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
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
all Merits besides Christ's but not exclusively of all governing Methods in applying the effects of Free-Grace They grant Faith in Christ is required that we may be saved we more expresly say it 's by a rectoral Authority they grant it so by the Law of Works we say it 's by a Gospel positive Law tho we grant when this positive Law requireth it we are obliged also by the general Law of Nature to yield Obedience yet not by the Law of Works as specified by Adam's Covenant which Faith in Christ was inconsistent with from the essential Nature of that Covenant Our Brethren are watchful against any inherent Righteousness of man mingling with Christ's Righteousness We besides avoiding of that are solicitous lest men come short of Salvation by the Righteousness of Christ through a neglect of what he requireth in all those who shall be saved by it and yet we declare against all things besides Christ's Righteousness to be any impetrating satisfying atoning meriting or compensating Righteousness and as Faith hath no share or place in this Office so Christ's Righteousness tho the sole meritorious Cause is not that which God by the Gospel requires of Sinners that they may be saved by the Righteousness of Christ. Faith is that commanded Requisite and no more than that its place is thereto confined and therefore here 's no mingling of our Righteousness with Christ's because their Use Place and Offices be so very distinct They seem most afraid of Popery and Arminianism and therefore keep to this sense of being justified by Faith alone viz. we are justified only by Christ believed on or the Object of Faith only is imputed to us for Righteousness We are truly afraid of Popery and Arminianism but not only of these but of Antinomianism too and therefore are intent to maintain two great Truths included in that one Sentence We are justified by Faith viz. 1. That the Believer is absolv'd from Guilt accepted into God's Favour and entituled to eternal Life in and for Christ's Righteousness and neither Faith nor any Grace or Act of ours make the least recompense to God or is the least Price or Merit of Pardon or Life or any motive inclining divine Justice to promise or accept us into his favour or to treat us as righteous Persons This from our heart we own and know that this is what sound Protestants intended by it against the Papists 2. Yet as God promised to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption all Belivers should be absolv'd c. so in the the Gospel Offer of his Grace to Sinners he promised to Men that he would in and for the Righteousness of Christ absolve accept treat as righteous Persons and give eternal Life already purchased by Christ to every true Believer commanding Sinners to believe and threatning that if they believed not they should remain condemned yea become subject to sorer Punishments And that he would judg them by this Gospel Rule of Iudgment Whence we are attentive to a second Truth viz. That God accepts and accounteth Faith a performed Condition of this Gospel-Covenant and upon it acquits the Sinner from the Charge of damning Infidelity and adjudgeth the Believer qua such in opposition to Infidels to be in Christ's Right and by his Gospel Promise entitled to a present personal Interest in the foresaid Absolution Acceptance and Gift of eternal Life yet as procured by Christ's Righteousness alone and applied for his sake To add no more our Brethren in the Doctrine of Justification almost confine their Regards to the Satisfaction of Christ wherein Christ transacted with the provoked Justice of God We besides that consider a propitiated God in Christ applying the effects of his Redemption to Men in a Method of governing Grace but without any real difference in the Doctrine of Satisfaction and withal sincerely granting the Condition is performed in the Strength of Christ freely dispensed Yet upon the whole they provide against carnal Security and we against carnal Boasting They are far from designing to eclipse the Glory of Christ as King Lawgiver and Iudg and we as far from intending the diminution of his Glory as a Priest How unreasonable and unhappy would perpetuated Contests by where the Grounds pretended are of so little weight Thus I have insisted on what seems most like a Difference in the Doctrine of Satisfaction and Iustification Some weak persons may think there is a great Controversy where I see nothing worth our notice they will say Some think we are justified by one Act of Faith viz. Reliance Well but they say justifying Faith is receiving Christ c. as well as a Reliance Ay but a Man sees only with his Eye tho more is of the Essence of a Man But I say no Man sees without that which is of the Essence of his Eye Another thinks justifying Faith as such receives Christ only as a Priest others say it receives him also as a King and Prophet yet the last say the convinced Sinner hath an especial respect to Christ's Priesthood as most agreeable to his present case and the former will say its but an hypocritical Faith that receives not Christ as Prophet and King as well as Priest Nay it s not the true Christ the anointed Messias who is received unless it be as Prophet King and Priest even Christ Iesus the Lord. Ay but some say Repentance is an effect of Iustification but there be very few of our Congregational Brethren of that mind and I suppose they mean Works meet for Repentance and not a change of the purpose of the heart Nay but several say Faith alone is the instrument of Iustification others make Repentance the Condition of Forgiveness What then seeing the first grant there is no justifying Faith without Repentance and the last grant the aptitude of Faith to receive and acknowledg Christ which I suppose they mean by instrument is far greater than Repentance But when both sides consider Faith as an ordained Condition as well as an Instrument they 'l scarce dispute but that Repentance is a Condition of Pardon as well as Faith unless they would agree to join them together by calling Faith a penitent Faith or Repentance a believing Repentance connoting at once a Sinner's purpose to return to God by Christ the Mediator and his closing with Christ the Mediator that he may return to God by him tho I think the end is first agreed to before the way or means to that end is resolved on or made use of Obj. But sure there is a vast difference between those who think we are justified by Faith only and those who think we are justified by Works as well as by Faith Answ. 1. Not so very great when both mean that we are justified neither by Faith nor Works as the word justified is commonly taken for both agree that we are absolved accepted as righteous and entitled to eternal Life only for Christ's Death and Obedience as the only meriting satisfactory and
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
whatever is included in the justifying Sentence yet in the way time manner and limits which the Gospel declares § 9. The Consideration of the Rule of Iudgment as before explained led me to affirm that the Justification of a believing Sinner is equivalent to a twofold Justification the one at our Creator's Bar the other at the Redeemer's the first by the imputed Righteousness of Christ the other by that of Faith which I have insisted on in PS to Gospel-Truth p. 276 279 c. 3d Edit And being desirous to prevent Mistakes in this Point which I think is probable to prevent furious Debates concerning the Doctrine of Iustification I 'll give a few hints of fuller Thoughts about it premising only that I hoped none would think that I said there is a twofold Justification for I make the Sentence to be but one tho that includes what 's equivalent to a twofold Justification Nor yet that I denied Christ as of one Essence with the Father to be Creator or said there be two actually existing Bars But these are things too low for many words 1. I consider God at our first Formation as our Creator governing Men by a Law suted to their rational innocent and perfect Natures by which Law he promised Life to sinless Obedience and threatned Death for all Disobedience God considered in this relation cannot be apprehended to enact a Gospel-Law with a Promise of Pardon and Life to the imperfect tho sincere Faith of Sinners 2. I consider this Creator offended by Man's Violation of his holy Law Under this Notion 1. He condemns the Sinner unless Satisfaction be made and excludes him from Life unless purchased by one capable of meriting it 2. He would reject Faith and every Work of a Sinner as satisfactory or meritorious this Offendor being incapable to satisfy for the least Fault or merit the least Blessing 3. I consider our Mediator transacting with our offended creating Lawgiver in the Covenant of Redemption wherein 1. Our governing Creator demands of Christ if he would save Sinners that in their Nature he must obey the violated Law and endure Death and what was equivalent to its threatned Punishment in their stead 2. He declareth that this Obedience and those Sufferings of this Mediator considering the Dignity of his Person should be accepted for Satisfaction for Sin and the Merit of eternal Life and of whatever subserved Sinners obtaining thereof 3. He promiseth Christ as a Reward of his Obedience and Sufferings that whoever of fallen Men should believe on him should be absolved pardoned accepted as righteous and eternally glorified for the sake of what he was to do and suffer and that a certain number should believe on him and so be absolved c. to his Glory and he have all Power Authority and Iudgment committed to him 4. Christ our Mediator covenanteth to do and suffer what was proposed and accepts of the said Rewards 5. In due time Christ porforms his Undertaking and becomes entitled to the said Rewards and invested in a right thereto with respect to which he is said to be justified 6. His Undertaking is allowed to operate as if performed at least from Adam's Fall and thereby his Kingdom and the saving Effects of his Obedience and Death antecede his obeying and dying 7. Whatever concerned the Sinner's Salvation was to be founded upon the satisfactory and meritorious Death and Obedience of Christ our Mediator 8. Man is to be considered under the first Head as an innocent Subject in a state of Trial according to the Law of Works and under the second Head as a Sinner obnoxious to the Curse of the Law past Relief by his own Merit and yet upon Christ's Satisfaction pursuant to the Covenant of Redemption in this third Head as savable notwithstanding the Curse of the Law 4. As an Effect of this Transaction I do not consider only Christ our Mediator under the Notion of a Redeemer as all will grant him to be in an especial manner because he alone paid the redeeming Price But I consider also the Creator to be Redeemer as he gave his Son to be a Saviour accepted the Satisfaction made by him promised to him the foresaid Rewards and so far executed them as to invest him in his Office of an accepted authorized Mediator admitting his Kingdom to commence as well as his Death to operate to saving Effects before he actually dy'd c. Upon these and the like accounts I apprehend the blessed God considered essentially tho the Father eminently bears the Title of Creator and sustains the Dignity of the Divine Essence and Government in proposing the Terms and receiving Satisfaction to stand towards us in the relation of a Redeemer who hath received Satisfaction and transacting with us in and by our Mediator in whom he is well pleased Our Creator being considered thus as God in Christ who is satisfied as to the Violations of his Law the Honour of his Government vindicated and the Ends of it secured tho Pardon and Life be granted to Sinners it will follow that in a consistency with rectoral Iustice he can so far suspend the Curse of the Law towards sinful Man and exert his Mercy as 1. To be willing to admit to Peace and Favour all whom Christ shall present to him 2. To be ready to forgive our Offences 3. To make Offers of Peace Pardon and Salvation to lost Sinners begging them to be reconciled c. 4. To return his expelled forfeited Spirit to strive with and work on dead Sinners in order to their acceptance of this offered Salvation 5. To be long-suffering and waiting to be gracious in the use of fit Methods and Means to conquer their Resistance These and the like immediately ensue upon Christ's Satisfaction and if Men intend but Instances of this kind when they say God was reconciled to us by the Death of Christ before Conversion we should allow it yet intreating them to note that the Curse suspended thus far and the Curse removed by an actual Interest in saving Blessings are very distinct as be Forgiveness with God and Forgiveness bestowed on us and yet I fear many do detract from this Benefit viz. that there is Forgiveness with God for guilty Sinners and Salvation for undone Apostates this is in it self a higher thing than that this or that Man is Partaker of it tho our personal Advantage consisteth in the latter 5. I consider God in Christ Redeemer making his offers of Salvation to Sinners and stating the Conditions upon which he will give the merited Pardon and eternal Life personally to them commanding their acceptance with a Promise of applying Christ's Satisfaction in those Effects upon their Compliance and denouncing their abiding under Guilt and Misery with sorer Punishments if they finally refuse This is by the Gospel To explicate which Note 1. Compliance is injoined by a governing Authority tho with a display of Grace it supposeth Christ's Sacerdotal Offering over and is an Instrument of
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
any thing which we owed for our Sins but when he is said to have died for our Sins as they were laid on him nothing else is meant but that he died by occasion of our Sins to take them away i. e. he died to reclaim us from our Sins and to assure us that if we did leave our Sins we should be forgiven and besides this that we might perceive and obtain the fruit of that Forgiveness c. Socin Tom. 2. 153. Tom. 1. Prael Theol. cap. 18 20. Crell Vol. 3. Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. Truth When it 's said Christ died for our Sins as being laid on him it 's not only to bring about the forementioned Ends and such other Purposes as are assigned by the Socinians but they were imputed to him as what he had for our Salvation engaged to make Satisfaction for And he did by his Death make a real full and proper Satisfaction to God's Justice vindicating the Honour of his Justice and Government and of the violated Law as fully as if the pardoned Sinner had endured the utmost Punishment threatned by the said Law Error 11. God did not inflict Death on Christ our Mediator to express his hatred of Sin and deter us from it by his Death as any instance of Divine Displeasure against our Offences and therefore our Sins were not punished in Christ. Socin Tom. 1. 577 578 581. Tom. 2. 194. Crell vol. 1. de Morte Christi p. 611. Truth God did punish our Sins in the Death of Christ by shewing his real Hatred against Sin in all the Extremities Christ did endure which Extremities and Death thus inflicted were not only fit but truly design'd to deter us from all Disobedience against which God thus testified his high Displeasure Error 12. Christ did not by his Death properly merit Salvation or any other thing for us nor did he by the Merit of his great Obedience appease God's Anger Socin Tom. 2. de Servat Part. 3. cap. 6. p. 205. Ruari Epist. 164. Smal. Disp. 2. contr Frantz Truth Christ by his Death and Obedience did properly merit our Salvation and the Reconciliation of God to us his Death being to be considered first as satisfactory and hen meritorious and his Obedience first as meritorious and then satisfactory Error 13. By Christ's dying for us or in our stead as some of them sometimes word it tho they expresly dispute against it is not meant that Christ was substituted to die in the room of us who were condemned to die that God might be pacified nor that his Death was instead of our Death that we for the Merit of it might be delivered but the meaning is that Christ for our good did by his Death come to be crowned with Glory and Power whereby he is able to make us meet for Pardon and authorized to give that Pardon to us Socin Praelect cap. 20 21. de Scrvat cap. 8. Crell Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. Par. 1 c. Truth By Christ's dying for us and in our stead is meant that whereas we Sinners were condemned to die for our Sins our Lord Jesus tho he became not a Sinner in our stead yet as Mediator he was substituted to die in our stead that by his Death God might be inclined to forgive us who otherwise must have died and by virtue of his Death as a Satisfaction to Divine Justice we are delivered from Death This Parenthesis I add to the Description Grotius gives of Christ's dying in our stead De Satisf cap. 9. LIMBORG's Opinion of Christ's Satisfaction consonant to EPISCOPIVS and some few other Arminians Error 14. Vindictive Justice required not Satisfaction to be made in order to the remission of Sin Limbor Theol. Christian. lib. 3. cap. 18. § 4. Truth Vindictive Justice for the Honour of the Divine Law required Satisfaction in order to the remission of Sin at least after the enacting of Adam's Covenant Error 15. Christ's Sufferings were not a full Satisfaction to Justice nor was the Price of our Redemption fully equivalent to the Misery we deserved But God might accept as a redeeming Price much or little as himself judged fit and might be satisfied with any sort of Affliction laid on Christ. Nor did Christ satisfy the Rigor of Divine Justice but the Will of God considered at once merciful as well as just i. e. Mercy abated to Christ in the terms of Satisfaction what Iustice demanded Lib. 3. cap. 2. § 8 9. cap. 22. § 2. cap. 23. § 6. Truth Tho the great Mercy of God appeared in his being willing to admit accept and provide Christ our Mediator to make Satisfaction for our Sins yet God our just Governor would have it that the terms of Satisfaction proposed to our Mediator should be such as strict Iustice demanded for the Honour of his violated Law and securing the Ends of his Government which terms were no lower than that he should suffer what was fully equivalent to the Punishments they whom he was to redeem deserved to endure And as our Lord Jesus did suffer in kind much of what we deserved to suffer so he suffered considering the Dignity and Innocency of his Person what was in the intrinsick Value fully equivalent to such of our deserved Punishments as he was not capable of suffering in kind Nay the Price of our Redemption paid by him was not only equivalent to what the Law of Works required of us but it was supralegal that is it far exceeded what any Sinners were thereby obliged to nor see we how a full Satisfaction for all our Sins could be otherwise made Error 16. Our Faith and Regeneration were not merited by Christ. Lib. 3. cap. 22. § 3. Truth Considering that our New-birth and Faith are the Fruits of the holy Spirit whom by Sin we had expelled his return to regenerate and make us Believers must be for the sake and with respect to the Merits of Christ as what vindicated the Honour of God who restored him to us Truth No Penance Pilgrimage Fastings or good Works of our own or other Men can make proper Satisfaction to Divine Justice for the least of our Sins as to any part of their Fault or Guilt This last we add in opposition to what POPISH Opinions seem to militate against the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction Socinian Notions of Iustification Error 1. In our Justification by Christ our Sins are blotted out not by Christ's Death and Obedience as any Compensation or Satisfaction to God for them but only by God's simple Forgiveness and Pardon absolutely free in all respects without any Merit of Christ's or our own Socin Tom. 1. Praelect Theol. cap. 15 16. Crell vol. 1. in Phil. 3. 9. in Rom. 3. 24. Truth In Justification upon our penitent believing our Sins are pardoned and our Persons accepted for the sake of Christ's Death and Obedience as what compensated and made Satisfaction for our Sins And tho neither our Graces nor Works do merit our Pardon Acceptance or eternal
same manner in Christ as in Adam 2. From the former another point ariseth referring expresly to the Satisfaction viz. in what sense our Sins were imputed to Christ. One saith our Sins were imputed to Christ only as to Guilt or Obligation to bear the Punishment which we deserved for them which Punishments tho he obliged himself to endure in our stead to reconcile God to us yet that did not render him a Sinner in God's account because that Title results from the violation of the Precept abstractedly from a respect to the threatning and conceiving he was not a Sinner in our stead tho he suffer'd in our stead the punishments due to our sins they think he was esteemed by God what in truth he was viz. the holy innocent Mediator punishable by his own consent for the Sins he came to expiate and were not expiable without his dying in our stead But our Brethren think our Sins were so imputed to Christ as to give him the Denomination and judicial acceptation of a Sinner in the esteem of God and the Law Yet lest the difference should appear greater than it is it 's fit I inform you that our Brethren deny that Christ had any Sin or Defilement in him or had any Sin of his own they were our Sins only imputed to him and he was a legal Sinner by being one political Person with those Sinners whom the Law esteemed real Sinners and condemned as such On the other hand we own that supposing the Covenant of Redemption he was as truly obliged and God the just Rector at as full liberty to punish him for our Sins as if he had been reputed a Sinner Nay Divine Justice required the inflicting those Punishments on him if the Sinner was to be redeemed from them for his sake Now Reader can this difference justify mutual Censures or Alienation What is a Sinner without Filth yea or any Fault of his own above a Sponsor obliged to bear the Punishments of other mens Sins in the stead of the Offenders And they who acknowledg him to be this what less say they of him than the others mean tho scrupulous of that harsher Denomination At least it would appear strange to revile each other for a different explication of that Text 2 Cor. 5. 21. he was made Sin for us One thinks he was made a Sacrifice for Sin after the Hebrew Custom for we find very oft the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify a Sin-Offering as well as Sin Lev. 7. 1 2. and cap. 4. 28 29 33. And this very Apostle follows the same Usage calling an Offering or Sacrifice for Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 8. Heb. 10. 5. The other side will have it meant that Christ was made a Sinner but a Sinner that 's holy undefiled and never offended which Notion of being made Sin is too diminutive to admit harsh thoughts of such as entertain it An unconcerned Observer will be apt to say These who call Christ a Sinner are intent to renounce Socinianism and they who call him a Sacrifice for Sin are as sollicitous to confute Socinianism and Antinomianism too by withholding an advantage which both these Errors receive by the use of that Word But where 's the Christian Charity or Prudence of the condemning Side when both contend for what seems the best Defence of the Doctrine of Satisfaction The other Phrases accounted for in the 6th Chapter admit the same Mitigation as this and upon the same Grounds 3. The third point wherein there appears some difference refers to the Doctrine of Iustification But before I insist on this permit me to offer a few hints 1. Any Difference in this matter seems to proceed from want of an equal Consideration of the Covenant of Redemption which fixed the terms of Satisfaction and Impetration of saving Benefits which Christ alone was thereby obliged to perform and the Gospel-Covenant wherein the Method of giving us a personal Interest in the Blessings impetrated by Christ is ordained By the former all that belongs to Satisfaction and Merit are confined to Christ and Pardon Adoption and eternal Life put in the hand of our Saviour as his Reward By the latter a way becoming our fallen State and rational Nature is appointed to apply to us a Right to the purchased Blessings nor can the Scripture-Account of God's Calls Pleadings and judicial Proceedings be explained without it I think the not distinguishing these two Covenants or fixing the Mind upon either of them with too little regard to the other contribute much to our Debates 2. With Humility I propose to Consideration whether such can dangerously err as to the way of Salvation and particularly in the Doctrine of Justification who do honestly adhere to our foregoing account of Christ's Satisfaction and in subordination thereto assert a Gospel-Law or Covenant wherein is enacted a Rule by which the saving Effects of that Satisfaction are given forth it seems to me highly improbable For in the account given of Satisfaction we ascribe the whole Impetration of Pardon Acceptance and all saving Benefits only to the Atonement and Merits of Christ expresly excluding all our own Graces and good Works from the least place therein And by our Judgment of the Gospel-Law we secure the Method and Rule of the personal Application of these merited Benefits and that conformably to the scope of the Bible in its most explained Parts as well as in full consistency with an apt Ministry and a judicial Sentence against impenitent Infidels to whom those Benefits are not applied notwithstanding Gospel-Offers Whereas if we conceived never so fitly and with greatest Soundness concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and denied a Gospel-Law or what 's equivalent to it we apprehend no small Danger inevitably to ensue and that in no less a matter than Mens Salvation for if this Gospel prove a Rule of Iudgment and that Christ gives forth Pardon and such merited Benefits thereby will not our Ministry be useless and ensnaring to Souls which doth not explain and press the Gospel Conditions in order to an Interest in those Benefits And must not those secure Sinners be destroyed who submit not to those Conditions however confident they be upon Orthodox Apprehensions of what Christ hath done to satisfy Justice and merit eternal Life The Boundaries therefore I would propose to my self are that Christ be not rivalled in his atoning or meriting Performances on the one hand nor rejected in his enacted Rules of dispensing his purchased and offered Benefits on the other for he is truly dishonoured and Souls undone by both But I would not be mistaken as if this were suggested to reflect on the Brethren who are seriously intent upon the first for it already appears and will be more evident that they neglect not the last but affirm what to this purpose is equivalent to a Gospel-Law 3. It is very evident that when Protestants express great Zeal for Christ's alone Righteousness