Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
work_n eternal_a good_a reward_n 7,006 5 8.9757 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A66345 An end to discord wherein is demonstrated that no doctrinal controversy remains between the Presbyterian and Congregational ministers fit to justify longer divisions : with a true account of Socinianism as to the satisfaction of Christ / by Daniel Williams. Williams, Daniel, 1643?-1716. 1699 (1699) Wing W2647; ESTC R26372 65,210 134

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Life yet these with all other saving Benefits were merited by Christ. Note The Socinians are as much for absolutely unlimited free Grace as even our Antinomians would pretend to be if not more Error 2. Faith in Christ is accepted under the Gospel as a perfect Righteousness for a perfect sinless Obedience And as this Faith expresseth it self in our Works our Justification is in it self firmer and surer Crell vol. 1. p. 110 612 613. 474. Truth 1. Tho true Faith be a Gospel Righteousness yet it is not accepted for sinless Obedience nor doth the Gospel entitle us to Salvation upon our believing as the Law did upon a perfect sinless Obedience for the Law entitled us to Life as of Debt for our Obedience as the immediate Merit of that Reward by the adjustment of governing Iustice. Whereas the Gospel of meer Grace tho in a way of Government entitles the Believer to Life as what was merited by the Lord Jesus and not by our Faith or Works Truth 2. Tho a dead Faith cannot justify us and our believing Consent must be executed if we survive it yet are we as truly and firmly justified and in Christ's Right entitled to Glory when we first believe as when those genuine Fruits of it are produced which are contrary to that Barrenness Ungodliness and Apostacy that would subject us to Condemnation We shall provide against Limborg's and some other Arminians Notion of Justification tho it be none of the five Points which constitute Arminianism and that we in the former Papers opposed each of the said Points in concurrence with our British Divines in the Synod of Dort Error 3. By Faith being imputed for Righteousness is meant that God graciously for Christ's sake will account our Obedience which we yield him by Faith as if it were perfect tho it be imperfect As if a Creditor having a Debtor who ows him 1000 Gilders should upon this Debtor's paying him 100 forgive him the rest and graciously impute to him this part of Payment for the Payment of the whole Lib. 6. cap. 4. § 39. 17. Truth Tho we are justified by Christ believed on and Faith in him be accounted a Gospel-Righteousness as it is the performed Condition upon which we are by the Gospel-Promise adjudged to have the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us as our pleadable Security against the Curse of the Law by which Righteousness of Christ alone our Right to Pardon and eternal Life wherein we are personally invested by the Gospel is merited as well as the Blessings themselves Nevertheless our Faith in Christ is no part of the Debt we owed to God by the Law of Innocency nor is it or our sincere Obedience proceeding from it either in themselves or Divine Acceptance a full Conformity to the Gospel Precepts much less doth God impute to us this Faith or that Obedience for the payment of the whole Debt owing by the Law or Gospel tho he grant us thereupon that Pardon Favour and Acceptance Christ hath procured so as to deal with us as righteous Persons and these he doth not suspend until Faith produceth the said Fruit of Obedience but grants them upon our first true purpose to turn from Sin to God and our acceptation of and trust in Christ for doing this and for obtaining all Salvation by him The common POPISH Notion of Justification as stated by Andradius in his authorized Explication of the Decree of the 6th Session of the Council of Trent whereto Bellarmine and the generality of the Papists agree Error 4. The first Justification is the Renovation of an ungodly Man by the infused habit of Love the infusion of which is merited by Christ. The second Justification is this habit of Love producing goods Works by the Merit whereof we are further justified and ex condigno deserve eternal Life but neither the first nor second Justification consists in the forgiveness of Sin Note By preparatory Work the Council intend with the School-men that our Wills moved by the Spirit do by their natural Power prepare themselves to obtain the habit of Grace and ex congruo merit the Infusion of it which Habit is that justifying Righteousness for the Merit whereof the Sinner is at first absolved from Guilt and accepted to eternal Life Truth 1. Neither this first nor second Justification is the Justification described usually in the Gospel which is not the Conversion of a Sinner or the progressive Holiness of a Convert but a forensick Act viz. God's judicial absolving us from the Curse due for Sin and adjudging us entitled to Glory for the Merits of Christ according to the Gospel Truth 2. It is not true that preparatory Works do any way deserve from God the Habit of Grace at first infused tho ordinarily the Divine Spirit doth by Knowledg and humbling Convictions abate the Obstacles to Grace in our Hearts and put us upon seeking help from Christ all which are as truly owing to his more common Operations as saving Grace is to his special Truth 3. Neither the first infused Habit of Grace nor its Acts do merit further Grace or Holiness nor yet any degree of that Pardon or Acceptance which by Divine Ordination ensue thereupon Error 5. Christ hath merited that the Habit of Love should by its virtue extinguish Sin in us by good Works and we by these Works merit Reconciliation with God Forgiveness of Sin and eternal Glory as what do appease his Anger satisfy for our Guilt and are part of the Price of eternal Glory Note The Popish Error concerning Satisfaction leads them to this Error about Justification and when Justification is considered in a Protestant sense viz. as a forensick Act the true Controversy between the Papists and us is about the Doctrine of the Merit of good Works Truth Neither Repentance Faith Love nor any good Work proceeding therefrom do in the least merit Reconciliation Pardon or eternal Life neither did Christ merit that we might merit But Reconciliation Pardon and eternal Life were merited only by Christ's atoning satifying and meriting Sufferings and Obedience And therefore the Righteousness of Christ is accepted and reputed the only meriting Righteousness in God's justifying Act altho this Act terminates on none Adult besides the penitent Believer and on all such by the Ordination of the Gospel Note 1. It 's one thing for Christ to merit that we might by our Works merit Salvation it 's another thing for Christ to merit that Salvation it self which he gives and applies to Men on Gospel-terms the first is Popish the last is Protestant Doctrine 2. It 's one thing what our Judg in his justifying Act accounts to be the thing which appeaseth his Anger for Reconciliation makes Compensation to Justice for Pardon and to be the meriting Price of eternal Life to which Reconciliation Pardon and eternal Life he now adjudgeth the penitent Believer to be entitled Now the thing which our Judg accounts to be that which appeaseth his Anger c. is
imputed to us in Justification against the Popish Doctrine the generality of the Learned among them do only exclude every thing besides that Righteousness of Christ from being meritorious of Acceptance Pardon Life and any other Blessing and from being any Satisfaction or Compensation for any Sin affirming that this alone can atone the Anger of God for the sake of this alone will he absolve us and nothing below this is perfect enough for us to stand in before the Bar of his Justice And therefore the Work of Faith it self can be no justifying Righteousness in that sense they took justifying Righteousness all which we heartily own and hence they oft appropriate the justifying Aptitude and Office of Faith mostly to a Reliance on that sole meriting Righteousness of Christ and its receiving Forgiveness Acceptance and a Right to Life of meer Mercy for the sake of Christ's alone Merits All which is justly and truly spoken as they accommodate it to the defence of Christ's Righteousness as the only thing appointed or fit for the fore-described Purposes and in opposition to the Popish Doctrine of Merit The Dispute they had with the Popish Church was about this meriting atoning satisfying Righteousness and you I find them often propose that if the Papists would grant that this Righteousness was that of Christ alone the great Controversy about Justification was at an end But at the same time most Protestants and our Homilies do fully grant that Repentance was necessary and required to Forgiveness and Faith to Justification and these Blessings promised to those Graces tho they were not led to dispute whether these were to be called a Righteousness as qualifying the Subject on whom God's justifying Act terminated But whether in that Act God regarded any thing as a meriting absolving satisfying Righteousness any thing as a Satisfaction to Justice any thing as an impelling Motive or valuable Consideration besides the Righteousness of Christ. To this their Debates were confined in their day and this they were intent to maintain as all Christians ought to be Whereas the reason of debating the Name of that by which the Subject of Justification was determined in opposition to such whom God did not justify was not so much before them as before others of later years assaulted by such as went into another Extreme from the Doctrine of Popish Merit Nor was this matter otherwise stated by our able Divines who contend against such Arminians as affirmed the Tò credere to be our justifying Righteousness for by Righteousness such Arminians mean the Righteousness which is part of Payment and stands in the place of and answers the same Ends in our Justification as perfect Obedience served for to sinless Man which we have before stated and renounced Were there need abundant Testimonies offer by which this Head is easily proved tho I grant some Men may be found to vent some Inconsistent Expressions Having premised these things I reassume the Difference about Justification that seems to continue which lies 1. In the manner of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Both agree it is imputed but how is not so universally assented to One side thinks the sense of imputing Christ's Righteousness to be that God reckons us to have legally done and suffered what Christ did and this to the full Satisfaction of Justice and the Law of Works and therefore are reputed to have perfectly obeyed the Precepts of this Law and fully endured its Curse and for our legally doing so God judgeth and pronounceth us righteous in full Conformity to the Law and therefore entituled to Pardon Adoption and eternal Life If you ask Is this justifying Sentence the Sentence of the Law of Works viz. it s premiant Sanction applied to us by God as the righteous Judg judging us by the Law of Works They answer It is the Sentence of the Law of Works but it is of Gospel-Grace that God allowed Christ to be one Person with us in the Covenant of Works whereby we are thus accounted to obey and suffer in him But others think that the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in the following manner viz. 1. They consider that the Father promised to Christ in Reward of his Obedience and Suffering that they who believed on him should be pardoned adopted dealt with as righteous Persons who had not sinned and be eternally sav'd Hence the Lord Iesus has a right to Believers obtaining these things And as Faith describes the Persons in this Covenant who shall obtain them so when we become Believers we are accounted and adjudged to be such Believers and such as are to obtain those Blessings in Christ's Right 2. They consider God in Christ for sapiential Ends making in the Gospel an Offer of Pardon Adoption and eternal Life to poor Sinners if they believe and promising these Blessings when they believe and still as Blessings bought by Christ's Obedience and Sufferings and promised to him for Believers tho withal used in his Gospel as Motives to inforce his Command of Faith and Calls to it These things thus considered we apprehend that when God in Christ justifieth us he doth not only give us Pardon Adoption and Life but he adjudgeth and sentenceth us to be the Persons that by the Covenant of Redemption were to be pardoned adopted and saved in the right of Christ and to whom the Gospel by its Promise gives a personal Right to that Pardon Adoption and Life as purchased by Christ And he esteems and adjudgeth that the Obedience and Sufferings of Christ in their full virtue is our pleadable Security for the enjoyment of them whereby we have a right to plead his Death and Merits with God as what procured these for us as well as God's Fidelity who promised them to us in his Gospel You see by this account that we rise not so high as to say we are accounted to do and suffer what Christ did and to be absolved immediately by the Sentence of the Law of Works nor fall we so low as a mere Participation of the Effects of Christ's Righteousness but assert an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness it self relatively to those Effects Christ's Right is applied and his very Obedience reckoned to us as what pleads with God for those Effects and secures us against all condemning Obstacles and Challenges The justifying Sentence is not the Sentence of the Law God saith not You have perfectly obeyed therefore you shall live you have satisfied the Curse therefore you shall not die Yet the Righteousness which procured our Salvation and is our adjudged pleadable Security of enjoying this promised Salvation includes an Obedience as perfect as that to which the Law promised Life if we had not sinned and Sufferings equivalent to what the Curse pronounced against us when we sinned But because we apprehend not where this Law includes such a Sentence as this viz. because Christ obeyed you shall live tho you obeyed not and because Christ who sinned not did suffer for your Sins you
repeat 1. Our Testimony against Dr. Crisp's Errors when so many were indangered by his reprinted Books 2. Some part of our former Declarations against Popish Socinian and Arminian Errors when our Brethren accused us thereof for subscribing the foresaid Testimony against Crispianism 3. We shall give an account of our Congregational Brethrens Declaration against Antinomian Errors 4. We shall evidence that this taken together and examined with Candor ought to be acknowledged a sufficient Vindication of the Approvers thereof from all hurtful Antinomian Errors 5. We shall add our further Testimony against Errors about Christ's Satisfaction and Justification If Peace at least must not be allowed us after this we must bewail a judicial stroke and expect to be despised by such who perceive our common hurt from these Debates but have not Judgment to distinguish between the injured Seekers of Peace and the injurious Fomenters of Trouble CHAP. I. The State of Truth and Errors subscribed by near fifty of us drawn up and published by Mr. Williams in a Book called Gospel-Truth stated and vindicated first Edition Anno 16. 1692. Truth 1. IT is certain from God's Decree of Election that the Elect shall in time be justified adopted and saved in the way God hath appointed and the whole meritorious Cause and Price of Justification Adoption and Eternal Life were perfect when Christ finished the Work of Satisfaction Nevertheless the Elect remain Children of Wrath and subject to Condemnation till they are effectually called by the Operation of the Spirit Error The Elect are at no time of their Lives under the Wrath of God nor are they subject to Condemnation if they should die before they believe yea when they are under the Dominion of Sin and in the Practice of the grossest Villanies they are as much the Sons of God and justified as the very Saints in Glory Truth 2. Tho our Sins were imputed to Christ with respect to the Guilt thereof so that he by the Father 's Appointment and his own Consent became obliged as Mediator to bear the Punishments of our Iniquities and he did bear those Punishments to the full Satisfaction of Iustice and to our actual Remission when we believe nevertheless the Filth of our Sins was not laid upon Christ nor can he be called the Transgressor or was he in God's account the Blasphemer Murderer c. Error God did not only impute the Guilt and lay the Punishment of the Sins of the Elect upon Christ but he laid all the very Sins of the Elect upon Christ and that as to their real Filthiness and Loathsomness yea so that Christ was really the Blasphemer Murderer and Sinner and so accounted by the Father Truth 3. The Atonement made by Christ by the Appointment of God is that for which alone the Elect are pardoned when it is applied to them But the Elect are not immediately pardoned upon Christ's being appointed to suffer for them nor as soon as the Atonement was made nor is that Act of laying Sins on Christ God's forgiving Act by which we are personally discharged Error The very Act of God's laying Sins on Christ upon the Cross is the very actual discharge of all the Elect from all their Sins Truth 4. An Elect Person ceaseth not to be a Sinner upon the laying of our Sins upon Christ that is he remains a Sinner as to the Guilt till he believes if Adult He is a Sinner as to the Filth of Sin till he be sanctified He is a Sinner as to the charge of the sinful Fact he commits and that even after Pardon and Sanctification Nevertheless he is free from the Curse when he is pardoned and shall be purged from all the Filth of Sin when he is perfect in Holiness And tho Christ did bear the Punishment of our Iniquity yet it never was Christ's Iniquity but ours Error The Elect upon the Death of Christ ceased to be Sinners and ever since their Sins are none of their Sins but they are the Sins of Christ. Truth 5. The Obligation of suffering for our Sins was upon Christ from his undertaking the Office of a Mediator to the moment wherein he finished his satisfactory Atonement The Punishment of our Sins lay upon Christ from the first moment to the last of his state of Humiliation Error The time when our Sins were laid actually on Christ was when he was nailed to the Cross and God actually forsook him and they continued on him till his Resurrection Truth 6. The God testified his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ's Soul and Body in his Agony and suspended those delightful Communications of the Divine Nature to the Human Nature of Christ as to their wonted Degrees yet God was never separated from Christ much less during his Body's lying in the Grave neither was the Father ever displeased with Christ and far less did he abhor him because of the Filthiness of Sin upon him Error Christ was on the account of the Filthiness of Sins while they lay upon him separated from God odious to him and even the Object of God's Abhorrence and this to the time of his Resurrection Truth 7. The Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ is so imputed to true Believers as that for the sake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life eternal it being reckoned to them and pleadable by them for these Uses as if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them whereby they are delivered from the Curse and no other Atonement nor meriting Price of saving Benefits can be demanded from them Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them until Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven See the 2d Truth and note it is only Dr. Crisp ' s Change of Person is denied viz. a perfect Change which makes us as righteous as he c. but not Christ's dying in our stead which in this Book is oft asserted Error Every Believer or elect Person is as righteous as Christ and there is a perfect Change of Person and Condition betwixt Christ and the Elect he was what we are viz. as sinful as we and we are what he was viz. perfectly holy and without Spot or Blemish Truth 8. I shall express it in the words of the Assembly The Grace of God is manifested in the second Covenant in that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator and Life and Salvation by him requiring Faith as the Condition to interest them in him promiseth and giveth his holy Spirit to all his Elect to work in them that Faith with all other saving Graces and to enable them unto all Obedience as the Evidence of the Truth of their Faith and Thankfulness to God and as the way which
foreknown predestinated and called effectually according to the purpose of his Grace shall fall away either totally or so as not to be finally glorified 5. That Faith Repentance a holy Conversation or any Act or Work whatever done by us or wrought by the Spirit of God in us are any part of that Righteousness for the sake of which or on the account whereof God doth justify any Man or entitle him to Eternal Life Then follows a Testimony against the other Extreams viz. Antinomian Errors Again Anno 1696. in a Paper call'd The second Paper sent to our Brethren we thus give our sense 1. Concerning Iustification That altho the express Word of God doth assert the necessity of Regeneration to our entring into the Kingdom of God and require Repentance that our Sins may be blotted out and Faith in Christ that we may be justified and Holiness of Heart and Life without which we cannot see God yet that none of these or any Work done by Men or wrought by the Spirit of God in them is under any Denomination whatsoever any part of the Righteousness for the sake or on the account whereof God doth pardon justify or accept Sinners or entitle them to Eternal Life that being only the Righteousness of Christ without them imputed to them and received by Faith alone 2. Of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us As we are to consider our Lord Jesus Christ in his Obedience and Sufferings as God and Man invested with the Office of Mediator so it is apparent this Commutation of Persons with us was not natural in respect of either Nature by which his individual Substance should become ours and ours his nor moral in respect of Qualities or Actions whereby he should become inherently sinful and we immediately sinless nor was it any change whereby his Office of Mediator should be transferred on us but it is to be understood in a legal or judicial sense as we may call it viz. He by Agreement between the Father and him came into our room and stead not to repent and believe for us which the Gospel requires of us as our Duty tho he hath undertaken the Elect shall in due time be enabled thereto but to answer for our Violation of the Law of Works he being made Sin for us that knew no Sin that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5. 21. 3. Of God's being pleased or displeased with Christ as standing and suffering in our stead We judg that God was always pleased with Christ both in his Person and Execution of all his Offices which is exprest most particularly in that of his Priestly Iohn 10. 17 18. Therefore doth my Father love me because I lay down my Life and no otherwise displeased than as having a dispassionate Will to inflict upon him the Punishment of our Sins which he had undertaken to bear that God might without Injury to his Justice or Honour pardon and save penitent Believers for his Satisfaction and Intercession founded thereon Note It was declared that by the words under any Denomination we exclude all Righteousness from being meritorious or atoning yea or a procuring Cause of these Benefits none is at all so but the Righteousness of Christ But we intended not to exclude what the Gospel requireth in order to our Interest in those Benefits given for the sake of Christ's Righteousness We also in 1697 delivered our Iudgment in this Proposal to our Brethren 1. That Repentance towards God is commanded in order to the Remission of Sins 2. That Faith in Christ is commanded by the Gospel in order to the Justification of our Persons before God for the sake of the alone Righteousness of Christ. 3. That the Word of God requires Perseverance in true Faith and Holiness that we may be Partakers of the Heavenly Glory 4. That the Gospel promiseth Pardon through the Blood of Christ to the Penitent Justification before God to the Believer and the Heavenly Glory to such as persevere in Faith and Holiness and also declareth that God will not pardon the Impenitent justify the Unbeliever nor glorify the Apostate or Unholy 5. That justifying Faith is not only a Perswasion of the Understanding but also a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for Salvation 6. That by Change of Person is meant that whereas we were condemned for our Sins the Lord Jesus was substituted in our room to bear the Punishment of our Sins for the Satisfaction of Divine Justice that whoever believes on him may be acquitted and saved but it is not intended that the Filth of Sin was upon Christ nor that he was a Criminal in God's account 7. That by Christ being our Surety is meant that Jesus Christ our Mediator obliged himself to expiate our Sins by his Blood and to purchase eternal Life for all that believe and Faith and every saving Grace for the Elect but it 's not intended that we were legally reputed to make Satisfaction or purchase eternal Life 8. That by Christ's answering for us the Obligations of the violated Law of Works is intended that whereas the Law obliged us to die for our Sins Christ became obliged to die in our stead and whereas we were after we had sinned still obliged to yield perfect Obedience Christ perfectly obeyed the Law that upon the account of his Active and Passive Obedience Believers might be forgiven and entituled to eternal Life but it is not intended that the sense of the Law of Works should be that if we or Christ obey'd we should live and if Christ suffered we should not die tho we sinned nor that Believers are justified or to be judged by the Law of Works but by the Gospel altho the Righteousness for the sake of which they are justified be as perfect as that Law of Works required and far more valuable CHAP. III. The State of Truth and Error published in the Congregational Ministers Declaration against Antinomian Errors about December 1698. Error 1. THat the eternal Decree gives such an Existence to the Justification of the Elect as makes their Estate whilst in Unbelief to be the same as when they do believe in all respects save only as to the Manifestation and that there is no other Justification by Faith but what is in their Consciences Error 2. That the Elect considered as in their natural Estate or as in the first Adam are not under the denunciation of Wrath by the Law as well as other Unbelievers and impenitent Sinners Truth 1. That there is a difference between the state of the Elect whilst in Unbelief and when Believers besides what is manifestative to their Consciences p. 13. Truth 2. That before they believe they are not personally and actually justified in the Court of Heaven p. 13. and none may expect to be pardoned in a state of Unbelief and Impenitence p. 47. Error 3. That pardoned Sin is no Sin and therefore God cannot see Sin in his People to be displeased
of the Threatning of the Law Determ 12. When he calls Sin an occasion of Christ's Death he there calls it also a remote meritorious Cause Determ 5. And as for a proper meritorious Cause as when Children are punished for their Parents Sins Determ 5. His Safaction yielded to our most just Rector a sufficient ground on which to forgive penitent Believers spiritual and eternal Punishments Dis● 2. Nay he sees not supposing the Law of Works how God could forgive our Sins without the Penal Satisfaction of Christ Disp. 2. Determ 15. It were endless to produce the Instances demonstrating the Orthodoxness of this great Man as to the Satisfaction of Christ against Socinianism And by the way such as say Christ's penal Satisfaction was not necessary to the forgiveness of our Sins do a thousand times more favour Socinianism than Mr. Baxter's Notions or Words can be wrested to Perhaps others who follow Episcopius and some other Arminians when all must acquit him of Socinianism may surmise he favoureth their Notion of Christ's Death as if it were a Satisfaction only to the Will of God and not a full Satisfaction to the Iustice of God To this I answer Mr. B. distinguisheth Satisfaction into that which is the fulfilling the Will of a Person and that which is the Payment of what was owing by an Equivalent otherwise not due And he affirms that Christ's Satisfaction was not a mere fulfilling the Will of God tho it supposeth his Consent but it was a full Equivalent to what Punishments we deserved in that it better answered the Ends of Divine Government than the Sinner's Punishment would have done it more fully demonstrated the vindictive Justice of God than if the Sinner had been damned and it was a full Satisfaction to governing Justice and the End of the Law Vbi supra Determ 10 11 12 15. I thought this account necessary not only for the forementioned End but also that our Agreement in opposition to Socinianism might not exclude Mr. B. and such as approve of his Scheme which would add strength to that Heresy and be injurious to many worthy Persons nor ought a few words so fully explained be pressed to brand them with that odious Title who could more plausibly fix the same Character on Persons from things plainly asserted in the Socinian sense and subserving their Hypothesis As Christ's Death was not necessary to the remission of Sin the Promise of Forgiveness is no Effect of Christ's Death Repentance under the Gospel is an Effect of justifying Faith in Christ. The preaching of Reconciliation to Sinners is only to publish to them that God is already reconciled to them and to call them to be reconciled to God Many others might be instanced but I think it were unjust even upon such grounds to call any of these Socinians CHAP. VII An Enquiry into what Difference seems to remain concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Iustification of a Sinner And this Difference reduced below any Cause of Discord I Think both sides are acquitted from all dangerous Errors concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Justification of a Sinner nor can I doubt but the impartial Reader must apprehend the remaining Difference doth not lie in Opinions about these Doctrines themselves but in accommodating some words in opposition to other Errors which either Side have more especially applied their Minds to confute unless he should also ascribe it to a Zeal for sundry received Phrases on the one part and an apprehension in the other part that more accuracy is become needful since those Phrases were received 1. In both these Doctrines the visible Spring of what Difference remains is a different Notion of Christ's Suretiship For by this the word Imputation as used in both these Doctrines is governed viz. how our Sins were imputed to Christ when he satisfied and how Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us when we are justified both which depend upon the various Conceptions of the Suretiship of Christ and the manner of his representing us which I will begin with One Side thinks him a mediating Surety and distinguishing both as to the matter engaged and Instrument wherein he voluntarily engaged himself as also the respect he had to us therein 1. In the Covenant of Redemption they consider Christ agreeing with his Father the Terms of Satisfaction to Justice and Impetration of Life for Sinners and obliging himself to assume our Nature and therein perfectly to obey the Law die an accursed Death with whatever was equivalent to what by the Covenant of Works our Sins deserved Here they think Christ did not covenant strictly in our stead or as our Proxy tho he covenanted to die in our stead even strictly so He transacted as a free Interposer tho for our Salvation we were no federating Party tho we were the Persons whose Salvation was his promised Reward And therefore we have more reason since we are become his Members to say we intercede in Christ now than to say that we covenanted in Christ then Finally they account his Act of engaging so peculiar to himself that his non-performance of what he engaged which was impossible had not made us more guilty tho it would have left us miserable for our own Sins there being no other way to redeem us 2. They find Christ called a Surety in the Gospel-Covenant made with fallen Man Heb. 7. 22. and no where else This Covenant supposeth the former yea supposeth Christ's having executed his Engagements by the Covenant of Redemption to make Satisfaction to Justice i. e. it was at first accepted as if executed for this Covenant with Man doth not adjust the terms of Redemption but the way of conveying the Effects of that Redemption and is called the Testament of our Lord Jesus whereby he bequeaths the Blessings he acquired by his atoning Death In this Covenant Christ is such a Surety as not only assures us all will be performed which is promised to us on God's part but that undertakes to bring in the Elect and for the Perseverance of Believers unto eternal Life by his exerting that Power and Authority he hath received But here also they apprehend Christ a distinct federating Party A Mediator treating and obliging himself to make the Covenant stand sure and effect the Ends it was designed for but he binds not himself to believe repent or persevere for us but that we shall repent believe and persevere nor doth his Engagement that we should do so prevent our personal Engagement by Covenant to do it our selves tho in his Strength Now our Act of engaging is not his engaging Act but an Effect of it nor is our repenting his repenting Act but the Effect of his engaged Assistance nor is that Assistance of his reckoned to be legally our assisting our selves nor can we say that we covenanted in Christ to bring in the Elect or that Believers shall persevere By which with other Reasons we are induced to think that in covenanting he
shall be absolved tho you have sinned therefore we rather conceive the justifying Sentence to be the Sentence of the Gospel-Law yet connoting the Law of Mediation and presupposing a Satisfaction made to the Law of Works which we conceive to be to this purpose Thou believing Sinner I judicially esteem and pronounce thee to be one that I promised to my Son in the Covenant of Redemption to pardon adopt and glorify in Reward of his perfect Obedience to my Law and Satisfaction to my Justice which I acknowledg he hath performed As also to be one of those Persons to whom I made a Promise of Pardon Adoption and eternal Glory when I offer'd these Blessings to all Sinners who would believe on him Thou art therefore in the virtue of the Promise made to Christ and the Promise made thee adjudged to receive Forgiveness Adoption and Glory and to have a right to plead the Righteousness of Christ for thy safe and comfortable Enjoyment of them in the prevailing Efficacy of his Merits who alone procured both these Blessings and that Faith upon which thy Estate is so much altered Charity obligeth me to think that some well-meaning Persons who talk of eternal Justification in Christ intend no more than this Promise made to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption and by not distinguishing between this Promise that all who should believe on him should be justified and that other Article all the Elect shall believe on him which is a distinct thing they consider not that by the first no Man can be justified till he be a Believer and the last Article only assures that the Elect will be Believers and by the Consequence of the first that they shall all be justified but yet not before they are Believers Isa. 53. 10 11. He shall see his Seed and by his Knowledg or Faith in him he shall justify many are not the same thing The former ascertains the Elect shall believe the latter that they shall be justified when they believe nor could it be otherwise even when Christ upon the Cross paid that for the sake of which these Promises were made to him he must then pursuant to the Compact die that Believers might be justified and the Elect become Believers otherwise the Articles of the Covenant of Redemption must be altered and not direct his engaged Performances and Rewards nor can I chuse but wonder to see our Divines in their Dispute against the Papists proving that Justification is a forensic or judicial Act and yet find many using terms so improper to such an Act and omitting yea condemning those which are proper But to digress no further you see what is this part of the difference about Justification yet remember our Brethren do not say we our selves did personally obey or suffer or are reputed so to do but are reputed to have done it in Christ who was one legal Person with us in the account of the Law nor do they deny the Pardon of Sin but own it whatever others think of the difficulty of reconciling such things they do deny also that we can be said to satisfy in Christ tho we died in him or that we merited in him tho he merited Further there 's no difference about the Effects of the imputed Righteousness of Christ nor yet about the Righteousness it self as including both his active and passive Obedience nor the time of its Imputation viz. when we believe And shall we condemn each other notwithstanding this Agreement in almost every thing besides the manner of Imputation and this is about what God accounts us to have done in Christ and not what Christ hath done for us Shall Men rend each other because one thinks there can be no Imputation beyond what he grants the other suspects it is not an Imputation unless it be in his words and yet both grant an Imputation effectually available to all the same real Purposes viz. the Honour of Christ and Grace the Accomplishment of God's Decree and the Acceptance and Salvation of Believers as if they had never been unrighteous with ground of believing hopes about it equally strong and quieting 2. The other Point undecided is what Title or Name we should give to that Faith which is required in the Person on whom God's justifying Act doth terminate our Brethren scruple our calling it a Qualification a Condition or a Righteousness Others of us think each of these properly ascribed to it a Qualification as it distinguisheth one Man described by the Word which declares who shall be justified from another who according to the Rule of the Word and the Incongruity of the thing is not to be justified unless the Divine Perfections and the Methods of Grace should be reflected on for by the Gospel-Rule he that hath not Faith is to abide under Wrath. And how unbecoming and of ill Consequence would it be to entitle a Man to Glory and receive him to favour for Christ's sake while he rejecteth Christ and is resolved to tread under foot his Blood tho it 's from God's Promise and not any Merit of Congruity that the Accepter of Christ should be justified They call it a Condition not to signify any Merit or Compensation which they abhor but to connote God's Offers of these Blessings to more than do accept of them as also a Divine Authority injoyning a Compliance with the Terms on which the Blessing is offered tho that be no more than a meet Acceptance And to shew the manner of God's conferring them upon that Acceptation they think it may be called a Gospel-Righteousness not as meritorious of the Blessing no nor a full Conformity to the Gospel-Precept but as it is the performed Condition of the offered Benefit according to the Tenor of the Gospel Promise which always supposes Christ's Satisfaction and his paying the impetrating Price of all such offered Blessings And they are more induced to account the performed Condition a Gospel-Righteousness because the Gospel so very often speaks of a subjective Righteousness in us and denominates imperfect Men righteous so expresly with respect to that Righteousness they also think that this cannot be from Obedience to the Law of Works unless it were perfect which it is not nor yet from full Obedience to the Precepts of the Gospel which enjoyn no less as a Duty than doth the Law it self therefore they can find no ground of that Denomination besides a Conformity to what the Gospel-Promise appointeth as a Condition of the Good it entitles a Person to yet still as a means of giving us in a way of governing Grace what was promised to Christ for us as a Reward of his full Satisfaction to Legal Iustice. But our Brethren think these Terms too high and prefer calling Faith an Instrument as many Protestants do who also call it a Condition Some chuse to call it a means I suppose to note a physical Influence in opposition to what 's moral and expressive of any Law both which by the
atoning Righteousness 2. They who say it 's by Faith alone that we apply this Righteousness do also grant that Faith is not alone in the person to whom God applies the Righteousness of Christ and when they apply it to themselves Repentance Love c. are Concomitants with Faith And they who think we are justified by Works as they think its God's applying Christ's Righteousness to us and not our applying it to our selves that is the great justifying Act so they grant God justifieth us as soon as we repent and believe with the heart and suspends not a justified State till Works meet for Repentance or the Effects of Faith are produced yea should a man dy then he would be certainly saved 3. They who say it s by Faith alone acknowledg that justifying Faith will certainly produce good Works and if good Works and persevering Holiness do not follow it was a dead Faith and because dead it never was a justifying Faith however men flatter'd themselves Also that Mens Faith tho not their Persons is justified by their Works yea the most Judicious own that if Sin should reign in Believers and they apostatize they would be condemned tho the Promise of Perseverance make that impossible and therefore persevering Holiness and good Works so far continue their justification as they prevent what would bring them into Condemnation and Faith is the Condition of the Continuation of Justification See Dr. Owen of Iustification p. 207 208 306. On the other hand they who say we are justified by Works do account Works to be no more but the executing the foederal consenting Act of Faith and so its Faith exerting it self by various occasions and considering that the Believer's not only forgiving his Enemies but his persevering in Faith and Holiness are plain Conditions in many Promises made thereto and God pronounceth to Believers that he will have no pleasure in any Man who drawerh back and he shall die if Sin reigneth in him Heb. 10. 38. Rom. 8. 13. Mat. 6. 14 15. They conceive that by Perseverance in Faith and true Holiness they are kept from being chargeable with final and total Apostacy and from Obnoxiousness to the Evils denounced by the Gospel against Apostates as such and are adjudged to be under the Influence and Safeguard of the Promises made to Believers as persevering nevertheless they abhor a thought that Perseverance in Faith and Holiness or any good Work is any meriting Righteousness or the least Compensation for Sin or entitling Price of the least Benefit nor exclude they the need of multiplied and continued Pardon or make they any Blessing due of Debt but they rely wholly on Christ's Merits for these things as the only procuring Cause tho they are affected and governed by these places of God's Word which are directed to Believers as part of his Rule of Iudgment well knowing that whatever Sentence the said Words pass in this Life God executes in part now and more at Death but at the great Day it will be solemnly pronounced and perfectly executed These respective Concessions duly weighed secure those who say we are justified by Faith alone from the danger of Licentiousness and those who say we are justified by Works also from detracting from the Honour of Christ's Righteousness as having the sole meriting atoning Virtue and Efficacy in Justification and do not only grant Perseverance but think these conditional Promises and Comminations are apt and designed means of it in Subjects capable of moral Government and whose Warfare is unaccomplished However such different Sentiments may appear to others I lay so little stress upon them that I had not thought it worth my labour to have printed a Sheet against any man who confessed the necessity of saving Faith as described in the Gospel to Justification Repentance and Love still accompanying that Faith in the Object on whom God's justifying Act doth terminate and the Uneffectualness of Faith to save any who neglected to perform good Works and to persevere in Faith and Holiness Such as granted but these things I had never wrote against for scrupling the conditional respect of them to the Gospel-Law But Dr. Crisp's Notions I apprehended dangerous and they so greatly prevailing my Brethren thought my confuting them necessary at that time whereas I had no purpose when I wrote against Dr. Crisp to intermeddle with these other points but some Congregational Brethren in their Attempts against my Book did from a very few occasional Expressions therein accuse us of Socinianism Arminianism and Popery and that they might have some pretence to fix that Charge they turned the Controversy into these lesser Matters whereby I was necessitated either to insist on them however against my Will or else abide under the foresaid severe Imputation to the prejudice not only of my own Ministry but also of most of my Brethren CHAP. VIII An Attempt to accommodate the difference between such as say Christ's Righteousness is imputed only as to Effects and not in se and those of us who think it is imputed in se. FOreseeing an Objection that will be improved against a peaceable Forbearance towards a number however small and that Rigidness may include in that number whomever the Objectors shall disaffect it 's of use to state it Object Granting the forementioned Points to be reduced below a Cause of Dissention yet the Difference cannot be compromised between such as say the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in se for Justification and them who say it is not imputed in se but quoad effectus Answ. I think it may be accommodated at least so far as to cut off just Pretences for hereticating and dividing from each other To which end I will consider these several Opinions and then reduce the difference First Among them who say Christ's Righteousness is imputed in se there be two Opinions most noted and whereto all others are reducible Of both these I have already treated so much that little more is needful 1. Some think the Elect are judicially according to the Law of Works accounted to have done and suffered in Christ all the Law demanded both as the Punishment of Sin and the Merit of eternal Life Such must hold that Christ's Death and Obedience are the formal Righteousness of the Elect and the formal Cause of Justification and that from the first moment of their personal Subsistence yea and except making Christ to be their Representative without any Gift of that Righteousness it being imputed not of Grace but of Legal Iustice as Adam's Obedience had been if he had finally obeyed and his Offence now is upon his sinning There are others who are for this judicial reckoning Sinners to obey and suffer in Christ but they hold they are not adjudged to have done this till they are Believers and then they are legally just before God and as such entitled to eternal Life These speak more safely but less consistently they limit the time from a Conviction that the
whole scope of the Gospel must be contradicted if Unbelievers do not remain condemned and Believers only are justified But yet it seems hard to apprehend that God by the Law of Works accounts the Person of a Believer to have suffered in Christ and therefore to be absolved whom yet he did not account to suffer in Christ while he was an Vnbeliever and therefore condemned him and this by that very same Law which now acquits him I know to make this consist it 's offered that the Elect are not Christ's Seed till they become Believers But this comes short for it will thence follow that Christ in his Death was a strict Representative who personated Believers qua Believers which will induce ill Consequences And yet further it is not true that the Persons of Believers were seminally in Christ when he died as we were in Adam when he sinned and so no Argument can be brought from that Instance I grant that both the Merit and the powerful Virtue whereby our Persons in time obtain Faith were in Christ before we were born but that makes not Christ the Root of our Persons at that time but of that regenerating Virtue whereby we become Believers and therefore tho as to this change of our Qualification we may be called Christ's Seed when we believe yet it 's not such a Seed as it may be said of we suffered in him as we sinned in Adam who was the natural Root of our Persons and thereupon such a Representative as his Descendents sinned in What may be said of Christ's adopting Merit will have no place here for these Authors make Adoption to be an Effect of Justification and so the Imputation is prior 2. There be others who are for imputed Righteousness in se but cannot approve of the former manner of Imputation among whom there is some variety in wording their Conceptions but they come to one and the same thing viz. that God adjudgeth the Believer to be one whose Absolution Adoption and Glory were promised to Christ in Reward of his Death and Obedience by the Covenant of Redemption which are promised also to the Believer himself in the Gospel-Covenant and for his actual Interest and Enjoyment thereof as also Acceptance and Treatment as a righteous Person against all Challenges God judicially accounts what Christ hath done and suffered to be his pleadable Security This we take to be Imputation Secondly By the Opinion of those who say Christ's Righteousness is not imputed in se but only as to Effects they in Expressions oppose all the forementioned account denying that the first Head is true and that the second is any Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in se. Nevertheless they grant that Christ's Righteousness is the meritorious Cause of our Justification by Faith and seem to insist mostly upon its Efficacy to that end as Christ's Satisfaction was the ground upon which God enacted the Gospel-Covenant wherein our Faith tho imperfect is accounted for Righteousness Concerning this Opinion I shall offer a few things 1. None ought to narrow it as if the Authors meant that Pardon and eternal Life are not merited by the Righteousness of Christ for they affirm that these and other Gospel-Blessings are merited by Christ as well as the Gospel-Covenant Pray say not this it 's not only the Covenant it self but those very Blessings which that Covenant conveys that are the merited Effects of Christ's Death and Obedience they were his deserved Rewards which are dispensed to us upon believing This I insert to obviate a Conceit too much improved by some so stupid or worse that they will not own this Distinction and still cry out as if their Opinion confined the Influence of Christ's Righteousness to the procuring of a Law whereby Men were to purchase Pardon and Life by their own Faith Whereas they are so far from this that they affirm these Blessings were already accounted purchased and Authority in Christ to dispense them before he could enact such a Law 2. They intend not to exclude Christ's Righteousness from being imputed in any sense for they say it's imputed quoad effectus and therefore should not be charged to deny all Imputation or represented to say we are pardoned and saved for our own Works without any Imputation of Christ's Death and Obedience at all 3. In all which they affirm concerning Justification they still suppose Christ's complete Satisfaction and are sound therein None can accuse them to differ from the Orthodox as to Christ's expiating Sacrifice or impetration of eternal Life 4. I could wish a very worthy Person of this Opinion would review his own account of Justification wherein he saith it 's that Act whereby God imputes to every sound Believer his Faith for Righteousness upon the account of Christ's Satisfaction and Merits and gives Pardon and Life as the Benefits of it i. e. of Justification which he further explicates Through Christ's Sacrifice the Defects of this Faith which is our Righteousness are pardoned and by his Merits that imperfect Duty is accounted or imputed to us for Righteousness which it is not in it self Had I thus stated this Point I should ask my self Do not I set Pardon too remote from Christ's Sacrifice as the meritorious Cause And how can Pardon be the Effect of imputing Faith for Righteousness which is Justification and yet God cannot impute Faith for Righteousness unless he first pardon its Defects for the sake of Christ's Sacrifice But the cause of my mentioning this Account follows 5. They do affirm what amounts to a real Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in se at least what supposeth this Imputation and infers it to be necessary For how by Christ's Merits can a Righteousness in it self imperfect be reckoned before a just God for our perfect Righteousness and yet those Merits for which it is so reckoned not be imputed at all for Righteousness to us who have that Faith Would Faith be no Righteousness except the Divine Mind did apply the Merits of Christ to Faith to make it a Righteousness upon which I am accounted righteous by this Faith and yet the Divine Mind not apply to me that Righteousness of Christ without which my Faith had left me still unrighteous whereas it seems undeniable as far as Christ's Righteousness is necessary to make my personal Faith my Righteousness in God's account that same very Righteousness is necessary to make my Person righteous in God's account Moreover they own that God promised to Christ in reward of his meriting Sufferings and Obedience that all Believers should be absolved and glorified and can they be adjudged to this Absolution and Glory without a judicial acknowledgment that they are to be absolved and glorified in that Right of Christ which resulted from that Promise made to him And can that be without an Imputation of those Sufferings and Obedience of Christ which are rewarded in that Right of Christ and thereby in those Blessings wherein Believers have this judicially acknowledged