of these his subtilty layes down not as positions here first asseâ—ted and consequently here to be proved But as assertions before proved and granted upon which he is now ready to build his other geere and tâ—ash which he hath in readiness to jâ—yne to these as a superstructure Whereas our sincere subjection and obedience to Christ saith he is part of the condition of the New Covenant And where again When the New Covenant saith Thou shalt obey sincerely putting there this voice of the New Covenant in opposition to the voice of the Old Covenant which as he tells us saith Thou shalt obey perfectly Here is a pretty slight to broach errors a creeping into men to perswade them in despight of their teeth that he and they are of one mind That he proved and they granted it yesternight when they were all fast a sleep and none of them spake or heard any thing Which shall we think this man to have more studied Machiavil or Mâ—ldonate If Bellarmine were alive hee would even shake off his red Cap with laughter to see a son of his so much more witty and crafty then his Father But to the matter it self First concerning obedience to the Morall Law that it is part of the condition of the New Covenant 1. I demand where it was before proved yea where in direct words asserted that it is here taken up as a point granted Hee gave cause enough indeed to bee suspected of it throughout the foregoing part of this Tractate but not evidence enough to be impleaded for it This is Magisterially to command Faith as one that speaketh by the authority of an infallible spirit and not Ministerially to teach as one that subjecteth himself and his Doctrine to the tryal of Gods Word 2. I demand whether he means not by the condition of the New Covenant the condition upon which and for which God will justifie the performer Yea that condition which he had before termed a righteousnesse perfect and meritorious in its own worthyness to Justification If this be not his meaning then Master Baxter eats up again to day what he spit out yesterday But this can in no wise befall the animosity of his spirit If it be his meaning then doth he pronounce even our legal righteousnes which consists in the fulfilling of the Morall duties of the Moral Law as well as our Evangelicall righteousnesse as he termes the personall righteousnesse which is conformed to the rule of the Gospel to bee meritorious to Justification And not any one of the Popes themselves have spoken higher language then this to deifie man in his own righteousnesse 3. I would be informed if the performance of the duties of the Morall Law in obedience to Christ doth justifie why the same performance in obedience to God doth not justifie also Is not obedience due as well to the Father as to the Son or is not Justification as much from the Father as from the Sonne The same honour is due to both and the same work of grace effected by both Neither can I see any more worth in Morall Righteousnesse Morally performed for I finde not Mr. Baxter as yet speaking further of it in obedience to the Son then in the same done to the Father by way of obedience to him But of this point we shall have a more proper place and occasion to speak more fully afterward 2. Concerning the second that the Gospel doth require but sincere not perfect obedience I might also enquire 1. Why Mr. Baxter doth here take it up pro concesso for granted He had indeed put it in the question to which he is answering but had said nothing for the solution of it except peradventure by the art of Ventriloquie he spake something under the Table that he might not bee heard when hee said in his first answer to it That the Morall Law is continued by Christ in the sense before expressed meaning by those words the expressions used in the said question that under the New Covenant the Morall Law commandeth not perfect obedience but onely sincere or at least the Gospel having the Morall Law for its preceptive part doth so If I knew that to be his meaning I have somewhat to say to it In mean while be it or be it not his meaning is every thing that Mr. Baxter hath once imagined in his brain or spoken under a bushel by and by to be taken up for a granted principle in Religion upon which he may make a superstructure of what he pleaseth 2. Why doth he not alledge those Testimonies of the New Testament which assert onely a sincere and not a perfect obedience Why doth hee suffer us poor soules to continue in darknesse for lack of his light communicated to us Is it in the outside or the inside of his Testament that this mystical doctrine is contained I acknowledge the promises of Gods free grace are made â—ut in the riches thereof to them that are in Christ that God for Christs sake will accept their sincere volitions and performances according to the ability which they have and not reject them for want of the ability which they have not That not onely the infirmities of their obedience but their very sins and disobedience is blotted out and shall be no more imputed to them c. But this in no wise denyeth perfect obedience to be their duty still Yea much more their duty under the Gospel then under the Law because there is a greater obligation of greater and more benefits upon them under thâ— Gospel then under the Law binding them to yeeld back perfect love and obedience to their Benefactor 3. What shall we think of those Texts in the New Testament which require of us to be perfect 2 Cor. 13. 11. Jam. 1. 4. Yea perfect as God is perfect Mat. 5. 48. reproving weakness and infirmity and commanding a going on to perfection Heb. 6. 1. as compared with the precedent Chapter in the latter part thereof Yea if perfection were not the duty of a Christian and unperfectness and infirmity his sin why doth the Apostle so much groan and grieve under the remainder of his naturall infirmities and presse on to perfection Rom. 7. 14 to the 24. Phi. 3. 12-14 Or is such unperfectness a sinne onely in reference to the rule of the Law and not the rule of the Gospel for that the Law doth but the Gospel doth not call for perfection This is both contrary to the Scriptures alleaged and doth withall make the Gospel to allow imperfections And to use Mr. Baxters own expressions which calleth the Gospel a Law what the Law forbids not we take the same to be approved by that Law If any should say that the Gospel doth not require perfect but sincere obedience ad aliquid in relation to this or that particular end it might in some case be a truth But Mr. Baxter layes it down positively in it self that the Gospel requires not perfection And this can
what Scriptures our Divines bring to prove justification to be only by faith and to deny all cooperation of works therein And herein I shall put limits to my self not letting out all that they produce for so should I offend with immoderate length but some particulars that the weakest reader may see what Mr. Baxter would not give him to see that our Churches are not destitute of strong grounds for the bearing up of their faith and assertions And when this is done I shall descend to examine the force of those Scriptures quoted by Mr. Baxter to see whether they make for him and against us I shall begin from the reasoning of the Apostle Rom. 3. 20. c. having before proved both the Jews by and under the Law and the Gentiles without the Law to be guilty before God he concludes Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justifyed c. and ver 21. The righteousnesse of God viz. to justification is manifested without the Law being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets to wit a righteousnesse which the Law is ignorant of the righteousnesse or life which is by faith From this righteousnesse the tenour of the Law or legall Covenant turns aside telling us he that doeth them shall live in them Gal. 3. 11 12. ver 22. Even the righteousnesse of God which is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve Lo here it is denyed to be by the most righteous works which the most perfect Law of God himself prescribeth and attained by faith only ver 24. Being justifyed freely by his grace through the redemption which is by Jesus Christ what can be said more fully It shall not be impertinent to annote briefly out of Zanchy what he hath upon Hier. zanch De natura Dei Lib. 4. Cap. 2. Th. 2. this verse more largly when the Apostle saith we are justifyed by his grace Per Gratiam intelligit gratuitum Dei favorem omnibus nostris exclusis sive naturalibus sive supernaturalibus dignitatibus saith he i. e. by Grace the Apostle meaneth the free love or favour of God excluding all parts and pieces of our worth both naturall and supernaturall and addeth that the Apostle still opposeth grace to all our works and to all our inward vertues wrought in us by the holy Ghost himself as well as to our legall and morall righteousnesse yea to faith it selfe as it is a work as is manifest to every one that hath with any consideration read this Epistle Therefore saith he he excludeth all works that he may conclude our Justification to be by grace alone Yea more the Apostle saith he not contented to say we are justifyed by grace addeth thereto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his grace that is by the grace which is in God not by any gift of grace infused by him into ourselves that it might be wholly of God and not of our selves at all in the least part Yea not contented with all this he addeth freely to notifie that there is not required any work or qualification on our part to put us into the possession thereof for so it should not be wholly by the free and naked favour of God as he tearms it And lastly he addeth by the redemption which is by Jesus Christ by this work of Christ excluding all ours hitherto that profound Zanchius Neither cannot it be freely by the redemption of Christ if our qualifications and conditions be brought to interesse us to it for so should we be in some kinde purchasers and not receive it freely The Apostle proceeds ver 25. Whom God hath set forth as a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sins c. The whole thing of Gods ordination to make the redemption propitiation and remission of sinnes which is by Christ actually ours to our comfort is here assigned to be saith in his blood and not any foregoing concomitant or subsequent vertue or duty of ours annexed to it and all to declare his righteousnesse Ver. 26. His righteousnesse he saith again that he may be just and the justifyer of him that beleeveth in Jesus If Mr. Baxters fancy stand of the Legall righteousnesse in Christ and the Evangelicall righteousnesse in us the Apostles assignation of the end of Gods justifying us by Christ should be maimed For he should have said To declare to declare I say his righteousnesse and our righteousnesse that he might be just and a justifyer and we might be just and justifyers of our selves And then we are to expunge the next verse Where is boasting then it is excluded by what law of works nay but by the law of faith For boasting should not be at all excluded if our works should bear a part with faith in justifying so should we have matter of glorying in our selves still How full is the Apostle here in the confirmation of Justification by faith without works had he seen what the Papists and Mr. Baxter over their shoulders would have objected against it he could not have spoken more punctually Yet as I know what the Papists say for themselves so I am not ignorant what Mr. Baxter will except for himself But I reserve the Examination thereof for another place where he goeth about to purge his doctrine from all contrariety that it hath to the doctrine of the Apostle and from any derogation from the Grace of God A second Testimonie or authority from Scripture we may draw from Rom. 4. 1 c. I shall be short in it The Apostle here denies 1 Our father Abraham the father of the faithfull himself to have been justifyed by works for then he should have whereof to glory ver 2 3. But as Abraham was so all the faithfull are justifyed by faith without works or to render the words of the Text By faith and not by works Here Mr. Baxter hath no evasion as in the former Chapter viz. that the works of the Law only are denyed for Abraham was under the promise not under the Law nether was the Law then given and the promise under which he was was without all condition of works so that the Apostle here excludeth works indefinitely I mean not good and evill works for no man ever brought evill works as evill to be thereby justifyed But good works whether Legall or Evangelicall all acts and deeds both of naturall and infused righteousnesse and holinesse 2 In affirming of him that worketh i. e. that seeketh justification by works that the reward is reckoned of debt to him that he requires it as due and shall not receive it if it be not found due in Justice but to him that worketh not but beleeveth on him that justifyeth the ungodly his faith is imputed to righteousnesse i. e. as hath been already evinced Christ by faith apprehended is of the free grace of God made righteousnesse to him When Mr. Baxter therefore claps his bundle of works upon
saith here he hath armed himself against all exceptions by saying it so that we shall not know his meaning Only thus far we may speak with Augustine Si non vis intelligidebes negligi What is not an understandable Argument we shall contemn as no Argument But his illustration and proof may possibly follow in his Explication Thither also we will follow him to examine which one of all these things delivered here so ambiguously he doth there plainly illustrate or prove it runneâ— thus pa. 281. B. This is the condition of the New Covenant at large That all this is sometime called faith as taking its name from the primary principall vitall part is plain hence Of the condition enough hath been said before we look for proof That all this is sometime called I mean in Gods not Mr. Baxters Scriptures faith we also will say it is plain if he make it plain by his Hence viz. B. 1. In that faith is oft called obeying of the Gospell but the Gospell commands all this Rom. 10. 16. 1 Pet 1. 22. 4. 17. 2 Thess 1. 8. Gal. 3. 1. 5. 7. Heb. 5. 9. 1 In all these Scriptures obeying of the Gospell is one and the same thing which in other Scriptures is called the obedience of faith i. e. obedience to that Gospell doctrine which requireth to rest upon Christ alone by faith for righteousnesse and life without any intermixture to attain the same called obedience to the Gospell to distinguish between the Gospell and Legall way of justification This Mr. Baxter knoweth well therefore he gives us the quotation without the words of these Texts most of them being such as if there were nothing else said in the whole Word even these are enough to subvert as pernicious his assertion 2 The thing in question is not whether the Gospell command these duties but whether it commands us to do them that we may be justifyed by such deeds and whether because the Gospell commands them it doth therefore call them faith or that all which is to be done in obedience to the Gospell is straightway to take up either the Nature or Name of faith 3 How doth he contradict himself here in what he had said before Thesis 31. pa. 154. where he affirmed the Commandements of the Gospell in relation to these duties to be the establishment of the Morall Law and the perfect obedience in the Law commanded and that this is but an adjunct of the new Covenant or Gospell and not a proper part thereof Will he say then that all the works which the Morall Law commandeth are faith or by the Gospell Metamorphosed from works into faith B. The fufilling of the conditions of the new Covenant is oft called faith c. But these forementioned are parts of the condition of the new Covevenant Ergo they are implyed and included in faith Gal. 3. 12 23 25. A wretched Argument lame in every foot in which one principle is begged to maintain another Neither of the premises nor yet the conclusion having any soundnesse either as they are considered a part or all together Or if he could have proved either proposition from Scripture would he have suffered them to passe under his bare affirmation alone The Scripture annexed prove only an opposition between faith and works the Gospell and the Law but are as far as heaven from earth from proving either of the premises Neither doth the conclusion infer what it should from the premises i. e. what is contained in them I should in particulars shew the deformed nakednesse of the Syllogism if it did not enough shew it self without my help How rotten must the cause needs be which puts so profound a man to such miserable shifts and absurd arguings to defend it where there is no opposer What followes in the same Sâ—ction is all one as if he had said not so but so c. because I have over and over told you so and what I have told you must needs be true The other things in the explication are not to this question Lest any should except that I wrong Mr. Baxter in calling these two latter his second and third Arguments to prove justification by works when he doth not so call them though he doth so use them I have prosecuted the matter of them wholly as considered in it self without any further reference to the conclusion then as himself in expresse words applies them to it CHAP. V. The fourth and great Argument of Mr. Baxter examined and the inference that because Christ as Lord as well as Saviour is the object of justifying faith as justifying therefore we are justifyed by works as well as by faith is confuted And withall proved that Christ as our Lord dying for us and not as Lord and a Lawgiver is the object of faith as justifying Mr. Baxters Reasons to prove the contrary answered HIS fourth Argument is drawn from the Object of Faith and the due qualification of the same Object It runnes thus as by his disputes compacted and compared together appeareth B. If Christ be the object of justifying faith as such not only in his Priestly office as our Redeemer and Saviour but also in his Kingly office our Lord and Ruler then other works and duties of obedience are as much required as faith in justifying us before God But Christ is the object of justifying faith as such not only in his Priestly but also in his Kingly office as our Lord as well as our Redeemer and Saviour Ergo other works and duties of obedience have so much to do injustifying as faith He saith affiance which whether iâ— at all differs from faith and whether he means not the same with faith we shall see afterward if it be necessary The Assumption he layes down and goes about to prove Thes 66. and in its explication beginning pa. 255. The consequent of the proposition he hath and endeavours to confirme in and under Thes 72 73. This one of all his Arguments hath the Dominicall letter on it it is the wood the rest are but the hay and stabble of his building his sacra anchora if this hold not the man with his vessell and all the trash-treasure therein must perish upon the Rocks All the rest of his Arguments are but bubbles in comparison of this bottle-glasse Therefore he attributes much to this gloryeth in it and only doth not fall down and worship it It was hinted before here and there in all his discourse but here he manageth it with all his strength and art I shall speak first to the Assumption because he first puts and endeavours to prove it And here now appears what his end was in laying a third opinion of the righteousnesse of Christ to justification besides the active and passive righteousness viz. a righteousnesse meritorious for us and not imputed to us after he had been 10. years for the passive righteousnesse only as he notifies to us pa. 54 55. The ground it seems of
this purpose in his Answer to the tenth eleventh Questions in his Appendix and to shew how hee there fights with his own phantasm feigns an Adversary and then quells him falls out with his own shadow never comming neer that which hee hath made to be the Question between him and the Protestant Churches but when the Adversary is Eastward hee rides out in indignation Westward beating every bush and wounding every bough that he meets with proclayming it an Adversary and so returns at last with as much gallantry as ever did William the Conquerour it shall be expedient for the disabusing of such as are apt in this kind to bee abused to premise something for the right stating of the Question heer controverted First then the doings duties and works about which the Question is conversant are of two kinds Legall or Evangelicall such as have their foundation in that law which is of Natural and Moral or such as are founded on precepts and doctrines of Gospell Positive right By the former I mean such works and duties as the naturall conscience specially if holpen by the written Law can apprehend to be and urge upon man as duty though there had never been a Christ or Gospell to adde further light By the later I meane such duties as are only in generall comprehended in the Law whatsoever the Lord shall at any time declare to bee his will and impose upon thee as thy duty thou shalt observe and do but cannot possibly be known in speciall to bee duties without a new revelation from heaven such as the Gospell is The former duties are naturall founded in Nature it selfe the later supernaturall because without a supernaturall manifestation they cannot be known and without a supernaturall power infused they cannot bee effectually performed All this Mr. Br. himselfe granteth in this his Treatise saving the very last clause which also because I finde him not any where flatly denying I shall forbear to prove taking it as granted with the rest 2. That this naturall righteousness and obedience was the Condition of the Old Covenant as to life and so remayneth still to them that remayn under the Old Coveant but so as that no man living can be saved by it since Adams fall but that whosoever is saved the same is saved after the tenour of the New Covenant i. e. the Covenant of Grace or the Gospel This also Mr. Baxter hath frequently taught and granted 3. That the duties of the New Covenant are of two sorts eyther more or lesse principall the more principall is fayth or receiving and embracing the Lord Christ together with the justification and salvation that are by him The lesse principall duties which are also pure Gospel duties are such as are subservient to faith or to the receiving of Christ alone to justification quickening illumination sanctification c. or to the reteyning of him and fuller closing with him to all these all other Evangelical ends for which he is given to us by the Father These 3. Positions are so frequently granted by Mr. Baxter in this his Book that I forbear to quote the places 4. That justification and salvation as the Scripture terms them a reward if indeed it doth ever so term justification as properly and strictly taken may bee considered first as benefits already conferred and in our possession in part or in the whole or else as rewards heerafter to be conferred the ground and foundation wherof was layd in our first conversion and union to Christ by faith together with the earnest and pledge of the spirit given to us by God to assure us of our full possession of all the fruits therof in the future And 2. if future the Gospel proposeth these as rewards of his free grace and benignity or else as rewards of dâ—bt due to our service and for the service done to him Neither in this can Mr. Baxter oppose or dissent 5. Then to come home and close to the Question it remains to be expressed how far all these duties are to be done for life I mean how far all or any kind of these are to bee performed for the attayning of justification and salvation as a reward and how far onely in love and thankfulness for the reward alrâ—ady made ours in possession or in hope 1. We grant that theâ— which are wholly under the Old Covenant having never the Gospel revealed unto them are bound to seek justification and salvation by the works of the Law or naturall righteousness still but they shall never attaine what they so seek because they are impotent to fulfill the condition Yet their unableness is no prejudice to Gods authority and obligation upon them It is otherwisâ— with them that live under the Gospel and have the Covenant of Grace in Christ revealed to them but have not yet so â—ffectually received Christ by fâ—ith as to beâ— justified and declared righteous within their own souls These are indeed to seek for justification and sâ—lvation yet not by the workes of the Law or legall naturall and meerly morall righteousnesse for this were to reject the new Covenant or Gospel with the justification which is by Christ and to hold themselves fast under the old Covenant in an incapacity to be justified and saved The best works of naturall righteousness which they can performe being but dead works of dead men like the stinch of Carrion offensive to the pure nosthrills of God who will therefore condemn not justifie for them 2. They that are in Christ and have obtayned justification and inchoat salvation by him i. e. have their conscience absolved and saved from sin and obligation to vengeance by faith in his bloud are to perform those works of naturall righteousnes not for life but from life not to procure thereby the life of justification for they have it already in Christ and to seek it more compleatly to be perfected by such works is as hath been before shewed to be so foolish as having begun in the spirit to seeke to bee perfected by the flâ—sh but in duty and thankfulness for so full and free a pardon and Gal. 3. 3. absolution which all our doings all our sufferings are insufficienr to answer Nevertheless the intuition of so great a redemption already attayned and in our possession together with the promise of so glorious an inheritance for the future life already confirmed to us by the seal of the spirit in the bloud of Christ are of such infinite value that we are to walk still in the splendor and glory of it so that our spirits should bee sublimated above earth and selfe to dwell and to spend our selves and be spent in the bosome of that Grace from which wee have received so much and expect yet so much more of ravishing and never ending felicity What neither eye hath seen nor ear heard nor the heart of man in a naturall way conceived of the riches of the incomprehensible bounty and free grace of God being
both Covenants denying any usefulness to Faith it self in justifying but as it is a deed and morall work Let Babel it self be raked from end to end there will not be found more confusion The Papists say doing and works as works and doing cannot be our righteousness to justifie us But as they receive purification from the blood and grace of Christ so they obtain acceptance with God and becom our righteousnes to justifie us Christ say they hath merited that our fulfilling of the Law should justifie us Mr. Br. saith nay but our fulfilling the works which the Law requireth meriteth that we should receive Christ to Justification as we shall see by and by Let now any rationall man judg which party doth most confound the Covenants he that makes the works of the Law in and for themselves as they are simply done meritorious to Justification or they that ascribe nothing to works but what they have from Christ Both I acknowledg are to be abandoned but the deeper grain of self-extolling the more sensuall lusting after the flesh-pots of Aegypt is in Mr. Brs. Doctrine Let none object that Mr. Br. attributes it not to works as works of the Law but of the Gospel himself knoweth and hath learned that poor shift of the Papists and that they come off handsomer with it upon their then it is possible for him to do upon his principles Bax. 3. They are sottishly ignorant in the Doctrine of Justification so am not I. This I conceive he puts as a third difference between his and their doctrine For what he saith under this third particular that when they say justified they mean sanctified that he had made before the first difference If this be the difference then is he much more guilty than they I obtained mercie because I did it of ignorance saith the Apostle implying that they which did it maliciously against the light of their own understandings were excluded from mercy He that knoweth his fathers will and doth it not shall be beaten with many stripes Yet I conceive Mr. Br. means here the Schoolmen of ancient times of Barbarism not the Jesuits Arminians Socinians and other Scholastick Phylosophick Theologasters of these later times For these are so knowing in Mr. Brs. account in the doctrine of Justification that hee hath borrowed all his knowledg and doctrine from them And why the former should be esteemed more sottishly ignorant in this than in other no lesse mysteriall doctrines of the Gospel I know not In thingt naturall and morall indeed they wrote as learned Philosophers so farr as refined reason could conduct them But in things purely Evangelicall saving about the persons and natures of Christ which they also handled more Metaphysically than Theologically besides some fragments gathered out of Augustine I could hardly ever meet with a sound piece in such of them as have come to my reading There may be a time when Mr. Br. may recant his profit and delight in dipping holy waters from the muddy streams contemning the pure fountain of the Gospel Or if he puts the difference in the former words Bax. 3 When they say we are justified by the works of the Gospel they mean onely that wee are sanctified by works that follow Faith and are bestowed by Grace they meriting our inherent Justice before God And in that which standeth as it were in a fourth place Bax. They take our works to be part our legall I take it only a part of our Evangelicall righteousnes or of the condition upon which Christs righteousness shall be ours Not to except here against his maimed alleadging of their opinions thereby feigning a distance from them that hee might allure his readers without suspition to joyn as neer with them as himself Let us take it for truth what he saith of them and then let the indifferent Reader judg 1 Whether is the most arrogant Doctrine the Papists that say works that follow and are the fruits of Faith and are done in the strength of grace supernaturally infused into the soul do merit or Mr. Br. that saith works as concauses with not fruits of Faith that flow from no other grace but Pelagius his morall Suasion without any Physicall renovation and change upon the will as for distinctions sake some of our Divines are wont to express themselves do so merit If Mr. Br. mean any thing els by grace he conceals it as a mysterie from us and will not throughout his whole book give one hint at it but makes man in his own naturall and morall qualifications the meriter of his own Justification by Christ 2 Or which ascribes most to works they that attribute to them inherent justice which is the lesser or hee that ascribes to them the meriting of Christs imputed righteousnes which is the greater Concerning legall and Evangelicall Righteousness I have spoken enough before And the phrase of the Papists and Mr. Br. is one and the same herein This might suffice to take off this delusion from his Readers that his Doctrine is not Popish But to manifest more fully in the sight of the Sun that every one may run reading it and read it running how grosly and in how many particulars his Doctrine is Papisticall I shall draw out in a parallel his Doctrine and the Doctrine of the Papists setting them side by side that whosoever will by comparing them may determine whether there be any worse Popery from Rome it self than from Kedderminster This I shall make the subject of the next Chapter CHAP. XVI The Doctrine of Mr. Baxter and of the most Trentified and Jesuitized Papists compared together in many particulars and found one and the same The Doctrine of the Papists and of Mr. Baxter compared together in many particulars in their Relation to Justification PAPISTS 1. THere is a two-fold Justification a first and a 2d. Justification the one inchoate unperfect more properly to be termed the beginning or root of and a disposition to justification or being justified than Justification it self or our being fully justified before God 2 The first justification is by the first grace given before all good works for the remission of sins for the meer merits of Christ to Infants by baptism to them that are of Age by Faith The second justification is by new obedience and good works by which the faithfull deserve increase of Righteousness to their fuller Justification 3 Good works are the condition of Justification without which Christs satisfaction is not applyed to us Of this opinion Bellarmine affirmeth some of his fellows to be and finds no fault with it or them onely himself takes up what seem'd to him more probable Himself also speaks to the same purpose The Gospel promising life upon condition of actuall working Righteousness which consists in keeping the Commandents 4 It is false therefore that we are justified by Faith onely the Scriptures no where affirm it let him be accursed that shall say it Many other graces vertues and
not Trid. Conc. in the forecited place the only Condition of the New Covenant but severall other duties also are parts of that Condition I desire no more of those that deny this but that the Scripture may be judg Whosoever shall reduce the contrary Doctrine Bell. de Justif lib. 1. cap. 13 c. into practice viz. to seek salvation and Justification by faith only not at al by works it wil undâ—ubtedly damn him Those other duties that justifie are Repentance praying for pardon forgiving others Love sincere obedience works of Love i. e. all good works not faith alone or some of these works and vertues with it but all must have their concurrence to justifie Aphor. p. 235 236 237. 325. Nay so far are both parties from this Faith that Faith onely justifieth that Both teach we are justified by Works only For We are still said to be justified by Bell. de Justif lib. 1. Faith which is an Act of ours Append p. 80. Morall duties are part of the condition of our salvation aâ— for it to be performed And evâ— faith is a Morall duty So thâ— Daventria So Pemble cites the Papists objecting Treat of justif p. 37. according to Mr. Brs. doctrinâ— Morall works and duties alonâ— as such are required of us to Jâ—stification and not Faith it seâ— this way usefull but as a moraâ— work and duty Append. p. 80. When the Apostle saith by worâ— and not by faith only hee plainâ— makes them concomitant in procurâ—ment Bell. de necessitate operum ad salutem or in that kind of Causalâ— which they have especially seeing â— saith not as he is commonly inteâ—preted not by faith which is â— lone but not by faith onely â— the phrase Justified by works tâ— word by implyeth more than an â—dle concomitancy If they should onâ— stand by while Faith 〈◊〉 all â— would not be said we are justifiâ— by works Aph. p. 299 300. Faith in the largest sense as comprehendeth all the conditions See Weimrichius l. 1. in Epist ad Romanos c. 3. p. 207. the N C is when a sinner c. do beleeve the truth of the Gospell aâ— accept of Christ as his only Lord aâ— Saviour c. and sincerely thouâ— imperfectly obey him as his Lord foâ— Osor lib. 3. de Instit n. 70. giving others loving his people beâ—ring all what sufferings are imposeâ— diligently using his Means and Orâ—nances c. And all this sincerely â— to the end Aph. Thes 70. Apâ— Bel. lib 4. de Justif c. 10. Qu. de veritate honor operum p. 243. This personall Gospell-righteoâ—ness is in its kind a perfect Righâ—ousness and so far we may admit the doctrine of personall perfection Aphor Thes 24. The first point of Justification and that which is but a point the first point must needs be a very small pittance Bell. de Juâ—if lib. 1. â—ap 20. Malden in Matth. 9. of it I grant to be Faith alone but the accoÌ„plishment i. e. the perfitting thereof is not without the joynt procuremeÌ„t of obedience Aph. p. 302. In a Larger sence as promise is an obligation and the thing promised is â—el de Mer. called Debt so the performers of the Condition are called worthy and the thing promised is called Debt Thes â—ea all the â—apists as â—lleaged â—y Cal. Inst â—b 3. ca. 14. â—ect 12. â—ap 17. â—ect 3. 15. 26. Yea in this Meriting the obligation to reward is Gods ordinate Justice and the truth of his promise and the worthiness lieth in our performance of the Condition on our part Aph. pa. 141. As it was possible for Adam to have fullfilled the Law of works by that Bell. lib. 4. â—le Justif â—ap 1. power which he had received by nature So is it possible for us to fullfill the Conditions of the New Covenant i. e. the righteousness which the Law requireth by the power which we receive from the Grace of Christ But whether this be grace or no grace Pelagius his imaginary or the Gospel real grace he wil not let us know so that herein the Papists are more ingenious than he for they express themselves plainly of effectuall Grace indeed Thes 27. The Doctrine of Justification by Hos in Conâ—ut pa. 140 â—b 3. Faith onely tendeth to drive obedience out of the world For if men do once beleeve that it is not so much Canis inprefat in Andr. Vega Andr. Vega de Justif in Epist prefat Osor de Justif lib. 2 7. as a part of the Condition of their Justification will it not much tend to relax their diligence And it doth much confirm the world in their Soul-cozening Faith c. Aphor. pag. 325 326. It was not the intent of the Father Trident. Cone Sess 6. cap. 14 16. Sess 14. cap. 8 9. Bel. de Purgatorio Bel. de Poenitent lib. 4. or Son that by this satisfaction the offenders should be immediately delivered from the whole Curse of the Law and freed from the evill which they had brought upon themselves but some part must be executed in soul and body and remain upon them at the pleasure of Christ And this Curse is upon not onely affenders in generall but also upon the Elect and beleevers Aph. p. 65 66 68. Not till the day of Resurrection Judgement will all the effects of Sin Bellarmine and all his fellows Bel. de Justif lib. 4. cap. 7. Syn. Trid. ib. can 12. and Law wrath be perfectly removed from the beleevers justified Beleevers after they be justified are under the Law as it is a Covenant of works for life and death Aph. p. 78 79. 82. Onely a conditionall but not an absolute Andr. Vega de Fide operibus q. 2 So also Thomas Seotus Bellarmine discharge is granted to any in this life When we do perform the coÌ„dition yet still the discharge remains conditionall till we have quite finished our performance and where the condition is not performed the law is still in force shall be executed A. p. 82. The justification of beleevers in this life is conditionall ut supra Men that are but thus conditionally Bellarmine prosecuteth this Argument at large pardoned and justified may be unpardoned and unjustified again for their non-performance of the conditions and all the debt so forgiven be required at their hands so that there can be no certainty of perseverance to salvation Aph. Thes 44. He seems in the explication to lenifie his assertion but to it I have spoken before Our Legall Righteousnes is not personal or in our selves and in our own qualificatioÌ„s actions c. but wholly without us in Christ Our Evangelicall Bel. de justif Lib. 1. Righteousness consisteth in our own Actions of Faith Gospel obedience This is the onely Condition of our interest in the Righteousness of Christ Now by reason of this personall righteousnes consisting in the Recâ—â—tude of their own dispositions
again with the strokes of his Curse so sorely that we shall be healed no more while the world lasteth I have sworn that I would no more be wroth with thee nor rebuke thee Isa 54 9. i. e. I have sworn but never meant to stand to it I might instance hundreds more of such Scriptures wherewith Mr. Brs. glosses and distinctions do as well agree as fire towe together If Mr. Br. did so much honour the very intrals of Gods word as hee doth the backside of Aristotles Topicks he would not dare so to elude and elide them But Gods authority with him must it seems stand or fall as it hath or hath not approbation from Aristotles or Socinus his Reason being submitted to the censure thereof And then what living plant of God can stand where this man brings the Axe of his distinctions to fell and prepare billets in heaps for his Cole-fires B. 2. As to the Covenant of works though he make them Concomitants with Faith in justifying and that the voyce of the New C is after his Assertion the same with the voyce of the Old Do and Live yet he denies his doctrine to be herein Legall Because there is a manifold difference implyed though not expressed between the Lawes and the Gospels justifying by works 1 The Law requireth an obedience or righteousness of works in every number and degree perfect to justification But hee makes the New Covenant or Gospell to require only sincere obedience or obedience perfect in sincerity for the attainment of this end Aph. pa. 133. 316. and Thes 77. pa. 310. and App. pa. 76 77. And the sincere covenanting of this obedience or this sincere obedience covenanted must be thus conditioned else it is not sincere 1 It must follow upon the knowledg of the Nature ends conditions of the Covenant 2 It must be done deliberately and not in a fit of passion or rashly 3 It must be done seriously and not dissemblingly or slightly 4 Freely and heartily and not through meer constraint and fear 5 Intirely and with a resolution to perform the whole Covenant and not with reservations giving themselves to Christ by the halves or reserving a purpose to maintain their fleshly interests 6 It must be the taking and obeying of Christ alone not joyning others in office with him but renouncing all other happiness save what is by him and all government and salvation from any which is not in direct subordination to him Append. pa. 33. These make up a sincere and perfect obedience a sincere and perfect Gospel-righteousness perfect in respect of Evangelicall though not of legall perfection For sincerity is our Gospel perfection being a conformity to the rule of perfection viz. the New Covenant as it is a Covenant a perfection of sufficiency in order to its end which is to be the condition of Justification Aph. p. 132 133. Who now is there of all men that hath eyes in his elbows but seeth distinctly a vast difference between the Laws and the Gospels justifying by works For it is justice which requires perfect but Grace that requireth but sincere obedience to justification All this is without book the dictates not of the Holy Ghost but of Mr. Br. and that spirit which wrought in his Masters from whom he learned it For 1. The Scriptures which he alledgeth in any part of this Treatise to make any part thereof probable have been examined and none of them found to speak for him most against him Neither do these assertions of Scripture that affirm Christ to give or promise that he will give life salvation c. to such or such qualified or working persons as to them that love him or fear him or obey him or to the meek the righteous c. any more infer that these qualifications or works have any proper or improper causality to produce their justification than when the Scriptures affirm him to give grace and life to Centurions Publicans Harlots Sinners Enemies Uâ—godly Chief sinners Samaritans Heathen do infer that their being such had any causality unto their justification 2. Nay the Scriptures utterly deny the Gospel to have to do with the Law in this voyce Do and Live as I have before oft alleged them Not by works of righteousness which we have done but of his Mercy he hath saved us by Faith not of works Not of workes but of Grace And how poor a shift Mr. Br. useth to elude the force of these and the like Scriptures hath been shewed in the examination of his vindicating himself from being contradictive to St. Paul 3. Yea if works in any notion or consideration be brought as coupled with Faith to promote Justification the Scriptures affirm them to destroy the hope of Justification and to repell the grace of Christ by which the Beleevers are justified If ye be circumcised which in Pauls sense there is if yee bring but this one work to forward your Justification by Christ ye are bound to keep the whole law Christ is become of no effect ye are faln from grace and faln under the Curse Gal. 5. 3 4. 3. 10. 4. And if works or obedience in Mr. Brs. sense which is the doing of the moral Righteousness that the Law commandeth be not as much as adjuvant to Justification then surely sincere obedience cannot be helpful where obedience yea perfect obedience is excluded This is and appears to be either an instinct or a distinction of Mr. Brs. own brain not a doctrine of the Scripture for which way shall we turn the leaves thereof to find it 5. Yea how rational or how ridiculous this distinction or gloss of Mr. Br. applyed to those Scriptures which deny justification by the obedience of works I leave both to the seeing and the blind to judg By the works of the law no flesh shall be justified saith the Apostle i. e. saith Mr. Br. by the perfect obedience of works but by unperfect obedience if sincere we may be justified Not of works but of grace i. e. not of works perfectly done but of works unperfectly yet sincerely done so grace and works may be made friends that is Gods grace and mans vain glory may kiss each other as co-equal workers of mans justification Not by works of Righteousnes which we have done but of his mercy c. i. e. which wee have done perfectly but which we have done maimedly yet sincerely If some Festus should hear such a Commentary of Mr. Br. upon Paul he would conclude sure that one of them is beside himself much learning hath made him madd Either Paul that he had not wit or words to express his own meaning that in the whole bulk of his disputes denying unto our works and righteousness indefinitely all operation to Justification doth not as much as with a Parenthesis in any place inform his Reader that he speaks not of Gospel but of legall works not of sincere but of perfect obedience that these are rejected from those necessarily
that gave and as he gave his life for the world and giveth life to the world All works are excluded that this beleeving might be reserved sole entire sacred and soveraign to receive Christ to Justification and salvation Here at length I shall put a period to my Examination of this Tractate of Mr. Br. in which I have not wittingly let passe any one particle of all that he hath brought to the re-erecting of Justification by works without examining the strength and force of it which if he had done in relation to all the Arguments which the Protestant Churches and Divines have brought against it before he adventured peremptorily to pronounce their doctrine Hâ—torodox and Antinomistick and the doctrine of the Papists in this point sound and holy I am of opinion that either this work of his had never come forth to the subverting of souls and troubling of the Church or if it had so come forth it would have been a very abomination to all that are not made to be taken and trampled under foot as an accursed thing But now having begun in that manner as we see to set up this worst piece of damning Popery under a false pretence of love to the Protestant and hatred of the Popish Religion It is not to be expected but that seeing his reputation jeoparded he will per fas nefas proceed to seek the support of it though it be to the further ecclipsing of the Grace of God and honour of Christ CHAP. XXV The Conclusion of the whole Treatise demonstrating that although we with the Scriptures exclude works from Justification yet we include them as necessary to a Christian life and that no less seriously and upon more spirituall grounds than the Evill Workers that will be justified by them HAving ended at present with Mr. Baxter I have for the Conclusion of all somewhat to say that may have relation to the weak reader It is a difficult thing to remove works from justification and not to expose our selves therein to the Censure of babish ungospellized and unstablished men that we therein banish them also from the life and practice of a Christian When we teach that the righteousness of the Gospel is revealed from Faith to Faith as it is written the just shall live by Faith not by works Rom. 1. 17. And that no man is justified by the Law i. e. by the strictest observation of the righteousness of the Law Because it is written that the just shall live by Faith Gal. 3. 11. That the inheritance is by Faith not by works lest any man should boast Rom. 4. 1 2. Eph. 2. 8 9. That it is of Faith that it may be of Grace and if it be of grace then is it no more of works else grace were no more Grace But if it be of works then is it no more of grace otherwise works were no more works Rom. 4. 16. 11. 6. That whosoever seeketh justification and blessedness by works worketh himself out of it and shall never attaine it because they sought it not by Faith but as it were by the works af the Law Rom. 9. 31 32. At the sound of this doctrine the unspiritual man excepteth and flesh and bloud swelleth murmuringly Crying out What profit is it then to serve the Lord Why should I fast pray give alms shew mercy study holines and purity deny my self the pleasures of sinn any more when all these have no â—fficacy in them to justifie and save It was the Clamor of men against Paul when he preached the riches of grace abounding the more by the abounding of Mans sinns We will therefore sinn said they that Grace may abound Rom. 6. 1. And do evill that good may come Rom. 3. 8. This doctrine of Faith makes voyd the Law loosing us from all obligation to perform the holines and righteousness which the Law requireth Rom. 3. 31. And as Mr. Br. teacheth them further to reply against God tendeth to drive obedience out of the world For if it be denyed that man can merit happiness by his own righteousness he will cease to be righteous and take the bitt in his teeth to run rebell So deep an impression hath the Covenant of works yet still in mans heart that though he be insufficient to do or to think as he ought 2 Cor. 3. 5. yet he will have Do and Live to be the issue of Life and Death still And Mr. Br. teacheth them to stopp the hole of mans insufficiency with this nayl not of the Sanctuary but of Alexander the Copper-Smith because we cannot perform legall therefore Gospel-obedience shall do the work as if work were not work when the Title of Gospel is written on it and because we cannot fullfill perfect therefore sincere obedience shall serve the Turn Hence is it that the Popish and Arminian doctrines wherewith this Book of Mr. Br. is fully fraughted takes every where so plausibly with and hath such Compleat acceptance among the multitude both of the learned and unlearned It is a doctrine not above but agreeing with the principles of Nature and the naturall man even the naturall Conscience suggesteth it to the unlearned to seek for happiness by their own righteousness And both that and the precepts of Moral Philosophy also together with the Law of Moses instruct the learned to seek for the Summum Bonum the best felicity all felicity in the way of vertue and vertuous performances Here now when any comes to them in the name of Christ holding forth to them the same doctrine it kindles in them so swiftly as fire in towe no need of the teaching of God or renewing of the Spirit Flesh and bloud of it self gives its suffrage to it An easie task have these teachers to perswade men and draw disciples after them and set them in an activeness and dexterity of practicing what they teach It is easily learned to swimm swiftly with the stream and to drop the Bowle down the hill But to teach men to live by Faith and yet to be fruitfull in good works too Not to seek justification and life by their righteousness yet to be zealous of all righteousnes and good works continually hic labor hoc opus est It is above the principles of Nature to apprehend it He must swimm against the stream and roll the Bowl against the Hill walk after the Spirit and not after the Flesh that puts it effectually into practice Yet that our Doctrine doth not let loose the reins to the flesh nor howsoever carnall sensuallists may abuse it to their Condemnation in the least degree blunt the spirits of the spirituall man to well-doing nor deny the both expediency and necessity of all good works in the life of a Christian is evident 1 Because although we exclude morall qualifications and works from officiating to Justification yet we retein and include them in and unto sanctification Our doctrine with Christs and his Apostles holds forth the Lord Jesus to every soul
the whole Law Christ is become of none effect to you whosoever of you are justified by the Law ye are fallen from Grace From these words must needs be deduced these Conclusions 1 That to be under the Law and to be under Grace are contraries and do exclude either the other so that it is impossible for the same person at the same time to be under both together If but circumcised if at all under the Law ye have saith the Apostle made Christ of none effect to you ye are fallen from grace and consequently if at all in Christ yee are not in the least part under the Law but free from the domination and Curse thereof 2 That whosoever yieldeth himself to be under the Law as a Covenant of Works in the least part hath his justification or damnation depending upon his perfect or unperfect keeping of the whole Law so saith th'Apostle if but circumcised c. ye are debtors to keep the whole Law How debtors viz. If ever ye will be justified and saved to keep it perfectly if ye fail but once to be damned for ever 3 That whosoever affirmeth whether he be a Bellarmine or a Baxter believers to be under the Law as a Covenant of Works the same by necessary consequence denyeth all actuall efficacy of Christs death that ever any soul was or shal be saved by his mediation and affirmeth all the Saints that have been are or shal be to be damned for ever For if at all under the Law then not at all under grace or in Christ but they must stand or fall according as they do or not do the whole Law which none doth ergo all must perish The same also may be gathered from Gal. 3. 10. but I have touched upon it before A noble Aphorist ye will acknowledg declaring a greater desire to bring the Saints under the Curse and damnation then there is force in his Disputes to prove them to be under it These Scriptures might suffice to satisfie every judgment that believers are not under the Law Yet I shall mention some few more to shew the copiousnes of the word in this point that there might be no doubting in this point Rom 7. 1-6 the Holy Ghost doth make out this truth as clear as the light The Law saith he hath dominion over a man onely during life as the husband hath power over his wife Let either the husband or wife dye the law or power which the husband had over the wife dyeth also If the wife dye he hath no power over the soul or ashes of his dead wife to exact under any penalty obedience from them If the wife be survivor she is no more bound to the dead ashes of her husband to fear either command or wrath thence but is wholly at liberty So also stands the relation between the Law and believers The Law in the height of its authority had power to inflict death but once upon man this death have believers suffered in Christ therefore are dead to the Law by the body of Christ have done their Law and suffered all that the Law had to inflict upon sinners in the body or humane nature of Christ suffering for them so that they are dead to the Law so far without the lists of further punishment or terrour of the Law as the Felon or Murtherer that is condemned hanged dead and buried is free from further punishment by the Law of the Land Yea the Law also is dead to them having spent it's sting and strength and life also on the naturall body of Christ and is thereby disabled for ever to re-assume the same against the mysticall body or any member thereof So that they are fully delivered from the Law All this doth th'Apostle speak out at the full in that place and no lesse in Gal. 3. 24 25. The Law was our School-master unto or untill Christ c. But after that faith is come we are no longer under a Schoolmaster This also he illustrateth Gal. 4. 1 c. by a similitude likening the Church before Christs coming to an Heir in his Minority by his fathers will put under Tutors and Governors so that though he be Lord of all yet differs nothing from a servant but is under his Tutors ferule and rod also to be constrained with fear when love becomes ineffectuall to move him to his duty such was the condition of the Church while in its minority and feeblenes of spiritual knowledge the Sun of righteousnes not being yet risen fully to enlighten them with the understanding of their liberty and glorious prerogatives During this time though they were Lords of all yet because of the weaknes of their knowledg they were kept Servant-like under hard Masters under the Commands and threats of the Law but resembling the Church under the Gospel to the same heir in his maturity of age now entred into the possession of his heritage and become rather Lord of his Tutors and Governours then any way subject or servile to their authority gently and generously accepting their wholsom Counsels but disdaining so to subject to their authority as to be brought under the rod of their power any more So also Gal. 5. 13 18 23. speaking of them that had been called to the liberty of the Gospel believing in Christ walking in the Spirit and bringing forth the fruits of the Spirit concludeth of them that they are not under the Law that against such there is no Law And 2 Cor. 3. 11. cals the Law as a Covenant of works that which was done away as he doth the Gospel as a Covenant of Grace that which remaineth Yea that the case might be so plain that no Jesuiticall distinctions might pervert it the Holy Ghost at once concludeth both negatively that believers are not under the terrours of the Law at all and affirmatively that they are wholly and onely under the sweet dispensation of grace Heb. 12. 18-24 Ye are not come to the Mount c. burning with fire nor unto blacknes and darknesse and tempest nor to the words and Covenants which could not be heard and born and to the terrible voyce which made Moses himself exceedingly to fear and quake These are the things done away in reference to believers But ye are come to Mount Sion to the City of the living God the heavenly Hierusalem c. to all the prerogatives and privileges of the Kingdome of Grace So also in the Epistle to the Galathians There are two Covenants saith the Holy Ghost the one from Mount Sinai where the Law was given which gendereth to Bondage the other from Hierusalem which is above and is free the mother of us all and concludes at last of all believers negatively that they are not the children of the Bond-woman i. e. under the Covenant of works and affiâ—matively But of the free i. e. under the Covenant of Grace Gal. 4. 24 26 31. Hence is that bold triumphant challenge of the Apostle Rom. 8. 33 34.
the condition yet still the discharge remains Here he followeth Arminius because in this point Arminius over-runs the Papists conditionall saith he till we have quite finished the performance i. e. till we have gasped out the last breath So that in this life there is no discharge but a conditionall promise that possibly we may in the world to come be discharged what is this discharging but Justifying and absolving us from what but from the sinn which we have committed and from the vengeance which the law threateneth such a justification he denyeth to be attainable in this life And this argument he thus urgeth Whosoever is not perfectly justified is still under the law as a Covenant of works But the very Saints are not in this world so Justified ergo they are under the Law c. The second that Justification in the world to come must be procured by mans own willing c. He delivereth plainly enough in that he saith that we must perform yea continue performing the conditions untill we go out of this world and then we may possibly obtein to be justified in the world to come What are the conditions by which we procure the discharge Mr. B tells us afterward as we shall finde Faith and good works These must we observe and continue observing to the end to procure justification after this life ended And so it is by our own strong and lasting endeavours that after the world is ended our sins may be possibly forgiven and we saved Here if we grant unto him that we are Gods hirelings thus to work in his vineyard the whole day the whole term of our life and that Justification is the wages of our work to be paid in the evening i. e. at the end of the world then it will follow indeed what he deduceth hence that untill the world be ended we are still under the Curse of the Law 3 That they that are in Christ may fall away and be damned if they continue in their Apostacy or may after their many apostacies oft renew again their union with Christ and so at last be justified he speaks out fully in telling us It is not one instantaneous act of beleeving but a continued faith that shall quite discharge us that no longer are we discharged than we are beleevers and when we cease to beleeve the Law is still in force and condemneth Either he reasoneth from an unpossible supposition or a possible and usuall Case incident to beleevers If from an impossibility it makes not at all for his purpose If it were possible for him to fall from grace then should beleevers be under the Law again But it is not possible c. ergo they shall never be reduced under the law again But he argueth as from a possible and usuall case and then if we grant him that the Saints may fall away it will follow that they are not absolutely freed from the curse of the law in this life But in granting this we grant our selves to be Popish and may shake hands with Mr. Br. The fourth that no man can in this life be certain of salvation depends on the former For if we cannot be certain of our perseverance we cannot be certain of eternall happines and by necessary consequence it must be concluded also that we are not discharged from the bondage of the Law But we cannot grant the premisses from which such inferences are drawn unless we will grant away our selves also in despair to perdition And therefore we deny to Mr. B all his argumentation here as having nothing of Christ but all of Antichrist in it I mean not to prosecute in this place a dispute against Mr. B about these four pernicious errors which he holds in common with other Papists himself will elswhere minister to me an occasion of speaking more fully to them where he doth not onely touch upon but also professedly handle the most if not all of them Here I shall onely to preserve the simple from his guile manifest upon what fallacious grounds he pitcheth these his assertions They are principally these two 1 That Faith as an infused gift of grace and a part of our inherent righteousnesse doth justifie when it is not onely as the Papists say Fides informis but also Formata perfected both in its duration of time and in all its Concomitants the other habits vertues and gifts of grace such as are love mercy goodness temperance c. and in the fruits and acts of all these which are good works For so shall we finde him in the sequele of this tractate teaching 2 That Faith and all those its Concomitants with their fruits and effects depend upon our freewill to gain and retein refuse and lose them at the pleasure and lust of our corrupt freewill These points being granted all those foure errors will follow as necessary deductions thence But the orthodox Churches hold and the Oracles of the Gospel teach otherwise 1 That our Justification floweth from our union to Christ that All in Adam are under the Law under the Curse unblessed unjustified unpardoned But that all which are in Christ are justified pardoned c. So the Apostle Phil. 3. 8. c. All things are doung to me that I may winn Christ and be found in him not having mine own righteousnes which is of the law but that which is through the Faith of Christ c. Here was the Apostles righteousnes and Justification to winn Christ and be found in him And this union unto Christ is made up principally by the Spirit by which Christ apprehendeth and uniteth us to himself No otherwise is our Justification attributed to faith than as it is the instrument by which we apprehend Christ to our selves as we are apprehended of Christ to himself and bring home into our bosom◠the benefit of this our union to him together with the sense and joy of our Justification by him This I shall have occasion to illustrate and prove more fully before I part with Mr. Baxter and because he will call me to it in another place here I shall say no more of it 2 That our Faith both in its existence and perseverance dependeth not upon the fickle sweek of our own freewill but upon the support of Gods power and unchangeable love and upon the vertue of Christs mediation and faithfullnes of the Mediator though our freewill be mutable yet the gifts calling of God are without repentance i. e. without Change Rom. 11. 29. He that hath begun a good work in you will performe it till the day of Jesus Christ Phil. 1. 6. Though our faith be weak yet we are preserved by the power of God through Faith and salvation Christ hath by his sacrifice purchased to us not onely salvation but faith also both in its being and persevering to apprehend him and it to our persevering Consolation They shall never perish saith he neither shall any man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any one
the law is not so repealed c. therefore none of these will follow For we hold that Believers are therefore delivered from the law as a Covenant of works not because the law was almost from the very beginning repealed or abrogated from being any longer a Covenant of works but because the law as a Covenant of works hath executed upon them in Christ all its penalty for all their sins and hath therefore now no more power to question them as hath been more copiously declared before The same I say also to the seventh Argument as it pointeth to the not repealing of the law whatsoever els is in it hath been in answer to the place cited sufficiently spoken to His sixth Argument about which he laboureth more then about all the rest though as I said a little before it makes nothing to his present and explicit purpose proving onely unbelievers to be under the law for this is nothing to believers yet it makes way to an implicit or secret end which he hath and determineth to prosecute with much ardency in the following parts of this Treatise There are two sorts of unbelievers the one under a temporary the other under a finall unbelief the elect and the reprobate Mr. Baxter here driveth with all his force to prove both under the law because he conceiveth that if he prove the elect before they beleeve in Christ are under the law and so granted to be it may be proved much the more easily and plainly that they are so also after they become believers For many of the strongest Arguments which are for the one are for the other and which are against the one are against the other also So that it is hard to bring reasons for the affirming or denying of either without giving advantage for the like affirming or denying of both I purpose not here to anticipate but to suspend the dispute upon this Question untill Mr. B. shall shew his face openly as a Challenger here he doth but as it were peep behind the Curtain in comparison of what he saith afterwards with full expressions of himself Yet that I may not be forced then to retreat hither again to what he doth here deliver but answer every thing in its owne place I shall at present examine those Scriptures which he here produceth whether and how far they prove elect unbelievers to be under the law as a Covenant of works And to clear up a way to the beâ—ter understanding of these and the like testimonies of Scripture I shall prefix two Positions visibly and apparently springing from the pure fountain of Gods word First that all which are elected from eternity shall in their appointed times come unto Christ and persevere in him by a living Faith I mean not onely all but onely these and none besides them As many as were ordained to eternall life beleeved when Christ was and Acts 13. 48 so still do or shall believe when Christ is or shall be preached to them If the Gospel be hid from any viz. so that they believe not in Christ manifested by the Gospel to them it is to them that perish c. 2 Cor. 4. 3. i. e. to them that are not elect but reprobates All that the Father giveth me shall come to me and him that cometh to I will in no wise cast out or suffer to be lost John 6. 37. To come to Christ is to believe truly in him such shall never be lost never fall away or make shipwrack of their Faith But who are they whom God giveth to Christ that they may beleeve in him Thine they were and thou gavest them me saith our Saviour Mr. B. will say they were in a peculiar manner to be Gods people at least by election and therefore given to Christ that by faith in him they might be saved Jo 17. 6. To you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God but unto them that are without all these things are done in Parables that seeing they may see and not perceive c. Mark 4. 11 12. Why was it given to the one part to know the mystery life and spirit of the Gospel to the other onely the outside and letter thereof They were within these without the lines of Gods election They went out from us but they were not of us for if they had been of us they would without doubt have continued with us but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not of us 1 Joh 2. 19. Not of us he means not of the number of them that are called according to Gods purpose of Election Rom. 8. 28. for then they could not have faln away All should have wrought for good to them So that hence it followeth that every elect unbeliever shall come to and continue in the Faith and whosoever doth not so is manifested not to have been elected of God 2 That justification or remission of sins may be considered in a threefold respect 1 As it is in God 2 As it is delivered over by God into the hands of Christ our Mediator 3 As it is by Christ brought home unto and given into the bosom and possession of any man As it is in God I shall pretermit to speak much of it any where but any thing at all untill Mr B. directly and exprâ—sly calls me to it least the man should be tormented before his time For he hates the very naming and thought thereof as an Act Immanent in God cane pejus angui and is ready Jew like to rend his cloaths and fling dust in the aire at any mention thereof as an article that stands in enmity to his justification by works 2 Then as it is delivered into the hands of Christ we may speak of it without such terrible offence to his patience or setting him into so direfull a commotion conditionally that we will undertake for Christ that he shall be ruled by Mr. B. to do what he appoints with it that is to keep it in his pocket and deliver it to no man but hold all under the Curse of the Law untill the day of judgement we cannot adventure upon such an undertaking nevertheles shall hold forth the truth of God in this case This is that Christ by offering himself a Sacrifice for sin and presenting the Sacrifice of himself unto God in the most Holy place i. e. in heaven at his Mercy-seat hath thereby effectually purchased everlasting redemption and remission of sins and hath received a full absolution and acquittance from the father for all his elect by name So that in Christ they are justified from all sin and freed from the Law as a Covenant of works even while they are unbelievers have this freedom I mean in the hand of Christ though not in their own apprehension and possession Though as to themselves and their own judgments and as to the apprehension of men they are under the Law under wrath yet in Christ they
home into their apprehension and Conscience that their sinns are remitted For so run the words in that 10 of Act. v. 47. that Whosoever beleeveth in him shall receive remission of sins not denying that Christ had received it for them before but affirming only that now they should receive it from Christ Besides this promise is held forth there promiscuously to all both elect and reprobate and it is but an offer not the gift of pardon to distinguish betwixt them for whom Christ had and those for whom he had not effectually satisfied and received absolution from the Father by the ones beleeving and receiving by faith from the hand of Christ the pardon and the others refusall and manifesting thereby their abode under death and the Law still The surety had paid the penalty of the obligation taken up the bonds and acquittance or discharge of the debt Thenceforth the Creditor had no more plea against either principall or surety Nevertheles the principall knew it not therefore playeth least in sight is in continual fear of arrests thinks every bush hath a Sergeant or Bayliff under it but at length the surety gives and delivers into his hand both the acquittance the obligation Cancelled Now is his first receiving of a discharge now he first finds himself free from his Creditors obligation now hath he the first comfort of the benefit but he was discharged before though he knew it not so is it with the elect c. Therefore Mr. Baxters inference hence is unsound He addeth the Testimony of Paul Eph. 2. 3. That the redeemed were by nature the Children of wrath who denyeth it But this is nothing to the question It is not here enquired whether the redeemed drew not the seeds of sin and death by naturall propagation from their parents as much as others But whether by the satisfaction which Christ made for them according to the Covenant of grace they were not redeemed from that wrath before they yet beleeved It is true what Mephibosheth said of himself and his brethren to David We were all as dead men before my Lord the King c. 2 Sam. 19. 28. because they were the progeny of Saul that fought against David Nevertheles by means of the Covenant that intervened between David and Jonathan Mephibosheth had right to all the favour that King David could express As for those testimonies cited by way of Thesis and Antithesis out of Gal. 5. ver 3 4. ver 18 23. they make wholly against him nothing for him The 3 4 verses speak nothing to the question in hand but utterly destroy that to which in this whole dispute he driveth nothing to the question in hand The circumcised are bound or debtors to the whole Law and Christ is become of none effect to them He was to have proved that beleevers were before they beleeved under the Law This Text speaketh not of the elect before they beleeved but of professed beleevers returning to Circumcision and the Law to fetch thence help unto their justification after that they seemingly at least beleeved in Christ so here is nothing that makes for him because nothing to the present question But much against him in reference to the grand thing which he laboureth for to bring beleevers under the Law as a Covenant of works Whosoever doth so saith the Apostle in the least mite that contents not himself with Christ alone takes in but so poor a peice of the Law as Circumcision to help with Christ to Justification the same person hereby forfeiteth all his claim to Grace and Christ and must gain heaven by his perfect fullfilling of the Law or must be damned in hell for ever Into this state Mr. Baxter striveth to bring himself and his disciples I shall not wish them joy in it because I use not to wish impossibilities Touching the verses which he puts in opposition to these ver 18 23. But if ye be led by the Spirit ye are not under the Law against such there is no law If he mean simply and sincerely what the Apostle here meaneth by being led by the Spirit viz. the seeking of righteousnes by Christ alone as the same Apostle more fully expresseth himself Gal. 3. 3. Phil. 3. 3. Then by granting that such are not under the Law there is no law against them he destroyeth and recanteth all that he hath before spoken to prove beleevers under the Law But if by being led by the Spirit his aim be to bring in works to justification under the name of the fruits of the Spirit we shall here forbear to answer him because it is besides the present question leaving it to its fit place where he openly explaineth himself And no less abhorrent from the question is his next proof Gal. 3. 22. The Scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ may be given to them that beleeve What is this to the purpose in hand we deny not the promise of or the promised Justification and remission of sinns by faith in Jesus Christ to be given to them that beleeve into their hands and possession when they beleeve by affirming that Christ hath taken possession thereof for them before they beleeve that he may let it down into their hearts when they beleeve He ascended up on high and led captivity captive and gave gifts to men Eph. 4. 8. The Apostle fetcheth his authority from the word in Psal 68. 18. where it is said He received gifts for men viz. to give them in his time But the Apostle contents himself with the scope of the word not binding himself to the bare letter and sound thereof So Christ at his ascension received for us the gifts of Justification and remission and all other benefits of his passion They were then laid up for us in his Custody so that we had them in him before our actuall existence upon earth But he gives them to us into our sensible possession when we come to be to live and to beleeve That which he citeth from Gal. 4 5. is altogether besides the question also Himself acknowledgeth that it proveth us onely to be under the Law when Christ redeemed us or undertook to pay our ransom Not that we were under the Law after he had redeemed us by paying our ransom before we yet beleeved The words are these in the 4 5 verses God sent forth his Son made of a woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law The scope of the Apostle here is one and the same with that to which he drives Gal. 2. 15 16. We who are Jewes by nature a holy seed within the Covenant and have all the privileges of the Law and not sinners of the Gentiles that are without the Covenant and the Law knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by the faith of Jesus Christ even we have beleeved that we might be justified by the faith of
Christ and not by the works of the law for by the works of the law no flesh is justified Why then do we draw the poor Gentiles to seek any furtherance to their justification by the observation of the Law by which our selves who were most privileged with it could not be justified but by Christ onely without the law So here Even they that had the law and were not a little zealous for and active in the righteousness of the law had need of a redeemer were justified and saved not at all by the lawes righteousness but onely by Christs redeeming of them What madnes is it then in you O foolish Galathians that are not of the holy stock of Israel but sinners of the Gentiles to seek any help to your justification by the works of the law which could not justifie the very Israelites that were born and brought up in it and not to repose your selves upon Christ alone If Mr. Baxter will pretend any other meaning of the Text besides he shall therein wound and not strengthen his Cause For he speaks of the same persons here to be under the law onely in the hand of a Mediator not under the Curse of the law but under such an administration thereof that even before they actually beleeved in Christ the very person of Christ are affirmed ver 1. to be Lords of all all the inheritance which is by Christ ergo not under the wrath of God before they embraced the Faith of Christ As for the other Scriptures which he annexeth yet further to prove that the very elect before and untill they beleeve are under the Law in the sense so oft manifested let him once shew how he will argue and what he will conclude and upon what grounds from them we shall be ready to answer him In the interim I profess I see not any thing in them more prevalent to his purpose than a nights lodging in a bed of snow and ice to cure the Cough Yet from all these wrested Scriptures he Concludes at last that the deliverance which beleevers have by Christ from the Curse of the Law is a conditionall deliverance viz. if they will obey the Gospel i. e. when they beleeve if they will beleeve not onely while they live but also when they are dead and buried For as we say that a conditionall proposition doth nihil ponere so it is true in the sense of Mr Bax. here that this conditionall promise doth nihil promittere The Condition as long as this world lasteth being still in performing not performed and so nothing obteined Yet will he have this new nothing together with the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law to which we never were none but the Israelites ever have been subject to be the great privilege of beleevers and effect of Christs bloud When we poor souls with our dull eyes can see no more privilege that we have herein by Christs bloud than the worst of infidells and reprobates have for they also â—ave this conditionall deliverance from the curse and freedom from the ceremoniall law And this deliverance saith he is yet more full when we perform the conditions of our freedom And then we are said to dead to the Law Rom. 7. 4. and the obligation to punishment dead as to us ver 6. This is indeed a full and perfect deliverance But what doth he mean in saying when we perform c. either when we are performing the conditions That were a contradiction to himself in what he saith p. 74. that we are not perfectly freed till the day of resurrection and judgement And so also it will be hard for another save Mr. Br. to make sense of the words That the deliverance of beleevers is yet more full when they perform the Conditions are performing the conditions of their freedom i. e. more full when they beleeve than when they do beleeve For if we should grant to Mr. Br Faith to be a condition and not rather a mean or instrument of our justification yet would we grant him no other condition thereof Or doth he mean it is full when they have performed the Conditions it seems then that some of the Conditions are left to be performed in the next world because untill then he tells us we can have no such perfect freedom This is the free Grace of God which Mr. Br boasteth himself so much to extoll p. 79. let him that delights in it be his disciple That which he speaks in the upshott for the mitigation of his harsh doctrine aforegoing that he knoweth this Covenant of works continueth not to the same ends and uses as before c. is but a trick of the Jesuits to give sugar after the poyson which was before gone down to destroy Neither can he make out how beleevers are under the law of nature as a Covenant of works and yet not bound to seek life according to the tenor and condition of that Covenant If any marvell that Mr. Baxter should so waste his spirits in abusing both divine and humane learning to prove the Saints to be still under the Curse under the law as a Covenant of works he will cease to wonder if he take notice of a further aim that he hath therein He would not out of doubt have so much insisted on it had he not looked to a further end in it If the beleevers are still under a Covenant of works as to the Curse wrath and Condemnation much more are they under a Covenant of works as unto life and Justification If the former be once granted he accounts the game wonn as to the latter Therefore doth he so much stirr in the former that he may with the more facility and less contradiction bring in afterwards the latter Justification by works which is his very busines in Compiling this book CHAP. XI Whether as the Covenant of Works was made with all mankind in Adam their representative so the Covenant of Grace was made with all the elect in Christ their Representer What relation the Covenants made with Adam Abraham the Israelites and lastly with us under the Gospel have to that Covenant made with Christ B. Thesis 14. p. 89. THe Tenor of the New Covenant is this that Christ having made sufficient satisfaction to the Law whosoever will repent and beleeve in him to the end shall be justified through that satisfaction from all that the Law did charge upon them and be moreover advanced to far greater privileges and glory then they fell from But whosoever fullfilleth not these conditions shall have no more benefit by the bloud of Christ than what they here received and abused but must answer the charge of the Law themselves And for their neglect of Christ must also suffer a far greater condemnation Or briâ—fly whosoever beleeveth in Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life but he that beleeveth not shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Mar. 16. 16. Jo. 3. 15 16 17 18. 36.
which is in our selves could be more excellent than that which Christ is made to us untill this new Doctor took the Chair to teach Mysteries and by inverting and misnaming Scripture-phrase hath so taught Nevertheles it behoved Mr. Br having resolved to keep on the triple Crown upon the Popes head by stablishing justification upon works though it were to the uncrowning of Christ to reject uprightnes and to seek after inventions Eccles 7. 29. First he must hold beleevers to be under both Covenants els while he builds up one peece of Babylon he should pluck down another and give his judgment against his holines in one point while he acts the Champion for him in another and adventure with all the loss of his Cause if he keep not as strong hold-fast in the Covenant of works with the one hand as in the Covenant of grace with the other 2 He must call the Condition or means of applying Christ to us or obteining interest in his satisfaction our Righteousnes els he will not be able to evade those Scriptures which assert our Justification by faith But by this feat he thinks himself in a fit posture both to answer this and to bring in all qualifications and works that he pleaseth in a partnership with faith to justifie True will he say we are justified by Faith as a part of our righteousnes and by all other good qualifications and works as other parts of our righteousnes 3 He must call faith and works our Evangelicall righteousnes having seen in what a stinking trance some of his dirty deer brethren in their disputes have been left when they would prove that good works as works of the Law do justifie and how little better they have fared who would have them to justifie onely as works of grace having not had enough subtlety to prove them Gospel or Grace works Need had he therefore to put himself upon strong and strange inventions that himself may not stick in the same mire after them But enough in generall let us hear him deliver his own minde in particulars B. Thes 17. p. 102. As there are two Covenants with their distinct Conditions So is there a twofold Righteousnes and both of them absolutely necessary to salvation The latter member of this proposition is grounded upon the former the Thesis upon the Hypothesis As true is the latter as the former But how true is the former that there are two Covenants and that they have their distinct Conditions First when he saith there are two Covenants he meaneth two Covenants in force to the very Saints in Christ that while they are under grace to salvation they are also under the Law to the Curse and Condemnation This hath been his busines to Confirm in the former part of this Treatise and he owns it in the explication of this Thesis But this is false as in disapproving of his arguments before hath been proved They are no more under the Law who are once under grace Rom. 6. 14. 2ly Neither have the two Covenants their distinct Conditions according to Mr. Br. For Thes 4. he makes the Condition of the first Covenant Perfect Obedience or Righteousnes The same he makes here the Condition of the New Covenant viz. Faith and Obedience but both as integrant parts of our own inherent righteousnes as we have partly seen and shall be forced to see more fully in that which is to come after So that we grant him that as true as there are two Covenants with their distinct Conditions in force to the same persons so true is it that there is a twofold Righteousness and both absolutely necessary to salvation if by salvation he means Justification At falsum prius ergo posterius When he brings proofs to Confirm his assertions he may meet with a larger answer In mean while a simple Negation stands fittest in opposition to his bare affirmation That which he brings in the explication to Confirm it hath been answered over and over before Onely he tells us in the upshot that He will take it as granted To which I answer that there hath been such a generation of men still upon earth so fingerative that will needs take that which was never granted and delivered to them such is the main bulk of Mr. Brs doctrine in this book taken but never delivered to him from God or his Christ Bax. The usuall confounding of these Righteousnesses saith he doth much darken the Controversies about Justification And Mr. Br doth no less cleer the Controversie than an Ecclipse the Sun-beams He proceeds to explain what this twofold Righteousnes is so absolutely necessary to salvation Bax. The legall Righteousness saith he is not in us or consisteth not in any qualifications of our own persons or actions performed by us But it is wholly without us in Christ Thes 18. p. 103. The righteousnes of the New Covenant is the onely Condition of our interest in and enjoyment of the Righteousnes of the old c. Thes 19. p. 107. Our Evangelicall Righteousnes is not without us in Christ as our Legall Righteousnes is but consisteth in our own actions of Faith and Gospel Obedience c. Thes 20. p. 108. What there is more in any of these three positions is transcribed at large before To the 18 Thesis he annexeth in the explication a dispute against the Papists not to Confute them as adversaries to the truth for joyning mans righteousnes with Christs righteousness unto justification for herein he professeth entire Communion with them but to admonish them as his loving brethren to defend this their Conclusion of Justification by their own righteousness not under the terms of their legall but of their Evangelicall righteousness Because the legall righteousnes is unpossible but the Evangelicall righteousnes according to his carving and forming of it is easie to be fullfilled and almost unpossible to be violated Not that the Papists were wholly ignorant of this mystery untill Mr. Br here teacheth them Nay many of them had and pleaded it very artificially before he was born And himself hath learned it of them But he as the most proficient of all their disciples hath more fully improved it so that now he becomes a teacher to his very Masters and exhorts them to learn of him the pious feat and fraud of making use of this distinction yet further than ever they had the wit or grace to devise even to all matters and purposes that tend to the eluding of the word of Christ and the advantaging of the holy mother Church in her doctrine of Justification that is altogether Contradictory to the doctrine of the Scriptures upon the same Argument To the 19th 20th positions he annexeth an explication of both of these and of all that was said in the two former positions also In it we shall finde whatsoever deserveth a fuller Answer than hath been yet given to all and every of these four positions or any thing in all or any of them conteined not
Divines to have sought an evasion Opera quidem legis saith he quatenus sine fide gratia Campian geruntur nihil habere quod ad justitiam conferant Caeterùm opera sanctorum Hominum cùm ejusmodi non sint sed fide gratia referta ideo justificari dicuntur verè coram Deo ex operibus suis non tamen tanquam suis i. e. The workes of the Law as they are done without Faith and Grace have nothing to contribute to Justification nevertheless the workes of godly men are not of that kind but replenished with Grace and Faith therefore are they sayd to bee justified by their workes yet not by workes as theirs but as wrought by the grace of God in them So also Vega the Monk Duplex est Justificatio altera ex gratia operandi infusa Andr. Vega de Just vag 751. altera ex debito Legis seclusa Gratia Excluditur ergo Justificatio illa quae fit seclusa gratia non Justificatio illa quae fit ex operibus gratia adjutis c. i. e. There is a two-fold Justification one of the Grace to work infused into us the other of the debt of the Law without Grace to enable That Justification is excluded which is sought after without Grace not that Justification which is of good works holpen by Grace And Hosius to Hosius elude that of the Apostle We are not justified by works Verum inquit ex operibus iis quae legis sunt aut quae liberi Arbitrii nostri propria existunt quae cum laborant imperfectione nihil ad justificationem conferunt i. e. It is true saith he of those works which are of the Law or done in the strength of Free-will only which in regard they have their imperfection cannot avail to Justification But as for such works as flow from our Free-will as it is set in operation by the over-powering of Gods Grace He concludeth otherwise Not to trouble our selves with what these Sophistical pratlers speak every and each of them severally let us take them collectively in one bunch and body as Mr. Pemble in his Treatise of Justification brings them in both head and tayle great and small thus disputing against Justification by the righteousness which is in Christ without any righteousness of our own intermixed Against this Doctrine they have two exceptions saith Mr. Pemble Pemb. Treat of Just if page 37. 1. That we are not justified by any work of our own viz. that we our selves do by our own strength without the help of Grace But yet we may be justified by some work which we doe viz. by the ayd of Grace such is the work of Faith 2. That wee are not justified by any workes of our own i. e. by any works of the Law but by a work of the Gospel such as Faith is we may be justified By this time it is enough evident that Mr. Baxter fights the Popes battel with the Popes weapons that as he maintaines the Popes cause so he rankes and files himself with the souldiers of the Popes Army who then can give any reason why hee should not be thought as sure a friend either to Christ or at least to Antichrist as are the Priests and Jesuits Onely if for no other yet for this cause Mr. Pemble deserves the brand of an Antinomian which in the following part of his Tractate Mr. Baxter gives him pag. 173. for disgracing this sophisticall shift which is common to other Papists with Mr. Baxter telling us in the fore-quoted place that this distinction of works done without Grace and works done by Grace was devised by one and consequently followed by others that had or have neither Wit nor Grace being a trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as exclude indefinitely all works from Justification c. A spightful speech thus at once to cast dirt in the faces both of Mr. Baxter and all his fratres or Fryars of the holy Mother Church of Rome No marvel if Mr. Baxter though he smooth him somtimes for his own ends yet doth carry him in mind to fit him a penny-worth for it when he thinks he hath caught an advantage against him Neverthelesse though Mr. Baxters ingenuity and plaine dealing seldom keep him company in this dispute and controvâ—rfie yet his subtilty and sophistry fail him never In his former positions before examined he affirms that besides the imputed righteousness we must have a personal righteousness inherent in our selves as absolutely necessary to salvation and justification Here now to make that his assertion sufferable he minceth it in its termes and in this Thesis calls it a performance of conditions and in the Explication an Acting of Duties what before he had called justifying righteousnesse Yea further tels us that some think it a self-ascribing and derogating from Christ to affirm our selves to be but the Actors of those Duties though we professe our selves to do it only by the strength of Grace When contrariwise the question is not about either the requisitenesse of Gospel duties nor about the strength by which they are to be performed herein if Mr. Baxter meaneth as he speaketh wee are agreed but about their office and end to which they are to be performed whether these duties are conditions of our Justification and that the end of our performing them ought to be that we may be justified by the righteousness which consisteth in their performance Doth hee meane to tune up a Palinodiam to recant and eat up his former assertions that he doth here so lenifie the roughness and correct the extravagancy both of his words and matter before delivered Nothing less but hee throws sugar after his poyson both that it may goe down the more quietly what he hath given already to his unwary Readers to drink and that they may be ready without suspition to drink deeper and more deadly draughts of the same poyson which thorow the whole sequele of this his Treatise he makes his business to temper for them I shall there answer more fully where he speakes more fully In the mean time all may see his dealing here to be not faire and logicall but fallacious and sophistical He tels us in the conclusion of his Explication that He will not digress from his intended subject so far as to enter here into a disquisition of the nature and workings of that Grace which doth enable us to perform these conditions but refers us to Parkers Theses de traductione peccatoris ad vitam What that Mr. Parker or his work is I know not But that Mr. Baxter will not here deliver his own judgement I think he doth well For if his judgement in the doctrine of Gods Grace working unto mans conversion and sanctification be not more sound then about the operation of the same Grace to mans Justification his silence will be farre more acceptable then his best argumentations to chaste ears and spiritual minds And little cause have we to expect any
here in defining or describing righteousness denying it a positive and reall being herein puffing off all the Classicall Philosophers and Divines Philosophers for Aristotle affirmeth that all Philosophers call Righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such an habit by which men are apt to practise just things and by which they act and will just things And to them he gives also his assent calling it further 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not onely a virtue but a perfect virtue citing and approving that Proverbial verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That all or every vertue is complexively or comprehensively in Righteousness Yea the most perfect virtue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again it is saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most excellent of virtues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not a part of virtue but virtue in the whole So speakes he of Righteousness in the general and as in the next Chapters he distributes it into its specials he makes virtue the general of those several Righteousnesses In the same manner the choicest of all the learned and Orthodox Divines that I have met with make Righteousness thus taken in its largest sense to sound and to bee one and the same thing with virtue it self Some call it bonitatem probitatem integritatem goodnesse honesty and integrity others rectitudinem virtutis the uprightnesse or rectitude of Virtue defining its specials by Virtue when they assign the next and immediate genus by habitus when they assign the remote genus And are not Virtues and either naturall morall or infused Habits Positive and Reall Beings Must all other Philosophers and Divines vanish to nothing when Mr. Baxter comes with his Denominations Modifications or rather Noddifications Neverthelesse though we deny to him that Righteousnesse is but a bare Denomination or dead notion yet we grant to him that true righteousness both of Mens Actions and persons must relate to some rule What will follow hence B. This Rule when it is the law of Man and our actions suit thereto we are then Righteous before men True and yet latet anguis in herba under this truth there lurketh a fraudulent falshood Mr. Baxter hath his restrictions to promote but not to prevent a falshood The thing that he pretends to prove is That men are called Righteous in Scripture in reference to the New Covenant onely There he finds the word onely to make a falshood Here he cannot find it will not finde it for if it bee brought in place it will reprove him of falshood to all men Is it for mens actions suiting to the Lawes of men onely that they are called in Scripture righteous before men He would be so understood for if it be not onely for this if at all for their outward and appearing conformity to the Law of God they are called Righteous before or in the account of men his conclusion is destroyed by this prop which he brings to sustain it And yet he dares not to say onely for this they are called Righteous before men For he knoweth whole streames of Scriptures would bee brought â—o confute so bold an assertion But he proceedeth B. When this Rule is Gods Law it is either that of Workes or that of Grace In relation to the former there is none righteous no not one c. ut supra This and that which followeth is all sophisticall fallacious and catching First the distinction which he here maketh of the Law of God that it is either the Law of Works or Law of Grace is somewhat a strange phrase to chaste ears that desire to hear Scripture Doctrines delivered in Scripture termes that oppose Grace to the Law and are not wont to call it a Law Secondly it is contrary to Mr. Baxters doctrine and Gospel for howsoever he in words talketh of a two-fold Covenant of Works and of Grace to beguile such as desire to be beguiled yet really hee labours to bring all under a Covenant of Works making mans own righteousnesse the condition of both so altering the name but retaining the nature and power of the first Covenant still as I have before evinced from his disputes and himself will in the following part of his book discover more fully 3. There is an ambiguity in the word Rule he manifesteth not how farre his meaning therein in reference to the Law extendeth whether for a direction onely what is good and what is evill wherewith God will be served and what is it that offendeth him teaching us to perform the one and to shun the other Or whether also for a direction how far in what degrees the good is to be done and the evill shunned that we may bee justified and saved thereby Though we may without much difficulty smell his meaning herein yet because he reserveth it for another place clearly to expresse himselfe we also will reserve it for the same place to make him a full answer 4. He playeth his usuall game of equivocation in telling us that In relation to the former there is none righteous no not one This is not that which is concluded and nothing ought to be in the conclusion which is not also in the premises The conclusion as we have seen is that none is called righteous c. The proof here is that none is righteous These phrases much differ A man may be called righteous in reference to the rule of the Law though he be not absolutely righteous in every particular thereof to Justification and himself acknowledgeth that in many respects the Scripture calleth men righteous in reference to the Law of Works who notwithstanding shall never be justified by the Law of Works as a little before in this Explication we have seen Concerning the Righteousnesse which is by the Law I was blamelesse saith the Apostle Phil. 3. 6. And I have lived in all good Conscience unto this day Act. 23. 1. Lo even while Paul was yet a Saul a hater a persecuter of the Gospel Righteousnesse yet he is termed and called Righteous blamelesly Righteous conscientiously righteous in relation to the Law of Works Or when Judah saith of Tamar She is or Saul of David Thou art more righteous then I and Solomon of Joab Two men more righteous then himself Gen. 38. 26. 1 Sam. 24. 17. 1 Kings 2. 32. Were these here called Righteous in reference to the righteousness of the Gospell and not of the Law Or when the Lord by his Prophet calls them righteous which turned from their righteousnesse and perished in and for their wickednesse Ezek. 3. 20 21. and 18. 20 24 26. and 33. 12 13 18. was it an Evangelical or a legal Righteousnesse that gave them the denomination of Righteous persons When Isaiah calls all his all the peoples Righteousnes menstruous or filthy Raggeâ— and Paul his Righteousnesse Dung Isa 64. 6. Phi. 3. 9. yet both such as gave them the denomination of Righteous men Mr. Baxter himself will not say that these were the righteousness of the New Covenant I could
heap and hoard up Scriptures to the same purpose which call men righteous in reference to the Law of Works But in what respects men are called so in Scripture for an unperfect righteousness is not the thing in question Not that they were justified by it is certain but in whatsoever other respects it destroyeth Mr. Baxters conclusion that men are called Righteous in relation to the Covenant of Grace onely and shews the inconsequence of his Argumentation that because none is perfectly righteous viz. to Justification in relation to the Law of Works Ergo in no other respect is he called Righteous according to the Covenant of Works What he addeth Onely in Christ who hath obeyed and satisfied we are Righteous This we embrace as our Gospel Righteousness and Mr. Baxter alone without company or suffrage of Prophet or Apostle Ancient or Modern Writers affirms to be our legall Righteousness But hitherto we finde it an affirmation without confirmation It follows Bax. But if you consider our actions and persons in relation to the Rule of the New Covenant so all the Regenerate are personally righteous because they all perform the conditions of this Covenant and are properly pronounced Righteous thereby Neither can it be conceived how the works of Beleevers should either please God or be called Righteousness as they relate to that old Rule which doth pronounce them unrighteous hatefull and accursed He proceeds still in his sophistry without any the least particle of Scripture or any thing else save the wind of wit and words to prove what he would have us to beleeve It behoveth him that will fasten and screw into the judgements of men new and strange Doctrines that never sounded before at least in the same phrase of words in their ears to bring irrefragable Arguments to confirm it But such paradoxes and prodigies both of doctrines and words doth Mr. Baxter here hold forth as were never before heard of but in uttering them he is a Barbarian to us and we Barbarians to him in not understanding them yet brings nothing else but his own word to promote them The mysteries of his sophistry are so deep that our woodden wits cannot sink to the bottome to comprehend and understand it First what means he by the Rule of the New Covenant Doth he put the New Covenant here in the Passive or in the Active and Possessive sense i. e. Doth hee meane by the Rule of the New Covenant a rule extrinsecall and without the New Covenant to which the New Covenant must bee conformed that it may bee regular or a rule in the New Covenant and by it made out to us whereunto wee must bee conformed If in this latter sense then whether without or else with reference to some end if to some end whether then to Sanctification or Justification I cannot so much as conjecture that he puts the phrase in the first sense that he tels us here of a Rule to which the New Covenant must be conformed because it is altogether alien from the scope of his dispute and besides how we should be related to a rule with which the New Covenant must suit I cannot see for such a Rule I should conceive to be immanent in God and so hid from us that we cannot perceive how to regulate our selves by it This then he cannot mean 2. Neither doe I conceive that his meaning is that we are to be conformed to the Rule which is contained in and manifested by the New Covenant without respect to any end to which the rule directeth that we ought to be thus and thus qualified and thus to act onely because the Gospel so biddeth without reference to the end of such qualifications and actings For neither is this any thing to the purpose of his dispute Neither in this sense can such qualifications and actings be in any shew of reason called what Mr. Baxter here calleth them Conditions of the New Covenant For they are Conditions if at all Conditions in reference to some ends without which the end cannot be obtained Or what ends doth the New Covenant immediately point at more then either our Justification or Sanctification 3. If he mean the Rule of the New Covenant for Sanctification 1. Then I shall demand of him whether the Law of Works be not the rule of the matter and substance of those qualifications and actions which conduce to Sanctification even under the New Covenant and whether the Rule of the New Covenant or Gospel doe extend any further then to the Modification of those Qualifications and Actions directing to the Mediator from whom to derive those Qualifications and Actions and by and through whom to present our selves and them unto God 2. And then whether in reference to Sanctification men may not be called Righteous as having their righteousness relating to the rule of the Old as well as the New Covenant I cannot be so uncharitable to think that Mr. Baxter having positively affirmed that beleevers are in part under the Curse of the Law will deny them to be also in part under the rule and direction of the Law if he should hee must brand upon himself the due infamy of Antinomianism which he unduly and falsly chargeth upon others 3. And yet this will in no wise advantage his cause For we grant him that in reference to the inherent righteousnes of Sanctification men are called Righteous in the Scriptures by a personal righteousnesse But what is this to that righteousnesse in our selves equally necessary to the righteousnes which is in Christ to Justification which he had in the former Theses asserted and here goes about to prove or illustrate 4. If he mean the rule of the New Covenant to Justification which seems to me unquestionable though hee will not fully express himself then 1. I demand of him how our actions relate to this rule Is it that themselves i. e. our very actions may be justified by it This he condemneth Thess 25 and its Explication Or that they may Justifie us as conditions of our Justification This most probably is his meaning which when he confesseth he confesseth himself worse then Popish for the Papists ascribe Justification not to actions indefinitely but to some good works onely When he speaks more broadly then they let him shew himself without a vizard under the name and notion of a Papist and he will not want answerers or answers But upon this supposition let us see what he inferreth So all the regenerate are personally righteous because they all performe the conditions of this Covenant and are properly pronounced righteous thereby Let us now collect together what in probability is the whole summe of his dispute Leaving what he hath said to deny that men are called Righteous in respect of Justification by the rule of the Law because wee doe not cannot perform the conditions of the Law unto which I have already answered here he endeavours to prove that they are called Righteous onely in reference to
evill is intended to them I shall give these few premunitions First that the question it self proposed by him is meerly captious If Faith be our Righteousness it self how is it said to be imputed to us for Righteousness as if Faith either as an act or duty or habit of Evangelical righteousness were imputed to us for and in stead of the perfect fulfilling of the righteousnes of the Law to Justification This he takes as granted whereas it is one cheif thing in question All the reformed Churches with their Teachers Pastors have unanimously denyed both that faith is our justifying righteousnes and that it is imputed to us for righteousnes otherwise then as it is instrumental to apprehend Christ to be our righteousness or the satisfaction which Christ hath made for us to be imputed to us for and instead of that righteousnes which consisteth in fulfilling the Law 2. As to the plain and positive answer which he makes to the question Though we grant what he saith of our unrighteousness Christs satisfaction and purchase of the prisoners yet in that which hee addeth of the covenant that hee makes with the prisoneâ—s so bought there is nothing but guilful ambiguity viz. that Whosoever will accept and belieâ—e in him who hath thus satisfied it shall be as effectual for their justification as if they had fulfilled the Law of Works themselves To the simple and upright man that is not acquainâ—â—d with Mr. Baxters subtilties this will seem as sound a Doctrine as if an Angel from heaven had delivered it But how wide is his meaning from that which his words seem to import 1 By faith he meanth not what he calls it An accepting of and beleeving in Christ as it is such an accepting and beleeving but as it is a qualification or act Comprehending in it all qualifications and good works besides as afterward he makes his meaning evident 2 When he calls it an accepting of and beleeving in him who hath thus satisfied he means not a beleeving and accepting of him onely under this notion as he hath satisfied that this shall suffice to Justification Nay our accepting him for our law giver and performing of all things that he Commandeth and Consequently all our obedience he will have to bear an equall part to Justification 3 When he saith whosoever thus accepteth and beleeveth doth he mean that this Faâ—th or beleeving is the alone Condition of the full justification of which he speaketh or upon whâ—ch alone Christ Covenanteth to justifie Nay he attributes no less to repentance Charity mercy holines every gift of the Spirit every work of the law to which we are moved by the Spirit and Called by the Gospel about their efficacy to Justification than to Faith it self Why doth he put off the Monkes Câ—wle and put on Pauls Cloke onely to deceive the simple for whom Christ hath dyed 4 When he saith It shall be as effectuall c. putting It next to the word satisfied and next to the Clause Him that hath satisfied there is the same ambiguity and falshood with that which I noted in the second place and whether he meaneth it faith or it satisfaction shall do the work 5 Where he saith It shall be as effectuall to Justification as if they had fulfilled the law of works themselves Here he utterly destroyeth the righteousness and satisfaction of Christ as any way imputed to Justification when elswhere he makes it equally necessary with the righteousness of Faith to Justification And thus he seems to leave the Papists which he would not do for a world I think which hold that we are justified both by Christs righteousness and our own righteousnes also and to joyn onely with the Socinians which hold that we are justified onely by faith imputed to us for righteousnes and not by the righteousness and satisfaction of Christ at all For if this beleeving be by the vertue of Christs Covenant as effectuall to Justification as our fulfilling of the law of works could have been then is there no need of any act or suffering or satisfaction of Christ to be imputed to us For whosoever shall fullfill the law shall have no need of a Mediator to justifie him Therefore neither he that so beleeveth c. But how hard is it for a man that oppugneth truth and propugneth error by meer fallacies against the light of his Conscience to keep himself free from Contradictions here he Contradicts what he had before said of Christ our righteousnes and in the application of the following similitude we shall find him in substance contradicting what he here saith Touching all those things which a little before I have affirmed his meaning to be so and so let none demand how I know what is in another mans heart himself in the following part of this Tractate fully discovers it as we shall finde by reading and examining it Neither will any question it but they that have not read him or in reading have not understood him Thus much to his plain answer before he discends to his similitude which he useth as sugar to lap roll it up in that it may go down pleasantly In this answer we finde nothing but words his own words not the least pittance of Gods word to authorize it he saith all and with the same facility we deny all Proceed we after him now to his similitude 3 As to his similitude first I except that Similitudines or rather Similia illustrant non probant Similitudes are of good use to illustrate and make Cleer to the understanding that which is before proved to be a truth but of no use to prove that which is unproved and the thing still in question That which Mr. Br hath before Concluded in his answer was that Faith is both the righteousnes it self by which we are justified and 2 that it is also imputed to us for and in stead of Justifying righteousnes viz. the very Gospel Righteousnes imputed for and in stead of the legall righteousnes He hath said it without any addittament of Scripture or reason to prove it so that his similitude here is brought to illustrate onely a phantasm of his own brain not any doctrine of Gods word 2 I except against the similitude it self as being in its matter and form altogether incongruous to illustrate the doctrine of justification by Faith which the Gospel holds forth to us because it hath besides other these following incongruities to it 1 Though as in the positive answer before we did so here we grant what he saith of the Tenants forfeiture unablenes to pay expulsion from the inheritance casting into prison his Landlords son paying the debt for him delivering him out of prison putting him into his house again as his Tenant having purchased the house and all to himself provided alway that all this be done by the will of the Father the first Landlord which Mr. Br doth not deny And though we pardon to Mr. Br upon Condition that
is a difference made up of a mans dreaming fancy without any least footing that it hath in or sustentation by the Word of God which utterly shakes off all mans righteousness works and qualifications in either and both senses from having any thing to do in the businesse of justification under the New Covenant as hath been in part already and shall be in its due place if God will more fully demonstrated afterward Nor doth he mean 2 things by Adams power by nature and our power by Grace Nature there and grace here to him are one the same For was not the power which Adam had to stand a power received by Grace what a malignant eye hath he so extremely to envie the raies of Gods Grace when they lustre and by their brightness discover the dimnesse and invalidity of mans nature He will own no longer Peter Lombard himselfe to be the Magister if he affirm as hee doth affirm that the power which Adam had to fulfill the conditions of the Old Covenant was not by grace but by nature or what means he by the grace of Christ now doth he under this word point out any other power than every man hath or may have that is no more Christified or Spirituallized now than Adam was then yea than he was immediately after his fall This book of his in many parcels of it doth not obscurely insinuate thus much of him and if we judge amisse it is his fault in writing so ambiguously and refusing to explain his own meaning that ministreth cause and evidence enough so to judge But as to the thing it selfe here posited by Master Baxter wee utterly deny that God hath ever given or any where promised to give unto the best of men in the state of sinfull infiâ—mity such a measure of Grace as might put him into a possibility by the power which he hath received to performe either a righteousnesse effectual and sufficient to justification or a righteousnesse perfect and Meritorious or a righteousnes which as righteousnes and by a worthinesse in it selfe can give him right and title to the righteousness of Christ to justifie him And these are the things which Mr. Baxter here either with the grace or without and against the grace of God contendeth for but neither hath nor ever will have the grace of God from the Word of God to prove and demonstrate though he bangle and bungle never so much with his loose shifts of Sophistry to give out an appearance to them that are more delighted with appearance then with substance as if he had done it CHAP. XVIII Arg. An examination of Mr. Baxters Doctrine about the nature and use of the Moral Law upon what grounds and in what sense and degrees the righteousnesse thereof is required under the Gospel what relation it hath to the Covenants and each of them His Paradox of sincere not perfect obedience required under the New Covenant and his extravagancies about all the rest of these particulars discovered THe three following Theses viz. the 28 29 and the 30th I purposely pretermit without examination not that there is nothing in them which deserveth exception against it but because whatsoever therein calls for examination by the touchstone of the Word is either not controverted between us and the Papists about the point of Justification or else hath been said and answered before or thirdly will offer it self againe more properly to bee answered in the following part of this Tractate where we shall find Mr. Baxter speaking it out more fully then he hath done here in these Theses and their explications To the 31 Thesis pag. 154. as it is considered in and by it self I have nothing to object but to the Explication thereof pag. 155. deinceps I have somewhat to say yet not altogether by way of exception against it but partly also for the substration of some grounds to answer him in things which in the following part of this Treatise hee hath to deliver accordingly as he layes down here for delivering them His words therefore I first transcribe beginning at pag. 155. B. That the Morall Law is yet in force I will not stand to prove because so many have written of it already See Mr. Anthony Burgesses Lectures But to what ends and in what sense the Gospel continueth that Law and commandeth perfect obedience thereto is a question not very easie 1. Whether Christ did first repeal that Law and then re-establish it to sâ—me other ends So some think 2. Or whether he hath at all made the Morall Law the preceptive part of the New Covenant and so whether the New Covenant doth at all command us perfect obedience or onely sincere 3. Whether the Moral Law be continued onely as the precepts of the Old Covenant and so used by the New Covenant meerly for a directive Rule To the first I answer 1. That it is not repealed at all I have proved already even concerning the Covenant of Workes it self and others enough have proved at large of the Moral Law 2 Yet that Christ useth it for other ends and for the advancement of his Kingdom I grant What is here meant by the Morall Law must bee first understood before there can be any well-grounded consenting or dissenting in judgements about the force in which it yet standeth Both the word Law and the word Moral have their ambiguity and are used in divers senses 1. The word Law is taken sometimes onely for a rule or guide or directive to give us light to discern between truth and falshood good and evill lawfull and unlawfull to which also may be added a power therein to command duty and to prohibit what is contrary to duty Sometimes it is taken in a larger sense also comprehending all these things in it and withall a promise of reward to the performers and commination of penalty to its transgressors Here I conceive Mr. Baxter taketh the word Law in the former sense onely because pag. 156. in answer to the first question he distinguisheth and puts a difference between the Covenant of Works and the Morall Law so plainly as if he did totidem verbis tell us that hee understands by the Morall Law the rule and precepts of Holynesse and Righteousnesse as considered apart from the pactionary Adjunct of life and death going with it 2. The word Morall also hath its divers senses sometimes Divines take it in a larger sense for all whatsoever pertaines to manners and then by the Morall Law they understand all the Commandements or Rules which God giveth for the regulating of our manners in reference to the qualifications of the mind and the outward operations also Whether those Commandements bee either of naturall or of positive right written in mans heart at his creation or had their first posituâ—e in time from the word and lips of God Sometimes in a stricter sense for that which doth eminently above other things concern the life and manners And then by the Moral
Law they understand sometimes the Decalogue or Law of the ten Commandments Sometimes the Law of Nature or naturall Righteousness imprinted in mans heart at his first creation Here taking it for granted that Mr. Baxter meaneth by the Morall Law the doctrine of the Law considered as a rule of Righteousness not as a Covenant of Works If 1. he mean by the Morall Law all Commandements both of naturall and positive right I deny the Morall Law so taken to be in the whole and in every part now in force If 2. he mean by it the Decalogue or Law of the tenne Commandements as it was given upon Mount Sinai in time so himself knoweth it to bee the judgement of many Divines that it bound the Nation of Israel alone was not at all given to the Gentiles doth not at all bind us that are not of the Naâ—ion of Israel otheâ—wise then it clears up to us the Law of Nature written in our hearts which dâ—th bind us or as the duties thereof are required of us in the New Testament by the Lord Christ whom we acknowledge to be our King See Zanchius Tom. 4. lib. 1. cap. 11. Thes 1. Where he fully handles and confirms this assertion adding moreover Sic etiam insignes Theologi omnes sentiunt i. e. All Divines of note aâ—e of this judgement Withall that there are some things contained in some of the ten Commandements not pertaining to the jus naturae save in their genus and that somewhat remote I know Mr. Baxter will not deny and if I thought any else would question it it were easie to be demonstrated But if he mean by the Morall Law the Law of Nature as aforesaid as it is written in the heart yea as it is further illustrated either by the book of the Creatures or by the Decalogue as it is epitomized in Tables of stone and explained and amplified in both Testaments so I grant the Moral Law to be still in force viz. as a directive of Moral obedience still What Mr. Baxter addeth viz. to what ends and in what sense the Gospel continueth that law and commandeth perfect obedience thereto is a question not very easie is to me a strange speech in many respects For 1. I cannot see how the question can be difficult to him that will not Nodum in scirpo quaerere make the plaine wayes of God rugged by filling them up with bryars and thorns To the same most honourable ends and in the same sense is it continued for and in which it was first given I mean to the same ends in general though not in every far remote particular First to make his glory elucent in this Microcosm this choice peece of his Workmanship Man is the glory of God saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 7. How but as he bears the image of God not onely in rule and dominion but also in wisdome holyness and righteousness to manage that authority and rule wherewith the grace of God hath invested him And this glory of God upon man is by so much the more conspicuous by how much the more perfectly he resembles God in wisdom righteousness and holyness Besides it was both given and continued to direct and enable man in some measure to render to God his Pepper-corn as Mr. Baxter terms it in testification of his homage and thankfulnesse both for the favours received and for the favours promised without the guidance of the Morall Law written without us yea within us also we should though our affections were never so sweetly sanctifyed for lack of sound illumination present God with wild grapes in stead of grapes with an abomination instead of due obedience and devotion And are not these ends as requisite in the state of mans Renovation as they were in the state of his innocency Yea further unpossible was it that Christ should not continue the Morall Law no lesse unpossible then it is for God to be unrighteous or not God He came to fulfill all righteousnesse not to destroy any one branch of naturall and essential righteousness The Morall Law is the image of God in which we may read the nature of God The rule and platform is in God himselfe originally this is but an extract from it and abstract of it Christ came to restore it not to quench it to set it up in man to perfection not to deface it by any diminution For so should he have abased the glory of his Father shining in his living image And lastly not to have commanded perfect but a maimed obedience thereto had been against the rule of righteousness which bids us to render to every one his due his whole due To God the things that pertain to God yea the whole that pertains to him All is but a Pepper-corn to a whole kingdome of Grace held and of glory expected from him and should not Christ require the payment of a Pepper-corn whole and entire without diminishing or dividing it But the truth is that the question is difficult to bee answered without crushing Mr. Baxters Gospel Justification by Works not in reference to Christs Gospel Justification by free Grace with it the Commandement of perfect obedience to the Morall Law sweetly cohereth The command of perfect obedience to the Morall Law as a condition of Justification leaves all men hopelesse of Justification sure to condemnation for ever Because none can perform the condition in this life But when we are justified freely by the blood of Christ and then by way of answering the grace of our Justifier with our reall thankfulness we are bidden to render our obedience more and more perfectly not slacking our endeavours untill we come to full perfection Though we attain it not in this present life yet our not attainment doth but encrease our self-abasement and make us feele that Christ is our all and we are nothing but doth in no wise destroy our Justification or lessen the joy of the Holy Ghost and peace of conscience which are bottomed only and wholly upon Christ and not upon our selves at all Now let us see how he will make the question difficult to us as it must be to him First saith he it is a question Whether Christ did first repeale that Law and then re-establish it to other ends So some think A meer windy question of such as delight to play with God in contempt as the Froggs with Jupiters Log. Where are those some thinkers No lesse rationally might they feign that the Lord Jesus pluckt down his Father Josephs house re-edified it to this other end that men might goe in and out no more at the doors but at the windows Mr. Baxter washeth his hands clean from having a finger in this pye Nay saith he I have proved already that it is not repealed at all even concerning the Covenant of Works it self i. e. That Christ is so farre from taking from us the perfect rule of righteousnesse that he however hee be called a Saviour yet hath left all
men without saving any to be damned for their unrighteousness But what he hath proved before I suppose we have disapproved and that sufficiently before Yet saith he that Christ useth it i. e. the Morall Law without the separable adjunct of the Covenant of Works thereunto annexed to other ends I grant He grants that which none demands of him But what title he hath to make such a grant he shews not And I think it will cost him so much labour as will make him sweat under the saddle before he be able to shew to what other substantial and not meerly circumstantiall ends it now serveth besides those to which it served at the first creation thereof in mans innocency at least after his principles that holdeth the workes thereof now under the Gospel to tend to Justification But from this he passeth to a second question which he makes hence to arise B. Quest 2. Or whether he hath at all made the Morall Law to be the preceptive part of the New Covenant and so whether the New Covenant doth at all command us perfect obedience or only sincere To this he answereth B. 1. That the Morall Law as it is the preceptive part of the Covenant of Works is but delivered over into the hands of Christ and so continued in the sense before expressed seemes plain to me 2. That the Morall Law doth therefore so continue to command even beleivers and that the perfect obeying of it is therefore their duty and their not obeying their sinne deserving the death threatened in that Covenant 3. That Jesus Christ hath further mâ—de use of the same moral Law for a direction to his subjects whereby they may know his will That whereas our sincere subjection and obedience to Christ is part of the condition of the New Covenant that we may know what his will is which we must endeavour to obey what rule our actions must be sincerely fitted to guided by he hath therefore left us this moral Law as part of this direction having added a more particular enumeration of some duties in his Gospel That as when the Old Covenant said thou shalt perfectly obey the moral Law did partly tell them wherein they should obey So when the New Covenant saith thou shalt obey sincerely the moral Law doth perfectly tell us wherein or what we must endeavour to doe Before he pretended a purpose to speak of the Moral Law in it selfe and as considered without the Covenants but finding quickly that his Babel will not tower up out of simples he is forced either to let all fall or else himselfe must returne to his compoundings and confoundings again now mixing the moral law with the olde and by and by with the New Covenant as a part sometimes of the one and sometimes of the other as if it were a Noun Adjective which cannot stand by it selfe When contrariwise the moral Law is the rule of righteousnesse complete in it selfe the very image of Gods Nature and Will to which every reasonable creature is bound to conform that it may be like to God himselfe and so illustrate either to other the splendor of Gods glory invisible in himselfe but shining forth in their persons and performances But the Covenants are separable Adjuncts of the moral law when annexed to the moral law being free and voluntary Acts and Statutes of God which hee might pro imperio by the Soveraign authority which hee hath over his creatures either have or not have added to the moral law at his pleasure The Old Covenant making out to men the way of Salvation in strict yet equal and uncorrupt Justice The New Covenant his way of saving sinners and justifying the ungodly by free grace when in justice they were lost and unrecoverable The one of these is by the perfect fulfilling of the moral law the other without reference to the moral law at all freely by the redemption which is by Jesus Christ Here now if both Covenants were silenced and annihilated yet the moral law would abide firm still it would as well without Covenant as by Covenant speak out mans duty and obligation both unjustified and justified in his state either of integrity or infirmity to be wise holy and righteous as God made him and to act perfectly according to the perfect principles of acting first created in him even without life and heaven before him to allure him or death and hell behind him to enforce him And so the moral law is no part of either Covenant essentially that it cannot be separated from it without its nullifying Nay it was in God from all eternity and shall be in him still when all Covenants conditionall shall have their expiration Yet let us follow Master Baxter to see what businesse hee will make in the dark having thus obscured the clear light of this doctrine by his mixtures and confoundings Hee gives many answers to this 2 question 1. That the moral law as it is the preceptive part of the Covenant of workes is but delivered over into the hands of Christ and so continued in the sense before expressed seems plain to me How clear are this mans eyes I can see no plainness in the answer or any part thereof It is all intricate and almost incomprehensible to our dull understanding For 1. I see not how the moral Law is the preceptive part of the Covenant of works It contains in it I confesse the precepts of all good just and holy operations as it is the rule of all these But how it is the preceptive part of the Covenant being a distinct thing from it the Covenant being added to it and not it to the Covenant I see not 2. How it is delivered over into the hands of Christ and in what sense is hard for me to apprehend Is it taken out of God in whom it was originally and essentially so put into Christs hands that it is no more to be found in God or is that unperfect remainder of it which abode still in the Synteresis or minde and conscience of lapsed man taken thence and put into the hands of Christ that it is no more to be found in man but that after Satan had felled down the stemm and branches thereof Christ at last hath forced thence the very root thereof also that there may be no more sprouting even of an unperfect righteousnesse in any man saving by some light and mover from without him Or is it so put into Christs hand to dispose of its being and office that if he say the word that which was shall bee no more natural or moral righteousnesse much lesse the perfect rule thereof or that which was mans duty and his conformity with the nature of God if Christ will shall be so no more All these are such absurdities as cannot possibly drop from Master Baxters learned pen. Or is it delivered into the hands of Christ to bee the dispenser and disposer of it in relation to iâ—s end whether
because the New Covenant threatens no death to such sinnes therefore no need if Christs mediating death here for us For where no death is threatned there is none explicitely due saith he But will he say none is either explicitely or implicitely due Or when Mr. Baxter tels us pag. 15. that in the Old Covenant the promise of life is not expressed but plainly implyed in the threatning of death Will it not follow by the same reasons that when Mr. Baxter in the after part of this his Tractate alleageth such multitudes of Scriptures that promise life to the performance of such and such acts of Gospel righteousnesse that there is implyed the threat of death against the non-performance of the same Or if it should have been printed as it is most probable because he so speaketh elswhere in reference to the covenants that where death is not explicitely threatned there it is not due and Christ hath not suffered it in our behalfe What shall we think then of all the fathers from Adam to Moses where was this death explicitely threatned to any actual sinne untill the Law was given by Moses The Scripture mentions it not and Mr. Baxter hath told us though I doubt somewhat rashly and Magisterially that to Adam himself in his perfection the form of the Covenant was not known as written in his heart but by superadded revelation pag. 14. Yea what shall we say of all the Nations of the world Israel alone excepted that even untill Christ had no revealed Covenant with God much lesse death threatned explicitely by such a Covenant Will Mr. Baxter deny death to have been due to them for their sinnes because not explicitely threatned Doth not the Apostle Rom. 1. 32. alibi affirm the contrary Thus if it were but it is not proved that the New Testament doth not so threaten death 3. When he tels us that Christ is said to have been made under the Law and to have born the curse of the Law and to have freed us from it but no where is this affirmed of him in respect of the Gospel pag. 161. This is an Argument of the same nature with that before from Heb. 9. 15. The Apostle to dash the crest of their self-confidence in seeking to be in part justified as Mr. Baxter also doth by their own personall righteousnesse done in conformity to the Law tels them that even the Israel of God that were priviledged above all other people with a Law of Righteousness were under the curse of the Law and could not be saved but by a Redeemer much less they that had not the help of such a Law It bears the same sense with that of Gal. 2. 15 16. We that are Jews by nature and not sinneâ—s of the Gentiles Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the Faith of Jesus Christ even we have beleeved in Jesus Christ that we may be justified c. What a monstrous delusion were it then for us to teach the sinners of the Gentiles to seek after Justification by their personal righteousness according to the Law And though it be no where totidem verbis said or affirmed of him in respect of the Gospel yet is it said in the words equivalent Heb 9. 15. That he is the Mediator of the New Testament whence Pareus on the place concludeth That if he hath satisfied for the sins against the Old much more for the sinnes against the New Testament seeing he is the Mediator of this not of that And the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne 1 Joh. 1. 7. Ergo from sins also against the Gospel I cannot say from sinns which are onely against the Gospel for there are none such Or if Mr. Baxter will take the words so strictly as hee seems to take them that Christ hath redeemed onely from sins against the Law hee must exclude himself with all the Churches and Saints of the Gentiles that are or have been from the redemption which is by Christ for so then must that passage in Gal. 4. 4 5. be read Christ was made under the Law to redeem them onely that were under the Law i. e. Only the Jews for they onely were under the Law of Moses and of this Law Mr. Baxter must needs confess the Apostle here to speak So that this argument of his if it please not a Jew it will please no body 4. The last Argument which he brings in the same 161 pag. to hit the white and cleave the pin and resolve the question so unanswerably that no tongue which cannot speak may ever more utter or mutter against it is as streight with his purpose as a rams horn with a line 4. But the question is out of doubt saith he because that every man that performeth not the Gospel-conditions doth bear the punishment himself in eternall fire and therefore Christ did not bear it True for Christ did bear the punishment of none of his sins neither of his lying swearing lust murther drunkennesse and other sins against the Law but he shall bear all himself shall we therefore conclude that Christ dyed not to make satisfaction for those sinnes in reference to them that have part in his death This were to pronounce Christ to have satisfied for no sin at all either against Law or Gospel and so no flesh shall be saved but ll suffer in eternal fire 5. What is in this Argument as also in the two next and immediately put before this in the same 161 pag. of his Saint-conditions which he worshipeth as his Mediators to bring him into communion with Christ no less then he doth Christ himself to bring him into communion with God I have partly spoken to before and shall have large and frequent occasions to speak more fully and largely upon other parts of this Tractate of Mr. Baxter here he doth but name conditions in general and what he saith is not worthy of any particular Animadversions in relation to it He confesseth himself pag. 160. To have been long of another judgement in this point while he considered not the tenor of the Covenants distinctly That is as long as he derived his guidance therein from the Scripture it self and from the truly Evangelical and Orthodox Commentators thereon But since hee hath met with Apocryphal Doctors the Jesuits and other nimble braines among the Papists and with Grotius and Vossius and others of that hair which hâ—â—e divided their consciences between the Papists and Socinians little prizing the Word where some quaint wit and invention of man haâ—h not descanted upon it to make it shine in the paint and varnish of humane speculations and art Now having found a Câ—ckows egge in a Finches nest the man is so taken with the pretty conveyance that hee doth as it were nest himselfe by it and accounts all other contemplations base in comparison of this defies Eagles Swans Turtles yea the whole generation of other birds cares not
Treatise what before he did but hint and whisper in a kind of darkenesse now he preacheth on the top of the house proclaiming it as the sole Soul-saving doctrine canonizing as Saints the Papists for the constant holding forth of it and Anathematizing all the Protestants Churches as Apostaticall for departing from it as by examining what followes in this his Tractate will appear For the avoiding of confusion and prevention of a voluminous prolixity into which I see my self already carried by following him Thesis after Thesis being necessitated thereby as he speaks so to examine and answer the same things often in many places I shall endeavour to reduce unto some few heads the sum of what he saith upon this Question examining that which is to the purpose and leaving the rest that is inconsideraable or impertinent to it 1 Then I shall endeavour to draw out from him the state of the Question what he holdeth and how he holds it forth to us 2 I shall examine his Arguments and Reasons by which he endeavoureth to confirme his assertion or assertions 3 I shall also examine what force there is in the Reasons which he bringeth to clear himself and his doctrine from being derogatory to the grace of God and full efficacy of Christs mediation or from all tainture of Popery Socinianism or other heresies Within this Triangle I conceive the whole fabrick of his doctrine of workes to be comprehended and in examining of these fully nothing to be left unexamined that may make for his purpose 1 The state of the Question or his assertions which he maintaineth I shall as neer as may fitly be done transcribe from him in his own words thus 1 The bare act of beleeving is not the only condition of the new Covenant but severall other duties also are part of this condition viz. of Justification For this is his meaning and if he be not so understood he is understood besides his meaning and in what he saith he saith nothing His Tractate contains Aphorisms of Justification only And the conditions of the new Covenant which tend to Illumination Sanctification Glorification c. must not be confounded with those of Justification if it were granted him that the Gospell dispenseth all or any of these upon conditions In this sense therefore he must he will be understood Thes 60. pa. 235. 2 That these duties coordinate with Faith to our Justification as conditions thereof are Repentance praying for pardon forgiving others love hearing the word consideration conviction godly sorrow knowledge of Christ assent to the truth of the Gospell subjection consent acceptance cordiall covenanting self-resigning esteeming and preferring Christ before all loving him above all sincerity perseverance affiance sincere obedience and works of love serious painfull and constant use of Gods ordinances hearing praying meditating in a word all good works i. e. all the works of Righteousnesse holinesse mercy c. which the Law requireth yet with this proviso that all these legall workes must be called not our Legall but our Gospell Righteousnesse Thes 60. p. 235 236. p. 240 241 242. Thes 73 74 p. 289. 290 291 292. 3 That the non-performance of any one of these doth hinder but it is not one or many but a concurrence of all these together in one that sufficeth to condition us unto Justification Thes 61. So that when the promise of life is made in Scripture to our beleeving in Christ or to any other inseparable concomitant of Faith you must understand it Caeteris paribus viz. that your knowledge repentance obedience good workes c. are not an inch behind your faith or in sensu composito that it is a compounded Faith hath all other vertues not only included in it but also actuated and cooperating with it for justification or else you must be shaken off unjustified yea though all the rest be in act and but one out of act Thes 61. and its Explication He saith not this indeed totidem verbis word by word But let him deny the least particle of all this to be his meaning he shall by such a denyall extremely wound if not wholly subvert his cause and yeeld it to us 4 It is not the habit of these vertues as infused from above into us but the act or work of them as set in operation by us that justifieth For so saith he of Faith it self much more implieth it of the other vertues that it is the act of faith alone as it is our act or work that justifyeth aâ—d consequentially that we are justifyed wholly by works viz. as the alone condition or causa sine qua non 5 That some of these justifying vertues or works are antecedaneous to or fore-going preparatives of some integrall parts some proper essentiall formall acts some differentiall and essentiall parts some modifications some in separable products some both parts and necessary consequents and subservient acts some necessary continuing and exercising means and lastly some separable adjuncts of Faith yet tending to the well being thereof and thus having adorned faith like the Cornish Chough with the feathers of all the best birds he sends it to scar aloft with these plumes to heaven for justification which without this borrowed help of it self it was not in a capacity to do pa. 240 241 242. In these particulars I take the whole sum of his doctrine about this Question to be comprehended He addeth indeed some lenitives here and there to mitigate and make tolerable the asperity and harshnesse of these his assertions which we shall examine among the reasons that he brings to manifest his doctrine not to be derogatory from the glory of Gods grace c. as being more proper to that then this place All the forementioned particulars may be summed up in this one That all the acts or works of all morall vertues and of all insuâ—ed Habits if he grant any such are required coordinately with faith to make up the conditio upon which we shall and without which we cannot be justifyed In opposition to this all the Protestant Churches do and still have maintained that Faith alone and the same not as it is in the consideration of a habit or vertue or as an act of ours but by way of a means or instrument as hath been before explained justifyeth without any concurrence of works with it in the act and office of justifying This assertion he endeavours to destroy and establish his own with many Arguments which we shall examine severally either after other CHAP. II. Mr. Baxters preface to his first Argument drawn from Scriptures to prove Justification by works examined and the Scriptures which the Protestant writers bring against it and Mr. Baxter would have stifled in darknesse here brought to light together with the opinion of the most eminent Protestant writers upon this Subject HIS first argument is drawn from Scriptures unto which he thus prefaceth B. 235. I desire no more of those that deny this but that
the shoulders of faith to officiate with it to justification he teacheth us to reject the grace of God and to exact at Gods hands both the righteousnesse of Christ and the end of it our salvation as a debt and due in justice The Apostle puts no medium here either between faith and works or between grace and debt where workes peep up with faith to justifie in any degree faith is destroyed grace rejected works alone stand pleading for justification and salvation at the barre of Gods justice from thence alone God heareth the plea of works in vain is it to plead them at the throne of grace there nothing else but the plea of faith in Christ is heard and excepted ver 4 5. 3 In describing the righteousnesse of justification to be a righteousnesse without works a blessednesse consisting in the covering forgiving and not imputing of sin ver 6 7 8. so that to obtrude works with faith into the office of justifying is to subvert Gods justification and erect our own i. e. our own condemnation 4. Ver. 16. From all his precedent reasoning the Apostle concludeth Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace and left this should be taken for a justification peculiar to Abraham and not common to all beleevers he addeth that the promise might be sure to all the seed c. which is of the faith of Abraham as before he had said that he might be the father of all them that beleeve that righteousnesse might be imputed to them also even to them which walke in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham ver 11 12. And again afterwards ver 23. It was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeve in him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead ver 24. In all which places though faith and beleeving alone are named yet are they named in opposition to and with an exclusion of works as the attentive reader of that chapter will easily perceive Not to fill up the paper with any other series or body of disputation which the Scriptures plentifully afford for the confirmation of our doctrine I shall only annex some scattered testimonies thereof compleatly proving the same The whole stream of the Gospell runs this way We that are Jewes by nature in covenant with God and not sinners of the Gentiles Knowing that a man is not justifyed by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ even we have beleeved in Jesus Christ that we might be justifyed by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law c. Gal. 2. 15 16. By the position of faith works are here deposed By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God Not of works lest any man should boast Ephes 2. 8 9. Not of works but of him that calleth Rom. 9. 11. Not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy Rom. 9. 16. Not by works of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy Tit. 3. 5. This is the work of God that which is in stead of all works and effectual to justification without all works to beleeve in him whom he hath sent Joh. 6. 29. They which are of faith are the children of Abraham and blessed with our father Abraham for as many as are of the works of the Law are cursed Gal. 3. 7 9 10. Beleeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved Act. 16. 31. Not by the Law of works for it is written The just shall live by faith Gal. 3. 11. If by grace then it is no more of works else grace should be no more grace if of works then it is no more grace else should work be no more work Rom. 11. 6. Hence is the opposition which the holy Ghost every where maketh between Gods righteousnesse and our righteousnesse Rom. 10. 3. The righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnesse of works Rom. 9. 30 31 32. Phil. 3. 9 10. and the consenting harmony of Scriptures that so oppose Law and Gospell faith and works Gods grace and mans righteousnesse Moses and Christ the righteousnesse which is by promise and that which consists in doing Gods imputation and our qualifications so that if the one be admitted the other must be excluded from justification Unto which if I should add all of the the rest Testimonies and examples of Scripture together with the Arguments which our Divines bring thence I should to use Mr. Baxters phrase be necessitated to transcribe almost all the Scripture that relateth to the New Covenant The conclusion therefore of our Divines is not only that works have not but also that they connot have any place in or to our Justification because righteousnesse and life are meerly and wholly by promise even by the free and absolute promise made to Abraham which was without all conditions annexed Gal. 3. 8 16 17. 18. therefore without works freely conferred on the children of the promise That they are by inheritance therefore descend freely upon them that are sons by saith Gal. 3. 18. Heb. 9. 15. Rom. 4. 13 114 16. and not attained by works That in respect of the righteousnesse of works Paul knew nothing by himselfe wherein he was not perfectly sincere and sincerely perfect yet deems not himself to be thereby justifyed for the Lord is his judge and justifyer whose justifications are free 1 Cor. 4. 4. That if justification were in any part by works then had man somewhat at least whereof to glory before God but he hath nothing whereof to glory therefore c. Rom. 4. 2. That it is by imputation wholly therefore cannot be from any inherent good in our selves Rom. 4. 3 4. That if flowes wholly from faiths object or correlate not at all from any vertue of faith as a qualification inherent in us much lesse therefore from any other qualification or work of ours whatsoever To which I might add their many other reasons proving that works cannot justifie That it is by promise as I said which is still opposed to works Gal. 3. 17 18 22. even by that promise that was made to Abraham which was free absolute and without all condition of works that Gospel promise In thee all Nations of the earth shall be blessed A promise admitting only them that are of faith to blessednesse but rejecting them that are of works to the curse Gal. 3. 7 8 9 10. Yea by the same absolute and unconditionall promise or covenant oft renewed Jer. 31. 31 -34. 32. 40. That this promise is made Yea and Amen ratifyed and effectuallized in Christ Jesus 2 Cor. 1 20. Not in works no nor in faith as the Papists work or Arminians act and deed or otherwise then as it is as Luther describes it Allegorically Luth. in Gal. Ca. 2. v. 16. the matter whereof Christ is the form
which before they detested as cursed and withall to shew how degenerate these are from our antient worthies who as Champions of Christ have defended this article of justification against the whole rabble of Antichrist I shall declare how little difference they were wont to put beteen merits and conditions that though they held somewhat to differ in the sound yet held them to be one in substance and still concluded against the Papists that there is no place for works in the office of justification either as merits or conditions thereof but that when the Scripture saith we are justifyed without works all works both of Law and Gospell are excluded from being any way subservient to justification either to the beginning or finishing thereof either as meriting it or conditioning us for it I shall mention only some few lest I should seem to attribute much to the authority of men yet so that these few speak out the mind and deliver the common judgement of all the rest First I shall produce that famous Martyrologist Mr. Fox what he speaketh to this purpose in that book of his De Christo gratis justificante Having alleaged that testimony of the Apostle Rom. 4. 16. It is of faith that it might be of grace to the end that the promise might be sure c. he addeth Atqui quonam modo firma nisi sit gratuita Fox de Christo gratis Justif p. 127. aut quo modo gratuita si quoquam modo ex operibus i. e. But how is the promise sure except it be free or in what manner or respect free if in any manner or respect it be of works Thus he excludeth works in all respects either of causality or conditionality from justification Again Duo sunt promissionum genera plurimum inter Idem ibid. p. 221. se diversa alterum ad legem spectans certis adnexum conditionibus alterum Evangelii proprium sine omni legis conditione gratuitum i. e. There are two kinds of promises made in Scripture much differing either from other the one legall tyed to certain conditions the other Evangelicall or proper to the Gospell free and without all conditions of the Law not tyed to any conditions as the legall promises are Unto him I annex Dr. Fulk in that Sermon of his which Mr. Fox translated out of English into Latine and annexed to the end of that Tractate of his own before-mentioned Isaac not Ismael saith he had the inheritance Quia nimirum unica ad hanc Dr. Fulkii concio p. 13. haereditatem perveniendi via patet per solam promissionem solam misericordiam solam fidem Ismael vero juxta carnem natus est Isaac per promissionem Haereditas autem sola nititur promissione promissio vero nulla meritorum pactione sed sola Dei misericordia perficitur i. e. Because there is opened one only way to the inheritance viz. by promise alone mercy alone faith alone But Ismael was born after the flesh Isaac by promise But the inheritance is grounded upon promise only and the promise is accomplished without any paction or condition of works by the sole mercy of God And a little after Certissimos se haeredes sciant ii qui ad Isaaci exemplum ita se comparant Id. ibid. p. 19. ut nullo alio ad eam titulo adnitantur nisi sola Dei promissione quique non nisi gratia solum ad eam adspirant qui denique fide eam sola amplectuntur non meritis non operum studiis viam ad eam affectant i. e. Let them know themselves to be most certain heirs who after the pattern of Isaac do bend to it upon no other title but the alone promise of God and who aspire to it by grace alone and lastly who embrace it by faith onely and affect not the way to it by merits or any endevours of their own works And anon after Quemadmodum legale justitiae foedus Id. ibid. p. 22. exquisitam omnibus modis innocentiam ita flagitat ut nullam veniae spem largiatur delinquenti ita Evangelica altera illa icta nobiscum pactio misericordiae justitiam nobis gratuitam exhibet nullamque exigit operum adjunctam conditionem i. e. Even as the legall covenant of justice so requires of us an innocency in all respects exquisite that it gives no hope of pardon to the offender So that other Gospell Covenant of mercy made with us holds forth to us a free righteousnesse and requires no additory condition of works And in the next page he affirmes the promise or covenant of the Gospell to be gratuitam omnibus nullisque impeditam Id. p. 23. conditionibus free to all men or from all and intangled with no conditions In the third place I annex Mr. Calvin that great light shining from the hand of Christ upon all the reformed Churches Inde justificare dicitur fides saith he quod oblatam in Evangelio justitiam recipit amplectitur Quod autem per Evangelium dicitur offerri eo excluditur omnis operum consideratio i. e. Faith is hence said to justifie because it receiveth and embraceth the righteousnesse offered in the Gospell But in that it is said to be offered in the Gospell hereby all consideration of works is excluded and so works in all considerations either of causality or conditionality totally rejected And having proved this from the difference which the Apostle putteth between the Law and the Gospell Rom. 10. 3 deinceps he addeth Videsne ut legis Evangelii discrimen hoc faciat Calv. Just lib. 3. cap. 11. §. 17. quod illa operibus justitiam tribuat hoc citra operum subsidium gratuitam largiatur i. e. Ye see what difference he maketh between the Law and the Gospell that the Law attributeth righteousnesse to works the Gospell gives it free without the assistance of works An excellent place saith he and that which will extricate us from many difficulties if we understand cam quae datur nobis per Evangelium justitiam legis conditionibus solutam esse i. e. that the righteousnesse which is given us by the Gospell is cleared from the conditions of the Law And then speaking of the opposition that the Apostle maketh between the Law and the Promise Gal. 3. 18. It cannot be denyed saith he that the Law hath also its Promises and therefore there must be something in the Promises of the Gospell distinct from those of the Law else could there be no such opposition and concludes that the difference is this that the Gospell promises are free ac sola Dei misericordia suffultae quum legis promissiones ab operum conditione pendeant i. e. and leaning upon the sole mercy of God when the promises of the Law depend upon the condition of works Likewise in the next Section from that of Gal. 3. 2. Hab. 2. 4. we are not justifyed by the Law because the just shall live by faith he addeth that this argument cannot stand
unlesse it be consented unto in calculum fidei non venire opera sed prorsus Idem ibid. §. 18. separanda esse i. e. that works have nothing to do in the borders of faith to justifie but must be wholly separated from it and proceeds that the Law and faith are here opposed Therefore because works are required to the righteousnesse of the one ergo sequitur ad hujus justitiam non requiri it follows therefore that they are not required to the righteousnesse of the other and further in the same place Herein the Gospell differs from the Law quod operibus non alligat justitiam sed in sola dei misericordia collocat that it binds not righteousnesse to works but placeth it in the sole mercy of God And Fides sine operum adminiculo c. Faith without any proppage of works resteth wholly upon mercy And that wherewith he concludes this Section That the righteousnesse by which we are justifyed is not ushered into our possession by works nec operando nos eam consequi sed vacuos accedere ut eam recipiamus i. e. not that we attain it by working but come with our hands empty of all works to be filled with it With those agreeth Ph. Melanchthon Evangelium offert remissionem per imputationem justitiae vitam aeternam sine conditione legis aut operum nostrorum i. e. the Gospell offers remission by the imputation of righteousnesse and eternall life without condition of the Law or our works Again Vulgo imaginantur homines Evangelium esse promissionem conditionalem at ab hac imaginatione abducendi sunt i. e. Men must be drawn off from that vulgar imagination that the Gospell is a conditionall promise And upon Rom. 4. Credens est salvus sola fide sine operibus Neque nostra obedientia aut causa est aut conditio propter quam accepti sumus coram Deo i. e. He that beleeveth is saved by faith only without works Neither is our obedience either a cause or a condition for which we are accepted before God So Zanchius in Hos 2. 21. Notandum est hanc esse simplicem Evangelicam sine omni conditione promissionem Hic nihil exigit Deus sed simpliciter promittit quod velit ipse c. This is a simple and Evangelicall promise which is without all condition where God requireth nothing but simply promiseth what he pleaseth As for Luther it is superfluous to cite him being every where so full both in the positing and confirming of this doctrine let but his Sermon upon Tit. 3. 5. be read he shall be there found calling it devillish doctrine and the teachers thereof Hypocrites who teach salvation to be far off and not already attained and to be sought for by works concluding Quicunque salutem non ex mera gratia per fidem ante omnia opera c. whosoever receives not salvation out of meer grace by faith before all works he shall never be saved I had a purpose to have annexed the Testimonies of some more of the Chieftains against Antichrist but there is no need Mr. Baxter for his part is not a Zizca warreth not by other mens eyes seeth and knoweth against whom he levelleth is not ignorant that all especially the more antient and unsophisticated worthies of all the Churches speak the same things and in the same tone with these against the Papists Neither was it my purpose to deal at all in this passage with Mr. Baxter but to shew the vanity of some Pharisaicall Cabalisticall Sophisticall but little Scripturall and Theologicall Rabbies who with Anti-evangelicall spirits partly to set up again a Babell or Babylon of works as a mount against Antinomianism as they term the liberty and purity of the Gospell and partly in a prostrate devotion wherewith they sacrifice to every Barbarism and Aphorism of exotick arts to which they must submit though it be to the denying of the whole word of God for fear they should not be reckoned Scholars are ready to gallop after Mr. Baxters Sophisticall Lectures into the very Lateran of Rome not knowing whence they run nor whither whose company they leave and whose they follow such levity and giddinesse hath taken their head-pieces that as having gotten a professed Protestant Divine to lead them into the worst sink of Popery they run with head and shoulders thronging who shall be foremost so no doubt if under the profession or misprision of a Jesuite Paul himself should descend to preach again and maintain the Doctrine of the Gospell in all its verity power and purity and not in a dialecticall phrase they would throw it back in his face as Jesuiticall and devillish For without such lightnesse and emptinesse it were impossible for them to be so suddenly and easily whirled into an applause of an assertion so grosly and palpably Popish and Damning by a peevish veneration of the learning and holinesse of the Penman thereof As if among the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees and Popish Monkes and Jesuits there were not to be found in depth of Learning and strictnesse of Legall righteousnesse many to whom this man may possibly serve and but serve as a shaddow But it sufficeth here to have manifested that the Doctrine of Mr. Baxter is totally the same in this particular with the doctrine of the Jesuits Or if in any respect we shall find it in what remains to be examined not wholly the same I doubt not but in every such difference which we shall meet with to demonstrate that it is far worse then theirs Or if it be not so let him produce any one knowing man within any of the Protestant Churches except he will make the Concision of Socinians and Arminians the true Protestants that hath ever taught or held this doctrine CHAP. III. The first Argument for Justification by Works drawn from Scriptures examined The Scriptures cited prepared to Mr. Baxters hand by the Papists and the Protestants answer to all the Arguments drawn from those Scriptures by the Papists by him concealed and the abhorrency of those Scriptures from the conclusion which they are brought to prove demonstrated HAving in part supplyed what Mr. Baxter would have buryed here in silence some of the Scriptures and Arguments from Scriptures which are brought by the Protestants to remove works from having concurrence with faith in the businesse of justifying let us now examine the Scriptures which he quoteth to prove their cooperation with faith to justifie Here as I said we meet not with words but figures partly therefore because he maintains the same assertion with the Papists partly because the Scriptures which he quoteth are all such as the Papists have urged before him against us so that he hath taken them up at the second hand as they were collected to his hand by the Fryers and Jesuits himself not expressing how he would argue from those Scriptures I conceive it is his desire that we should understand he means so to argue
altering his judgment is because that opinion would not subserve to his justification by works which he hath so pertinaciously determined to set up that whatsoever of sacred or humane Authority he meets with opposit to it he shoulders it out of the way and whatsoever occurres out of any sink and puddle making for it he takes up as a treasure But the Meritoriousnesse of Christs Legislative and Kingly office to satisfie for our sins being laid as a groundwork he thought it seems would tend much to the exalting of the works done by the Commandement of King Jesus to justification therefore he took it up from Grotius and made use of it as a paved way to Justification by works which here almost from the same grounds he urgeth And so we see that from the very beginning to the end of this Tractate all that he hath conspireth and aspireth to this end justification by works and to elude all that the Gospell hath against it But let us come to examine his Assumption to this Argument and what he brings for it B. Thes 66. Christ is not in any one part or work of his office alone the object of justifying faith as such but Christ in his entire office considered is this object viz. as he is Redeemer Lord and Saviour In a good sense we might grant him both all this and all the substance of all the Arguments which he brings to prove it For none of the Protestant Churches have denyed but maintain 1 That all the offices of Christ are needfull and cooperating to and in the worke of Mediatourship that Christ not only as our high Priest but also as our King and Prophet made satisfaction for us and makes his satisfaction effectuall to us 2 That the object of justifying faith is Christ in all his offices King Priest and Prophet 3. That these offices of Christ are not to be severed by us because counited and coworking in him He layes not down nor puts from him any one of his offices when he either justifyeth sanctifieth or illuminateth c. but doth all and every of them as Lord Saviour and Teacher Yet when all this is granted to him his cause is never the stronger nor ours at all the weaker Nay he declares himself guilty of the fault wherewith he chargeth the innocent viz. of separating Christs offices holding him forth to us as redeeming us only as our high Priest governing and giving Lawes to his Church only by his Kingly office enlightening us in the truth only as our Prophet when contrariwise we teach that Jesus Christ i. e. the Anointed of God in all his offices and anointings is made unto us of God wisdome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption not wisdome in one only of his offices righteousnesse in another c. but all in all as the Scripture witnesseth 1 Cor. 1. 30. Neverthelesse we deny not but some acts and benefits of Christ are to be attributed more properly and peculiarly to one then another office of Christ yet so that the cooperation of the other offices therein is nor wholly to be denyed But this we deny that there is any other fountain opened for the washing away of our sins but the bloud of Christ only or any other satisfaction made to the justice of God but by the sacrifice of Christ alone yet so as this bloud and sacrifice as they are primarily our high Priests so are they our Kings and Prophets also howbeit the bloud and sacrifice of one Christ alone And herein we follow the Scriptures leading threed which affirm not only the Priest to have dyed for us but our Prophet or Shepheard also I am the good Shepheard and give and lay down my life for the sheep Joh. 10 11 15. He came not to be ministred unto but to minister and to give his life a ransome for many Mat. 20. 28. viz. to seal the doctrine with his bloud which he had taught with his lips and to make the way through the veil of his flesh thorough his bloud which he had taught to be the only way into the Holiest to the Father And as the Shepheard so the Lord and King also It was the LORD that was betrayeâ— 1 Cor. 11. 23. crucifyed 1 Cor. 2. 8 killed Act. 3. 15. and raisâ—â— again 1 Cor. 6. 14. Even the Lord of glory and Prince of life Therâ—fore it is that the holy Ghost cals it the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 2â— The Lords body and the Lords bloud 1 Cor. 11. 27 29. And needfull was it that Christ as Lord and King with all his power should thus grapple with sin death and hell on our behalfe how else should he have vanquished them and having spoyled these Principalities and powers made a shew of them openly and triumphed over them Col. 2. 15. And without this victory his death had been to us vain our enemies had remained unconquered and our selves unransomed The strong man had not been driven out by a stronger then he Luk. 11. 21 22. Thus we neither divide nor separate the offices of Christ one from another but conjoyn them all in the death and passion of Christ by which alone we beleeve and teach that the Lord Priest and Prophet Christ Jesus hath made satisfaction for our sins But we utterly deny that which Mr. Baxter drives at that Christ as our Lord that is as a Lawgiver and to speak in Mr. Baxters words Thes 31. as he doth establish the morall Law commanding perfect obedience and forbidding every sin as exactly as under the Covenant of works is the object of justifying faith as justifying This was that great and principall article which Luther with so much vehemency defended against the Papists viz. that Christ is Luth. in Gal. Cap. 2. 20 alibi no Moses no Exactor no giver of Lawes in reference to justification but a giver of grace a Saviour c. pronouncing it an accursed â—and hellish doctrine which the Papists taught that he justifyeth as a Law-giver that they which so paint him out make him not a Christ but a Fiend or Devill The state of the question then is betwixt him and us not whether Christ as Lord as well as Saviour but whether by the sacrifice of himself for us or else by giving Laws and Commanding all duties of obedience to us also be the object of justifying faith as justifying i. e. whether our faith by obeying Christ in the works of righteousnesse as well as by cleaving to Christ crucifyed do justifie We maintain that the death of Christ or Christ dying for us is alone offered to our faith for justification he contrariwise that Christ as commanding the duties of obedience is the object of faith as justifying Our Assertion that Christ suffering for us is the alone object of justifying faith as such may be confirmed by many Arguments One Argument may be drawn from the offerings and sacrifices of the old Testament and the sacraments both of the old and new Testament
be brought to leave the way that nature hath taught to find and enter into this way which the Father revealeth What then say yee is the broad way and wide gate by which men seek to enter into life I answer M. Brs. way the way of our own righteousness and strict carriage It is broad and wide because all learn it from nature corrupted which telâ—s us it was the way if we had kept it but cannot tell us that it is now blocked up to sinners so that many so many as seek for life by their own righteousness and works doe by this supposed way of life passe to destruction Not but that the way of vice is a broad way also buâ— our Saviouâ— speaks not heer of it but of the broad way by which men seek life but find destruction To this effect is that of our Saviour â—he Publicans and harlots enter into the kingdome of heaven before the strict living Pharisees Ma 21. 31 By what way did these vitious livers enter but by Christ into the Kingdom else if strictness of life had been the way to it the Pharisees had entred before them This is the interpretation of this Gospel text after the tenour of the Gospel and so Mr. Br. suo se jugulavit gladio hath brought a sword to cut the throat of his own cause B. Ma. 7. 21. Not every one that faith Lord Lord shall enter c. but he that doth the will of my Father c. This is the will and work of the Fathers willing and commanding as to life that we beleeve on him whâ—m he hath sent Jo. 6. 29. B. Ma 7. 22. 23. Many shall say in that day Lord we have prophesiâ—d c. to whom it shall be answered I know you not depart from me ye workers of iniquities Hypocrites that come with their mouths full of Works and merits to plead for Heaven shall all be shaken off and the ground of their exclusion is this I know you not ye were not built upon mee had no union with mee no setled dwelling and recumbency upon me therfore he shakes off both them and their works as workers and works of iniquity B. Ro. 8. 4. That the righteousnes of the Law might bee fulfilled in us which walk not after the flesh but after the spirit The righteousness of the Law is perfect And they walk not after the flesh but after the spirit which as the same Apostle saith worship God in the spirit and rejoice in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh i. e. as in the following verses he expoundeth in legall priviledges or works of their own Righteousnes Phi. 3. 3. In these the righteousnes of the Law is fulfilled They have a perfect righteousnes even Christ made Righteousnes to them which the Law weak through the flesh could not produce in them B. Ro. 8. 13. If yee live after the flesh yee shall die but if yee through the spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body yee shall live Who they are chiefly that in reference to life and death doe live after the flesh and after the spirit the same Apostle teacheth not only in the forequoted Text Phi. 3. 3. but also Gal. 3 3. Are yee so foolish having begun in the spirit are ye now made perfect by the flesh In which words I challenge Mr. Baxter yea the whole pâ—ck of Jesuits if they dare to deny that by beginning in the spirit the Apostle means their trusting wholly on Christ for justification and salvation and by being made perfect by the flesh their seeking to perfect it by works viz Circumcision and with it the morall duties which the Law commandeth If in this place â—e will take the flesh and spirit in a larger sense yet compare we this 13 with the 1. vers of the Chapter and it will appear heer is nothing for his turn Ver. 1. he saith There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus But who are they Such as walk not after the flesh but after the spirit Let now Mr. Baxter put what sense he will upon flesh and spirit in the 13. verse it must bear the same sense as in the 1. verse And then if any demand why they that live after the flesh must die the answer is in readiness Because they are not in Christ Iesus or why they that mortifie c by the spirit shall live Every one can answer because they are in Christ Iesus So that in these there is no condemnation to the other nothing but condemnation Because he that hath the son hath life he that hath not the son hath not life 1 Jo. 5. 2. Heer according to promise I annex what I left unanswered cap. 16. of the third bunch of Scriptures quoted by Mr. Baxter p 236. referring them to this place to be examined as speaking more soundingly to glorification than to iustification by works I shall begin as I there left at B. pa. 236. lin 21. Mat. 10. 37. Hee that loveth Father or Mother more then me is unworthy of mee so of Sonne or Daughter When he meaneth the same with Bellarmine as he hath enough manifested under his 26. Thesis let him speak out the same with Bellarmine viz. That none shall receive salvation by Christ but those that by works merit it and make themselves worthy of it Let him so express himselfe and hee shall not want an expresse answer At present while he will lurk in the dark we will leave him in the dark B. Lu. 13. 24. hath been before examined Phi. 2. 12. Work out your salvation with fear and trembling Whether we look to that which precedes or that which followeth this Text we shall find its testimony to be to Mr. Baxters cause what a Colledge Brush alias called a hatchet to a Freshmans Gown cutting it in peeces because it will not be cleansed If to that which goeth before we are bidden v. 5-11 to follow the example of Christ as far as he was in a capacity to give him selfe a patterne to us in this kind in selfe deniall who being in the form of God and equall with God took to himselfe the forme of a servant made himselfe of no reputation abased himselfe to the death to the Cross to the Curs and so became exalted on high above all names c. So must wee deny and abase our selves in our relation as Christ did himselfe in his lay all the false glitter and glory of our works and righteousness in the dust as he did his true glory watching with a holy feare and trembling over our backsliding heart that is apt assoon as any shew of righteousness and goodness appears in our selves and works to depart from Christ and to rest in it as our sanctuary in this case is it that the Apostle requires this continuall working and heaving out selfe from our selves that Christ may be our All. And that with much fear and trembling watchfulness over our deceitfull hearts that are
life and salvation not to the end that we may be justified by them but in thankfullnesse for our justification by Christ without workes to bee an Antinomian and damning doctrine if reduced to practice he pâ—rremptorily pronounceth not onely all Protestant Churches and saints but also Paul himselfe an Antinomian and damned For 1. that Paul and all the Apostles of Christ doe teach and urge upon all the Saints of Christ all diligence in good workes and duties and fruitfulnesse in obedience in thankfulnesse for their Iustification Mr. Baxter will not cannot deny for if he should he cannot be ignorant that he shall be forthwith overwhelmed with testimonies of Scriptures against him that himself must acknowledge unwrested Yea he must quench not only the light of the Gospell but also of reason and nature it selfe which possibly are more authentique with him than Gospell to deny that we are to be really as well as verbally thankfull to God for his least much more for his greatest benefits such as are our Iustification and salvation But that the Apostle also teacheth that we are not to performe good works and duties that we may be justified and saved by them is evident To him that worketh saith he i. e. seeketh it by works the reward is reckoned not of grace but of debt shall be conferred on him if due in strict Iustice he must expect nothing from grace But to him that worketh not seeks not the attainment therof by works his Faith is imputed to him for righteousnesse Ro. 4. 4. 5. to which he addeth the testimony of David pronouncing the man blessed to whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes ver 6 7 8 By Grace are ye saved through Faith not of workes least any man should boast Eph. 2. 8 9. we knowing that a man is justified by the workes of the Law have beleeved in Christ Iesus that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ for by the works of the Law none can be justified Gal. 3 16. Not by workes of righteousnesse which we have done but of his mercy he hath saved us Tit. 3. 5. That no man is justified by the Law it is evident for the just shall live by Faith The strength of the reasoning is in the opposition of the Righteousnesse by which the Gospell to that by which the Law justifieth By Faith therefore not by our sinceerest and exactest study of the righteousnesse which the Law prescribeth Gal. 2. 11. with many other testimonies before frequently alledged Lo heere the Apostle teaching the same doctrine which Mr. Baxter damneth a working not for Iustficacation by his workes but from justification and in thankfulnesse for it Yea hee reduceth it to practise also Wee knowing that there is no iustification by workes have beleeved in Christ Jesus that we may be justified Gal. 2. 16. I count all things doung that I may winn Christ and bee found in him not having my owne Righteousnesse which is of the Law but that which is through Phil. 3. 8 9 the Faith of Christ the Righteousnesse of God by Faith Behold wee heere in these Scriptures the Apostle teaching and reducing to practise every particle of the doctrine which Mr. Baxter heere dâ—mneth What followeth According to Mr. Baxter Paul is an Antinomian and damned Let me also be so damned with Paul the Antinomian rather then justified in the way of Mr. Baxters justification Mr. Baxter cannot evade here by any sophisticall interpretation of Pauls sense and meaning in these scriptures For they which have delivered this doctrine of Paul in Pauls words or in words equivalent professe themselves to hold it also in Pauls sence and meaning So that Mr. Baxter in interpreting Pauls interprets their meaning also so that it is evident that his wrath here is against the very doctrine of Paul though his pretence bee to blow up them onely which speake after him But Mr. Baxter hath a greater authority than Paul can boast of for himselfe to pronounce them all Antinomians and damned with Paul that followe Pauls doctrine viz. the determination of the Holy councell of Trent which hath thus concluded Si quis dixerit c. If any shall say that a man is justified by Faith alone without workes let him be accursed Who dares now to equillize Pauls Tent to the Popes Throne and so many Cardinals and Bishops palaces As to the matter it selfe it is all sophisticall and fallatious that Mr. Baxter here delivereth Let him bring that Antinomian to light that hath ever taught that we must not labour and strive for justification and salvation against whom his Argument may holde good that he must needs bee damned because he that seeketh not and striveth not to enter shall never enter Some indeede by expressing themselves too briefly have given occasion to Mr. Baxter and such as he is to catch a phrase or sentence from them that may smel of some absurdity as considered in it selfe and by its selfe such as is that which he heer mentioneth we must work from life and not for life But if the scope of the Authors in such phrases be gathered from that which went before and that which followeth it will appear clearly they meant we are not to work and perform duties to this end that wee may bee justified and saved by such works as works and duties but to perform them in love and thankfulness to him that justifieth us freely of meer grace without works through the Redemption which is by Christ Jesus And this is the Question betweene Mr. Baxter and the Papists on the one part and the Antinomians i e. the Protestants on the other part whether wee must perform good works and duties to bee justified and saved by them and for them so performed yea by them or for them as they are our inherent righteousness our perfect possible and meritorious Righteousness All which he affirms and the Protestants with one consenting voice deny as hath been before and may after before we part from Mr. Br. be more fully manifested What he concludes with as a notable absurdity and inconvenience that will befall his doctrine of works if we will not say what he sayth viz. If good works bee no part of the Condition of our full justification and salvation who will use them to that end For how it can procure justification as a means and not be the condition therof I cannot conceive Besides his fallacy before noted in arguing from justification and salvation simply and indefinitely taken to a full justification and salvation of his own devising and so controvertibly again from this latter to that former it concerns him to look to the inconvenience and danger which useth and practiseth not to us which use not good works to that end And now is his time to consider that his full justification when hee thinks to possesse it do not evaporate into no justification no salvation Now to make way for the examination of what hee hath more largely to
live the other sayth Live and doe this the one sayth Doe this for life the other sayth Doe this from life But I have provedfully that the Gospel saith also Doe this for life 1. Now hee manifesteth wherin the haynousnes of the doctrine of this Book and the intolerable damnable wickedness of the Author consisteth viz. in his blindness that hee did not foresee what Antichristian doctrine Mr. Baxter would afterward divulge to the world and say hee had fully proved it but for lacke of this foreknowledge doth heer deliver the contrary truth of Christ prepossessing the minds of men therewith against Mr. Baxters future impostures But 2. Let him not say he hath fully proved but let him fully prove that doing and works as the Scriptures doe oppose the same to faith and receiving of Christ in which sense this Author speaketh are injoyned by the Gospel to justification of life or the life of justification and then let him expect that his Gospel shall stand and the Gospel of Christ lie prostrate at his feet 3. Because Mr. Baxter will never bee able to prove this the true Disciples of Christ will still hold this as one principle difference between the two Covenants that the one requires us to seeke life after the tenour of Justice the other after the tenour of Grace The one bids us to seeke it by Works the other by Fayth The one presupposeth the originall righteousness given us in Adam bidding us by it to follow after happiness the other offereth Christ unto us as the fountain of life both of Justification and Sanctification calling upon us to receive or beleeve in him for both that both may be ours when Christ is ours He is our life and when Christ our life not works our life shall appear we also shall appear with him in glory This is all that this Author meaneth in this passage as himselfe makes evident If in this he be an Hereticke let mee live and die with him in his Heresie To prevent mistake I meane heere the Covenant of works in Mr. Baxters sense throughout this his Treatise viz. the first Covenant made with Adam B. So in his second part page 190. his great note to know the voyce of the Law by is this That when in Scripture there is any Morall worke commanded to bee done eyther for the eschewing of punishment or upon promise of any reward temporall or eternall or else when any promise is made with the condition of any worke to bee done which is commanded in the Law there is to bee understood the voyce of the Law A notorious and dangerous mistake which would make almost all the New Testament and the very Sermons of Christ himselfe to bee nothing but the Law of works I have fully proved before that Morall duties as part of our sincere obedience to Christ are part of the condition of our salvation and for it to be performed And even Faith is a Morall duty It is pity that any Christian should no better know the Law from the Gospel especially one that pretendeth to discover it to others About the matter heer delivered by this Author enough hath been spoken before in examining what Mr. Baxter hath sayd in many parts of his Aphorisms contrary to it Touching the proofe of the contrary Assertion Mr. Baxter hath sayd no more than nor so much as Bellarmine had sayd before him and left prepared to his hand Hee should therefore more properly have sayd Not I but Bellarmine hath fully proved and therefore fully because Mr. Baxter so affirmeth As to the Assertor of it why doth hee pitch upon this Author alone when Calvin Fulk Mr. Fox as I have before Chap. 15. alleadged and quoted them Dr. Amesius Medul Theol. lib. 1. cap. 22. Se. 19. In a word all Protestant Divines from Luther till this present time have in substance and most of them that have occasion to pitch upon the same Subject have even totidem verbis delivered the same doctrine as to mercenary or rewards of debt having learned the same from the Apostle why doth he single out this one as a singular man Let him with Bellarmine Stapleton Maldonat and the rest of that hair roar out against all the Reformed Churches A notorious and dangerous mistake c. A herd of Hereticks and ignorant Animalls It is pity that any Christian should no better know the Law from the Gospel especially such as pretend to discover it to others As to his Morall duties and even Faith as a Morall duty to bee performed for salvation hee speaks like such morall men as nature now blinded and corrupted formeth whose principle it is Naturam ut optimam ducem sequi to follow Nature and naturall instinct or Reason as their best guide knowing not spirituall things because the Naturall man cannot receive them If he savoured so much the Gospel as Philosophy why doth not the phrase which Christ his Apostles use of the spirit and spirituall things so much delight him as that of the Philosophers Morall and Moralities As much was Christs offering himselfe a sacrifice and giving satisfaction to the Justice of God a Morall duty and so not meritoricus for us because due to God from him by the Law for himselfe as Faith in Christ and other purely Gospel duties subservient unto Faith For both these duties on Christs and on our part are comprehended under this one generall of the Law of nature Whatsoever I shall command thee thou shalt doe I shall leave the justification and salvation by Morall Faith and Morall duties to Mr. Baxter and with the Apostle through the Spirit wait for the hope of Righteousnesse by Faith Gal. 5. 5 B. So in the next page 191. he intelerably abuseth the Sripture in affirming that of 2. Thes 2. 12. to be the voice of the Law and so making Paul a Legall preacher Is then every teacher after Mr. Baxters Canon which declares what the voice force curse and condemnation of the Law is a Legall and Anti-Evangelicall preacher So he affirmes Paull to bee if he speake out what the curse and condemnation of the Law is Then not onely Paul but Christ also and all his Apostles are Legall not Gospel preachers For he will not deny them to have so made out the Law in its force c. Or when the Apostle in that quoted Stripture speakes of their Damnation which would not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousnesse doth he not leave them under the damnation of the Law for not embracing the Gospell doth not the Law hereby take occasion to damne them the more deeply for neglecting and rejecting the truth The proper office of the Gospell is not to condemn but to save Onely when its salvation is contemned it yeelds backe the contemners under the greater guilt to the Law to power out on them the larger if not largest measure of its curse and wrath Do not thinke saith our Saviour to the Iewes that rejected his Gospell
dead from further labouring and moving to this end For what righteousness what works can bee sufficient to such an atchievement So obedience to the Faith is nipt in the very budde where there is a sense and conviction of a mans naughtiness and nothingness 3. By taking off the spirits of a Christians love joy and alacrity in beleeving and serving when a humble and selfe-denying soul is once choaked with Mr. Baxters Doctrine that all the benefit which he hath or can have by Christ is to be only a probationer for justification and life even to his dying day that till then hee is but conditionally pardoned and conditionally adopted that Gods love to him may be anon turned into hatred his sinnes againe imputed and himselfe hurried into hell That his safety still depends upon his own works righteousnes no peny no Pater noster that the grace of God is let to farme for fine and rent no one promise of the word in all this his Booke being alledged by Mr. Baxter which I can remember of any support which the beleever shall receive from God in the state of Grace but all Selfe doe and selfe have This Doctrine eyther benummeth and freezeth up all a poore Christians love and delight in serving God emasculating his spirits to obedience or reduceth him under a yoke of bondage making him to worke possibly but in feare not of love as under the rod or rather in the fire fearing death and hell all his life time And whether this bee saving in Mr. Baxters accompt obedience or disobedience let them that are spirituall judge 4. By turning the very obedience of his Disciples into disobedience and rebellion The best works done to be justified by them and for them are the greatest abhomination in Gods accompt his Grace and Salvation are either denied or refused when wee bring works to appropriate it to us Rom. 4. 4 5. what is righteousnesse in its matter is sin in its end Therefore shall wee finde still that whosoever are admitted to those that seek to ingratiate themselvs by their good works though done in Christs name are hurled off from Christ I am not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance I know you not depart from mee yee workers of iniquity More joy for one sinner that repenteth than for ninety nine just persons that need no repentance For a more full and satisfactory answer to the Argument contained in this Quere I leave the Reader to the perusing of the Protestant Divines that have written upon this Subject and abundantly refuted this calumny of the Papists what I have here said is rather an addition to them then a full answer to the Quere which I leave to be fetcht from them What he speakes in the Amplification of this Quere needeth no large examination First he grants That love and thankfulness should be enough to hold us to obedience and duty and will bee so when all our ends are attained in our ultimate end then wee shall act for these ends no more c. How untowardly doth this passage and and another passage of the former Quere hang together what he pronounceth here that love and thankfulnesse should be enough to hold us to duty without doing for justification and salvation and that which here should be and hereafter shall be our perfection the same he affirmes there if practiced will undoubtedly damne the Practicer So according to Mr. Baxter if a Christian endeavour sincerely to do what he should and to come as neere in this life as it is possible to the perfection which he shall enjoy in the future hee shall undoubtedly bee damned for it Who then goes about to drive obedience out of the world he or they whom he opposeth What use is to be made of the affections of feare desire hope and care to the attainment of our great ends hath been enough discussed in the examination of the former Quere and would be a meere Tautology here to do it againe Let it be proved once that God hath left Justification by workes to be a motive to obedience it shall be granted to bee a help to the destroying of Obedience to take downe this one Motive But if contrariwise Justification of sinners by Works and Morall Obedience bee erected not by God but by the Devill Mr. Baxters neither Sophistry nor Oratory shall induce us to leane upon the Devils crutch both to the forfeiting of our Justification and turning our Obedience into sin CHAP. XII Whether the doctrine of justification by Faith without workes be a soul-cozening doctrine or harden the people in a soul-cozening Faith what the doctrine of Faith which the Protestant Churches holde is and how farr from deserving this Calumny with something about the facility or difficulty to perswade the multitude to such a Faith HIs fourth Quere by which as by another Argument he goeth about to make odious and to destroy justification by Faith without works runs thus B. pag. 326. Doth it not much confirme the world in their soul cozening Faith surely that Faith which is by many thought to justifie is it that our people doe all most easily embrace that is the receiving of Christ for their Saviour and expecting pardon and salvation by him but not withall receiving him for their Lord and King nor delivering up themselves to be ruled by him I meet not with one but is resolved in such a Faith till it be overthrowne by teaching them better They would all trust Christ for the saving of their soules and that without dissembling for ought any man can discerne Are all these men justified c. A Chip of the same blocke with the former in the use of it Mr. Baxter as he hath learned of them from whom he hath received it levels against the very heart of Christ and his Gospell Had hee said with Iames that to say we have Faith and not to have workes is to cozen our souls I should have said with him But in that he speaketh not of a soul-cozening profession of Faith but layeth so horrid an imputation upon Faith it selfe this gives us cause to examine what Faith he meaneth that we may be able to discern whether that Faith or else Mr. Baxter by defaming it goe about to cozen our souls and so embrace the true friend and reject the Cheater This cozening Faith according to Mr. Baxter must needs bee that which squareth not in its nature and manner of justification with the justifying Faith viz. that Gospell Faith which neither as a deed and worke as a worke of Morall duty and worke of our owne righteousnesse of our perfect and meritorious righteousnesse doth begin and but begin to inright us to Christ and justification by him leaving to eyther vertues and works to perfect it but as an instrument ordeyned and given us of God by which we receive Christ alone offering up himselfe a sacrifice for us to bee cur whole righteousness to justification and that without
Qu. 14. that he so layeth this position that he may thereby lay a ground-work for Justification by works Doth Dr. Preston to this end make Christ as Lord the object of Justifying Faith or any where affirm him to be offered as a Law-giver or Commander of morall works and duties to our justifying Much less doth he affirm that such works have any thing to do with Faith in justifying A notable skill hath Mr. Br in confounding when he should divide and distinguish and in distinguishing when there is no need as either may serve to his purpose He knowes that Dr. Preston when he treats of the New Covenant comprehends under it the whole doctrine and all the Promises of Grace made Yea and Amen in Christ as the same Christ is given to us not onely to Justification but also to regeneration illumination sanctification and whatsoever the Grace of the Eternall Father hath made him to us And when he treats of Faith he handles it as the instrument by which not onely Justification but also all the other benefits of Christ may be made ours in receiving Christ the treasury spring of all appropriated to us Therefore in describing the New Covenant he describes it in generall as the womb of all the blessings which are attainable by Christ and not of Justification and Salvation alone And in describing Faith he describes it as the instrument by which we apprehend and appropriate to our selves not onely Christ as righteousness and salvation but also as wisedome and sanctification yea all that tends to the perfecting of a poor sinner to our selves Therefore is it that he speaks more largely of the Covenant and treats more fully of it then needed if he had been to speak of it onely to Justification and Blessedness and that he speaks of Faith more largely and mentioneth other acts of it then are required to this one end And necessarily must he so do else should he have maimed both the Covenant of Grace and the Faith of Christ Here whatsoever Dr. Preston speaketh of the Covenant and Faith in generall of which some part belongeth to the interessing of us to sanctification and other blessings which are by Christ Mr. Br to beguile his Reader confoundeth and confineth to Justification as being spoken of it alone When contrariwise the Doctor doth enough cleerly express the distinct benefits of the Covenant and the distinct acts of Faith receiving the distinct benefits in the very words which he alledgeth out of him App. p. 117. Thou shalt receive the gift of Righteousness wrought by him for an absolution for thy sins and for a reconciliation with me This is our Justification And thereupon thou shalt grow up in love and obedience towards me This is our sanctification But suppose he should have affirmed that Faith as it cleaveth to Christ not onely for the sprinkling of his blood for Justification but withall for the effusion of his spirit to sanctification and the shedding forth of his beams for illumination and the stretching forth of his Almighty arm for supportation c. doth in all these acts justifie as some Divines do seem to speak though without prejudice to their reputation not enough advisedly yet both he and they are so far from making either the most spiritual knowledge and wisedom which are the immediate fruits of illumination or love righteousnes and holines and their acts or works which are the immediate fruits of sanctification to be in any respect usefull to justification that they utterly deny peace joy and hope the immediate fruits of Justification to be any way effectuall and usefull in this business But I find not Dr. Preston any where laying that ground-work much less erecting such a building on it To the five last points if Mr. Br hold them in that which I have expressed to be Dr. Prestons sense yea which himself expresseth to be his own sense I have nothing to say against him The tenth onely excepted to which I must be also mute because neither doth Mr. Br alledg what the Doctor saith and I have not that Treatise of his to inform me But all this is but a playing with holy things he might as well have said Dr. Preston consents with him in confessing there is a God a Christ a Justification a man a sinner to be justified as have said most of what he hath here said We expected he should have produced testimonies of other Divines speaking in common with him what he speaks in common with the Papists in opposition to the doctrine of the Protestants In his Appendix p. 167. and thenceforth to the end of the Book he brings a new supply of Testimonies which he intituleth Bax. Sayings of excellent Divines added to satisfie you who charge me with singularity I shall examine so many of them as have any shew of agreement with Mr. Br in those things wherein he fights against the doctrine of the Protestant Churches Bax. 1 He alleadgeth Dr. Twisse his discovery of Dr. Jacksons vanity p. 528. What one of our Church will maintaine that any one obteins actuall Redemption by Christ without Faith esspecially considering that redemption by the blood of Christ and forgivenesse of sins are all one Eph. 1. 17. Col. 1. 14. How prettily would he here instill into the thought of his Reader that Dr. Twisse is a man of levity here a subverter of Antinomianism whereof in his Aphorisms p. 173. he complained him to be a Pillarer that here he subverteth Justification from eternity whereof elswhere he is an assertor Nay here he speaketh of the Justification which is by vertue of the New Covenant of the obteining of it actually to our selves This neither Papist nor Protestant neither Dr. Twisse noâ— Mr. Br ever affirmed to be without Faith Bax. 2. Bishop Hooper cited by Dr. Jackson Christ onely received our infirmities and originall disease and not the contempt of him and his Law Expounded by Dr. Twisse against Dr. Jackson p. 584. His meaning in my judgment is onely this that Christ hath made satisfaction for the imperfection of our faith and holiness although we continue therein untill death But he hath not made satisfaction for the contempts and hatred of his word c. in case men do continue therein unto death Here is nothing of that which Mr. B. hunts after that Christ hath satisfied for no offence no infirmity committed against the New Covenant but this alone is the sum of it that they shall have no benefit by Christ no one sin committed against the Law or Gospel pardoned to them who live and dye impenitent and unbelievers According to that of our Saviour Jo. 8. 24. Therefore I said unto you ye shall dye in your sins for if ye beleeve not that I am he ye shall dye in your sins B. 3 Alstedius Distinct Theol. cap. 17. p. 73. The Condition of the Covenant of Grace is partly Faith partly Evangelicall obedience or holiness of life proceeding from Faith in Christ 1 In
works are required to it viz. The fear of God hope in his mercy Love Repentance a desire to receive the Sacraments a purpose to lead a new life and keep the Commandements under this lâ—st speciall they comprize all good works whatsoever Nay so far are both parties from this Faith that Faith onely justifieth that Both teach we are justified by Works only For 5 We are justified by the Act of Faith which is a work and a Law so that if we are not justified by works Faith it self must be excluded from justifying Though we are not justified by any works i. e. by any works of the Law yet by a work of the Gospel such as Faith is we may be justified 6 Our Adversaries i. e. the Protestants consent together in this that good works are not necessary to salvation otherwise than by the necessity of their presence but that they have not any relation to salvation as merits or causes or conditions thereof c. We contrariwise say that good works are necessary to a righteous man unto salvation by way of causality or efficiency because they effect or work salvation 7 When the Apostle saith we are justified by Faith and not by Works there is to be understood a Synecdoche in the words of Paul that when he saith we are justified by Faith hee meaneth not without works but by Faith and works together so that Faith is put for Faith works of Faith 8 The good works of justified men which effect their Justification are absolutely just and in their Mode or manner perfect 9 So the perfection of our righteousnes and Justification is not from Faith but from works For Faith doth but begin Justification and afterward it hath assumed to it self Hope and Charity it doth by these perfect it 10 Good works merit without all doubt yet not by any intrinsecall vertue and worth in themselves but by vertue of Gods promise A promise made with a condition of work brings to pass that he which performs the work is said to have merited the thing promised and may challenge the reward as his debt in Law 11 The Hereticks teach that it is unpossible for a righteous man to fullfill Gods Law The Catholicks teach that it is absolutely possible for a righteous man to fullfill it by the help of Gods Grace and Spirit of Faith and Charity infused into them in their Justification 12 The contrary doctrine which denyeth Justification by works and the Merit of works is a pernicious doctrine an enemy to all good endeavours good works invites all to a licentiousness of sinning and to transgress without fear or shame what evil will he fear or what good will he not despise who thinks faith alone sufficient to righteousness 13 Though a man hath received the infusion of grace and the Spirit of Faith and Charity and is now justified yet he is under the penalty and curse of the Law still For Christ hath given and God hath taken satisfaction onely for the fault but not for the punishment so that when God hath fully pardoned the fault he may and will inflict the punishment upon the offender 14 Yea this punishment remains upon the Justified both inlife and death and after death in Purgatory 15 For the Righteous or Justified man is so under the obligation of Gods Law that except he shall fullfill it he shall not be saved 16 Because our Justification being still conditionall even after we are Justified may be somtimes lost somtimes reteined now had and then lost and after recovered yea and lost again as we do hinder or not hinder the Grace of God 17 No man can be assured of his eternall Election that he is ordeined of God to life or of his perseverance in grace to the end and consequently not of his salvation For the Scripture in express words teacheth that Salvation depends of the condition of works But no man can certainly conclude that he shall do much less persevere to do all that Christ hath Commanded 18 It cannot be that the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us in that sense that by it we may be called and be formally righteous although it be true that Christs merits be imputed to us because God hath made them ours by donation and we may offer them to God the Father for our sinns because Christ hath taken upon him the burthen of making satisfaction for us and of reconciling us to God the Father yet the denomination of righteous persons is from the intrinsecall righteousnes in themselves 19 Though we are justified by the works which the Law commandeth yet are we not justified by them as they are works of the Law but as they are Evangelicall and works of the Gospel done in the strength of Christ and by the power of renewing grace powred upon the Elect by Christ under the Gospel 20 Love or Charity is the form of Justifying Faith so that when faith doth Justifie it justifieth by charity as its form which gives it its life and motion so that if Faith justifieth love justifieth either in an equality with it or more than it 21 Justifying Faith consisteth in the Assent of the judgement to all things which are written in the word of God No other faith is required of any But an implicit Faith is sufficient in the Laity and ignorant which are not acquainted with the Scriptures in whom it is enough to beleeve as the Church beleeveth i. e. as their Clergy teacheth and beleeveth though they do not explicitly and in particulars know what the Church beleeveth BAXTER JVstification is two-fold either in Trident. Conc. Sess 6. c. 6 7 8. Tilet in Apol p. 237. in defeÌ„s Trid. Conc. adversus ChemnitiuÌ„ part 1. title of Law or in sentence of Judgment In this later having out-runn the Papists to meet with them again he looks back to the former and makes it two-fold thus Justification in title of Law is to be considered either in its first point possession or in its after continuance and accomplishment The later he makes entire consequently in the way of opposition there used the former to be put in part Aph. p. 302. 311. The first point and possession of Justification I acknowledg to be by faith alone without either the concomitancy or co-operation of works Iidem Ibid. for they cannot be performed in an instant But the continuance and accomplishment of Justification is not without the joynt procurement of obedience Aphor. p. 302. The righteousness of the New Covenant i. e. in his sense faith and works is the only condition of our interest in and enjoyment of Bel. l. 1. de purg cap 14 Sect. 4. Ratio 4. Bell. lib. 4. de Just c. 2. the Old i. e. of the righteousness of Christ to justification Both these righteousnesses are absolutely necessary to salvation Aph. Thes 17. 19. 60. and from thence every where untill the very end of his Book The bare Act of beleeving is
and actions the godly are called Righteous in Scripture and their faith and duties are said to pleas God viz. at they are related to the Covenant of grace i. e. as they are coÌ„ditions procuring our Justification by Christ as well as in regard of the imputed Righteousnes which he addeth but as a cypher bringing no proof for it but all seemingly for the former Aphor. Thes 18 19 20 22 and its explication p. 119. c. We are justified by works commanded This is the generall vote of all Popish writers none excepted in the Law yet as they make up not our Legall but our Evangelicall Righteousness not as they are done upon legall terms but as they are conditions of the New Covenant This is the chief substaÌ„ce of Mr Brs whole book and it is a poorer shift to elude the doctrine of Paul than is that of the Papists Love is an essentiall part of Justifying Faith not properly a fruit of of it Aph. p 266. When Faith therefore The common Tenet of Papists not love is said to justifie it is said so to work in its essentiall work of accepting by Love pa. 268. That both are necessary to salvation are concurrent in apprehending Christ is doubtless p. 271. Love doth truly receive Christ c. p. 224. The people are to understand that for them to take upon trust from their Teachers what they cannot yet reach to see in its own evidence is less absurd and more necessary that many This also is a known Tenet among the Papists do imagin Epistle to the reader in the last page save two These may suffice for a Taste by which the reader may judge whether Mr. Brs and the Papists Barrells are filled with the same Herring or not Should I proceed to Compare also his and their equivocations ambiguities mentall reservations together with their purposed and not unwary Contradictions when to say and deny the same thing in severall places as may severally make for their advantage But specially if I should go on to Compare them how they bring the same arguments to prove their severall assertions and the same distinctions and other shifts of Sophistry to elude the Scriptures and reasons which make against them I should procedere ad infinitum almost begin but finde no end In alleaging the words of the severall Authors something here and there hath perhaps been abbreviated some words standing as cyphers without waight in reference to the questions Controverted interserted to make up some orderly Connexion of the following with the foregoing particular cited But no where have I wittingly Committed any such alteration of the words as to alter in one Title the sense of the Writer as will be evident to all that will but take the pains to examine the citations with their authentique or books from which they are cited Neither is there any one thing alleaged in which the two parties Cohere but what hath been still Controverted between the Papists and Protestants Else would it be easie to produce a thousand particulars wherein the Pope and Luther themselves speak one and the same thing without opposition or difference If any where when Mr. Br and the Papists speak the same words yet Mr. Br means not punctually the same thing with the Papists in every such allegation I undertake to manifest that he is worse and delivers more self-exalting Grace-depressing doctrine than they Yet all this is too little to set forth the frame of Mr. Brs spirit he may take himself injured and left too obscure if he be but matched with the Papists and have no pre-eminence granted him before and above them in exalting mans righteousnes and nullifying the Grace of God in Christ That we may not rob him of the praise to which his ambition seems to aspire we will grant to him that the Papists are but the Pigmies and he the Giant that in the battell between Michael and the Dragon he hath superexcelled more deserved the Scarlet Hat Miter Crosier yea Triple Crown it sâ—lf than they that have and wear them if not by his Art yet at least by his daring boldnes in his undertakings This service therefore I shall do him to manifest not onely his equality with but also his exâ—perancy above many of the famous Champions of Rome That many of the brave Cardinals Bishops Jesuits and Fryars of the Church of Rome are Protestants in the poynt of Justification as compared with Mr. Br and that he sheweth himself in many particularâ— about this doctrine a Papist of a deeper dye than the more modest Papists yea than some of the most Jesuitized and Trentified Rabbi's among them This shall be the business of the next Chapter CHAP. XVII A comparing of Mr. Baxters Doctrine with the Doctrine of some of the more Modest and other more Trentified and Jesuitized Papists in which he is found more Antichristian than they Papists 1 IT is to be noted that the Scripture attributeth this imputation of Righteousness to no other thing but Faith 2 Faith hath not of it self any efficacy as it is our act to forgive and reconcile but all its vertue proceeds from its object namely Christ whose vertue and merit God hath disposed to apply to the sinner unto Justification by Faith on him 3 If it be enquired how the Law of Faith is distinguished by Paul against the Law of works even of morall works when Faith also is comprehended under the genus or kind of works for to beleeve is our work The solution is that to beleeve in him that justifieth the ungodly leaneth upon the Righteousnes of another to wit of God through Christ but other works do lean upon their own Righteousness every work is in or after it self good and makes him good that hath it 4 If Faith as it is a certain Act and of it self should procure Righteousness then were not Righteousness given freely God hath not used works to justifie as he hath used Faith that men should not boast attributing Righteousness to the vertue or merit of works 5 Faith is not counted to us for Righteousness as if it self were made our Righteousness but because it brings a Righteousness on man before God not as it is an act of man then Grace should be of works for to beleeve is a kind of work but of Gods will as he hath willed that Righteousness should be given to man by Faith and the vertue of Christ upon whom man beleeveth should be communicated to the beleever This is to count or impute Faith to Righteousness before God 6 Whereas we attain a twofold Righteousness by Faith an inherent Righteousness c. by which we become pertakers of Gods nature and the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us c. It remains to be enquired upon which of these we ought to lean or trust and to account our selves justified before God My judgment is that we are to rest to rest I say as upon a stable
out to be children of the Devill though they brake not out in them into every particular Act as in the Devill The utmost that M. Br. can from such premisses conclude is that though in many things els it be yet in this one his Doctrine is not aspersed with Socinianism 2. I think it will not be objected by any to M. Br. that he is ambitious in all things to be a Socinian but in such only wherein the Socinians are most subtle Sophisters than the Jesuites and doe bring more shew of sophisticated reason to exalt Popery than the Papists themselves and with greater plausibility and craft do pervert the truth and simplicity of the Gospel more extolling mans pride and more nullifying Gods grace than any of the Champions of the Pope had either the wit or the audacity to do untill these had taught them If then in the before-mentioned point hee holds not with Socinus no marvell for then should he have relinquished the Papists I do not think that his wits do run in Pilgrimage to Racovia upon any other grounds but in love to Rome and in abhorrence of free Jerusalem Gal. 4. 26. 3. Hee should have cleered if hee could his Doctrine from other peeces of Socinianism which he knows it guilty of would be objected against him As 1. His To Credere or Act of believing justifying a sinner 2. All other works of obedience as our Acts or works justifying in an equality and in the same manner with Faith without mentioning any vertue that they have from the death of Christ to this end as the Papists teach but rather that Christ fetcheth vertue from these to justifie 3 His doctrine of Gods dispensing with and relaxing of his Law To which I might add in the 4 th place his canonizing and almost deifying Reason and that without any adject of renewed or spirituallized even of naturall and sophisticall reason to which he doth so frequently in his book almost sacrifice as to the sole and sufficient Judg of the Scriptures and guide unto salvation These things he cannot deny to be originally from Socinus though probably brought home to him by other dirty Channels and not dipt from the spring or rather puddle it self It is but a vain piece of his sophistry to defend himself where none will accuse and to hide himself in the dark where ke knows he should meet with opposition and accusation 4 He professeth himself to be but yet a puny in the School of Secinus hath read but little of their doctrine yet is much sowred with the Leaven thereof when hee hath more fully tryed the quaintnes depth of their sophistry in which his soul delighteth more than in the plainnes foolishnes of the Gospel who knoweth whether he may not following such a guide as reasō at length also sup up with pleasure what now he casteth off with defiance the Apost speaks somthing that may put us in fear of it 2 Tim. 3. 13. 5 Even this error of Socinus against which in speciall he protesteth his abhorrence he doth in generall maintain with as strong a Front as any of the Socinians They say that Christ offereth salvation to all but it is every particular mans particular faith and obedience their actuall believing and obeying following his precepts and treading in his steps to the end that in the end makes him to be actually and effectually a Saviour to them And this is the sum and full dimension of Mr. Brs. doctrine Only they make Christ the Prophet chiefly but this man Christ as Priest and King to be the Saviour In this they both agree that except we by our own righteousness become self-Saviours we shall have no salvation by him What else he hath in this Section for the vindicating yea magnifying of his doctrine hath been oft spoken to already and will a little after be examined again where hee useth the Tantundem though not literally the Idem of these words to apologize for his doctrine against other crimes imputable to it CHAP. XIX Mr. Baxters first Reason examined by which he endeavours to evince his Doctrine not to be repugnant to Pauls viz. that Pauls question in his Epistles and his question in his Aphorisms are not one but divers Pauls question what is that proper Righteousness by which we are justified from the laws malediction which the Apostle concludeth to be Christs satisfaction only But Mr. Brs. and St. Iames his question what is the condition of this Justification by Christs Righteousnes whether Faith alone or works also WEe have examined what he hath to say for the vindicating of his Doctrine from Popery and Socinianism we expected also that hee should in the next place have shewed or at least pretended some distance between him and the Arminians But it seems he glories in it as his Crown to be reputed one of their part Therefore leaving this he undertakes a greater Task an Herculean Labour in his third dispute of this kind viz. to cleer his doctrine from all opposition to Paul and the Scriptures This is a work indeed which if hee discharge honourably and full up to what he promiseth all will grant him the Lawrell above all the Angelical and Seraphical Divines that have in any age made use of ink and paper It is the sole thing that we long after for satisfaction Let him bless us with sound demonstrations to prove it wee shall all run after him And though some madd men may term us Papists Socinians Arminians or whatsoever else we shal gladly bear it to become his Disciples All what else he hath said would be superfluous to every conscientious man This alone would win him But how poorly and Pigmie-like this supposed Giant dischargeth this bold adventure let his owne words declare B. p. 307 c. Lastly let us see whether S. Paul or any other Scripture do contract I thinke it should be printed do contradict this And for my part I know no one word in the Bible that hath any strong appearance of contradiction to it The usuall places quoted are these Rom. 3. 28. 4. 2 3 14 15 16. Gal. 2. 16. 3. 21 22. Eph. 2. 8 9. Phil. 3. 8 9. In all which and in all other the like places you shall easily perceive 1 That the Apostles dispute is upon this question what is the Righteousness which we must plead against the accusation of the Law or by which we are justified as by the proper Righteousness of that Law And this he well concludeth is neither works nor Faith but the Righteousness which is by Faith that is Christs Righteousnes But now St. James his question is what is the condition of our Justification by this Righteousness of Christ whether Faith onely or works also This is the first part of this his Dispute Let us examine what force it hath to the end for which he useth it whether it reconciles Paul to Mr Br. or shew they never contradicted one the other 1
an opinion that he and the Papists his Masters have the whole body of the Scriptures on their side to prove Justification by works But that the Protestants can only catch here and there a sentence of Scripture that hath a seeming and scarce a seeming to speak for them It is a Maxime of Mr. Br. himself that men are seldom bold with Scripture to force it but they are first bold with Conscience to force it pag. 297. Yet here he is bold not only to force but to stifle Scriptures When himself quoteth a Scripture to maintain his Popish Justification see how he improves it in the same page If it were but some one phrase dissonant from the ordinary language of Scripture I should not doubt but it were to be reduced to the rest But when it is the very scope of a Chapter c. no whiâ— dissonant from any other Scripture I think he that may so wrest it as to make it unsay what it saith may as well make him a Creed of his own let the Scripture say what it will to the contrary Lo what a mountain he can make of a mole-hill and bring all Scriptures into the belly of one making that one of what dimension he listeth all the rest to say what he commands them when he is to plead for the Papists But here when he is â—o produce what the Protestants have to urge against the Papists what mincing and mayming doth he use forcing the whole body of the Gospel into a Cherristone it is but here and there a sound without substance that they beguile themselves with Did the man as he pretends seek to apprehend to himself and sincerely to make out unto others Scripture Tâ—uâ—h we should find him faithfully alledging what the Churches of Christ have cited against Antichrist His false dealing herein declares his hatred of the Truth that he will not have the Scriptures shine upon it in their full splendor that it may not be known and embraced Nay we have the main body of the New Testament speaking for us specially almost all the Doctrinal part of the Epistles to the Romans Galathians Ephesians Colossions Hebrews all the four Evangelists specially St John as I have before shewed A breviate of Scriptures which our Divines have urged to this purpose I have before given and it would be useless here to rehearse 3. Even these few Scriptures which he quoteth affirm that man is justified by Faith without the deeds of the Law that if he were justified by Works he had whereof to glory and boast himself that if they which are of the Law be heirs Faith is made void and the promise of no effect That it is of Faith that it may be of Grace that it is by Grace through Faith not of Works Were there nothing else is there not a strong appearance of Contradiction in these Scriptures to Mr. Brs. doctrine that we are justified by Faith and Works together 4 But see we how he evades these Scriptures and all other Testimonies of the Apostles viz. That his dispute is what is the Righteousness which we must plead against the Accusation of the Law or by which we are justified as the proper Righteousness of the Law and this hee well concludeth is neither works nor faith but the Righteousness which is by Faith i. e. Christs Righteousness But St. James his question is what is the condition of our Justification by this Righteousness of Christ whether Faith only or Works also so farr Mr. Baxter Must not Mr. Br. needs be happy that hath learned so perfectly that which he cals else-where the Papists Feat of making the Scriptures a nose of wax and turning them into his own complexion Let any one now alledg against him that of the Apostle Gal. 1. 8. If Paul or an Angell from heaven shall preach to you any other Gospel than what you have received let him be accursed Cannot he as prettily and solidly shift the Curse from him and retort it upon the denouncer as he doth these Scriptures upon the alledgers True may hee say but I am not Paul nor an Angell from heaven therefore the Curse cannot fall on me Nay I have made Paul to preach another Gospel since his death thatn what he preached in his life Therefore Paul is accursed As good grounds hath he for this as his former arguing But let us see whether his interpretation of these Scriptures be so solid as pretty To that of James I have spoken before therefore shall say little here Onely I cannot omit how unsufferable his audacious confidence is that he thinks it enough to say without shewing or endeavouring to shew it from the Context or otherwise this is the meaning of Pauls and that the scope of James his dispute No such immodesty is oft there to be found in the very Jesuits Socinians and Arminians They when they go about to pervert in stead of expounding any Scripture labour stoutly from the Context and from a seeming Coherence of other Scriptures to make such a perverting exposition either probable or plausible This man doth all pro Imperio Sic volo sic jubeo c. I say it what man or Angell dares to deny it Doth hee think all the world to be his Diocess that he may force what he hath or saith he hath upon his Kederminsterians upon the consciences of all men an implicit Faith that all must believe when and because he saith it Is the infallible spirit gone out of Zedechiah 1 King 22. 24. or out of Bellarmine or Arminius inâ—o him Or doth he execute the office of the Popes Legate speaking to us only that which is decreed in his unerring Chair or hath hee gotten a monopoly of Socinus his Right Reason which is infallible what else can hee alledg that his word must be taken for a Law without dispute Or is it indeed because he finds Gods word will yeeld him no succour therefore he must proprio Marte militare act in his own name because God is not with him So indeed it seemeth for neither God nor reason nor any thing els but a high conceit of himself will be accessary to his reasonless Conclusions viz. that James his question is what is the condition of our Justification by Christs Righteousness when James in his whole dispute there neither expresly nor implyedly utters a word of Christs righteousness or if Mr. Brs Jesuito-Arminian condition nor any thing that can easily be reduced to Christ himself Or where doth Paul dispute only of the righteousnes proper to justification and not also of the way and means by which this righteousness may be applyed to us and made ours Or in which of his quoted Scriptures or any other of the Apostles writings when he excludes works doth he exclude Faith also from its subserviency to justifying Such peremptory dreams of a haughty brain cannot be more fitly answered than with contempt and â—ilence Thus should I do were it not in respect to some
pious and not unlearned men that have taken some infection of the Epidemicall disease of our times too easily to drink down errors differing herein only from the vulgar that error is more appetible to them from a learned and sophisticall than truth from a plainer though faithfull hand Let a man once have the name of a learnnd Scholar and strict-walking Pharisee all his Doctrines by such men are concluded to be of rare use and excellency before they be seen whether they be white or black from Heaven or from Hell Not a few of these men having in my hearing stood firm and up moved in the defence of the doctrines of this book of Mr. Brs. not being able to speak any thing to refell the objections made against it but this that the Author thereof is an eminently learned and pious man As if Satan had not the wit to make choyse of his instruments that have the most compleat aptitude and power to deceive or that the Jews had not so much to say for their Pharisees the Papists for their Bellarmine and the Remoâ—strants for their Arminius or the Devill had forgotten his ancient subtlety when he will seduce from the verity of Christs Gospel to change himself into an Angell of Light or that no damning errour could proceed from a self-saving or rather self-deceiving Pharisee To cleer up the truth to such at lest to give their occasion to search the Scriptures by which they may cleer it to themselves I shall lay and compare together Paul and Mr. Br. in that which Mr. Br. saith was the question about which Paul disputed that it may be made evident whether they agree or contradict either the other To this purpose by the way there is to be taken out of the way a fallacy that lurketh in Mr. Brs. words where he saith The dispute of St. Paul is upon this Question It is not enough to say this was A Question excâ—pt he say also it was the Question yea the Onely Question upon which the Apostle disputed in those places where he excludeth works and inferreth Faith alone to be ordeined as effectuall to justification He disputed in some of his Epistles upon many questions To reduce what hee disputed severally to the severall questions all to one were to make non-sense of the whole The same may be said of all mens yea of the most Scholastick disputes of Mr. Br. himself who is a greater Philosopher and more studied in Logick and Metaphysicks than ever the Apostle was But I deny it to be the onely or the chief question about which St. Paâ—l so disputeth what is the Righteousnesse which wee must plead against the Accusation of the Law or by which wee are justified as the proper Righteousness of the Law I grant it to be one but a less principall question upon which he disputes But the more principall question is in generall by what means we may be interessed into Christ or obtain the righteousness of Christ to become ours and so still retâ—in it to justification More particularly whether the Native Faederall holiness of the Jewes and the priviledges of the Covenant in part mentioned Rom. 9. 4 5. Phil. 3. 5. Gal. 2. 15. Or their actuall and personall righteousnesse and sincere obedience to the Law mentioned Phil. 3. 6. Mat. 20. 12. and the 19 20. together with all the Typicall purgings mentioned in the 9. 10. Chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews On the other side whether all the Naturall and Morall righteousness of the Gentiles which they performed by the instinct of the Law of Nature written in their Consciences without the help or knowledg of Gods written law or their exemption from the Covenant of God made with the Jews For some of the believing Gentiles reading the promises made of calling unto the grace of Christ them that were not Gods people or beloved before weakly concluded that their former uncircumcision and uncovenant-ship was a speciall furtherance to their admission unto Christ as may be probably gathered from Rom. 11. 19. Gal. 5. 6. whether any of these kinds of holinesse and works of righteousness either with Faith or without Faith or whether Faith alone without all or any of these be required as instrumentall subservient and effectuall to inright us to the Justification which is by Christ This was the more principall question upon which Paul disputeth in the places before mentioned Somewhat he saith to the former but lesse principally and seldom but in subserviency to this So the question upon which Paul disputes in his Epistles and Mr. Br. in his Aphorisms is one and the same but their Conclusions absolutely contradictory either to other The one concludeth that Faith alone without mans works and righteousness The other that not faith alone but Faith as a work together with all other works of righteousnesse do justifie and all morall duties collaterally with Faith are required to make the Righteousness of Christ ours to justification No greater or more palpable Contradiction can be devised Whosoever shall preach another Gospell of Justification otherwise than by Faith in Christ without works let him be accursed saith Paul Whosoever shall be practically a solifidian trust to a bare Faith and not work for Justification shall be Damned saith Mr. Br. If one of these be granted to be an Apostle of Christ the other must needs be proclaimed to be the Apostle of Antichrist But whether this which I have expressed be indeed the principal question on which the Apostle so disputeth adhuc sub judice lis est We are left uncertain on both hands may some say True and if I onely say and not shew it I shall be guilty of the fault which I blame in Mr. Br. And so we may deserve both to be laught at as Triflers This therefore is the next thing to be added First then if we do but consider to whom and against whom the Apostle handleth these disputes for Mr. Br. reduceth them all to his Epistles it will be more than probable to every rationall man that his most principall question is By what means we possesse and continue in the possession of the righteousnesse which is by Christ to Justification And but secondarily less principally and in subserviency to this question What the righteousnesse is by which we are to be justified The persons to whom he writeth were all Christians the purest and most eminent Churches of Christ that had received the pure doctrine of Christ by the preaching of the Apostles viz. that whereas sinn and death and the Curse by sinn reigned over all men in all the world so that all wete Children of wrath and every soul guilty before God Christ was given of the Father to be the Author of Righteousness and life by the Mediation of his death that in him and in no other name under heaven was salvation attainable that whosoever would beleeve in him should have everlasting life should be Justified freely by Grace
through the Redemption which is in Jesus Christ and by their very receiving of him should obtein power to become the sonns of God notwithstanding all their former pollutions without all prejacent qualifications in them to purchase so great a Redemption Such was the doctrine preached to them and in the embracing and professing of this Doctrine and their Faith in Christ the alone redeemer they were first admitted into Christ gathered into Churches and so continued a while stablished in this truth with the joy of the Holy Ghost abounding in them The persons against whom he disputeth were chiefly if not onely the False Apostles of the Circumcision who also professed the Faith of Christ and preached it not the unbeleeving Jewes for these should not have had any such audience from the Churches But such as went out from the Apostles and the Church that was at Hierusalem to preach Christ Act. 15. 24. Such as came from James Gal. 2. 12. Such as boasted themselves to be of Câ—phas to hold forth the doctrine of Peter 1 Cor. 1. 12. Such as preached Christ of envie strife and contenâ—iâ—n not sincerely but under the luâ—e of so holy a name to take the advantage to deceive Phil. 1. 15 16. Who not labouring to gather Disciples to Christ out of infidelity as the Apostles had done entred into the severâ—ll Churches before stablished by the Apostles troubling them with words subverting their souls teaching them that they must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses els they could not be saved Act. 15. 1. 24. And these were of the Sect of the Pharisees which beleeved Act. 15. 5. Emissaries out of those Many thousands or rather Myriads of the Jewes at Hierusalem which beleeved yet were all zealous of the Law Act. 21. 20. Had the Apostles dispute been against such as had apostatizâ—d from the profession of Christ and against such unbeleevers as had seduced them from trusling on Christs imputed to rest upon their own inherent righteousness for justification iâ— had not been besides the purpose to have it his question as Mr. Br saith whether it be Christs righteousness or our own righteousness that we must plead against the accusations of the Law But seeing both the seduced and seducers with whom he dealeth were such as professed faith in Christ as their justifier and Saviour and questioned onely whether Faith alone or els their righteousness works also together with Faith were required to inright them to Christs righteousnes and salvation it had been impertinent if not ridiculous to have made it his question what the proper righteousnes is by which we are justified For this had been to decline and not to prosecute the question between him and them They would have granted him all that he concluded without the least dammage to their Cause Therefore his question was principally By what means we come to partake of the righteousness of Christ to Justification 2 Let the Apostle himself give his Testimony what his principall question was For he better knew his own minde than Mr. Br or my self And first in his Epistle to the Romans having for an introduction to the question in the three first Chapters proved both the Jewes with all their legall and the Gentiles with all their naturall righteousness and unrighteousness to be under sin guilt and condemnation he no sooner in the third Chapter begins to speak of the mean of their recovery Christ Jesus but he annexeth also by what means we come to have right in him In both which he no less Contradicteth Mr. Br than if he had seen before what Mr. Br hath written so many ages after Or the former he affirmeth that we are justified as by Christ so by the Redemption which is in Jesus Christ as he was set forth to be a propitiation or expiatory sacrifice for our sinns Rom. 3. 24 25. Not as Mr. Br before so stoutly Contended as he is our Lord i. e. in his sense our Lawgiver Of the latter that it is faith alone that makes this redemption and Propitiation ours to Justification namely Faith in his bloud Faith without the deeds of the Law Faith which excludeth without works which include boasting ver 25 27 28. And this faith in the death of Christ without works without deeds cannot include in it Morall works and righteousness unto Justification as Mr. Br would extort from it elsewhere by making Christ as our Lord and Lawgiver the object of Justifying Faith At length he Concludeth ver 30. that both in them which have some seeming and plausible qualification of righteousness and works and in them that have it not it is not that righteousness of their own but Faith which Justifieth And that this Faith is no less effectuall to the justifying of them that unto that very day have been ungodly than of them which from their very birth have seemed to be holy to the Lord. So much is Comprehended in those words of the Apostle It is one God which Justifieth the Circumcision by faith and the un-circumcision through Faith In these words is included the whole State of Pauls question The Apostle writing to the Church that was at Rome Consisting of beleeving Jewes and Gentiles endeavours to heal the divisions Close the breaches and settle a sweet union and Communion between them This he applyeth himself unto first in that great and fundamentall point of Christianitie viz. Justification by Christ in which they dissented Both Jewes and Gentiles acknowledged Justification and salvation to be by Christ alone but in this they differed The Jewes Confined this salvation by Christ to themselves alone that to them onely he was promised that they alone were qualified and in a capacity to receive him and the benefits that are by him That he came to be the Saviour of his own hallowed people that had waited for him not of the common and unclean Pagans that were aliens from the Common wealth of Israel and strangers from the Covenant of promise To this purpose they boasted of their Naturall Faederal and personall righteousness and holines qualifying them for the Justification which is by Christ of all which the Gentiles were destitute Their naturall Righteousness and holiness that they were Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles the seed of Abraham the holy stock to whom and whose seed the promise was made Their Faederall holines That they alone of all nations were in Covenant with God and did bear the badge and seal of the Covenant Circumcision in their Flesh by which they were distinguishd from all other people as holy to God when all other Nations under the Sunne were an abhomination in his sight Their Legall holiness that they had the Law Word and Oracles of God Committed to them all other Nations being left without Law without God and without hope in the world Their personall and Actuall righteousness that in reference to this holy Law of God they had walked exactly kept it from their youth
and touching the righteousness thereof were blameless When contrarwise the Gentiles had walked inordinately lawlesly after the instinct of their own nature and lusts of their own hearts servants to idols and devills not to God For this Cause they Contended that they by this their righteousness had that the Gentiles by means of their unrighteousness had not right to the redemption and Justification which are by Christ That the Gentiles in stead of the naturall holiness before mentioned must become Proselytes and so the ascititious or adopted Children of Abraham becoming Jewes must receive the seale of the Covenant Circumcision in their flesh receive and be brought under the Law and become personally righteous in keeping it Else they could not be saved by Christ Act. 15. 1 24. Their bare Faith in Christ without their own righteousness and works could not make them partakers of the tighteousnesse and salvation which are by Christ And who seeth not here that Mr. Brs doctrine is one and the same in generall with theirs that were the first heretical troublers and subverters of the Church of Christ But against this plea of the beleeving Jewes the Apostle layeth his Contradictory Conclusion That both the Circumcision and the uncircumcision they that had and they that had not all or any of these kinds of righteousness were made partakers of Justification through Christ onely by Faith in him That our own prejacent works and righteousness are nothing to further nor our former unrighteousness and sinn any thing to hinder our Justification but Faith in Christ is all He that beleeveth is not condemned he that beleeveth not is already condemned whether he be Jew or Gentile clean or unclean outwardly because as he had said before ver 22 23. There is no difference For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God This Conclusion that Faith alone without our prejacent or concomitant works and righteousness do make the righteousness which is by Christ ours to Justification he proveth soundly in the 4th Chapter 1 From the example of Abraham the Father of the Faithfull By what means Abraham found and obteined the Justification which is by Christ by the same means all now obteine it that are Justified But Abraham found or obteiaed it not by his own righteousness or works but by Faith Therefore so do now all that are justified The proposition he leaves as standing so firm on its own pillars that none will dare to seek the demolishing thereof The assumption he proves in both its members that it was not by his own righteousnes either Natural i. e. derived from parents and ancestors for they were Idolaters and served other Gods Josh 24. 2. Or faederall in the Jewes sense for he was justified before he was circumcised and after received Circumcision as a seal of the Righteousness of Faith ver 10 11 of this 4th Chapter to the Romans or Legal For he was so Justified 400 years before the Law was given Or personall by the works of righteousness which he had done For then first he should have had matter of boasting that he had done something towards his own Justification ver 2. And secondly then his justification should have been reckoned not of Grace but of debt and so the glory thereof should have redounded to Abraham and not to God ver 4. And if by no one of these kinds of his own then not at all by his own righteousness That it was by Faith he proves by clear Testimony of Scripture ver 3. Therefore the conclusion stands that we are justified also by faith without works That Faith and not any righteousness of our own makes Christs righteousness ours Another Argument he draws from clear and evident Scripture witnessing that the righteousness and justification which consisteth in the forgivenes not imputing and covering of sinn is made ours without works therefore by Faith alone ver 6 7 8. When in these two Arguments none can deny but that the righteousness and Justification which Abraham obteined and which Consisted not in the doing but in the imputing of righteousness and in the pardoning and not imputing of sinn is the Justification which is by Christ and when the Apostle laboureth not at all to prove this to be The proper Righteousness to Justification but takes it as granted and unquestioned all must acknowledge that his question was not What righteousness it is that Justifieth whether Christs or ours But when all his dispute is confined to this one point to prove that this righteousness by Christ is made ouâ—s not at all by works but altogether by Faith what rational man can be so swayed by a Spirit of Contradiction as to say with Mr. Br. that St Pauls question was not to make out by what means this Justification by Christ may be made ours Whosoever will see these two Arguments further and fully illustrated and amplified together with more arguments to these annexed let him peruse the residue of this 4 Chap. And if he return with his Reason sound and brings not this verdit that it is impudence not judgement in Mr. Br. to state Pauls question as he doth Then am I a stranger both to Paul and Reason Again when the Apostle still insisting upon the same subject setts forth the priviledges of them that are justified by Faith doth withall affirm that while they were yet sinners Châ—ist dyed for them and so they became Justified by his bloud and being yet enemies are reconciled to God by his death Rom. 5. 1 8 9 10. thereby implying that there is nothing of our own works and righteousness except sin and enmity against God be such that doth or can Concurr to our justification so leaving justification to Faith onely it is evident that his principall question was not whether we are Justified by Christ but whether Faith alone or works with Faith are appointed of God in order to Justification I shall forbear to cite short testimonies from other Epistles of the Apostle evincing this Truth and pass to his Epistle to the Galathians in which he wholly levelleth to this mark It cannot be denyed by Mr. Br. himselfe that the Apostle there disputeth not of a legal but Gospel Justification and that this is a Justification onely by Christ that when he saith If any man if we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel c. his meaning is not a Justification out of Christ for this should be a legal not a Gospel Justification but any other way to the Justification which is by Christ save that which we have preached let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8 9. Herein it was agreed between the Apostle and the false Apostles that Christ is the alone Justifier and that salvation is onely by him and to this all the seduced ones among the Galathians assented Else had they been Apostate from Christ to the Law and not to another Gospel as the Apostle terms it Gal. 1. 6. And from their beginning in the Spirit to seek
perfecting by the flesh The question therefore was whether Faith alone in Christ or eâ—â—e together with it a naturall faederall and practicall righteousness after the rule of the Law were required to the acquiring of the Justification which is by Christ Hence is that his zealous expostulating with Peter and Barnabas for giving some occasion to the Gentiles to question whether besides Faith in Christ some Conformity to the Law were not also needfull to Justification We saith he who are Iewes by Nature and not sinners of the Gentiles knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the Faith of Iesus Christ even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified Gal. 2. 15 16. The sum of his debate is as if he had said If we that besides the supereminent prerogative vouchsafed to us to be the Apostles of the Lord Jesus have a derivative holines by nature and the Covenant of God from Abraham and withall a righteousness oâ— works by living up to our utmost in the highest pitch of obedience to the Law having found by revelation from the Lord Iesus Christ that all these are nothing available but Faith alone proper and effectuall to obtein the salvation and righteousness which is by Christ have wholly rejected all confidence in and use of these in order and reference to justification and made our addresses by Faith alone to partake of his righteousness why do we by our judaizing beguile the poor Gentiles that have none of these prerogatives into a pernicious opinion of perfitting their justification by Christ with their practicall righteousness in obedience to the Law Where it is to be noted that in one and the same verse the Apostle doth thrice expresly banish works from having any thing to doe in the business of justification by Christ and no less often attribute it to Faith and belâ—leeving in Christ without all help of works And can it be doubted what the question is about which he disputeth To the same scope is directed all that he delivereth in the third Chapter That he pronounceth the Galathians foolish and even bewitched that having obteined justification already by Faith alone in Christ they would be seduced to seek the perfecting thereof by works Gal. 3. 1 2 3. That while they were ambitious to become the Children of Abraham they fell utterly from Abraham and from the justification which Abraham found by seeking it another way then Abraham found it viz. by works and not by Faith onely ver 6 7 8 9. That so to seek it was the way to meet with the Curse in steed of the blessing of Christs righteousnesse ver 10-12 of which more may be said a little after That the justification which is by Christ discendeth by promise to us and promises are the object of Faith not of works ver 17 18 22. But all this together with what the Apostle disputeth of liberty and bondage in the fourth Chapter I leave to them that will but considerately read it to judge whether it evinceth not that to be Pauls question which I have mentioned Lastly when the Apostle Gal. 5. 4. brandisheth so heavy a denuntiation against such as had suffered themselves in this point to be sedueed by the false Apostles whom Mr Br. followeth as his guides and gods Christ is become of no effect to you whosoever of you are justified by the Law ye are fallen from Grace What force had there been in this wrathfull threat if the question between him and them had been about the proper Righteousness by which we are justified if they had held iâ— to be their own righteousness in opposition to Paul that held it to be the righteousness of Christ they would have laughed at such a Commination as a meerly frighting squibb or scar-crow answering we grant all that we are fallen from Grace that Christ is become of no effect to us But what damage can by all this befall us we make not Christ our Justifier but labour to Justifie our selves we seek Salvation not from Grace but as a debt in justice due to the Righteousness of our own works The Apostle surely was not such an ignorant Antinomian as to dispute so impotently that his Arguments might by subtle Baxterians be thus flung back as absurdities in his face It is therefore evident that the Galathians when most sednced ceased not to make Christ their Righteousness but had yeelded to this imposture as the next Vâ—rse declareth that not Faith alone but their own works and righteousnes with it were pre-required to make them capable of the righteousness which is by Christ and that upon this ground the Apostle denounceth them to be Apostates from Christ and Grace because they sought by their own righteousness to entitle themselves to the righteousnesse which is by Christ and sought it not by Faith alone If any demand the reason of this Consequence that whosoever seeketh right to the Justification of Christ by his own works makes himself an alien from Christ from Grace the Apostle in part implyeth it in that which he speaketh in these 4 and 5 verses of Chapter 5. But had more fully explained himself Chap. 3. 9 10 11 12. So that by comparing together what he hath said in both places the reason of his Conclusion resulteth into all mens view viz. that such a one seeketh the righteousness and salvation which are by Christ in a legall not an evangelicall way by works and not by Faith therefore is bound to bring the perfect righteousness and works which the Law requireth to make him capable of justificasion by Christ or els falls from Christ from Grace to his everlasting ruine I shall add no more upon this subject not because the Scripture hath no more but because I hold this sufficient and know the morosity and humorousness of most readers in our times preferring an erroneous conciseness before a sound and full manifestation of the truth But my endeavour is to please not men but Christ I leave Mr. Br to trample his own rule not to be bold with Scripture by being first bold with Conscience I dare not usurp to my self his peremptory audaciousness with one breath of the mouth to destroy the whole Gospel in saying onely not shewing and proving that it must be thus understood He that can so do with holy things bewrayeth much pride and prophanness in his heart though he be never so much pharisaically enamelled and philacterized in the outside Let him see how he can answer God for his audacious curtness I shall not fear the censures of men for my length in bringing to light what he hath stifled in darkness Let my style please or displease fancies it shall suffice me to have taken off his first Paradoxicall imposture that he brings to prove his doctrine to be the same with
and conditions of the Law and the works and conditions of the Gospel 1 He onely saith all but proveth nothing therefore deserves onely the contempt of not an Answer from his Reader 2 He saith nothing but what he hath been taught by the Papists that though we cannot be justified by the works of the Law yet we are justified by Gospel works such as Faith is And must the Conclusions of the holy Apostaticall not Apostolicall Church be Canonicall to us because he hath made them so to himself 3 If he therefore forbears to prove what he saith because he holds it enough proved by the Papists already and so transmits his Reader to their Writings We also refer the reader to the perusall of the works of our Protestant writers that have dashed into shivers all such seeming proofs of the papists and brought to light the truth which they sought to imprison in darkness 4 Whatsoever he fableth here of Gospel works yet are they all legall or works of the Law which he obtrudeth upon men to Justification or as he here phraseth it to acquire part in Christ even to Faith it self he attributes no such property or power but as it is a morall work which the Law commandeth as we have found him speaking 5 to come to that in which the whole force of his reasoning here lyeth It is false what he affirmeth either that Paul doth in express words or in the sense and scope of his speech exclude onely the works of the Law but never the fulfilling of the same works as required by the Gospel for unless he so meaneth he saith nothing from their co-operation with Faith to Justification or that this is the reall difference between Legall and Gospel works that whereas in matter and substance they are one yet as they are done to justifie us by their own righteousness they are works of the Law but as done to justifie us by the righteousness of Christ so they are works of the Gospel or Gospel Conditions This is nothing but the Sophistry of a brain sophisticated with strong delusions to falsifie and nullifie the pure word of God For 1 What doth he bring to prove â—â—y least particle of what he saith if he had the testimony of God and Christ on his side would he leave their name and authority unmentioned 2 The Apostle when he treats of Justification by Christ doth not onely exclude works of the Law but works indefinitely and universally any works all works from having any power ordinate or not ordinate to give us part in it or him as hath been fully in its place before demonstrated 3 His dispute every where is as was declared and confirmed in the former Chapter not so much what is the righteousnesse which by its own power and vertue justifieth but what it is that instrumentally uniteth us to Christ for justification by him This he denyeth to all to any works and attributes to Faith alone as hath been there evidenced 4 In such places where he expresly speaketh of the works of the Law he means the Law written as it was given and pertained to the Jewes alone as a signall evidence of Gods love to them above all other Nations This is cleer from the Apostles own Testimony Ro. 2. 12 14. 17. 5. 13. as also where he numbreth Circumcision the observation of times and meats and other rituall peeces of the Ceremoniall Law together with the morall works of the Decalogue And will Mr. Br say that these rituall works are Conditions also of our part in Christ 5 When he so giveth the Adject of the Law to works calling them the works of the Law he doth it to beat down the pride and boasting of the Jewes that gloried in the Law Rom. 2. 23. declaring to them that although the Law were one principall prerogative vouchsafed to them not to any other people Rom. 9. 4. yet the works of the Law so glorious and privilegious had nothing to do with Faith to further our Justification by Christ but that the Gentiles without the Law had as free accesse to God by Faith in Christ as they with all the furniture of the Law and its works 6 Paul doth exclude all works under what name or notion soever from justifying so as Faith justifieth or to be instrumentall and conditionall to justification as Faith is But Faith is instrumentall or as M. Br. terms it conditionall to receive Christ to Justification Thereforr works are excludeded from being so conditionall or to be Conditions of the Gospel as he phraseth it This is apparent by those Scriptures where Paul saith Not of works but of Faith by Faith without works to him that worketh not but beleeveth c. as hath been 〈…〉 before alledged and amplified And all this of works without the adjection of the Law yea of works done hundreds of years before the Law to which Paul had reference in such disputes was given 7 Paul denyeth to works any operation in the Justification of Abraham or of us that obtein the same Justification with Abraham But the works which are denyed to justifie Abraham could not in Pauls sense be the works of the Law being acted 430 years before the Law was given and the Justification which is common to Abraham and his spirituall seed was and is justification by Christ So that works have nothing to do with Faith to condition us for justification by Christ This hath been made out in the former Chapter from Rom. 4. 1 c. 8 And lastly If such imperious arbitrary unreasonable and unproved distinctions be harkened to in Divinity what one part either of Law or Gospel shall abide sacred The whole word as Mr. Br. the great Artificer in the Trade somewhere complaines shall be made a waxen Nose For with as much integrity as Mr. B. hath here used to put the greatest Article of the Gospel to a topsie turnie may I mock at all the Commandments of the Decalogue with a distinctionary vanity to nullifie them Thou shalt have no other Gods before me True may I say but God meaneth other Gods of the Pagans devising not excluding the Gods of my own feigning Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image That is right said the Greeks once but God here excludeth the graven Images which the Romanes not the painted Images which we adore Thou shalt not steale the thief may here distinguish the lean Cattell are here excluded not the fat Thou shalt not murther the Pharisees glosse upon it was to wit my friends but my enemies I may The like might I say of the rest yea of every Gospel truth also and all with as good reason as Mr. Br. here deals with Paul We are justified or have part in Christ not by works but by Faith by Faith without works saith Paul Right saith Mr. Br. for he excludeth works onely as they are works of the Law not as they are works and Conditions of the Gospel Yet Vltra Sauromatus fugere
to say for the vindication of his doctrine from so fowl a scandal and blemish And here I shall in the first place onely minde the reader of what hath been before Copiously in its place manifested that Mr. Br. takes up this Feat of arguing from the Papists who to Clear their doctrine of Merit and Justification by works from being derogatory to Christ and his Merits do plead against us That they in no wise lessen the Merits of Christ by teaching that good works do Merit and Justifie But that herein they advance the Merits of Christ in ascribing to them this soveraign vertue and power to give validity and worth to mans good works to Merit and Justifie Nay the Hereticks say they degrade the Merits of Christ in teaching that mans works cannot Justifie or Merit as if there were not force enough in Christs Merits to enable them to it Whether theirs or Mr. Brs Argumentation have more shew of reason to support it I leave to the intelligent reader to judge 2 The whole Argument is Sophisticall and fallacious 1 In that his Argument is not full and wide to the proving of his position The position which by this Argument he pretends to Confirm is in his own words that This doctrine of his is no whit derogatory to Christ and his Righteousness But his Argument is shapen onely to prove that his doctrine doth not derogate from Christs righteousness not that it doth not derogate from Christ himself Were it granted that it doth not derogate from Christs righteousness yet it follows not that it doth not derogate from Christ any more than if a man should ascribe all due praises to Mr. Brs learning but should deny his honesty Charity Chastity verity or other like vertue in him yet because he doth not derogate from the learning of the man he doth not derogate from the man himself in any of his accomplishments Mr. Brs doctrine may derogate from Christ in veiling his grace mercy and fullnes in other Conditions required to the Compleating of his Mediatorship though it did where it doth not ascribe to his Righteousness its due praise and fullness 2 In that he playes with equivocation of words For to shun the deserved hatred which the Papists doctrine incurreth from the Saints of Christ he delivers their doctrine not in theirs but in the Arminian phrase putting under the name and in stead of good works Obedience to Christ For this is an equivocall phrase and as oft as it is used in the New Testament in order to Justification it is the same thing with Faith and differs not a whit from it The obedience of Faith obeying of the Gospel and obedience to Christ signifying nothing else but the deniall of our selves and our own righteousness and our trusting in Christ alone for Justification and salvation as Christ and his Gospel Command in opposition to the voyce of the Law that knowing nothing of Christ speaking nothing of faith saith Doe and work that thou mayest be saved Gal. 3. 12. But Mr. Br. takes this obedience to Christ not in that Gospel but in this legall sense for the fulfilling of the Moral works which the Law requireth to interesse us in the justification which is by Christ and so deceives his reader with the homonymy of the phrase 3 In putting a restricting in his Argument upon the Righteousness of Christ which in his position that he was to prove was left at large and in generall Christ and HIS Righteousness but in the Argument he putts a limitation upon it in the Major That Righteousness which also he explaineth to be onely the Satisfactory Righteousness of Christ as if there were no other but that righteousness in Christ whosoever derogates not from it could not derogate at all from Christs righteousness I may subscribe to the righteousness of Mr. Br. in some Acts of his though I onely desire but finde it not in other Many other Acts of righteousness were required in Christ even as he is our Mediator besides that by which he gave satisfaction to Justice for our Sinns without which his satisfactory righteousness becomes unavaileable to us And he that derogates not from the one may derogate from the other Yet see we the boldness of our Sophister what he restreigneth in the proposition about Christs righteousness in the Assumpeion he leaves indefinite loose generall and without restriction again not that righteousness but HIS Righteousness so making his Argument by his fallacy of four terms to run four-footed 4 By begging the question in Calling good works which with him is the same with Obedience to Christ the Condition of the New Covenant and Justification by Christ Well doth he put it upon himself saying He that maketh them such for neither God nor Chtist ever made them such 5 His Activity and Liegerdemain which he useth to draw off his reader from Considering the palpable sophistry used in this Argument This he seeks to do by giving and prosecuting in the explication of this Thesis a seeming reason that he bringeth to prove his assumption viz. that Christ came not to fullfill the Gospel but the Law and then spending his whole explication about it When not to speak how equivocall and ambiguous the phrase is and in its most literal and grammatical sense the assertion altogether false we utterly deny either that Christ hath fulfilled the works of the Law or the Gospel in our stead otherwise than by giving satisfaction by his death for our infirm and maimed fulfilling of them or that works done to justifie us are as all works of the Gospel but are contrariwise wise wholly works of the Law or that Christ hath any more satisfied for our infirmities in fullfilling the works of the Law than of the Gospel in that sense in which Mr. Br. distinguisheth them It was his part not to say but to prove soundly his assertion if he would not have it exploded for a new and vain fancy rather than to have answered in his explication objections of his own making that scarce touch upon the matter in question This might suffice as a full answer to his Argument to have proved it in so many particulars to be unargumentall no argument or a faulty argument not a Syllogism but a Para-logism Yea not to leave an occasion to any of excepting that the propositions of the syllogism may have some force in them or either of them apart from other to his purpose I shall afford the labour to examine them also To the Consequent of the Major I have many things to say 1 That it is as the whole Argument sophistical a meer declining of not a speaking to the question The word in that is foysted in besides the question and makes that which is said unsaid as altogether besides the question That which he undertakes to prove is in his own words that His doctrine is no whit derogatory from Christ and his Righteousness To prove this see how grossly he acts the
Sophister to be guâ—le fools in stead of a Logician to satisfie the intelligent He that ascribeth saith he to works or obedience no part of that work which belongeth to Christs satisfactory Righteousness doth not derogate in that from that Righteousness No less true than the Gospel but so farr from the question as the earth is from heaven For who ever questioned whether the not ascribing to works that which belongeth to Christs satisfactory righteousness be a derogating feom that righteousness Yea it were madness in any to question it For if the not ascribing should so derogate then God Christ Spirit Word Apostles Prophets all Protestants yea all animate and inanimate Creatures without understanding should be guilty of derogating from Christs satisfactory righteousness For none of these ascribe to works any part of that work which belongeth to that righteousness of Christ How palpable is this cheat which Mr. Br. would put upon us He that doth not ascribe c. doth not derogate in that i. e. in his not ascribing to mans works what belongs to Christ from Christ By the like Argumentation might Joah clear himself from the guilt of murther Committed upon two better men than himself and Christs Tormentors themselves from having any hand in his death Thus might they learn of Mr. Br. to plead They that wound not that keep a mans head from wounding do not in that take away his life True the not wounding of the head was not prejudiciall to the life of them whom they slew But the wounding and piercing of their bodies and shedding out their bowells made them as actually murtherers as if they had also dashed out the brains of them whom they slew It was not what they did not but what they did that Constituted them guilty of murther So it is not Mr. Brs not ascribing but his ascribing to works that derogates from Christ Shall we thinke that Mr. Br. slumbered and doated into this fallacy Is he a puny that he should need to be taught how to express himself in an argument Nay all must see that he knows it to be a heterodox and desperate Conclusion which he mainteineth that no honest and holy means can pillar up therefore tramples all ingenuity under-foot running over it to fetch patronage from his Sophistry And even herein bewraies the high thoughts that he hath of himself that all his flies are Eagles and his grossâ—st Conceptions oracles and his abasing of all others that they are so blinde as not to see and so blunt as to be all taken in his rook nets Or if we take his meaning thus That his doctrine in making Works a Collaterall with Faith to Justification which he would say plainly if he meant not fraudulently and had not his own judgement and Conscience suggesting to him the weakness falshood of such an assertion because it ascribeth no part of the work of Christs satisfactory righteousness to works doth not derogate from Christ and his righteousness Then I deny both the Consequent and Consequence of the Proposition For 1 It derogates from him and it a full potency and efficacy to justifie any one untill it be animated and enlivened by our own works to do it leaving it all feeble dead to produce its effect untill our obedience as its Concause gives life to it And this is Contradictive to the doctrine of the Apostle who asserteth the efficacy and actuall efficiency of Christ and his righteousness to justifie us yet ungodly Rom. 4. 5. yet without strength to work yet sinners yet enemies and so workers against him Rom. 5. 6 8 9 10. 2 It derogates from it its glory in parting and dividing our Justification between his righteousness our righteousness so ascribing part of the praise to man which ought to be attributed full and entire to Christ This also is contrary to the doctrine of the Apostle that excludes works under every notion from having to do in the business of Justification to exclude Boasting lest any man should boast or glory in himself Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Eph. 2. 9. But that He that glorieth may glory in the Lord 1 Cor. 1. 29 30 31. Nay it doth not onely derogate from but totally destroy and nullifie the righteousness of Christ as to us and our justification For so first the Apostle testifieth Christ is become of no effect to you whosoever of you are justified by the Law Gal. 5. 4. And to be justified by the Law or by the works of the Law are with the Apostle the same thing as hath been oft shewed before Yea to seek justification in any part or degree by the works or obedience which the Law requireth as a Condition of Justification is to seek to be Justified by the Law Works being the Condition of Justification by the Law and not by Grace 2 Because it obstructeth the way of Justification which Christ hath made and sends poor souls to seek it in a way that is impervious by which there can be no access to Christ his righteousness For the righteousness of Christ is given of free Love pure grace meer mercy as a free Gift Rom. 5. 15. Freely offered and received Rev. 22. 17. Without money and without price Isa 55. 1. He is the worst Simoniak that seeks to buy this gift of the Holy Ghost for money to make it his by his own Merit and obedience Whosoever is admitted to it such a one is rejected from it For Christ came to call not the Righteous but sinners to repentance The Publicans and Harlots enter when these are excluded They shall come from the East and from the West c. From all parts of Paganism and Barbarism that shall sit down with Abraham Isaac and Jaakok in the kingdome of God in the possession of graâ—e and righteousness by Christ but these that think themselves in their own righteousness to be the children of the kingdome shall be cast out with the Jewes into whose doctrine manners they are naturallized And justly For he that worketh i. e. brings works to inright him to Justification Challengeth it as Debt from Gods Justice as the fruit of his own work Merit that God oweth to him not as a free gift from his grace Rom. 4. 4. Who will envie to him the fruit of his deservings This is Condemnation from the Tribunall of Justice where no flesh can be justified when they which work not but beleeve on him which Justifieth the ungodly i. e. which bring Faith alone without works as Coadjutors to put them into the actuall and sensible possession of the righteousness which is by Christ these even these alone shall be justified at the throne of grace Rom. 4. 5. Why these seek it in the way where God is present to give it The other in a way wherein God never was never will be present to bestow it Lastly I deny the Assumption also It is false that Mr. Br. making so as he doth it Obedience or Works the condition
required to justification Or Mr. Br. that without craving leave of Paul by such gross distinetions goes about to make him unsay what he hath said and the world to believe that in all what he wrote of Justification hee meant to be understood on the contrary to what hee speaketh 6. If we bring works at all to procure justification by Christ we do by evacuating the grace of God and merits of Christ to our selves oblige put a bondage upon our selvet to fulfil the whole Law legally in its perfection else can we never be justified but abide under the Curse for ever For he that worketh requireth the reward as a debt in law and not as a gift of grace therefore except his work be so perfect as that it can in strict justice save him hee can never attain salvation as by comparing together these Scriptures will be evident viz. Gal. 5. 3 4. 3. 10. Rom. 4. 4 5. 9. 30 31 32. 7. As to the rules or qualifications which he gives to covenanting and obedience that it may be sincere they are in substance meerly legal the Name of Christ being only put in stead of the Name of God And who is there not only of the Jesuits Socinians with the Arminians from whom he borroweth most of his principles but even of the reall Antinomians whom he pretends to oppose who in all those particulars thinks not himself or gives not cause to all to think them as sincere as Mr. Br what ground have we to conclude but that they know the ends nature and conditions of the Covenant so truly and obey with so much deliberation and as little fittishness and rashness so seriously without dissimulation and slightness so freely intirely and singly aâ— Mr. Br. doth Thus every stigmatized Heretick in his own way bringing with him such a sincerity of obedience shall thereby be possessed of the investiture of Christs righteousness though he seek it in his own not in Gods way by his own righteousness and not by Faith alone which alone God hath stamped with an aptitude and efficacy to this work B. 2. The Law saith he requireth obedience and doing by its own righteousness to justifie us but the Gospel requireth it as a Medium to acquire to us Christs Righteousness by which wee may be justified So that the one requires works to justifie us withoutt the other the same works to justifie us by a Mediator This he saith so frequently in substance that it were lost labour to quote the places And it hath been almost so oft answered as said Therefore I shall referr the Reader to the places where it hath been answered and specially to the examination of those his disputes in which he labours to cleer his doctrine from all tincture of Popery from all contradiction to Paul and from being derogatory to Christ his righteousnes Here only I add that this doctrine is the same with that of the most legal Pharisees against whom the Apostle so much inveigheth wishing them accursed cut off for troubling the Churches therwith Gal. 1 9. 5. 12. For they arrogated to themselves alone part in Christ his Righteousnes because of their own personall righteousness in the works and obedience which the Law requireth resisting the Gentiles denying to them all possibility to partake in the Justification which is by Christ by means of Faith alone except they also fulfilled the righteousnesse which the Law required to give them right to him and it Yea Mr. Br. with these ascribes more to works than the very unbeleeving Pharisees For these claymed Justification only by their works but he and the beleeving Pharisees challenged for their works right both in the Justifier and in his justification also For Causa causae est etiam causa causati As farr as they ascribe to their works a Causality to make Christ theirs they make them causal to render the Justification which is by Christ theirs also B. 3. That neither is his Doctrine legall nor doth he ascribe too much to works because he maketh Faith and obedience to be but a Condition or a Mâ—dium or a poor improper Causa sine qua non of our Justification Aph. pa. 223 224. and our doing no part of satisfaction for our unrighteousness for this hee seems to have ascribed before to our sufferings in bearing the Curse but to be our Gospel-Righteousness or the Condition of our participation in Christ who is our legall Righteousness so of all the benefits that come by him App. p. 78. I say that subjection and obedience justifie 1 Not as works simply considered 2 Nor as legall works 3 Nor as meritorious workes 4 Nor as good works which God is pleased with 5 But as Conditions to which the free Law giver hath promised Justification and life Nay your i. e. the Protestants doctrine ascribeth farr more of the work to man than mine For you make Justification an effect of your own Faith and your faith an instrumentall cause of it and so make your self your own Justifier And you say your faith justifieth as it apprehendeth Christ which is the most intrinsicall essentiall consideration of Faith so faith hath much of the Honour But while I affirm that it justifieth only as a condition which is an extrinsicall consideration and alien from its essence and Nature I give the glory to him that freely giveth mee life and that made so sweet a condition to his Covenant and that enableth me to perform the said Condition App. pag. 120 121. All this hath been oft and fully examined before in its place also and how little truth there is in any part or parcell thereof discovered It would be weariness to the flesh and vexation to the Spirit but to look so often upon his great Goddess his Queen of Heaven CONDITION as he blesseth her O that his conscience had been so well acquainted with Christ as his fancy is with this Idoll he would not then have pestered the Church with such an imaginary Deity nor prostituted all that is called God at the feet of such a Proserpina I am weary any more to attend to him making the will of God i. e. God willing conditional and so the immutable God a conditional God the salvation of Christ conditional so Christ a conditional Saviour or the witness seal of Christ a conditional seal and witness and so the Holy Ghost a conditional Spirit of Adoption or the gospel of righteousness forgiveness and life a conditional Gospel and consequently nulling all thâ—se and pronouncing them no God no Christ no Holy Ghost no Gospel For a conditional proposition doth Nihil ponere and after Mr Brs. principles it is in mans righteosness to give or destroy the actual existence of every of these But I leave to him that delights therein to bury himself in this guâ—ph I conceive my self obnoxious to censure for spending and spilling so many words already to shew the deformity and
ugliness of this imaginary Chimera Here therefore it shall suffice leaving the Reader to the perusall of what hath been said already upon this subject to mind him of these two things 1. That both the whole and every least fragment of all that is here collected whether we look to the substance or Artifice used about it is not his but borrowed partly from the Papists partly from the Socinians and their Apes the Arminians as hath been before shewed and if I shall be called thereto I am ready more fully to shew by quoting the Authors out of whom he hath transcribed all almost word for word to his use So that the Reader may consult with such of our Writers that have answered their sophistry if he desire to read more fully and largely upon this subject and not expect it from mee who have already transgressed as some will judg by my too much largeness thereon as to Mr. Baxter 2 That although the voyce here be the voyce of Jacob yet the hands are the hands of Esau Sweet words but subverting doctrine in matter and substance Pills of poyson wrapt up in gold we except not against the gold but the poyson therein inclosed not against the Terms of words considered by themselves but against the pernicious doctrine which they palliate Whether we ascribe too much to Faith by making it an instrument see the examination of his answer to the last question which he propoundeth in the explication of Thes 56. But how false and fallacious his flaattering words which he useth here to make tolerable yea sweet his arrogant doctrine of Justification by works viz. that Wee that is I and the Papists with Socinus and Arminius make our righteousnesse but a Condition or Medium or a poor improper Causa sine qua non no part of satisfaction for our unrighteousness Not as works simply considered nor as Legall works nor as Meritorious works Nor as good works with which God is pleased but as our Gospel-righteousness and conditions to which the free Law-giver hath promised justification and life will easily appear to him that considereth what how much hee ascribeth to works Though he cals works a poor Causa sine qua non yet himself affirmeth that some Causes sine qua non deserve farr greater praise in morall respect than some that have a proper Causality do Aph. pa. 216. which though in words he deny of Faith meaning by faith all obedience and good works which hee calls the severall Acts of Faith Aph. p. 126. that it doth so deserve Aphor. p. 224. yet in matter and substance he affirms it And Nulla fides verbis cum res adversa loquatur For as I have more than hinted before 1 He maketh our righteousnes of works and Christs satisfactory righteousness co-ordinate and collateral in the procurement of our Justification the one as absolutely necessary as the other to the attainment of this end the one to purchase a possibility of Justification the other to render that which was but in possibility actual and effectual to us Both satisfactory the one as a sufficient Fine and payment the other as satisfactory Rent and homage Aph. Thes 17 18 19. pa. 129. 2 He puts both in the same order and kind of Causes making our righteousness and Christs satisfaction to be both the Causa sine qua non Thes 56. For although he names Faith there yet himself declares himselfe under Faith to mean and comprehend obedience also This Civility alone he vouchsafeth to Christ that he names Christs satisfaction before our faith or obedience because it seems that is the elder But in order power and authority to the producing of this effect Christ hath no pre-eminence given him above man 3 He affirms mans righteousness to be as perfect as Christs righteousness in order to Justification viz. both perfect in suo genere Christs righteousness perfect to do its work mans to its work or as he explains himself both perfect in the perfection of sufficiency in order to its end So that here also is a parity no efficiency in Christs righteousness without mans nor in mans without Christs to justifie But when the two perfections meet if neither lose its perfection they may after the world is ended perfect our justification Thes 24. p. 132. In the mean while till our works be added to Christs satisfaction what he saith of faith that he every where implyeth of the satisfaction of Christ that it is dead being alone as to the use and purpose of justifying And so as works make faith alive so they make Christs satisfaction alive as to the attainment of its end justification 4 That works justifie in the same kind of Causality and procurement with faith not only proving Faith to be sound but themselves being in the same obligation with Faith not idle Concomitants only standing by while Faith doth all which some fools might imagine hee meaneth when he calls them onely necessary Antecedents of Justification pa. 223. Nay they are Concomitants with Faith in the very Act of procuring it and in that kind of Causality which they have p. 299 300. 5 They do all this as they are works Even Faith it self justifieth as it is an Act of ours Append. p. 80. and as a morall duty Append. p. 102. So do all other Morall duties as they are part of our sincere obedience to Christ ibid. 6 That we are justified not only by works Aph. p. 300. and according to our works but also for our works pa. 320. that good works are a ground and Reason of it p. 221. 7 That we are justified for our works that is for the Merit of them Not Merit in the most proper and strict sense which is the performance of somewhat not due by one that is not under the Soveraignty of him to whom it is performed of that worth in it selfe which bindeth him to whom it is done in strict and naturall justice to requite him Such an obligation can no creature lay upon God Neither could perfect obedience in respect of the Law of Works if man had continued still upright have so merited But so far as it was possible for a perfect man to have merited under the Covenant of works hee may now merit also under the Covenant of Grace by his works viz. in an improper way of Meriting where the obligation to reward is Gods Ordinate Justice and the truth of his promise and the worthinesse lyeth in our performance of the Condition on our part Thus farr might Adam in his perfection have merited according to the Law of works and so farr may wee merit according to the Covenant of Grace Aphorism Thesis 26. pa. 138. 140 141. Let all this be laid together and who can but per-force acknowledge together with the horns of the Lamb the voyce of the Dragon also and all that he hath spoken pretendedly to the diminution of works under the fine terms of his causa sine qua non his
to salvation to become fools thereunto Are yee so foolish saith he having begun in the Spirit are yee now made perfect by the Flesh That by the Spirit and the Flesh is to be understood Faith and works in order to Justification cannot will not be denyed When therefore Mr. B. teacheth men to seek the beginning of Justification by faith and the perfecting thereof not by Faith onely but by works also he teacheth them to be foolish O foolish the worst fools to salvation and to be wise onely to condemnation This is to be wise according to Mr. B. wisedom in this Tractate that is wise after the Flesh not after the Spirit in seeking happiness in the way of works which the wisedom of the Flesh teacheth not in the way of Faith which the wisdom of the Spirit the wisedom of Christ his Gospel revealeth But all this together with a plain and full discovery of the vanity of this evasion hath been in its due place before held out which would be but a tyring of the Reader here again to be troubled with Onely the generall and chief thing which Mr. Br. both here and elswhere layeth as a foundation to his Justification by works it shall not be amisse briefly to examine here for the prevention of deceit to his Reader before I put a totall conclusion and period to what I have thought fit to except against this Work of his If it prove sandy and unsound his great Colossus of Justification by works falls all to shivers This is his quaint interpretation of faith in all such Scriptures as ascribe to Faith in opposition to works our justification That then by it we are to understand all Gospel duties all that Christ Commandeth not Faith in a distinct consideration from other qualifications and duties but Faith in a collective sense comprizing all morall duties and actions within it which is Faith and all its fruits yea more Faith and all that is reducible to it And thus according to Mr. Br. so oft as we are said to be justified by Faith not by works we must understand that the Holy Ghost meaneth that we are justified by Faith and works done after the tenor of the Gospel not by Faith and works done after the tenor of the Law Behold now the unfathomed depth of Mr. Brs wit and the unlimitted verge of his power His wit surpassing all the wisedom of all good and Orthodox men and Angels of whom no one had ever the reach since the world began to find with all his searching such a bugbear sense lurking in the plain Scripture Texts of the Apostle His power that with the stroking of this Mercuriall rod he makes fire and water life and death hell and heaven to lay down all their enmity each to other and sweetly to coll lodge and incorporate together Who would have thought that Paul who so seriously and sacredly professeth that he had rather in the Church to speak five words with his understanding so that he might teach and edifie others also than ten thousand in an unknown Tongue 1 Cor. 14. 17 19. And in preaching the Gospel discended to the unlearned and babes to feed them with milke to make all plain and easie to their understandings 1 Cor. 3. 2. should yet every where deliver the chief doctrine of the Gospel Justification by Christ in so dark Parables and riddles that none could find it out untill this Oedipus inspired from Socinus and Arminius rose up to unâ—iddle him For let there be named any one Protestant in any age till Mr. Br. held out his Candle to give light to the Sun that ever could dream of this Allegoricall sense after the principles of Origen lurking in Pauls words Or what hinders now but Faith may be turned into works and works into Faith Grace into strict justice and strict justice into free Grace the Law into Gospel and the Gospel into meer Law since Mr. Br. hath made a reconciliation and composure between Faith and Works in the point of Justification But whether this interpretation of Mr. B. be so firm as it is pretty and witty hath been before examined as elswhere so in the Examination of his third Argument for Justification by works drawn from his large definition of Faith which he giveth in his Thesis 70. Here onely I shall mention some phrases or names by which Justifying Faith is described in Scriptures and leave it to the judgment of every intelligent Reader to determine whether works can properly or in any tolerable sense be said to be comprized in faith as acting in the same kind of causality about such acts as those phrases or names imply 1 As Mr. Br. himself in his shorter definition defineth faith it is called our Receiving of Christ Jo. 1. 12. and that not in that wide sense which Mr. Br. fancieth but in that strict sense wherein Paul interprets it viz. the receiving of Christ to be our Righteousnes or receiving abundance of Grace and of the gift of righteousness by him Rom. 5. 16. 2 It is called the directing of the eye or looking to Christ yea to Christ lifted up upon the Cross for healing Io. 3. 14. 3 A coming to Christ for Life Jo. 6. 37. 5. 40. 4 The eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood to everlasting life Jo. 6. 53-56 5 A putting on of Christ as a Garment of Righteousness to cover our nakednesse and filthinesse Phil. 3. 9. Rev. 3. 18. I could add many the like phrases if it were needfull But these may suffice and who is there that sees not these to imply an instrumentality in faith to make Christ ours to Justification Yea and that in faith onely and not in works at all for how can Charity Chastity Mercy righteousnesse and the severall acts of these and other qualifications of which most have our Neighbour or Brother for their immediate Object about which in acting they are occupant be called the receiving intuition of and coming to Christ the eating of his flesh and drinking his blood or the putting on of him for righteousnesse It would seem strange to me that any man waking and not dreaming should conclude such works to be Antecedents and not the fruits of Justification and life by Christ Or that when faith is described by these denominating phrases works also as couched in faith should contrary to their nature be so denominated Nay Faith is thus diveâ—sly named in opposition to works yea to Gospel works For so doth our Saviour answer and determine the question put to him what to do under the Gospel that we might work the works of God i. e. what is to be done on our part that we may be justified and saved This is the work of God saith he that is this is in steed of all doings all workings that ye beleeve in him whom he hath sent Jo. 6. 28 29. which after he expresseth more fully to be a beleeving in him that came down from heaven and
or else be free and absolute and in what sense it may be granted to be Conditional pa. 1. p. 108. to 118. The numerousnesse and withall unprofitablenesse of the Conditions which Mr. Br. assigneth part 2. p. 31 32. His vain ascribing to Conditions part 2. p. 26 83 108 109 c. 272 273. His Reasons to prove it examined part 1. p. 353 to 356. The hurtfullness of the contrary doctrine which Mr. Br mainteineth part 1. p. 351-353 His dispute to prove it still after we are in Christ to remain Conditional par 1. p. 292. to 308. VVhat the judgment of the Protestant Divines in this point is part 2. p. 17 to 22. 204 205. The promulgation offer of it may be granted Conditionall but once in being and possession it is absolute part 1. p. 355 356. The rashnesse of some Ministers in closing with Mr. Br. in this his Popish Arminian doctrine pa. 2. p. 22 23 25 237. Whether the Covenant of Grace were originally made between the Father and the Son and what the Covenant was and upon what terms so made p 1. p. 99. to 107. What relation all the other Covenants made in time between God and man had to this ibid. Mr Br. after the Papists distinguisheth between the Commands and Counsels of the word part 1. p. 213 214. The doctrine of Justification by Faith alone not a soul Cozening doctrine p 2. p. 173 c. Beleevers not under the Curse as the Curse or revenging punishment for sin part 1. largely discussed from p. 24. to p. 61. The Question stated ib. p. 32. c. The Reasons brought by the Protestant Writers to prove the Negative against the Papists ib. p. 33. to 37. Mr. Brs Arguments for the Affirmative ib. p. 29-31 His Arguments answered ib. p. 38. to 49. How many wayes popish and pernicious this his doctrine is ib. p. 49. to 62. D Darkening in stead of cleering Truths common to Mr. Br. with the Papists part 1. p. 5 9 10. The Death and blood of Christ onely expiatory and satisfactory to Justification part 2. p. 64 65 67. to 70. VVhether Justification admit of Degrees or magis minus part 1. p. 286. to 291. VVhether the Devil shall manage the accusation of men in the day of Judgement part 1. p. 281. Distinctions in Divine matters not grounded upon the word viz. Arts Sophistry Doctrines not to be judged of after the personall splendour of their Authors pref p. 4 5. Doe viz. Life and Live E VVhether it be Easie to perswade men to embrace Justification by Faith but difficult by works part 2. p. 181. to 184. Sanctification a sure Evidence of Justification so convertibly pa. 2. 176. to 178. In what respects good works do so Evidence ib. F Faith without works not competent to justifie according to Mr. Br. part 2. p. 4. How farre he followeth the Papists in the doctrine of implicit Faith part 1. p 1 2 3 c. His doctrine herein directly pointed against the Protestants ib. p. 4. We must not admit doctrine of Faith upon the authority of our Teachers ib. p. 6. The evils attending the doing thereof ib. p. 7 8. Mr. Brs wild and irregular definition of Faith to prove justification by works discovered to be ridiculous pa. 2. p. 56. c. The doctrine of the Protestants about Faith and works part 2. p. 174. c. What Mr. Br. meaneth by Faith or his To credere part 2. p. 71. c. How different Mr. Brs sense is from some of the Protestant writers that with him call Faith the Condition of justification part 1. p. 349 350. Forgiving of others not a Condition of Gods justifying and forgiving us part 2. p. 31 33 c. to the 37. Mr. Brs Fraud in hiding all that the protestants have written against his popish doctrines part 2. p. 17 18. 128 129. G The Genius of men when conspiring is apt to draw each other into truth or error pref p. 10 11. By what means the Gospel was so much and so suddenly propagated at the begining of the Reformation by Luther pref p. 39 40. How the further propagation of it was stopped ib. p. 40 41. Gospel Comforts are Antidotes against sin and carnall liberty not fomenters of it par 2. p. 162 163 167 168. Mr. Brs Reasons to prove his doctrines not to be legall and against the Gospel examined part 2. p. 266. to p. 276. Whether or in what respects Christ hath or hath not satisfied for sins against the Gospel as for sins against the Law p. 1. p. 219-227 Whether works as holpen by Grace justifie part 1. p. 139. to 143. Mr. Br. the papists vainly make this their common plea to excuse their arrogance in ascribing justification to works ib. p. 175 176 H Whether beleevers ought to serve for fear of Hell part 2. p. 155-157 Hiding viz. Fraud I What the judgment of many learned protestant Divines hath been and is about justification as an Immanent and eternal act in God part 1. p. 231. to 238. What Scriptures they bring to prove the affirmative ib. p. 238. to 247. Mr. Brs dispute against them examined ib. p. 248-262 Faith the Instrument of justification p. 1. p. 330. And the some both Gods and mans Instrument and in what sense each is such ib. p. 332 334 336 to 341. Mans Instrument 334-336 342-348 Mr. Brs cavils against this doctrine answered ib. p. 358. to 361. 364. to 368. 370. Whether believers as well as the reprobates shall be judged for according to their works in the last day largely discussed against Mr. Br. p. 2. p. 124-136 Whether the Scriptures which speak in the future tense of justifying do denote the day of Judgment p. 1. p 278-280 Judgment viz. Devil 282. The State of the question between Mr. Br and the Protestants about Justification by works Part 2. p. 4 5 6. Justification by works denyed ibid. c. Scriptures produced to prove that Workes have no part with Faith in justifying ibid. p. 10. to 17. The Scriptures cited by Mr. Br to prove the contrary assertion examined ibid. Chap. 3. VVhether according to his own principles he rightly calleth Faith the more and works the less principall Condition of Justification ibid. p. 49. 51 278 279. And if so whether this proveth that when we are said to be justified by Faith onely we are said to be justified by works also and yet justified by Faith alone ibid. Or whether the Reducibleness of all works to faith in some kinde prove it ibid. p. 49 50 52 53-56 278 279. Justification considerable in 3 respects 1 in God 2 in Christ 3 in our own persons and how in every of these Part 1. p. 89 -91. Mr. Brs distinction of justification and pardon into Title of Law and sentence of Judgement Constitutive and Declarative virtuall and Actuall examined and proved unscripturall and vain and his reasons to prove a Justification in the day of Judgement answered
Part 1. p. 277. to the 286. More of Justification see Bellarmine Repentance Faith Works Condition Scripture Lord Prayer Forgiving Love Easie Christ Papists Paul Cozen Grace Causes Reconciliation Degrees K. The kingdome and pardon of God and of Christ are one and the same Part 1. p. 228 229. L. VVhether beleevers are under the Law as a Covenant of works largely discussed against Mr. Br. part 1. p. 61 to 97. Protestants reasons for the Negative ibid. p. 62-66 Mr. Brs Sophistry in stating the question ibid. p. 66-70 The Law not repealed as a Covenant of Works to any but in a right sense nulld to beleevers part 1. p. 71-74 The vanity of the distinctions fallaciousness of the Arguments which Mr. Br brings to prove the Affiâ—mative ibid. p. 75. to the 97 Many abuse the Law in preaching it first not onely to kill but then also to make alive again Pref. p. 11 12. Distinguishing the same works into works of the Law and works of the Gospel viz Paul and Moral Law-giver vid. Lord. Legal or Law teacher vid. Gospel Secular Learning see Arts Sophistry Tertullion Bullinger The doctrine of Faith gives not the Reins to carnall Liberty Part 2. p. 286. to the 295 The doctrine of Mr. Br so accusing it doth se ibid. p. 170 171 c. Do and Live whether and in what respects the voyce of the Gospel and in what sense to work for Life not from Life or from Life not for Life are either and both sound doctrine Part 2. p. 137. to the 153. 158. Part 1. p. 179. Whether Christ Justifie as our Lord and Law giver and that it follow thence we are justified by works as well as by Faith Part 2. p. 64. to the 84. How farr and in what sense onely the affirmative may be granted ibid. p. 79. The question stated ibid. p. 65. Mr. Baxters Arguments to prove the affirmative answered ibid. p. 71. to 84. VVhether Love cooperate with Faith in Justifying Part 2. p. 37. 40. Our Acting from Love to God denieth not a regular Love to our selves Part 2. p. 293 294. M. Mr. Brs Magisteriall and usurped Authority in saying without proving Part 2 p. 252 253. Marks vid. Evidences Metaphysicks see Arts. Mr. Brs doctrine of Merits examined in which he shews himself as high-flown a Papist as any of the Jesuits Part 1. p. 186. to the 194. An Admonition to such Ministers as inconsiderately suck up Mr. Brs doctrines Part 1. p 59 60. What the Moral Law is as considered in it self and in what sense taken Part 1. p. 197-199 VVhat Relation it hath to the severall Covenants ibid. p. 201 202 c. Why the Gospel continues it as a Rule and that it can be no more repealed or abrogated than God un-Godded ibid. p. 199 200 203-206 N. Novelty or Newnes of words and phrases used oft for the Vshering in of errors Part 1. p. 128 129. O. Obscuring see Darkening How all the Offices of Christ concur in our Justification yet nothing concludible thence for Justification by works Part 2. p. 63 64. Origen how great a Scholar and how great an abuser of his Learning and corrupter of the Gospel Pref. p. 33 34. P. VVhether our doctrine by excluding works from justifying be a stumbling block to Papists hindering their conversion and an occasion given to many learned men to turn Papists and therefore unsound Part 2. p. 188 to 197. Mr. Brs doctrine compared with the worst of the Papists and found one and the same with theirs Part 2. p. 215. to p. 222 His doctrine compared with such of the Papists as write more moderately found worse than theirs ibid. p. 223. to the 229. VVhether his doctrine contradicts Pauls or not ibid. p. 234. to the 258. His first Reason refuted viz. that Pauls question was what is the proper Righteousness by which we are justified but his own by what means we may attain this Righteousness though they answer differently to these differing questions they consent in Judgements ibid. p. 239 to the 250. His 2 reason that Paul excludes the works of the Law not of the Gospel vain and Popish ibid. p. 251. to the 257. His 3 reason that Paul under the word Faith implyeth works and obedience vitious in the same kinde with the former ibid. p. 257 258. It is no sound reason that Christ commands not the Perfect Righteousness of the Law because Mr. Br seeth no Reason why he should require what he enableth no man to perform Part 1. p. 215. 217 VVhat Reasons thereof may be given ibid. p. 216 217. Perfect See Sincere and Righteousness Person vid. Work Philosophy vid. Arts. Whether Mr. Brs doctrine be as he contendeth free from Popery Part. 2. p. 209 to 215. VVhether it be possible for us to perform a Righteousness perfect to Justification Part 1. p. 194. 196. Whether and in what sense Praying for pardon may be said to be a condition of pardoning and justifying Pa. 2. p. 31-33 Promises see Qualifie Punish and Punishment vid. Curse and Affliction VVhether Mr. Br hold for Purgatory Part 1. p. 54-56 Q. Promises of life made to persons so and so Qualified describe the Justified but demonstrate not for what they are justified Part 2. p. 40 41. 269. Rules given by our Divines for the right understanding of such promises to persons of such qualifications P. 2. p. 112 c. Quotations without the words of Scripture or shewing how he would argue thence why so frequent with Mr. Br. P. 2. Cha. 2 3 in the beginning thereof R. Whether ReconciliatioÌ„ denotes the same thing with or different from Remission and Justification Part 1. p. 227 228 308 309. VVhether and in what Respects sin may be Remitted before it be committed Part 1. p. 310. to the 313. Whether and in what sense Repentance may be said to officiat in Justifying Par. 2. p. 26. to the 31. Scripture seemingly asserting it examined ibid. What Legal Repentance is ibid. p. 26. What the life promised and death threatened under the Law to this legal Repentance are ibid. p. 26-28 What Gospel Repentance is and how manifold ibid. p. 29-31 Sometimes one with Faith ibid. p. 29 30. In what sense life is promised to it ibid. Repentance either in its large or strict sense how it giveth life ibid. p. 28 29 30. Mr. Brs doctrine of a twofold Righteousness absolutely necessary to Justification the one Legal the other Evangelical this in our selves that in Christ and his Reasons to make good 1 his phrase 2 his matter examined and refelled Part 1. p. 119. to p. 143. His dispute that his doctrine is not derotory to Christ and his Righteousness proved fallacious and false Part 2. p. 259. to the 265. VVhether Righteousness be a Reall Being or else but a Modification of a Being Part 1. p. 149 150. 159. to 161 VVhether the Scripture call men Righteous only for performing the Cnnditions of the New Covenant Part 1. p. 144. to 163.
VVhether the inherent Righteousness of Beleevers be perfect Part 1. p. 181 to the 186. Whether Faith as our Righteousness Justifie Part 1. p. 366-368 S. What to judge of some passages that fell from Mr. Saltmarsh his pen. Part 1. p. 138. Salvation twofold the state of Grace and of Glory Part 2. p. 104 105. In the former sense it is the same with Justification ibid. p. 105. Whether in the latter sense it runs upon the same Conditions with Justification ibid. p. 105 Mr. Brs arguing for the affirmative proved fallacious and invalid ibid. p. 102 oth e 1 12. The Scriptures which he alledged to prove works the condition of Salvation found incompetent and invalid to prove it ibid. p. 116. to the 123. As soundly may we argue from Justification to Salvation that it is universally conditionall as convertibly p. 1. p. 331. Satisfaction vid. death Schoolmens Learning and studies described Pref. p. 37 38. Mr. Br. pretends to admit the Scripture as Judge in the Controversie of Justification by works but fallaciously Pa. 2. p. 7 8. What Scriptures he produceth to prove Justification by works pa. 2. p. 25 c. These all collected by the Papists to his hands ibid. These severall Scriptures examined whether they make for him ibid. p. 25. to the 48. His calumny that the Protestants wrest and implyedly that the Papists truly expound the Scriptures ib. p 9 85 86 87 89. Whether and in what respects God doth see or not see sinn in his pâ—ople Part. 1. p. 70. to 72. Signes vid. Evidences Similies prove not but illustrate what is proved Part 2. p 172. Sincerity what it is Part 1 p. 210. Whether the Gospel requires Perfection or sincerity onely ibid. p. 208. to the 217. Part 1. p. 270. Reasons ministring doubts of Mr. Baxters much applauded sincerity Pref. p. 5. to the 9. Mr. Brs oft excusing himself from affectation of Singularity true yet examined upon what grounds it is true and that he doth it Part 1. p. 331. Whether and how far Mr. Brs doctrine is tainted with or free from Socinianism part 2. p. 229. to the 234. Mr. Brs Sophistry and the evils thereof discovered p. 1. p. 8. to 21. 284. to 281. Sophisticall distinction how pernicious part 1. p. 180 189 278 382. How incoherent with the mind of Christ ib. p. 350. Whether to affirm that Christ Suffered the idem for us denies pardon and free grace part 1. 229 230. T Tertullians judgment of secular intermixed with Divine learning in Gospel matters pref p. 34 35. The Testimonies of those eminent writers whom Mr. Br. citeth as Patrons of his opinion manifested to be against him not for him part 2. p. 197-208 W Word alone competent to determine in Gospel matters pref p. 16 18. to 21. Works and duties co-ordinate with Faith to justifie according to Mr. Br. part 2. p. 4. what duties and works these are ib. p. 5. In what consideration and sense he makes them to justifie ibid. How far we are justified by them before men viz. Charity Mr. Brs and the Papists arguing from St. James for justification by works examined and refelled part 2. p. 184 to 102. His arrogant ascribing to works under his Causa sine qua non or condition part 2. p. 274-276 VVhether when we are said to be justified by Faith works be comprized in faith part 2. p. 281. to 284. How apt mans nature is to put it self under the Covenant of works part 2. p. 285 286. Mr. Brs untoward question answered whether if God had ordeined any work or vertue to justifie it should not have done it part 1. p. 379. c. In what sense our Divines say God justifieth first the person then his actions pa. 1. p. 193 194. Covenant of works see Law More of works see Life and Live Grace and Justification In what sense and respects the Scripture calleth the Saints worthy part 1 p. 187 188. FINIS
whatsoever notions of naturall righteousnes and holines of God of good and evill of truth and falshood there are in naturall men without the word the same not to be ingraven into them by nature or remainders of any Law written in mans heart at his first Creation but of Gods immediate infusion by a generall and common operation of the Spirit in time distributed to some in a greater to some in a lesser measure to some scarce at all as his infinite wisedom shall see it to make most for his glory And from these Mr. Baxter seems elswhere not to dissent And how then can that be nulled and repealed or what new super-addition can there be made to that whith was never in being much less can a Covenant stand firm which was never existent If the second then contrary to his Assertion the Old Covenant in respect of our personall Obligation to it and of the dependence of our life and death upon it according to our personall obedience or disobedience to it is nulled there being now no accessible Paradise nor tree of knowledg of good and evill about which our obedience may be exercised or disobedience manifested If the third Mr. Baxter speaketh point-blank in contrariety to the Apostle in saying that the Covenant of Grace was added to the Law or Covenant of works For the Apostle giveth the priority to the Promise or Covenant of Grace and affirmeth expresly that the Law or Covenant of works was many hundred years after added to it Gal. 3. 17 19. So that we know not where to meet with Mr. Baxter to understand much less to answer him 4 He hath a mentall reservation also when he affirmeth that the Covenant of Grace was super-added as the onely possible way of life Who knows whether he pronounceth it the onely possible way to life as it hath fulture and supportance from the Law and Covenant of Works to which it is super-added and so Moses and Christ meeting together in the Mount do save a poor sinner and what the Law could not do of it self being weak through the flesh that could not fulfill it Rom. 8. 3. Now by the super-added help of Grace it doth perform Or as it is operative in it self and by it self saving by its own soveraign power without any help from the works of the Law Why doth not Mr. Baxter speak out Veritas non quaerit angulos Truth loveth to shew its face in the cleer light not hiding it self in the clouds I do no wrong to Mâ— Baxter in pressing upon him for his meaning herein every man may see in the sequell of his Tractate that grace and faith have with him very little power to justifie or save but what they borrow and fetch home in a Cardinals Hat or Monks Cowl from good works 5 And he leaves us in the dark and doubtfull what he means by the word hereby when he saith Christ doth not null the Covenant hereby it is a relative word and must have its meaning from that which is antecedent in the tenth Aphorism viz. Christs prescribing of a new Law and tendering of a new Covenant The old Covenant is not nulled hereby saith Mr. Baxter Doth he mean by the tendering of the New Covenant Or the offer of Grace This makes nothing to the end he drives at None conceiving that the offer or tendering of Grace to a sinner doth forth with free him from the Curse of the Law untill he accepts the tender Or doth he mean that the effectualizing of the Covenant of Grace to a sinner or the taking of him effectually into the Covenant of Grace doth not make void the Law to him as a Covenant of works This is indeed like himself and agreeable to his purpose He is not consistent with himself nor with the most subtle and sophisticall of the Papists whom he loves as dearly as himself if he do not so mean Nevertheles because he is willing here to pass under a vizzard I will not trouble my self to unmask him Himself will openly enough discover himself to us when the humour takes him At present let him be sullen 6 The same might I say of that which followeth The former i. e. The Covenant of works or the Law still continueth to command prohibite promise and threaten A wide dominion and large authority but who the subjects servants are over whom it is exercised he leaves as all the rest in an ambiguity is not disposed to tell us except the next words do it So that the sins even of the justified are still breaches of that Law and c. 7 But here also he determineth to passe away in the dark tells us onely what power the Law hath against the sins not against the persons of the justified that it threatens and curseth their transgressions but whether onely upon the person of Christ satisfying for them or els in their own persons also after Christ hath so satisfied is a secret that at this time and in this place we must not know from him though if he had not let it out before he would have been in pangs of travell with it untill he were delivered of it Thus have we found M. Baxter in this Aphorism fighting against the fore-mentioned Conclusion and the Scriptures that confirmed it with his sword in the scabbard How terrible the skirmish was they that felt either the point or edge of his weapon can tell you Suppose he should now unsheath it who could stand before his drawn sword This he is about to do by his Explication Mr. B. I acknowledge that this assertion is disputable and difficult and many places of Scripture are usually produced which seem to contradict it I know also that it is the judgement of learned and godly men that the Law as it is a Covenant of works is quite null and repealed in regard of the sins of believers Yea many do believe that the Covenant of works is repealed to all the the world and onely the Covenant of grace in force Against both these I maintain this assertion by the Arguments which you find under the following Position 13. And I hope notwithstanding that I extoll free grace as much and preach the Law as little in a forbidden sense as though I held the contrary opinion First he acknowledgeth his Assertion to be disputable and difficult We have found it not onely to be so but to be so of his own making by means of his clothing it with the darknes of such and so many ambiguities equivocations c. Against it he saith there is a two-fold authority usually produced the one Divine the othee humane The one he despiseth and blowes of as contemptible the other he falsifieth I am confident that he may have somewhat to say in answer to it 1 There is Divine authority or many Scriptures produced which seem to contradict his Assertion And here take we notice in how base esteem he hath the Holy Scriptures of those many Scriptures he
5. 24. 6. 35 40. 47. 7 38. 11. 25 26. 12. 46. Act. 10. 43. Rom. 3. 26. 4. 5. 5. 1 10. 4 10. 1 Jo. 5. 15. Mar. 1. 15. 6. 12. Luk. 13. 3. 5. 24. 47. Act. 5. 31. 11. 18. 20. 21. 2. 38. 3. 19. 8. 22. 26. 20. Rev. 2. 5 16. Heb. 6. 1. 2 Pet. 3. 9. Mr. Br having as he thinks laid prostrate the whole generation of Christ and antipapisticall beleevers under the Curse under the wrath of God sticks as close to them as the vulture to the carkas or the beetle to the doung or the flesh-fly to the sore For here again he concludes that the very Tenor of the New Covenant is that notwithstanding Christs sufficient satisfaction made to the law they must remain unjustified unpardoned under sin under vengeance to the end and then possibly after many hundreds and it may be thousands of yeers wherein their bodies have laid under rottennes and their souls under all hell-torments which the law can inflict they shall be justified And this very probably shall be about that time when Origens reprobates and devills shall arise from hell and fly away thence all at once and together to heaven For whosoever is not justified and pardoned here in this life shall surely not attain it untill that St Nevers day of Origen But to this it hath been answered already He seems now to bring some new thing and that which every beleeving soul gaspeth to hear made out in its fullnes viz. What the Tenor of the New Covenant is viz. That whosoeve will repent and beleeve to the end shall be justified after the end When the Serpent hath got his head into the hole the body also by little and little followes Erewhile it was he that beleeveth to the end now it is he that repenteth to the end and beleeveth to the end that shall be after all ends and worlds justified Yet this is but the head and neck of the Serpent The bulk and belly are behinde and the same full of all the qualifications and good works that Mr. Br can devise or all the herds of Monks and Jesuits have devised to his hands These all must be according to Mr. Baxters Gospel as effectuall as faith or Christ himself to Justification I should but preoccupate a dispute here to examine whether repentance be one of the many thousand conditions of Justification which Mr. Br in the sequele of this Treatise holds necessary to Justification I shall therefore leave the handling thereof to its due place Onely by the way if by repentance Mr. Br here meaneth any thing heterogeneous or specifically distinct from faith I affirm and shall in its place make good that this his assertion is totally Popish against the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles As for the Scriptures which he doth here roll out in a Crowd without rank or file to prove it partly because he neither alleageth the words nor shews how he would argue from them partly because his shuffling them together in Clusters tends onely to make the labour of his answerer almost intolerable to shew particularly how little each Scripture makes for him and how much many of them against him partly because he doth still reserve to himself whatsoever be said in answer an advantage to evade by telling us that the force of that Scripture doth in another way and not in that to which we have answered prove for him but principally because he quotes the same Scriptures over and over again in another place more proper where it shall be more pertinent to answer them I shall therefore here forbear to speak to them lest I should there be forced to omit it or to say over again what had been here said before Nay himself will not have them to be answered here for he speaks so ambiguously that he will not have his meaning understood telling us onely that upon these Conditions forsooth performed we shall be justified in another world but doth not let us know from him whether upon performance of them we may be justified in the present world But he passeth to the explication Explication Bax. Christs satisfaction to the Law goes before the New Covenant though not in regard of its payment which was in the fullnes of time yet in regard of the undertaking acceptance and efficacy There could be no treating on new terms till the old obligation was satisfied and suspended I account them not worth the confuting who tell us that Christ is the onely party conditioned with and that the New Covenant as to us hath no conditions so Saltmarsh c. The place that they alleage for this assertion is that Jer. 31. 31 32 33. cited in Heb. 8. 8 9 10. Which place conteineth not the full tenor of the whole New Covenant but either it is called the New Covenant because it expresseth the nature of the benefits of the New Covenant as they are offered on Gods part without mentioning mans conditions that being not pertinent to the busines the Prophet had in hand Or els it speaketh onely what the Lord will do with his elect in giving them the first Grace and enabling them to perform the Conditions of the New Covenant and in that sense may be called a New Covenant also as I have shewed before p. 7 8. though properly it be a prediction and belong onely to Gods will of purpose and not to his legislative will But those men erroneously think that nothing is a condition but what is to be performed by our awn strength But if they will beleeve Scripture the places before alleaged will prove that the New Covenant hath Conditions on our part as well as the old Some benefit from Christ did the condemned here receive as the delay of their condemnation and many mere mercies though they turned them all into greater judgements but of this more when we treat of generall redemption I shall here propound some questions to Mr. Baxter about his own words to be answered by some of his Chaplains or Disciples For I am not so ambitious as to expect his stooping in person to so low an office 1 Whether Christs satisfaction to the law were undertaken and so virtually made without an agreement between the Father and the Son that the Son should give and the Father accept such satisfaction Mr. Br so great a Master of reason who hath sacrificed all his religion to reason can judge whether this could rationally if possibly be done 2 If by agreement whether this agreement was not by way of Covenant between the Father and the Son and so whether the whole busines of mans justification were not transacted and concluded upon first between the Father and the Son 3 Whether Christ undertook to give satisfaction or the Father to accept it for any other besides those that in time have or shall have the full benefit thereof I mean besides the elect whom
soaring still higher towards the very top of it and sinking lower from the Orb of Christian verity So by that something of man that must enright him to Justification he must mean something more then Repentance and Faith which he had before concluded necessary to Justification Thes 14. Els were he upon a retreating not a marching posture Nevertheles how subtlely doth he dâ—wb and paint to gull the simple and catch them that are made to be taken by putting fine words upon his course purposes telling them that we are justified by Faith and that there is required on our part but receiving and applying of Christs merits as if he were as innocent as a Dove and had none of the Serpent in him when contrariwise the sequele of his Tractate proclaimes him by that which he calls here somewhat of man to mean at the full with the worst Papists mans works to the totall exclusion of Gods grace In mean while his words leave it doubtfull here what this somewhat of man is and whether it be the hand or the heel that must receive and apply Christ to Justification His Disciples are not yet enough moulded he thinks to receive the Dragons voice in his own tone they must be accustomed to bear the Calf daily untill he become an Oxe that he may be born then too and at length we shall finde the instruments which Mr. B. appoints to receive Christ to be instrumentall onely to push him from us However he concludes thus because he will have it so That no man by the meer satisfaction made is freed from the Law and Curse c. absolutely but conditionally onely i. e. not at all And this he hath said over and over already and there needs no further Answer then that which hath been before given So that where he repeats this Assertion again in the Explication That Christ doth not justifie by the shedding of his blood immediately without somwhat of man intervening c. adding that All the Scriptures alleaged p. 79. do prove it I grant what he saith for I finde no Scripture there alleaged But if he mean p. 89 90. what I said there I say here again he shall not misse of an answer to them when he comes to alleage them again in their proper place and declares how he will argue from them Yet because the man is delighted to deliver first in generall what he will after deliver again in particulars I shall say something also in generall to his generall assertion That Christs satisfaction justifieth not without something of man intervening to give him right to it Let us see what the Scripture saith for or against it The Apostle speaking of mans redemption and justification and shewing the cause why some have and some have not their part in it affirmeth and proveth that it is not of him that willeth or of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy Rom. 9. 16. By the willing is to be understood all the good qualifications and operations of the soul by running all the good works of a mans life and practice as all confess When the Holy Ghost excludeth every somewhat of man within the man and every somewhat of man without man from conferring any thing to Justification what other somewhat remaineth of man to intervene c Let it be judged whether Mr. B. doth not purposely fight against Scripture Again Rom. 5. 6 8 9 10. When we were yet without strength viz. to any spirituall operation Christ dyed for the ungodly while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us and we were justified by his bloud while enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son Here the Result of the Apostles reasoning discovers to us two things to our purpose 1 That according to the minde and language of the Holy Ghost Christ dying and by his death satisfying for any mans sinns and that mans justification and reconciliation to God by that satisfaction are equipollent terms holding forth one and the same thing For so the Apostle here useth justification and reconciliation as words of the same sense and weight And Amesius manifesteth Ames Med. Lib. 1. c. 27. Sect. 22. in what respects they must needs be taken for the same thing and makes both the same with Christs dying for him So that every person for whom Christ hath by his death made satisfaction is effectually justified and reconciled to God I mean in Christ though possibly not yet in his own apprehension 2 That we are thus justified and reconciled to God while ungodly while sinners while enemies while without strength to that which is good What somewhat of man can there be in such to enright them to justification unless any will say their impotency ungodlines sin and enmity shall do it Such contrariety is there between Mr. Br and the Spirit or word of truth There needs not much deliberation to determine which to follow But he proceeds Bax. p. 93. Let all the Antinomians shew but one Scripture which speaks of Justification from Eternity And what if it be but one of all or one that is not an Antinomian that shews it will Mr. Br harken and submit his judgement to that Scripture so alleaged I say in like manner Let all the Antichristian Jesuits or Mr. Br. or his Mr Grotius shew one Scripture which asserteth onely a conditionall and not an absolute Justification purchased to us by Christ I will hear and submit though I see not then how to be saved As to his Challenge I shall speak in a more proper place Bax. I know God hath decreed to justifie his people from eternity and so he hath to sanctifie them too but both of them are done in time Justification being no more an immanent act in God than sanctification as I shall shew afterward I shall therefore wait on him untill he hath the leisure and pleasure to shew it In the mean while why doth he Conclude so hotly and peremptorily before-hand that which he brings nothing save his own bare affirmation to prove He said not unwisely which said Let not him that girdeth on his armour boast as he that putteth it off 1 King 20. 11. Bax. The bloud of Christ then is sufficient in suo genere but not in omni genere sufficient for its own work but not for every work There are severall other necessaries to Justifie and save quibus positis which being supposed the bloud of Christ will be effectuall Qui non vult intelligi debet negligi He that will so speak that he may not be understood is worthy to pass without an Answer If he mean that the bloud of Christ is sufficient to compleat our justification before God and that this is its own work But that there are other necessaries to justifie us in our selves and our own apprehensions which being supposed the work is ended I will abstein from all contradiction If he mean otherwise and will not express himself Hony soit Qui male
put a difference betwixt mid-day and mid-night It is plain by what light by what argument It is the thing in question and none untill Mr. Br. ever held forth this assertion in these his expressions Yet it must be plain viz. because he hath said it so plain as a New world created in Mr. Br. fist he that can see what is not may see it We deny both the righteousnes which is by Christ to be a legall righteousnes and our own qualifications to be the terms and grounds upon which he is made to us Righteousnes And let the world judg whether he shew himself a Christian Teacher or an Antichristian Imposter who having promised a confirmation of his strange and before unheard of doctrine brings nothing but flourishes of words to charm fools not one argument or Scripture to satisfie the wise and conscientious Himself seeth the grosnes and palpablenes of his delusions and left his Reader should stay in his meditations upon it to see it also he hasteth to annex a fourth Conclusion very plausible to them whom he hopes to beguile wherupon as on a Cross he naileth the picture of an Antinomian to crucifie him that with this pleasant spectacle he may divert his Readers eyes from the nakednes and nothingnes of what went before to the beholding of a new object set before him To affirm therefore that our Evangelicall or New Covenant Righteousnes is in Christ and not in our selves or performed by Christ and not by our selves is such a monstrous piece of Antinomian Doctrine that no man c. ut supra Which is as much as if he had said to his Reader if upon the bare authority of my words when I have no one good Argument to prove them thou wilt not become a rank Papist I will register thee for an Antinomian and make thee out to the world such a Monster that all shall abhor thee as unsufferable With this Thunder-bolt he knows he shall shake into an Ague all those that Nicodemus-like are Disciples of Christ but secretly for fear of the Jewes Should they be suspected of the least tang of Antinomianism they should never more have a good look from the Scribes and Pharisees But he is not forth with an Antinomian whom Mr. B. so termeth If Pythagoras his transmigration of souls into new bodies were Canonicall I should conclude that the ghost of one of those ghostly Fathers of the Councell of Constance had crept into Mr. B. body They to make John Huss odious painted an ugly Devill in paper and crowned John Huss therewith when they carried him to the stake to be burned at the view whereof the people exulted in his death as if they had seen some Witch or rather young Devill burned So deals Mr. B. here with them which are truly Evangelical inures upon them the black brand of Antinomianism so to make truth in their mouth hatefull as well as the persons But is it decreed that they are all Antinomians that hold and that it is a monstrous piece of Antinomianism to hold that our Evangelicall or New Covenant righteousnes is in Christ not in our selves performed by Christ and not by our selves If so I much question whether there will be found any one save Mr. B. alone in all the Reformed Churches that are or have been but must bear the imputation of a monstrous Antinomian I will not be over confident of Socinus Arminius Grotius and their followers because I take them not for members but troublers of the Reformed Churches For my part I know no difference about this point between the Orthodâ—x and Antinomians Both consent 1 That our Gospel-righteousnes which worketh effectually to our Justification is in Christ not in our selves save by imputation 2 That our Gospel or New Covenanâ— righteousnes in reference to our sanctification is in Christ radically but in us by derivation and influence actually to sanctifie us 3 That our faith repentance obedience holines good works though flowing from Christ himself into us are the Gospel or New Covenant Righteousnes not by which we are justified but by which we are sanctified And let Mr. B. or any of his Disciples produce that Orthodox man that ever called this doctrine Antinomianism or that hath not shunned the contrary doctrine as Popish and Antichristian Yet Mr. B. finding himself bound by promise to prove many things as was said before that his fallacious dealing might not be too notorious and shamefull he chooseth one of the many leaving the rest untouched to speak something to it as he had said though not to prove it And in that which he saith there is nothing to confirm his own assertion but a meer reviling abusing abasing of them that assert the contrary under the false imputation of Antinomianism And here he comes upon the stage like Hercules Furens who in a Phrensie taking his Wife and Children to be a Lioness and her Whelps falls upon them fiercly with his Clubb and envenomed Arrows untill he had utterly destroyed them So Mr. B. in somewhat a like fit not finding reall Antinomians but making in his fancy imaginary Bug-bears and phantasms of them curseth them with Bell Book and Candle for saying that Christ hath fulfilled the conditions of the New as well as of the Old Covenant and that our Evangelical righteousnes is not in our selves but in Christ At the supposition of such assertions which none ever laid down in these terms the man is in a rage beats the wind and flings dust in the Aire cryeth Blasphemy heresie impiety and enumerates Absurdities upon absurdities arising from such doctrine all which I am not at leizure to transcribe it being all superfluous and not to the purpose but may be read at large pag. 111 112 113 of his Tractate More proper shall it be for me here to make out Mr. B. either willing or unwilling mistake herein and then all his absurdities will â—ither vanish into winde or return upon himself First then as we deny not Faith in the Lord Christ to be instrumentall to apprehend to our selves Christ for our justification and a declarative evidence to our own souls that we are actually justified by him as before hath been granted so we affirm it to be hereticall and popish doctrine which Mr. B. doth here pag. 111 deliver in asserting repentance obedience submission c. and afterward all other vertues and good works to be conditions of the New Covenant viz. by which as by our Gospel righteousnes we are and without which preceding we cannot be justified For all these in Mr. B. sense as Austin from the tenor of the Gospel saith Non precedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum are not the precedents but fruits of justification 2 We affirm Repentance Obedience Charity c. and all good works which the Gospel requireth to be originally and materially the works and duties of the Law Nature and naturall conscience it self suggesting to every of us both the rest and withall in
and the same conformed not onely to the Law but the Gospel also as before hath been mentioned In respect of this sanctification though yet but unperfect wee indeed affirme the godly to bee sometimes called Righteous yet not righteous to Justification but in regard of the life of Righteousnesse new begotten and inherent in them But it is observable how subtlely he slanders the Orthodox Teachers with a fault which is his not theirs how hee would condemn them for men attributing too much to the Law and Workes because they call those virtues and good works which the Law commandeth a righteousnesse with which the godly do serve the Lord in and through Christ Jesus When himsel◠affirmes the same to be the very Righteousnesse by which they are justified For if he be demanded whether the personall Righteousnesse which he contendeth to bee necessary and effectual to Justification ought not to have at least some unperfect agreement to the Law of God he answers affirmatively and fights strongly for it in the sequele of this Treatise Let him be demanded whether any other supposed Righteousnesse that the Law command not can be our personal righteousnesse to justifie us This he◠denyeth What then is the difference betwixt him and them This onely that they will not say with him that his righteousnesse so unperfect as hee here termes it and which in the las◠words of the former Section he pronounced unrighteous hatefull and accursed is the personall righteousnesse by whic◠men are justified before God If you ask how such workes should justifie being so unrighteous and accursed yes saith he as God hath appointed them to be the conditions of the New Covenant the performance whereof justifieth and maketh us personally righteous before God Here now is a heavenly Gospel Such conditions and such a justification if the one bee accursed much more the other And where is Gods Righteousness if hee will not justifie but upon accursed conditions Those that will not have not consented to this doctrine of his he calls intolerably ignorant Let him now name any one either Divine or understanding Christian in any of the Churches that have shook off Popery and not suckt it back again consenting with him in this doctrine else it is not his humility that is discovered in calling all the godly and learned that are or have been in any of the Churches of Christ intolerably ignorant Satis pro imperio enough Magisterially out of doubt What he talks of the streight crooked line hath its dependence onely upon the fallacious definition which hee before gave of Righteousness making it a mear empty notion not a vertue or gif of Gods grace which definition falling this comparison fals with it For if we grant unto Righteousness a real being Master Baxter himself will not deny but as one sparke of fire under a vast heap of ashes is as true and real fire as if no ashes were there so one spark of righteousness I mean living Righteousness under a whole body of infirmities is as true and truly Righteousness as if no infirmities were there And if God vouchsafe to call a man righteous in reference to that poor pittance of Righteousness rather than unrighteous for the whole mass of his corruptions what art thou O man that repliest against God is thine eye evil because he is good B. Most they say to maintain it is in this simple objection If we are called holy because of an unperfect holinesse then why not Righteous because of an imperfect righteousnesse Answ Holinesse signifieth no more but a dedication to God either by separation onely or by qualifying the subject first with an aptitude to its Divine employment and then separating or devoting it as in our sanctification Now a person imperfectly so qualified is yet truly and really so qualified And therefore may truly be called Holy so farre But Righteousnesse signifying a conformity to the rule and a conformity with a quatenus an imperfect rectitude being not a true conformity or rectitude at all because the denomination is of the whole action or person and not of a certain part or respect therefore imperfect Righteousnesse is not Righteousnesse but unrighteousnesse It is a contradiction in adjecto Object But is our personal Righteousnesse perfect as it is measured by the New rule Answ Yes as I shall open to you by and by I could here heap up a multitude of orthodox writers that do call our personal Righteousnesse by the title of evangelicall as signifying from what rule it doth receive its name The words of the Poet are here verified by Master Baxter mali bonos malos esse volunt ut sint sui similes Hee is angry with the simplicity of the godly and orthodox that they are single and sincere in their disputes and would have them double and crafty like himselfe In this sense I acknowledge the Argument which he saith they bring and is most they say to maintain their assertion is a simple objection They have more to say for the maintenance thereof then all his sophistry can subvert And this argument though simple yet is not silly or weak but strong and sound against all his batteries It is drawn à pari If there be a parity between righteousnesse and holinesse to give a denomination of holy and righteous persons then the argument is firme and men may be as properly termed Righteous in reference to a righteousnesse not yet perfected as holy in reference to a holinesse not perfected at verum prius ergo Postorius The former is true therefore the latter also Master Baxter denyeth the assumption and goes about to shew a disparity in this case between righteousnesse and holinesse making holinesse to be either onely a separation of a thing or person to holy use without an infusion of a new qualification to fit him for holy employment or at least the qualification of such a person first alway and then a separating of him afterward as if usually the consecration or separation by the blood did not go before the new qualifying of him by the Spirit of Christ this indeed is not so squaring with the Popish Canon as his way But to let passe this touch onely upon that wherein he opposeth righteousnesse to holinesse Holinesse he grants to be a qualification and consequently to have a real Being This here he denyeth as before of righteousnesse A meerly fallacious evasion for righteousnesse hath no lesse a real being than holinesse as hath been before shewed And the Scripture gives its Testimony making Righteousnesse and true Holinesse as it were the two essentials of the New Man which is created after God i. e. in answer and conformity to that essentiall Righteousnesse and Holiness that are in God himselfe Eph. 4. 24. And what els doth Saint Peter mean in affirming the Saints to be Partakers of the Divine Nature but by the infusion or creating of Righteousnesse as well as Holinesse in them by which they are reformed to
signifie But that he means to extoll them he doth enough plainly give us to understand When he saith that the purchase did not Onely serve to advance the value and efficacy of that grain of pepper his meaning must be at least that Christ dyed and by his death hath purchased to the pepper-corn of mans righteousness a value and efficacy in part though not Onely to Justifie us so that our righteousness must go Cheek by Cheek with the righteousness of Christ to Justification Now as if Usury as it Consisteth in taking increase be unlawfull a penny of a hundred pounds taken by way of increase is no less in substance Usury and unlawfull than the taking of Tenn pounds of the hundred so if the adding of our righteousness to the righteousness of Christ for our justification be an unlawfull exalting of our own and depressing of Christs righteousness then to bring our own righteousness with the righteousness of Christ in the least part to justifie is as truly an unlawfull depression of Christs righteousness and advancing of our own as if we brought it in the highest degree wholly and alone to justifie us and so by his account Christ dyed to make man though not the Onely yet in part a saviour of himself And herein to follow his doctrine is the ready way to be a self-destroyer Christ is become of none effect to you whosoever of you are justified by the Law ye are faln from grace said the Apostle to a people that did extoll but in part and not Onely their own righteousness to justification Though it be not Onely poyson which a man eateth yet it there be poyson in it it brings death after iâ— If we magnifie one grain of our own pepper to that height that we make it a part of that righteousness by which to stand at Gods tribunall this one grain will sink us down to hell so hot a poyson is Mr. Brs pepper-corn I shall joyn that which followes in the similitude viz. Bax. But thus A personall Rent must be payd for the testification of his homage He was never Redeemed to be Independent and his own Landlord and Master The olde Rent he cannot pay his new Landlords clemency is such that he hath resolved this grain shall serve the turn With that which is homogeneous to it in the application Bax. Two things are considerable in this debt of righteousness The value and the personall performance or interest The value of Christs satisfaction is imputed to us in stead of the value of a perfect Obedience of our own performing and the volue of our Faith is not so imputed But because there must be some personall performance of homage therefore the personall performance of Faith shall be imputed to us for a sufficient personall payment as if we had payd the full Rent because Christ whom we beleeve in hath payd it and he will take this for satisfactory homage so it is in point of personall performance and not of value that faith is imputed It is not denyed but a personall testification of homage is required We were not Redeemed to be independent or our own Landlords and Masters to serve our selves and walk after our own thoughts No Ye are not your own for ye are bought with a price saith the Apostle Therefore glorifie God in your body and in your Spirit which are Gods 1 Cor. 6. 20. And again He hath given himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works We must live and dye to him that dyed for us in testification of our homage But the thing in question is not whether this homage is to be done but whether when it is performed it be a Cause or an effect of our redemption and justification Whether we are to perform all duty that we may be redeemed and justified or because we are redeemed and justified Whether the relation of the persons go before the relative duties or the relative duties before the relation of the persons Reason tells us that filiall obedience doth alway presuppose the relation of a Son and where there is no Childe there can be expected no Childlike obedience First free and then free service And to this tenor runs the vote and voyce of the Gospel We are delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we may serve him without fear in holines and righteousness before him all the dayes of our life Luk. 1. 74 75. Not that we shall be delivered out of c. because we have so served him all the dayes of our life That we are married to Christ that we should bring forth fruit unto God Rom. 7. 4. Not that we are married to Christ because we have brought forth fruit unto God That he dyed for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him that dyed for them 2 Cor. 5. 15. Not that we must live to Christ that we may live by Christ and obtein life by his death If any man be in Christ he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Not that he must be a new creature to the end that he may be in Christ Mr. Br shakes the whole frame of the Gospel into a topsie-turnie and might as rationally make our glorification the Condition of our sanctification as sanctification the Condition of our Justification and Adoption As for the distinction which he puts in the application between the value and the performance of Faith i. e. in his sense of sanctification making the value of Christs satisfaction to be imputed in stead of the value of a perfect obedience and the personall performance of Faith to be imputed onely in stead of the personall performance of the Law and so our inchoat sanctification for that he means by the performing of faith is imputed to us in place of performing all perfect righteousness unto justification some pretty witty men may be taken with it as a pretty witty fancy But whosoever Loveth the Lord Jesus up to a due jealousie for his honour Cannot but have his heart full of trembling to see the sacred word and mysteries of Christ to be made the play-game of an audacious and frothy wit and eluded yea vilified and enervate with such absurd and windy distinctions that have no footing in the word of God Himself using this distinction with a purpose not to teach but to Cheat the simple For pag. 141. he doth in express words affirm the worthines or value which he doth here ascribe to Christs satisfaction to lye in our performance or works Either he must be destitute of all natural and moral operations of Conscience or an Anti-Hannibal that hath sworn unreconcileable warrs not for God against Rome but for Rome against Christ that in so holy a busines can so frequently and fearlesly act the wanton I shall conclude therefore in the words which Mr. Pemble hath against the brethren of Mr. Br in this point
act absolved the conscience there followeth also the sense of our remission and justification So that besides this sense and apprehension there are two things in our justification by faith over and above that which was in our eternal justification in Christ viz. 1. A total diffidence and denyal of our own righteousnesse and a trusting and adhering wholly and onely to Christ for pardon and justification 2. Gods act upon our consciences declaring and assuring us that our debt is paid by Christ and we discharged upon the satisfaction which our surety hath made so that the obligation is cancelled and we depart with a full and general acquittance in our consciences Neither of these were there in the former justification i. e. in the justification in the former sense before mentioned and so that there is more than the bare knowledge of our justification in our being justified in the latter sense is evident Whatsoever else is conteined in the doctrine of the Protestant divines about this question we shall have occasion to adde in examining what Master Baxter saith here and afterwards to oppugn it But the chief thing is yet behind may some say viz. the proof of these positions by sound Arguments or by evidencing Scriptures and the main thing to be proved is that there is such a justification as is an immanent and eternal act in God It is Master Baxters lowd challenge pag. 93. Let all the Antinomians shew but one Scripture that speaketh of justification from eternity I will be so charitable as to conceive he expects not that we should produce Scriptures that say in those very words but that which is the Tantundem that say it in sense and substance else if he reject the matter and stick to words I shall challenge him to produce one sentence of all the sermons which Christ preached and in the whole doctrine that he personally delivered which speaketh at all of justification by faith But in words equipollent to Master Baxters the Scripture delivereth this doctrine which he opposeth viz. justification from eternity First What lesse is to be gathered from 2 Tim. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with a holy calling not according to our workes but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the World began What can be said more fully to Master Baxters challenge He will not deny that the word saving doth include in it justifying for so should he both contradict himselfe and lose elswhere more than he can gain here by denying it It will then run thus that we are justified and called of God with a holy calling not according to our works these words destroy the end of Master Baxters opposing the eternity of our justification if our own qualifycation and workes may not come in collaterally with Christ to constitute us justified he little regards whether the act be immanent or transient but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the world began and that is from eternity See the grace of justification and salvation was given us in Christ from eternity Object Master Baxter may probably object that the grace was indeed given us in Christ from eternity that is God had decreed from eternity to justifie us in Christ when we should come to beleeve in him to justifie or save us in time as to call us in time For the grace here mentioned given us in Christ before times is as much affirmed to be the grace of our vocation or calling as of our saving and justifying But our calling must therefore our justification also must be in time And thus by the grace given must be understood Gods gracious purpose and decree to give us salvation and justification So Mr. Baxter I know God hath decreed to justifie his people from eternity But it is done in time page 93. Sol. 1. That Covenant justifying or the declaring of us in our own Consciences to bee accepted as just in Christ is not denyed to be an act accomplished in us in time Nor yet that God decreed from Eternity to declare us in our consciences Righteous when wee should beleeve But the granting of all this nothing advantageth Master Baxters cause For neither doth this Act of God in time terminate upon our conscience nor his eternal decree so to justifie us beleeving in our selves deny that wee were justified in God and in Christ from Eternity 2. It appears not that the Apostle here speaketh of our calling to the participation of Christ and of justification and sanctification by him in time but rather of that calling mentioned Rom. 4. 17. That God calleth those things that be not as though they were As he called Abraham the father of many Nations when he was yet either childlesse or at least was in reference to the strength of nature without having without hope to have that child from whom those nations should issue and accrew to him as their father So God is said to have called us with a holy calling i. e. to have called and reputed us in Christ his pardoned accepted and adopted children even before we had any actual being in our selves Dedit qui erat accepit qui non erat Quis antem hoc facere potuit nisi qui vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam ea quae sunt Aug. de verb. Apost Sect. 3. If by Calling it be pertinaciously maintained that we must understand that which is done by the Ministry of the Gospel yet all this helps not Master Baxter at all in regard of the exclusive clause following not according to our workâ— where our salvation and justification as well as our vocation are denyed to have any dependance upon our own workes and qualifications as conditions thereof And the whole end of Master Baxters dispute against justification as an immanent Act in God is because if that be granted there will be no place for footing our works and qualifications as necessarily precedent conditions of justification And these fall to ground as well as if we were justified without them though in time as if wee were justified from Eternity 4. But how and whether we can truly and properly be said to have received Grace in Christ before all worlds whereby we are saved and justified and yet not to be saved and justified in Christ before the world was will come to bee examined in drawing forth the sense of other Scriptures which I shall annex In the interim this remaines unquestioned that although the Apostle speak here of Justification in our selves in time yet he affirmes it to be according to the Grace given us in Christ before the world so it was in Christ for us before though not in our selves till we beleeve Againe when the Scripture speaking of the Sonnes of Isaac saith of them while yet unborn and consequently having neither done good nor evill Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated Mal. 1. 2 3. Rom. 9. 11 13. And
elswhere pronounceth of men that when they lay in their blood in their nakedness then hee made it the time of love sayd to them live spread his skirt over them and covered them entred into Covenant with them and made them his Ezek. 16. 6 8. God of his great love wherewith hee hath loved us even when we were dead in sins and trespasses hath quickned us c. Ephes 2. 4 5. God commendeth his love to us that when we were yet sinners when enemies we were justified by Christs blood and reconciled to God by his death Rom. 5 8 9 10. Here it is evident to all men that the love of God justifying and reconciling us to himself goeth before our Faith and Workes was then in its power and operation when wee were yet sinners in all our pollution enemies dead in sinne therefore without any spirituall motion or operation to our own cleansing or happiness I demand now when this love of God so justifying us beganne Not when we beleeved and first obeyed the Gospel for it went before it was then acted toward us when wee were enemies dead c. Or when wee beganne to be sinners Then it seems our sinne begat this love in God and then let the Atheists Aphorism stand as an impregnable Principle let our sinne abound that the grace and love of God may abound Or was there ever an hatred of us as a contrary affection in God before which is now expelled that love might succeed in its place And hath God now changed his hating of us to condemne us into a love to justifie and save us This were to accuse God of mutableness and change For God is Love 1 Iohn 4. 8. and the Love of God is God himselfe loving and to affirme where wee finde the Love of God at present that there was a time when this Love was not in God and a time when God beganne to love is no other but to affirme that there was a time when God yet was not and a time when he beganne to bee God the will of God being God himselfe And the volitions or willings of God being God himself willing And the acts of Gods Love and Hatred being acts of Gods Will yea of God himselfe and no more subject to change because immanent in God then God himselfe So that these Scriptures which affirme Gods love to us when sinners doe affirm also consequentially his love to us before we were either in being or just or sinners even from eternity Thirdly when the Lord saith to his people I have loved thee with an everlasting love Jerem. 13. 3. Doth hee not mean a love which is from everlasting to everlasting Or is there a Love of God to everlasting which was not from everlasting Or was it not the Love of accepting and approbation of them unto Righteousnesse and Salvation whereof hee there speaketh And when the Apostle Iohn tels us that the glory of Gods love doth herein shine forth Not that we loved him but that he loved us 1 John 4. 10. making not our love or any fruits thereof the foundation of Gods love to us but the love of God to us to goe before and prevent our love is not this a doctrin universally true of all the Saints that are or have been that Gods love to them prevented and was antecedaneous to their love toward him if so then consequently before mans being as well as before his loving and if before mans being then from eternity was this grace given us that we were loved of God in Christ to justification and salvation It is that which the Lord Christ speaketh and that not obscurely in his prayer before his passion where having interceded and craved sundry blessings for his Elect he adds this reason why he craved those blessings in their behalfe viz. That the world may know that thou hast sent me and that thou hast loved them as thou hast loved me Jo. 17. 23. How is that in the next verse he explaineth himself thus Thou hast loved me before the foundation of the world what doth follow hence but that as Christ so they that are Christs were loved of God unto life before the foundation of the world why will not Master Baxter acknowledge what Christ hath prayed that all the world may know Object 1. Or will it be objected that God loving the Elect in Christ before the foundation of the world is to be understood onely in this sense that before the foundation of the world God decreed in himselfe to love them in Christ afterward in time Then must we so conclude of Christ also that God loved Christ before that is decreed before the foundation of the world to love Christ in after time not that he loved him from eternity for as hee loved Christ so he loved them in Christ But he actually loved Christ as the head of the Church before the foundation of the World therefore also he loved the Elect in Christ as the body and members of Christ before the foundation of the world Yea to decree from eternity to love them afterward in time and untill the time came to hate them or not to love them in Christ was to decree mutablenesse and change in his own will i. e. in himselfe which is wholly repugnant to his nature that cannot change by receiving augmentation unto or diminution of the acts of his Will which were in him from eternity Object 2. But perhaps Master Baxter may object with his friends of the Netherlands the Arminians whose ghosts have much infested us within this Nation these many years that this love of God from Eternity that which he shed abroad upon the Elect when they were yet sinners enemies and dead in sin is to be understood onely of Gods universal common love his love to all the creatures which he hath made or at the uttermost his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his love unto mankind which he extends to all alike Making the raine to descend and his Sun to shine upon the just and unjust and fills the hearts of all with food and gladness Sol. But how then was Jaakob loved and Esau hated when Esau partaked more of this common love than Jaakob or was it a Common love by which God doth justifie and reconcile sinners to himselfe then all shall be reconciled justified and saved Or when the Apostle termes it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the much or great love of God out of which when he quickned us yet dead in sinnes and trespasses Eph. 2. 4. was this the common love extended to all the Sonns and Daughters of Adam without difference Then also for God loved us as he loved Christ the love of God to Christ was a common love in nothing supereminent to the love wherewith he loved Cain and Judas Lastly when God saith I have not beheld iniquity in Jaakob nor seen perversnesse in Israel Num. 23. 21. it will I doubt not be granted that the meaning was that God did
every such person That these Antinomians of the former age were filthy dreamers loose livers such as turned the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ into lasciviousness is very probable if not certain from that which Calvin and others have written against Antinomians and Libertines And from such we have no less abhorrence then Mr. Baxter But while Mr. Baxter declaimeth against the innocent hee proclaimes himselfe a rank Antinomian in teaching and maintaining that the perfect obedience and righteousnesse of the Law are not required and consequentially not due under the Gospel Islebius himself never spake so derogatorily to the righteousness of the Law CHAP. XXIII Arg. Mr. Baxters distinction of Justification in Title of Law and in Sentence of Judgement examined together with other distinctions equipollent to this Whether besides the present there be also a future Justification and whether it be begun and perfected together at once I should wholly have passed over the 37 38 39 and 40 Theses with their Explications as meerly shady imaginations voyd of all reality and substance without stopping to give them one word of answer For why should wee talke of Pictures that have no life in them were it not that it is Master Baxters drift to carry us through these wayes of his own chalking wholly from Christ under a pretext of leading us to Christ the Justifier To frustrate therefore his deceit I shall speak somewhat to these passages of his Tractate also Thes 37. pag. 183. B. Iustification is either in title and the sense of Law or in sentence of judgement The first may be called Constitutive the second Declarative the first Virtual the second Actual Lawyers have layd it down for a Maxim Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguit i. e. We are not to distinguish of any point in the Law where the Law it self hath not made a distinction If the Laws of men are not much lesse are the Laws and Word of God to be violated with mens bold distinctions For this is no lesse then to bring Gods sacred Oracles into a subjection to mans vain fancies Let Mr. Baxter shew any Scripture that gives footing for the distinguishing of Justification into that which is in title of Law and that which is in sentence of judgement into constitutive and declarative or virtuall and actuall Justification These are the inventions of wanton wits in these latter times whose endeavour it hath been to tear in peeces and thereby wholly nullifie Gods Justification and to put many Justifications of their own in stead thereof We deny not a constitutive and declarative Justification in some sense but in Mr. Baxters sense we deny it It is granted that the Satisfaction which the Son by promise gave and the Father accepted for the sins of the Elect according to the Covenant between the Father and the Son before more then once mentioned did constitute the Elect justified in Christ before they were born who notwithstanding were not declared just to their own consciences before they actually beleeved nor to others until they manifested their Faith by their Works But Mr. Baxter explodes this constitutive and declarative Justification as an unsufferable abhomination and will not have his virtuality and actuality to these applyed And let him alleage any one Scripture that calls the sentence of life unto those that shall bee saved by grace that is to be pronounced in the last day Justification Or if he cannot but that the justification of the New Covenant wherever it be mentioned in the Word be that which is in this present life who sees not that his distinguishing here tends to the subverting of Scriptures and of the both virtual and actual Justification which the Scriptures speak of B. The Scripture speaks of it many times as a future thing and not yet done Rom. 3. 30. Mat. 12. 37. Rom. 2. 13. Explic pag. 185. This is all that he bringeth or can bring for Justification in the day of Judgement and this all is nothing It followeth not because these Scriptures speak of Justification as of a thing to come saying they shall be not they are justified that this Future tense doth point out the day of Judgement If I should say Mr. Baxter shall dye I should not be accused for speaking an untruth but if any will needs confine that shall to the day of Judgement that Mr. Baxter shall then dye who would not laugh at the absurdity of the consequence That of Mat. 12. 37. By thy words thou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned and that of Rom. 2. 13. Not the hearers but the doers of the Law shall be justified speak of Justification after the tenor and covenant of the Law not of Grace therefore pertain nothing to the present purpose Hee shall but Dare verba damnably deceive with words that teacheth men to seek for Justification by the righteousness of the Law consisting in deeds and words Whosoever indeed shall neither in word or deed be found a transgressor of the Law actually or originally shall be justified by his words and deeds But this man must be sought for out of a happier generation then those of the race of Adam else if we except Christ alone we must return our Non est inventus That of Rom. 3. 30. speaks indeed in the Future tense but may be as properly rendred by the word will as shall though the difference be not very considerable thus It is one God which will or shall justifie the circumcision by faith and the uncircumcision through Faith The Apostle here meaneth no otherwise speaking here in the Future then what he had said before in the Present Tense of Justification And it is as if he had said God hath decreed and declared his method of justifying both Jews Gentiles to be one and the same As long as there remain or succeed any upon earth of either part to be justified the purpose of God abides firm to justifie as wel the one as the other by faith and no one of either sort by Works neither circumcision nor uncircumcision shall avail or hinder any thing but Christ faith in Christ shall bee all unto all in this businesse as long as the world endureth And what is there then in this Text to pâ—ove Mr. Baxters declarative Justification in the day of Judgement Not that wee deny the adjudging of life in the day of Judgement to all that in this life were justified but the Scriptures terming this last sentence by the name of Justification whatsoever is said of Justification by Faith or Grace is still to be understood in this life And the whole reason that Mr. Baxter hath here to coyn a Justification in the day of judgement is to lay a foundation of Popish Justification by Works as by the sequele of this his Treatise will more fully appear Else would we not contend with him about meer words did they not tend to a destructive end and that we are taught
in his disobedience we all sinned and were condemned in him So also Christ the second Adam in making satisfaction to Gods justice upon the cross sustained the office of a publick person stood in the room of all the Elect bare their sins as imputed to him so that they all in him did their law were in him crucified dead and buried and suffered the paines of hell it self And as he was a publick person in his suffering so also was he in his resurrection having paid the utmost farthing of our debt he rose to receive a full acquittance or justification in his own and our names for all the sinnes for which and all the vengeance which he had suffered for us and we in him The justification and acquittance then given him and to us in his name by the Father is that which out of doubt Mr. Baxter calls Christs own justification yet was not his own so but that it was every elect persons in him Having the meaning of the phrase let us now enquire into the truth or falshood of the Position The Justification saith hee which we have in Christs own Justification is but conditional as to the particular offenders and none can lay claim to it till hee have performed the conditions nor shall any be personally justified till then Even the Elect c. Hee saith much and audaciously as all may see but how strongly doth hee prove it For confirmation saith hee in the Explic. there is enough said under the 15 18 19 20 Positions before And I answer how valid and pertinent to his purpose that Enough which hee there said is I there examined And because he brings here no new reasons I may justly passe it by without giving any further answer Onely it shall not bee impertinent to take notice how ambiguously hee layes downe every clause of this Position to corrupt with an evill sense whom hee can and to evade with the pretext of a good meaning where he cannot deceive if espied and questioned 1. When he saith this Justification is conditional as to the particular offenders none can lay claim c. Though by the whole frame of this his Treatise it is enough evident that he means what he speaks in the worst sense yet his words leave it here doubtful whether he means that our Justification which we have in Christs justification be conditional as Christ hath received it in his or our names or as he having received it for us doth offer it to particular offendors upon conditions upon the performance whereof they shall have it with the fruit and comfort thereof declared and evidenced to their own soules Though the former bee his sense yet knowing with what arguments hee may be encountred That there was an absolute and not a conditional payment made to which not a conditional but an absolute discharge is due That Christ as a publick person standing in our stead received the same justification for himselfe and us from all the sinnes that had been imputed both to him and us but that he received for himself not a conditional but an absolute Justification therefore for us also That if particular offendors be but conditionally justified in Christ then are they not at all actually and really justified in Christ and so the fruit of Christs death being suspended upon conditions may be none at all in case none performe the conditions That it is against the stream of the Gospel which affirms that even upon the cross he hath cancelled or blotted out the hand-writing spoiled the principalities and powers Col. 2. 14 15. redeemed us from the curse of the Law Gal. 3. 13. purged the conscience from dead works by his blood Heb. 9. 13 14. That God was in Christ reconciling the world while the world to himself 2 Cor. 5. 19. and made us accepted in the beloved Eph. 1. 6. And all this before we had a being personally therefore before we performed any conditions Knowing I say how he might be overwhelmed with arguments from the Scriptures by our Divines as hee hath read far more copiously then I have time here to particularize in their works against the Papists and Arminians and might have been more pressed and multiplyed against himself and that Truth is not onely unconquerable but victorious To prevent the inconvenience he leaves a hole by which to escape viz. Hee meant not thus But that our Justification is conditional as to our claim of right therein we are not personally justified have not our forgiveness declared and evidenced to our own consciences till we perform the conditions Such sincerity and integrity is there in Mr. Baxters doctrines 2. When he saith None can lay claim to Justification untill he have performed the conditions nor shall be personally justified till then he leaves it ambiguous whether he mean till his faith obedience and good works which with him are the conditions be in fieri or else in factum esse be begun or else finished and perfected in doing or else fully done His phrase directly points out the latter the whole stream of his disputations in this Book concurs with it Neither is Mr. Baxter such an A B C darian that he need to bee taught to speak Grammatically and to deliver in proper termes his own dictates that we should think him to speak more or lesse then he meaneth saving when he will doe so for his own advantage Unlesse therefore he meant in the latter sense and would be so understood hee would give no advantage by his words to any so to understand him This being then his meaning he leaves us yet in doubt whether he joynes with the Papists here in implying that it is possible to attain perfection of righteousness and so to have fully performed all obedience in this life thereby meriting Justification so winning it at the hardest before he wear it as we have found him in and under his 23 24 26 27 Theses maintaining enough fully behind the curtaine or else with the Arminians in holding that no man is justified in this life and so confounding Justification and Glorification either with the other an assertion worse then Popish wholly contradicting the whole â—enor of the Gospel as Rom. 4. 10. Abraham was justified while yet uncircumcised Rom. 5. being now justified now reconciled ver 9 10. So Rom. 8. 30. Eph. 1. 7. Yea not to stay particularizing the whole sum of the Gospel but because both Papists and Arminians are his cabinet friends that he might please both and offend neither it sufficeth him to shew himself an adversary to the truth wherein he hath them both confederates with him and either with the other it being no difficulty for him to close with both that differ but in words a little but are one in substance like Sampsons Foxes hung together by the tails in a firebrand though their faces look several waies 3. I might no less discover his subtilty in that ambiguous term of Personal Justification as he
Christ hath purchased onely and we receive onely an universal conditional Justification 3. Upon as good grounds as Mr. Baxter doth in the ensuing part of this Treatise argue from salvation or glorification to justification might I also argue from justification to salvation that if justification be universally conditionall so is salvation or glorification also that if one then both run upon these terms dum bene se gesserit if he beleeve and obey he shall be justifyed and glorifyed if not neither shall be his protion And when any is justifyed and glorifyed his perseverance in that state depends upon his freewill runs upon the same condition still so long justifyed and glorifyed as he is willing and obedient if he cease to obey he shall be unjustifyed and unglorifyed again And thus all the fruits of Christs death shall be rolled to nothing and Christ righteosunesse and glory shall be a conditionall and mutable righteousnesse and glory to day in splendor to morrow in darknesse and himself become a conditionall Saviour a conditionall King at one time compleat and sitting among his golden Candlesticks in the midst of his glorious Temple at another unchristed unkinged a head without a body and members a Saviour of nobodies a King without subjects some not at all submitting to his golden scepter the rest that have submitted revolting from him some from the kingdome of grace some from the kingdome of glory as Adam from Paradise the Angels from heaven so that he shall be left alone and his sufferings and merits lose all their fruit by means of this conditionall justification There is I confesse no weight in this Argument as to the truly Orthodox But it holds as firme to Mr. Baxter as his Arguments can hold to us about conditionall justification in Christs justification If he object that the Saints in the kingdome of glory shall be so confirmed that they shall not fall away I shall answer so are the Saints also in the kingdome of grace and are as absolutely fixed therein upon the truth love and power of God in Christ as the triumphant Saints in the kingdome of glory I doubt not to prove the one as soundly as he can prove the other I cease further to enlarge my self in Arguments to this purpose That which I have said being as I before mentioned spoken not so much to prove an absolute and to shew the vanity of a conditionall justification by Christ as to make way to that which comes after to be handled From the 45 then I passe to the 55 Thesis of Mr. Baxter because whatsoever there is in the interposed positions worthy of examination either hath been or will come to be considered in a place more convenient Only by the way we shall take a short view of what he hath in and under the 54 Thesis it runnes thus pag. 209. B. Remissian Justification and Reconciliation do but restore the offender into the same state of freedome and favour that he fell from but adoption and marriage union with Christ do advance him far higher Here Mr. Baxter gives me occasion to put up some Quaeries to him 1. Whether remission justification and reconciliation are equipollent termes signifying one and the same thing in substance or so many distinct things differing each from other as well in sense as in sound If differing things wherein doth the difference consist he answers in the explication B. The freedome from obligation to punishment is called Remission the freedome from accusation and condemnation is called Justification and the freedome from enmity and displeasure is called Reconciliation These are all at once but he saith not all one Excellently distinguished as he that divided the word malt into four parts But doth not every of these words imply all those freedomes doth not remission free as well from accusation condemnation and enmity as from obligation to punishment And doth not reconciliation free from obligation to punishment and from condemnation as well as from enmity and displeasure And doth not justification likewise do all as well as one I know no absurdity to assert that the same freedome is in divers respects but in the same sense as Amesius well expresseth called by all Ames Med. lib. 1. cap. 27. §. 22. these names As the state of sin from which we are freed is considered as a state of subjection to punishment or vengeance so this freedome is called Remission As the same state is considered as enmity against God so is it called Reconciliation As the same state is considered as a state of sin and condemnation so the same freedome from it is called Justification and this also so that justification is all these remission all and reconciliation all and neither any thing effectually if it be not all All together make up one act of God by his Gospell and may as I conceive more properly be called Gods act or acts in their active sense then concomitant consequents of one and the same act of God Besides if he take them for three differing things I would aske him whether there be any mysterie in the order wherein he placeth them Whether first we have remission of sins then justificaon from condemnation and then at last reconciliation I speak of priority and posteriority in order notin time for so he saith they are concomitants and at once If some such mystery I would be enformed whether by reconciliation he mean the reconciling of our love to God or of Gods love to us if the former how can our love as he teacheth be a condition of justification if in order it be not before but after justification if the latter then it seems Gods love is not the cause of our justification seeing it doth in order follow it but that our love to God is the cause and ground of it Or if he put these three as Synonyma's for one and the same thing why doth he then so curiously distinguish and as it were give to them their severall differencing forms as we find him to do 2 Whether he take them for the same or divers things I enquire whether they be antecedents or consequents of our union with Christ If antecedents whether it be possible for a man to be justifyed in the way of the new Covenant for of this justification Mr. Baxter speaketh being yet out of Christ or how is he then justifyed by faith charity and good works except it be by a legall faith charity and works and if legall how are these then our Gospell righteousnesse or have they Gospell righteousnesse which are not in Christ Or if consequents of our union with Christ whether then they do not presuppose our union with Christ and if so whether the justifyed in Christ are not advanced to a far higher state of freedome and honour by their being found righteous in Christ then they lost by being found sinners in Adam and whether their union with Christ be not the common foundation both of justification and
adoption Or lastly is his meaning that our union with Christ is the foundation not only of remission justification and reconciliation which do restore the offender into the same state of freedome and favor which we had lost and faln from but also of Adoption and of a far higher advancement then that from which he fell herein I shall not dissent from him But why then doth he so transpose his words as to make the stream of Gods operations to run backward if not to make mans qualifications the ground of his union with Christ his faith and good works by which he is justifyed to be if not the cause yet the antecedent of this union and not this union to be the cause or antecedent of his both justification and holinesse So much I thought fit to interpose here that this Thesis of Mr. Baxter might not serve as a bridge to carry over the reader captive unto some fallacious untruths in the after-part of this his Tractate contained Hence now let us passe to the 55 Thesis which hath not a totall disagreement with the former that have been examined in this Chapter but a dependence upon them B. Thesis 55. p. 211. Before it be committed it is no sin and where there is no sin the penalty is not due and where it is not due it cannot properly be forgiven therefore sin is not forgiven before it be committed though the grounds of certain remission be laid before The strength and evidence of this reasoning will the better appear if we lay by it another to the same tune and upon the same terms It cannot be denyed to be as good an argumentation as this if I should thus argue Before it be committed it is no sin and where there is no sin there is no penalty due and where it is not due it cannot properly be required therefore the sins that have been committed since the death of Christ had not their penalty born by Christ before they were committed and consequently Gods justice remains unsatisfyed for the sins of all that have been committed since the death of Christ and every offender is to bear the condemnation of them in his own bosome though the grounds of certain remission were laid before in God except another Christ be sent from heaven to bear or the same Christ again to bear the penalty of the sins after they are committed Whether this argumentation doth not carry in it as great if not greater likelihood of reason then Mr. Baxters I leave to every rationall man to judge And thus when a proud lust possesseth us to reason from our own brain and not from Gods word we easily reason our selves into hell Neither do I see how Mr. Baxter according to this reasoning can ever look to be justifyed or saved except by one of these two wayes either by asserting his own righteousnesse which hitherto with his fellowes he hath made but a collaterall with the righteousnesse of Christ to justifie and save to be at a pinch all-sufficient and effectuall to perfect the work without Christ as it is with partners in a Trade and buying and selling of wares what one doth both do and what bargain one makes both must stand to it Or else by canonizing the Popish masse to offer therein Christ often unto God as a sacrifice for the expiation and forgivenesse of his sins when he hath committed them sith Christs offering himself was in no wise the bearing of the penalty or satisfying of Gods justice for his or our sins because not then committed But let us see whether in any sense the reasoning of Mr. Baxter here may be made good or taken up as tolerable Not to mention here Gods forgiving of sins as an act immanent in God from eternity For this would but make Mr. Baxter startle he is no more patient to hear this voice then was Caligula at the voice of Thunder his bloud riseth at it as do theirs at the sight of a Cat whose natures have an antipathy to that poor creature that never meant them hurt Let us consider forgivenesse and pardon in tearms and wayes as himself granteth a possibility of giving and receiving it And First in foro conscientiae at the bar of God in the conscience of man to which he most limiteth and contracteth remission and justification May not the offender apprehend and apply to himself the pardon of his future as well as of his past and present sins through the Lord Christ in some sense 1. In respect of the seed of all the sins which he shall through infirmity commit in the time to come of his life I mean his corrupt nature or originall defilement and sin from which as from their naturall source all their acts of sin spring every true beleever is and may apprehend himself pardoned this the very Papists acknowledge denying originall sin and defectivenesse to have any mortality of sin in it because the guilt thereof is purged from the soul by the bloud of Christ at his very first admission and entrance into Christ as they say In this respect I doubt not but Mr. Baxter will confesse that all their after acts of sin are remitted in their seed and womb to beleevers before they be committed 2. In respect of Gods not imputing them to the person that shall offend so the sins not yet committed are forgiven to every elect person God hath laid on Christs score all the sins of the elect committed or to be committed and satisfyed his justice for them upon Christ who in their names hath paid the penalty of all therefore their consciences are discharged neither sins past nor sins to come shall be any more imputed to them There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. There is dayly new sinning why not also subjection to condemnation because the person being in Christ though subject to a necessity of sinning yet through the justification of his person is exempted from the further imputation of sin so committed unto condemnation He that beleeveth hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation Joh. 5. 24. He comes dayly into the acting of new sins how is it that he comes not into a subjection and obligation to condemnation by those sins but because they were forgiven to the offender before therefore not imputed to him when committed It is one chief priviledge of the new Covenant Their sins and iniquities will I remember no more Now where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin Jer. 31. 38. c. Heb. 10. 17 18. speaks the holy Ghost here only of sin past and not of those to come that they which are within the new Covenant have remission of them then 1. The same person hath some sins forgiven and some not forgiven by Christ that which is past is remitted that which is to come is retained 2. Then the priviledge is no priviledge if only sins past are not remembred but sins to come are
of rich glasses set in artificiall order and able to dazle the eye of the beholder what pity is it that any one of them should meet with a knock and be broken and so the beautifull order in which they were placed be on a suddain marred yet if such a thing should fall out it were no great wonder Pretinesse and strength are rarely twins and we speak of prety things but rarely long in the present tense before their perishing by weaknesse forceth us to take up another tone and to tell that there was such a delicate toy but if we seek it the place thereof is not to be found It is possible such a stroke may befall the image that Mr. Baxter hath here set up in imitation of that of Nebuchadnezzar Dan. 2. 31 32 33 c. it hath clay in the feet cannot goe without halting if it meet with a stone to crush its toes it may possibly fall all to shivers Himself seems to doubt of it therefore prepares himself to defend it as seeing it cannot defend him or it self So saith he in the Explication B. Here it will be expected that I answer to these Questions 1. Why I call the Gospell the Instrumentall cause 2. Why I call Christs satisfaction the Meritorious cause and the Causa sine qua non 3. Why I make not Christs righteousnesse the Materiall cause 4. Why I make not the imputation of it the formall cause 5. Why I make not faith the Instrumentall cause 6. Why I make it only the Causa sine qua non To these Quaeries it will be expected saith he that he answer But what if other besides these exceptions be made though it be in his power to deny his answer yet it is not in his choice or authority to restrain any from excepting 1 Perhaps some may except why he in asserting God to be the principall efficient cause of Justification lets it passe so nakedly without an adjection of any of his attributes so leaving it doubtfull whether it be the grace or the justice the love or the hatred the mercy or the wrath of God that is the efficient of Justification We may easily answer our selves as to this question It is not Gods but Mr. Baxters justification whereof the causes are here assigned such as the Scriptures are unacquainted with a justification of his own devising defining and distinguishing himself and none before himself that I know was in every point acquainted with it No marvell then if he speak differingly in setting forth the causes of his from our Divines in laying down the causes of Gods justification And indeed it is a difficult question to determine whether his justification if it were at all granted to be of God might challenge more properly the love or the hatred the grace or the justice of God for its womb It being a justification that leaves all men under the curse under the wrath of God both in life and in death untill the very day of Judgment as we have found him disputing most profoundly in and under his 9. Thesis A justification that gives only a titular title without actuall and absolute possession of any greatest or least benefit to the justifyed which according to Mr. Baxter is the same thing as if we should say to the unjustifyed A justification more unpossible to be apprehended and held then was the first justification by works that was held forth upon possible tearms exacting from a living man only continuance in the works of life this upon unpossible as respecting our present state of infirmity offering to a dead soul righteousnesse and life upon condition the dead soul will quicken and arise from the dead to fetch it thence whither if it come it must still abide empty as it came untill the day of Judgment and then Mr. Baxter will come again to tell us more of his minde whether it be at all attainable I do not at all injury the man in saying he offers justification to a dead soul c. upon condition the soul will quicken it self For let there be found but one clause in his whole book that implyeth a concurrence and effusion of grace from God more to the quickning and justifying of Peter and Paul then of Cain and Judas of the damned then of the saved Or what doth he lesse that brings in works to justification then destroy grace to set up justification after the order and rule of strict justice Or when Mr. Baxter is so exact in enumerating the Procatarcticall or outwardly moving causes to what purpose doth he jumpe over the Proegumene or inward moving cause viz. the grace love and mercy which is within God himself but to imprison it in darknesse and eclipse its glory that mans righteousnesse might have the praise which pertains to God alone 2 It may be also questioned why amongst all the causes of justification here assigned there is no mention made of union and communion with Christ when as our Divines following the rule of the Word makes our union with him the very chief cause and ground of our being justifyed or declared to be justifyed according to the Gospell justification 1 Joh. 5 12. Phil. 3. 9. 1 Cor. 5. 19. and a multitude of other Scriptures which they alleadge and if there were the least need I might here quote a score What else but an evill eye maligning the praise of God and of his Christ suppresseth in silence and suffers not to appear in the chain of the causes of justification this link of union with Christ Is it not that he will make our faith and works yet out of Christ the cause of our union with Christ and not this the ground of the other 3 To come to those questions which Mr. Baxter answereth because he conceives it will be expected 1. About the instrumentall cause we question not what he goes about to answer why he cals the promise or grant of the new Covenant or the Gospell the instrumentall cause of justification actively considered but 1. Why he makes it the only instrumental cause of justification howsoever considered For this grant and promise doth by it self no more justifie the beleevers then the infidels the justifyed then the unjustifyed Doth not God also make the spirit his instrument of justifying by declaring and unfolding the doctrine of the Gospell and evidencing and witnessing to the soul remission and justification together with the love and grace of God from which this justification floweth Why doth he stifle the working of the Spirit from having to do in this great work except either with the Sadduces he denies the being or with the Socinians the divinity and divine operation of the Spirit or else to leave open a door to let in justification by the flesh not by the Spirit by the strength of mans free will without the preventing helps of the Spirit of grace Or as justification is taken passively for our being justifyed in our selves why is not faith put as an
not of great moment but the supercilious haughtinesse of the man puft with the opinion of his secular learning so high as to puf and pif at so many excellent Divines for learning and holinesse to many of which he is not worthy to be an Amanuensis is unsufferable I shall therefore as briefly as I can expresse upon what grounds our Divines and how far they make the righteousnesse of Christ the matter of our justification as near as I may upon good probabilities conjecture The Doctrine of justification by Christ is no where in the four Evangelists held forth under the name of justification or justifying Many both Parables and clear doctrines that proceeded from the lips of Christ do indeed in other words fully display it specially John the Evangelist who made it more his task to record the doctrine then the acts of Christ because he saw those historifyed somewhat largely by the other three Evangelists which had written before him Eagle-like mounting on high to the contemplation of his Celestiall and Divine nature and doctrines very exactly sets it forth but under other words naming it Life eternall Life everlasting Life He that beleeveth in the Son hath everlasting life Joh. 3. 36. Is passed from death to life Joh. 5. 24. Hath eternall life Joh. 6. 54. My flesh which I give for the life of the world Joh. 6. 51. And ye will not come to me that ye may have life Joh. 5. 40. Except ye eat my flesh and drink my bloud ye have no life in you he that eateth me shall live by me Joh. 6. 57. In all which and many other texts of this Evangelist none can deny but by life is to be understood chiefly if not only life in law the life of justification not that of glory which is to be received above but that of grace here For so those Scriptures point out a life here in this present world enduring everlastingly to all eternity and not a life here only to be hoped for and hereafter to come into our fruition Neither do I find the word justifie used but once by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles Nor yet at all in any one of the Epistles of the Apostles St. James only excepted in one Chapter but by the Apostle Paul alone Yet the substance of justification was the chief doctrine in all their Epistles handled but the same set forth under the name of Salvation saving life and other phrases which our Saviour himself used And these phrases also doth St. Paul use as equipollent with the word Justifying in all his Epistles Now the reason why this Apostle more then the rest treats of this doctrine under the name of justification I conceive to be this Because he was forced to handle it by way of controversie against the false Apostles some professing some rejecting Christ that taught justification and salvation by the works of the Law in part and not by faith only whom therefore he must needs in his disputes treat with in their own tearms and words Their Argumentation against the Apostle as may be gathered from the Apostles answers ran in this tenour and to this effect That righteousnesse alone which justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous saveth But the righteousnesse of the Law is that righteousnesse alone which justifyeth or maketh man perfectly righteous at least by procuring proper righteousnesse to him therefore that alone saveth The Apostle here granteth the proposition that no other righteousnesse but that which justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous saveth But denyeth the assumption that the righteousnesse of the Law only or at all justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous Because only the perfect doers of the law are perfectly righteous not the hearers But no man can perfectly do it And contrariwise proveth that the righteousness of the Gospel which he cals the Righteousnesse of God the Righteousnesse of faith the Righteousnesse of God by faith which consisteth in Christs satisfaction imputed to us is the Righteousnesse which justifyeth and maketh perfectly righteous because it cleanseth from the guilt and freeth from the imputation of all sin and unrighteousnesse Rom. 1. 17. 3. 5 21 22 25 26. 4. 3 5 6 11. 5. 17 18 21. 9. 30. 10. 3 4 6. 2 Cor. 5. 21. Phil. 3. 9. In all which places and in many other the Apostle having rejected the righteousnesse of works from being asserteth the righteousnesse of God in Christ by faith to be the righteousnesse the matter and substance of the righteousnesse by which we are justifyed This he illustrateth Rom. 5. 19. by a comparison between Adam and Christ Adams disobedience and Christs obedience As by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made roghteous the ones disobedience was not only the merit but also the matter of our sin as far as sin is capable of matter the very sin it self which being imputed to us as being in him without any personall and actuall sin of our own makes us sinners So the obedience of Christ in offering himself a sacrifice for sin and giving satisfaction to Gods justice in obedience to that positive command of the Father which required it was and is not only the merit but also the matter of that righteousnesse which being imputed to us as being in Christ without any personall obedience of ours added to it constituteth us righteous and justifyed in Gods acceptance or is that for by and in which the Lord pronounceth us just and justifyed to our own consciences Such is the frequent dispute of the Apostle about the substance and matter of that righteousnesse by which we are justify ad which he concludes not to be a righteousnesse inherent in us but this Righteousnesse inherent in Christ but imputed to us and apprehended by faith to justification whom God hath set forth as a propitiation for our sinnes through faith in his blood Rom. 3. 25. And this is all that I finde our Divines to mean in saying the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ is the materiall cause of our justification defending against the Papists as the Apostle did againsts the Pharisees that the matter of the righteousnesse which God accepteth and imputeth to us in justifying us or unto righteousnesse and justification is this righteousnesse of Christ only not the righteousnesse of works Mr. Baxter in rejecting the phrase 1. As rude and not Logicall 2. As at the best unproper doth first accuse the Apostle and secondarily them that follow his Apostolicall doctrine and phrase of this rudenesse and impropriety of language One of them speaks out the minde of the rest Deus justitiam i. e. Obedientiam satisfactionem Sevarpius â—rs Th eol â— justif â— 925. Christi nostram facit ac pro nostra ducit c. atque ita nos antequam justos pronunciet justos facit God makes the righteousnesse i. e. the obedience and satisfaction of Christ ours
or between the not accusing or condemning of a man and the not imputing any thing to him to his accusation and condemnation CHAP. XXV Arg. of the Causa sine qua non or the condition or the instrumentall cause and whether faith be the instrument And in what sense it is so The absurdities wherewith Mr. Baxter chargeth this doctrine removed and those that follow his doctrine in part particularized TO the first Question we must apply our selves somewhat more fully because in answer to the former Questions Mr. Baxter seems to me to have aimed chiefly to the ostentation of his wit and Logicall both acutenesse and profoundnesse to make himself thereby admired and formidable But in answering this and the next he collects in one all his subtilty and Sophistry â—o beguile and deceive if it were possible the very Elect. And indeed if he carry these two Questions in captivity to his own sense and purpose he shall thereby make at least a seeming way by which to introduce all his Popish soul-subverting errours about justification which follow and hang as at the tayle of these Questions His words in the Thesis are B. The Causa sine qua non is both Christs satisfaction and the faith of the justifyed As much as he thought would be objected against his putting Christs satisfaction in the same place and degree of causality as a collaterall with faith he hath spoken to in his answer to the second Question and the firmnesse of this his answer hath been there examined But what concernes faith that which he thinks he shall be opposed in he formes into two Questions Explication pa. 214. 1. Why he makes it not the Instrumentall cause 2. Why he makes it the Causa sine qua non The former which is his 5. Question he applies himself to answer pa. 219. in these words B. To the fift Question perhaps I shall be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of our justification But affectation of singularity leads me not to it 1. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or man Not of man for man is not the principall efficient he doth not justifie himself 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so still man should be said to justifie himself 3. For as Aquinas the action of the principall cause and of the instrument is one action and who dares say that faith is so Gods instrument 4. The instrument must have influx tâ— the producing of the effect of the principall cause by a proper causality and who dare say that faith hath such an influx into our justification Here I know not whether we have more of the subtle serpent or of the roaring Lyon 1. He useth his winding Sophistry to intangle 2. His daring threats to them that being not intangled will be so bold as to contradict him Let us examine what efficacy there is in either or both these and first in his Sophistry To insinuate or as the Apostle saith to creep into the hearts of his Readers to deceive them he tels us Perhaps he may be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of justification It seems he doubted that some of his Readers for lack of acquaintance with many Authours upon this subject would not or could not take notice that it is a new doctrine which he here delivereth and so he should be robbed of the glory of his new invention That the praise thereof might therefore wholly redound to him he tels them he is the first of men that ever saw and taught Faith not to be the instrument of justification that herein he is singular from all men Bâ—t had he not rubbed his forehead that with open face he thus vindicateth to himself that which he hath received from the Priests and Jesuites Let him name himself singular and abhorrent from all Protestants yea from Christ and his Apostles not from all men he is singular and alone in this and most his assertions from the Orthodox from whom but holds it in common with the whole herd of Antichrist to whom he is fallen Doth not Bellarmine deny that faith can truly be said to justifie us except it doth obtain and in some sort merit Justification from God Do not all his brethren with one voice shake off the instrumentall causality of justification and make it as a perfect quality or good work to merit it A two fold subtlety yea falshood is there to be found therefore in this his insinuation 1. That he affirmes himself singular in this point to catch after an usurped praise to himself as if he had seen what none in the world before him had seen 2. In pretending it to be a new doctrine thereby to draw disciples after him in a time wherein the ears of men itch after new in disdain of sound and true doctrines But further to insinuate he tels us that affectation of singularity leads him not to it We beleeve him without oath or protestation It is not the desire of them that are of his hair to trudge single but accompanied with a whole Brigade of disciple under their conducting and seducing unto Rome But let us come to his Arguments B. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or Man But of neither of these Ergo not at all an instrument His Proposition or Major we grant him And it were enough and full to that which can be expected to refell his reasons which he brings for the proof of the minor Yet because my drift is not so much to answer him as to stablish some weak and unwary Christians against his impostures I shall endeavour first to confirm what he denyeth and seeks to shiver and then to examine the strength of reason which he brings against us When he saith in the Minor that faith is the instrument neither of God nor Man in justification What if I should undertake to prove and defend it to be the instrument of both He speaketh here of Justification as taken Passively declared to and termined upon the conscience For if we should mention justification as taken meerly Actively for that internall eternall and immanent act in God not transient upon an extraneous subject but hid in God before the world was or any justifyed or unjustifyed persons began to live or be Mr. Baxter would be ready to deal with us as did the Jewes with Steven Act. 7. 57. stop his ears and cry out against us with a loud voice Blasphemy blasphemy Yet in this sense we acknowledge that saith is neither Gods nor Mans instument of justification But in that sense which alone Mr. Baxter here taketh justification for that gracious act of God by which he dischargeth for Christs sake the sinner from condemnation by vertue of the new
he hath out of Schiblers Mâ—taphysicks sound enough I acknowledge as Schibler proposeth it in Thesi but fallacious and misapplyed by this man to his Hypothesis Yet what ever it be though not the least portion of Gods word in it let us examine the strength of it It is the principall efficient of the act or effect that worketh by the instrument saith he but man is not the principall efficient therefore worketh not in this businesse by instruments or instrumentall helps I answer 1. not only in resevence to this but to that which also followeth in his Argumentation We are to distinguish between instruments that they are of two kinds effective or receptive Effective so is a knife the instrument of cutting Receptive so is the hand the instrument of receiving Mr. Baxters Arguments are applyed to the former only not at all to the latter For 1. Of an Effective instument it may be said the knife cuts and the Man cuts likewise But a Receptive instrument hath a double relation 1. To the giver 2. To the receiver As if a rich man give a great treasure to a poor man he receiveth it in his hand the receptive instrument of the poor mans inriching is his hand Now if a man should argue as Mr. Baxter doth the hand if it be an instrument it is an instrument either of the giver or receiver not of the receiver for he doth not inrich himself he is not the principall agent inriching not of the giver for he doth not receive any riches but the act of the hand is to receive therefore the instrument of neither nor at all an instrument Who sees not the vanity of such an Argument Yet such is this paralogism of Mr. Baxter I say therefore that the Canons of an instrument which he citeth out of Aquinas and Schibler hold only of effective not of receptive instruments Yet as faith is Gods effective instrument to justifie man and not himself as Mr. Baxter trifleth so these Canons hold of it also in the sense before specifyed 2. I deny the Assumption or Minor he proves it thus Man doth not justifie himself This is an equivocation and besides the question None ever made man the causa prima of his justification none I mean of all those whom Mr. Baxters disputes against Himself indeed and his followers asserting the perfection and merit of mans righteousnesse consisting in faith and good works and affirming that this righteousnesse of man and in man doth give him title to the righteousnesse which is by Christ cannot well be cleared from making man the first tause of his justification But we speak nothing tending to this purpose and in no other sense do we say that man acteth to his justification but by this apprehending and applying to himself the justification of God And in this respect man is not only the principall but also the sole efficient of apprehending or receiving Christ to justification and faith his alone receptive instrument therein by the instrumentall subsurviency of his faith in receiving Christ We make it not mans instrument of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation or of his declaring but only of our applying it to our soules That it is not Gods instrument he hath these reasons to prove B. 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions A meer bull with which he jeers and scoffes not only at all the Protestant Divines but also at Christ and his Apostles as poor sorry animals and asses unworthy to be answered with reasons but with absurd non-sense 1. Faith in one was never used or ordained to be an instrument of justifying another much lesse faith in God to justifie man 2. He can conclude nothing else hence but this God beleeveth not therefore God is not justifyed or discharged from condemnation by the new Covenant 3. He doth in the Magisteriall confidence of his heart implicitely accuse Christ his Apostles and faithfull Teachers in his Church to hold that God is the instrument of our justification that the Principall agent and the instrument are the same thing that the instrument must be in the Agent or cannot be his instrument so that faith must be Gâ—d himself for whatsoever is in God is God himself the immanent acts of God are Gods acting These are all but slanderings of the Lords servants to make odious the doctrine which they deliver 4. We make faith in man not in God Gods effective instrument which he infundendo creat creando infundit and having wrought it in the soul he doth put it also in acting thereby to evidence to man his justification As some great and munificent Lord having laid up a great treasure for one of his poorest and most abject servant in some secret place tels him first what he hath done bestowes it fully and freely upon him but the servant not finding it is never the richer because he hath not the possession of it At length the Lord lights a torch guides his servant to the secret place and by the light of the torch shewes him the treasure which before in the minde and purpose of the doner was wholly his bids him to see and possesse Here the torch is that Lords instrument by which he discovered to his servant the treasure and evidenced him to be indeed enriched So and much more compleatly is faith Gods instrument by which he justifies us to our selves i. e. declareth and evidenceth us to be just and justifyed B. 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so man should be still said to justifie himself Either I understand him not or he speaks words without matter or words that are nothing to the matter in hand He is speaking of justification as of a transient act of God upon man in time This act of God we acknowledge no other but Gods declaring and evidencing man to himself justifyed Gods manifestation or pronouncing his justification to his conscience How man in this act of God should be the causa secunda between God in the action he explaines not and I perceive not That man is the causa secunda between God in the application of justification so manifested I deny not But in this doth man no more justifie himself then is above expressed Or because it is faith in man which we pronounce to be Gods instrument of justifying is therefore man causa secunda or a self-justifyer nay faith even in man is Gods Creature and the same nothing of mans essence Not of our sâ—lves it is the gift of God Ephes 2. 8. May not God lay up his own instruments where it pleaseth his will and wisdome for his own use or ceaseth it to be Gods instrument or in Gods hand when it is laid up in the heart of man for his good Obj. But faith acts not in man without man as the second cause acting it and by such acting his faith man should justifie
he hath enough manifested himself B. Some think that Faith may be some small low and impulsive cause but I will not give it so much though if it be made a Procatarctick objective cause Iâ— will not contend If he mean any other difference between the impulsive and the Procatartick objective cause besides that which is between the Generall and the Speciall it is past my skill to understand him or to comprehend what he denies and what he grants no doubt either he would not be understood or else he attributes to his righteousnesse of faith and good works an excitation but not an impulsion forsooth of the Grace of God actually to justifie those whom he beholdeth Schild Metaph li. 1. câ— 44. N. 24 25 40. fairly dressed therewith and so the beauty of the object enamors God to love and justifie And what more doe the Pâ—pists teach and so our justification as Gods act is but in posse till our righteousnesse as a sufficient cause brings it into esse or act Thus far of Mr. Baxters causes of Justification in which if he hath illustrated or confirmed any truth of God God is much beholden to him and Aristotle for it For distrusting the succour of the Scriptures he hath left them and brought nothing else but Logical and Metaphysical notions and reasons to prove all that which he hath said CHAP. XXVII Arg. Whether the sinner be justifyed only by the act not the habit of faith And whether it be not ordained to this use by reason of the usefull property which God hath infused into it to receive Christ Whether and in what sense a man may be said properly to be justifyed by faith In which also some things are intermixed about Mr. Baxters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere and conditions of Justification B. Thes 57. IT is the act of faith which justifyeth men at age and not the habit yet not as it is a good work or as it hath in it self any excellency above other graces but 1. In the neerest sense directly and properly as it is the fulfilling of the condition of the new Covenant 2. In the remote and more improper sense as it is the receiving of Christ and his satisfactory righteousnesse It is not for nothing that Mr. Baxter puts here a restriction upon justification by the Act of faith limiting it to men of age Are then elect infants that die before they attain age and strength of reason to put forth their faith into act justifyed only by the habit of faith It seemeth then that the hue and crie hath apprehended the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere as to them and laid it fast from justifying them Again if they are justifyed by the habit of faith as a habit of inherent grace though not such as he here denyeth to have an excellency above other graces what difference doth he put between Justification and Sanctification Doth he not speak the same things here with the Papists Yea in a higher dialect then any of them For they grant to Infants justification only by the washing of Christs bloud conferred upon them in Baptism without any qualification of their own But this man if he thus say justifies them by an inherent righteousnesse of their own But if Infants are justifyed without the act of faith and yet not by its habit how are they then Justifyed but by that which he calleth Christs own justification as a publick person at his resurrection which notwithstanding he utterly denyed Thes 42. and its Explication and if they are so justifyed will it not follow then that justification by the act of faith is Gods declaring and mans applying of his justification to his present comfort and full assurance which Mr. Baxter explodeth as an unsufferable conclusion But dying Infants are to have no use of this present comfort and full assurance therefore it sufficeth them to be justifyed in Christ though not in themselves Lastly or do they depart hence unjustifyed because without actuall beleeving and receiving of Christ and so shall be justifyed in the day of judgment because at the resurrection they shall actually beleeve What a crie do the poor souls in the interim then make in that Limbus insantum And why may not then according to Origen all the Devils and reprobates in hell be then justifyed and saved also because then they may actually beleeve and according to Mr. Baxter the condition of justification lasteth untill that day B. Explication That faith doth not properly justifie through any excellency that it hath above other graces or any more usefull property may appear thus To the excellency of faith above other graces I have nothing to say But to the reasons which he brings to deny the more usefull property of it I shall speak briefly B. 1. Then the praise would be due to faith No more then when God gives us meat the praise of our nutriment and life is due to our teeth because they have a more usefull property to grind and chew the meat then our eyes or ears B. 2. Then love would contend for a share if not a priority This is only said and not proved or declared upon what grounds love should contend B. 3. Then faith would justifie though it had not been made the condition of the Covenant 1. We denie faith to be the condition of the Covenant in Mr. Baxters sense If he would have spoken directly to them against whom he argueth he should have said Then faith would have justifyed though it had never been appointed and given of God as an instrument to receive Christ the justifyer And then we should answer 2. That it is so much as if he had said Then our teeth would have nourished and preserved life although God had never appointed and given them to us as instruments to chew the nourishing meat And thus the Caveat that he addeth becomes uselesse viz. B. Let those therefore take heed that make faith to justifie meerly because it apprehendeth Christ which is its naturall essentiall propertie For none affirmes faith to justifie meerly because it apprehendeth Christ without considering also Gods ordering and fitting it to this office together with his promise and the virtue laid up in Christ to justifie all that do by faith so apprehend him B. That it is faith in a proper sense that is said to justifie and not Christs righteousnesse onely which it receiveth may appear thus 1. From a necessity of a twofold righteousnesse which I have before proved in reference to the twofold Covenant 2. From the plain and constant phrase of Scripture which saith he that beleeveth shall be justifyed and that we are justifyed by faith and that faith is imputed for righteousnesse It had been as easie for the holy Ghost to have said that Christ only is imputed or his righteousnesse only or Christ only justifyeth c. if he had so meant He is the most excusable in an errour that is led into it by the constant
also concurreth with it to blesse it even it alone to this end Here to determine peremptorily whether of these acts of God his qualifying of faith for or his commanding it to this use is more and lesse direct or proper to the end or whether they are coordinates thereunto I fear may proceed more from a headie rashnesse then from the modesty of Christian wisdome especially because I take justifying faith to be more then a naturall or morall virtue which Mr. Baxter possibly will deny viz. an infused habit qualifyed by God himself that infuseth it with this peculiar property to cleave unto Christ and receive him But by the way it shall not be impertinent to shew in some particulars what mentall Reservations Mr. Baxter hath in his words not easily appearing to a cursory reader 1. When he saith B. Faith justifyeth as it is the fulfilling of the condition of the new Covenant His meaning is that it only so far justifyeth as it fulfilleth the condition But throughout our whole life according to his principles we are but fulfilling have not fulfilled the condition of the new Covenant therefore throughout our whole life we are but in justifying not justifyed And then consequently if it be true what most of our Divines conclude that in the next life there shall be no use of faith because vinon and fruition are proper to that state beleevers shall not be justifyed at all because the condition was never fulfilled 2. When he saith B. Because God hath commanded no other means nor promised justification to any other therefore it is that faith is the only condition and so only thus justifyeth The reader that doth but catch here a little and there a little of his doctrine would think him by what he here findeth no lesse Orthodox in the point of Justification then Luther or Paul himself that he explodes all works all inherent righteousnesse from bearing the least part with faith unto justification whereas contrariwise he speaks not here of the faith of Gods stamping but of his own coining of a faith that brings in all good works that is it self all good works to justification attributes no more to faith then he doth to any other part of our inherent righteousnesse nor any thing to faith it self as usefull to justifie but as it is our whole inherent righteousnesse or at least a part of it as partly by that which hath been but principally by that part of his treatise which remains to be examined appeareth The rest of this Section I let passe without examination I come now to the fift and last Section of his Explication pag. 230. B. 5. That faiths receiving Christ and his righteousnesse is the remote and secondary and not the formall reason why it justifyeth appeareth thus We finde verifyed in Mr. Baxter that of the Poet Dolus an virtus quis in hoste requirat having professed open warre against the doctrine of all the Protestant Churches yea of the Gospell of Christ he manageth it more by stratagems then by valour We finde him here perverting in stead of rightly stating the question thereby to get advantage to answer what he will and to what he pleaseth The question controverted between us and the Papists first and in these latter times the Arminians also is not whether Gods instituting of faith in Christ or else the acting of faith so instituted be the one the formall and the other the remote reason why it justifyeth But whether faith so instituted of God to be the mean or instrument of our Justification doth justifie by vertue received from Christ its object or else by its own vertue as it is a good work or as it is an act of righteousnesse performed in obedience to Gods commandement That which they maintain is that faith justifyeth by vertue of its object Christ denying the Papists work and the Arminians act If Mr. Baxter did labour more for truth then for victory we should not finde in him so much fraud and so little of sincerity It is not Christs but Antichrists kingdome that is maintained by the pillarage of shifts and sophisms Let him not astonish the poor Saints of Christ with words that they cannot understand obscuring the truth with needlesse terms of art his poor flock of Kederminster for whom he affirmes himself to have compiled this work are in all probability as well acquainted with the formall and remote reason why faith justifyeth as they are with Hocus Pocus his Liegerdemain In this point let him either confute the assertion of our Divines or maintain the adversaries assertion here he doth neither directly but beats the aire and makes a great noise to little purpose Yet let us see how well he proveth his own assertion B. Suppose Christ had done all that he did for sinners and they had beleeved in him thereupon without any Covenant promising Justification by this Faith would this Faith have justified them By what Law or whence will they plead their Justification at the Bar of God This supposition is not full there must be another supposition antecedaneous to this supposition A true supposition that will shew the invalidity of this feigned one Suppose that upon a foregoing Covenant between the Father and him Christ hath done all this for his elect whom he knoweth by name and so Christ in their names hath given and God hath taken full satisfaction for all their offences and hereupon Christ hath received in their behalf a full acquittance and discharge Who now shall lay any thing to their charge It is God that justifieth Rom. 8. 33. under this supposition they are for ever freed from pleading at Gods Bar They have there an Advocate to plead for them Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the Propitiation for our sins 1 Joh. 2. 1 2. Sits at the right hand of God with the effectuall Oratory of his pretious bloud making intercession for us Rom. 8. 34. so the supposition of Mr. Baxter extends no further then this if without any Covenant promise of Justification by Faith in Christ could they by beleeving in him have had the beeing and comfort of Justification within their own souls Unlesse God had by some other way ratified and sealed this benefit to them I acknowledge they could not yet had their justification been still nothing the lesse firm before God in Christ But now by the promise of the New Covenant through Faith they have the sweetnesse and joy thereof in themselves also B. But suppose Christ having done all that he did for us that he should in framing the New Covenant have put in any other condition and said whosoever loveth God shall by vertue of my satisfaction be justified would not this love have justified No doubt of it I conclude then thus The receiving of Christ is as the silver of this coin the Gospel promise is as the Kings stamp which maketh it curraut for justifying If God had seen it meet to have stamped any thing else it
imforming and giving life and vertue to it an act apprehending Christ as its object in whom all its vertue lyeth the cloud or darknesse in which Christ dwelleth as God was formerly in a cloud or darknesse upon mount Sinai and in the Temple or as all our Divines say the hand by which we receive Christ made of God righteousnesse to us and in us Gal. 3. 27. 1 Cor. 1. 30. 2 Cor. 5. 21. That the life of justification consisteth not in works at all nor in faith considered in a sense divided from Christ but in Christ our life living in us so that the life which we live is by the faith of the Son of God by the recumbency of our souls by faith upon the Son of God which is our life and that this is to live by faith Gal. 2. 20. Col. 3. 4. Gal. 3. 11. That Christ with all his righteousnesse to remission and salvation is given us freely of God not sold as by Judas to his enemies and so made ours without money without price without fine or rent In the Covenant of grace there is nothing smelling of a Simoniacall contract it is wholly of Gods giving not in the least particle of our purchasing Isa 9. 6. Joh. 3. 16. Isa 55. 1. That the life and justification which are by the second Adam descend to us in the same manner with the sin and condemnation from the first Adam But these descended by our naturall union and communion with the first Adam not by our imitation of him For death reigned from Adam over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam Therefore also righteousnesse and justification descend to us by the union and communion which we have with the second Adam Christ Jesus and not from our imitation of him and configuration to him for when we were yet enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son Not but that every one to whom the sin and condemnation of Adam once descended are thenceforth imitators of and configured to Adam or that they to whomsoever the righteousnesse and justification of Christ have descended do not thenceforth become imitators of and are configured to the image of Christ but that these imitations and configurations do follow and not goe before such union and communion declaring not producing the sin and condemnation which are from Adam or the righteousnesse and justification which are from the Lord Christ Rom. 5. 11. 19. And this is a sound Argument which the Apostle bringeth to prove that works can in no respect justifie or save For we are Gods workmanship saith he created in Christ Jesus to good works which God hath ordained before that we should walk in them Ephes 2. 9 10. where we may take notice that good works are Gods end in saving or justifying us from sin But the means do alway in order of nature go before and not follow the end in execution I mean though not in intention That we are first in Christ the justifyer and in possession of the justification that is by him and then being new created in Christ to the image of God are inabled to do good works That God hath ordained before that we should walk in them being saved or justifyed not that we should be saved or justifyed by them That the righteousnesse of God by which we are justifyed is from faith to faith not begun by faith and ended in works which according to the Apostle is a beginning in the spirit and a seeking to be perfected by the flesh Rom. 1. 17. Gal. 3. 3. Should I proceed so far as the Scriptures as a leading thread would guide me for the confirmation of justification without works I should be taken as exorbitant For the rest I shall refer the reader to such writers as have handled the point of justification against the Papists or to the disputations of the Apostle himself against the false Apostles who taught the same doctrine with Mr. Baxter though not expresly in the same words They taught that we cannot be saved by Christ by faith in Christ alone except we be circumcised and keep the Law or do the works which the Law commandeth Act. 15. 1 24. Mr. Baxter teacheth in this his 60. Thesis that B. The bare act of beleeving is not the onely condition of the New Covenant but severall other duties also are parts of that condition If we take together with his words that which in the precedent Chapter we have manifested to be his meaning in these words and that by the bare act of beleeving he understands faith without and in opposition to works for himself knoweth that it is his Pontificall-Arminian-Socinian not our Protestant Evangelicall doctrine which holds out justification by beleeving as either a bare or a cloathed act or work then he teacheth the same doctrine for which the Apostle anathematized the false Apostles and arch-church-troublers in his time Gal. 1. 7 8 9. 5. 12. And what the Apostle hath against them is against Mr. Baxter their own son I will not say in the faith but in perverting the faith and Gospell For neither did they deny faith but Mr. Baxters bare faith faith without works to be effectuall to justification Against this assertion common to him and them if there were no other Scriptures contradicting but what I have alleaged no arguments brought by our Divines to subvert it and to establish the contrary doctrine but what have been here expressed and implied al which are scarce a drop of their ful bucket yet doth Mr. Baxter declare any finglenesse of heart or sincere aime to advance the glory and truth of God in suppressing all this and all the rest in silence so to beguile his more Logicall then Theologicall readers whom he knowes to be more acquainted with Sophistry then Divinity with exotick scriblings then Canonicall Scriptures with an opinion that the stream of Scriptures runne all to his Mill and that we have nothing from the Word favouring our cause Neither let any object that our Churches do only deny the merit of works not the necessity of them as a condition to justification Herein I shall have a fit place to speak afterward as to Mr. Baxter and as it is his plea to lenifie his self-arrogating assertion In the interim to manifest the simplicity of our gudgeons that are apt to swallow the most portentous errours if offered to them involved in fine terms of logicall notions among whom some that erewhile did prosecute with bel book and candle some to death some to banishment some to sequestrations whom they thought but to smell a little of the perfumes of the purple whore These very same men now having inriched themselves with the spoyles of them whom by their outcries they erewhile pursued are mad to drench themselves with the very dregs of the cup of fornication which is in the hand of the whore and kisse the lips of Mr. Baxter which hath blessed with plausible words the doctrine
as his Masters have done before him My labour therefore here will be the lesse because the labour of so many before me hath been so full to manifest how alien and improper these Scriptures are to desend what these men would have defended by them For why should I say again what so many worthies have said untill Mr. Baxter shall make it his taske to prove some infirmity and insufficiency in that which they have spoken All that Mr. Baxter here saith he doth almost wholely transcribe out of Bellarmine giving us a compendium of what Bellarmine hath at large and so Mr. Baxter here is but Bellarmine abridged Let us lay them together and 1 They jumpe in one common conclusion That the bare act of beleeving saith Mr. Baxter faith alone saith Bellarmine Thes 60. is not the only condition of Justification but many other duties c. One of these duties according to Bellarmine first and after Explicat p. 234. him according to Mr. Baxter here is Repentance In this alone they differ that Mr. Baxter puts Repentance as the first and Bellarmine puts it as the fourth in order after Faith and concurring with it in the pardon of sin and salvation The Scriptures which Mr. Baxter alleageth for repentance are some from Bellarmine some from Bellarmines fellowes To this place I referred those Scriptures which Mr. Baxter quoted Thes 14. pa. 90. beginning with Mark 1. 15. to prove repentance a collaterall with faith All which are here quoted over again saving these three Act. 20. 21. Revel 2. 5. ver 16. all which three Scriptures speak no lesse home to his purpose then if he should thus argue Kederminster is in Worcestershire ergo it supports Pauls Church at London Act. 20. 21. The Apostle having affirmed himself to have dealt faithfully in preaching all that was profitable to them to evince it gathers into two heads the sum of all his doctrine which he had testifyed among them viz. Repentance toward God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ what is there in this to prove repentance a concomitant with faith to justifie is every profitable doctrine effectuall to justifie A mans food and garments are both profitable to him shall I therefore concude either that his garments do nourish him or his meat clothe him Revel 2. 5 Christ admonisheth the Angell of the Church of Ephesus To repent and do his first works else will he come and remove his candlestick out of its place except he repent what is this to justification will he say that the removing of the candlestick out of its place was either the justifying of the unjustifyed or unjustifying of him that was before justifyed And Revel 2. 16. Christ cals upon the Angell of the Church at Pergamos Repent or else I will come to thee quickly and will fight against them viz. the Balaamites and Nicholaitans mentioned in the two former verses with the sword of my mouth Surely Mr. Baxter must flie from the latter and rationall meaning and follow the precepts of Origen in fishing after the Spirit or an Allegoricall sense of these words to make them speak any thing for his justification by repentance All the rest Scriptures quoted in the 14. Thesis we have again in a bunch here pa. 235. in the explication of his 60. Thesis to prove the same thing And here why doth he deal worse then Bellarmine in attributing justification which he makes to consist in pardon and salvation to repentance without manifesting as Bellarmine doth what he means by repentance This is but to strive about words and leave the matter in darknesse As for the other particular Scriptures here quoted if I should particularly examine them we should find not a few of them as the three former coming no neerer to the question in hand then Tybris doth to Thames As for all such of them as have the least shew or sound of speaking for him he hath them in part from Bellarmine whom he here followeth and in part from other Jesuits and Fryers that controversally handle the Popish justification against us I refer therefore the reader to informe himself from the many answers of the many Protestant Theologists which they have extant against Bellarmine and the rest of that generation from whom if truth and sobernesse be dear to him it is almost unpossible but that he must receive satisfaction Yet something shall I speak in generall of these quoted Scriptures As many of them as do hold forth the promise of life upon condition of repentance to sinners or to sinners if they repent all the rest quotations being altogether besides the purpose These all speak of a legall or of an Evangelicall repentance Of a legall repentance consisting meerly in a feeling of humiliation and contrition for hatred against departing from sinne and applying of the endeavours to all morall vertue and obedience This is a meerly morall repentance derivable from the strength of naturall conscience illuminated by the Law and common knowledge of Gods will and nature In this sense is the word taken in most of the Scriptures quoted from the old Testament and some also possibly of those that are quoted out of the new But then the life by these Scriptures promised is not the life of justification or of spirituall and supernaturall blessednesse but that which the administration under the Law is wont to call life viz. 1 The fruition of the land of Canaan which prefigured the life and rest both of grace and glory And 2 Of the blessings of health honour peace plenty safety and other temporall benefits promised to the obedient in the Land of Canaan This is clear to him that will see from the 18 of Ezek. where so often mention is made of life and death Turn and live if ye turn not ye shall die what is here meant by this life and death may be understood from that proverb cursedly used by the Jews whereof mention is made in the beginning of the Chapter The fathers have eaten sowre grapes and the childrens teeth are set on edge the fathers have sinned and death is inflicted upon the children for their fathers fault This gave occasion for the delivery of all the doctrine comprehended within this Chapter in which God throughly vindicateth his justice from inflicting death upon the children righteous children for their wicked parents offences shewing how justly they dyed which dyed and lived which lived in reference to their own not their fathers sinne and righteousnesse what then was this death here denounced or the setting of the teeth on edge but the plague famine sword which had been upon them in the Land and their captivity and exile now upon them in Babylon out of the Land of their inheritance these temporall evills are the death here affirmed to be inflicted and denounced to be continued upon them The life promised upon condition of their repentance and turning from their evill wayes was their restauration to the land and blessings of the
but those of Mr. Baxter as far as they relate to it do follow justification 4 The scope of these Scriptures is to urge upon all that draw near to God in prayer to purge out all hatred and purposes of revenge against their brethren from their hearts and the argument by which this duty is pressed is that else it as also any other reigning sin allowed within the heart will make both their persons and prayers an abomination to the Lord. God will not hear will not forgive such as bring while they bring such a devill in their hearts before him they shall depart without any more answer of peace to their souls then they are disposed to give to their brethren against whom they are provoked From these Scriptures therefore we may gather how they are qualifyed which are forgiven and justifyed not by what qualifications and works they have obtained justification That whosoever hath tasted of the pardoning grace of God the same by beholding in Christ the glory of Gods grace as in a glasse is transformed into the same image of grace love mercy goodnesse pity c. towards his brethren as himself hath found in God and sees shining forth upon him from the face of God through Christ 2 Cor. 3. 18. That in whomsoever this mercy and goodnesse of God appears not whatsoever he boasteth of faith and devoutnesse in prayer yet it is certain that he is empty of justifying faith and of the justification which is by faith and so we have here some description of the justifyed and unjustifyed not a precept of duties by which the unjustifyed may attain to be justifyed 5 The three last quotations of Mr. Baxter do subvert utterly all that he built by the former quotations For these Scriptures affirming it to be not indefinitely prayer but the prayer of faith which saveth and obtaineth forgivenesse that not the asking simply but the asking of the faithfull in Christs Name is prevalent that not every one but we know that whatsoever we aske we have our petitions granted do manifest that whatsoever vertue is in prayer it floweth from faith prayer it self is a dead work unlesse faith enliven it and all our works of mercy and forgiving dead works untill faith becomes the living root from which they derive life or rather hath breathed out the life which it hath suckt from Christ our life into them That it is Christs name and mediation that makes all accepted with God and that not to all but to those peculiar ones of Christ that are in union and conjunction with Christ it being a priviledge peculiar to true beleevers that is here mentioned under the word we we have it saith the Apostle the world hath no part in it Esaus forgiving Sauls confession of sin and Simon Magus his prayer for forgivenesse may as in Mr. Baxters last quotation Act. 8. 22. perhaps be so far heard and forgivenesse obtained from the Lord as to the exempting of them from some temporall vengeance but not to interest them in the justification of the Gospell If the cryes and workes of any of these dogs bring them in to partake of the childrens bread it is but in mans judgement alone before God it was their faith and cleaving to Christ yea being in Christ by faith that of dogs made them children and partakers of the Gospell priviledges So these Scriptures in no wise prescribe as I said the duties by or for which we are but delineate the Acts and qualifications of those that are justifyed by Christ So much in generall to the summe of these Scriptures as for the meaning of the severall Scriptures and how Mr. Baxter argues from them as the Papists how the Sophisters for so our men fitly tearm the Papists endeavour from them to prove justification by works and the Protestants answer and confute them I leave to the Reader to fetch from the Commentators themselves whom they shall finde to speake fully as Mr. Baxter knoweth but concealeth not daring to enter the Lists with them The third duty which he brings as coofficiating with Pag. 236. faith to justification is a complexion of duties the whole swarm the vast mountain of duties all that men and Angels can devise to be duty yet that he might declare how he can measure and contain so huge an Ocean in his fist he crusheth them so together as that they may be held in the concave of two Eg-shels love and sincere obedience and their works Fain would he have followed Bellarmine as his shâ—ddow at every turne but he finds his genius somewhat differing from Bellarmines The Cardinall was for prolixity Mr. Baxter is for brevity Bellarmine puts love in the fourth place as operating to justification with faith and thence proceeds to more But Mr. Baxter follows him here to love and weary to go after him any further in particulars shakes hands in love with him and parts from him with good leave in respect of his method but in his matter to hold with him throughout the work The first Scripture which he quotes is the first which Bellarmine alleadgeth thus B. Luk. 7. 47. though I knew in Pinks interpretation of that It seems Pink hath given the right interpretation of that Text which all the Protestants give But Bellarmine interprets it otherwise and must not Christ mean as Bellarmine will have him The words of the Text are these Wherefore I say unto thee her sins which are many are forgiven for she loved much But to whom little is forgiven the same loveth litle What doth Mr. Baxter hence conclude the same with Bellarmine her much love was the ground of the forgivenesse of her many sins and so her love went before her justification and forgivenesse which followed as the fruit or consequent thereof Bellarmine and his fellowrs put authority and holinesse upon this interpretation else would not Mr. Baxter who makes right reason the foundation and rule of his Religion forswear his wit and reason to follow it For it is evident from the Text to all that are not sworn enemies to the truth that the Lord Jesus reasoneth here from the effect to the cause and not from the cause to the effect from the womans great love that many sins were forgiven her causing this love not from the greatnesse of her love as from the cause why so many sins were forgiven her So runs the Text Which will love most he to whom the creditor hath forgiven 500. pence or he Ve. 41 c. to whom he forgave 50 The answer was I suppose he to whom most was forgiven Thou hast well said saith the Lord so it is with this woman she loves much because much was forgiven her Who sees not here the forgivenesse to be the cause of the love not the love of the forgivenesse Or will Bellarmine which affirmes this woman to be Mary Magdalen or Mr. Baxter after him say that while she was yet a Harlot and had seven Devils in her that
passed thorough after men are dead With hundreds more of the same kind and worth wherein it seems Mr. Baxter here would imitate them to ingratiate himself into their favour As for the residue of Mr. Baxters quotations in this place they are for the most part if not all urged in another place to prove works the condition of our glorification and future salvation and untill then I forbear to answer them But lest any in the interim should stand doubting at any of the Scritures hâ—re quoted promising either love or life or grace or glory to men thus and thus qualifyed and conceive that such qualifications are the ground and condition together with faith to in right us in that which is promised I think it fit to premonish by the way what all Protestant writers have â—maintained and cleared against the Papists that the ground of our right in such selicities promised is not the qualifications or works of the person but the new relation of the person so qualifyed his union with Christ justification and adoption before God Such promises not being made to all but to the Saints in Christ so doing I shall clear it up to you by a similitude Isaac promiseth his son Esau his blessing but bids him go a hunting and bring him venison and then in eating it he will blesse him what was that which enrighted Esau to the blessing that was the ground or condition upon which Isaac would blesse him the venison caught and dressed nothing lesse for if a 1000. others should have presented him with a 1000. pieces of venison at severall times all dressed and fitted to his appetite the blessing should have been reserved entire for Esau and they all have been sent away empty as appeareth by his dealing with Jacob presenting his made venison how agreeing so ever the dish was to the palate of the old Patriark yet he will examine thorowly who it is whether his very son Esau that brings it before he gives the blessing It was not then the venison but the sonrship yea primo-geniture of Esau that was the ground and condition of Isaacs promise to blesse him So is it also to his justifyed and adopted ones in Christ that the Lord saith Aske and ye shall have seek and ye shall finde knock and it shall be opened to you Run and ye shall obtain Overcome and ye shall be crowned Love and I will love you Be mercifull and I will be mercifull to you Humble your selves and I will lift you up and a thousand more such promises of grace as far as they hold forth spirituall and saving blessings they are the Childrens bread dispensations of God within his own family no stranger hath part in it or right to it Let the world those that are not beloved aske seek knock run fight c. the Lord may possibly out of the goodnesse of his providence infinitenesse of his wisdome and bounty of his nature reward with corporall and temporall good things their carnall and temporall endeavours but untill by the spirit of adoption they are through faith united to Christ they have no right by the new Covenant to make claim to the spirituall and saving blessings promised neither are they any otherwise to be ratifyed to any but as they were beloved of God in Christ before there were any such qualifications and motions in them as Mr. Baxter cals conditions as hath been before declared Yea suppose that Esau could not have brought the venison to his Father had been hindered or drawn aside from seeking it or seeking could not find it or finding could not have taken and brought it should the promise and purpose of Isaac to blesse him for this cause have failed He performed not the condition he shall therefore be bereaved of the blessing Nothing lesse for the generall and fundamentall ground and condition the relation of a son of the first-born son stood still fixed unto which the good will of the Father and the blessing in the Fathers purpose was entailed In like manner though a child of God fail in some of the works and qualifications which Mr. Baxter cals conditions of the new Covenant yet this makes not the promise of the Covenant or the beneficence of the Covenanter promising to be void because these are grounded so far as they are grounded out of God upon Christ our union unto Christ and new relation to God in Christ All which I doubt not shall be made manifest in its own place only what hath been said I thought fit to be said by the way for the prevention of doubts and perplexities that might ingage the weak reader before we come thither I should here have put an end to what I had to say to his first Argument drawn from Scriptures having spoken to all that in this place are quoted saving those which he brings again elsewhere for which place I have put off my examination of them But that p. 310. he comes with a new supply Lest therefore I should make another work of it there or minister occasion to any of saying that where his Argument is most fortifyed there I shun and shrink from answering I shall examine here also what force such of those Scriptures as have not been here quoted and examined have to prove justification by works and so much the rather because he tels us there that the assertion is evident from these following Scriptures B. Mat. 12. 37. By thy words thou shalt be justifyed and by thy words thou shalt be condemned Justification and Condemnation seem here by our Saviours testimony to depend upon the sinfull and blamelesse use of our tongues Ergo upon works We may grant all in our Saviours sense without advantaging Mr. Baxters cause or endammaging our own For the Lord Christ here directeth his words to those Legall Jewish Pharisaicall Justiciaries who stuck fast to the righteousnesse of the Law for justification and in zeal thereof blasphemed as in the precedent part of the Chapter upon which this dependeth is to be seen Christ and his Gospell This blasphemy Christ here reproveth and smiteth with a weapon fetcht out of their own Armory Even your own law forbids such evill words and blasphemies holding forth Justification and Condemnation not only upon condition of good and evill works but words also so that there is nothing spoken of the justification of the New but of the Old Covenant only A reprehension and commination pat to them to whom it was denounced the threat of the Law to them that refused the Gospell and were and would be under the Law But this is nothing to the justification of the new Covenant that followes the rule of the Gospell The next Scripture not contained and examined in the former sardle of quotations is B. 1 Joh. 1. 9 If we confesse our sins God is faithfull to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from our iniquities Here confession another work seems to be a condition of forgivenesse and justification
to Christ that they perish not by following their own thoughts What then shall become of the wicked which are wholly full of corruption and unbeleef without any spark of faith and whom the Lord hath given up to a spirit of slumber like Bastards without all Chastisements hindering to roll themselves into ruine B. Rom. 6. 16. His servants ye are to whom ye obey whether of sin unto death or of obedience unto righteousnesse The Apostle here speaketh of the righteousnesse not of Justification but of Sanctification except we will say he here digresseth from that which he makes the subject of this whole Chapter But whether he means the righteousnesse of justification or of sanctification yet the obedience he here speaketh of is that which cap. 1. ver 5. he declares himself to have received commission and Apostleship to preach viz. obedience to the faith the suâ—me whereof is faith in Christ Jesus What he would infer from his two last quotations 1 Pet. 1. 2. 22. Let him that can understand declare and make answer to it I yeeld that his profoundnesse condemns my shallownesse I dare not contradict him in what he would because I have not the wit to imagin what he would say It seems he had determined such a number of quotations and took at adventure those that came next to his view to make up that precise number Any other Scriptures besides these being as to my apprehension no lesse pat and proper to his purpose then these CHAP. IV. The vanity and ridiculousnesse of Mr. Baxters second and third Arguments discovered The former that Because faith is the more principall and works the lesse prinpall condition of our Justification and that all other duties are in some respect or other reducible to faith therfore we may be said to be justifyed by other works and duties yet to be justifyed by faith alone The second drawn from a wide and irregular definition of faith that it containeth all works in its belly therefore whosoever is justifyed by those works is justifyed by faith only A second Argument he drawes from an anticipation of an objection which he prevents by turning the edge of it against the objectors and applying it to the strengthening of his own assertion The objection that he sees in readinesse against him is that this doctrine of justification by duties and works wholly overthroweth that highest and most fundamentall Gospel doctrine of justification by faith alone This he denies and affirmes Thes 62. p. 238. that although we be justifyed by a thousand duties besides B. Yet faith may be called the only condition of the New Covenant i. e. of justification True if Mr. Baxter give the denomination but the question is not what things may be called but what they are A woe is pronounced to them that call or put light for darknesse and darknesse for light good for evill and evill for good c. I shall no further presse the unaptnesse of the phrase Mr. Bavter declaring in that which followeth his meaning to be that faith may be the only condition notwithstanding which he proves thus B. 1 Because it is the principall condition and the other but the lesse principall And as the whole countrey hath oft its name from the chief City so may the conditions of this Covenant from faith 2 Because all the rest are reducible to it either being presupposed as necessary antecedents as means or contained in it as its parts properties or modifications or else implyed as its immediate products or necescessary subservient means or consequents I speak first to the latter of these two arguments because he speaks first in the explication to the confirmation of it It is almost as wise an argumentation as I knew once used by some home-bred course-spun sons of a Country farmer who having heard that their father upon a day was sworn Constable at the Court made merry at home concluding from their fathers Constableship that they were all Constables and must rule the Parish because they were his sons and dwelt in house with him or as that of the Athenian boy that boasted himself to be the ruler of Athens thus proving it that he ruled his mother and his mother swayed his father and his father being Lord Maior that year swayed Athens Yea more of reason at least lesse of reasonlesnesse is there in both these arguings then in that of Mr. Baxter theirs concluded only the sons to to partake necessarily of their fathers office this man makes all that are in any respect of kindred yea of any relation to faith for such their relation to partake of the office of faith to justifie For so he reasoneth all the rest are reducible to faith as Antecedents going before it means to obtain it or parts or properties or necessary adjuncts and modifications or products effects or consequents What then Ergo these all in regard of their alliance or affinity to faith justifie and bear a part with faith in its office of justifying And yet when these justifie as much as faith we must understand that faith justifyeth alone Because what all these allies of faith do that faith it self may be said to do This is indeed Logick to prevail with his Kederminsterians or rather such of them as know no difference between Logick and Garlick It is as if I should dispute thus God made choyce of David before all and any other of the sons of Abraham to be King and to rule over Israel therefore all the progenitours of David as well Tamar and Ruth and Râ—hab as Judah Pharez and Booz yea more specially Jesse the father of David and all the brethren of David yea all the sons and generation of David to Joseph the Carpenter let me dilate my self more boldly all the tribe of Judah which were flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone nay all Israel which were allies to him and met with him in one common father Jacob these all partaked of Davids kingship and were partners with him in the office of ruling because they all were one way or other reducible to David as going hefore him or following him c. and yet when all these were Kings with David neverthelesse David was King alone Or thus The eye only of all the members of the body is appointed to the office of seeing neverthelesse the head that holds and gives influence to it the eye-lids that cover it the veins that convey nutriment to it the cheeks nose lips and teeth that are contiguous to it the hands and feet that are guided by it c. all these and many more do partake of the office of seeing together with the eye and when all these doe see as well as the eye yet the eye doth see alone because all the rest are reducible in some way of alliance to the eye If Mr. Baxters dispute be not one and the same with this in its grounds then is all my reason gone out of my head into my cap.
slaves future service is not a condition but a consequent of his present redemption But let us see now whether Mr. Baxter with this paint of that which he cals right Reason do fight against God or Man doth resist the placits of men or else the holy Ghost himself He required before that all might be tryed by Scriptures Let us now bring his doctrine to the touch-stone I shall not repeat all or any of the Scriptures before alleadged or that might be further alleadged against him One arrow out of that holy quiver one Scripture out of the whole body of Gospell doctrine shall suffice to smite to the heart to death it self all that he goeth about here with fine flourishes of wit to establish Eph. 2. 8 9 10. thus speaks the holy Ghost By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God Not of works lest any man should boast For ye are Gods workmanship created in Christ Jesus to good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them That the word Saved is an equipollent here with Justifyed if there should be any that will deny yet Mr. Baxter will and must affirme unlesse he will beat in pieces one of the chief pillars of the fabrick erected in this book and overthrow what he hath built In this truth he must joyn with us though in other he estrange himself from us The same Act of God being called justifying as it dischargeth us from the state of our misery as considered to be a state of sin and saving as it delivereth us from it under the consideration of it as a state of condemnation and vengeance Mr. Baxter will grant cannot but grant this And then there will naturally drop from this Scrtpture these following positions 1 That the justification or salvation of the Covenant of grace is by faith 2 That it is not of works but by faith in opposition to works 3 That the very works which flow from our union to Christ and to which we are new created in Christ Jesus even those which Mr. Baxter calleth the righteousnesse of the Gospell are excluded from bearing any part with faith in our justification 4 That the not justification by works doth in no wise hinder the beleevers performing of them for they are created in Christ Jesus their hearts are new wrought by the Spirit to a holy delight in them 5 That God hath not ordained them to justifie but for the new created and justifyed in Christ to walk in them 6 That to teach otherwise of works the very works of Sanctification is to depresse Gods grace and to extoll mans boasting and vain-glory 7 Even these gospell works and righteousnesse are excluded from having any part in justifying not only as collaterals with the satisfaction of Christ but also as collaterals with faith i. e. from bearing a part either in causality or conditionality with faith to justifie I challenge Mr. Baxter and all his Legall and Anti-evangelicall disciples here to deny any one of these positions to spring naturally from this Text. And if the the holy Ghost here speak all this then by it all that Mr. Baxter speaketh throughout this whole Tractate for justification by works is by the breath of Gods mouth blown to the curse as in many things I shall by Gods help shew afterward At the present what he speaketh of works comprehended in faith to justification is here shaken off as a Sophisticall phantasticall Antiscripturall dream the holy Ghost here by the positing of faith in expresse words rejecting works Gospell works all that Mr. Baxter makes a part with faith in that which he cals Evangelicall righteousnesse from all and any copartnership with faith in saving or justifying so excludes all as that he denyeth that justification by grace can any more stand if the best Gospell works of the best Saints are put in any cooperation with faith in the promoting of it All the rest that he hath in the explication pa. 240. and thence to pa. 243. is wholly besides the question which is not whether works and duties be reducible to faith or in what respect every particular qualification and duty standeth to it But whether reduced or not reduced it doth by Gods appointment help with saith to justify us before God This we have found to be an usuall feat of Mr. Baxter where his assertions are confident and peremptory but his proofs of them light and shadie to devise in such case some witty passage wherewith to divert the considerations of his reader from the shame and nakednesse of his foregoing Arguments And this most probably was his drift and craft here having given us but words in stead of Arguments to prove that works are comprehended and implied in faith in all such Scriptures as attribute justification to faith only that the emptinesse and nothingnesse of his argumentation to make this good may not appear to the reader he tols him a way to attend to a subtle and plausible dispute of the relation that every good endowment and work hath particularly to faith In which discourse of his we will not examine how many things are true and how many false for if they were all true they are nothing to the thing in question viz. whether in the severall relations that Mr. Baxter makes them to stand to faith or in any other they help with faith to justification and that so as that when all these with faith cojustifie we may be yet said to be justifyed by faith alone When he hath spoken all by meer affirming without confirming he thus indeed at last concludeth pa. 243. B. So then when you invite a man to your house it is not necessary to bid him come in at the door or bring his head or arms or legs or cloaths with him though these are necessary because all these are necessarily implyed Even so when we are said to be justifyed by faith only or when it is promised that he which beleeveth shall be saved all these forementioned duties are implyed and included How ecliptick is falshood but sincerity open and full No man invites another to his house but to some end either to taste of some dainties or hear some good tidings or see some excellent work or for some other end He should have named the end and we would grant him all thus that as much as the door head legs armes clothes of the invited do partake with the mouth in the act of tasting or with the eye in seeing or the ear in hearing so much when we are invited to Christ do other duties and workes partake with faith in receiving him to justification A third argument if indeed it be not one and the same in substance and differ only in words from the former he draweth from a wide wilde vast confused and incircumscriptive definition of faith begotten of his own brain and now first as an overgrown monster born into the world and baptized
is more adoe then come in and sit down and take what we have a minde to God hath put all his Sons offices into the condition to be received and submitted to Either all or none must be accepted And if all be in the condition then the receiving of all must needs justifie upon the grounds that I have laid down before It is not a new thing to see heresie usurping the chaire to condemne truth of errour The reasoning here is wholly carnall and naturall besides the rule of the Gospell When he calls faith a naturall way of receiving the mercy offered by Christ and our own worth and works implyedly the spirituall way how doth he put light for darknesse and darknesse for light giving to the truely spirituall cause of renewing that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 2. 14. The naturall man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God c. Can Heaven and Hell be more opposite either to other then the Apostles doctrine to Mr. Baxters The Apostle cals the way of faith alone the Spirit and the way of works superadded to faith for justification the flesh Gal. 3. 3. Is it Flesh or Spirit in Mr. Baxter that makes him a contradictor of the holy Ghost speaking by the Apostle The way of faith is the way of grace supernaturall Flesh and bloud cannot reveal it unto us but our Father which is in heaven But the way of works is beneath grace dictated by nature it self therefore naturall but so that all the force of nature cannot effectuallize it to justification It is a slander that he puts upon the Orthodox whom he hateth therefore represents them as Noddies and Simpletons pretending that they teach faith to be nothing but an accepting of pardon and accepting of holinesse c. Nay we make neither pardon nor holinesse nor the c. but Christ Jesus the object of our faith adhere and cleave to him for all yet not confounding his benefits or the means by which he applyeth them but wait by faith at the severall sluces by which he conferreth his severall benefits to receive the washing away of our guilt by the effusion of his bloud and holinesse or sanctification by the effusion of his Spirit and not contrariwise holinesse by his bloud and pardon by the effusion of his Spirit So we repair by faith to Christ for all because in him as in the spring is all yet so as that in coming to him alone that hath all we come to the Sun of righteousnesse for light to the fountain for life and to the Spirit of sanctification which flowes from him for holynesse He cryes against separation and makes it as I have shewed for union and makes confusions Where doth he mention any office or operation of faith to sanctification or use of sanctification but to justification or what is faith with him but a compound of all endowments works and duties And thus he confounds faith and works Christs righteousnesse and mans righteousnesse morall honesty and Gospell sanctification of all together making up one linsy-woolsy justification or righteousness to justification which the Spirit of God never revealed but the spirit of Mr. Baxter hath hatched What he speaketh of Christ stablishing his office either is above my understanding or else is not at all to his purpose And what of accepting as under the notion of accepting or as under the notion of a condition hath been enough spoken to in what was before said about the instrumentality of faith All that followeth is wholly averse from and adverse to the doctrine of the Gospell Jewish and Popish For what meanes he by our title in Law and the wedding garment but the whole furniture of works and duties done in obedience to a supposed legislative authority of Christ Without these and before these to take possession i. e. to dare to adhere to Christ for justification is usurpation and an incurring of Gods vengeance for usurping Thus beating off from Christ sinners chief sinners for whom Christ hath dyed How doth the spirit of the rejected Jewes work upon this man when they heard of righteousnesse and Act. 22. 21 22 23. salvation offered to the Gentiles a common and profane people that were not holy how did they stretch their throats and rend their clothes in a zeal against this indignity So this man hearing of the justificition of Publicans and sinners hath his eye evill because God is good tears himself with anger crying usurpation vengeance hell-fire why because they had not put on the filthy rags of mans righteousnesse which he cals the wedding garment and thereby gotten title to Christ before they were so bold as to beleeve in him and girded on their own gaol-clothes first and then have put on Christ upon them that their own righteousnesse might have been neerest the heart and Christs righteousnesse at a further distance as having no efficacy but from our own righteousnesse effectuallizing it Unto all this I shall use only that oracle of the Lord Christ The Publicans and harlots enter into the Kingdome of God before these Pharisaicall justiciaries and whited sepulchers Let Christ alone be my wedding garment I leave all that unrighteous righteousnesse which Mr. Baxter would wrest out from the Kingly office entire to Mr. Baxter to compleat his righteousnesse to justification I know no other title to the justification of the new Covenant which the chief sinners must look after before they possesse it but the grant of grace in the new Covenant and their closure by faith with Christ in whom God presents himself to justifie and reconcile them to himself One voice of my Bride-groom crying Whosoever thirsteth i. e. is dry and empty of all good in himself let him come to me and whosoever will let him drink of the well of the water of life freely Rev. 22. 17. is of more force with me then ten thousand contradicting voices such as this of Mr. Baxter There is more adoe then come in and sit down and take what we have a mind to If this man had the imaginary place of Peter to be Porter of heaven how quickly would he forfeit his place by repelling those whom alone Christ will have admitted and admitting those that Christ will have repelled Christ admits beleevers not doers this man rejects all beleevers that are not doers before they are beleevers The rest that he saith here is sacrificed to his Goddesse the Lady Condition A deity that the Scriptures never knew nor yet all the whole University of Athens They erected an Altar indeed to the unknown God Act. 17. 23. see the depth of Mr. Baxter he hath found the Antipodas which the old Mathematicians wrote of but could never find the deity which the learned Athenians worshiped but worshiped they knew not what This Goddesse Condition by some help of the Socinians and Arminians hath M. Baxter brought to light and invested her with more glittering ornaments then they had wit to do only he hath not yet
in his other forementioned operations upon us by his Word and Spirit not only to teach and command but also by his infinite power to enliven us to bring forth fruits of so great a salvation and to walke worthy of it in all holinesse and righteousnesse and exactnesse to fulfill all duties and works of Christian obedience In this he is to be made indeed the object of justifying faith or which is the same of sanctifying faith yet not at it justifyeth but as it sanctifyeth We should not a little maim both the office of faith and the benefits which we have by Christ if we should restrain them all to justification Nay Christ is made unto us as well sanctification as righteousnesse and faith adhereth as fast to Christ for the one as the other else is it not a legitimate but bastard faith Neverthelesse Christ is not in the same respect the object of faith as sanctifying and of the same as justifying Because this is Mr. Baxters supereminent Argument in which himself seems most to trust and by which so many learned Ministers do even professe themselves staggered and astonished I shall omit nothing unexamined that he speaketh in the affirming or confirming of it lest any should take occasion to say that the strongest part thereof is not because it could not be answered Therefore have I left out nothing of what he hath said to the other Proposition though many things were unworthy of Animadversion To the consequent of this Proposition he speaketh more in his next two Theses viz. 73. 74. what is inserted in these two Aphorisms more fit to be examined under another notion I shall here forbear to transcribe leaving it for its proper place What is to the present purpose he thus expresseth B. Thes 73. pa. 289. Faith only doth not justifie in opposition to the works of the Gospell but those works do also justifie Thes 74. Both faith and works justifie in the same kind of causality viz. as Causae sine quibus non or mediate and improper causes or as Dr. Twisse causae dispositivae c. The like may be said of Love and of others in the same station These are but meer affirmations and contain no reasons to confirme only in the latter Thesis seemingly at least is produced the authority of that Antinomian Dr. Twisse but with so fine a conveyance as that he may be kept in or left out at pleasure if Mr. Baxter be dealt with to make good his allegation of him He knowes the name and authority of Dr. Twisse to be great and amiable as an eminent servant of Christ and patron of his truth He concludes therefore that his assertions will be swallowed with the more facility having such an authority to sweeten and fortifie them Therefore so interserteth his Testimony that his Reader may suppose Dr. Twisse to affirm works to be causas dispositivas of justification I neither have read all that Dr. Twisse hath written neither do I so far trust my memory as to deny it flatly and peremptorily Yet by knowing Dr. Twisse aright I am as confident that Bellarmine hath taught the righteousnesse of justification to be meerly by imputation and our justification only by faith as that Dr. Twisse hath any way affirmed works in this or any other respect to prevent or operate to our justification If he did why doth not Mr. Baxter quote the place as elsewhere he doth very diligently when the Testimony of the Author makes for him or why in the end of his Appendix where he sucks out of Dr. Twisse and others all that he thinks may make for his advantage doth he not cite this so pregnant a Testimony But he hath left to himself an evasion that when he hath beguiled whom he can with such an authority being found at last he can answer his meaning is the term or phrase viz. causa dispositiva upon some other not to this Argument is that which Dr. Twisse useth I finde him indeed calling works causas sine quibus non or dispositivas salutis of our salvation or glorification never of our justification And so far is he from attributing under this term what Mr. Baxter attributeth that he seriously abandoneth it So he expresseth himself Vind. Lib. 1. Par. 2. Sect. 2. Proxime finem Vix majus pâ—ceatum est quam justificationem quaerere ex operibus and almost in the next words Nullum opus Deo gratiuâ— acceptius est quam sibi justitiae suae in negotiosalutis renunt iare et in Christo unice confidere But come we now to that which he speaks for confirmation the first part consists in prefacing His own conscience telling him that it is a Pharisaicall Popish principle which he hear positeth he forelayes his Proeme to the proofe thereof thus B. I know this is the doctrine that will have the loudest out-cries raised against it and will make some cry out Heresie Popery Socinianism and what not For mine own part the searcher of hearts knoweth that not singularity affection of novelty nor any goodwill to Popery provoketh me to entertain it but that I have earnestly sought the Lords direction upon my knees before I durst adventure on it and that I resisted the light of this conclusion as long as I was able but a man cannot force his own understanding if the evidence of truth force it not though he may force his pen or tongue to silence or dissembling That which I shall do further is to give you some proofs c. First here a word to such Ministers as being more the disciples of men then of Christ and better versed in Sophistry then Divinity do only not deify Mr. Baxter maintaining all his doctrine in this book to be the doctrine of all the Protestant Churches Why do they anger the man in charging him with so low a spirit that he hath nothing but what is common with him and the most eminent lights in the Church will not he be offended at it doth he not here in some kind pronounce himself a dissenter and that what he here asserteth is that which the Protestant Churches detest as heresie doth not himself even before experience what acceptance his book would have as it were proclaime himself in this point departed from us into the Tents of Papists and Socinians As to Mr. Baxter 1. We have before granted to him that he gives no cause of suspicion that affection of singularity and novelty hath drawn him into this opinion For he is not herein singular nor is his doctrine new but such as the Phariâ—ees in Christs time and the false Apostles in the Apostles times and the worst of Hereticks from thence unto our dayes have unanimously pestered the Church with Yet in this I appeal to Mr. Baxter whether some affection of repute by being a deviser of a new way and new Arguments for the confirmation of this old Popish Socinian doctrine hath not possessed him 2. Whether the searcher of
all hearts witnesse for him that no good will to Popery in generall provoked him to trouble the Church with his doctrine I will not judge But if good will to this part of Popery that consists in justification by works unto which if all the rest garbage of Popery be compared it is insufficient to counterpoise it in mischief did not provoke let him shew what hath provoked him to it Is it in hatred to the Papists that he hath laboured so stoutly to maintain their Kingdome Is not this the pillar of all Popery and if this be demolished what is there of all their heresies but will fall after 3. As to his sincerity in this businesse in following conscientiously his judgment I know I finde in my self the heart is deceitfull above all things and desperately evill who can finde it out I search only my own not anothers heart that is out of my orb and beyond my fathom But I should give the more credence to Mr. Baxter speaking of his own sincerity in this businesse did I not see him forsaking the fountain and digging to himself cisterns deriving from every puddle of Papists Arminians Socinians and Atheists both his tenents and all fallacious Sophistry to maintain them leaving the pure word of God and tossing it either from him or for himself at his pleasure 4. As for his prayer if presented to God after his own principles as an Act helping to justifie him and no further through the mediation of Christ then as the same mediation take efficacy as to him from his own works and worth no marvell if the justice of God flung it back as dirt in his face and left him to that de luding spirit which worketh by those false Apostles whom he had studied so many years having spent but a few days upon the Scriptures as himself confesseth So the Pharisee after his praying departed from the presence of God unjustifyed unregarded Such devout Protestations may possibly take impression upon the weak and ignorant But Satan in the vizzard of an Angell of light and Satan in his own ghastly visage is to them that are strong in the faith the same Satan and alike shunned Besides when men rest not satisfyed with the sacred truth of the Word but will as it were rake the very dung of Gods enemies for quaintifies of knowledge which the Word hath not if they are blacked no marvell for their delight is to dwell with Colliers And God hath threatned to send them strong delusions that they should beleeve a lie c. 2 Thes 2. 10 11 12. Yeelding them up to waxe worse deceiving others being themselves deceived or self-deceivers 2 Tim. 3. 13. He promiseth some proofs of what he saith and one argument he puts in this explication thus B. If faith justifie as it is the fulfilling of the condition of the new Covenant and obedience be also part of the condition then obedience must justifie in the same way as faith But both parts of the Antecedent are before proved An Herculean Argument as soon may a man wrest the Club out of Hercules his hand as make void the conclusion which is inserred by this Argument If my eye discerneth colours upon condition it look diligently upon them and my hand doth inrich me upon condition that it stretcheth forth it self to receive a Princes beneficence and my heel be put into the same condition with my eye and my hand then my heel doth discerne colours in the same way with my eye and enrich me in the same way with my hand But both parts of the Antecedent are as firmly proved before as the both parts of Mr. Baxters antecedent Ergo the conclusion is as very a blank as Mr. Baxters If Mr. Baxters oft saying of the same thing doth prove the thing to be true then this cannot be denyed to be a truth For who can number the times that he hath kissed and spit in the mouth of this Ashteroth Condition setting it up cheek-mate with Christ himself in justifying us For Thes 56. he yoaks together Christ and faith in the same way of causality to justification and here and every where faith and obedience or works so that Christ faith and works are collaterals in justifying how as they meet together in this one Great Colossus condition or causa sine qua non Christ is the condition even in his satisfaction and faith is the condition and works is the condition so that Condition it seems by him justifyeth more then works or faith or Christ for neither works alone nor faith alone nor Christ alone doth justifie But this mouth-almighty Condition when like Bel and the Dragon she hath eaten up and swallowed into her bowels Christ faith and works doth of and by her self alone justifie such a Justifyer and such a Justification I should speak more seriously if Mr. Baxter had ministred to me more serious matter whereof to treat Chaffe is wont to be exposed to the winde when the Wheat as more substantiall is allotted to a more substantiall handling The rest of his Arguments which he brings in other Theses I shall examine by themselves CHAP. VI. The fift Argument answered and the dispute of St. James Cap. 2. opened and the Reasons drawn thence to prove justification by works refuted THe former was Mr. Baxters great Argument the fift in number is like to it yet not so much hugged and honoured by him as the former because that was his own born of his own brain This he takes up as fully formed by the Papists to his hand and use so that he is not to have the entire honour of it but every petty Monk and Sacrificer will challenge his part therein This is indeed their great and sole Argument against the Protestants The rest they bring is unworthy the hearing This therefore Mr. Baxter here that the Popish cause may stand and ours fall Atlas-like puts his shoulder and whole strength under to support B. Thes 75. pa. 292. The plain expression of St. James should terrifie us from an interpretation contradictory to the Text and except apparent violence be used with his Chap. 2. 21 24 25. c. it cannot be doubted but that a man is justifyed by works and not by faith only Eusebius Hierom. I mean not here to seek an evasion by pleading that this Epistle in the primitive times of the Church before the controversie about justification by faith or by works and faith was in agitation was questioned by some and denyed by others to be of divine authority Or that * Erasmus Luther Musculus Cajetan a Cardinall of the Romish some great Divines of these latter times have not received it into the Canon or that among those that embrace it as Canonicall it is much disputed what James is the Authour of it For besides the Syriac interpreter that weakly attributes it to James the brother of John who in the cradle of the Church was slain with the sword by Herod Act. 12.
of them that hath not at all times held and spoken the same things with Mr. Pemble And so pronounceth the faith of Christ to have been no where sound but within the confines of Rome and that the Protestant Churches are all hereticall and apostates have rejected the faith of Christ and sought righteousnesse and salvation by a Creed of their owne making 4 Neverthelesse his sincerity in the very next words after his such stout pleading for the Papists fals foul with them for making the Scripture a nose of wax to delude the simple with an opinion that he hath no confederacy with them Yet 5 Holds them fast by the hand telling us that he will joyn with them and follow James in their sense and interpretation to seek justification by works and not by faith only But let us come to the text it self and see whether St. James will be brought to dance after St. Bellarmine and Mr. Baxter with all their piping and charming and in this the sincerity of these two great champions in the interpreting of this Scripture will appear First for the scope of the Words who can better expresse it then the Author This himself declares to be the subversion of the false confidences of shadie beleevers who being destitute of true faith gloried in the meer shadow and profession of it as if it should justifie and save them though it never wrought to their Sanctification but left them to every good work reprobate Against this pernicious delusion he bends the whole drift of his dispute and proveth such a faith to be vain dead devillish and on the contrary that the faith which justifyeth is lively and operative in good works This will be manifested in examining the severall passages of the dispute specially to him that will take the labour of reading but some of the many hundreds of our Divines that have answered the Arguments of the Papists hence deduced either in their Commentaries upon this Epistle or in handling this Controversie against them And herein some of the learned among the Papists are more plyant to obey and lesse stubborn to resist the truth then Mr. Baxter The scope of the Apostle saith Cajetan is to shew quod non fide sterili sed foecunda justificâ—mur i. e. that we are justifyed not by a barren but fruitfull faith Thus do we finde James himself staâ—ing the question ver 14. What doth it profit though a man say he hath faith and hath not works shall his faith save him It is against the saying and false professing of faith that hath no force or life to bring forth good works and not against faith indâ—ed which worketh by love that the Apostle here argueth denying to it any efficacy to Justification this is the thing which we shall finde him prosecuting throughout his whole disputation and on the contrary part affirming faith which is living and active to good works to be also alive and effectuall to justifie This will more properly offer it self to be made out in the next place Let us then come to examine Mr. Baxters dispute from the authority of James Pag. 293. Br. In opening this I shall first shew the clearness of that in Iames for the point in question c. This he goeth about to doe by dashing in peeces all whatsoever hath been sayd by all or any of the Protestant Churches or Writers against the Papists in expounding this Text thus B. The ordinary expositions of St. James are these two 1. That he speaks of Justification before men and not before God 2. That he speaks of works as justifying our Faith and not as justifying our persons or as Mr. Pembles phrase is The Apostle when he saith works justifie must bee understood by a Metonymy that a working faith justifieth That the former exposition is false may appear thus This is his shewing the clearnesse of that in St. James viz. to anathematize all that any of the faithfull servants and Martyrs of the Lord Jesus within the Protestant Churches have spoken in the Exposition therof that it may bee embraced by all after the Catholick that is Romish interpretation Two things wee except against in this his clarifying passage 1. That being very good both at confounding and dividing as hee sees either to make for his turn hee doth heer by dividing seek to pervert as erewhile by confounding we found him to obscure the truth Why doth he make two opinions two expositions heer of that which is but one Hath he learned of Maâ—chiavel so to deal in spiritualls as hee prescribes in Politicks Divide impera Why els should hee set at division those that are united Or make them to fight one against another who speak the same things Or set in opposition Iohn against Calvin and Calvin against Iohn Or David against Pareus and Pareus against David And so other thousands when every of these gives both these expositions which he mentioneth in one Possibly as to some particulars in this question he may meet with some particular Writer urging the one onely but he knowes that most and those not the meanest make use of both as shal be shewed 2. Wee except against him that in alleadging theâ—e expositions he doth subtlely hide the grounds upon which the Protestants doe fix these their expositions And thus he exposeth them to the vulgar at least as groundless dreams shifting evasions wherof no reason can be given on our part That all the reason lieth on the Papists part with whom therfore he hath joyned Is this Christian or Jesâ—iticall dealing Would it not bee expected from him that professeth himselfe a Protestant and zealous Presbyterâ—â—n when â—e divides himselfe utterly from them all them of whose side hee professeth himselfe to be at least to set down their opinions and grounds thereof and to confute those grounds and not as hee doth deny and fight against the conclusion without speaking a word to the premisses What he therefore fraudulently omits I shall heer supply rendring the expositions as our Divines give it and the grounds of it and not as Mr. Baxter corrupts it We have found him acknowledging that if it be but some one phrase dissonant from the ordinary language of Scripture that one must bee reduced to the rest and not all the rest to that one pa. 297. So stands the case heer The ordinary language yea drift of the New Testament is to hold forth Justification by faith without works as wee have seen before and every one that will but consideratively reade as other the Evangelists so chiefly the Gospell written by Iohn the Apostle the Acts of the Apostles the Epistles to the Romans to the Galatians to the Ephesians Philippians Colossians and Hebrews especially and above the rest and withall from the rest it must needs appeare This one passage in one Epistle hath a sound of differing but a souÌ„d Must al be reduced to this or this to all According to the rule therefore allowed by Mr. Baxter
himselfe our Divines give an interpretation to this one passage that may declare it though it hath a seeming yet not to have a reality of dissent from the rest Because if this be Canonicall and from the H. G the H. G. cannot contradict himselfe In expounding this dispute of James therefore the Protestants take notice of a two fold homonymy of words one in the word Faith the other in the word Justifying both which Paul and James use but use them the one in one and the other in another sence so that though they seeme somwhat to differ in words yet in sense they speake the same thing 1. They say as when Paul speakes of Faith to justification by Faith he meanes a true and lively Faith which fetcheth power from the merits of Christ to Iustifie and from the spirit of Christ to Sanctifie so Iames here battereth under the name of Faith a bare profession and boasting of Faith which some Hypocrites leaned on to Iustifie them being wholly destitute of Faith indeed that is alive and effectuall to draw from Christ matter both to Iustification and Sanctification 2. They say that as Paul takes the word Iustifying for remission and absolution before God so James takes it as oft as he requires here works to Iustifie for the declaration of the truth of our Faith and Iustification before men Yet let not this their distinction if it may fitly be so termed and exposition bee taken up unlesse it hath sufficient grounds from the Text to beare it up I shall begin first with the latter because Mr. Baxter there begins That Justification by works is by James understood the declaring us to man to have true Faith and to be Iustified by it they bring these reasons to prove 1 James himselfe even in expresse words affirming it ver 18 Shew me thy Faith without thy workes and I will shew thee my Faith by my works where he tels us that by Iustifying he means the shewing or declaring our Faith and Justification not to God but one to another And thus he denieth Faith which is not Shewed by works to Iustifie i. e. to Shew or declare us to men Iustified 2. ver 21 where he saith was not Abraham our Father justified by works when he had offered Isaack his Son upon the Altar doth he speake of Gods Iustifying Gen. 15. 6. him or declaring him to be justified unto men Not the former for God had justified him by Faith many yeares before and there was no diâ—uption according to Mr Baxters doctrine in the intervall by any apostacy made by Abraham that of justified he became unjustified and needed here to be justified anâ—w How then was hee justified by offering his Sonn Can there be any other way not repugnant to reason devised but this that God here by proving and bearing him up in so searching a proof and Temptation to shew so matchless an act of obedience did declare to the world that his Faith was in sincerity his feare and love unfained so that all must be restrayned from charging him with selfe respects and Hypocrisy in all the professions that he made towards God Or what less is to be drawn from those wordâ— from Heaven Gen 22 12. upon this act of Abrahams obedience Now I know that thou fearest God seeing thou hast not witheld thy Son thy onely Son from me Did not God know what was what himselfe had wrought in Abrahams hart before this tryall of him doth he need outward actions to manifest to him what is in the heart within M. B. so much cleavs to theÌ„ that make all things which God doth to flow from his prescience that he will not ungod God so much as to deny that he knew as perfectly before as after tryall Why saith he then now I know but to intimate that now he had given a strong evidence both to the present and future generations to know that God knew and therby to convince men of all ages that they also must know the truth of Abrahams Faith feare and justification 3. The same might bee said of Rahabs justification by workes in receiving the Messengers and letting them forth another way ver 25. Did such a work as this justifie her before God or obtain to her remission of sins and deliver her from everlasting vengeance when there cannot be the least probable conjecture that shee had then any Faith in Christ or had ever heard of a Christ to come Then let us disclaime that Fabulam de Christo as one of the Popes termed the Gospell Righteousness is by workes without Faith without Christ and Stapletons glosse â—apleton Anrid p. 82 83. upon Pauls Iustificamur fide i. e. non absque side we are justified by Faith i. e. not without Faith because Faith is necessary to justification though not without works sufficient to it must be rejected as too Evangelicall And then also how shal Mr Baxters Thesis not fal which makes workes collateralls with Faith in Christ to justification workes can do it without Christ But if all this intrench upon Blasphemy then was shee justified by workes to men to the Israelites who by this Act toward them had so farr evidenced her fidelity to them and their cause that thereupon shee was taken into Covenant with them delivered from the ruine which befell Iericho and after as it were adopted or naturallized into the Common-wealth of Israell Ye have one part of the exposition and the grounds of it which Mr Baxter concealed that the unwary reader might despise it as groundlesse Mr Baxter opposeth it tellâ— us it is false and it may appeare thus B. p. 294. The Worlds Iustification frees us but from the worlds Accusation to which it is opposed And therefore it is but either a Iustification from Mans Laws or else a particular Iustification of us in respect of some particular Facts or else an usurped Iudgement and sustification for they are not constituted our Iudges by God and therefore wee may say with Paul it is a small thing with me to be judged of you or of mans judgement And so a small thing to be justified by men from the accusations of the Law of God But the justification in James is of greater moment as appears in the Text. For 1. It is such as salvation dependeth on ver 14. 2. It is such as followeth only a saving Faith But the world may as well justifie us when we have no faith at all I therfore affirm 1. That the world is no lawfull judge of our righteousness before God c. 2. Nor a competent capable judge and cannot passe any certain true sentence c. 3. If they could yet works are no certain Medium or evidence wherby the world can know us to bee righteous For there is no outward work which an hypocrite may not perform and inward works they cannot discern c. So that if it bee not certain that the Text speaketh of justification before God I scarce know
what to be certain of It were more tolerable and excusable for me to leave the grounds of one single man giving his private interpretation of this Scripture despised unexamined and unanswered than for him so to deale with all the Churches of Christ But I will not be a follower of him that followes not Christ in lowliness and his Precept in selfe-deniall His dispute here is two fold 1 to prove that Iames speaks not of the declaration of our justification before men 2. To prove that he speaks of our justification before God when he mentioneth justification by works To the former all that he saith is Sophisticall and Fallacious For if wee grant that by the World hee meanes the whole generation of men both good and evill which yet can hardly bee drawne from his dispute which to make our assertion odious would make it out as relating only to the wicked of the world that these must be the alone Judges Notwithstanding his whole Argumentation is a meer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a waving the question with a false assumption that by Justification before men we meant a raising of a Tribunall upon earth in opposition to Gods in heaven there to set up men to be judges and to passe sentence of justification and remission of sinnes one upon another according to the evidence of every ones works The falshood wherof hee proves by the illegality of such a judicature and incompetency of the judges and evidence for it And what is this but a Devill of his own raysing and laying again For what one rationall man in any of the Reformed Churches ever dreamed of such a justification All that wee understand heerby is but a declaration and discovery of the tree by its fruits of the state of a man before God that he hath justified or not justified him according as we see the fruits of justification i. e. the works of sanctification following or not following the profession of faith And all this not by a judiciall sentence given for or against any nor by the judgement of infallible faith or knowledge but in the judgement of charity alone which hopeth all things beleeveth all things thinketh no evill except by strong evidence it bee drawn to it 1. Co. 13. 5. 7. In fighting against this doctrine Mr. Baxter fighteth against Christ against the Holy Ghost the Author of it not onely heer but elsewhere also By their fruits ye shall know them saith our Saviour Mat. 7. 16. By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples if yee love one another Io 13. 35. that the World may know that thou hast loved them Io 17. 28. He that is of God heareth us he that is not of God heareth us not hereby know we the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Error 1. Io 4. 6. Let your light so shine forth before others that they seeing your good workes may glorifie your Father which is in Heaven Ma 5. 16. I magnifie my office if by any meanes I may provoke my bretheren c. and save some of them Ro. 11. 14. By your orderly carriage c. the unbeleever shall be convinced fall downe worship God and report that God is in you of a truth 1. Cor. 14. 24. 25. That he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed having nothing evill to say of you Tit. 2. 8. Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles that whereas they speake evill of you they may by your good works which they see glorifie God 1 Pet. 2. 12. Because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of God to blaspheme 2. Sam. 12. 14. God hath begun and will perfect in you the good worke as it is meet for me to judge of you because c. Phil. 1. 6 7. I am perswaded of you things that accompany salvation because of your works and labours of love c. Heb. 6. 9 10. Wee give thanks to God for you c. since we heard of your Faith in Christ Jesus and love to all the Saints for the hope which is laid up for you in Heaven Col. 1. 3 4 5 To the Saints which are at Rome Corinth c. and hundreds of the like Scriptures which testifie the declaration such a declaration of the Faith Saintship Justification and salvation of others by the evidence of their works that we ought that it is a sinne in men by the judgement of Charity not to acquiesce therein And on the contrary part testifying the want of such an evidence to be an occasion given to all men to reject our Faith and justification in the profession thereof as spurious and vaine Against all these Mr. Baxter excepreth pronouncing that mans judgement herein is illegall incompetent and the evidence insufficient therefore to make use of any judgement or discerning in this kind is usurpative Doth he herein fight against men or against God Suppose that the event in any thing prove contrary to our judgement yet is there not sin in such judgement while we follow Christs Rule and to be deceived by Charity rightly ordered if it may be called a deceivednesse yet is it no sinfull deceivednesse What hee produceth from the Apostle Vnto me it is a small thing to be judged of you or of mans judgement c. 1 Cor. 4. 3. is nothing subservient to his turne For the Apostle there speaketh of their unjust Censures of him besides and against Christs Rule the Rule of Charity from which while they erred their judgement was not to be regarded and in relation to the future judgement which followes not mans but Christs owne knowledge of us Thus have we found one part of his arguing vaine and wide from the scope in going about to prove that James his Justification by works is not to be taken for the declaring of us to men to be truly justified His second dispute is to prove that this Justification by Works is to be understood of our justifying by works at Gods Tribunall His Reasons to prove it are partly in his words before transcribed partly in a new supply thereunto added The first Reason in the former is B. 1. It is such as Salvation dependeth on ver 14. Brevis esse laboro Obscurus fio No mans immoderate prolixity and tediousness hath ever so much troubled mee as this mans pretended affectation of conciseness and brevity By it when hee speakes nothing he gets the advantage to bee thought of fooles that he speaketh great and mysticall things Were it not that I regard such as are too apt to run after his whistle though they know not his tune I should rather kick at such Delphicke mystericall passages of his than take them up to looke on them If James here take not justifying and saving for the same thing then to use Mr. Baxters words I am not certaine what to be certaine off So that when he saith it is such a justification as salvation dependeth on it is one as if hee
had said it is such a justification as justification dependeth on or such a salvation as salvation dependeth on The Apostle there speaks of a dead and barren Faith of a profession not a being of Faith and by an interrogation bearing the force of a strong Negation by saying Can Faith or the saying that he hath Faith save him he means and saith it cannot save him and that is the same with him as if he had said it cannot justifie him Here wee have indeed an idle dreame of Faith that cannot save But a Iustification that cannot justifie or cannot save or can justifie and not save is as far from James as neare to Mr. Baxter B. 2. It is such as followeth only a saving faith But the world may as well justifie us when we have no Faith at all That the justification of the New Covenant in which God evidenceth by faith to us that we are justified in Christ or the justification which consisteth in the evidencing by works to men the truth both of our Faith and Gospel Justification so far that in charity they are to regard us as truly beleeving and truly justified do both follow either saving faith or that which in charity to them that profess it men are to account a saving faith none denieth But it will not hence follow that works justifie us at Gods Judgement seat because they follow faith that declareth and evidenceth us to our selves to be so justified He comes with a new supply pa. 296. B. Once more 1. Was Abrahaem justified before men for a secret Action 2. Or such an Action as the killing of his only Son would have been 1. Had the Action been kept secret from men it could not have justified him before God or men Not before God for no actions as actions are the ground of his justifying us as hath bin already abundantly proved Nor before men for this action could not have declared the truth of his faith to them that never heard of the man or his Action But God having ordeyned him to bee a Father of the Faithfull and pattern of all beleevers to the worlds end and to confer Blessedness with Abraham upon all that walk in the steps of the Faith of our Father Abraham Ro. 4. 9. 12. hath recorded this Action of his to justifie and magnifie the truth of his Faith to all that in all ages shall beleeve and to incite them by his patterne by the like eminent obedience to justifie their Faith also to others 2. We are not to enquire what the evil world will judge of such an Action but whether Abraham or rather the spirit of God working in and by Abraham did not give in this Action a sufficient demonstration to convince the evill world much more the saints chosen out of the world of the truth of his Faith Which conviction if the evill world will carnally neglect or cursedly oppose it shall leave them the more inexcusable in the day of Judgement B. Was not he the Justifier beer which was the imputer of Righteousness but God was the imputer of Righteousness ver 23. Therefore God was the Justifier So I leave that Interpretation to sleep This is one of his extravagancies He hath all this while disputed of Justification by works what he cannot prove of works now he proves of Faith James saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousness Was it imputed to him of God for a partiall or for a perfect righteousness If but unto righteousness in part let him prove it or stand guilty before God for perverting his word If in the whole then is there no place left for works to challenge a part Or let him produce from James the like sentence of works imputed to Abraham to Righteousness else he puts the handle of his Argument into our hands to retort it upon him Abrahams Faith was imputed to him by the testimony of Iames to righteousness Ergo by the testimony of Iames works were not so imputed to him So his Epiphonem I leave that interpretation to sleep is the only sound thing that he hath spoken to this question For he hath said nothing that hath any power to awaken much less to rowze it So that it may sleep and that securely and in safety because they are but false Alarms that he soundeth against it The second interpretation as Mr. Br. terms it or as it is indeed the second homonymy or different sense of words wherin our Divines affirm Iames and Paul to speak in sound one but in meaning disagreeing eyther from other is in the word Faith as hath been sayd Paul when he attributes justification to Faith without works means a living faith fruitfull in good works Iames where he denies Faith without works to justifie means a dead faith a meer profession of faith that hath neither life nor being much less fruitfulness in good works That Iames takes the word Faith in this sense appears by these Reasons from the Text it selfe 1. From the scope of his dispute which we shall find to be as I sayd to beat down the presumption of carnall professors who reposed the hope of salvation wholly upon a bare profession of faith though the faith wherof they boasted had no vertue to sanctification obedience and to prove that alone to be a justifying Faith which is alive to good works This even Cajetan himself one of the pillars Cajetan in Jacob. of the Romish Church giveth as the scope of the Text as I have shewed he further expresseth himself thus Adverte hic prudens Lector quod Iacobus non sentit Fidem sine operibus mortuum esse c. Quoniam constat nos per fidem justificari etiam sine operibus sed sentit fidem sine operibus i. e. renuentem operâri vel non paratam operari esse mortuum esse vanam non justificare That is Let the prudent Reader heer note that Iames means not that faith is dead without works to accompany and help it in justifying us for it is evident that faith justifieth even without works but his meaning is that faith without works that is that refuseth or is not in a readiness to good works is dead vain and justifieth not Thus he makes the scope of James heer to prove that an idle and fruitless faith is not a saving or justifying faith So that we find it easier in this argument to find the truth from the very Papists than from Mr. Br. 2. From the 14. ver where James putting the question of faith without works saith not indefinitely can faith but annexeth the article to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can this faith save Is there power in such a faith to save which hath no power to sanctifie In like maner as heere ver 20. What in our Translation is rendred faith absolutely is there also in the Originall put with the restriction of the same article that faith which is without works is dead 3.
From the attributes that he gives to the faith to which he denieth justification viz. a dead faith ver 17. 20. 26. A faith of Devils ver 19. But a dead and Devillish faith are not a true Gospel faith but at the best a figment and counterfeit thereof 4. From the similitude by which he illustrateth his disputation If a man in a pretence of charity speaks comfortable words to his hungry and naked brother Alas poor soul be cloathed be filled but ministreth nothing to him for his refreshing will any call that flourish of words true charity Is it any more then a paint therof So also of him that saith hee hath faith but evidenceth it not by its fruits c. The verball faith doth no more profit to justification than the verball charity to sanctification If one of these in the mind of the Author be true charity then according to the minde of the Author also the other is true Faith 5. From the object of that Faith which James excludeth from Iustification Mr. Baxter acknowledgeth that the object of justifying Faith is Christ Thes 66 -68 and their explication But let him shew that James doth here expresly or impliedly in any one passage of his dispute make Christ the object of that Faith which he excludes from justification or any other object than the Faith of a meer Heathen or Hypocrite may pitch upon viz. generall truths that there is a God c. else let him grant from his owne principles that it is not true Faith but an unprofitable Historicall Faith as some terme it which is here excluded Thus have our writers in answer to the Papists Cavills expressed the minde of James in this place or rather from him selfe declared what himselfe expresseth to be his minde and this they expresse not as Mr. Baxter perverts them by some one but by both of these interpretations viz. of the word justifying and the word Faith manifesting out of James himselfe that as oft as in this dispute he attributes justification to works he speaks of justification i e. the declaration or manifestation thereof to men As when vers 21 Abraham and ver 25. Rahab and ver 24. A man indefinitely are said to be justified by works he meanes they are so manifested and declared by their works to us This is a usuall phrase not only in Scripture but in our common expressions and our common talk I will justifie what I have spoken or done i. e. I will declare it make it appear to be all good true and just I will justifie him from all that is layd to his charge i. e. I will declare and prove him just and free from all that he is charged with Again where hee denieth justification to that dead faith that worketh not by love that by faith he means a false profession and counterfeit of and not the true justifying faith and who among us ever said that to say I have faith never expressing the power and fruits of it can justifie a man So there is nothing to be found in James crossing the Protestant yea Evangelicall and Apostolicall conclusion that we are justified in our consciences before God by faith alone without works i. e. by a living and working not a dead faith yet without works can we not be declared and manifested just unto men That which Mr. Br. hath spoken against the former part of this interpretation viz. justification before men we have found to be either less or worse than nothing To the other viz. the denying of justification to faith that is a counterfeit a false profession of faith hee saith nothing and why because hee hath not what to say Therfore he stifles it in darknes will not have his Reader hear of it for then actum est he must run to S. Francis or some other Saint S. James leaves him in the mire It is no lesse ludicrous than fallacious that he turns the state of the question another way and danceth round about it never comming to that which our Divines answer 1. Having devised pag. 294. that we say James speaks of works as justifying our faith not our persons he doth pa. 296. goe about to prove that works justifie the person not the faith only And who ever denied this position Doe not wee all say that the holy life declares the truth of faith and therin justifieth as to men the professor of it from all hypocrisie in making such a profession 2. pag. 297. he falls foul with the Ghost of sweet Mr. Pemble for saying that by Faith and works Iames understands a working Faith And after a sharp chiding without examining his Reasons the matter whereof I have before examined at length p. 298. fetching breath he offers him peace and friendship upon condition that he will arise from the grave say what Mr. Baxter saith But despairing of that and concluding if he should rise again from the dead he would still say with the Protestant Churches and Writers that Fides solùm justificat non autem fides sola Faith alone justifieth but not that Faith which is alone without works because that alone faith is not a true Faith he 3. Makes a transition to fall out with all Protestant Churches for attributing too much to Faith in making it instrumentall to Iustification that when Believers are said to receive Christ Io. 1. 12. and to receive abundance of Grace and of the gift of Righteousnesse Rom. 5. 17. wee will not say they receive this Christ this gift of his Righteousnesse to Iustification without any receiving instrument but make Faith the instrument by which we receive the same p. 299. A most pernicious Doctrine to Mr. Baxters Cause If it stand Mr. Baxters Iustification by workes in the same relation with Faith as its Concause must needs fall and tumble downe to hell for works will not be bowed into any instrumentality to co-operate with Faith in receiving Christ and his righteousness When contrariwise if we would say as he doth and which we must take his word without any further demonstration to bee true then in despite of Paul and the Holy Ghost our justification should be parted between faith and works and Mr. Brs. new Gospel stand the Gospel of Grace being wholly taken out of the way as unprofitable But in all that he saith hee diligently keeps off from speaking a word to what our Divines say in proving from James himselfe that he means not true faith when hee denies to the counterfeit or profession of it any efficacy to justifie and let the conscientious Reader judge whether he doth this in zeal for Christ or against him Let none except that possibly hee never read any of them that have thus expounded James What one of them hath he then read Nay I rather question what one of them hath he not read or with what one thing is he unacquainted that any of them hath written He is a stranger to Mr. Br. that will accuse him of little reading
Even Mr. Pemble himselfe whose words hee can almost if not altogether rehearse without book gives it as the common interpretation of Protestant Writers so that he cannot be ignorant of it Yet he saith nothing to it and saith all to what none denieth Is this sincerity in handling the chiefe point of mans salvation Such as hee begged from God upon his knees or the use of that which he injoyns upon us tenderness in the interpretation of Scriptures But we must leave him in his own way because hee is resolute therein Sith hee will not answer us let us answer him in these things which in stead of an answer to us he would fish from the Text for himself Br. pag. 299. 1. When it is sayd we are justified by works the word by implieth more than an idle concomitancy if they only stood by while Faith doth all it could not be sayd wee are justified by works We grant it doth much yea almost all in the justification wherof James there speaks viz. before men And this is that which he speaketh ver 21. 22. 23. of Abrahams justification by works fulfilling that Scripture which sayth Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousness How did his justification by works fulfill the Scripture which affirmed him to be justified by faith but as this great work and fruit of his faith declared and manifested to men the truth of that Scripture and the truth of his faith by which he was so many yeers before justified B. p. 300. 2. When the Apostle saith by workes and not by faith onely hee plainly makes them concomitant in the procurement or in that kinde of causality which they have especially seeing he saith not as he is commonly interpreted Not by Faith which is alone but By Faith onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All is granted as before of the justification before men The profession of Faith or to say we have Faith is not sufficient without declaring it by works so to justifie us Therefore saith the Apostle Shew me if thou canst thy Faith without thy works and I will shew thee my Faith by my works vers 18. B. 3. Therefore he saith that Faith is dead being alone because it is dead to the use and purpose of justifying for in it selfe it hath a life according to its quality still This appears from his comparison in the former verse 16 that this is the death he speaks of And so works make Faith alive as to the attainment of its end of Justification We grant that the hypocriticall profession of Faith which James reproveth is as all other sinne alive to condemne the unbelievers and unjustified but dead to the use of justifying us in our consciences before God or outwardly before men But that the addition of workes to such a dead Faith can make it alive to justifie a man before God we deny neither doth James affirm though there may be some force that way to his justification before men who are subject to failings in their judgement In the fourth place he findes something to say for and something against the Analysis of Piscator and Mr. Pemble When he would depresse it at the utmost he can onely say that they seeme to faile in the Explication of the 22. verse about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faiths working with Abrahams workes and perfecting by workes In this I leave the Reader to peruse Mr. Baxter and them whom hee opposeth from thence to judge which party layes the surer ground of their interpretation As to the question in hand the working of both together to justifie and declare his faith perfect or sincere to men doth nothing strengthen his assertion or weaken ours The rest that hee hath in this Section are meere words without proofs as also his Answer given to some Objections made on our part and the same so curt that the best examination of them is to leave them unexamined untill he bring somthing to prove them Yet what of all that hee saith heere hath or seemes to have force to some other end I may possibly in its proper place call it into Examination CHAP. VII Argument Mr. Baxters sixth Argument to prove justification by works drawne from the Identity of the Conditions of justification and salvation examined To which are added the Rules which Protestant Writers give for the Right understanding of such Scriptures as promise eternall life to men of such works and qualifications an enquiry into the force of those Scriptures out of which Mr Baxter seeks to evince that eternall life runs upon condition of works A Sixth Argument he draweth from the Identity of Justification and Salvation in relation to the Condition of their procurement and attainment He layes it thus p. 310 B. Thes 78. Our full Justification and our everlasting Salvation have the same conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without all Doubt a condition of our sâ—lvation Therefore also of our Justification We except here against the Terms or Phrases used in the proposition and that 1. against that which by way of distinction hee names our FULL Justification implying thereby that there is an empty or at least partiall maimed and not full Iustification before God as by what he hath oft said before by his own expressing himselfe and his meaning in the Explication of his Thesis he makes evident The Protestants utterly deny this 1. and 2. partiall and full unperfect and perfect Iustification acknowledging one onely Iustification of the New Covenant which as an act of God is simul semel perfect admits of no degrees or increases though as to a mans owne apprehension and comfort it hath its increases and decreases And whatever Mr. Baxter hath hitherto brought to proove on his part wee have found no lesse vaine than is that which hee seekes to prove The Scripâ—ure is altogether ignorant of such a two fold Iustification so that we leave it as Mr. Baxters not Gods Iustification 2. Against that which by the like way of distinction hee calls our everlasting salvation implying thereby a temporary salvation which is by Christ in respect whereof the saved may be unsaved againe and so the salvation which they have by Christ become transitory not everlasting Both these wee deny and detest as Popish Socinian and Arminian doctrines what audaciousnesse is it in Mr. Baxter to name them and not to prove them to beguile his credulous Reader not acquainted at all with Controversies with an opinion that these things are knowne and granted by Protestants who detest the hearing of them and with unresistable arguments of Scripture oppugne the Authours of them Wee shake off as prodigies in the Gospel Doctrine of Iustification and Salvation the Attributes which hee giveth in that sence in which hee gives them It is a bad Cause that seekes the support of Sophistry and fallaciousness to support it Truth loves to bee attended with simplicity and plainnesse Let Mr. Baxter say why he puts
these two distinguishing Attributes here the thing in question requires them not But his rotten Cause will receive no appearance of support by this Argument without them Againe as to the rest of his Argument why doth hee assume and conclude otherwise than he proposed The Proposition speaks of a Full Iustification and an Everlasting Salvation but the assumption of a Salvation only and the conclusion of a Iustification only without their Attributes of Everlastingnesse and Fullnesse Doth he not know the falaciousnesse of such Arguings why then doth he use it Is it because he is wholly made of it and cannot shun it or because his Cause is such that it cannot stand without it that to use plaine dealing will discover the deformity of it or for the congruity which such a kind of Argumentation hath with the cause fallaciousnesse with falshood Let him either propose what he assumeth and concludeth or else assume and conclude as he proposeth And then he must argue one of the two wayes either first thus Our Full Justification and our Everlasting Salvation have the same Conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of our Everlasting Salvation Therefore also of our full Justification Here the arguing is regular but it is about immaginary things such as neither the word nor the Churches of Christ are acquainted with Wee deny that in Mr. Baxters sence there is any Full Justification as opposite to a maimed true Iustification or any Everlasting Salvation in his sence as opposite to a true spirituall salvation that is temporary and transitory So that his Arguing is the same as if he should argue from Jupiters thunder to Jupiters lightning or from Bellerophons horse to Bellerophons saddle when all these were Fictions had their being only in immagination not in reality Or secondly thus Our Justification and our salvation have the same conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without doubt a condition of our salvation Therefore also of our justification Heere I distinguish the word salvation that it is taken in Scriptures when by it is meant the everlasting salvation of the whole man by Christ sometimes for the state of grace which wee attaine here sometimes for the state of glory above In the former sense we finde it 2. Cor. 6. 2. Now is the day of salvation Luk. 19. 9. This day salvation is come to this house So Acts 28. 28. Rom. 11. 11. Heb. 6 9. and in other places In which sense we are said to be saved when we effectually receive the word of Christ and Christ Jesus to whom that word directeth for Salvation 1 Cor. 1 18. To us that are saved Ephes 2. 5 8. By Grace ye are saved So 1 Cor. 15. 2. 2 Cor. 2. 15. 2 Tim. 1. 9 Tit. 3. 5. and elsewhere In all which iâ— is said wee are not that we shal be saved that Christ hath not that he will save us And the same is further confirmed in the word life where Believers are said to have life 1 Io. 5 12. Everlasting eternall life Io. 3. 36 and 5. 24. and 6. 6 47 54. to bee passed from death to life Jo. 5. 24. All which proveth a life eternall life and everlasting salvation in this world that cannot be lost but shall have its coronation in glory above In this sense wee grant the Proposition so far as we have before granted any condition of justification But we utterly deny the assumption And what Mr. Br. saith sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of Salvation we affirme to be all the doubt the whole thing in question If it be granted of salvation in this sense it must be granted of justification also Because justification and salvation in this sense are not 2 things but one the same It being cal'd justification as we are freed delivered from the state of misery considered as a state of sin and salvation as we are delivered from the same misery considered as a state of wrath and condemnation To say therfore that our justification and salvation have the same condition is all one as to say our justification and our justification or our salvation and our salvation have the same conditions and wee might as well assume and conclude hence Obedience is a condition of our salvation Ergo of our salvation also as of our salvation Ergo of our justification also In the latter sense if Mr. Baxter take salvation for our future glorification then we utterly deny the consequent of the proposition It is false that he saith justification and salvation have the same conditions For what is a consequent of justification is an antecedent of salvation And obedience in Mr. Baxters sence cannot be a condition without the position whereof God doth not justifie because it followes justification and goeth not before it And in this sense I have oft spoken before to the minor and shal have occasion to speak again But let us see how he goeth about to prove his major proposition B. Explic. p. 311. The Antecedent is manifest in that Scripture maketh faith a condition of both Justification and Salvation and so it doth obedience also as is before explained How far any thing of this is true there hath been given an Examination before to his Explanations before B Therefore are we justified that we may be saved Wee grant more in aright sense viz that in being Justified we are saved But what of this B. It would be as derogatory to Christs righteousnesse if we be saved by works as if we be justified by works Therefore we reject both And let Mr. Baxter look to himselfe for maintaining both B. Neither is there any way to the former but by the latter The greater is his sin that teacheth such a way to justification as bars up the way to salvation making it impervious and unpassable to Gods people B. That which a man is justified by he is saved by This is Christs mediation or Christ the mediator for there is salvation in no other nor any other name given us under Heaven by which we may be saved Act. 4. 12. By the righteousness of this One Grace came upon all to justification of life So we are saved by Christ and not by Condititions B. Though Glorification bee an adding of a greater happinesse then we lost and so justification is not enough thereto yet on our part they have the same Conditions This must be because hee will have it to bee the result of all his dispute But he only saith it but proves it not All that he layeth as the foundation of this Conclusion excepting that which in other words is the conclusion it selfe doth not infer it For it being granted what he saith but sheweth not that the Scripture saith it that we are therefore justified that we may be saved that there is no other way to Salvation but by justification and that it be as derogatory to Christs righteousness to be saved as to be
justified by works will it follow for all this that justification and salvation have the same conditions on our part The reasoning is one and the same in reason as if I should thus argue Having 1. slandered the Scriptures and said they say what I say I should further proceed Therefore are we created that we may be saved neither is there any way to salvation but by creation It would be as derogatory to the grace of God to be created by our own working as to be saved by our own working Therfore though Glorification be adding of a greater happinesse than we had by Creation and so Creation is not enough therto yet on our part they have the same conditions The reasoning after the Principles of true Protestants would not in its conclusion though in its premises seem altogether absurd Because they affirm the absolute will and good pleasure of God without any conditions on mans part in Mr. Baxters sense of Conditions to be the alone cause both of his creating and saving us But after Mr. Baxters Principles it would bee both absurd and odious for so our good works must bee the condition of our Creation because they are so of our salvation that we must be created by ouâ— sincere obedience bâ—cause by it we are saved and that our sincere obedience must go before our Creation because they so do before our salvation and so when we have perseveringly obeyed without a being we shall at length bee created and have a being They that are taken with such Arguments I doubt are in the number of them that are made to be taken 2 Pet. 2. 12. And who can hold that which will away Mr. Baxter saw the wall gaping and ready to fall before hee had finished it therfore hastens to plaister and dawb it thus B. Yet heer I say still our full Justification because as I have shewed i. e. said our first possession of it is upon our meer Faith or contract with Christ But I think our glorification will be acknowledged to have the same conditions with our finall justification at the bar of Christ and why not to our entire continued justification upon earth These are but words comparing that which is reall with that which is but imaginary We still deny such a full and finall justification at the bar of Christ compleating that which was but unperfect conditionall and reversible heer upon earth All that hee hath said to prove it hath been examined and found insufficient We look for proof indeed and meet with nothing but words They that are once possessed of it by faith are fully and finally possessed of it His peremptory and bold conclusion is now come even upon his own grounds to I think and why had hee not kept his thoughts to himself untill he had known reason enough for rationall men to have concluded with him yet upon this thought he addeth and why not to our entire continued justification upon earth To which we need say no more in answer but this because wee must not build any Article of our Faith upon the thoughts of men but upon the word of God To the objection which hee supposeth some may make and to which he answereth before it be made against him I say no more but let him answer our reall not imagined objections and such we shall so long defend untill by the light of the word wee finde them unworthy of defence The Scripture which hee brings to prove the perseverâ—nce of Faith to be the condition of our persevering justification runs thus Heb. 3. 14. We are made partakers of Christ if wee hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast to the end Here perseverance is made a declaration and evidence of the truth of our Faith and of our participation of or Communion with Christ at present not a condition either of our justification or the perseverance therof By this it shal be evidenced that ye are truly in Christ and justâ—fied by him if ye persevere for thâ—se that fall away wâ—re but seemingly never truly in Christ They that are his in truth continue so to the end Like that v 6. We are the house of Christ if we hold fast our confidence to the end compared with 1 Jo. 2. 19. They went out from us but they were not of us for if they had been of us they would without doubt have continued with us but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us So the perseverance or not persevering of these would manifest who had been who had not been truly pertakers of Christ and the house of his habitation not the condition of their persevering justification for then should it be for a time at least the condition of the perseverance of their justification who were never truly pertakers of Christ and consequently in Mr. Brs. phrase had never a beginning of justification Hitherto of what Mr. Baxter hath said to confirme the Proposition Hence he descendeth to prove the Assumption That Obedience is an undoubted condition of our salvation That wee may not here beat the winde we do first understand his obedience to be the obedience of good workes else is it the same with Faith as I have shewed and that of Faith in Scripture sense and not in Mr. Baxters large unscripturall and uncircumscriptive definition So much also many of the Scripture testimonies which hee alleadgeth here elswhere which I shal reduce to this place declare Yea himself in many places before hath set to his hand that it is his meaning 2. We understand him here by Salvation to mean that which he a little before calls glorification and not simply the salvation which is one and the same with Iustification But 3. We except against him that whereas without ceasing he beats our eares even into deafnesse with that Roman Rampant Exotick word CONDITION scarce uttering a sentence which he doth not blesse or curse with it though hee know the holy Scripture hath upon this Argument not the least mention of it that wee might thence learn that it is but borrowed from the Papists and improved much by the Arminians with whose common language through his familiarity with both parties hee is more acquainted than we can be who have no trafficque with them yet he will not fully make knowne to us the meaning of the word whether the signification thereof be boundlesse or within what limits it is bounded whether it comprehends under it all the necessary Antecdents of glorification or no if so whether it comprehends not under it as well much disobedience as obedience and works of the Divel as of God as the Cansas sine quibus non we shall obtaine salvation by Christ Or whether by Conditions we must understand onely Duties and if so whether those alone which go before or else also those that accompany and follow justification and glorification And withall whether those duties as morall or as spirituall because his Divinity
being most drawne from naturall Philosophers and Theologers mounts not above Morality tels us nothing of spirituall things that the Gospel wholly treats of shuns the very word Spiriall as a rock on which all the pride of man might suffer shipwrack and the grace of God in Christ be alone exalted Besides how far thâ—se conditions are to be stretched whether only so far as that only their absence doth hinder but their presence doth not put or inferr justification and salvation as the effects in which sence wee are wont to take the Causa sine qua non or else so far that both their absence doth hinder and their performance produce these effects In these and many other things whereof I shal be forced to speake in its proper place Mr. Baxter will not impart his meaning to us that he may take his liberty to traverse his ground and under the name of Condition ascend and descend run sometimes in a wheele and sometimes in a race play all in sight and least in sight at his pleasure reserving still to himselfe this advantage to help himself with his Conditions widening and straitening them making them the same with or more than his Causa sine qua non having kept the power in his own hand as it shal be most inservient to his ends In the meane while wee are permitted onely to heare the humming and bombing but not to see the buz whether it be a Hornet or a Beetle What hee will not himselfe directly tell us wee must therefore take leave to gather from his writing as well as we can In his Explication of this Thesis even in that part thereof which I have before transcribed being to prove that justification and salvation have the same Condition hee tells us oft that we are both justified and saved by works Here to follow his owne exposition he teacheth pa. 300 that the word By implieth more than an idle presence and concomitancy if they only stand by while the work is in doing it could not bee said we are justified by works That it speaks out works to have their agency and operation in procurement or in that kind of causality which they have And this is the same which under the 17. 18. and 19. Theses he had before delivered of a twofold Righteousness Christs Righteousnes and our Righteousness ours as absolutely necessary as his to salvation both in their kind effectually procuring it So in that which followeth in the explication where to be the condition of our salvation and to have a hand in or give right to justification are put by him as the same thing or as equipollent phrases So that under the word condition he involves all the Papists efficiency and as much as after their and his defining and modifying of Merits is comprehended in their doctrine of Merits In this sense therfore we deny Works or Obedience to be a condition of salvation 1. Because thousands are saved without works viz. all that have been or shal be saved being never in a capacity to work 2. Because the New Covenant in promising salvation makes it to follow grace and faith not works yea grace and faith in opposition to works as hath been before shewed cap. 15. of justification and salvation together And that not by the vertue of that dung and rags and filth of mans righteousness wherwith Mr. Br. filleth the belly of his faith in the largest sense Thes 70. but by the vertue of Christ its object which it receiveth Jo. 1. 12. and of the aâ—undance of the grace and righteousness which it receiveth from Christ in receiving him Ro. 5. 19. 3. Because it is by inheritance as by our union unto Christ wee are made and adopted to bee with him children and joint heirs Act. 26. 18. Ro. 8. 16. 17. Gal. 3. 18. Eph. 1. 11. 14. Gal. 3. 29. and 4. 30. 31. Tit. 3. 7. and else-where and that of Grace freely therfore without works For then should it be of debt and no more of Grace Ro. 4. 4. and 11. 6. 4. Because if it be at all by works then wholly by works Christ is excluded will not profit will be all or nothing do all without works and give no place or partnership to works with him in the business of salvation if we bring any thing of works to save us hee leaves us wholly to our works to save or damn us If ye be circumcised Christ shall not profit you ye are debtors to the whole Law i. e. If ye bring works in part to save you yee must trust wholly to works to save you Christ is become of none effect to you Gal. 5. 2. 3. 4. 5. Neither can they bee a condition in that way of causality to which Mr. Br. professes himselfe to tie it viz as the Causa sine qua non For 1. the property of that kind of causality or conditionality not extended beyond it self can only by its absence deny the effect as in this case the want of obedience and good works can onely deny them which refuse or neglect them to be saved or have right to salvation but by iâ—s presence cannot Ponere as the say i. e. conclude or evince the effect that he which doth them shall live in them or be saved by them no nor yet that they shall be saved For if they can it is by some other and not by this kinde of causality which Mr. Baxter attributes to them 2 Neither doth it as himselfe describes its opperation in its causality to salvation remove the impediments of salvation which are in generall sinne in particular chiefly unbeleefe If good workes can remove these it may save But it can neither remove the guilt of that which is past by way of purging it or satisfying for it neither is it made instrumentall to put us into the possession of Christs satisfaction and purging for it precedes not but follows it whatsoever Mr. Br. hath sayd to the contrary Nor can it stop the flux of sin and unbeleefe but that it breaks out upon every of our good works to make them in themselves evil and damnable and doth no further or otherwise remove than by denying unbeliefe so far as we doe beleeve and the neglect of duties as far as we have diligence and zeal to perform them But this cannot bee called rightly the removing of the hindrances of our salvation therfore it cannot be the Causa sine qua non of our salvation 6. Because salvation is the gift of Gods free grace Ro. 6. 23. Jo. 10. 28. 2. Ti. 4. 8. But it is a payment of justice and not a gift of Grace which is made the wages of works Didst thou not agree with me for a peny Take what thine is by contract and condition of the bargain and go thy way Mat. 20. 13. 14. Wheras contrariwise the free gift hath no other foundation or condition but Gods free love and good pleasure He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy Ro.
and order he can call his but the substance of all is theirs as to Justification by works and from them in common with the Socinians and Arminians as to Justification by Faith as an Act or Worke. This I could easily make evident by affixing but marginall quotations of those Popish and Arminian Authours to this Worke whom in every particle hee followeth as having spoken the same things before him if I had now that which once I had that which might be called a Library By how much the more I admire some that make their concourse confluence to him from all parts as to an Oracle to learne from him that which at home by their owne fire Eckins Hosius Vega c. or the more ancient Schoolemen before them or Beâ—â—arminâ— with the Jesuits and Arminians since them would have taught them more at large or which besides other hundreds of our Divines one Chamier in his 3 Tome of his Panstratia would have given them to understand at large together with a large and full confutation of all as to the Papists Yet see with what confidence Mr. Baxter speaketh It is most clear and beyond all dispute c. What is so cleare that our proper compleat and actuall justification c. This is cleare by Scripture Yet neither hath he alleadged or can alleadge any one Scripture that tels us of or teacheth any such justification The Papists tell us indeed of a two-fold Justification but both in this life They say Christs judgement or sentence or our account and reckoning not our justification shall thus pass in the last day The Arminians indeed say as Mr. Baxter and hee hath learned to speake as confidently as they proving as little as they Now what boldness is it to call that from a pretended cleare testimony of Scripture our Actuall most Proper compleat Justification which the Scripture doth in no place call or bid us to call Justification in any sense or con-consideration we would grant to Mr. Baxter the use of his owne Phrase and use it with him if he would understand by the Justification in the day of Judgement onely either the publication and open declaration of the justification before given and received or the conferring on Believers the Glorious and eternall fruits above of their justification here or their exemption from the sentence of vengeance which shal be then pronounced against from condemnation which shal be then executed upon the unbelieving world in which sense it is sometimes indeed in Scripture called our Redemption and the day of Redemption to the Saints which to the world will be an evill day a day of judgement But this will not satisfie him and the Scripture grants no more so that we cannot please him without displeasing God Againe when he saith our most Proper Justification will be at the great Judgement according to our workes and according to what wee have done in the flesh whether it be good or evill Doth he meane first that the measure of our justification wil be according to the measure of our works great works and a great and full justification a little Treasury of workes and a little corner of justification This agrees not with his owne phrase in tearming it a compleat justificacation Nor will it cohere with the definition that he gives to this justification Thes 39. making it to consist in Gods acquitting from the Accusation and condemnation of the Law This Act of God or of Christ doth not recipere magis minus hee that hath more works cannot be said to bee more or he that hath less to be less acquitted but iâ— at all acquitted then compleatly acquitted acquitting and not acquitting being contradictories that admit of no medium but the one or other must stand in all its force Or 2. doth he mean that the being or not being of justification doth follow the being or not being of our Works no works and no justification but if works then justification will it not hence necessarily follow both that many which have died in Christ shall be condemned viz. all that after their union to Christ by the Spirit departed out of this life before they had time and oportunity to doe such works as Mr. Baxter after instanceth and many that never believed in Christ never were in Christ shall bee justified by Christ in the last day viz. such as have lived and died such as the Apostle Paul was before his conversion touching the Righteousnesse which is by the Law blamelesse Phil. 3. 6. and that of sincerity in opposition to hypocrisie and vaine glory walking in all good Conscience before God As for faith in Christ hee doth not heere touch upon and Acts 23. 1 whether any of his reasons which hee brings to confirme his Thesis will infer it we shall see in examining them 3. When he saith that Christ at that great Assize will not give his bare will of Purpose as the reason of his proceedings c. Let him say whether his intent in this passage were not to cast an Odium upon the Protestants as if they so taught And except hee can produce any one man that hath so taught and hath not still asserted that the damnation of the damned shall be for their sinnes and the glorification of the glorified a free gift of God for the satisfaction which Christ hath made for them with reference to their being in Christ Let him confess that he hath slandered them 4. In the rest that is contained in this Thesis we finde nothing but contradictions his unsaying and gainsaying of what he had before said A little before pag 294 295. to destroy that interpretation of James which our Divines bring that when he speakes of justification by workes hee meanes the declaring to men by works the truth of their Faith and Justification the man is angry and cries out An usurped Judgement and Justification I affirme The World is no lawfull Judge of our Righteousnesse before God neither are they competent or capable Judges of our Righteousnesse or unrighteousnesse neither are works a certaine Medium or evidence whereby the world can know us to be righteous for the outward part an hypocrite may performe and the inward part Principles and ends of the worke they cannot discern Why was it that hee was so hot there against the possibility of manifesting to men the truth of our Righteousness It was against his Cause there to owne it Here contrariwise Justification in the last day must passe by workes to declare to the World not only the righteousnes obedience of the justified but also the equity of the Justifier and to stop every month from speaking against either And now the world is no longer an usurping but a lawfull Judge not an insufficient but a competent and capable Judge not onely of mans righteousness but of Christs equity in judgement and works are become a certaine Medium and evidence to manifest both to the world How comes this sudden change
heâ—r it tends to the promoting of his cause to affirme it And this alters the Case quoth Ploydon How rightly did Mr. Baxter describe his owne acting in this businesse p. 291. I resisted saith he the Light of this Conclusion as long as I was able It is the light of the Conclusion not of the Premises that swayeth him First hee pitcheth upon this Conclusion Works justifie there was light in this Conclusion it fell out of the Lant-horne of the Jesuits sophistry into his bosome and by that light he is swayed and having taken up the conclusion in such light of its owne from them now he digs downward for day and takes up that which erewhile he shook off as darkness for light to illustrate and prove it So his light conclusion is first formed and afterward he seeks for Crutches and reasons what come first to hand to support it sacrificing here more to hast than to reason lest his idol should fall before he returnes with his props to sustaine it And what if upon new thoughts we shall finde all that is here said all so unsaid again Let us passe to his explication peradventure we may stumble at such a stone before we come off from it B. Explication Heere I have these things to prove 1 that the Justifying sentence shall passe according to works as well as Faith 2. That the Reason is because they are parts of the condition For the first see Mat 25. 21. 23. well done good aâ—d faithfull servant thou hast been faithfull over a few things I will make thee ruler over many things enter thou into the ioy of thy Lord. And most plaine is that from the mouth of the judge himselfe describing the order of the processe of that day Mat. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed inherit the Kingdome c for I was hungry c. So 1 Pet 1. 17. who without respect of persons judgeth according to every mans worke So 2. Co 5. 10. we must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body acording to that he haâ—h done whether good or bad So Rev. 20. 12. 13. They were judged every man according to his works Heb. 13. 17. Phil 4 17. Mat. 12. 36 c. but this is evident already The Scriptures that he brings to prove that the justifying sentence shall passe according to workes as well as Faith are first here put and therefore first to be examined And against his reasoning from them I except 1. as well as Faith is here foysted in being wanting in the position And why heere supplyed but to beguile the simple with a good opinion of his assertion as if he attributed something to Faith also in Christs and Pauls sense When contrariwise he teacheth that Faith hath nothing to doe in this businesse but in the notion of our Act our righteousnesse or worke so that with him to be justified by Faith is to be justified by our owne worke 2. That there is no one of these Scriptures but is alledged by Bellarmin and his fellows against the Protestants and by them fully answered manifested to make nothing for justification or salvation by works scripture after scripture no one of them pretermitted When Mr. Baxter now stands up in Bellarmins place against us is it sufficient for him to tel us what Bellarmin hath said against the truth as if we could not without him know it and to leave unanswered yea unmentioned the hundreds of our side that have retorted upon him his owne arguments to the subverting of his owne cause that by these Scriptures he would have maintained If he would have another answer ought he not to have excepted against the validety of those that have beene already given Is he worthy to heare more from vs that hath stopped his eares against all that so many worthies have said already scorning to take notice thereof Nay when he will onely alledge the Scriptures and not take the labour to tel us what or how he will conclude from them he leaves us not in a capacity to declare so much as our consent with him or dissent from him Yet for the use of the weaker sort of readers that have not ability to make recourse to those learned workes where these controversies are handled or to understand them in that language in which most of them are written I shal speak something in generall to all these Scriptures First of that of Mat. 25. 21. 23. or rather taking the whole parable together beginning at ver 14. and ending at v. 30. granting it on both sides to be the same Parable which Luke recordeth chap. 19. beginning at the 12. and ending at the 27. verse which very few have questioned no one hath had cause to deny then it suits not at all with Mr. Baxters purpose or his Judgement dayes justification For the Kingdome of Heaven and the Lords comming and reckoning with his Servants and retribution of their service is to be taken for Christs comming to preach first in his owne person and then to set up and stablish the Gospel by the Ministry of his Apostles The servants to be reckoned with are principally the Teachers of the Iewes the Talents used or abused are the mysteries of the Gospel revealed though veyled under the Law The matter of the Account is what each by his serious studies and labours had cleared up to himselfe and others of this Gospel and saving knowledge of Christ before his comming for the advancement and advantage of Christ at his comming They which had spent their labours this way received at Christs comming a double measure of the spirit of illumination in the knowledge of Christ and salvation by him and were intrusted with a fuâ—ler measure of this sacred Treasure to bee the dispencers thereof to the world But hee which â—ad wrapt his Talent in a Nâ—pkin and hid it in the earth left the Doctrine of Christ scattered throughout the old Testament under a veile as he found it without searching into it and clearing it up to others was lâ—ft in the state of infidelity rejected and bound over hand and foot by his unbeliefe to perdition And his Citizens which sent word after him wee will not have this man to rule over us we will have a Christ such a one as wee have framed to our selves in our owne immaginations but not this Christ have their doom not only denounced but executed also upon them bring them hither and slâ—y them before me Who are these but the great Body and Nation of the Iewes that professed themselves Citizens and the onely Saints of God but for their refusall of Christ were slaine and destroyed by the sword of the Romans And so the parable comprehends in it a Prophecy of the successe of the Kingdome of Grace now in the way of erecting in its power as to the Iews So saith Luke in that 19. Chapter verse 11. Hee added and spake a parable because
he was nigh to Jerusalem and because they thought that the Kingdom of God should immediatly appeare by this Parable foretelling them that the Citizens the Children of the Kingdom the Iews for their rejection of Christ should bee cast out into utter darknesse where is weeping and gnashing of teeth i. e. into blindnesse of minde and stubbornnesse of heart accompanied with all calamity and misery as we see them undergoing untill this day This I acknowledge to be but my owne private opinion yet such as I could easily manifest from the Text it selfe if occasion were to be very probable if not certainely the minde of Christ Yet let it stand or fall sub calculo melioris Indicii But if we are to understand all of Christs last Comming to judgement it ministers nothing to advantage Mr. Baxters Cause but enough to ruinate it For first the faithfull Servants that shall bee so richly rewarded are such as wrought with a free spirit and the reward which they received was a free gift they challenged it not in St. Conditions name and Christ confers it freely as their munificent Lord. That hee mentions their service argues not either dignity or desert in their service but the riches of his grace that having justified their persons hee had in regard their service also The unprofitable servant cast into utter darknesse is Mr. Baxters legall man serving with a mercenary and slavish spirit expects nothing from Christ but in the way of justice lookes upon him as upon an Austere man a strait Law-giver and a rigorous exactor of the fulfilling of his Lawes I knew thee that thou art an hard man reaping where thou hast not sowne and gathering where thou hast not strawed and I was afraid saith he and so did nothing because of his feare of so strict a Lord at least nothing to purpose nothing to the advancing of the Kingdome of Christ in righteousnesse peace and joy in the Holy Ghost within himselfe or others The second Scripture Mat. 25. 34. 35. is most plain sayth Mr. Baxter in which the mouth of the Judge himselfe describeth the order of the processe of that day Come ye blessed inherit c. For I was hungry c. The Judges mouth describes but why doth Mr. Baxters mouth refuse to speak out the description which the Judge maketh of the processe of that day If hee began at ver 31. when Christ is set in his throne to call all Nations before him to judgement he declares the maner of the processe 1. by separating the sheep from the goats 2. by setting the sheep at his right hand What the sheep were himself declares Jo. 10. such as hear his voice his Gospel voice and are Gospellized and spirituallized by it What hee means by his right hand the Apostle declares 1. Thess 4 16 17. The dead in Christ shall rise first and shall bee caught up in the clouds to meet with the Lord in the ayre What to do not only to be with the Lord but also as the same Apostle sayth to sit with him in judgement and to judge the world 1. Co. 6. 2. This is the right hand of Christ to which the saints perhaps shall bee advanced even before the dead out of Christ shall be raysed To this at last is annexed what Mr. Br. alleadgeth Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world Who seeth not heer the grounds of their glorification to bee that they were Christs sheep the heirs of God and his elect vessels That they are to be convened before Christ not as prisoners to bee judged but to bee owned as his justified ones and to receive the glorious fruits of their justification and adoption a Kingdome by inheritance yea to sit as partners and Commissioners with Christ in judging the world what the Lord Iesus addeth for I was hungry c and yee thus and thus ministred unto me will Mr. Baxter because of the word for conclude these offices to be the cause of their justification then let him also conclude that the cause of Gods shewing mercy to Paul was his ignorance and unbeliefe This will as well follow from those words of Paul 1 Tim. 1. 13. I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbeliefe To his condition the proper place is to speak afterward So the 1 Pet. 1. 17. who without respect of Persons judgeth according to every mans work holds forth thus much to us that God cannot be deluded or corrupted as oft times earthly Iudges are either to pervert justice for favour or carnall ends or to take appearances for substance but jugeth all both persons and actions according to what they are not what they seem In like mnner 2 Cor. 5. 10. the Apostle appeales as may appeare by the 11. and 12. verses compared with this from the standers and censures of the false Apostles to the judgment Seat of God They had it seems questioned among the Corinthians the sincerity of both the Apostle and his Ministry Hee refers all to Christ the Iudge Before him wee must all appeare saith he and hee will reveale who are the sincere and which the hypocriticall Professors and Preachers of Christ they or I to take vengeance of the one and to owne the other He maimeth that testimony of Rev. 20. 12 13. that the force therof may not be understood by his Reader Let him supply what he hath cut off the Book of life by which they which are in Christ are to be judged which is there mentioned aswel as the other books by which the world is to be judged and then the judgments which the Saints are to pass through wil appear to be a judgment of Grace not of strict justice to consist in their admission to the Kingdom after the tenour of Grace not of Workes The other three Scriptures he seeth to have so little even of shew in them for his use that he deigns not the labour to alleage the words and let him not expect that I should stil do it for him Thus far we grant that the sentence of Iudgement though not the justifying sentence shall passe in the last day according to works 1. The whole world that hath not heard of Christ much less beleeved on him shall be judged according to their works to life or death according as their works have been perfect or unperfect yea to a measure of vengeance answering to the measure of their sinnes some to many some to fewer stripes 2. The whole bulk of professed Christians also shall in this respect be judged according to their works viz. that as their professions of and actings in Christ were eyther in truth or in hypocrisie meerly formall or else Vitall and reall so shall they be either exempted from or adjudged unto vengeance And so the secrets of all hearts shall bee then disclosed the Sheep and Goats Saints and Hypocrites shall then bee fully seperated one from the other which untill
that time shall never be wholly done nor bee known to all whose works were vitall and whose dead works 3. That the very Saints as compared one with another shall be judged according to their works i. e. shall be adjudged to glory in severall measures above according to the severall measures of their services and sufferings heere is the opinion of many eminent for learning and godliness neither doe their Reasons yet wholly sway me who dissent from them and will have neither right hand nor left hand nor sun nor stars nor great nor small but all equall in one degree of glory It is no proper place heer to dispute it but I see no reason to conclude that hee which distributeth his gifts of grace heer in different measures may not so also there distribute the degrees of glory Seeing both are by the purchase of his death and whether by the former he puts us in a greater or lesser capableness of the later is in question But in any other sense how as he sayth the sentence of justification shall passe according to works and that as hee infers from 2. Co. 5. 10. according to works whether good or evill I cannot conjecture 1. Not according to works as they are a condition which is the next thing hee undertakes to prove for evill works cannot be the condition of our justification either negatively that if we have done evill we neyther are nor shal be justified then all must bee damned nor positively that whosoever hath done evill shall be justified then all shall be saved Nor 2. shall it passe so as that according to our good works we shall be justified and according to our evill works we shall be condemned then every man at least every true Christian should be both saved and damned 3 Nor that we shal be much justified if we have all good works little justified if we have done some evil works also for that is the last judgment where every man shall have a full discharge or no discharge I must leave this as one of Mr. Baxters Mysteries it must die with him as to my understanding unless hee vouchsafe his interpretation As for the thing it selfe I utterly deny that they which are in Christ shall be so judged or justified according to their works as other men that they shall stand as prisoners with the world at the bar of Christ to bee judged for life and death as the other according to their works What that the Lord Christ should then discover the nakedness and lay open in the sight of men and divels all the sin and shame of his beloved members That he should cast in their faces all the filth of all their originall and actuall pollution even when they are upon the threshold of heaven Let it be Mr. Baxters doctrine my eares are abhorrent from the sound thereof It is against the stream of Gospel doctrine which tells us that Christ hath born their sin and curs and done their law therfore they are not to be called to such a reckoning That their iniquities are forgiven and sins covered Ro. 4. 7. That the Lord will no more remember them Heb. 10. 17. That they are not under the Law but under Grace Ro. 6. 14. Therfore exempted from the accusations of the Law at the Bar of Justice where the world is to be tried and to receive no other judgement but what flowes from the throne of grace That there is no condemnation to them that the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed them from the law of â—in and death Ro. 8. 1. 2. So that the Law hath no mâ—re power of judgmeÌ„t over theÌ„ than the lawes of our Land to try an Angel of Heaven for life and death That none can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect because God justifieth them and who is hee that is the judge and condemner even Christ which is their Saviour Ro. 8. 33. 34. That they are the sheep that shal be first separated and set at the right hand of Christ before he enters upon the judging of the world and so freed from judgement by the mercy of God in separating them as Augustine well observeth Aug. de Consens Evang. lib. 2. cap. 30. That they shall not come into condemnation but are passed from death to life Jo. 5. 24. That what to the world is the day of judgement to these is the day of Redemption Lu. 21. 28. They shall not come into judgement to answer for any one of their sins as is well observed by Reverend Mr. Fox the author of that which we call the De Christo gratis Justif p. 336. Book of Martyrs for saith he Sublatâ offensâ tollitur simul Judicii obligatio i. e. The sin being taken away viz. by the Lamb of God as appears Io. 1. 29. all obligation of judgement is taken away with it As for the works and righteousness which these Scriptures declare shal be mentioned to beleevers in that their Jubilizing day this speaks out the infinit freeness and riches of Gods grace in covering their nakedness and setting forth only the beauty and ornaments which he hath put upon them but in no wise any sufficient ground or reason upon which they might expect so great a salvation Suppose a noble and indulgent Father hath a prodigall and rebellious son that for many yeers hath grieved the spirit of his Father with his impure cariage and exorbitant outrages to whom notwithstanding his Fathers heart is no less indeared than was Davids to Absolom therfore never hath a thought of disinheriting him but reserves his whole heritage together with a boundles treasâ—re entire for him in the mean while wooing and even melting him with loving kindness into love and duty â— at length the son repenteth becomes ashamed of his base carriage toward so good a Father returns to him waits on him ministreth to him in his weakness and sickness and his Father by his last Will and Testament gives him all naming him therin his good and beloved son that hath done him great service ministred to him much comfort in the time of his necessity Will any hence gather that the attendance of such a son on such a Father at last is a sufficient ground and reason for the Fathers setling on him so vast an estate Could not the Father have hired a stranger for a few Crowns to have done him as much service Doth not the mentioning of the sons good deeds which he would seem to reward with so rich munificence speak out only the remarkable goodness of the Father that hath buried in oblivion all the disobedience and mischiefs which his son hath committed and will have his good parts alone to be mentioned or if another that was not his son had done a thousand times more in his service should he have been entitled for it to the inheritance So also in this case to attribute to the works of beleevers the
reason or ground of their glorification because the Grace of Christ mentioneth them is to lay the honour of Christs Grace in the dust They that shall be glorified even when Christ of his infinite Grace extolleth their service done to him shall depresse themselves that the entire prayse may bee his Lord when did wee thus and thus minister to thee what ever did we of any worth that thou shouldest owne it as a service to thee what thou imputest is no otherwise our observance but in thy acceptance It is therefore denyed that the justifying sentence as Mr Baxter termes it shall passe in the last day either for or according to works otherwise than hath beene before granted And if wee shall not at last be glorified according to and for our workes but that Mr. Brs. proofes in this particular faile Then is his labour lost in going about to prove the second particular that the reason hereof is because they are parts of the condition It must first appear that it is before wee trouble our selves to know in what respect it is so So that we will not contend about the second particular with him to deny what he concludeth that workes concurre in the same concausality with Faith to our glorification 1. Not to evidence the truth of our Faith nor secondly as the righteousnesss which the Law requireth not thirdly as a meer signe by which God doth discern our Faith nor fourthly as a mere sign to satisfie the justified person himselfe nor fiftly to satisfie the condemned world of the sincerity of our Faith All this we grant and further adde in the sixt place nor as a condition in Mr Baxters sense of our glorification And because none of these or other wayes therefore not at all The Scriptures which he brings pa. 322. n. 5. that seeme to hold forth the promise of glorification for our workes are of the same nature with those examined in the former Chapter alleaged by him and all as those gathered by the Papists to his hand and either do conclude no more than what a little before we have in this Chapter granted or pertaine to some of those ends of such promises of life which God maketh to our obedience specified in the former chap. I shall therefore here pretermit to speak to them because Mr Baxter alleageth them to another end here viz to prove that the mention of these works to judgement is more than to signifie their sincerity to the condemned world as in the end of that Section he expresseth himselfe And this we deny not So that it were impertinent to examine the premises where the conclusion is granted CHAP. IX Whether according to Mr. Baxter Doe and live be the voice of the Gospel as well as of the Law The question stated and resolved whether and in what respects Believers must act or work from life not for life IN the eighth place as naturall motions are strongest when they come neerest to their period and center so at the conclusion of his Aphorismes pag. 3. 4. and so onward to the end he multiplies Argument upon Argument or rather twisteth many arguments together in one under the notion of Queries The substance of all may bee gathered together into this one Syllogisme That Doctrine which by necessary consequence draweth after it many intolerable absurdities mischiefs and soul-damning evills must needs be a falsâ— doctrine But so doth the Doctrine of justification by Faith or by Christ instrumentally received by Faith without the addition of works in a concausality with Fâ—â—â—h or Christ Ergo It is a false doctrine The Proposition is granted him The Assumption hee goeth about to cleer and make good by enumerating the particular absurdities and mischiefs that are consequentiall to this Doctrine And this he doeth by way of interrogations bearing the force of strong Affirmations I shal examine them in order The first query he puts in these words B. Doth it not needlesly constraine men to wrest most plaine and frequent expressions of Scripture A simple negation would here best suit with so untoward and audatious a question Neither shall I say any more to it but admonish the Reader to take notice that hee doth in these words frame an enditement against Christ his Apostles and all that beare the name of Protestants for sacriledge in wresting the holy Scriptures And that 1. Though he doth not and why but because he cannot bring any one Scripture which they have so wrested 2. And thereby affirmeth plaine enough to the capacity of every understanding reader that the Papists and Arminians alone have purely and truely interpreted the Scriptures as to the point of justification whom himselfe therefore followeth as their obedient disciple And 3. shewes us no reason therof but leaves us to conjecture what his meaning is viz that the Scripture is no farther Canonicall than after the interpretation and sense which the holy Mother Church alloweth it Nay we retort the argument upon him Iustification by works constraines the assertors thereof not onely to wrest many Scriptures but also to destroy and nullifie the whole Gospell and Salvation of Christ Therefore it is false doctrine This first query was but a warning peece but who can stand to beare the force of the second The man as if hee had newly come forth of Vulcans shop is all fiery spits out nothing but lightening and thunderbolts blowing into the bottome of Hell all that stand in his way How formidably he layes about him they that dare to come so neer may finde partly in this second querie it selfe but principally in his Appendix pag. 76. c. and in the highest strength of his wrath pag. 83. and onward to the end of pag. 98. First his querie here runs in these words B. pa. 324 and 325. 2 Qu Doth it not uphold that dangerous pillar of the Antinomian doctrine that we must not work or perform our duties for life and salvation but only from life and Salvation That we must not make the attaining of Justification or salvation an end of our endeavours but obey in thankefulnesse onely because we are saved and Justified A aâ—ctrine which I have else where confuted And if it were reduced to practise by all that hold it as I hope it is not would undoubtedly damn them for he that seeks not and strives not to enter shall never enter Now if good workes or sincere obedience to Christ our Lord be no part of the condition of our full justification and salvation who will use them to that end For how it can procure justification as a meanes and not by way of condition I cannot conceive In what part of the world Mr. Baxters elsewhere lyeth in which his confutation of this doctrine is to be found I know not I am not inquisitive to know I have enough in this and desire not to fish in any more of his foule waters But in pronouncing this doctrine of working and performing duties not for life buâ— from
once revealed to us and made ours in possession or in hope ought so to spiritualize us so to swallow us up into the spirit that we should no longer walk after the flesh but after the spirit to delight in the Law of God in all the holiness and righteousnes which the Law teacheth after the inner man He that seeks not so to doe hath hugd in his arms a dream of Christ not Christ himselfe hath had him possibly in his fancy never in his heart and conscience Hee that hath effectually met with God in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe and there tasted the love of God or rather God which is love hath suffered a Metamorphosis and is changed all into love hath so beheld God shining in Christ as in a glasse that he is transformed into the same image is or would bee wâ—olly configured to the likeness of God Yea we grant more that the truly justified and adopted ones of the Lord may perform these works of naturall righteousness which the Law commandeth with respect to and expectation of the future glory which shall be revealed to them and conferred on them for Christs sake as a reward of such their imperfect service yet not a reward of debt purchased by and due to their works but of free gift and grace from their indulgent father who of his infinite love and bounty is wont to recompence the mites of his dear childrens labours with the talents of his grace and bounty not because they are worthy but because he is gracious yea Grace and Love it selfe Ro. 4 4. 5. Goe ye into my vineyard and whatsoever is right or meet ye shall receive Mat. 20. 7. It must bee a boundless reward what such a father shall think right and meet to bestow upon his dear children Their reward shall bee proportioned not to the pittance of their poore service but to the riches of their fathers bounty and uncircumscriptiveness of his treasure The respect of such infinite treasure in their fathers hand and the riches of his love to bestow it in largest dimensions upon them with a gracious respect to their dutifulness and service should serve as a strong motive and attractive to them to be still doing for him When I was yet in my bloud hee loved and cleansed me Ezek. 16. 6 -9. When dead he quickned me Eph. 2. 1. When without strength to work when a sinner when ungodly when an enemy he gave his son to die for me and reconciled me to himselfe What will he now doe for mee so quickned reconciled washed and justified having attained strength if I employ that strength in his service Ro. 5. 6-10 Now wee are the sons of God but it doth not yet appear what wee shall bee onely wee know that when he appears we shall bee like him having therefore this hope we ought to purifie our selves as he is pure 1. Jo. 2. 25. 3. Thus are the saints to draw encouragement to obedience from the consideration of the reward or rather from the infinite love and bounty of the rewarder 3. That they which are out of Christ yet under the means of Grace and Ministry of the Gospel must performe all pure Gospel duties which the Law requireth onely in generall and implicitely but the Gospel specifieth expresly to the severall ends to which the wisdome of God hath severally related them some to justification some to sanctification by Christ Jesus It is their duty to hear learn study and meditate upon the doctrine of Grace and mystery of Christ duly to prize and value it to desire gasp cry and pray for the effectuallizing of it to themselves to embrace and receive Christ to repent of their long estrangedness from him to deny themselves and cast away all opinion of and confidence in their owne righteousness that Christ alone may bee embraced and the dung being cast out they may bee replenished with that which is indeed the Treasure and all this that they may bee justified and saved not by and for these duties so performed but by and for Christ to whom they seek and strive in all these duties to come into union All this the Gospel both tacitely implieth and expresly teacheth and the Law also in generall and inclusively commandeth as hath been sayd Thus the Kingdome of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force Here stil Christ is al to justification salvatioÌ„ Faith the alone instrument to receive him All the other actings are but subservient to Faith in this its instrumentall service to make way for it As when a treasure is offered by a munificent benefactor to a poor beggar the grace of the benefactor and pretiousnesse of the treasure is that which inricheth him and the hand the alone instrument to receive it yet must the eye guide him the understanding prompt him the wil move him the feet carry him and other actings of the minde and body bee subservient to him that the hand may rerceive that which inricheth him At length when all is done such a begger hath more apparent grounds of boasting that hee hath been and done somewhat to his owne enriching than the best of us that we have been or done any thing to our own Justification For though the Benefactor hath poured upon him freely of his own mercy not for or upon condition of his crying running to him emptying his hand of what was in it before and stretching it forth to bee filled with the treasure profered him yet the benefactor gave him neither a heart to desire nor wisdome to value nor light to guide him nor feet to carry him nor a hand to receive the treasure conferred It is otherwise in our Justification by Christ God freely gives it in Christ and all the power will actings and instruments by which we come into the possession of it Neither when we affirme all these to be our duty while yet unjustified doe we thereby affirme that all must be done before we can bee justified The grace of God oft prevents our operation in most of these justifying us by Faith before we have time to put our selves upon many of these operations In this sense I know none that denieth an obligation upon sinners to act and worke for their justification and salvation 4 They that are justified ought to be still active and industrious in all the duties of the Gospell tending to their confirmation in the Faith stablishment in Christ illumination in the misteries of the Gospell denyall of themselves and seeking to be wholly swallowed up into the Lord Iesus that they may be dayly more filled and ravished with fuller assurance and comfort of their justjfication salvation by him This we find the Apostle making his taske Phill. 3. 8 9 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. And hereunto tend the many memento's scattered by the holy Ghost in the Gospell watch pray take heed beware stand fast hold fast Run fight strive continew c. All which tend to the
and his glorying that they prove wee may act for salvation p. 81. which as generally posited by him no man ever denied there is no need of answering that which they are brought to prove being granted At length in the same pa. 81. of his App. he frameth an objection made against his doctrine thus B. Object But is it not the most excellent and Gospel-like frame of spirit to doe all out of meere Love to God and from thankefulnesse for life obtained by Christ and given us To this Objection he gives a three fold Answer Bax. Answ 1. If it come not from love to God it is not sincâ—re But is it sincere if it come from love to God Is there not aswell a naturall love as a naturall fear of God in the hearts of all both good and bad Or was there ever any that hated God as God and good Or that served him from hatred to him If such a Naturall or Morall Love for I finde not Mr. Baxter ascending any where higher suffice to make the obedience of men sincere and because sincere a perfect and sufficient righteousnes to justification and salvation Then all will more fitly cohere than the golden crowne with the golden pantofle a universall conditioning righteousness with a universall conditionall salvation All shall be saved except the Antinomian Paulites or Protestants if Mr. Baxters Gospel stand if he misse none else but they B. 2. Yet doth not the Gospel any where set our love to God and to our own souls in opposition nor teach us to love God and not our selves but contrarily joyneth them both together and commandeth them both The love of our selves and desire of our own preservation would never have been planted so deeply in our nature by the God of Nature if it had been unlawfull I conclude therefore that to love God and not our selves and so to do all without respect to our own good is no Gospel frame of spirit As home to the matter as his doctrine of Justification to the truth Where was conscience when will and wit alone shew themselves to beguile his Readers with meere opinions and imaginary suspitions Who ever opposed the ordinate love of God to the ordinate and subordinate love of our selves When he hath degraded us from being men yea into a state beneath Beasts and bruits telling the world that we doe not appetere bonum desire and move unto any thing that is good yea our chiefe good thenceforth hee thinks the world in stead of hearing will trample us as other stocks and stones that have no sensitive appetite Our doctrine is of another frame Wee oppose the love of God which is from the spirit of Adoption not from Nature to the servile feare which is from the spirit of Bondage following heerin the light and testimony of the Holy Ghost Ro. 8. 15. 1. Jo. 4. 18. And this I doubt not to be also the meaning of the Apostle Gal. 5. 6. where hee makes the all on our part to justification consist in Faith which worketh by love i. e. in faith which carrieth out the beleever to work no more in slavish fear and by a mercenary spirit but in the freedome and spirit of Love And whosoever will but vnwinde the Clew of Pauls disputation in the whole 4. Chapter especially from verse 21. and so forward to this 6. verse of Chap. 5. shall I think have the suffrage of his own Reason for this interpretation For the Apostle having disputed of the bondage discending from Hagar to Ismael and his Children from Mount Sinai to those that held themselves under the Covenant of Works Doe and live there given and withall of the Freedom discending from Sarah to Isaac and his seed viz. the seed of Christ then included in and typified by Isaac i. e. from the New and spirituall Jerusalem to all true Christians concludes of all such We are not the Children of the bond woman but of the free and in 5. Chap. verse 1. exhorting them to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free And forbidding and in the next 3 verses shewing the danger of returning againe under the servile yoke of the Covenant of works Do and live whereas by Faith and not by works the hope of Righteousness is to be expected he concludes in the sixth verse that neither circumsition nor uncircumsition i. e. neither workes nor any externall priviledges of the workers avail any thing to life and righteousnesse but Faith which worketh by love what is that but Faith which worketh by a new principle of filiall love and not from that olde principle of servile feare the proper adjunct of the Covenant of workes This is to be the Children of the free not the bond woman by the Faith of Christ alone to seek for righteousnesse yet to be still working from a principle of love not of feare to bring forth fruits of sanctification to him that hath freely justified us This man saith the Apostle hath entred into his rest as God hath entred into his rest Heb. 4. 10. As God having consummated the worke of Creation rested and ceased from his worke because all was perfect and needed no addition and Christ having offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sat downe at the right hand of God ceasing from further sufferings because our redemption is fully perfected and nothing more needed to bee added Heb 10. 12. 14. So every beeleever in respect of the rest of Grace having received by Faith the righteousnesse which is by this one sacrifice of Christ for the purging of all his sins sitteth downe for ever at rest in the fruition and firme tenure thereof ceasing from his owne workes to perfect his justification because it is already compleated and nothing needeth to be added to it All his workings henceforth is to manage so great a salvation to the glory of the Author as God worketh hitherto and Christ worketh for the governing and disposing to their proper ends the Creatures made and elect men redeemed Mr. Baxter contrariwise teacheth men so to love themselves as with love to destroy themselves and so to seek for life as to be sure to lose it forbidding them to enter into their Rest of Grace and calling them back to the yoke of bondage againe not suffring them to cease from their owne workes nor to doe that worke of God Jo 6. 29. nor to act in the Sp. of love but of feare and bondage Is not he one of those hard Taskmasters from whose cruelty Christ calleth his Disciples Come unto mee all yee that are weary and heavy laden with the yoakes and burthens which your legall Teachers impose on you and I will give you rest c. These will never permit you to have rest to your soules Mat. 11. 28 29. I conclude therefore that Mr. Baxters Conclusion of this his second Answer to the Objection is as patt to the purpose as an Oyster-shell to a hungry appetite and the love to
nothing c. When the Auâ—hor in the quoted place speaketh nothing of the New Covenant but of the Law of Christ by which hee there declareth himselfe to meane the Ten Commandements as they are now in the hand and disposing of Christ And this Law he understands also in relation not to the whole world but to them that are implanted into Christ his words being directed to Neophytus To such Christ having already borne the penalty of the Law in their stead temporall and fatherly chastisements onely for their purging and perfecting are threatned in case through infirmity they transgresse the Law In this I conceive hee alludeth to the priviledges of the Covenant made with David as the Type of Christ and his seed as the Type of Christs seed and so pertayning as a Gospel liberty no lesse fully to us than to them If his children forsake my Law breake my statutes c. Then will I visit their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with stripes nevertheless my loving kindness will I not take utterly from him nor suffer my faithfulnes to fail my Covenant will I not break c. Ps 89. 31-34 And this is M. Brs. own doctrine when he teacheth that there is no deathly violation of the new Covenant besides final unbelief rebellion against Christ in and under Thes 32. 33. 34. and 37. But the Author whom Mr. Br. calls heer ad partes speaks not of finall unbeleefe or rebellion incident to the world but of some particular transgression of any of the Ten Commandements as hee expresseth himselfe through the infirmity incident to the Saints What fire and fury is there in this mans wrath that having made an Adversary will have him wounded vel per me though through his owne heart aniâ—amque in vulnere ponit If it be an intolerable errour in this man much more in Mr. Baxter who much more vehemently and upon sligâ—â—er and slenderer grounds asserts it The Scriptures which Mr. Baxter alleâ—dgeth as contraried by this doctrine speak eytherof such rebells as when the Grace of Christ is offered them persist in a finall refusall of it or of such hypocrites as having once seemingly tasted it Apostatize utterly from it And with these this Author hath nothing heere to doe Onely Mr. Baxter being heavily burthened with another Monster which hee had a purpose to have disburthened himselfe of in a Tractate of Universall Redemption being prevented by another must needs now and then case himselfe of it and speake out how hatefull to him the doctrine of the certaine perseverance of the Saints in grace is The other things which hee hints and but hints at as errours in this Author might bee taken into examination if Mr. Baxter would alleadge his words and shew what hee excepts against in them I see not but the passages are pure and cleare enough in the Booke if hee would forbeare the casting in of his salt-petre to corrupt them As he sayth it was not his businesse to have objected so neither was it my businesse to have defended had hâ—e not sought under a pretence of opposing this Booke to defame many truths of Christ CHAP. XI Whether according to Mr. Baxter the Doctrine of Justification by Faith without works tend to carnall Liberty and to the driving of Obedience out of the World IN prosecuting his second Quere Mr. Baxter hath lead us a long race In the rest he is more straight and short A third Quere which bears the force of another Argument to subvert Justification by Faith without works hee so proposeth as contayning another absurdity and evill likely to follow upon this doctrine His words are as followeth B. Aphor. pa. 325. Whether this Doctrine doth not tend to drive obedience out of the world For if mâ—n doe once beleeve that it is not so much as a part of the Condition of their Justification will iâ— not much tend to relax their diligence I know that Love and thankfulnesse should bee enough and so it will when all our ends are attained in our ultimate end Then wee shall Act for these ends no more wee shall have nothing to doâ— but love and joy and prayse and beâ— thankâ—full But that is not yet Sure as God hath given us the affections of Feare Desire Hope and Care so he would have us use them for the attainment of our great ends Therefore he that taketh downâ— but one of all our motives to obedience he helps to destroy obedience it selfe seeing we have need of every Motive that God hath left us I shall examine heere first the Quere it selfe then the amplification of it The Quere or Interrogation bears the force of a strong Affirmation That the doctrine of Justification by Grace without Workâ— doth tend to drive obedience out of the world and to relax mens diligence to good works It must bee therefore a prodigious doctrine that produceth so cursed an effect First then I demand whom he censureth as the Authors of so direfull an evill God or men If the Holy Ghost hath not taught men this doctrine let the guilt of this evill bee upon such men as have entertayned it But the Holy Ghost hath taught it To him that worketh not but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is imputed to him for righteousnesse But hee that worketh or brings works to be justified by them is excluded Ro. 4. 4. â— His is the blessedness to whom God imputeth Righteousness without works ver 6. Not of works but of him that calleth Ro. 9 11. If at works then not by Grace if by Grace then not of works Ro. 11. 7. By Grace through Faith not of works Eph. 2. 8. 9. Not our owne righteousnesse but the righteousnesse which is by the Faith of Christ Phil. 3. 9. Not by works of righteousnesse which wee have done but according to his mercy And many more testimonies before in a fitter place alleadged all in one harmony evincing the Holy Ghost to bee the Author of this Doctrine So that Mr. Baxter loadeth not man but God with this reproach of seeking to drive obedience out of the world 2. Whether hee hath not taken up this slander from the Monks and Jesuits Whether there bee any of them that having written against Justification by Faith which hath not aspersed it and our Churches that hold it with this scandall Or any one of the Protestant Divines which hath defended this Article of our Faith but hath spoken fully to the vindicating of this Doctrine from this so injurious a slander When Mr. Baxter is so much Popish that hee takes up every most frothy Objection of every shaveling of that side to adore it and so much an Anti-Protestant that hee scorns to mention what on our part hath beene regested in way of answer to it why takes he up his habitation among Protestants but to corrupt and seduce them 3. If hee meane by the World the unbeleevers of the World that are strangers to Christ and the Covenant
all the justified by Faith are sanctified if it be sanctification indeede it may be made an evidence of justification 6 Yet neither all seeming peace and quietnesse of conscience or joy in expectation of salvation or hope that is made the ground of this joy and such other like seeming effects of Justification are alway sure evidences to a man that he is justified because not alway fruits or parts of sanctification they may proceed from another and baser principle viz. from the deceitfulnesse of their heart or self-love and self-advancing or from the spirit of slumber upon the conscience or from ignorance of Gods way and method of bringing many Children to glory Nor are all seeming holiness honesty meeknesse temperance patience and other like vertues either in their habite as they really affect the heart or in their act as they are with an ardent zeale for God brought forth into practice sure evidences of sanctification by Christ because these also may proceed from other and baser principles and not from the Spirit of Christ as from the abiding prints of the Law of Nature written in the heart or from the power and suggestions of a convinced and awaked conscience or from strong impressions made into the soule by a morall and vertuous education or other like sub-celestiall and unspirituall principles So that our certaine and known union to Christ and our justification and sanctification sensibly thence flowing may be properly and unfailingly made our sound evidence of the spirituall life and acceptablenesse of our vertues and works But these in themselves in no wise certaine evidences and demonstrations to us of our justification and sanctification by Christ Sanctification is one thing and a zealous endeavour to be in all things conformed to the will of God is or may be another The former is only from the Spirit of Christ and wrought only in them which are in Christ The later may proceed from morall principles and is incident even to them also that are aliens from Christ 7 Neverthelesse even these vertues and good works do so farr evidence that from the Negation of these a man is certainely denyed to be in Christ or to be justified or sanctified by the faith of Christ I mean that whosoever can allow himself in the habituall practice of any known sin or rejection of any known duty that man may know himself and be known of others to be an Alien from Christ Because whosoever is in Christ is a new Creature all things are become new not only in respect of his relation but of his manners and conversation also and in whomsoever the Spirit of Sanctification dwelleth it dwels in a state of reign not of bondage Withall these vertues and good works when they are found to flow from our union to Christ and the love of God shed abroad in our hearts through Christ and upon examination a man can truly say that he hath ceased to hew from any other Qâ—arrie or to dip from any other Fountain than from Christ that from his Spirit alone hee daily sucketh life as the branch from the root to bring forth fruit and from the sacrifice of Christs death a sweet odour to make himself and his fruit acceptable then they serve as good seconds to prove to his soul that he is justified and sanctified But so that his being in Christ must first prove his fruit to be good before his fruit can have any power to evidence him to be in Christ and the evidence of both his justification and sanctification consisteth not so much in the qualifications which he hath attained or works which he doth and hath done as in his continuall waiting upon Chrih from him alone to receive what hee ought to be and to do in all wel-pleasing before God and the love of God in Christ enabling to obedience 8 That although Sanctification and the fruits thereof do each in its own degree as aforesaid more or lesse evidence our Justification yet have they no concausality with Faith to the producing of it All that are in Christ are Saints in Christ yet their sanctity goes not before their being in Christ but is an immediate fruit thereof The forgiveness of sin and Adoption doth in order go before their doing of acceptable service to God and unacceptable service cannot justifie 9 The grace of God which bringeth salvation and justification teacheth men to deny ungodlinesse c. and to live soberly c. Cals upon all to stretch forth their Faith to apprehend to themselves in Christ both the imputed and the inherent righteousness so far is it from breathing a soul-cozening or a soul-corrupting faith Therefore is the justifying Faith called by the Holy Ghost a most holy Faith Jude 20. A soule purifying Faith Act. 15. 9. A sanctifying Faith Act. 26. 18. Implying its efficacy as well to sanctifie as to justifie and that there is no true sanctification but that which is instrumentally obtained or at least received by Faith Lastly that one chief end of our Justification is that we bring forth acceptable fruit to God here inchoate hereafter in perfect obedience to God and conformity with him And the Justifier doth and will attain his end in justifying therefore brings none to glory but such as have all vertues and good works at least in their root and seed while they are here and if after their effectuall calling they live to have time and opportunity do not unfeigâ—edly endeavour universally to declare the same in their practice So that to dream of any glorified man in heaven that was not actually a Saint upon earth is a dream from hell not from heaven All these things might have been largely proved both from the Scriptures and our Protestant Writers but that I esteem them all to be so known to be the consenting asserteons of all our Churches and by them so fully confirmed by the word that I should but abuse time to take it up in particularizing what is in this Case so generally written and read I have been the more large in expressing the doctrine of the Protestant Churches upon this Argument to wipe off the stain which Mr. Br. hath learned of the Papists to lay upon it in this and the former quere which are wholly framed to beguile the weaker sort having nothing in them to stagger the Judicious And now I leave it both to the strong and weak to judge whether the Accuser of the Brethren himself can possibly expresse more impudence and falshood in slandering the Churches of Christ than this man hath done or if he had not bound himself to speak after the Jesuits and Monks whatsoever they traducingly say whether there be any colour of reason for him to have layd upon us these two accusations To hold my self to that which I am now examining what is there in this Faith and Doctrine thereof which I have described deserving to be called a soul-cozening Faith And when he addeth That Faith which is by many
the integrity and purity of its celestiall endowments Without spot if this be but half Christ which is the other half 2 Or because he understands by whole Christ Christ in the fruits of all his offices as is most probable whether he will deny them to receive whole Christ which apply not all the severall Acts and Fruits of his severall offices to one and the same end but to severall ends to which his wisedom hath appropriated them Suppose a son of some Luke that is a Physician a Minister of the Gospel and a Father in his Family If the sayd son shall make use of the Acts and Fruits of all these Offices of his Father not at all to one end but to the severall ends to which they are proper of his Art and Physick to cure his diseased body of his Gospel-doctrine to illuminate his understanding and heal his wounded soul and of his provision of victuals to preserve his life and nourish his body and not of physick word and bread together for one and the same the nutriment of his body shall this man therefore be said not to own and receive his whole Father but half of him Even so the Offices of Christ are various and his actings in them tend to various ends some to our quickning som to our enlightning some to our justification some to our sanctification c. Do I take but half Christ because I apply not all the Actings and Fruits of all his Offices to my Justification only and none of them to the other honourable ends to which he hath appointed them who can bear the absurdity 3 Whether it be possible for any man according to the rule and tenor of the Gospel by a lively faith to apply to himself the satisfaction of Christs death and yet to remain unpardoned and unjustified or for such a one to abide unspiritualliz'd and unsanctfied If not then the reason why the multitude which profes they trust Christ for the saving of their souls as Mr B. is pleasd to phrase it do remain unjustified is because they profess but have not a lively faith in his death and not as Mr. Br. saith for want of I know not what Moral Theological decompounded phantastical sincerity consisting in laying hold on the half of Christ i. e. either his wounded and not his whole parts or Christ the Mediator not the Mediator Christ I can no better distinguish his meaning sith himself hath refused to do it Of the same nature is that which he hath pag. 328. B. Though some thinke nothing is preaching Christ but preaching him as a pardoning justifying Saviour Indeed among the Turks and Indians that entertain not the Gospell it is necessary to preach his pardoning office yea and the verity of his Natures and Commission Therefore when the Apostles preached to Jews and Pagans they did first and chiefly teach them the person and offices of Christ and the great benefits which they might receive by him But when they preach as James to be professors of the Christian Faith they chiefly urge them to strive to enter to fight that they may conquer to run that they may obtain to lay violent hands upon the Kingdom c. Either all this relates to Justification or it is meer babble in the Ayr sound without sense or substance as much to his purpose as was his that trudged about all the Town from shop to shop to buy two penny-worth of Circumstance for the cure of his tooth-ach For his quere is whether our Doctrine which teacheth Justification by faith without works do not confirm men in their soul-cozening Faith If all doth relate to justification then let him that can find help me without help I cannot find as much as a grain of reason in all or any part of it such reason at least as befits Mr. Br. who grounds all his Religion upon reason To the first Clause I stand stupified not knowing how to preach Christ to justification but as Christ the Justifier to pardon but as Christ the pardoner or to salvation but as Christ the Saviour Should I preach him as a condemner to justification as an unpardoning Judg to salvation As to his justifying me as he is a Law-giver either there hath been wanting something in Mr. B. dexteriry of teaching or in my docility to apprehend I am yet to be taught this lesson All that he hath said hitherto hath made it but odious and absurd and here hee saith no more to perfect it To that which follows the absurdity of it doth enough confute it self Who can endure to hear that the Apostles when they preached to Jewes and Pagans did and we if we should be sent to preach to the Turks and Indians must first preach Christ alone to justification and so generate in them a soul-ct zening faith But when once they become professors of the Christian Faith then the Apostles did and we must teach them better urging them no longer to cozen their souls with faith in Christ the Saviour but by their own works to justifie and save themselves He that delights in such a Gospel let him be Mr. B. disciple It seems he is angry with James for not helping him erewhile in his great exigency that he singles out him from all the Apostles to father him with this intolerable doctrine But whether James give him herein any relief hath been before examined As for the rest of the Apostles let Paul give the Testimony for himself and them There is one Lord and Mediator Christ Jesus one Faith one Baptisme one Lord and Father of all Ephe. 4. 5. 1 Tim 2. 5. Not two Christs and two Faiths one to cozen at first and the other to save the soul afterward If Paul or an Angell from heaven should preach any other Gospell then what you have heard from me at first while Pagans let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8. Therefore many years after the Romans and Galathians had been professors of the Christian faith he seeks to root them fast by faith alone in Christ and not to start from their first principles reducing such as went a whoring after works to help faith in justifying them pronouncing them accursed and Apostates from Christ that should so fall off from their first liberty in Christ That all obedience yea faith in Christ to all obedience vertue and good works is to be preached and urged upon them that profess the Christian faith is so true that he is but a maimed preacher of Christ that doth it not but all to sanctification not to justification This is the true Preacher of Christ that preacheth Christ to good works not works to win Christ that seeks to bring us into Marriage-union with Christ that we may bring forth fruit to God Rom. 7. 4. Not that we should bring forth bastard-fruit from another that we may be married to Christ But this is not Mr. Brs. business he speaks of fruit to justification To conclude what I have to say to this
Quere It is his doctrine that teacheth a soul-cozening Faith a Faith made up of a fardle of works and rags of our own righteousness as in his larger definition of justifying Faith he hath described it CHAP. XIII Mr. Baxters calumnie that this doctrine doth harden the Papists in their Popery and give occasion to many learned Protestants to turn Papists answered HIS fifth Quere hath no shew of weight in it deserving an examination savouring more of the Spleen than of the judgment of the Author Nevertheless though it declares only the stomach and indignation of the man against the truth rather then any strength in his hand to hurt it yet because it is formed for the deceiving of the simple and unwary upon whom sounds oft times take no less impression than actuall strokes to prevent damage to such I shall examine whatsoever may seem materiall in it as I have the rest B. pa. 329. 5. Lastly Is not this excluding of sincere Obedience from Justification the great stumbling-block of Papists and that which hath had a great hand in turning many learned men from the true Protestant Religion to Popery That by obedience he meaneth all morall qualifications and works as they are vertues and works we have before learned from his own words so his meaning is that the Doctrine of Paul and the Churches which follow him viz. Justification by Faith and not by works is guilty of the damnable and pernicious evills which he here chargeth upon it These evills are two 1 It is the great stumbling-block of the Papists 2 It hath carried back many learned men from the Protestant Religion to Popery To both these I shall speak in order 1 Of its hardning the Papists in Popery Is it not the great stumbling-block to Papists saith Mr. Br. I answer 1 Was not Christ and that in this very point of justifying the ungodly by an imputed righteousness without any inherent righteousness of their own a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence to the Jewes as which they were so offended that to their eternall ruine they reject the Gospel and salvation of Christ unto this day Rom. 9. 32 33. 1 Cor. 1. 23. 1 Pet. 2. 8. What then must Christ be anathematized Nay but let the truth of Christ stand and man be the lyar the transgressor It is scandalum acceptum non datum an offence taken not given And blessed is he who soever shall not be offended in or at Christ Mat. 11. 6. Lu. 7. 23. But if any will be offended and dash the Lord Christ admonisheth him of the danger Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken but on whomsoever it shall fall it will grind him to powder Mat. 21. 44. 2 And as sound a reason is it that our doctrine of Justification hinders the Papists from turning Protestants as was that of some Statists that complained against the Church of Geneva that they hindered the conversion of Papists in those parts by forbidding dancing and the like grave consideration by some great Politicians in England that the forbearing of Bull and Bear-baiting and other sports on the Lords day hardned the Papists of Lancashire in their Popery When Religion is made a meer piece of policy and to have in it at the best no more than a dress of dreggish formality or morality no marvail if such dirty and unspirituall means are made use of to spread it 3 But how deep doth this effect lurk in its cause so that only this one mans sagacity can smell it out That the Papists in the least things will not turn Protestants except we in the worst turn Papists For this Article of Justification is the greatest of all the questions controverted between us and the Papists All the rest not ingredients of or meerly relating to this may the Papists continue in if not of malice or wilfulnesse with a possibility of salvation They are but wood hay and stubble built upon the foundation the very builders whereof may be saved but so as by fire saith the Apostle But a Trentified Papist by the coherent judgment of the best Divines cannot be saved because hee holdeth not the foundation sure and pure but mixeth mans works with the grace of God in Christ to Justification And their judgment is grounded upon the authority of the Apostle Yee are faln from grace Christ is become void or forfeyted to you whosoever are justified by works An ardent love to Romes shavelings out of doubt possesseth Mr. Br. that he doth not only wish himself as did the Apostle but would make himself and all us accursed that they might be not saved but damned with us For if they reject all other their errors and practically retain but this one by it they forfeyt all the salvation of the Gospel 4 Nay contrariwise as long as this Article of the Gospel was diligently preached and stoutly maintained in the Protestant Churches and that not with quiâ—ks and quidities of humane Art but by the nervous arguments of Scripture alone so long the Kingdom of Antichrist more and more decayed and they which were before marked up as slaves to that rivall of Christ brake the fetters and came in by thousands and ten thousands taking the Kingdom by a holy and violent force But since the time this Doctrine hath been less preached and patronized the Reformed Churches have been still in a languishing and the Antichristian Kingdom in a growing condition as Mr. Br. himself so great a Reader and so fully acquainted with the Ecclesiasticall Histories must necessarily grant And why hath this stop to the promoting of the Gospel befaln the Churches but that the Lord Christ doth herein declare his offence taken against us for not making him our all that hee also ceaseth so victoriously as in former times to vouchsafe his presence among us 5 But since Mr. Br. is leapt home to them and many foot beyond many of the more moderate sort of them in the point of justification by works and so hath removed the slumbling-block let him speak by experience how many of them are come in to him to be his Proselytes rejecting the Papacy and other their Popish errors Or whereas his Friends the Arminians have in this and many other of their Tenents so many decads of yeers closed fully with them where is the confluence of Papists to them seen that shaking off their former opinions and practices profess themselves Converts A Cardinals Hat perhaps hath been sent or a fat Bishopprick promised to some of the most deserving men among them in relation to the Romish Cause to allure them to further and higher deservings of this kind But the holy Mother Church I warrant you sticks where she was If shee should permit but one stone of her Fabrick to be loosed it might cause a crack in the whole This part of the Quere I shall therefore upon these Considerations leave as reasonless and examine the next whether there be any more reason in it
learned men turn'd to Popery This shall suffice to have said to the matter of Mr. Brs. Quere But memorable and worthy to be written upon the purest chrystal waters where he that can may read them are the reasons which Mr. Br. annexeth for which this Doctrine hath had a great hand in turning many learned men to Popery viz. B. pa. 329. When they see the language of the Scripture in the fore-cited places so plain that no mortall eye can discern it to the contrary When Illyricus Gallus Amsdorfius c. shall account it a heresie in George Major to say that good works are necessary to salvation And when if Melchior Adamus say true eò dementiae impietatis ventum erat ut non dubitarent quidam haec axiom ata propugnare Bona opera non sunt necessaria ad salutem Bona opera officiunt saluti Nova obedientia non est necessaria When even Melanctons credit is blasted for being too great a friend to good works though he ascribe not to them the least part of the work or office of Christ And when to this day many Antinomian teachers who are magnified as the only Preachers of free grace do assert and proclaim That there is no more required to the perfect irrevocable Justification of the vilest Murtherer or Whoremaster but to believe that hee is justified or to be perswaded that God loveth him And again p. 331. This Doctrine was offensive to Melancton Bucer and other moderate Divines of our own What of all this and what is the issue at last Therefore these learned men with great learning and wisedom took the advantage Cum ratione in sanire like a pampred horse with a fly in his tayl to catch the snaffle in the teeth and in great indignation to runn mad to Rome Who els but Mr. Brs. learned men could have expressed so much grace and wit And it seems they were all fellow-students in the same School els could not their good wits have jumpt together upon so pretty a slight And it seems Mr. Br. by his exagitation of the damnable doctrines of the Antinomians in our days doth tacitely invite the learned to joyn with him in prosecuting the same learned device As to the matter of these severall particulars somwhat yet not much is needfull to be said 1 To that of George Major c. Mr. Br. here discovereth fully what elswhere in this his Tractate he doth not totally hide his enmity and swelling against the first reformation of the Churches by Luther and others that hee accounts it a schismaticall defection not a due reformation Hee spares the names of Luther Zuinglius Calvin c. lest his spitting in their faces shâ—uld make his own odious to all knowing Christians But the Doctrine which he reprehendeth under the names of Illyricus Gallus Amsdorfius c. he knows to be the frme which those former Divines which all the Protestant Churches have taught and propugned Concerning Gallus either what he was or what he did I can give no account Illyricus is reported by some to have been somwhat hot and heady in prosecuting all that he undertook but that at any time he entred the lists with George Major I find not This I find that they both lived and conversed together at Jenes in the same University and were both adversaries to Strigelius a famous Divine unto whom between them they procured great persecution But Amsdorfius was one of those eminent instruments of Christ in the reformation who bare the burden and heat of the day was a Colleague with Luther in the University of Wittenberg at the first dawning forth of the Gospel his yoke-fellow in the laborâ— and in the sufferings of the Gospel both in prosperous and difficult times one and the same Holding fast the same principles which were laid in his heart while a young man even to his old age and death which God prolonged untill the 88. year of his age I know not any one professed Protestant that hath aspersed him for any thing that in all that time of so long a life he either committed or omitted as unworthy of a learned and faithful Minister of Christ until the candor of M. Br. hath now done it Truth it is that George Major in his time about a hundred years sithence when Luther was dead not daring so to do while he was living set forth some propositions and disputations of the necessity of good works to salvation and finding himself quickly encountred he after more fully explained himself or rather endeavoured to make his Doctrine the more smooth to be swallowed by allaying it thus That we are justified by faith only but not saved without works So that good works are necessary though not to justification yet to salvation At this his Doctrine as all the Churches and their Ministers were much offended so were there many that confuted it among others Strigelius Wigandus this Amsdorfius who wrote against him his Bona opera officiunt saluti Good works are hinderances of salvation A proposition I acknowledg not well sounding in words but the substance of Treatises is not to be judged alway from their Titles This work of Mr. B. hath a golden Title Aphorisms of Justification untill a man hath read the Book he would have supposed from the Title they had bin Aphorisms to maintain not to destroy Justification by free grace So on the other side the Paradoxical sound of Amsdorfius his titular position doth in no wise deny his Treatise thereon to be orthodox except Mr. Br. can produce any thing thence to prove that he affirms good works in themselves to be so and not only in the sense wherein George Major affirms them necessary to salvation Or why this Assereion stifly maintained by George Major should not be counted a heresie in him as well as in the Papists or the Pharisees before them I see no other reason but this that then Mr. Br. having more worthily deserv'd than he will be thought fit to be honoured with the Title of Doctor in the same profession 2 To that of Melchior Adamus I say no more but that the Testimony of an Adversary without proofes is unworthy or at least incompetent to bow our belief to it What wresting and curtilating there is of their sentences whom in this case such men would defame is obvious to every mans notice He should in stead of his Individuum vagum his quidam have named some singular persons at least have quoted some of their writings in which they have propugned such assertions that we might have searched and found whether it were so if he would have been believed Otherwise if these things were only for disputations-sake handled in the Schools this argues not the propugners to be of that judgment 3 What he saith of Melancton and Bucer whether it be true or false is of the like moment Be it that some crazie brains or corroding sonns of Momus with whom the world too much at all
times aboundeth envied because they could not match and sought to defame because they envied the excellent parts of these two Worthies was either of them so wise and learned as to run headlong from Christ to Rome upon it Nay this is a piece of learning which Mr. B. his Grotius have of very late yeers learned and taught The true servants of Christ in former times were so little scholasticall that they were ignorant in this Art Yet whether Melancton after the death of Luther gave not some occasion to the Protestant Churches to mourn till this day for the yet remaining fruits of his timorousness or as Mr. Br. will have us call it moderation I leave to the wise who are acquainted with the passage of those times to judg But I never understood any such thing imputed to Bucer or that he hath left any other but a sweet savour behind him Nor any thing that can so dim the worth of Melancton that his name should not be in continuall veneration among the Saints For who can say he is without his infirmities But in the point of Justification by Faith only he was sound till death 4 But what hee saith of the Antimonian Teachers what they preach at present and yet are magnified for the only preachers of Free Grace is that which startles Mr. Br. and makes him run many furlongs beyond Grotius If his hast had not put him out of breath he might have told us what places of England are haunted with these Spirits that we might have shunned them Why should a man of such animosity that scorns to look upon Colier Hobson Spriggs and such like fellows be so troubled about these unconsiderate animals which he here mentioneth what the former three are I do not know yet by what I have heard of them I should think them not so inconsiderate as these to affirm justifying faith to consist in a mans believing that he is justified or in a perswasion that God loveth him But that there are either more than one fountaine opened for the purging away of sinne or any other propitiation for our sins set forth by God Besides Christ alone or any other means to effectuallize it to the chief sinners besidâ—s faith in his blood or that the justification which is by Faith iâ— according to the tenor of the Gospel revocable I am so far an Antinomian of Mr. B. defining to deny and cannot find him so learned a Papist or Pharisee to prove it There is nothing else which I see in this Quere which he hath not in substance said and so hath been examined before or else will more properly offer it self to examination in that which remaineth to be examined And this shall suffice to have said to that one and yet five-fold Argument comprehended in his five Quere's CHAP. XIV Mr. Baxters last Argument drawn from the Testimony of many approved Authors Examined and Answered HIs last Argument is drawn from the testimony and authority of many eminent Divines in the Protestant Churches which he saith have taught and published this doctrine before him This Argument is principally urged not in the Aphorisms but the Appendix And although Mr. Br. tell us App. p. 111. that he alleageth them not to confirm his doctrine but to shew that he is not singular but hath the concurrent judgments of others therein And App. p. 167. 188. that he doth it to satisfie them which charge him with singularity not as an appeal to man Yet it is too evident that his purpose herein is to abuse the less knowing and considering part of his Readers with this more then with the most of his other Arguments Great names he knowes doe make deep impressions upon the fancies of men that have much of affection but little of judgment And that these look not so much to the matter as to the men Could they think Mr. Br. hath here said no more then these and these confessedly pious and learned Worthies have said before him they will take him for a blasphemer that shall say against him Therefore he musters together so many choyce vessels and pretious servants of Christ trusting to the either imbecility or credulity of his vulgar Readers that either they cannot or will not examin and compare these and Mr. B. together and then Mr. Br shall be taken to be of the same spirit with Dr. Preston Dr. Twisse Calvin Pareus Perkins and the other renowned Divines whom he alleageth and then also it must be all truth that he hath said after such men and whosoever shall oppose him must be brought forth to be stoned But where is the mans sincerity that will be justified by the morall sincerity of his obedience and works Was it not wholly banished from him when he cited these men as concurring in judgment with him when he knowes them all to detest his assertions against which we except more then death it self and that many of them have jeoparded and some of them laid down their lives and blood to give testimony to the contrary Assertions Or will Mr. B. name any one of these at whose judgment his doctrine shall stand or fall as true or erroneous Why doth he thus abuse the simple thereby discovering his impudent fallaciousness to the intelligent with whom elswhere he seeks chiefly to ingratiat himself But come we to the Testimonies which he alleageth Bax. 1 Mr. Wallis Faith is an accepting of Christ offered rather then a beleeving of a Proposition affirmed App. p. 111. Who hath denied this Or what is this to Justification by works It may possibly be something to the Question not considerately there proposed but nothing at all listing with that conclusion to which all the rest which he delivers are but preparatives Next to Mr. Wallis he alledgeth Dr. Preston at the end of the same page The six first Positions wherein he affirms him to speak the same thing with himself I see no sound reason why any should except against But if Mr. B. or Dr. Preston or Paul or an Angel from heaven shall deduce erratick and erroneous Conclusions from those Premisses they are not to be heard but resisted at the face None of the worst Hereticks but agree in some principles with the most Orthodox yet this nothing hinders but that the assertions in which they dissent may be altogether pernicious How far and how unanimously all the Protestant Churches maintain the seventh point wherein Mr. B. affirms this pious and learned Doctor to agree with him hath been before fully expressed in the examination of the fourth Argument So that it is useless here to run over so many passages of the Author from p. 112. to p. 117. of the Appendix to declare that this one man saith what all the rest say and hold with him viz. That justifying Faith is an accepting of Christ as Lord and Saviour But what is this to the substance of the question to which Mr. B. answereth Where it is objected to Mr. Br
is as smooth as Esau's hands as free from Popery Socinianism from all injurie against the grace of God all-sufficiency of Christs merits consolation of the Saints yea from all error whatsoever as Lazarus was from sores or the poor Gadaren from Devills that had but a legion of them within him That it agrees so harmoniously with the doctrine of Paul as light with darkness Christ with Belial and the Temple of God with Idols That in these things the Covenant of Grace consisteth indeed therefore invites all at the consideration of the innocency and profundity of this his Gospel to follow him in seeking a sure salvation by their own righteousness in the Curse of the Law To insist no longer upon generals I shall examine the particular Apologies which he makes for this his Doctrine of Justification by works to cleer it from the false imputations which the ignorant Antinomians that is in his Construction Luther Calvin Twisse Pemble and their followers might charge it withall His first Task which he appoints to himself is to vindicate it from having any smack of Popery how so doth not both he and they maintain in the same words that we are justified by works this he cannot deny But forsooth there is a great difference in this whose pen it is that drops the assertion The Papists do it with a quill of a Capitoline Mr. Br. with a quill of a Kederminster goose This alters the case saith Ploydon makes the same Proposition to be Popery and no Popery But let us hear himself speaking and multiplying his reasons why it must not be taken for Popery Br. Aphor. p. 304 305. How this differeth from the Popish Doctrine I need not tell any Scholar that hath read their writings 1 They take justifying for sanctifying so do not I. 2 They quite overthrow and deny the most reall difference between the Old Covenant and the New and make them in a manner all one But I build this Exposition and Doctrine chiefly upon the clear differencing and opening of the Covenants 3 When they say we are justified by the works of the Gospell they mean only that we are sanctified by works that follow faith and are bestowed by grace they meriting our inherent justice at Gods hands In a word there is scarce any one Doctrine wherein even their most learned Schoolmen are most sottishly ignorant then in this of Justification So that when you have read them with profit and delight on some other subjects when they come to this you would pitty them and admire their ignorance 4 They take our works to be part of our legal Righteousnes I take them not to be the smallest portion of it but only a part of our Evangelicall righteousness or of the condition upon which Christs righteousnes shall be ours Suppose all these things were true and the difference between him and the Papists were so great and manifold as in these particulars he pretendeth yet all this nothing evinceth his Doctrine not to be Popish especially among Scholars to whom he appealeth For 1 All this would but excuse him a tanto non a toto that in these particulars he is not though in many other and greater he be Popish 2 Though he differed from them in the premisses yet he is one with them in the conelusion Bellarmine brings his arguments and Stapleton his to prove that works justifie Are they not both Papists because their arguments differ when their Conclusion is one Mr. Br thinks that in some particulars his curious wit hath prompted him with a finer and surer way of demonstration to stablish Justification by works than ever entered into the Cardinals Cap or Cranion Doth this deny him to be a Papist because he speaks more for them than they could for themselves 3 Though Bellarmins and Brs. way of arguing do in some particulars differ yet is the later as great an opposite to the truth of the Gospell in his way as the former in his Both oppugn with their utmost strength the doctrine of grace though they divide the battell between them the one scaling from the North the other from the South 2 But it cannot be truly sayd that there are truly those reall differences between Mr. Brs. and the Papists Doctrine which hee here particularizeth For 1 Though in some of these particulars he speaks not the idem yet he speaks the Tantundem with them 2 Where he speaks not the very idem hee speaks more grosly Pharisaically and adversatively to the truth then they For the manifesting hereof let us particularly examine those particulars in which he saith he differs from them 1 Saith he They take justifying for sanctifying so do not I. 1 This speaks out their Doctrine to be more tolerable then his For the Scripture denies not the increase of sanctification to be in part by works which is all that the Papists hold But accurseth them that shall attribute Justification either in its beginning or growth if there were any such thing to works 2 It is not true that the Papists make whole or all Justification to consist in Sanctification For in their many divisions and distinctions of Justification among the rest they have this There is a first and a second justification The former of Infants and new Converts conferred in baptism This consists in remission of sins meerly by the blood of Christ sprinkled by the Spirit in Baptism upon Infants that are not of age actually to believe and received also by Faith by believing Converts in their Baptism The later end indeed they make to consist in the infusion of the habit of grace and sanctification when the justified man ex justo justior fit is more and more justified This will afterward be manifested So that all Scholars must acknowledg Mr. Br. to have the Tantundem and almost in every apex the Idem of this Doctrine Yea worse is his doctrine in this particular than theirs For he makes Sanctification and good works a Collateral with the righteousness of Christ in justifying They abandon this doctrine teaching that they are but fruits of Gods grace and Christs merits Thus he sets up vain man as Cheek-mate with Christ they set him at his foot-stool or appoint him to follow and apprehend the hemm of his garment to draw vertue from him though indeed to other and prouder ends then he hath ordained Br. They quite overthrow and deny the most reall difference between the Old Covenant and the New and making them in a manner one I build upon the clear differencing and opening of the Covenants 1 All this is said not shewed and proved 2 If the Papists did wholly as he saith Mr. Br. to every particle of what he charges them with might tune up the Poets Epigram Jam sumus ergo pares Jam sumus ergo pares In all this we shake hands What fouler confounding of the Covenants can there be then what Mr. Br hath committed when he makes DO and LIVE to be the voyce of
thing that firmly susteineth namely the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us and not on the holiness and grace inherent in our selves For this is unperfect c. therefore we cannot for it be counted Righteous before God But the imputed righteousness of Christ is a perfect righteousnes in which there is nothing that can offend the eyes of God but all things that can abundantly please him Vpon this alone therefore are we to rest as upon a thing sure and stable and to beleeve that by it alone we are justified 7 This may undoubtedly be affirmed and it is the opinion of all Divines that God can justifie men and make them pleasing and amiable to him without any inherent quality or habits infused 8 To the same purpose and somewhat more fully speaketh Bellarmine The guilt or obligation to punishment saith he may be taken away without the infusion of Righteousnes For nothing hinders by how much the less God can will the not ordeining to punishment and the pardoning of the offence and the not accounting him for an enemy to whom he hath not granted the gift of habituall Righteousness 9 The Scope of James in the second Chapter of his Epistle is to shew that we are justified not by a barren but by a fruitfull Faith 10 The meaning of James is not that Faith without works is dead c. For it is evident that we are justified by Faith even without works But his meaning is that Faith without works that is which refuseth to work or is noâ— disposed to work is a dead Faith vain and justifieth not What therefore James alleageth out of Gen. 15. Abraham beleeved God to this purpose he alleageth it that he beleeved being in readiness to work Therefore he saith that in the work of offering his Son the Scripture was fulfilled speaking of his Faith prepared to work It was fulfilled I say as to the execution of that great work to which his Faith was prepared 11 If any where in Scripture thou hearest reward or wages promised know that it is no otherwise due then by Gods promise freely he hath promised freely he gives If thou wilt abide in his Grace and Favour make no mention of thy Merits 12 All Papists consentingly make the Merits of Christ the foundation of mans merits as far as he can merit Neither Faith nor works nor doing nor sufferings say they have any other vertue to merit then what they receive from the merits of Christs death then as they are dipt in his blood this makes them acceptable to the Father 13 When Christ saith of the woman Luk. 7. 47. Many sins are forgiven her for she loved much it is to be understood not that she loved much and so her much love was the cause of her great forgiveness but contrarywise that because many sins were forgiven her therefore she loved much 14 To be given freely and to be a retribution to works are as much opposit as that which is free and that which is from Justice or as not due and debt And this way of inference the Apostle useth in the beginning of this 4th Chapter viz. speaking of Justification by Grace 15 The work of Justice is wages or Reward and this way of Justice Grace excludeth whose work is meer gift or Donation 16 In this verse the Apostle concludeth that Christ hath saved us from all the evill both of fault and punishment That there is nothing of condemnation remaining to them that are in Christ because all judgment is taken away both to the fault and the punishment 17 It is certain that when originall sin is remited that the evils which it brought are not remitted and taken away as all finde by experience Notwithstanding they remain not under the consideration of punishment because the fault being taken away there can be no desert as to punishment remaining 18 I will remember their iniquities no more saith the Lord i. e. I will neither in this world injoin any Penance for them nor in that which is to come inflict any punishment for them So hath the Holy Ghost promised that our sins shall be forgiven by the New Covenant of Grace 19 In regard of the uncertainty of our own righteousness and the danger of vain glory it is most safe to repose our whole confidence in the sole mercy and benignity of God Baxter THe bare act of beleeving is not the onely condition of the New Cardinall Contarenus in Rom. 4. Covenant but severall other duties also are parts of that Condition The Common opinion that justifying faith as justifying doth consist in any one single act is a Wretched Mistake by the one act of faith he means Faith in opposition to works Aph. p. 235 248. Faith it self is our righteousnesse viz. our Evangelicall as Christ is our Legall Righteousnesse It self Toletus a Iesuite upon Rom. 3. is imputed to us for righteousnesse Aph. p. 125 126. It justifieth as it is an act of ours and as it is a morall duty App. p. 80. 102. Both Faith and workes make up one condition one righteousness one perfect righteousness of our own by Cardinall Cajetan upon Rom. 3. which we merit to be justified by God by the legall righteousness which is in Christ And consequently Faith doth not lean upon anothers and works upon their own righteousness but both make up one compounded righteousness and goodness which make us righteous and good also and by this righteousness and goodness deservers of justification salvation Aph. Thes 17 18 19 20 23 24 26. and scatteringly throughout the whole Book Faith as an act of ours and of it self with other workes procureth Righteousness And God hath used Toletus the Iesuit up on Rom. 1. works to justifie as he hath used faith even in the same kinde of causality So we have found Mr. Br. oft affirming as may be seen in our former quotations Let him deny that he holds the consequents of these two Antecedents if he will It is so far from being an error to affirm that Faith it self is our righteousness that it is a truth necessary for every Christian to know yea it both is our Righteousnesse and is imputed to us for righteousnesse The very personall performance of faith shall be imputed to us for a sufficient personall payment of righteousnes Idem in Rom. 4. as if we had paid the full duty and righteousnesse which the Law requireth This is the substance of his words though not his very words which being continued in terms of a Metaphor cannot without the citing of the whole similitude be expressed to the understanding otherwise Aphor. p. 125 126 129. There is a two-fold righteousnesse attainable by Christ at least in words the one an inherent righteousnesse in our selves consisting in the seed and acts of Faith Love Holinesse c. the other in Christ but made over to beleevers by Gods Donation if not imputation Both of these are absolutely necessary to salvation neither is
the one perfect and the other Contarenus Card. in Tractat. de Justif unperfect as to justification but the inherent perfect in its kinde as well as the imputed so that both in their kinds of causality are to be rested on as things sure to support us to justification before God and we are as truly justified by and for the inherent as the imputed righteousnesse if the righteousnesse which is in Christ meriteth a possibility of the justification of a sinner before God he must by his inherent and actuall righteousnesse merit the actuall application of Christs righteousnesse and justification by it else he cannot be justified Mr. Br cannot deny every particle of this doctrine to be his own in words at length that hath been already manifested in those former these latter quotations The inherent righteousnesse is absolutely necessary to salvation Aph. Medina in 1. 2. Qu. 110. â— 2 4. Thes 17. Otherwise justification from eternity also would peep in and then Actum est c. And if absolutely necessary how can God justifie without it Manum a tabula this is enough to wipe out Bellarmine from Mr. Brs Kalender of Saints A whole ile of Salt is too little to season Bell. de Justif lib. 1. cap. 16. this passage It overthrowes the great Goddesse Condition so pretious to Mr. Br. and erects that Image of Iealousie in its place justification an immanent act in God For if God may justifie where there is no infused righteousnesse where then is the condition Then is the justification in God and not termined on the Conscience of the justified but Bellarmine hath his time to deny it again els Actum esset de Amicitia Except apparent violence be used Caâ—etan on Iames. with this Chapter c. iâ— cannot be doubted but that a man is justified by works and not by Faith onely Thes 75. James saith that Faith is dead being alone because it is dead to the use and purpose of justifying For in it self it hath a life according to its quality still c. And so works make Faith alive as to the attainment of Cajetan â—bidem its end justification Works therefore justifie not onely proving our Faith to be sound but themselves being in the obligation as well as Faith and in the same kind of causality and procurement with Faith Salmero on cap. 2. Iac. though not in equality with it which I prove thus When it is said we are justified by works the word by implyeth more then an idle concomitancy c. as I have before alledged him p. 229 230. Mr. B. makes the promise of God an obligation by which God is bound to man so that man may challenge God for debt pronouncing the performers worthy their performances Fryar Ferur on Mat. 20. 1. merit Yea scarce admits of any one drop of Gods blessings to discend upon the good or bad which he ascribes not to some kind of mans merits Aph. p. 137-141 Mr. B. contrariwise ascribes all the meritorious vertue of mans works to their own righteousnes leaving man so long naked of the righteousnes which is by Christ untill he hath by his own strong indeavours merited it so that according to his doctrine the application of Christs merits to any is the fruit of that mans merits and not the mans merits the fruit of Christs merits this is cleer from the former allegations M. Br. interprets it the contrary way Aph. p. 236. as the understanding Reader will easily perceive Let all judge that have but a mite of reason whether Soarez Bishop on the place this man hath any awe of the Scripture which so abuseth it yet cries out upon others as faulty To use his own words he may as well make a Creed of his own whatsoever the word saith to the contrary There is no such opposition Justification is from the ordinate Salmero disp 35. ad Rom. justice of God and the fruit of the merit of our righteousnes yet a free gift of free grace nevertheless So he declares his judgment in the fore-cited places Mr. Br. directly teacheth the contrary doctrine throughout Dominicus a Soto in Rom. 4. his Book every where solving the absurdity of his doctrine by his conditions Nay he hath not so saved freed us from the punishment and curse but that they that are in Christ must bear it both Soto Salmero Aquinas â— upon Ro 8. 1. in soul and body As his alledged words before declare Mr. B. asserts the contrary doctrine and propugneth it with ten Arguments which Vasquez in 3. ThoÌ„ disp 156. cap. 3. de paenalitatibus have been examined in the first part of this Tractate Nay the beleevers sins tho pardoned yet are but conditionally pardoned so that they Anselm are still in Gods remembrance to inflict the curse and punishment of the Law upon them as the curse in life and death giving them no full discharge till the day of judgment The place hath been cited before So to repose our confidence Bellarmine on sole mercy and grace is a soul-cozening Faith Aph. p. 326. He must be undoubtedly damned that doth not work and obey to be justified and saved by and for his obedience and works ibid. p. 325. compared with p. 300. 320. Let now not only Schollars to whom Mr Br appealeth to judg of his freedom from Popery but with them all rationall and conscientious men give their verdict whether he be not so cleer as Pilate when he had washed his hands was from the blood of Christ and whether the better Divinity come from Rome or from Kederminster CHAP. XVIII Whether Mr. Baxters Plea here be of sufficiency to prove his Doctrine free from Socinianism THe second aspersion of infamy from which he endeavours to vindicate his doctrine is Socinianism This hee goeth about to do in these words Bax. p. 306. But what difference is there betwixt it and the Socinian doctrine of Justification Answ In some mens mouths Socinianism is but a word of reproach or a stone to throw at the head of any man that saith not as they Mr. Wotton is a Socinian and Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Gataker and Mr. Goodwin and why not Piscator Pareus c. if some zealous Divines know what Socinianism is But I had rather study what is Scripture-truth than what is Socinianism I do not thinke that Faustus was so infaustus as to hold nothing true That which he held according to Scripture is not Socinianism For my part I have read little of their writings but that little gave me enough and made me cast them away with abhorrence In a word The Socinians acknowledg not that Christ had satisfied the Law for us consequently is none of our legall righteousness but only hath set us a Copie to write after and is become our pattern and that we are justified by following him as a Captain and guide to heaven and so all our proper
Righteousness is in this Obedience Most accursed Doctrine so far am I from this that I say The Righteousness which we must plead against the Laws Accusation is not one grain of it in our Faith or Works but all out of us in Christs satisfaction Only our Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience are the conditions upon which wee must partake of the former And yet such conditions as Christ worketh in us frely by his Spirit How forcible and unresistible is the power of Conscience flying in the face of the guilty and accusing where men applaud or at least hold their peace Who either of men or Angels could have charged Mr. Br. for saying that which he had not yet said or for venting Socinian Doctrine in his writings before he had yet written What none els can do M. Br. is forced by Conscience to do against himself to arraign himself at the Bar for Socinianism Conscience is the accuser what Patron will he retein to be his defender Nothing out of himself can suffice to answer an accuser within himself Therefore he fees Reason that is his sophisticated and sopisticall wit art and craft to plead his Cause against Conscience The first of these exceptions which these make for him against the Charge is the abuse which some make of this imputation laying it upon all that speak not as they But 1. This is besides the Charge These some had not then spoken against Mr. Br. it is the accusation of his own conscience which he should have answered and he hnows it not to have confederated with those some of whom he speaketh 2. I know none of those some that have layd that aspersion upon any of those Divines which he mentioneth save one and that one I suppose would be very angry with any other man in England M. Br. alone excepted that should go about to rob him of that honour which Mr. Br. calls a reproach It is for brotherhoodssake that he hears it from him 3. But his craft herein is to befool his Readers with an opinion that he is of the same judgment with Pareus Wotton Gataker c. of whom they that are dead have as much shewed their abhorrency from and opposition against his Doctrines as any that have lived upon earth And those that are living if they be consistent with themselves in their former writings whereof I nothing doubt are as far from Mr Br. as he is from Christ and his truth 4. His jeer that he casteth upon them that are Adversaries to his Doctrine terming them Zealous Divines infinuating that they have zeale without knowledg and learning I leave as proper to him that in that way of wisdom and righteousness which his own reason either as refined with Philosophy or corrupted with Sophistry suggesteth seeks for justification and eternall glory Let us be accounted fools to the world and no bodies in that which is falsly called science so that we may be wise in and zealous for that which is the power and wisedom of God to salvation The second Plea which he makes for himself is the singlenes and sincerity of his studies bent rather to seek out what is Scripture truth than what is Socinianism that he thinks that Socinus his Nature Studies and Attainments did not so much vary from his name Faustus the happy that he should be so unhappy as to hold nothing true and consequently that neither himself is so unhappy but that he hath learned some Truths from this happy Socinus and perhaps such as he could never learn from Christ his Apostles or faithfull Ministers But 1. This may be said of Faustus the Conjurer who by giving himself to the Devill did not exterminate all notions of all truths from his soul Will Mr Br. be his Disciple also Both had the like effectuall influence from Satan neither know I which to prefer 2. Who sent Mr. Br. to learn from such Teachers to seek for light in darkness or Heaven in Hell or Scripture-Truth in the precept of Pagans or glosses of Papists or Socinus his God Reason Is it not because there is no God in Israel that he goes to enquire of Baal-zebab the God of Ekron 2 King 1. 3. The Lord Jesus rebuketh silenceth and refuseth to hear the Spirit of lies even when hee speaks truth Mar. 1. 23 24 25. and abandoneth the spirituall Devil no less than if he had blasphemed Mat. 4. So also Paul Acts 16. 16-18 The truth of Christ needs not any disdains all props from Hell to sustain it He that will not dip from the fountain but at the pools which the unclean beasts have defiled let him without our envy have mudd and dung enough in the water which he drinketh 3. It is much to be doubted the mans heart deceives him Were his studie so unfeigned and serious to know what is Scripture truth he would more study the Scripture it self and less Bellarmin Socinus Arminius and such like Sophisters whose whole study it is to corrupt all and to leave no Scripture unperverted 4. Had he not ploughed with Socinus his Heyfers or rather Bulls he could never have sowed so much darnell in the field of Christ The third Plea which he bringeth to prove that his Doctrine is free from Socinianism is because there is one point wherein hee dissenteth from Secinus That Socinus and his followers deny any expiatory sacrifice that Christ hath offred to God to satisfie his Justice for our sins or that ther is any effectual vertue in Christs death to purge our Consciences from dead works But that he becomes our Saviour only in this that he hath given us more perfect precepts of Righteousness than were contained in the Law and the Prophets and withall he hath given us a Copie or pattern by his own practice to which we must be conformed And so we must be justified not by the blood of Christ but by our own obedience in following these precepts and this pattern which he hath given us In this point Mr. Br. professeth himself so farr from joyning with him that hee casteth off this Doctrine with abhorrence But this reasoning hath no soundness in it For 1 It is the same as if I should argue that Goliah was not of the race of the Giants because he had not upon each hand six fingers and upon each foot six toes at some of the Giants progeny had and possibly the Giant himself Or that Mr. Br. should seek by this Argument to prove himself no English-man because he dwels neerer the Severn than Thames So also might the Jews elude the words of Christ and Elymas the words of Paul as slanderous arguing themselves not to be the children of the Devill because they had flesh and bone so had not the Devill They had never carried Christ aloft and set him on a pinacle of the Temple fearing they might fall headlong thence themselves so had the Devill The seed the Lusts of the Devil abiding and reigning in them spake them
hine libet it makes me not onely to wish but even to hold my self almost in a desart as impatient of the company of some of our distinctionary Rabbies that admire and are ready to blesse themselves at the wit and profoundness of such wilde barbarous prophane senseless distinctions of this incomparable man that hath not his Peer in England when in this piece of his worth there is not a ploughboy so rustick but would easily whistle so prophanely in this kinde as he And if the reason were given to Mr. Br. why he is in this artifice more full than others it might be given in the Poets words Non tibi plùs cordis sed minùs oris in est Bax. pa. 309. 3 Paul doth by the word Faith especially direct your thoughts to Christ beleeved in For to be justified by Christ and to be justified by receiving Christ is with him all one Though I might except in some sense against this assertion yet because I cannot apprehend waking what he dreams sleeping how he will from this assertion prove that Paul either doth not exclude works from Justification or doth not attribute it to Faith alone I leave it unexamined If by Receiving Christ he means our taking him as our Lord to be obeyed in all his Commandments that we might thereby be justified enough hath been said before in the examination of his 66 72 73 Thes in answer to the fourth Argument that he brings for justification by works unto it I refer the reader Bax ibid. 4 And when he mentioneth Faith as the Condition he alwayes implyeth Obedience to Christ Therefore beleeving and obeying the Gospel are put for the two summaries of the whole Conditions The vanity and falsity of this assertion hath been discovered in the examination of his 62 70 Theses in which is Comprehended his 2 Argument for Justification by works What is there said being perused will take off I suppose from the reader all expectation of any more to be here said to it Onely by the way all may note 1 That what he saith here labours of the same disease with the former it is onely said not proved We must all sit at the Feet of this Gamaleel and beleeve because this great Doctor and Magister noster hath spoken it 2 That although it be the Popish Cause which he here mainteineth yet he with a holy Craft makes use rather of the Arminian than Popish Phrase the more easily to beguile the simple Calling works not as the Papists do plainly Works but Obedience to Christ and Obedience to the Gospel How doth he fitt his bait to be swallowed by gudgeons that cannot discern a line from a halter He knows there is a generation of men that detest swines flesh yet feed every morning upon pistles of pork as the greate â—â—elicacie Change the name and they disaffâ—ct not the substâ—nâ—e 3 Yet what he here saith he hath received in matter though notiâ—n words from Stapleton the Priest and his fellows We are justâ—â—ed saith the Apostle by Faith not by works i. e. saith Stapletâ— not by works without faith but by works and Faith that is saith Mr. Br. not by works or obedience out of Faith but by works implyed in Faith Let him that can decide which of these two is the finer Sophistâ—r and Papist 4 And no less harmoniously do Pauls words and Mr. Brs exposition and distinction upon them agree together than a harp and a harrow Paul affirms Justification or imputation of Righteousness to be without works Rom 4. 6 Mr. Br expounds his meaning to be without works which are not but by works that are implyed in Faith As good a distinction as if I should distinguish between the brains that a man hath out of his head and the brain which he hath in his head How great is his self-Confidence that he should think such absurd distinctions should take with any rationall man onely upon this Authority because such a Cathedral scholar hath said it And when Paul saith so frequently Not by works but by Faith he should mean by Faith works also implyed in Faith This were to affirm that Paul in the delivery of the sacred doctrine of the Gospel speaks by Contraries and that what things he setts in opposition we must take to be in a Conjunction so that if he had said a man seeth with his eyes not with his heels we must understand him to mean that he seeth with his eyes and heels together or with his heels implyed in his eyes What he addeth of beleeving and obeying the Gospel that they are the two summaries of the Gospel hath been before examined and both found to be the same thing Obedience to the Gospel being nothing else but the hearts submission to the voyce of Christ and doctrine of the Gospel in stretching forth faith to apprehend Christ alone to Justification illumination sanctification c. resting upon him both for salvation and for grace and power to walk worthy of it as hath been more fully before expressed Thus much in way of examination of the third part of his vindication viz. that his doctrine in nothing dissents from Pauls And in this poynt I doubt not but we have found Paul and him no less Cohering than Christ and Antichrist CHAP. XXII Whether there be any validity in Mr. Brs Apologizing for his Doctrine that it is not derogatory from the Righteousness of Christ THe 4th part of his vindication is to free his doctrine of Justification by works from being derogatory to Christ and his righteousness Here unto his endeavours bend in many parts of this his Tractate In stead of all I shall mention onely two or three places which Comprehend the summe and whole of all the rest Bax. pa. 307. The Righteousness which we must plead against the Lawes accusations is not one grain of it in our Faith or works but all out of us in Christs satisfaction Again Appendix pa. 78. Our dooing or works are required not to be any part of our Legall Righteousness nor any part of satisfaction for our unrighteousness but to be our Gospel Righteousness or the Condition of our participation in Christ who is our Legall Righteousness and so of all the benefitts that come with him What his meaning is he expresseth Aphor. Thes 79. pa. 313. in a Syllogism thus This Doctrine is no whit derogatory to Christ and his Righteousness For He that ascribeth to Faith or obedience no part of that work which belongeth to Christs satisfactory righteousness doth not derogate in that from that Righteousness But he that maketh Faith and Obedience to Christ to be onely the fullfilling of the Conditions of the New Covenant and so to be onely Conditions of Justification by him doth give them no part of the work of his Righteousness Seeing he came not to fulfill the Gospel but the Law Ergo c. I shall speak onely to the Syllogism because in it is fully Comprehended all that Mr. Br. hath
Gospel Condition and necessary Antecedents to be really but a Cloke to hide his diminution of Christ and exaltation of sinfull man A Syrens song to draw poor souls to dash against the Rocks and be drowned in the gulph Why had he not made our works conjunctly vvith Christs satisfaction in his Thes 56. the procatarctick and meritorious cause of our Justification as well as he doth the satisfaction of Christ conjunctly with our Faith or obedience in the same Thesis the Causa ssne qua non thereof Had he so done could he have ascribed more to vvorks under the name of a Meritorious cause then he doth under the title of a poor improper Causa sine qua non But by so doing he should have shewed himself in the light when contrariwise he that doth evill hateth the light neither cometh to the light lest his deeds should be reproved Let now any of his Disciples produce I will not say one Arminian but one Socinian Papist yea or Jew that ascribes more to works then this man in derogation from Christ and Grace else let him cease to be a follower of him or openly and ingenuously profess that he followeth him as a Jew Papist or Socinian and consequently that he hath made not Mr. Br. but Mr Brs Masters his Master also in the doctrine of Justification And that in advancing self so high as to affirm he meriteth no less fully and properly then Christ himself hath or could have done For his merits are in order to Gods ordinate not naturall justice But to shew the vanity of his distinction here how carelesly he eludeth the holy Scriptures as meer shaddows and play-games the Apostle denyeth man in this or that or in any sense to be justified by works He saith not Not by works as the efficient or meritorious cause or as the Medium or Antecedent or Condition or Causa sine quâ— non lest any man should boast but positively and peremptorily not by Works as by Faith yea not by works in any acceptation upon any score and accompt Mr. Brs chippings therfore have no more force then a chip to make the Holy Ghost to unsay what he hath said And it is as good sense as if I should say Mans bread doth not apparrell him as it is the maker or matter or instrument or merit of his clothing but as it is the antecedent or medium or condition or Causa sine qua non of his apparrelling when contrariwise it doth not at all in any sense apparrell him CHAP. XXIV Mr. Baxters Sophism to prove that his Doctrine of Justification by Works doth not at all derogate from the Doctrine of Faith examined and found to be meer vanity BEcause the Scripture attributeth Justification to Faith without works and to Faith in opposition to works excluding works and requiring Faith alone to apprehend the Righteousnesse which is by Christ and denominating it the Righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. The Righteousnesse which is of Faith Rom. 9. 30. 10. 6. in opposition to the Righteousnesse of works He easily seeth that he shall be excepted against for his antiscripturall doctrine in making Faith and works Concomitants in the same kind of causality and procurement of Justification Therefore he makes it his sixth task to vindicate this his doctrine from all derogation from Faith and from all unscripturall confounding of Faith and works together To prove himself as innocent in this as in all the rest he brings these Reasons B. Thes 62. 1 Because though he makes Works and Faith to be the Conditions of our Justification yet according to Scripture phrase Faith may be called the onely Condition of the New Covenant 1 Because it is the principall Condition and works but the lesse principall And so as a whole Countrey hath oft its name from the chief City so may the Conditions of this Covenant from Faith 2 Because all the rest are reducible to it Either being presupposed as necessary Antecedents or means or conteined in it as its parts properties or modifications or else implyed as its immediate products or necessary subservient means or consequents All without Book one of Mr Brs Mysticks that hath no one sound of Gods word patronizing or favouring it Witnesse Mr. Br. who neither in his Thesis nor in its Explication hath alledged one Scripture to make it good Is Pythagoras come among us in a new body speaking nothing but Parables and Paradoxes which vulgar capacities can no more comprehend then they can Plato's Idea's or Democritus his Atomes If so it shall be needfull for him to injoin upon his Schollars as he did of old five years dumbnesse or silence Els if the mouth of a very Asse should be open it would rebuke the madnesse of the Prophet for delivering things so contradictive to the word to himself and to reason 1 To the word and the Holy Ghost speaking by it who every where opposeth Faith and works as to Justification making them to exclude not to infer or imply either the other By faith therefore not at all by works not by works therefore by faith alone But this man puts them in a conjunction makes Faith and works together the Condition of our justification from thence to conclude that Faith is the onely Condition and justifieth alone So much a greater Artist is Mr. Br. then the Holy Ghost and so ambitious of the praise of wisedome that he thinks himself to be but a vulgar idiot if his wisdom be not stretched Nine whole words by measure beyond and above the wisedom of the Holy Ghost 2 Contradictive to himself For Aph. p. 300. He denyeth that which he calleth an idle Concomitacny of works with Faith that they onely stand by while Faith doth all and concludes that they act together with faith in the same kind of causality to procure Justification and so denyeth that we are justified by Faith onely Here contrariwise he denyeth all such co-working of works with Faith but that faith may be said to be the onely Condition and to justifie onely 3 Contradictive to reason also and yet this next to Condition he seems to honour as the greatest God it must be to the Goats and sheep of the mountains not to Christs sheep to men that have reason that Mr. Br. must deliver this doctrine That we are justified not by faith alone but by works also yet it stands nevertheles as a firm Maxim faith is the onely condition or justifieth alone If the lips were shut and sealed up yet reason would use a ventriloquy or force a way thorow the ears to reclaim against such an absurdity If I should so reason of Condemnation the contrary to Justification that when the blind lead the blind and both fall into the ditch when seducers pervert those that are made to be taken and destroyed and so all utterly perish and are damned That tho all are damned yet it is but the leader and seducer alone that is damned he for all that he hath
seduced and they all but damned in him their principall and leader Would not Mr. Br be one of the first that would cry out at such an Arguing as absurd and not Logicall Yet because he is a man made up of the very spirits of Reason and brings his Reasons that his Assertion agrees with right reason according to the tenor of the Gospel I shall produce two or three in steed of many Gospel Scriptures and lay by them his Reasons to see how pertinently they will agree as a Commentary with the Text. The Holy Ghost tells us Eph. 2. 8 9. We are saved by Grace through faith not of works lest any man should boast Mr. Br. Comments upon this Text thus i. e. Principally by Faith least any man should boast principally of himself But not of works principally to exclude this principall boasting yet lesse principally of works also that man may also boast lesse principally of himself Or thus according to his second reason Of Faith and not of works unreducible to Faith lest any should boast yet of works also that by some relation or cognation are reducible to Faith that of such works we might boast Shall we call this a hatchet or a Comment upon the Text. Which of these Explications is the more absurd Or as if in this latter that runs more smoothly then the former we might not conclude so wisely of any morall vertue or duty When we are said to be justified by any or all good qualifications and works we are said to be justified by Mercy or Chastity or Wisdom onely because all other vertues and works are reducible to this by some one or other kind of relation or cognation Again Rom. 4. 16. It is of faith that it may be of grace the Antithesis whereof is given ver 4. Not of works that it might not be of debt The Comment which Mr. Brs first reason gives to this Text is Nay it is both of Faith and works works are comprehended in Faith as the lesse principall in the principall So that the meaning of the Text is that it is principally of Faith that it may be principally of Grace but lesse principally of works that at least less principally it may be of debt also His second reason thus Comments It is of Faith that is of Faith and works reducible to Faith that it may be of Grace not of works unreducible to faith such as are murther witchcraft Sodomy blasphemy c. that it may not be of debt Again Tit. 3. 5. Not by works of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us i. e. saith Mr. Br. Not principally by our works but according to his mercy Yet lesse principally by our works and not according to his mercy Or not by works of righteousnesse done by us that are not but according to Gods mercy that is reducible to Faith What else to make of it when he hath taught me I may divulge I might annex many Texts of the same nature upon which these two reasons of his set as Comments will speak out so much of sense as the Commentator doth in them of Conscience But I have fully both examined and anâ—wered before all that is comprised in this Thesis where I took occasion to weigh every branch thereof under the notion of his second Argument which he brings to prove Justification by works To it I refer the reader for fuller satisfaction B. 2 That he doth not derogate from faith in yoking works with it in the joynt procurement of justification because he doth not ascribe to works an equall part with it in this office or businesse but makes faith the more principall and works but the lesse principall part of the Condition granting our first Justification to be chiefly by faith and the second Justification onely by Obedience and ascribing the beginning or first point of Justification to faith alone and but the continuance and consummation thereof to works Aphor. Thes 74. p. 302 311 312. And in many other parts of his Book All this hath been fully and oft answered before Here onely I shall intreat the reader to retein in mind what hath been before pointed at 1 That the Gospel mentioneth not knoweth not any such distinction of a first and second Justification by Christ but speaks onely of one justification That this doubling of Justifications is but a juggling fancy of the Papists by them first created and by Mr. Br. licked into a finer mode and form for the pillaring up of their Justification by works which hath no proppage from the word 2 That according to Mr. Brs principles who caseth both together in one kind of causality it cannot be discerned how otherwise then by bare and glozing words any pre-eminence can be given so as duly to belong to Faith above and before works in this businesse 3 That even where and in what respects Mr. Br. gives a pre-eminence it belongeth more properly to works then to Faith Because the consummation and perfitting of Justification is so far more excellent then the beginning thereof as that which is perfect then that which is unperfect And herein he equalizeth and in som phrases seems to prefer works to Faith in their operation to perfect what is begun 4 That the Scripture affirms not onely the first but also the last point and period the consummation as well as the beginning of Justification to be by Faith By the Gospel the righteousnesse of God viz. which he giveth us to Justification is revealed from Faith to Faith saith the Apostle he saith not from Faith to works but from Faith to Faith that is omitting other Interpretations partly ridiculous and partly invalid and besides the scope of the Apostle from Faith inchoat to Faith growing and consummat or coming neerer and neerer to consummation This Exposition the choicest of our Divines give as both properly agreeing with the drift of the Text and as owned and patronized by the like phrase in other Scriptures From strength to strength Psal 88. 7. From glory to glory 2 Cor. 3. 18. which even all acknowledge to be understood from one to another from a lesser to a greater degree of strength and glory So also of this phrase from faith to faith And thus not onely the beginning but also the increase and consummation of Gospel Justification in our own Consciâ—nces before God is here attributed to Faith which as it groweth to more and more strength by apprehending more and more revelations of the Gospel so it more and more declareth and evidenceth to the soul the certainty of our Justification to the continuall stablishment and increase of our peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And thus the Magis and Minus is in us not in God and whatsoever of increase there is is from Faith not from works Nay the same Apostle tels us it is a most unglorious task which this uncomparably wise and profound man undertakes viz. to teach them that are wise
he fights against natural reason perswading men never more to eat because their meat is not appointed to Clothe them or to walk naked because he saith their garments are not usefull to nourish them No more Cause hath Mr. Br. or the Papists to accuse us that we banish good works from the life of a Christian by teaching that they are not usefull or appropriated to justifie but to sanctifie very usefull in all the particulars before-mentioned How unacquainted with the frame of a Christian spirit are these objectors Either they do not experimentally know or else do stifle within themselves this knowledge that a Christ-enjoying and Gospellized soul gaspeth no less for deliverance from the bondage than from the Condemnation of sinn delights so much in performing duty to Christ as in receiving pardon from him groanes so pathetically under the body as ever he did under the guilt of sinn Cryeth with equall vehemency of affâ—ctionâ— for holiness unto God as for happiness with him for Conformity to him in righteousness as in glory makes no other use of his redemption than to run at liberty the race of obedience set before him embraceth and delighteth in sanctifying as well as in saving grace in the infusion as in the imputation of righteousness labours to dispense all for the Lord and his service whatsoever he hath received from the Lord and his free grace Therefore whatsoever the Lord powrs upon him to sanctification is received with so great joy in the Holy Ghost as that which is communicated to him to justification and he labours to be and express himself wholly Christs as well as to obtein Christ wholly his As for Mr. Brs meerly Morall Men that will receive Christ neither to Justification nor to sanctification but upon their own terms purchasing him by Fine and rent that the glory might be partly theirs and not wholly Christs It is enough that Mr. Br. hardens and subverts them in this their Moral madness wholly contradictive to the spirituallness and wisdome of the Gospel We shall not be insnared by all the nicities of his Arts and Chimicall extracts of the spirits of his spoyling Philosophy to involve our selves with him in the guilt of poysoning so many souls and turning their best righteousness and devotion into sinn by encouraging them to appropriate the same to such an end as is destructive to the glory of Gods grace and contrary to the minde and rule of the Gospel We have one Master which is Christ his dictates expressed by him and his Apostles in the plainness and foolishness of their preaching are so sacred and authoritative with us that neither the most labyrinthical mazes of sophistry shall unwinde us nor the extravagancies of the most luxuriating witts nor the most Curious plausibilities of humane reason shall by Gods Grace unreason us so from our selves as to undisciple us from him Yea though we could not in some things give a satisfactory answer to the sophisticated reasonings of these disputers against Christ and his Gospel yet should we fit down as fools with Christ and his Apostles adoring the manifold wisdome of God revealed in a mystery rather than be wise with these men to the world knowing that the foolishness of God is wiser and the weakness of God is stronger than men And we seek wisdome and happiness from the mines of Christs Gospel not from the dry quarrie of mans literature and inventions 2 Though we reject it as an arrogant and presumptuous doctrine which Mr. Br. in Common with the Papists teacheth That we are justified and saved by our good qualifications and works for our works for the merit and worthinesse of our good works yet we teach and believe that they are in respect of all that have age ability and time to perform them necessary Consequents of our Justification and Antecedents of our glorification Let a man pretend what he will of Faith in Christ yet if by Faith hee do not cleave firmly to him to derive from him power to mortifie every sinn to perform all duty if he can allow within himselfe any known evill or continue in the neglect of any known duty without striving to get the victory in the strength of Christs Spirit over every such infirmity wee take such a man so farr from Christ as Christ is from Belial A branch in Christ not bearing fruit which is appointed to be cut off and cast into the fire because he was never in Christ otherwise but by a formall profession never had vitall union to him or communion with him by the ligatures of Faith and the Spirit For sanctification is an individual companion of Justification And the office of Christ is to be the Author of both to all that believe Otherwise the work of his Mediator-ship should not be compleated in either one of these and so he should not be our Christ if a halfe Christ only to us And Sanctification is still begun and carried on towards perfection also where there is time and meanes in the kingdom of Grace before its perfecting and swallowing up into glory in the Kingdom of glory No righteousness and holiness of man is begun in the next life But there shall be the consummation in power of that which here was begun in truth though it laboured of and languished with much infirmity 3 Wee are guiltless of those Crimes wherewith Mr. Br. endeavours to defame us and our Doctrine For 1. Neither doe wee teach or think as M. Br. suggesteth that nothing is preaching Christ but preaching him as a pardoning justifying Saviour Aph. pa. 328. Indeed we preach Justification to consist if not only yet chiefly in the pardon of sinn through the mediation of Christs death That this benefit of Christ is perfected by the satisfaction which he hath made to Gods justice in suffering for us and appropriated to us by faith alone But wee deny this to be all the Gospel-grace exhibited to us by Christ and in and through him We hold him forth as the Light of the world also having all the treasures of wisedom and knowledg hid in him Joh. 8. 12. Col. 2. 3. from whom are all the irradiations and Revelations of all the mysteries of Grace effectuall to life and holiness Mat. 13. 11. 1 Cor. 2. 10. And to the word and spirit of Christ we send all men for illumination And the Life of the world not only to restore them to life in law by Justification but as the Lord and principle of Life to beget in us an inherent life active and moving to all obedience Therefore we endeavour to send all to Christ for life even for this life because the whole judgment and dispensation thereof is committed to him and he is our all to sanctification also Joh. 5. 21 22 25 26. Col. 3. 11. We indeed except against that Doctrine as more Legal than Evangelical that roars thunders Condemnation against poor Exiles in a dry wilderness where is no water fainting and even dead with
the New Man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness Eph. 4. 20. 24. If Mr. Br. had been taught of God as the truth is in Jesus I should think he would not have put at least upon deliberation left in print such a question and bold Cavill against the Apostle yea against Christ himself Object But if good works will neither justifie nor save me why should I do them and not take the liberty to do what I list Answ The voyce of a Rebel against God who if hee may not serve God to his own ends will not serve him at all and professeth openly that he doth all that he doth in Gods work not for Gods sake but for his own sake An Objection more deserving to be answered with a Thunder-bolt than with Scripture-reason Yet may there be alledged many other most holy and honourable ends for which we are to do good works though we be not justified and saved by them These I had thought here to have particularized but the work is swoln already to a bignes and dimension never intended at first And this Task hath been already so fully performed by so many of our Protestant Writers in answer to the Papists that I should but glean after them to say a little but begin a new work if I should say all that they have sayd and might be said to this purpose I therefore transmit the Reader for his full satisfaction to read Calv. Instit lib. 3. Cap. 16. Zanch. Confess Fidei pro se sua Familia bound with his Miscellan Vrsin Catech. Quest 91. Catech and his Quest 5. upon that Question Tylenus Synt. part 2. disp 46. Th. 8 9 10 11. where is to be read too short an abbreviation of the three former But M. Perkins in one of his works I remember though at present I am bereaved of them all hath the very same words of Zanchy translated into English in answer to this question And since these whole hundreds both of English and forreign Divines have after Zanchy and Perkins delivered the same things in substance with them though some more largely some more compendiously so that to the exercised Reader it will be superfluous for me to write any thing upon the same subject I shall conclude all in the words of Augustine as more needing his Apology than himself where he useth it Lib. de Spir. Litera Cap. 35. Haec egi libro isto loquacius fortasse quà m sat est Sed contra inimicos Gratia Dei paraeùm mihi dixisse videor Nihil que mihi tam multum dicere delectat quam ubi mihi Scriptura ejus plurimum suffragatur id agitur ut qui gloriatur in Domomino glorietur in omnibus gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro sursum corda habentes unde a patre luminum omne Datum optimum omne donum perfectum est that is These things have I treated of in this Book it may be with more than enough plenty of words and language But I seem to my selfe to have spoken little against the Enemies of the grace of God And I take delight to be large in speaking about nothing else so much as when both the Scripture doth most give its testimony with me and the question treated on is that hee which glorieth may glory in the Lord and that in all things we may give thanks to God having our hearts lifted up to the Father of Lights from whom every good and every perfect gift discendeth He it is that freely justifieth us by his Grace To him be the praise and glory of all and let his Kingdom come and be speedily inlarged throughout the world that from all parts thereof there may be a joyfull acclamation of Saints Amen Amen FINIS A TABLE of the Generall and Chief Heads of Doctrine Treated of in this Booke A WHether the To credere or Act of beleeving be that by which we are justified part 1. p. 164. and onward to p. 181. p. 363 364 Mr. Br. to shew that both Papists and Arminians are met together in his owne brest teaaheth both that it is our justifying Righteousnesse and imputed to us for Righteousnesse his Reasons to prove it examined ibid. p. 166 c. More of Act viz. Immanent and Life A short Animadversion upon Mr. Brs dispute of Christs Active and passive righteousnesse in order to Justification Part 1. p. 21. to 25. Afflictions befalling the Saints not parts of the Curse but fruits of Gods Love Part 1. p. 35. to 37. What they are in their nature ib. p. 44 45 Antinomians their first rise originall and what their Tenets then were part 1. p. 263 264. Their growth and what hath been in these latter yeers charged on them as errours ib. 264 266. What of all wherewith they have been charged is errour indeed ibid. p. 267. to 271. 273. Who are such in Mr. Brs Kalender Pref. p. 7 8. part 1. p. 271 272. His Fraud under this Nick-name to make odious the Gospel and all true Protestants Pref. ibid. part 1. p 274. In the midst of his Invectives against imaginary he hath more then all men besides honoured the reall Antinomians part 1. p. 162 163. and declared himself really one of them p. 277. Exotick Arts how far usefull in Divinity Pref. p. 14. to the 17. They are incompetent to be Rules and Judges in purely Gospel matters ibid. and in some following pages and part 1. p. 341. What evils have followed such use and abuse of it Pref. 24 c. How abasingly the Scriptures speak of it as so abused Pref. p. 22 23. More viz. Sophistry Authority of men viz. Faith B Bellarmine and Mr. Br. speak the same things in the point of Justification part 2. p. 25. 31. Bullingers judgment of mingling prophane Arts in teaching with the Gospel pref p. 42 43. C Mr. Brs new Modell of the Causes of Justification and Salvation examined part 1. p. 314 c. And 1 of the principall efficient Cause ib. p. 316 317. 2 Of the instrumentall Cause ib. p. 317 318. 3 Of th◠procatarctick Causes ib. p. 318. to 321. 4 Of the naturall Cause and the Protestant doctrine defended against his cavils ib. p. 323. to 327. 5 Likewise of the formall Cause ib. p. 327. 329. The Protestant doctrine that Faith is the Instrument or Instrumentall Cause of Justification viz. Gods effective and mans receptive Instrument largely defended against Mr. Brs Sophisms ib. p. 330. to 348. Whether Faith be the Causa sine qua non ib. p. 356 357. Works cannot be the causa sine qua non part 2. p. 110 111. Charity the Rule of judging one another and by what evidence it must judge part 2. p. 93 94. What it is to take half and what to take whole Christ to justification part 2. p. 184 186. What to make Christ our All in Preaching part 2. p. 291. More viz. Grace 293. Whether Justification run upon Conditions