Cor. 4.3 The Antinomians may read out their eyes before they produce us one Text c. Had he reported my Judgement truly there had been no room for this Exception I have said indeed and by all that Mr. W. hath said against it I see no reason to change my minde that when the Scripture attributeth our Justification to Works as in the Epistle of James it is to be understood of our Justification before men when it ascribes it to Faith Faith is taken either properly or metonymically if it be taken properly for the act of Believing then it is to be understood of our Justification before God terminated in our Consciences or as it is revealed and evidenced to our selves Justification in Conscience is Justification before God as an Acquittance in the heart of the Creditor and in a Paper is one and the same this manifested and the other secret He that is justified in his Conscience is justified before God and Faith apprehends that which doth not onely justifie us in our Consciences but before God Or if Faith be taken metonymically for its object then Justification by Faith is Justification before God for it is Justification by the Merits of Christ to whom alone without works or conditions performed by us the Holy Ghost ascribes our Justification in the sight of God Rom. 3.24 Ephes. 1.7 and in many other such places § 11. But says Mr. W. Justification before men and in our Consciences are neither of them of much worth in the Apostles Judgement 1 Cor. 4 3. 1. I wish that Justification with men were of less account with Mr. W. He best knows whether Conscience of vindicating the truth or popular affectation put him upon this engagement I am sure the former would not have tempted him to those incivilities he hath offered unto me and others whom I doubt not but God will know by other names then he is pleased to cast upon us If the later or a desire of ingratiating himself with some of my Opposers did spur him forward though he hath Justification before men which yet I assure him is not Universal no not amongst many that do wish him well I dare say he is not justified in the Court of Conscience and if our heart c. 1 Joh. 3.20 2. But doth the Apostle account neither of these Justifications much worth Let Mr. W. judge in what account he had Justification before men by what he sayes 2 Cor. 1.12 1 Cor. 9.15 And Justification in Conscience by those blessed Effects he ascribes unto it Rom. 5.1 23. see 1 John 3.21 3. It is true 1 Cor. 43. he sayes That he cares not to be judged of mans judgement or of mans day The meaning is That he did not regard the sinister Judgements and Censures of carnal Christians who praise and dispraise upon light and trivial inducements like them Chap. 1. v. 12. Yea sayes he I judge not my self q. d. I am not solicitous nor do I enter into consideration what degree of honor or esteem I am worthy of amongst or above my fellows Now what is this to the purpose What is this to the Justification of his person in the Court of Conscience by Faith or the Justification of his Faith and Sincerity towards men by Works I must needs say with a very worthy Divine That no small portion of favor consists in a Sence and Knowledge of the kindness of God in its actings terminated upon the Conscience however Mr W. is pleased to value it § 12. In his next Passage he gives us a Youthful Frolick to shew his gallantry like Mr. Baxters challenge Let the Antinomians shew one Scripture which speaks of Justification from Eternity The Antinomians saith he the Anti-Papists and Anti-Arminians he means may read their eyes out before they produce us one Text for any other Justification in Scripture which is not by Faith or Works 1 Though the Antinomians are so blinde that they cannot finde one Text for this purpose yet he himself is such a quick-sighted Linceus that he hath discovered more then one For Pag. 23. he tells us of a threefold Justification and yet neither of them is by Faith or Works I hope he hath not read out his eyes to finde them out 2 In what sence the Scripture asserts Justification before Faith or Works hath been shewn before but 3 if I may be so bold I would ask how long the Anti-Gospellers may read before they produce one plain Text for any of those Dictates they would thrust upon us That Justification doth in no sence precede the act of Faith that Christ purchased onely a conditional not an absolute Justification for Gods Elect that our Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified is in our selves that the tenor of the New Covenant is If thou believe c. That God hath made a Covenant with Christ that none should have any benefit by his death till they do believe Cum multis aliis quae nunc c. § 13. Mr. W. thinks he hath sufficiently cleared the coast of this Exception That Faith in a proper sence is said to justifie in respect of its evidencing property or because it declares and applies to our Consciences that perfect Justification which we have in Christ. But by his leave it is like to be a bone for him to pick till the Index Expurgatorius hath
till it looks unto him in whose wounds and stripes is the healing of sinners 3. This very comparison doth make against him as the Israelites were alive when they looked upon the Brazen Serpent or else they could not have seen it So they that â—â—ok upon Jesus Christ i. e. Believe in him are spiritually alive or else they could not put forth such a vital act It is said indeed Numb 21.9 that when any man that was bitten beheld the Serpent of Brass he lived i. e. He was healed or had ease from his anguish so they that by Faith look up unto the Antitype they finde ease and rest for their wearied souls they do then live i. e. they have the comfort and enjoyment of that life which before they had in Christ. A man is said to live when he lives comfortably and happily § 2. 4. Mr. W. to make the comparison suit hath falsified the Text Joh. 6 40. The words are It is the Will of God that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life it is not may be justified as he corrupts it 5 Whereas he sayes Faith is compared to eating and Justification to nourishment Joh. 6.51 It is a mistake like the former for it is Christ himself who throughout that Chapter is compared to bread and food whom by Faith we receive for our refreshment consolation and spiritual nourishment § 4. His fourth Argument is drawn from the perpetual opposition between Faith and Works from whence he reasons thus What place and order works had to Justification in the Covenant of Works the same place and order Faith hath to our Justification in the Covenant of Grace But Works were to go before our Justification in the Covenant of Works Ergo Faith is to go before our Justification in the Covenant of Grace I answer That his Major is extreamly gross I dare say a more unsound Assertion cannot be picked out of the Writings either of the Papists or Arminians then this is That Faith taking it as he doth in a proper sence hath the same place in the Covenant of Grace as works have in the Covenant of Works That I have not charged him too high will appear to any one that shall consider these few particulars First Works in the first Covenant are meritorious of Eternal life he that doth the works required in the Law may in strictness of Justice claim the promise as a due debt Rom. 4.4 Was ever any Protestant heard to say That Faith and Faithful actions which as hath been shewn men of his notion do include in Faith do merit Eternal life Secondly Works in the first Covenant are the matter of our Justification he that doth them is thereby constituted just and righteous in the sight of God Righteousness consists in a conformity to the Law so that whosoever keeps the Law must needs be righteous But now Faith is not the matter of our Righteousness God doth not account men righteous for their Faith I confess he hath Bellarmine and Arminius on his side who say that ipsa fides or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere imputatur in justitiam but the Apostle hath taught us other Doctrine Rom. 5.19 That by the obedience of one i. e. of Christ many are made righteous And 2 Cor. 5.21 That we are made the Righteousness of God in him Thirdly If Faith hath the same place in the second Covenant as Works in the first then must God account Faith to be perfect Righteousness which is contrary to his Truth and Justice To say that Faith is perfect Righteousness by the second Covenant though not by the first is but petitio principii Legal and Evangelical Righteousness being one and the same as to the matter of Righteousness though they are inherent in divers subjects The first Covenant requires a Righteousness in us the second gives and accepts a Righteousness which is anothers Fourthly If Faith hath the same place in the second Covenant as Works had in the first then were the second Covenant a Covenant of Works seeing Faith is a work and a work of ours So that by this means the two Covenants should be confounded nor would the latter be any whit more of Grace then the former Fifthly This Assertion makes Faith to be not of Grace because not from the Covenant of Grace seeing the Covenant it self depends upon it How contrary this Doctrine is to the sense of our Protestant Divines hath in part been shewed before who till this last Age have taught that these two Propositions A man is justified by Works and A man is justified by Faith do carry meanings utterly opposite to one another The one is proper and formal the other is metonymical and relative In this Proposition A man is justified by Works we are to take all in a plain and literal sence That God doth account him that hath kept the Law exactly in all points a righteous person and consequently worthy of Eternal life but now that other Proposition A man is justified by Faith we must understand it Relatively thus That a sinner is justified in the sight of God from all sin and punishment by Faith i. e. By the Obedience and Righteousness of Jesus Christ which we receive and apply unto our selves by true Faith § 4. Let us now hear what Mr. W. hath to say for the defence of his Major which treads Antipodes to the current of all out Protestant Writers If saith he the Minor be granted the Major must be out of Question I must confess if confidence did prove here were proof enough That which he addes hath as little weight as 1 Why should not Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved which is the tenor of the New Covenant Rom. 10.6 9. plead as strongly for the antecedency of Faith to Iustification in this Covenant as do this and live doth evince that works were necessary antecedents of Justification in the Old Covenant Answ. Here he takes for that granted which will certainly be denied scil That believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved is the tenor of the New Covenant for 1 it is no where called so 2 where the New Covenant is recited as Jer. 31. Heb. 8. it runs quite in another strain it doth not promise Salvation upon condition of Faith but Faith and Salvation and all other Blessings present and future That Text Rom. 10.6 9. is not the tenor of the New Covenant for that requires Confession as well as Faith and then the Justification of the New Covenant should be called Justification by Confession as well as by Faith The Apostle there describes the persons that shall be saved they are such as do believe and profess the truth His scope as our Divines have noted is to resolve that grand and important Question How a man may know that he shall be saved You need not sayes he to ascend into Heaven or descend into
Hâ—ll c. to fetch Christ himself to tell you by immediate Revelation whether you shall be justified and saved we have neerer and more certain evidences He that believes with the heart c. In this Scripture he gives us two marks or characters of a true Christian one Internal known onely to the Christian himself Believing with the heart the other External or visible to men Confession with the mouth But of this we shall have occasion to speak more anon § 5. 2 He urgeth That Faith and Works have the like order to Justification in their respective Covenants or else Justification by Faith and Justification by Works were not opposed as they constantly are in the Apostles Writings c. We grant that there is a true and formal opposition between Faith and Works The Affirmative which the Jews pleaded for That a man is justified by Works and the Negative which the Apostle contended for That a man is not justified by Works but by Faith are as opposite as East and West and as impossible to be reconciled as light and darkness But then Faith must be taken Objectively and not Properly for that which is formally opposed to Works is not the act but the object of Faith to wit the Righteousness of Christ which we apprehend and enjoy by Faith for if by Faith he had meant the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of believing there were no opposition at all between Faith and Works and the establishing of Justification by Faith will in no wise destroy Justification by Works and consequently to use Mr. Woodbridges Expressions there would be nothing but falshoods and equivocations in all the Apostles Disputations against Justification by Works How easily might the Jews and the Apostle I will adde the Papists and Protestants be reconciled They say we must be justified by Works and these say we must be justified by Faith which is a work of ours and such as includes all other works of new Obedience an easie distinction will salve the matter We are not justified by Works as they are conditions of the first Covenant but we are justified by Works as they are conditions of the second Covenant We are not justified by Works as they are our Legal Righteousness but we are justified by Works as they are our Evangelical Righteousness Was it beseeming the gravity of so great an Apostle to raise so sharp a contest about a trifle as the denomination of Works from the first and second Covenant when as the Works are the very same in respect both of the matter and subject Would not all men have censured his Writings to be but strifes of words § 6. His fift Objection is raised from 1 Cor. 6.11 Such were some of you but you are washed but you are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Where sayes he there is an evident opposition between the time past and present in respect of their Justification And thence he argues Now you are justified Ergo not before or beforâ— you were unjustified To which I answer 1 That the words do not countenance this inference He sayes indeed that in times past they were unsanctified they had been Fornicators Idolaters c. i. e. As vile and wicked as the worst of men for which sins they deserved to be shut out of the Kingdom of God no less then they that are damned He doth not say that they were unjustified before Conversion they were reclaimed or cleansed from those sins by the Preaching of the Gospel but they were justified from those sins in or by the name i. e. The Merit and Righteousness of Jesus Christ which was imputed to them by God whilest they lived in unbelief But 2 if any man will strain this consequence from the words You are justified Ergo You were not whilest you lived in these sins I shall then own the answer which he rejects with so much scorn and contempt That they were not justified before Conversion either in foro Conscientiae or in foro Ecclesiastico not doubting but that I shall sufficiently clear it from his Exceptions § 7. The first of which is Why might they not be said to be exception 1 sanctified before Conversion as well as justified I answer that there is not the same reason for a mans Sanctification before Faith and Conversion as there is for his Justification For 1 to say That an unconverted person is sanctified is contradictio in adjecto but it is no contradiction to 〈◊〉 That an ungodly or unconverted person is justified which is the expression of the Holy Ghost Rom. 4.5 Sanctification consists in our Conversion or turning unto God but our Justification in Gods accounting unto us the Righteousness and satisfaction of his Son the one is a work or act of God done without us 2 Cor. 5.19 but the other is the operation of God within us God cannot sanctifie us without holiness because he cannot do contradictions but God may justifie us if he please without Faith and Inherent holiness because that ex natura rei is no contradiction Our Sanctification flows from Faith as the principle and motive of it 1 John 3.3 4.19 Gal. 5.6 But now our Justification hath not that dependence upon Faith seeing that is Gods act and not ours though we are said to be sanctified by Faith yet not in that sense that we are said to be justified by Faith Faith is Active in the one but Passive in the other it is onely the Hand or Instrument that receives our Justification it is the principle or efficient which operates and produceth our Sanctification 2 Though Justification be sometimes taken for the declared sentence of Absolution in the Court of Conscience yet it follows not that Sanctification should be so understood because the sentence of Justification is terminated in Conscience But Sanctification is diffused throughout the whole man 1 Thes. 5.23 Sanctification is not our knowing that we are sanctified but the conformity of our faculties and their operations to the rule of holiness So that his Assertion that Nothing can be alledged for Justification before believing which will not hold as strongly for Sanctification before believing hath nothing but confidence to support it exception 2 § 8. His next Exception is That the Justification they now had was that which gave them right and title to the Kingdom of God which right and title they had not before they believed c. For if they had this right before they believed then whether they believed or no all was one as to the certainty of their Salvation and they might have gone to Heaven though they had lived and died without Faith To which I answer 1. That these Elect Corinthians had no more right to Salvation after their believing then they had before For their right to Salvation was grounded onely upon the purpose of God and the purchase of Jesus Christ. Salvation is a 〈◊〉 freely bestowed upon us and not a debt or
wages that becomes due to us upon the performance of conditions 2. It will not follow from hence That then they might have gone to Heaven without Faith seeing Christ hath purchased Faith for his people no less then glory 2 Pet. 1.1 And God hath certainly appointed that all that live to years of discretion whom in his secret Justification he hath adjudged to life shall have this evidence of Faith Acts 13.48 2.47 exception 3 § 9. But sayes Mr. W. this evidence is of such necessity as that if they have it not they shall loose that life to which they are adjudged or no If not then whether they believe or do not believe they shall be saved if it be then there is no absolute Justification before Faith and Justification must be conditional Ans. 1. By this Argument not onely Faith but all other works of Sanctification and perseverance in them must be the conditions of our Justification and consequently we may be said to be justified and saved by them The Scriptures speak the same things of works as it doth of Faith Mark 16.16 Prov. 28.18 1 Tim. 4.16 Matth. 24.13 Now let him consult with our Protestant Divines whether this be a good Argument No man is saved or glorified without works Ergo Men are saved by works 2. This reason makes as much against absolute Election before Faith as against absolute Justification He may argue as well Faith is of such necessity that they that have it not shall loose the life to which they are elected or not If not then whether the Elect believe or not they shall be saved if it be then there is no absolute Election before Faith and Election must be conditional contrary to many Scriptures 2 Tim. 2.19 Rom. 9.11 Mark 13.22 But 3. to the Argument we say That Election and Justification are absolute because they depend upon no antecedent condition in the person elected and justified not because they are absolute without the consequents that depend upon them so that notwithstanding all that hitherto he hath brought the Opinion he opposeth will stand unshaken We shall now proceed to the Anascheuastical part of his Discourse and so weigh the strength of his Replies to those Arguments of ours he is pleased to mention CHAP. XIII Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Answers to those Scriptures which hold forth An immediate actual reconciliation of sinners to God upon the death of Christ without the intervention of Faith are examined THe Texts which he hath cited as objected against him are Matth. 3.17 This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased viz. With sinners And Rom. 5.10 we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son Which places were not once mentioned in the Conference that I had with him The former I alledged in the Discourse which I had with Mr. Warren as hath been shewn before to which I had added sundry others had I not been inteâ—rupted by the unseasonable not to say uncivil interposing of this Antagonist who then cast in the Exceptions which since he hath Printed with some enlargements exception 1 His first Exception against the force of that Scripture is That the wel-pleasedness of God need not to be extended beyond the person of Christ Who gave himself unto death an Offering and Sacrifice unto God of a sweet smelling favor Eph. 5.2 Whereunto I answer 1 That he opposeth his single opinion against the judgement of all the Interpreters that I have seen without one grain of Reason to counter-ballance them as if he were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as David 2 Sam. 18.3 worth a thousand such as Calvin Beza Paraeus c. who do extend it unto all those for whom Christ exhibited himself a Mediator It was the opinion of Musculus Testimonium hoc Patris caelitus terris illatum declarationem habet voluntatis ejus erga genus humanum c. That this testimony of the Father doth manifest the Will of God towards mankinde God sayes Calvin by this testimony which he gave to Christ declares he is a Father unto us all And a little after Saint Paul doth best interpret this Text Eph. 1.6 where he sayes God hath made us accepted in Jesus Christ. And again In this clause in whom I am wel-pleased he gives us to understand that his love is so great to Christ that from him it overflows upon us all And Beza more expresly Significat enim Pater Christum c. The Father did hereby signifie that Christ is he alone whom when the Father beholds he layes aside all his wrath and indignation which we deserved and that he is the onely Mediator and Reconciler Which sayes he will be better understood by comparing this Text with Exod. 28.38 where we read That Israel was made accepted to God by the High Priests appearing for them in the presence of God which High Priest was undeniably a type of Christ. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he though in the use of Sacred and other Authors it hath the signification of the Present tense yet here it may as fitly be rendered by the time perfectly past Ut declaret Pater se jam esse in filio hominibus reconciliatum That the Father might declare that he is already reconciled to men in his own Son he plainly alludes to Isai. 42.1 Sensus est c. saith Pareus The meaning of the place is That this is my Son for whose sake and merit I do lay aside all my displeasure against mankinde and do receive them into favor This voice doth comprise the whole mystery of our Reconciliation with God by and for the sake of Christ. To these we might adde the suffrage of one of our own Countreymen This voice was uttered in respect of us because of old God was angry with us for our sins but now he is reconciled to us by Christ. And honest Ferus who was more a Protestant in the Doctrine of Justification then many of ours Haec verba nedum Christo dicuntur sed nobis c. These words were not onely spoken unto Christ but unto us Let him that hath leisure look over more § 2. 2 It is against the scope of the words to limit them to the person of Christ they being a solemn declaration of Christs investiture in the glorious office of a Mediator in which respect he is said to be a Son given and born to us Isa. 9. And therefore this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of God to men was at his birth proclaimed by the holy Angels Luke 2. All that grace or favor which at any time was manifested to Christ as a Mediator was for their sakes whom he represented and to whom the benefits of his Mediatorship were intended See John 12.30 That Text Eph. 5.2 which Mr. W. alledgeth for confining of this voice to the person of Christ proves nothing less where the Apostle shews the effect of Christs sacrifice towards us thus as
justitia bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his Eternal Election The onely cause of Christs death was to satisfie the Law he did not die to procure a new Will or Affection in the heart of God towards his Elect nor yet to adde any new thing in God which doth perfect and compleat the act of Election as Wallaeus seems to intimate But that God might save us in a way agreeable to his own Justice that he might confer upon us all those Blessings he intended without wrong and violation to his holy Law for God having made a Law that the soul which sinneth should die the Justice and Truth of God required that satisfaction should be made for the sins of the Elect no less then of other men which they being unable to perform the Son of God became their Surety to bear the Curse and fulfil the Law in their stead God might will unto us sundry benefits which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice As a King may will and purpose the deliverance of his Favorite who is imprisoned for debt yet he cannot actually free him till he hath paid and satisfied his Creditor So though God had an irrevocable peremptory Will to save his Elect yet he could not actually save them till satisfaction was made unto his Justice which being made there is no let or impediment to stop the current of his Blessings As when the Cloud is dissolved the Sun shines forth when the partition wall is broken down they that were separated are again united So the cloud of our sins being blotted out the beams of Gods love have as free a passage towards us as if we had not sinned Now that Christ by his death removed this let and hinderance the Scripture is as express as can be desired as that he made an end of sin Dan. 9.24 Blotted it out c. Col. 2.14 Took it quite away as the Scape-goat Levit. 16.22 John 1.29 And slew the enmity between God and us Ephes. 2.16 See Verses 13 14 15. § 4. Fifthly If it were the Will of God that the sin of Adam should immediately over-spread his posterity then it was his Will that the Satisfaction and Righteousness of Christ should immediately redound to the benefit of Gods Elect for there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both to their respective subjects for as the Apostle shews Rom. 5.14 both of them were heads and roots of mankinde Now the sin of Adam did immediately over-spread his posterity All men sinned in him before ever they committed any actual sin Rom. 5.12 14. And therefore the Righteousness of Christ descended immediately upon all the Elect for their Justification Rom. 5.17 18. Sixthly If the Sacrifices of the Law were immediately available for the Typical cleansing of sins under that administration then the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered was immediately available to make a real atonement for all those sins for which he suffered The reason of the consequence is because the Real Sacrifice is not less efficacious then the Typical Heb. 9.14 But those Legal Sacrifices did immediately make atonement without any condition performed on the sinners part Levit. 16.30 § 5. Seventhly If it be the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without any condition performed by them then it was his Will that it should be so for all of them the reason is because the Scripture makes no difference between persons in the communication of this Grace The free gift saith the Apostle came upon all men i. e. In omnes praedestinatos to Justification of life to wit by the gracious imputation of God But it is the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without conditions performed by them viz. To Elect Infants or else they are not reconciled and consequently they cannot be saved Now if any shall say That God hath a peculiar way of reconciling and justifying Infants or of communicating unto them the Benefits of Christs death let them clear it up from Scripture let them shew us the Text that saith God gives Salvation unto Infants in one manner and to men in another to the one freely and to the others upon conditions If they say Infants have the Seed or Habit of Faith the Scripture will contradict them which affirmeth 1 That they have no knowledge at all either of good or evil Deut. 1.39 And that they cannot so much as discern between the right and the left hand And if so how can they who conceive not of things Natural understand those things that are Heavenly and Spiritual And therefore sayes Augustine If we should go about to prove that Infants know the things of God who as yet know not the things of men our own senses would confute us And can there be Faith without knowledge 2 That Faith cometh by hearing of the Word Preached Rom. 10. Now Infants either hear not or if they do they understand not what they hear We have sufficient experience that no Children give any testimony of Faith until they have been taught and instructed Elect Children which are afterwards manifested to be such are as obstinate and unteachable as any others As for the instance of the Baptist that he believed in his Mothers belly because it is said Luke 1.41 That he was filled with the Holy Ghost c. it doth not prove it for as one observes it is not said Credidit in utero but onely exultavit which exultation or springing Divinitùs facta est in Infante non humanitùs ab Infante And therefore it is not to be drawn into an example or urged as a rule to us what to think of other Infants But if any shall say that Infants do perform the conditions of Reconciliation and Salvation by their Parents then it will follow That all the Children of believing Parents are reconciled and justified because they perform the conditions as much for all as they do for one But I suppose no man will say That all the Children of believing Parents are justified we may as well assert works of supererogation as that one is justified by anothers Faith That any Infants are saved it is meerly from the Grace of Election and the free imputation of Christs Righteousness of which all that are elected are made partakers in the same manner § 6. Eighthly If it were the Will of God that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation it was his will that it should not in the least depend upon our works or conditions because that condition or conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect and our Justification would be partly of Grace and partly of Works partly from Christ and partly from our selves Nay it would bee more from our selves then from Jesus Christ seeing that
We may remember when it was not so I wish that all Orthodox Christians and especially our University Worthies who have more leisure and far greater helps for such Polemical Exercises then their Brethren abroad had more Zeal to improve this Liberty for the advantage of the Truth The Authors of most of those Errors and Blasphemies which have been lately started are but little more to be faulted then they that do profess the Truth I mean such as are indued with Gifts and Abilities who suffer them to walk abroad without check and controle seeing there is no Error whatsoever but the Scripture affords us variety of Weapons to wound and slay it We cast the blame upon Magistrates because they do suffer them nor can I excuse their connivence at any of those Evils which are contrary to the Light of Nature yet I fear the greatest share of this guilt will lie at our doors who are the Ministers of the Gospel whose office without controversie it is To contend for the Faith to convince gain-sayers and by sound Doctrine to stop their mouths who teach things which they ought not It is but a slender discharge of our Duty to cry out against Errors and Heresies and never shew and convince men what Truth and Error is such loose and general Invectives do never advantage most times they wound the sides of Truth whereas if the Trumpet gave a more certain sound and Ministers did prove those things to be Errors which they brand with this name their pains would much more succeed to the profit of their Hearers they would be better armed against such dangers Your late Resolves to emit a Declaration For giving fitting Liberty to all that fear God within this Commonwealth for the better preservation of the mutual Peace of such as fear God among themselves without imposing one upon the other and to discountenance Blasphemies damnable Heresies and Licentious Practises in Answer to the Petitions of the Congregated Churches in the Northern Counties I am perswaded have exceedingly rejoyced the hearts of all the Faithful throughout the Land Now I humbly offer it to your considerations whether it be not a necessary expedient to preserve the mutual peace of Christians straitly to prohibite under fitting penalties the giving names of obloquy or railing accusations such as the Archangel durst not bring against the Devil and the imposing of slanders upon one another I see not how any manner of good can be expected from this Practise me thinks mens Arguments might be as keen and nervous though their Language be sober beseeming Christians and civil Men. Such names they do not convince most times they harden those that are mis-led But then the mischeifs that come by it are not a few I know nothing that doth imbitter the spirits and alienate the hearts of Christians from each other so much as this and which is worse the Truths and Ways of God are not seldom nor a little clouded by this means For usually the names of the vilest Errors and Heresies are made the Badge and Livery of the choisest Truths The Discourse before you doth instance in one the title of ANTINOMIAN which was originally the character of loose and licentious Libertines i◠by some of our new Doctors appropriated to them who have most faithfully managed the Protestant Cause against the Papists and in the cheif Points which are depending between them to wit Our Justification by Christ alone without Works and Conditions performed by our selves and our full and perfect Deliverance from the Curse of the Law Though there is no true Christian but will rejoyce to suffer shame for the sake of Christ yet by these arts the Ignorant and Simple have their ears stopt and eyes shut against the Word of Life for few have so much courage as to look into that which is generally branded with an evil name So that in a short time a few nick-names shall do us more hurt then Fire and Faggot did heretofore The Lord therefore keep these purposes in your hearts till you have fulfilled them and inable you to perfect the Work which you are called to that the Truth may spred and Godliness flourish that Righteousness may be equally administred and Wickedness especially in High Places severely punished that Learning whereof there is so great use both in Church and State may be encouraged and Peace if possible be restored unto us For the effecting hereof I doubt not but you have the earnest Prayers of all the Faithful throughout the Land I can assure you of him who is Yours Honors most humble Observer W. Eyre The Fourth day of the Nineth Moneth 1653. TO My Deare Flock in the City of NEVV-SARUM unto which God and their own Choise have made me an Over-seer Loving and Beloved Brethren IT was a frequent saying in the mouth of Luther That after his death the Doctrine of Justification would be corrupted A few years last past have contributed more to the fulfilling of his Prediction then all the time that went before Can there be a greater evidence of mens Apostacy from this Article of our Faith then their branding of the Doctrine it self with a mark of Heresie Though our Adversaries are grown more subtle to distinguish yet they are as wide from the true Doctrine of Justification by Christ alone as the perverters of the Faith in Luthers daies It is not easie to number up all the wiles and methods wherewith Satan hath assaulted this Foundation-Truth he knew it was too grosse to tell men That they must be justified by Works seeing the Scriptures are so expresse against it And therefore mens wits must be set on work to find out some plausible distinctions and extenuations a little to qualifie and and sweeten this Popish leaven to take off the odium of the phrase and to rebate the edge of those Scriptures which usually are brought against it It is true say they we are not Justified by Works of Nature but we are Justified by Works of Grace and though we are not Justified by Legal or old Covenant Works yet wee are Justified by Evangelical or New Covenant Works performed by our selves And againe works though they are not Physicall Causes which no man ever affirmed yet they are morall Causes or Conditions of our Justification though they do not mer◠in a strict sense by their innate worth and dignity yet in a large sense and by vertue of Gods Promise and Covenant they may be said to merit our Justification and Salvation Or if these will not doe it the matter is dispatched if Faith may be but taken in a proper sense the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere fetches in all other works within its circumference But that delusion which is least apt to bee suspected by wel-meaning Christians is the calling Works or Inherent Holinesse by the name of Christ the successe of this bait we have seen of late in too many who have dallied so long with the notion of a Christ
which â—e endeavored to maintain against those blessed Martyrs of Jesus Christ Barns Hierome and Garret who sealed the contrary Doctrine with their dearest blood 1 The effect of Christs passion hath a Condition the fulfilling of the Condition diminisheth nothing from the effect of Christs passion 2 They that will injoy the effect of Christs passion must fulfil the Condition 3 The fulfilling of the Condition requireth first knowledge of the Condition which knowledge we have by Faith 4 Faith commeth of God and this Faith is a good gift It is good and profitable for me to do well and to exercise this Faith Ergo By the gift of God I may do wel before I am justified 5 By the gift of God I may doe well towards the attainment of Justification 6 There is ever as much Charity towards God as Faith and as Faith increaseth so doth Charity increase 7 To the attainment of Justification is required Faith and Charity 8 Every thing is to be called freely done whereof the beginning is free and set at liberty without any cause of provocation 9 Faith must be to me the assurance of the Promises of God made in Christ if I fulfil the condition and love must accomplish the condition whereupon followeth the attainment of the Promise according to Gods Truth 10 A man being in deadly sin may have Grace to doe the works of Repentance whereby hee may attain to his Justification Never did the child saies G. Joy so lively resemble his own Father as these Articles do expresse the Bishop of Romes Anti-christian Doctrine And as for his choise Notion of Justification by Workes as they are our New Covenant Righteousnesse I finde it was a shift of the Papists long agoe The said Doctor Barnes having cited this passage out of Bernard I do abhor whatsoever thing is of me c. See saies he Bernard doth despise all his good works and taketh him onely to Grace Now had he no works of the New Law as you call them I shall not trace Mr. B. any farther there being now in the Presse as I am informed a large and full answer to his Paradoxicall Aphorismes by a faithful Servant of the Lord Jesus a workman that needs not to be ashamed though I heartily wish that the work may provoke others unto shame who have more strength leisure and far greater helps for such undertakings then Country Ministers I dare say that they who sate at the stern in our Vniversities heretofore such as Reynolds Whittaker Davenant Prideaux c. would never have indured to see so many Popish and Arminian books far more dangerous then the Ranters blasphemous Pamphlets shew their heads but would have sent forth their Antidotes to correct their poison I doe speake the more freely to stir up others of greater abilities then my selfe to undertake this cause least it should suffer overmuch through my weaknesse in managing it We were wont to say that if a man doth plead for the King all is to be taken in good part the design of this Discourse was to plead the cause of the greatest King that no flesh might glory in his presence who of God is made unto us Wisdome Righteousnesse Sanctification and Redemption though the Advocate hath not holpen the Cause yet the goodnesse of the Cause may excuse the Advocate I shall desire thee to read without prejudice and either to read all or none for that which is curtaild in one place is more explained in another If thou reapest any good from what I have written I know thy returns will be according to my hearts desire Praises unto God and more fervent prayers for Thy Servant in the Work of the Gospel W. EYRE The Third day of the Ninth Month. 1653. Justification without conditions OR The Free Justification of a Sinner justified CHAP. I. Shewing the occasion of this Discourse and the rise of the Controversie which is here debated SInce it hath pleased the Lord to reveal the riches of his Son unto me and to make me a Steward and Dispenser of this Grace unto his People the cheif design of my Ministry hath been to bottom my hearers upon Christ alone that they might have no confidence in the flesh but in that perfect and everlasting Righteousness which he hath wrought For which end it hath been my care frequently and clearly to demonstrate to them both the sole-sufficiency and efficiency of Christ in the work of Mans Redemption that he is able to save unto the utmost and that no work of ours either before or after our Conversion doth share with him in the glory of this atchievement In a word That there is no cause without God concurring with the precious and invaluable merit of his Blood to present us holy unblameable and unreprovable in the sight of God Which truth as it shines clearer then the Sun throughout the Scripture so it appears unto me to be of greatest moment when I consider the concernment thereof both to God and Christ and to the precious souls of Gods Elect I know nothing that gives so much glory unto God and Christ as to proclaim him the onely Saviour and that besides him there is none other that we ow the whole work of our Salvation from the beginning to the end unto Christ alone and surely there is no point in the whole Doctrine of Godliness which contributes so much to the Peace Security and Fruitfulness of the Saints as this doth It affords the greatest encouragement to sinners to believe to believers to hold fast their confidence firm unto the end and to serve God with a willing minde in Righteousness and true Holiness all the days of their life § 2 Now though this truth be so evident and my intentions in pressing it such as have been mentioned yet it hath hapned unto me as unto many of my betters to be mistaken and by some of my own Profession who insinuated into the people That I taught a new Gospel made Faith and Repentance to be needless things for no other reason that I know of but because I dare not give them that honor which is due to Christ in making them concauses with him in procuring our Peace with God and in obtaining our Right and Interest in all the Benefits which he hath purchased for they themselves are my witnesses would they speak their knowledge as to matter of Fact that in all my Exercises though usually something of Christ be the Doctrine which I handle yet the use that I make of it is to press men unto Faith and Holiness Nay I challenge all my Adversaries to say that ever I positively spake so much as one syllable to lessen the esteem of Inherent Holiness though I am not ashamed comparatively to say as the Apostle doth That I count all things but loss and dung that I may win Christ Jesus Phil. 3.8 But otherwise I thank the Lord if I should speak
Aphorisms who denies That Christs obedience is the material the imputation of his Righteousness the formal cause of our Justification or that Faith is the Instrument by which we do receive it he plainly ascribes the same kinde of causality unto Christ and Faith making them to differ onely secundum magis minus that Christ is the sine qua non principalis and Faith the sine qua non minus principalis he might have listed sin in the same rank which too is a sine qua non of our Justification That Faith and works in a larger sence are meritorious causes of Life and Blessedness Now we say with Mr. Cr. 1 That God is the efficient cause or the onely Justifier that he hath no motive or inducement but his own Grace and Love to will not to punish us and to give to us his Son thorow whom we have Redemption◠and Deliverance from the curse of the Law We say too 2 that Christ is the onely meritorious cause of our Justification taking Justification pro re volita for a transient effect of the Will of God that Jesus Christ hath by his death and satisfaction fully procured and merited our Discharge and Absolution from the penalty of the Law which we deserved by sin For which cause he is said to have purged our sins by himself i. e. Without the help and assistance of other means Heb. 1.3 There are many who ore tenùs in word do acknowledge That Christ is the meritorious cause of our Justification that in deed do deny it The Papists in the Councel of Trent say That God is the efficient the glory of God the final the death of Christ the meritorious cause of our Justification But yet we know that they allow not this effect unto it unless other things do concur on our parts they say That Faith Charity c. do Impetrare remissionem suo quidem modo mereri Obtain and after a sort merit forgiveness though not by their own worth and dignity yet by vertue of Gods Covenant and Promise Too many of our Protestants setting aside the word merit which yet Mr. B. thinks may be admitted do tread directly in their steps they ascribe as much unto works as Papists do It is a poor requital unto Jesus Christ to call him the Meritorious cause of our Justification and in the mean while to deny the merit of his death as to the immediate purchases thereof and to ascribe at least a partial meritoriousness to other things 3 I shall go further with Mr. Cr. I freely grant him which I believe Mr. W. will stick at That Faith is the Instrument by which we receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ unto our selves whereby the gratious sentence of God acquitting us from our sins is conveyed and terminated in our Consciences We say indeed That Faith doth not concur to our Justification as a proper Physical Instrument which is a less principal Efficient cause Mr. Rutherford saith well That Faith is not the Organical or Instrumental cause either of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation thereof on our behalf By believing we do not cause either our Saviour to satisfie for our sins or God to accept of his satisfaction Every true Believer is perswaded That God hath laid aside his wrath and displeasure towards him for his sins having received a sufficient ransom and satisfaction for them in the death of his Son Sed hoc fides non facit saith he sed objectum jam factum praesupponit Faith is a Receptive not an Effective Instrument an Instrument not to procure but to receive Justification and Salvation which is freely given us in Jesus Christ. It is called an Instrumental cause of our Justification taking Justification passively not actively or in reference to that passive Application whereby a man applies the Righteousness of Christ to himself but not to that active Application whereby God applyeth it to a man which is onely in the minde of God Therefore Calvin calls Faith Opus passivum a passive work § 4. Mr. Cr. proceeds This Doctrine saith he hath in all ages been opposed and obscured sometimes by open Enemies sometimes by professed Friends and such as would be accounted the great Pleaders for Free-grace It is most true That this Article of Free Justification hath and will be a Bone of Contention to the worlds end It is the cheif cause of all those contests and quarrels which have arisen between the Children of the Free-woman and the Children of the Bond-woman Mr. Fox hath well observed It is so strange to carnal Reason so dark to the World it hath so many enemies that except the Spirit of God from above do reveal it Learning cannot reach it Wisdom is offended Nature is astonished Devils do not know it Men do persecute it Satan labors for nothing more then that he may either quite bereave men of the knowledge of this truth or else corrupt the simplicity of it It is not unknown what batteries were raised against it in the very infancy of the Church how the Wits and Passions of men conspired to hinder it what monstrous consequences were charged upon the Doctrine and what odious practises were fathered upon them that did profess it never was any truth opposed with so much malice and bitterness as this hath been and by them especially that were most devout and zealous But when it could not be withstood and stifled Satan endeavored then to deprave and adulterate it by mixing of the Law with the Gospel our own Righteousness with Christs which corruption the Apostle hath strenuously opposed in all his Epistles and more especially in that to the Romans and Galatians where he excludes all and singular works of ours from sharing in the matter of our Justification For the eluding of whose Authority carnal Reason hath found out sundry shifts and distinctions As that the Apostle excludes onely works of Nature but not of Grace Legal but not Evangelical works and that our works though they are not Physical yet they may come in as Moral causes of our Justification It is certain That the most dangerous attempts against this Doctrine have been within the Church and by such as Mr. Cr. calls Professed Friends who have done so much the more mischief in regard they were least apt to be suspected Justification by works was generally exploded amongst us whilest it appeared under the names of Popery and Arminianism which since hath found an easie admittance being vented by some of better note such as would be accounted Pleaders for Free-grace § 5. Mr. Woodbridges Discourse saith Mr. Cr. deals not with the Errors of Papists Socinians Arminians but with Antinomian Error How unjustly our Doctrine is called Antinomian hath been shewn before and Mr. Cr. may be pleased to take notice That Mr. Rutherford accounts the Opinion we oppose the very cheif of the Arminians Socinians and Papists Errors about Justification to wit That
3.24 26. 8.33 Eph. 2.8 We can no more justifie our selves then raise our selves from the dead Eph. 2.1 5. or then we could give our selves a being when as yet we were not Vers 10. Man is so far from being the total or principal Cause of his Justification that he is no cause at all by ascribing the least causality or efficiency to man in his Justification we derogate from the Grace of God in Jesus Christ. § 4. Others do take Faith in a proper sence as the Papists Socinians and Remonstrants amongst whom though there be some difference in Expression yet they all agree in this That by Faith in this Proposition A man is justified by Faith is meant the act or habit of Faith or such a Faith as is accompanied with faithful Actions The Papists say That Faith and other inherent Graces though in their own nature they do not deserve Justification yet through the merits of Christ and Gods gracious acceptance they do procure and obtain the forgiveness of our sins Though they ascribe a meritoriousness to Faith it is but in a qualified sence Faith saith Bellarmine doth but Suo quidem modo mereri remissionem after a manner merit remission scil By vertue of Gods Promise and Covenant who hath annexed forgiveness unto this condition If a King saith he doth promise a Beggar a thousand pound a year upon no condition then indeed the Beggar doth not deserve it but if it be upon condition that he do some small matter as to come and fetch it or to bring him a Posie of flowers then he doth deserve it because the promiser is bound unto performance And in this sence Mr. B. ascribes a meritoriousness to works But the chief difference between them and us lies in this We say a man is justified by the imputation of Christs Righteousness they That we are justified by inherent Righteousness or by doing of Righteous Actions such as are Faith Love Fear c. Ipsa fides in Christum saith Bellarmine est justitia Faith it self is our righteousness And that it doth justifie us impetrando promerendo inchoando â—ustificationem Arminius and the Remonstrants though they have exploded the word merit yet they attribute as much to Faith and faithful Actions as the Papists themselves Dico saith Arminius ipsum fidei actum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere imputari in justitiam idquè sensu proprio non metonymicè The very same is affirmed by Vorstius Bertius Episcopius and the rest of the Remonstrants Their Opinion in brief is this That God in the Legal Covenant required the exact obedience of all his Commandments but now in the Covenant of Grace he requires Faith which in his gracious acceptation stands instead of that obedience to the Moral Law which we ought to perform Which say they is procured by the merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect faith to be perfect Righteousness § 5. Some of our late Divines who seem to disclaim the Doctrine of the Papists and Arminians say the very same who explain themselves to this effect That Faith doth justifie as a condition or antecedent qualification by which we are made capable of being justified according to the order and constitution of God The fulfilling of which condition say they is our Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God Mr. B. is so fond of this notion That although in one place he findes fault with the length of our Creeds and Confessions yet he would have this made an article of our Creed a part of our Childrens Catechisms and to be believed by every man that is a Christian so apt are we to smile upon our own Babes Though I honor Mr. Baxter for his excellent parts yet I must suspend my assent to his new Creed I shall prove anon That Faith is not said to justifie as an antecedent condition which qualifies us for Justification but at present I shall onely render him the Reasons of my disbelief Why I cannot look upon Faith as that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified I shall not insist upon it though it be not altogether unconsiderable that this notion is guilty of too much confederacy with the aforenamed enemies of the Christian Faith for though it is no good Argument to say That Papists Socinians c. do hold this or that therefore it is not true yet it will follow That such and such Tenents have been held by Papists c. and unanimously opposed by our Protestant Writers therefore they ought to be the more suspected and especially such Tenents of theirs as are the cheif points in difference between us and them as this is Our Brethren that have started this notion do take Faith as the others do in a proper sence they attribute as much to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere as Bellarmine Arminius or any other Faith it self says Mr. B. is our Righteousness There was never any Papist so absurd as to say That our Faith Love c. are perfect Legal Righteousness but that God judicio misericordiae non justitiae doth account and accept of it instead of perfect Righteousness For my part I must confess that I can see no dâ—fference between them but in Expression The Papists do acknowledge the satisfaction of Christ and that he is the meritorious cause of our Justification They say indeed That we are not justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed but by a Righteousness inherent in us or righteous actions performed by us And what do our Brethren say less less then this But I shall not follow the Parallel any further § 6. The Reasons which turn the Scales of my Judgement against this notion That our Faith or Faithful Actions are that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified Are 1. If we are not justified by our own works then our believing c. is not that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified but we are not justified by our own works Ergo. The Assumption is written with a Sun beam throughout the Scripture Tit. 3.5 Not by works of Righteousness which we have done Rom. 11.6 If it be of Works then were Grace no more Grace It is the cheif scope of the Apostle throughout this and the Epistle to the Galatians to prove That we are not justified by works The sequel of the Proposition is as evident Because Faith and Obedience to Gospel Precepts are our works It is man that believes and obeys and not God though we do them by his help and assistance yet they are our acts or works so that consequently we are not justified by them in the sight of God The Papists to elude the force of this Argument say That the minde of the Apostle was onely to exclude from Justification works of Nature and not of Grace works which we our selves do by our own strength without the help
2.2 3.10 13.10 c. Now the Scripture doth not call these Inherent Graces ours to exclude the Divine assistance in the working of them as if they proceeded onely from our selves the strength of Nature in us or the towardliness of our own wills The Jews who went about to establish their own Righteousness or Justification by their own works did not deny that these works are the gift of God the Pharisee expresly acknowledgeth as much therefore gives thanks unto God for them Luke 18.11 But they are called ours because they are subjectively in us and instrumentally wrought by us and in opposition to the Righteousness of Christ which is neither in us nor performed by us but is as the Scripture rightly terms it the Righteousness of God not the Essential Righteousness of God as Osiander supposed but the Righteousness of our Mediator God-man which though it be Inherent in the Humane Nature and performed by it yet is it truly called the Righteousness of God because it is the Righteousness of that Person who is perfect God And thus the blood by which we are redeemed is called The blood of God Acts 20.28 Or which is all one The blood of the Son of God 1 John 1.7 The life which was laid down for us was the life of God 1 John 3.16 The death by which we are reconciled to God is the death of his Son Rom. 5.10 The Obedience by which we are constituted just Rom. 5.19 is The Obedience of the same Son of God See Gal. 4.4 5. Christs Mediatorial Righteousness is called the Righteousness of God to shew the dignity and perfection of it it being the Righteousness of so great a person who is not onely Man but God And that we should not think it to be any thing in us from God it is sometimes called his blood Rom. 5.9 sometimes his obedience Vers. 19. By the imputation whereof we are made the Righteousness of God in him as he by the imputation of our sins was made sin for us And thus the godly learned yea and some of the Popish Doctors have expounded the Righteousness of God mentioned in the 1 3 and 10 Chapters to the Romans of Christ and his Righteousness which says Cajetan is called the Righteousness of God Quia est in Deo personaliter sum quia est apud divinum tribunal vera justitia ad differentiam justitiarum nostrarum quia apud divinum tribunal sunt velut pannus menstruatus c. i. e. Because it is personally in God as also because at Gods tribunal it is accounted Righteousness and to distinguish it from our Righteousness which in the sight of God is as filthy rags There is nothing more clear then that our Obedience to Evangelical precepts is not that Righteousness of God the Scripture mentions which is not inherent in us but imputed to us being without us in Christ God-man The Assumption That the Righteousness whereby we are justified is the Righteousness of God is undeniably proved from Rom. 1.17 3.21 10.3 In which last place the Apostle shews there is such an opposition betwixt Gods Righteousness and ours in the point of Justification That whosoever seeks to be justified by his own Righteousness cannot be justified by the Righteousness of God and therefore he himself professeth that in the Question of Justification he utterly renounceth his own righteousness desiring to be found in Christs Righteousness alone Phil. 3.9 This Righteousness of Christ which is out of us in him is properly called Evangelical Righteousness because it is the matter or substance of the whole Gospel the Gospel doth reveal it and not the Law Rom. 1.17 If the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of believing were that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified this Scripture would be guilty of a gross Tautology The Righteousness of God is revealed from Faith to Faith for then the meaning must be our Evangelical Righteousness is revealed from Evangelical Righteousness to Evangelical Righteousness which is absurd § 9.4 If we are not justified by two Righteousnesses existing 〈◊〉 two distinct subjects then our Obedience to Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness whereby we are justified But we are not justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two distinct subjects Ergo. The Sequel is manifest in regard the Righteousness of Christ is inherent in him and obedience to Gospel precepts is a Righteousness inherent in us The Scripture sundry times declares That we are justified by Christ and his Righteousness Rom. 3.24 5.9 19. Now if we were likewise justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts it would follow That we are justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two distinct subjects But this is gain-said in the Assumption which will be secured by this proof If by Christs Righteousness alone we are made perfectly just and righteous in the sight of God then there is no other Righteousness which concurs with his to our Justification For what needs an addition to that which is perfect But by Christs Righteousness alone we are made perfectly just and righteous in the sight of God as these and many other Scriptures do witness Heb. 1.3 10.14 Col. 1.22 2.10 13. Again if we are justified partly by Christs Righteousness and partly by our own our Faith for Justification must relie partly upon Christ and partly upon our selves Paul might have desired to be found in his own Righteousness But our faith and trust for Justification may not in any part relie upon our selves Jere. 17.5 Phil. 3.3 Gal. 5.2 3 4. The Adversaries of Grace as we shewed before acknowledge that it is the safest course to trust and relie upon Christ alone and to fetch the comfort of our Justification from his perfect Obedience onely § 10.5 That which overthrows the main difference between the Law and the Gospel ought not be admitted for the confounding of them will open an in-let to innumerable Errors nay by this means the Gospel it self will become a meer cypher The Apostle we see was exceeding careful to keep these Doctrines distinct each from other and therefore throughout all his Writings he still opposeth the Law and Grace Works and Faith our Righteousness and Christs Righteousness instructing us thereby how needful it is they should be kept a sunder But the making our Obedience to Gospel precepts the Righteousness whereby we are justified overthrows the main difference between the Law and the Gospel Ergo. For herein as Bishop Downham well obâ—â—â—ves standeth the chief Agreement and Difference between the Law and the Gospel they agree in this That unto Justification both do require the perfect fulfilling of the Law but herein they differ That the Law requireth to Justification a Righteousness inherent in us and perfect Obedience to be performed in our own persons the Gospel reveals for our Justification the perfect Righteousness of an other even of Christ which is accepted in their behalf that do believe in him as
Justification then God who made onely a conditional grant notwithstanding which he might have perished but he by performing the condition makes the grant to be absolute And truly sayes the same Author whosoever makes Faith the condition of the New Covenant in such a sense as perfect Obedience was the condition of the Old cannot avoid it but that man is justified chiefly by himself and his own acts not so much by Gods Grace in imputing Christs Righteousness but more by his own Faith which is his own act though of Gods work God by making his supposed gracious conditional promise doth not justifie any man for that makes no difference at all amongst persons It remains therefore that man must be said to justifie himself for where there is a promise of a Reward made to all upon condition of performing such a service he that obtains the reward gets it by his own service without which the promise would have brought him never a whit the nearer to the Reward Thus a man justifies himself by believing more a great deal then God justifies him by his promulgation of the conditional promise which would have left him in his old condition had not he better provided for himself by believing then God by promising as in the old Covenant it was not Gods threat that brought death upon the world just so in the new if it be a conditional promise it is not the promise that justifies a believer but the believer himself § 7. Mr. W. may as well call the Blood of Christ a Passive condition in our Justification because it did not make the Law nor pronounce the sentence of Absolution let the indifferent Reader consider whether this be not I will not say a childish but an impertinent answer which draws his former Concession quite aside from the matter now under debate for the question is not whether man did concur in making the Law and Rule of his Justification but whether he hath any causal influx in producing the effect or whether before Justification he can or doth perform any condition to which God hath infallibly promised this Grace Which if granted will conclude That he is not Passive but Active in his Justification when our Protestant Divines say That a man is Passive in his first Conversion Their meaning is That he can perform no condition at all to which God hath inseparably annexed the Grace of Conversion So Cameron expresseth their sense and meaning Vocatio nullam poscit in objecto conditionem For though a man before conversion do perform many natural acts which have a remote tendency to this effect as Hearing Reading Meditating c. yet for all we say He is Passive therein because these are not such conditions to which God hath promised saving Grace So though a man doth never so many natural acts or duties whereunto God hath not immediately promised this priviledge he is but Passive for all in his Justification but if he do perform any condition to which Justification is promised then he is active and consequently may be said to justifie himself § 8. But says Mr. W. We do no more justifie our selves then we do glorifie our selves it is God alone doth both and we are Passive in both Pag 8. And again It is God that glorifies us and not we our selves yet surely God doth not glorifie us before we believe Pag. 10. First I shall readily grant him that we do neither justifie nor glorifie our selves seeing that we obtain neither of these benefits by our own works From the very beginning to the end of our Salvation nothing is primarily or causally Active but Free-grace all that we receive from God is gift and not debt Glory it self is not wages but Grace For though it be called The recompence of Reward Heb. 11.27 yet that is not to be understood in a proper sense as when the Reward is for the Work which may be two ways First When the work is proportionable to the wages as when a Laborer receives a shilling for a days work here the work doth deserve the wages because the work doth him that payes the wages as much good as the wages doth the worker Now surely no reward can come from the Creator to the Creature in this way bâ—cause no man can do any work that is profitable unto God Psal. 16.2 Job 22.3 35.8 Rom. 11 35. The very Papists will not say that Glory is a reward in this sense Works saith Bishop Gardner do not deserve Salvation as a Workman deserveth his wages for his labor Secondly When the work is not answerable to the wages but yet the wages is due by promise upon the performance of it as when a poor man hath twenty shillings for an hours labor though the work be not worth it yet is it a due debt and he may challenge it as such because it was promised him In this sense neither is Glory a Reward for under the New Covenant Blessedness is not to him that worketh but to him that worketh not Rom. 4.5 We are saved by grace and not by works Tit. 3.5 Eph. 2.5 8. And saith the Apostle If by grace then it is no more of works Rom. â—1 6 But when Glory is called a Reward we are to understand it improperly as when a thing is called a Reward onely by way of Analogy and Resemblance because it comes after and in the place of the work as the nights rest may be called the Reward of the days labor because it succeeds it Thus is that of the Apostle to be taken 2 Thes. 1.7 And thus the Heir inheriting his Fathers Lands hath a Recompence or Reward of all the labor and service he hath done for his Father although he did not his service to that end neither doth the enjoyment of that inheritance hang upon that condition In this sense Eternal Lâ—fe and Glory may be called the Reward of our Works because it is a consequent of them not that our works have any influence either Physical or Moral to obtain it All things being given us in and for Christ alone Rom. 8.32 Eph. 1.3 And therefore it is called by the Apostle A reward of Inheritance Col. 3.24 Which comes to us not by working but by inheritance as we are the heirs of God and joynt heirs with Christ. If Glory were a Reward in a proper sense we might properly be said to save and glorifie our selves because we concurred to the Production of this effect but Mr. W. sayes well It is God that glorifies us Eternal Life is called his gift in opposition to wages Rom. 6.23 2 Tim. 4.8 It is solely the effect of Gods grace and Christs purchase though God doth glorifie us after working yâ—t not for any of those works which we have wrought though by the help and assistance of his own Spirit § 9. But yet secondly Though God doth not glorifie us before we believe yet it will not follow that he doth not justifie
rased out those Scriptures which ascribe our Justification unto Christ alone For my own part I see no such cause he hath to triumph unless it be in the dejection of those feeble consequences which he himself hath devised to make our Doctrine odious which we have shewn before are as remote from our principles as the East is from the West I confess neither he nor I are competent Judges in our own cause let the Godly Reader judge between us and hold fast that which comes nearest to the Analogy of Faith I shall now address my self to sâ—an the force of those Arguments he hath brought to prove That the Elect are not justified in the sight of God before they believe CHAP. X. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges first Argument against Justification before Faith taken from the Nature of Justification is answered HIs first Argument is drawn from the Nature of Justification Which sayes he is the absolution of a sinner from condemnation by that gracious sentence and signal promise in the Gospel He that believes shall not enter into condemnation The Argument he hath cast into this frame If there be no act of grace declared and published in the Word which may be a legal discharge of the sinner while he is in unbelief then no unbelieving sinner is justified But there is no act of grace declared and published in the Word which is a legal discharge of the sinner whilest he remains in unbelief Ergo. Whereunto I answer 1. That his Assumption is false for the Gospel or New Covenant is a published or declared discharge of all the Elect. The sum of which is That God hath transacted all their sins upon Jesus Christ and that Christ by that offering of his hath made a full and perfect atonement for them whereby the whole spiritual Israel are really made clean from all their sins in the sight of God as of old carnal Israel were Typically clean upon the atonement made by the High Priest Levit. 16.30 Now though they cannot plead it before they believe yet is it a real discharge because it frees them from condemnation As a Pardon granted by a Prince is a legal discharge though the Malefactor doth not know of it 2. The Sequel or Consequence of the Major stands upon a sandy bottom a postulatum that will not be granted to wit That Justification is the discharge of a sinner by a published declared act We have shewed before That Justification consists in the non-imputation of sin and the imputation of Righteousness which is an act of the Minde or Will of God It is a gross non sequitur God doth not declare his non-imputing of sin to his Elect before they believe Ergo He doth account and esteem them sinners The Question is not whether this gracious sentence of Absolution be declared but whether it be not in the Brest of God before it be declared or whether this immanent act of God doth not secure the sinner from condemnation If so then there is Justification though there be no published declared sentence As Gods saying in his heart That he would never drown the world any more Gen. 8.21 did sufficiently secure the world from the danger of an other deluge though he had never declared it so Gods will not to punish secures a person from condemnation though this security be not declared § 2. They are but feeble proofs wherewith he hath backed hâ—s Assertion That Justification is onely by the promise as a declared discharge We are not says he as if he saâ—e in Pythagoras his Chair to conceive of Justification as an internal immanent act of God resolving privately in his own Brest not to prosecute his right against a sinner but it must be some declared promulged act c. But why are we not to conceive of it as an internal immanent act Instead of proofs he gives us Illustrations which may pass in a Sermon but are too weak for a dispute As sin saith he is not imputed where there is no Law Rom. 5.13 So neither is Righteousness imputed without Law Whereunto I answer 1. Though men will not impute or charge sin upon themselves where there is not a Law to convince them of it For by the Law is the knowledge of sin Rom. 3.20 7.9 Gal. 3.19 Yet it follows not but God did impute sin to men before there was any Law promulged or before the sin was actually committed For what is Gods hating of a person but his imputing of sin or his will to punish him for his sin Now the Lord hated all that perish ere ever the Law was given The scope of the Scripture alleadged Rom. 5.13 is not to shew when God begins to impute sin to a person but that sin in being supposeth a Law and consequently That there was a Law before the Law of Moses else men could not have sinned as it is confessed they did As the Law it self had a being in the Minde of God so the issues thereof were determined by him before it was declared 2. There is not the same reason of our being sinners and being righteous seeing that sin is our act but Righteousness is the gift of God A man is not a sinner before he do commit sin either by himself or Representative which necessarily supposeth a Law For sin is the transgression of a Law 1 Iohn 3.4 But a man may be righteous before he doth works of Righteousness and consequently before any Law is given him to obey Indeed if we were made righteous by our own personal Inherent Righteousness then our Justification would necessarily require a Law for as much as all our Righteousness consists in a conformity to the Law But seeing we are justified by the imputation of anothers Righteousness what need is there that a Law should first be given unto us § 3. Mr. W. goes on As our condemnation is no secret act or resolution of God to condemn but the very voice and sentence of the Law Cursed is he that sinneth and therefore he whom God in his Eternal Decree hath purposed to save may yet for the present be under the sentence of condemnation as the Ephesians whom God had chosen to Eternal Life Chap. 1.4 were yet sometimes the children of wrath Chap. 2.3 So on the contrary our Justification must be some declared promulged act or sentence of God which may stand good in Law for the discharge of the sinner against condemnation We say that condemnation being taken not for the Will of God to punish or to inflict upon a person the desert of his sin but for the thing willed or for the curse it self it comes upon men by vertue of that Law or Covenant which was made with the first Adam So our Justification being taken not for the Internal Act of Gods will not to punish but for the benefit willed to us by that Internal Act to wit Our actual discharge from the Law descends to us by vertue of that Law or Covenant which was made
with the second Adam He performing the terms of agreement between the Father and himself made the Law of Condemnation to be of no force against us Gal. 3.13 4.5 Which New Covenant and not the Conditional Promise as Mr. W. would have it is called The Law of Faith Rom. 3.27 And the Law of Righteousness Ch. 9.31 It is called a Law because it is the fixed and unalterable Sanction of the Great God or else by way of Antithesis or opposition to the Covenant of Works The Law of Righteousness it being the onely means whereby men do attain to Righteousness and are justified in the sight of God and the Law of Faith because it strips men of their own righteousness to cloath them with Christs and thereby takes from men all occasion of boasting in themselves whereas if men did attain to Righteousness by vertue of this Conditional Promise He that believes shall be saved they would have as much cause of boasting in themselves as if they had performed the Law of Works That saying of his with which he closeth this Argument is wide from truth That every man is then condemned or stands condemned in foro Dei when the Law condemns him for then all men living are condemned seeing the Law condemns or curseth every one that sins and there is none that lives without sin Either he must say Believers do not sin and then Saint John will give him the lie 1 Joh. 1.8 or else That Believers are not justified which is contrary to the Scripture last cited by himself Joh 5.24 with a thousand more In what sence the Elect Ephesians were called Children of wrath will more fitly be explained in the next Chapter § 4. In the mean time we will adde a few Reasons against the main support of this Argument That Justification is the discharge of a sinner by a declared published act to wit by that Signal Conditional Promise He that believes shall be saved Which when a man hath performed the condition he may plead for his discharge Against this Notion I shall offer to the Readers serious consideration these following Arguments First If Justification be not by works then it is not by this or any other Conditional Promise which is a declared discharge onely to him that performs the condition i. e. That worketh But Justification is not by works which we have wrought but an act of the freest grace and bounty Col. 2.13 where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle useth to express the forgiveness of sin ascribes it solely to the Grace of God without Works or Conditions performed by us § 5. Secondly If Justification be by that Signal Promise He that believes shall be saved then none were justified before that gracious sentence was published which was not till our Saviours Ministery in the flesh nor was there any sentence of Divine Revelation like it which the people of God could plead for their discharge from the Law from the fall of Adam until the publication of that subservient Covenant in Mount Sinai which is the tenor of the Law of Works the Lord never made any Conditional Promise which they could plead for their discharge and absolution from sin the promises to Adam Noah Abraham were not conditional but absolute Now if there were no Justification till God had made some conditional promise which men upon performing the condition might plead as their legal discharge I marvel into what Limbus Mr. W. will thrust the Fathers of the Old Testament For they that were not justified were not saved But the Scripture gives us more hope shewing that they were saved by the same grace as we are Acts 15.11 God accepting them as righteous in Jesus Christ who in respect of the vertue and efficacy of his death is called The Lamb slain from the foundations of the world Revel 13.8 For though this rich Grace were not revealed to them so clearly as unto us Eph. 3.5 1 Pet. 1.12 Yet the Effects and Benefits thereof descended upon them unto Justification of life no less then to the Faithful in the New Testament The Argument in short is this If the Fathers of the Old Testament were justified who yet had not any such declared discharge then Justification is not by a declared discharge but the Fathers of the Old Testament were justified c. Ergo. § 6. Thirdly If Justification be onely by a declared discharge then Elect Infants insensible of this Declaration and unable to plead their discharge from any such promise have no Justification I hope Mr. W. is not such a durus pater infantum as to exclude all those from Justification that die in their infancy which he must necessarily do if he makes Justification to consist in that which they are utterly uncapable of § 7. Fourthly The making Justification a declared discharge detracts from the Majesty and Soveraignty of God For as much as it ascribes to him but the office of a Notary or subordinate Minister whose work it is to declare and publish the sentence of the Court rather then of a Judge or Supream Magistrate whose Will is a Law And by this means Justification shall be opposed not to condemnation but to concealing or keeping secret § 8. Fifthly If Justification were by a Conditional Promise as a declared discharge then it would not be Gods act but our own God should not be our Justifier but we must be said to justifie our selves For a Conditional Promise doth not declare one man justified more then another but the performance of the condition So that a man should be more beholding to himself then to God for his Justification § 9. Sixthly We may argue a pari Forgiveness amongst men is not necessarily by a declared discharge Ergo Gods is not for there is the same reason for both and therefore we are bid to forgive one another as God for Christs sake hath forgiven us Eph. 4. ult i. e. heartily or from the heart as the Apostle elsewhere explains it Col. 3.17 Not in word or in tongue but in deed and in true affection Mans forgiveness is principally an act of the Heart and Minde A man forgives an injury when he layes aside all thoughts of revenge and really intends his welfare that did the same his heart is as much towards him as if he had not done it And therefore Gods forgiving of a sinner is not necessarily a declared absolution God may justifie or acquit a person though he doth not declare his reconciliation with him § 10. Mr. Woodbridge foresaw the force of this Reason and therefore hath wisely laid in this Exception against it Indeed to our private forgiveness one of another being meerly an act of Charity there is no more required then a resolution within our selves to lay aside our thoughts of revenge c. But the forgiveness of a Magistrate being an act of Authority must be by some formal act of Oblivion c. A Vote in the
notwithstanding all that he hath done for us we had been eternally miserable unlesse we had also contributed our owne endeavours How derogatory this is to Christ and contrary to the Scriptures is sufficienâ—ly manâ—fest Ninthly If it were the Will of God that his people should have strong consolations and that their joy should be full then it was his Will that their peace and reconciliation should not depend upon termes and conditions performed by themselves For as was noted before out of Calvin it is impossible that any soule should injoy a firme and settled peace whose confidence towards God is grounded upon conditionall promises and sayes the Apostle our Salvation is by grace to the end that the promise might be sure unto all the seed implying that if it depended never so little upon our works wee could not bee sure thereof and consequently wee must walke in darknesse and see no light § 7. Tenthly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the reconciliation of his Elect whilst they live in this world then it was his Will that it should procure for them immediate and actuall reconciliation without the intervention of those conditions supposed to be required of them and the reason of this consequence is because they cannot performe all the conditions required of them till their last breath this being one that they must persevere to the end and the nature of conditionall grants is such that the benefit cannot be had and injoyed till all the conditions are performed So that if the reconciliation of the Elect did depend upon the conditions pretended they should not only not have reconciliation before Faith but not before death which is contrary to innumerable Scriptures which doe declare that the Saints are perfectly justified and so immutably reconciled unto God that nothing shall be able to separate them from his love though their Sanctification be imperfect yet their Justification is as full and perfect as ever it shall be it doth not grow and increase as the other doth but is perfect at first And therefore baptisme which seals unto us the forgivenesse and washing away of all our sins not originall only but actuall also is administred but once in all our life time to shew that our Justification is done all at once at the very first instant wherein the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to us Ezek. 16.8 9. Act. 13.39 1 Joh. 1.7 Col. 2.13 14. § 8. Eleventhly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should certainly and infallibly procure the reconciliation of his Elect then surely it was not the Will of God that it should depend upon terms and conditions on their part because that which depends upon future conditions is as to the event altogether uncertain it is possible it may never be by the non-performance of the condition But this hath been alleadged before Twelfthly If God willed this blessing to his Elect by the death of Christ but conditionally then he willed their Reconciliation and Justification no more then their non-Reconciliation and Condemnation and stood as it were indifferent to either event but doubtlesse his heart was more set upon it then so see John 6.38 39. John 17.21 22 24. The consequence is cleare for if he willed their Justification onely in case they should beleeve and repent then he willed their Damnation in case they doe not beleeve and repent and then it will follow that he willed their Justification no more then their Damnation nay most probably he willed it lesse because we are more prone to Infidelity then we are to Faith and to hardnesse of heart then we are to repentance I adde to this § 9. Thirteenthly If God willed unto men the benefits of Christs death upon any condition to be performed by them it will follow that God foresaw in them an ability to performe some good which Christ hath not merited Conditionall reconciliation necessarily supposeth Free-will For either God willed it unto men upon a possible or impossible condition not upon an impossible condition for that is inconsistent with the Wisdome of God if upon a possible condition the possibility thereof ariseth either from Gods Will or from Mans it is possible either because God will bestow it or because man can performe it Our adversaries cannot mean it in the former sence for God will bestow upon us nothing but what Christ hath purchased and Christ hath purchased nothing save what God hath promised in his Covenant Now Mr. W. denyes that the promise of Faith is any part of the Covenant or any effect of it p. 32. and others that are for this conditional reconciliation look upon it as a ridiculous conceit that God should promise men Salvation upon a condition and that he should work this condition in them and for them so that in the upshot we shall be beholding cheifly to Free Will an opinion so absurd that in all ages it hath been exploded by humble and sober minded Christians it being palpably contrary to the Scriptures which shew that every man by nature is without strength dead in treaspasses and sins that we cannot so much as think a good thought that it is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure If any shal say that God did will that by Christ wee should have Faith and after that reconciliation Though this be granted them it will follow notwithstanding that our reconciliation is an immediate effect of the death of Christ as Mr. Owen hath invincibly proved in his answer to Baxter p. 34. and then all the controversie will be about Gods order and method in conferring on us the effects of Christs death and whether God doth enable a man to perform good works before his person is reconciled to God Some Reasons for the Negative have been given before § 10. Fourteenthly If God did will that our sins should be accounted unto Christ without any condition on our part then it was his Will that they should be discounted unto us without any condition and the Reason thereof is because the charging and accounting of them unto him necessarily includes our discharge the imputing of our sins to Christ was formally the non-imputing of them unto us Gods accounting of them unto him as hath been shown was a reall discounting of them from us for they could not be accounted or charged upon both without a manifest contradiction in the thing it selfe and in the Justice of God But God willed that our sins should be accounted to and charged upon Christ without any condition performed by us for he actually suffered for them before we were Ergo. § 11. To these Arguments from Scripture I mighr adde many plaine Texts which doe declare that our reconciliation is the actual and immediate effect of Christs death as Col. 1.14 Eph. 1.7 We have redemption not we shall have the forgivenesse or non-imputation
of sins according to the riches of his grace not according to any condition performed by us he having obtained eternall redemption for us Heb. 9.12 And 2 Cor. 5.18 19. a place which we have often mentioned the Apostle shewes that Christ by his death made such a reconciliation for us as that God thereupon did not impute our sins unto us which was long before any condition could be performed by us Elsewhere That Christ by himselfe purged and expiated our sins Heb. 1.3 and afterwards set downe as having finished that worke chap. 10·12 Now sin that is fully purged and expiated is not imputable to the sinner The same Apostle addes that Christ by his sacrifice hath for ever perfected all them for whom it was offered Heb. 10.14 And in another place that he hath made them compleat as to the forgivenesse of their sins Col. 2.10 13 14. In Rom. 8.33 34. He argues from the death of Christ to the non-imputation of our sins Who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect it is God that justifieth it is Christ â—hat dyed whereas notwithstanding sin would have been chargeable upon them and they condemnable if the death of Christ had not procured their discharge without the intervention of any condition performed by them CHAP. XV. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Replyes to the second Objection as he cals it concerning our being Justified in Christ as a common person are examined THe Argument was proposed by me at the time of our Conference in this manner They that were in Christ as a common person before they beleeved were Justified before they beleeved But many were in Christ as a common person before they beleeved Ergo Mr. W. denyed both Propositions The major I proved in this wise If Christ was justified before many â—hat are in him doe beleeve then they that are in him were â—â—stified before they beleeved But Christ was justified before many that are in Christ do beleeve Ergo. His answer hereunto as I remember was I deny all And therefore the Assumption was confirmed from Isa. 50.8 9. in this manner Christ was justified at his resurrection but that happened before many of them who are in Christ as a common person doe beleeve Ergo That Christ was justified at his resurrection is clear from this Text He is near that justifieth me c. Which words I said were uttered by the Prophet in the person of our Saviour in the time of his greatest humiliation who comforted himselfe with this that the Lord would shortly justifie him which was to be done at his Resurrection when the Lord publickly declared to all the world that he was acquitted and discharged from all those sins which were laid upon him and which he as a Surety undertook to satisfie The sequel of the major was also proved by this Enthymem The acts of a common person doe belong unto them whom he represents whatsoever is done by or to a common person as such is to be attributed to them in whose stead he stands and therefore if Christ were justified all that were in him were justified also For seeing that he was not justified from his own but from the sins of others all they whom he represents were justified in his Justification Whereunto hee replyed That Christ was not justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant which did lead us to that discourse of the New Covenant which is afterwards mentioned of which in its place § 2. We shall now take a view of his Replyes to this Argument which we find in his printed copy And 1. he distinguisheth of a threefold Justification 1 Purposed 2 Purchased and 3 Exemplified all which are before Faith So then by his own confession Justification in a Scripture sense goes before Faith Which is that horrid opinion he hath all this while so eagerly opposed It may be he will say as Arminius doth that neither of these were actuall Justification which were a poor put off for as Dr. Twisse observes Omnis Justificatio simpliciter dicta congruenter exponenda est de Justificatione actuali Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato When we speak of Justification simply there is no man but understands it of actuall Justification And first That which he cals Justification purposed in the Decree of God is reall and actuall Justification for if Justification be Gods will not to punish or to deal with his Elect according to their sins as both the Psalmist and Apostle do define it then when Gods Will was in actual being their Justification was actual It is absurd to say That God did decree or purpose to will any thing whatsoever his Will being his Essence which admits no cause either within or without God 2 We have shewn before that Justification being taken for the effect of Gods Will to wit our discharge from the Obligation of the Law it was actually because solely and absolutely obtained by the death of Christ there being no other cause out of God which concurs to the producing of this effect § 3. The third Branch of his distinction Justification exemplified is terminus redundans a member that may well be spared for 1 there is not the least hint thereof in Holy Writ the Scripture no where calls our Saviour the example or pattern of our Justification For though he is proposed to us as an example in acts of Moral Obedience yet in his works of Mediation he was not so in these he was not an exemplary but a meritorious procuring cause an example is proposed to be imitated and therefore we are frequently exhorted to imitate our Saviour in works of Sanctification but we are no where bid to imitate him in our Justification or in justifying our selves It was needless he should be a pattern of our Justification for this pattern must be of use either unto us or unto God Not to us because we do not justifie our selves not unto God because he needs no pattern or example to guide or direct him 2 He that payes our debts to the utmost farthing and thereupon receives a discharge is more then a pattern of our release Our real discharge is in his as our real debt was upon him And therefore his Grand-father Parker said well That Christs Resurrection was the Actual Justâ—fication both of him and us 3 If Christ were onely a pattern and example of our Justification then was he justified from his own sins and consequently was a sinner which is the most horrid blasphemy that can be uttered The reason of the consequence is evident for if Christ were but a pattern of our Justification then was he justified as we are Now we are justified from our own sins which we our selves have committed and therefore his Justification must be from his own sins or else the example and counterpart do not agree 4 This expression intimates that as Christ was justified by performing the conditions required of him so we
Faction are but ridiculous termes yet the things themselves are reall evils the one being an offence against Civill and the other against Ecclesiasticall peace If this Author had shewn wherein I had offended against either of them I doubt not but I should have cleared my selfe at a just Tribunal For 1. I have ever been so far from factious Combinations or attempting any thing against the Civil Peace that as I verily beleeve it hath not been the least cause of my troubles that I have alwayes prayed for and pressed subjection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the â—owers in being had others of my calling done the like the disaffections of the people against the present Government had not been so great as yet they are in these parts 2. As for Schisme I know no ground that he hath to charge me with it for Schisme cannot be but where communion is or ought to be held now to my best remembrance I never refused to hold Christian comunimon with any person or persons with whom by the Rules of Christ I conceived I ought It is true we receive not all within that Parochial circuit wherein we live unto communion in Church Priviledges because either they refuse to make Profession of their Faith and to declare their subjection to the Ordinances of Jesus Christ and so they separate from us and not we from them or else they are such as in their practises do contradict the profession which they seem to make like them Tit. 1.16 And as for Members of other Churches we are ready to give them the right hand of fellowship unlesse the person or the Church to which he belongs lyes under the guilt of any publick scandal If he doth accuse me of Schâ—sm because I have refrained going to some Lectures that are preached in this City I doubt not but the wise will be satisfied with a just Apology I doe not conceive that Christians are bound to frequent every Lecture that is preached near them the obligation to this Duty must needs be determined by Christian prudence and we ought to follow that which we conceive hath the greatest tendency to Edification Now I confesse I have rather chosen to deprive my selfe of that benefit which sometime I might injoy then to wound my Conscience by keeping of silence when I hear the Truths and Servants of God declaimed against Dr. Jackson a man large enough in the point of communion grants that there is just cause to separate from the communion of a visible Church our practise doth not amount so high when we are urged or constrained to professe or beleive some points of Doctrine or to adventure upon some Practises which are contrary to the Rule of Faith or Love of God and in case we are utterly deprived of freedome of Conscience in professing what we inwardly beleeve for which he cites 1 Cor. 7.23 Yee are bought with a price be yee not Servants of men For sayes he although we were perswaded that we might communicate with such a Church without evident danger of damnation yet in as much as we cannot communicate with it upon any better termes then Servants and Bondslaves doe with their Masters we are bound in Conscience and religious discretion when lawfull occasions or opportunities are offered to use our Liberty and seek to our Freedom rather then to live in bondage Let them allow us that liberty which we offer to them to discusse and examine the Doctrines which they do deliver and if they shall be found erroneous to professe against them I shall not often decline such opportunities § 10. But says Mr. W. the contending about this matter will harden and discomfort more soules in an houre then the opinion it selfe will doe good to while the world stands 1. It seems he is of Curcaelleus his mind that the matter in question is of so small concernment that it ought not to breed a controversie I marvel then he should offer himselfe a Champion on either part especially in a place where he had so little to doe and where his humility might suppose there were others as able as himselfe to defend the notion which he stickles for No man will imagine that he ingaged in this controversie upon conscientious principles if he judgeth the Point in question to be of little moment For my part I cannot looke upon that as such a trifle which doth so nearly concern the glory of Gods Grace the vertue and efficacy of Christs Blood upon which alone poor Souls can with confidence and security build their hopes of Eternall life 2. I have shewed before that the Doctrine it selfe is guiltlesse both of hardning and discomforting the soules of men and if these effects doe insue the pressing of it in a Christian way they are accidental and consequently ought not to be charged upon the Tenent I know none that are discomforted by these Debates but such as the Apostle speaks of Who are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth For having pinned their Faith on the sleeves of others they are jealous of their credit least they should be thought to have builded on a sandy foundation CHAP. XVI Of Mr. Woodbridges Answer to the third Objection which he hath framed concerning our being in Covenant with God before beleiving THis last he scoffingly cals the great Argument which as he hath proposed it was none of mine We fell upon our discourse of the Covenant upon his saying that Christ was not justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant whereunto I replyed If the New Covenant were made with Christ then Christ was justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant But the New Covenant was made with Christ Ergo. He denyed the Assumption But by the way let me give the Reader the Reason of the Sequel which is as followeth The New Covenant containes all the Promises which God hath made to the Head and the Members both to Christ Personal and to Christ Mystical the same Covenant is conditional to him and absolute to us a Covenant of Works to him but a Covenant of Grace to us Now if it be one and the same Covenant by which Christ and we are Justified though in a far different manner scil he by Works and we by Grace he by his own Righteousnesse and we by his then his Justification was by vertue of the New Covenant that we are justified by We read but of one Covenant that was made with Christ by and according unto which he was justified when he had paid the debt which he had undertaken To confirme the Assumption That the New Covenant was made with Christ I alleadged 1 the Judgement of the late Assembly who in their larger Catechisme have laid down this Proposition in terminis The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his seed First he denied the Allegation though I beleeve at
on our part to give us a right and title to the blessings of it But before we proceed we will give the Reader a brief account of those other Scriptures which Mr. W. hath alledged to prove That Faith is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means on our part to obtain the remission of sins All which I finde have the same misfortune as the rest not to be able to bring forth the conclusion which his fancy hath begotten on them That in Ezek 36.25 26 27 28. makes quite against him for there the Lord first promiseth to justifie us in those phrases of pouring out clean water upon us and of cleansing us from all our filthinesses Verse 25 â—nd then to renew or sanctifie us Vers. 26 27. So that there is no colour to infer from hence that Sanctification or any part thereof is promised as a means to intitie us to Justification § 7. The other two Texts are much to the same purpose scil Ezek. 11.19 20. and chap. 27.23 24 26 27. where the Lord after he had promised unto his people many particular blessings as that he would give them a new heart take away their stony heart make them walk in his Statutes and Ordinances that they should no more defile themselves with Idols that David i. e. Christ should be their King and Shepherd that his Tabernacle should be with them i. e. He would dwell in them and walk in them 2 Cor. 6.16 He tells them That he will be their God and they shall be his people from whence Mr. W. would gather That God promiseth Faith not as a part of the Covenant but as a means to bring us into Covenant that God may be our God How rational this Deduction is let the Reâ—der judge for if that promise I will be their God must be taken exclusively so that the promises preceding are no part of the Covenant then the promises of Justification Sanctification Perseverance c. must be excluded from being parts of the Covenant If he sayes that it onely excludes Faith I would ask quô jure what reason is there that it should exclude Faith more then the other promises preceding If it includes the rest why not this But to draw to a conclusion we say that this promise I will be their God and they shall be my people may be taken either 1 more generally as comprehending all good things whatsoever as if the Lord after the enumeration of many particular benefits had summed up all in this I will be their God q. d. They may expect as much good from me as the living God can bestow upon his people even this that hath been mentioned and all things else and in this sence the promise of Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is included in it or 2 it may be taken more restrictively as noting some particular benefit and priviledge distinct from the rest as that they shall worship him and he will protect and provide for them or else that they shall not onely have an interest in God but that they shall know it and live in the comfort of it § 8. In the next place Mr. W. offers me his service to new mold my Argument and to cast it into a better form as thus They concerning whom God hath promised that he will give them Faith they are in Covenant before they believe but concerning the Elect God hath promised that he will give them Faith Ergo. But pace tanti viri I shall not accept his courtesie if he hath any minde to it as I have framed it the Law is open he may try his skill onely he may be pleased to remember that these Texts Jere. 31.8 Heb. 8. were not brought to prove that we are in Covenant before we believe but that the Spirit which works Faith is given by vertue of the Covenant made with us As for that Argument which from these Texts he hath advanced against us together with the Auxiliaries which he hath placed in the rear I shall presently attend their motion having first given in my evidence to the cause depending That the New Covenant is not conditional and that in it God doth not require any restipulation from us to intitle us to the blessings of it The contrary Assertion I conceive is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his whole discourse For if there be no condition or restipulation required in the New Covenant there will be no need to make Faith the mears of our entrance into Covenant nor any absurdity in saying that our Justification in the sight of God precedes Faith CHAP. XIX Wherein is shewn That in the New Covenant there are no conditions required of us to invest us with a Right and Title to the blessings of it BEfore I do give the Reasons of this Assertion I must crave the Readers patience whilest I tell him 1 what I mean by the New Covenant and 2 what I understand by a condition 1. By the New Covenant I mean that engagement which God hath laid upon himself to bestow on them for whom Christ hath died all good which is commensurate to their nature and by vertue whereof all blessings Corporal Spiritual and Eternal do flow down unto them I call it an Engagement because God by promising makes himself a debtor though not to us yet unto himself being bound in justice to perform his Word and Promise There are two principal Engagements which God hath laid upon himself in order to our Eternal Happiness to one of which all his promises may be reduced The first is that Covenant which he made with the first Adam in the time of his innocency wherein God promised us life upon condition of our perfect obedience This is called a Covenant of Works because the effects thereof do depend upon our works the promise is not in force nor have we any right to the Blessings until all those works are performed which are here required Now this Covenant saith the Apostle became weak through the flesh i. e. It was altogether unable to give us life by reason of our default and not performing the condition required of us we have no benefit at all by this engagement and therefore the Lord made another Covenant with the second Adam that upon the making of his soul an offering for sin he would give unto his Seed viz. All the Elect Eternal life i. e. All good things whatsoever which they stand in need of Now this we call The New Covenant because it succeeded in the place of the other and the Covenant of Grace because all the effects thereof do flow down unto us meerly from the favor of God and the merit of Christ. All the mercies we receive they are the fruits and effects of this engagement Zech. 9.11 It is the onely plea we can use to God both for the things of this life and that which is to come and by vertue hereof we may claim and confidently expect from him all
though he started aside as well as Saul yet the Covenant made with him was not thereupon dissolved and broken § 8. 3. Because if there were any condition required in the New Covenant to intitle us to the Blessings of it it would not be a Covenant of pure Grace so that the asserting of conditions in the New Covenant doth by necessary consequence overthrow the nature of it for as Austine hath observed Grace is not grace unless it be every way free and the Apostle before him Rom. 11.6 If by grace then is it no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace but if it be of works then is it no more grace Our Salvation is ascribed to Grace not onely inclusively but exclusively Ephes. 2.8 9 Tit. 2.5 All the Blessings of the New Covenant are called Gifts Rom. 5.17 18. 6.23 and gifts that are given freely 1 Cor. 2.12 Rom. 3.24 To give a thing freely and conditionally are contradictories he that parts with any thing upon conditions doth as it were sell it The works and conditions which men perform in the Prophets phrase are their money Isai. 55.1 2. A condition performed makes the thing covenanted for a due debt which the promiser is bound to give so that if the Blessings of the Covenant did depend upon conditions they would not be of grace but debt and men by performing those conditions would be at least in part their own Saviours Now what can be imagined more derogatory to the Grace of God Object True may some say it would derogate from the grace of God if we attributed such a meritoriousness unto these conditions as the Papists do unto works but we do not do so To which I answer 1 That the Papists assert no other works and conditions to be necessary to Justification and Salvation then what our Adversaries do 2 Neither Papists nor Arminians do ascribe any more meritoriousness to works then our opponents They grant there is such an infinite distance and disproportion between the Blessing promised and the conditions required of us that in strictness of Justice they do not deserve it onely expacto seeing God is pleased to promise so largely upon condition of so small a pittance of service we may be said to merit by performing the condition and in this sence Mr. Baxter will tell you That the performers of a condition may be said to merit the reward The Papists never pleaded for merit upon any other account Mr. Calvin observed long ago how much they please themselves with this simple shift supposing that hereby they shall evade whatsoever Arguments are brought against them Though Mr. B. seems to mince the matter calling his conditions but a sine qua non and a Pepper corn c. he attributes as much if not more to works then the Papists Arminians and Socinians have done the Papists will not say That works do merit in a strict and proper sence Smalzius calls their fides formata a meer sine qua non and a known friend to the Remonstrants Doctrine amongst our selves dubs it with no better name then a sleight unconsiderable despicable Pepper corn most pitifully unproportionable to the great rent which God might require and to the infinite treasure of glory he makes over to us And again That mite of Obedience Faith and Love But now Mr. B. goes a step beyond them in that he ascribes a meritoriousness to works which the Arminians and Socinians have not dared to do 3 I would ask whether the condition required of Adam were meritorious of eternal life I presume no man will say it was in a strict and proper sense there being no proportion between the work and the wages but yet that condition did lessen the freeness of Divine Grace The Grace of God was not manifested so much in saving man in that way as in giving life unto him freely And therefore to put our Justification and Salvation upon the same terms must necessarily eclipse the Grace of God in the New Covenant Object But some may say there is a great difference the conditions required of Adam were legal conditions but the conditions which we stand for and assert in the New Covenant are Evangelical Conditions I answer That the sound of words doth nothing at all alter the nature of things all conditions performed for life are legal conditions The precepts both of Law and Gospel have the same matter though not the same end but when Gospel duties are made conditions of Justification and Salvation there is no difference Object Yes may some say Evangelical conditions are more facile and easie then the Legal were Are they so Let them consider again whether it be more easie for a man that is dead in trespasses and sins to believe in Christ to love God to hate sin to mortifie his lusts c. then it was for Adam in his innocency when he had a natural inclination to obey God to abstain from the fruit of one Tree when he had a thousand besides as good as that there can be no condition imagined more facile and feasable then Adams was But if it were so yet would the reward be debt and not grace As he that hath his peny by contract hath as much right to it though he labored but an hour as if he had endured the heat of the whole day We say Gradus non variat speciem it is not more grace but all grace that doth denominate the Covenant a Covenant of Grace § 9. To these Reasons there might be added many more which because they have been mentioned before upon another occasion I shall not stand upon them 4. Because all the pretended conditions of the Covenant are promised in the Covenant Now it is absurd to make any thing a cause of itself or a means and condition whereby it is procured 5. Because the asserting of conditions in the Covenant attributes unto men a power and ability to do good not onely before they are justified but before they believe For if all the promises of the Covenant are conditional then the promise of Faith is conditional and consequently a man must be supposed able to perform some good and acceptable work to God before he believes whereas without Faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Conditions in a proper sence do necessarily infer the liberty of mans will unto that which is good for as the Remonstrants do define it A condition is a free act which we absolutely may perform or not perform by Freewil not acted by the predeterminating grace of God A Conditional Covenant and Freewil are inseparable the former supposeth the latter Whether Mr. W. will own the Consequence I am not able to say however that there is no such power or ability in the Natural man to do that which is good might be irrefragably demonstrated from sundry Scriptures as Gen. 6.5 Eph. 2.1 2. 1 Cor. 2.14 2 Cor. 3.5 Rom.