by the Law is the knowledg of sin But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets even the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe for there is no difference for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God Being justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ. In which words 1. I take notice of the Apostles peremptory Conclusion By the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified in his God 's sight Now as this Proposition smiles or frowns upon our Author or his Opponent so will the whole cause stand or fall on either side It seems indeed to carry a smart sound of words against his Notions but he is well enough provided against all Arguments drawn from express words and therefore we must enquire What that Law is by the deeds whereof no flesh can be justified If it proves the Moral Law our Author will not deny that he 's at least half undone and I find him feelingly aware of that all along Now to dally no longer with him nor to put him to a lingring death The Apostle who knew his own mind best has assured me that by Law he understands the Moral Law 1. It 's that Law by which we have the knowledg of sin His Argument runs thus By the deeds of that Law by which comes the knowledg of sin no flesh is justified But by the Moral Law comes the knowledg of sin therefore by the deeds of the Moral Law no flesh is justified The major is the Apostle's own in this very place The minor is his own too Rom. 7. 13. I had not known sin except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet From whence I argue By that Law which says Thou shalt not covet comes the knowledg of sin but that Law which says Thou shalt not covet is the Moral Law therefore by the Moral Law comes the knowledg of sin The major is the Apostle's own in the place last quoted the minor needs no other proof but that a man be able to read the Ten Commandments which is the sum of the Moral Law the Tenth whereof is Thou shalt not covet But now at what a weak rate must the Apostle argue to please our Author By the deeds of the Ceremonial Law shall no flesh be justified No Why not Why because by the Moral Law is the knowledg of sin 2. None can doubt of what Law the Apostle speaks that considers how he draws this great Conclusion out of vers 19. That every mouth may be stopped and all the World become guilty before God therefore by the deeds of the Law c. His Argument is this By the deeds of that Law by which every mouth is stopped and all the World become guilty before God shall no flesh be justified But by the Moral every mouth is stopped and all the World become guilty before God therefore by the deeds of the Moral Law shall no flesh be justified And this evidently excludes the Ceremonial Law from any Concern in this Argument For that Law never obliged all or half the World and therefore they could not violate it and therefore not become guilty by it before God Again the instances which the Apostle gives of the violation of the Law shews what Law he excludes from Justification vers 13. With their Tongues they have used deceit Vers. 14. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness Vers. 15. Their feet are swift to shed blood c. which are all apparent violations of the Moral Law But is there never a Creep-hole at which our Author may escape the Apostles Argument Yes yes p. 245. The great dispute in the Epistle to the Romans is Whether we must be justified by the Law of Moses or by the Faith of Christ that is Whether the Observation of the External Rites and Ceremonies of the Law and an External Conformity of our Actions to the Moral Precepts of it will justifie a man before God c. This sorry evasion has all its small pretence from that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the deeds which our Author would willingly perswade himself signifie nothing but Observation of Ceremonies and outward Conformity to the Moral Law Now that the Apostle in this place directly excludes the Moral Law I have proved All the Question is Whether he disputes against Justification by external Conformity to its Precepts only or against Justification by whatever Obedience is or may be given to the Moral Law by man under his present Circumstances And against our Author's conceit herein I oppose these things 1. It appears not that ever there was such a Question started amongst any Christians Whether Hypocrisie would justifie a man before God much less was it ever laid down in Thesi and Dogmatically maintained that it would do so Many Hypocrites there were then there are so now who may deceive themselves into a Fools Paradise that Hypocrisie might not condemn and damn them but none ever so forsaken of common sense as to think that Hypocrisie would justifie and save them Many presume to be saved notwithstanding their sins but none to be saved for their sins If any should so dote they deserve to receive their Confutation from Bedlam rather than the Divinity-Schools I cannot therefore once imagine that the Apostle should so operosely handle a subject that he should rowse up his zeal and knit all the nerves of his spiritual Reason to confute what was either no-where or so thin and transparent a falshood that to recite it was clearly to confute it 2. The Deeds or Works of the Law are the Deeds and Works which the Law commands which it primarily commands but the Law never commanded outward Conformity of actions without inward Conformity of heart to its Precepts These are not the Deeds of the Law but such as God abhors therefore the Deeds of the Law by which no flesh shall be justified are not external works only 3. The Deeds of the Law by which no flesh shall be justified are the Deeds of every one of God's Laws the Deeds of every particular Commandment but the Deeds of one of God's Laws of onâ—… particular Commandment are only internal Deeds therefore the Apostle disputes not only against external deeds By the Law is meant the whole Law but one part of the Law extensively taken reaches internal deeds only As is evident in the Tenth Commandment Thou shalt not covet but according to our Author's way the Apostle should have laid down his Doctrine thus By the deeds of nine parts of the Law shall no flesh living be justified 4. The Apostle disputes against Justification by such deeds of the Moral Law as wherein all the World is become guilty But by the external deeds of the Law all the World is not become guilty therefore he disputes not against Justification by the external deeds of
declared her Judgement And I will not conceal it This was one thing that quickned me to undertake this Province when I saw how readily some men could snatch the Pen to under-write what with the same Hand and Pen and Breath they intended to Confute or if not to Confute yet however to Deride Upon a serious Reflection on these things Remembring somewhere a Passage of Austin That he would have every man that can hold a Pen write against Pelagius that sworn Enemy to the Free Discriminating and Effectual Grace of God and Remembring also the Command of the Apostle Iude v. 3. To contend earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints I thought we had as good a License to plead for Christ and his Truth here at the Footstool who pleads for us according to his Truth upon the Throne as any man can pretend to plead against them And therefore to deal Freely with my Reader I judg'd it my Duty rather to lament than imitate that Deep and Dead Silence of those who are equally concern'd with and better qualified for the Work than my self to give some Check to this growing Petulancy and sawcy Humour of daily encroaching Prophaneness A poor Man came once to a Learned Physician for Advice but first he would know Whether it was safe to take Physick in Dog-dayes His Physician replyed no more but this If it be lawfull to be sick it 's lawfull to be well at any time of the Year I shall apply it no further than this If this Author be qualified to Oppose every true Christian is qualified to Defend the Gospel of Jesus Christ For the Dispute is not now about Decency and Order about Fringes and Philacteries about the tything of Mint Anise or Cummine nor about a Pin or Peg in the Superstructure of the Churches Polity nor about the three Innocent Ceremonies but about The Influence of the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Sacrifice of his Death upon our Acceptance with God about the Interest of the Blessed Spirit in the glorious Work of the New Creation Whether Christ be a proper Priest or no Whether as a Priest he Offer'd himself as a proper Sacrifice to God or no Whether God and Man are Reconciled and we Redeemed from the Curse of the Law by the Blood of Iesus or no Whether we are Iustified before the Just and Holy God by our own Righteousness or by the Righteousness of a Mediator And in a word Whether the Death of Christ be the proper and immediate Cause of any one single Blessing great or small of the Covenant of Grace In which the Concerns all the Eternal Hopes of every Christian are wrapt up and wherein that he may not mistake and so Finally miscarry as 't is the unseigned Design of these Papers so 't is the Earnest Prayer of READER Thy Servant in the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour IESUS CHRIST N. N. CHAP. I. Containing an Answer to the First Chapter concerning the Name Christ The Offices of Christ c. IT was a Question stated by the Curious Why Homer should begin his Iliads with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Answer had a spice of the same vanity because forsooth Anger is blind Let none be so Hypercritical as to enquire Why our Author commences his Discourse wâ—…th ALL ERROUR nor any so hasty to Reply Because he intends to continue the Metaphor and carry on the Humour proportionably to the End but hear him out All â—…rour hath some Appearance of Truth to which if you shall adde and All Truth may have some Appearance of Errour You have then his Syllabus Capitum the Marrow and Contents of Five long Chapters with their Sections Paragraphs and goodly Periods spun out into Four hundred thirty and two Pages The whole dividing it self into these two general Heads Blanching of Heresie and smutting of Truth The Gentleman Alwayes took it for granted that Christ and his Religion were very well agreed and he is still of the same Mind that his Person is not at Oddes with his Gospel but it seems there are some who have made as irreconcileable a difference betwixt the Religion of Christs Person and of his Gospel as between the Law and Grace p. 3. It was no smaller a Name than that of the great Socrates who curst the Man whoever he was that first distinguisht between Bonum Utile and Honestum and I must confess I have no small Pike against that Generation of Men who have made Two Religions of one and then set them both together by the Ears Whether there be any such on this side Utopia I shall not determine but this I will 'T is highly expedient nay absolutely necessary that some such there should be for else what will become of all that heavy Dinne our Author has raised upon that one Supposition and with what a ruefull Clutter will the Superstructure fall upon the Head of the Architect who has rear'd it full five stories high upon that single Hypothesis To prevent which fatal Inconvenience I would humbly Advise the Persons concern'd in the Charge to plead Guilty to the Indictment if they may do it with a good Conscience and not to be so uncivil and disingenuous as to render an Exceâ—…lent Author Ridiculous And yet if what he tells us be true That the Gospel of Christ be as severe a Dispensation as the Law I see not what Great Disparagement it can prove to the Religion of his Person and his Gospel to be at as great a Feud as the Law and Grace A mistake then there is somewhere or other which though we poor dull Mortâ—…ls could not discover our Authors piercing Eye had soon observ'd the ground of it viz. That some men wherever they meet the word Christ alwayes understand by it the Person of Christ p. 4. That was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it seems the Spring of all this mischief And if they do not so understand and misunderstand to boot there 's no way to Deliver His Discourse from two little silly Scapes of Impertinency and Superfluity nor any warrant to justifie the reviling of those Men for expounding Faith in Christ and Hope in Christ of a fiducial Relyance and Recumbency on Christs Person in contradistinction to Obedience to his Laws For the very truth is as I shall acquaint my Reader privately betwixt him and me Those Persons whom he reflects upon with so much sâ—…ornfull Indignation do not in the least urge Faith in Christ in opposition to Obedience onely they judge That an Evangelical Obedience to the Commands of the Gospel must as indispensibly follow Faith in Christs Person as it must necessarily precede Eternal Life and Salvation revealed promised and purchased by Christ It 's no Question then with Them Whether Obedience to the Gospel shall have a Place a great Place but what is the Proper place of that Obedience But this I speak onely under the Rose being loath to nip the blossoming hopes I have conceived of
pardon humble and penitent sinners and not till then 3. In pardoning of these humble and penitent sinners Gods Dominion Sovereignty and the Authority of his Laws must be vindicated for God being the Righteous Iudge of all the Earth should he discover a facile Indulgence and indifferent connivence at Sin the Authority of his Lawes were gone in a moment and the sinews of Government cut asunder God then must be declared to be a Righteous God the Sanction of the Law as to Promise running thus Doe this and live Doe this personally doe this exactly doe this constantly and perpetually and then live and as to Threatning thus Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the Book of the Law to doe them Gal. 3. 10. And of the same mind with our Author is as I remember one Dr. I. O. who is very peremptory that the Iustice of God may have its actings assigned to the full which is not done by Any that ever yet was heard of but the Lord Jesus Christ Now whilest I see the sweet Agreement of these two at present I fancy my self with Aeneas in the Elysian fields pleasing himself with the Amicable correspondence held between Caesar and Pompey and yet his delight mixt with another passion even grief in the foresight of their Civil Wars and Friendly Debates Illae autem Paribus quas fulgere cernis in Armis Concordes Animae nunc dum nocte Premuntur Heu quantum inter se bellum si Lumina Vitae Attigerint quantas Acies stragémque ciebunt Aeneid lib. 6. 4. Jesus Christ having undertaken to be a Ransome and to make Attonement for Sinners and his blood being of Infinite value the oldest greatest and stubbornest Sinners through Faith may possibly come to be concern'd in Christs Ransome and Attonement and so may be saved with a Notwithstanding their sins for seeing Gods Dominion Sâ—…vereignty the Authority of his Laws the Wisdom and Iustice of his Providence are all vindicated by this Means and security given that none of his Attributes shall be reproached what can Now hinder repenting sinners from coming to God and what can hinder God from rewarding those that so come and diligently seek him Nay 5. God cannot but be well pleased when his own Son undertakes to be a Ransome and to make Attonement for sinners And the Reason is evident The price being of Infinite value and payd into Godâ—… hands he cannot but be satisfied with it Nay further We can Reasonably desire no greater security for the Performance of the Gospel-Covenant than that it was sealed with the Blood of Christ the surety of a better Testament Heb. 7. 22. who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that undertakes for the Performance of it I could willingly lose my self my Reader and my Time in the Throng of these good words Say not This is only the Sealing of a Covenant on Gods part undertaking for him whose veracity needs none to undertake for it but not for us whose guilt and weakness needs an undertaker The Covenant being mutual the undertaking must be supposed Reciprocal also and so I hope our Author intends it that as Christ undertakes for God with Man so he undertakes with Man unto God Perhaps you will say A word or two might have been added to have put matters out of dispute why so there might in any bodies Writings besides his and as many spared hanc veniam petimúsque damúsque As 1. It 's likely you would have had him say The Vertue of Christs Sacrifice depends not onely very much on the Greatness of his Person but Altogether and the Acceptation thereof with God depends on the Compact between them both seeing that which depends altogether does depend very much on the Greatness of his Person and therefore pray let that break no squares 2. Whereas he sayes The Blood of the Son of God is such a Confirmation of the Covenant as the World never had before Perhaps you would add Actually because the World had it before Virtually exhibited in Sacrifices and accepted as already Performed But set your hearts at Rest whether he meant well or ill in this Chapter I 'le engage you shall not be prejudiced if he happens to discover an ill meaning in the next Chapter and in the mean time let us go seek all over Pauls Church-yard Little-Britain and Duk-lane for an old Treatise De modo tenendi Anguillam Aequivocationis per Caudam 5 The Person of Christ is of no other Consideration in the Christian Religion than as it has an influence upon the great Ends of his Undertaking I confess I had thought our Author had not been upon the Head What Consideration the Person of Christ is of but Of what Use the Consideration of his Person is but let that pass I had thought too that the former four particulars had shewn us What influence Christs Person has upon the great Ends of his Undertaking and therefore this seems not to be a fifth Particular but the total summe of the other four but I wave that too The Lord Jesus Christ undertook both with God and with Man for God and for Man and he had special Ends of his undertaking in both He undertook for God that he should be willing to pardoâ—… sinners and for man that he should return and come back to God He undertook to God that his Attributes should not be reproached but all secured his Righteousness cleared his Holiness vindicated he undertook to man that God should make every word and letter of the Promises good as they stand in the Covenant of Grace He undertook that Godâ—… Iustice should not break out upon the believing repenting creature to consume him and he undertook that Man should not break in upon Gods glory nor break away from Gods Wayes in a manner inconsistent with a New Covenant What a horrid Absurdity then must it be to imagine that his Person will destroy these Ends or to expect more from the excellency of his Person than his Gospel has promised Most wretchedly therefore doe they deceive themselves and wrong the Redeemer who Trusting to the goodness of his Nature Renounce his Mediation that trust in his Person without a Promise nay in contradiction to the Terms of that Covenant which he hath seal'd with his Blood that quit hiâ—… Promise to rely and rowl on his Person For should he acquit those men whom his Gospel condemns wilfull and incorrigible sinners this would flatly disannull the Covenant Though he may absolve such sinners as the Covenant of Works condemns through the Intervention of Christs Sacrifice But I perceive we are besides the Cushion all this while nay besides the Book for he knows none thaâ—… will in so many words own it nor does he dares he charge any man with it but yet it 's the natural Iâ—…terpretation of Trusting in the Person of Christ. That is It 's impossible to Trust in Christs Person but you doe ipso facto Renounce
Gospel and Salvation by Christ when time should serve 3. It would be cleared what he means by as well as since aequè but not aequaliter sure not so much as since but as truely and really as since But because his Reason is to be the Measure of his Assertion let us attend to it with diligence This Respect is founded on that Natural Relation God owns to Mankind To which I answer Whatever respect God had to the Gentiles so as to afford them at any time the Means of Salvation it was not founded on Natural Relation as their Creator but on a Relation Voluntary and of pure and mere Grace and we will joyn issue with him upon this point when he pleases But I shall endeavour to set the Apostles Argument upon its own Legs What he drove at he shews you v. 28. That a Man is justifi'd by Faith without the deeds of the Law he had proved this in the foregoing Verse thus The way that God takes in the Iustifying of a Person is such a one as shuts out of dores Boasting But Justification by Faith onely excludes Boasting and the way of Justifying by works would not exclude it and therefore God takes that way to justifie the Sons of Men In this 29th verse he proceeds to another Argument to evince the same Thing If Justification come by the works of the Law then never any Gentile could be justifi'd but some Gentiles have been justifi'd Therefore Justification comes not by the works of the Law That some Gentiles had been justified he proves in the Instance of Abraham who was justifi'd not in Circumcision but in Uncircumcision as he sayes ch 4. v. 10. Now it 's evident that Circumcision and Uncircumcision are Terms of equal wideness with Iew and Gentile For that which he calls v. 29. of the third Chapter Iew and Gentile Verse the 30th he expresses by Circumcision and Uncircumcision It is one God that shall justifie the Circumcision the Jews by Faith and the Uncircumcision the Gentiles â—…hrough Faith and this he brings as a proof of his foregoing Assertion Seeing it is one God c. And therefore Abraham though he were an Hebrew by Birth whether so denominated as coming from the Race of Heber or from his passing over Euphrates as some will have it it makes no matter yet being uncircumcised he fills the room in Gods account of a Gentile or one of the Nations Now for the proof of the sequel of the first Proposition That if Iustification comes by the works of the Law then never any Gentile could be justified he takes special care to put that out of Question v. 30. Seeing it is one God that justifies There is but one God that justifies and therefore but one way of Justification as he is alwayes the same so is his Method alwayes the same One God one Christ one Faith and therefore if ever any Gentile were justifi'd without the works of the Law never any Jew could be justifi'd by it for that would be to suppose two wayes of justifying sinners and such were Jews and Gentiles both under sin both guilty before God and then that would prove that God were not the same one God which the Apostle throws out of dores Let our Author now cast up his Accounts and see what he has gain'd by this place God is the God of the Gentiles Such a God as has justified Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for instance Abraham and that as his God in a Covenant of Grace I will be thy God and therefore it follows that Jews are not were not could not be justified by the works of the Law and then no such thing will be inferred that God as a Creator had such a respect to every Individual Person in the World being fallen sinners 〈◊〉 to give them the Means of Salvation But to proceed This plainly evinces saith he that all those particular favours which God bestowed on Israel were not owing to any partial fondness and respect to that People Methinks I hear our Author speak like the Great Pompey when he had got Caesar into Lobs-pound Non recusare se quin nullius usûs Imperator existimaretur si sine maximo detrimento Legiones Caesaris sese recepissent inde quo temerè essent progressae De Bell. Civ lib. 3. Let our Author never be reputed a Man at Arms more if he has not got us into such a Cramp and Purse-nett that we shall never escape without loss of Bag and Baggage For thus he assaults us Had God a Partial Fondness and respect for Israel Answer Yea or No. I see we are quite undone If we say No he has us on the Hip and comes over us with a Why not what no respect for Israel no favour for his Beloved People Why Psal. 147. 20. He has not dealt so with any Nation he shew'd his Word unto Iacob his Statutes and his Iudgements unto Israel and where are we now If we say Yes Then he fetches us over the Coles What partial fondness in God! one Law for Titius another for Sempronius Fish of one and Flesh of another I see we must fall upon one of the horns of this Dilemma and both are equally mortal And never was there more need of the Curat 's Collect to be deliver'd from the great Pain and Peril of Cowgoring We have got a Wolf by the Ears and dare neither keep nor slip our hold for our own When I read this and some other like passages in his Book surely thought I this man takes us all for Widgeons and Woodcocks and that to Scrible with him is 〈◊〉 thing but the Recreation of catching Dottrels hâ—… could never else hope to Impose upon us with so Childish and obvious a Sophism In short 't is nothing but Fallacia plurium interrogationum As 〈◊〉 you should ask our Author Whether he were 〈◊〉 London with a Feather in 's Cap He would not scruple to answer He is indeed at London in the Parish of St. George but he has no Feather in'â—… Cap Well Good for one good for another God had a respect for Israel but no partial Fondness Two things then would be a little cleared that God had and upon wh at account he had a particular respect to Israel 1. God had a special respect to Israel above all the People in the World Rom. 3. 1. What advantage then hath the Iew and what profit is there of Circumcision Much every way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Upon all accounts they carried it But chiefly that unto them were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 9. 4. To whom pertaineth the Adoption and the Glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the Services of God and the Promises whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the Flesh Christ came As whereas God chose Abrahams Posterity and committed His Laws to them from whence as our Author thinks all the rest of the World might when they please fetch the Rules of
them and the only thing that gives a right to the promises of Future glory is to obey the Laws and imitate the Example of our Saviour and to be transformed into the Nature and Likeness of God We must crave his leave to take his words in pieces that we may the better deal with them 1. The Gospel says he makes a different Representation of it tells us expresly that he is righteous that doth righteousness But say I This is no representation of our justification different from what the Doctor has assigned And let the words be Interpreted how he will they make nothing against the Doctors assertions 1. Let these words He is Righteous signifie He is Inherently righteous or holy and then the plain Sence is that he that doth righteousness that practises an Uniform and Universal conformity in his Life to the Gospel may charitably be judged by others and certainly known by his own Conscience to be such a one as a Tree is known by its fruits For so are we warranted by our Saviour to make a Judgment Mat. 7. 16. And the same warrant we have from the Church of England Art 12. Insomuch that by them good Works that necessarily spring of a true and lively faith a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a Tree discerned by the Fruit. 2. Let the words be interpreted of that Righteousness by which in which and for which we stand accepted as Righteous before God yet it meets in the same point he that from an honest and good heart brings forth holy Fruit most certainly justified in the sight of God and is accepted of him we may argue â—… hope without Offence from the Effect to the Cause and yet the Cause and the Effect are two things He that is sanctified is justified and yet Sanctification is not Justification we may safely conclude an imputed Righteousness from an imparted Righteousness and yet that Righteousness which we have in Christ may be another thing from that Righteousness which we have by influence from Christ as our Head 2. Sayes he The Gospel tells us that without Holiness no man shall see God It does so indeed but does it tell us that Holiness is inconsistent with our Iustification by the Righteousness of Christ Or does it tell us that upon the account of our own Holiness we shall be justified before God 3. The onely way to obtain the Pardon of Sins is to repent of them and forsake them That without Repentance there 's no possibility of obtaining Pardon of Sin we freely grant they must be Sinners that need a Pardon and they must be penitent Sinners that are qualified to receive one The Gospel has annex'd by express Promise the Pardon of Sin to Repentance 1 Ioh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness But what an absurd way of procedure is this to jumble and confound things together which ought to have their several Apartments and distinct Interests allotted to them in one and the same Effect The Grace of God as the great Spring and Fountain of all Mercy must have a place in the Pardon of a Sinner and the blood of Iesus Christ as the Meritorious Cause justly challenges a great room therein Eph. 1. 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood even the remission of sins according to the riches of his grace and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ will come in for a share too as it gives us an Interest in what he has suffered by way of Atonement to God and Expiation of our sins and godly sorrow for hatred of and turning from sin in Purpose and Resolution at least must have its proper Concern therein too But to assert that Repentance is the onely way of procuring Pardon excluding Faith and the Propitiation made in the Blood of Christ needs more grains of Allowance than he will afford to any he deals with to make it justifiable But the vanity of this Fallacy lyes in this That he opposes the Righteousness of Christ and the Means whereby it 's applyed to our Persons As if one would stiffly contend that we are justified by Faith alone and therefore not by the Righteousness of Christ whereas we are therefore justified by Faith because we are justified by Christ we are justified by the Righteousness of Christ alone as that which God onely considers in the Justification of a Sinner to answer his Law his Justice and we are justified by Faith alone as that which makes Christ ours Say the same here Repentance is a Means to qualifie us for the receiving the pardon of Sin God will never give forth a Pardon to that Sinner that is not brought upon his knees throughly humbled for his Transgressions yet still that which God respects in the pardon of a Sinner is the Blood of his Son without shedding of which there is not there cannot be any Remission Hebr. 9. 22. But no man shall perswade our Author to distinguish betwixt Christs procurement of so great a Mercy and the Way of the Gospel appointment for the Applying it to our selves 4. The onely thing that gives us a right to the Promises of future Glory is to obey the Laws and imitate the Example of our Saviour and to be transformed into the Nature and Likeness of God For my part I conceive far otherwise That though our Holiness give us a Meetness and Fitness to partake of the Inheritance of the Saints in light yet it was the Lord Jesus Christ that procured our right and title to it and the Promise of it The Church of England was of the same Opinion when it decreed Art 13. That works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of the Spirit are not pleasant to God neither do they make men meet to receive Grace c. And then we may presume will not make us meet to receive Glory much less give us a right and title to the Promises of it And Art 12. That the works which follow after Iustistification are those that are pleasing and acceptable to God and I think we may equally take it for granted that upon our justification with God we have a right to the Promises of future Glory But if this be true that the onely thing that gives us this right be Obedience to Imitation of Christ and Conformity to the Nature of God we may have a Right to when we have actual Possession of Glory for till then it will hardly be true that we have obeyed all Christs Laws But our Author had Wit in his Anger and was aware of an Objection that was coming against him and wisely layes in for it as well as he could It might be returned to all that he had said How can so imperfect an Obedience as ours is so every wayes lame and defective and short of the exact Law of God ever give us a right to the Promises of future Glory Yes
the Law only That all the World is not become guilty by the external deeds of the Moral Law and a failure therein he proves Rom. 5. 14. where he shews That death reigned over some who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam ' s transgression 5. Those deeds which David excluded from his Iustification the Apostle excludes from our Iustification for he quotes his Proposition from Psal. 143. 2. and therefore takes it in his sense or else he could not make use of his Authority But David excludes all his deeds whatsoever from Justification Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man be justified He durst not once think of God's entering into judgment with him upon the account of any thing he had attained From all which it appears that the Apostle exclâ—…es the Law the whole Law and the deeds thereof all the deeds thereof from having any concern in the Iustification of a sinner in the sight of God 2. We may observe hence That the Apostle opposes the Righteousness of God unto a Righteousness by the deeds of the Law But now says he the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested vers 21. And as in vers 20. he says not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the deeds of the Law but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the deeds of Law of a Law of any Law So here he says not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Law as if he intended some singular Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a Law without any Law And hence he fully silences and stops the mouth of our Authors Cavil that by the deeds of the Law is meant only an external Conformity of our Actions to it But the Apostles words leave no place for ambiguity For if the Righteousness of God without Law a Law any Law be manifested then without either Ceremonial or Moral Law then also without external or internal deeds of either But the Apostle shuts out Law simply and absolutely The Righteousness of God without Law is manifested As this term Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is more properly predicated of the Moral than of the Ceremonial Law so the deeds of Law are more properly predicated of internal than external deeds and Analogum per se stans stat pro famosior Analogato If then as our Author contends we are justified by the Moral though not by the Ceremonial Law or by internal Conformity to it though not by external Conformity to it only then the Apostles Doctrine is true in an improper or less proper sense but utterly false in the proper or more proper sense of the words For had 〈◊〉 words been inverted they had carried a clearer truth in them By the deeds the internal deeds of the Law the Moral Law shall all flesh be justified But now the Righteousness of God with the Law the Moral Law and it s internal as well as external deeds is manifested But this is not to interpret the Apostle but dictate a new Gospel to him But further Hence I have just occasion to complain of an unrighteous surmise with which our Author loads some men That because they exclude Law and Law-deeds from Iustification in the sight of God that therefore they exclude it from having any place in their Lives and Conversations The Apostle who is a zealous Vindicator of the interest of the Law as a Rule of our Obedience yet we see discharges it wholly from any from all use and service in the Justification of a sinner in the sight of God Therefore he adds Before God and the Psalmist In thy sight to teach us That though the Righteousness of God without Law is manifested as to the truth of the thing yet the Righteousness of God is not cannot be manifested to us without a sincere obedience to the Law There 's a Iustification before God to this the Law a Law any Law contributes nothing but there 's a Justification before Conscience before men and to this a sincere and evangelically universal obedience contributes much 3. The Apostle assures us That this Doctrine of his is no new fancy broached t'other day and set on foot lately in Gospel-times but the same way by which all the good men of old were justified v. 21. It 's witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Now as to the Prophets testimony though our Author approves not their Cryptick way of demonstrating but is all for plain Meridian demonstration yet they are full that Jesus Christ was the main consideration in the Justification of a sinner from of old Acts 3. 25 26. Ye are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant that God made with our Fathers saying to Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed unto you first God having raised up his Son Iesus sent him to bless you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities Whence it appears God's raising up Christ in the World to bless his people with spiritual blessings was no more than what he had covenanted with Abraham and promised to him even in that very Promise which our Author thinks was fulfilled in the numerous Posterity of Isaac But now that this Righteousness of God without Law should be witnessed by Law this seems strange Does the Law witness against it self Is it false to it 's own interest But the Law is God's Law and when it witnesses to a sinner it witnesses home convinces him of the perfect holiness of that God who gave the Law of the peremptoriness of God in not abating one jot or tittle of the Law of the sinners utter inability to come up to the Demands of the Law and therefore the utter impossibility of being justified by the Law of the severity of God's Justice in punishing the violater of his Law and therefore unless he can find another Righteousness he must utterly perish 'T is true the Law speaks its old Language still Do this and live but then it speaks it only to those who are upon a bottom of Innocency for to a Transgressor its language is Cursed is very one that continues not in all things 4. The Apostle acquaints us what that Righteousness of God is which is manifested vers 22. Even the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Christ. Now hence it 's evident that the Righteousness of God and Righteousness by the Faith of Christ are both one and therefore Faith in God and Faith in Christ are both one As is the Righteousness such is the Faith as is the Faith such is the Righteousness which perfectly overthrows that Arbitrary distinction which our Author had studied for more need Of Faith in God and Faith in Christ on purpose to shut Abraham out of Christ and by Consequence out of Heaven and to lock him up in the Limbus Patrum 5. The Apostle concludes That there 's no difference in point of Justification all that are sinners by
determined against him to whom therefore from his partial Judgment-Seat I shall appeal v. 5 6. For Moses describeth the Righteousness of the Law that the Man that doth these things shall live in them from whence I argue against our Author That Law whose Righteousness Moses describes the Apostle excludes from having any place in Justification but it is the Moral Law whose Righteousness Moses describes therefore it is the Moral Law which the Apostle excludes from having any place in Iustification The Major is evident from the Connexion of the Apostle's Words v. 3. They have not submitted themselves to the Righteousness of God v. 4. For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth for Moses describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law c. The Minor I prove thus That Law which saith He that doth these things shall live in them is that Law whose Righteousness Moses prescribeth but it is the Moral Law which saith He that doth these things shall live in them therefore it is the Moral Law whose Righteousness Moses describeth The Major is the Apostles own v. 5. the Minor I prove from Lev. 18. 5. You shall keep my Statutes and Iudgments which if a Man do he shall live in them v. 6. None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him 7. The nakedness of thy Father or of thy Mother thou shalt not uncover c. from whence I argue thus That Law which forbids incest is the Moral Law but that Law which saith He that doth these things shall live in them is the Law which forbids incest therefore that Law that saith He that doth these things shall live in them is the Moral Law Again I argue thus from Gal. 3. 10 11. That Law which hath the Curse annext to it for noncontinuance in all things commanded therein is the Law which the Apostle excludes from having any place in the Justification of a Sinner but it is the Moral Law which hath that Curse annext to it therefore it is the Moral Law which the Apostle excludes from having any place in the Justification of a Sinner The Major is evident from the place v. 10. As many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse for it is written Cursed is every one that continues not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them v. 11. But that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God is evident The Minor I prove from Deut. 27. 26. from whence the Apostle quotes it Cursed be he that continueth not in all the Words of this Law to do them That Law which forbids making Images which forbids setting light by Father or Mother which forbids removing Land-marks which forbids causing the Blind to go out of his way which forbids perverting of judgment incest sodomy is the Law which hath the Curse annext to it but it is the Moral Law which forbids all these things Therefore it is the Moral Law which hath this Curse annext to it I cannot foresee what our Author will return to all this but his old tawdry Answer That indeed the Apostle does exclude the Moral Law but that is only with respect to External Obedience without Internal Conformity But it 's evident that the Apostle excludes the Law it self and therefore it must be highly impertinent to enquire what Deeds of the Law are excluded when the Law it self is excluded But yet for his further satisfaction I shall bestow an Argument upon that also Those Acts of Obedience to which the Promise of Life in the Covenant of Works originally was most directly made are excluded from Iustification but to inward acts of Obedience the Promise of Life was most directly made and therefore inward acts of Obedience are excluded from Iustification The Apostle has secured the Major Rom. 10. 3 5 6. They have not submitted themselves to the Righteousness of God For Moses describeth the Righteousness of the Law that he that doth these things shall live in them The Minor is evident for God never made a Promise of Life to External Acts of Obedience without inward Conformity of Soul to them and of both to the Law of God Again Those Acts the want whereof mainly exposes the Sinner to the Curse are excluded from Justification but the want of Internal Acts of Obedience mainly exposes the Sinner to the Curse therefore internal Acts are excluded from Justification And the true Reason why these inward Acts are excluded from Justification is not because they are not well-pleasing to God but because the case is thus with impotent fallen men that he cannot reach the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the utmost tittle of what the Law requires theresore must fall under the severe doom annext to the violation of the Law in the least punctilio unless God had provided a better Righteousness than that of his own Obedience After all that has or may be said in the Case If any one will be so civil and ingenuous as out of his pure good-nature to yield our Author a few small inconsiderable things As 1. That there is a double Antithesis where there is but one And 2. That a man 's own Righteousness is another thing than the Righteousness of the Law 3. That the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Christ is distinct from the Righteousness of God 4. That by the Righteousness of the Law no more is intended than Ceremony and Hypocrisie 5. That a mans own Righteousness is so called not because it is his own but because he places his Righteousness in it and 6thly one poor sorry triffle more That all he asserts is meer Gospel grant him but this and he will prove all the rest with ease but though I would go a great way to save his longing yet this is so large a boon that it deserves mature advice and serious deliberation There are yet a few odd things in arrear some notice whereof I promised to take and seeing we are a little at leisure I shall do him justice And first let us consider what work he has made with that Text Rom. 8. 3 4. For what the Law could not do in that it was weak-through the Flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful Flesh and for sin condemned sin in the Flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit Now our Authors Paraphrase as well as we can scramble it together from broken fragments and odd shreds of his Discourse is thus much The Ceremonial Law being designed of God to work in the Iews inward holiness and purity of Mind which was represented by Circumcision Washings Purifications and Sacrifices it was found too weak to effect this design and therefore God sent Christ into the World to die as a Sacrifice for our Sins to confirm and seal the New-Covenant with his Blood
these it is acknowledged once for all that though he had the Original and Radical Power the plenary Commission to put in Execution all these matters during the state of his Humiliation and in some pregnant particulars did accordingly exert and put forth that Authority yet the way and manner the degree and measure of his Acting therein was in much wisdom suited to that dispensation wherein he was to appear in the form of a Servant The more illustrious august and solemn exercising thereof being reserved for the State of Exaltation when he should Appear like himself cast off the Cloud which had eclipsed the rayes of his Deity and sit down on the right hand of the Majesty on high But 3ly I must repeat my charge of Falshood against his Doctrine in that he sayes All this is called his Intercession p. 6. That Government of the Church Raising the Dead Judging the world c. should be called Christs Intercession looks as like Non-sence as ever I saw any thing in my life For Intercession has God for its Object as Intercessor he deals with his Father though on the behalf of Men 1 Ioh. 2. 1. We have an Advocate with the Father and he is the propitiation for our sins I should wonder to hear that an Advocates Office should be to plead with his Clyent and not with and before the Iudge on the behalf of his Clyent but because Intercession is the other great Branch of the Sacerdotal Office and some are deeply concerned that he should not offer up a Proper sacrifice to God they judge it Reason that one part of the same Office should not fare better than the other The High-Priest under the Law when he had offered Sacrifice upon the Altar upon the Feast of Expiation he goes into the Holy place with the blood carrying on his Breast and on his shoulders the Names of the twelve Tribes to signifie that he went in to intercede with God for the whole Church what He did typically Christ has done really Hebr. 9. 12. for when he had obtained eternal Redemption for us by his blood he goes to Heaven there to Appear before his Father and our Father his God and our God on our behalf and this is indeed called his Intercession the benefits we have thereby comprize some or all of those things before mention'd but I think it 's reasonable to distinguish between a thing and its proper effects and fruits but these are nothing but the Socinian Coleworts twenty times â—…oyled till they are rank poyson So Volkel lib. 3. de verâ Relig. p. 148. Primò illud occurrit quod seipsum pro nobis in Coelo offert vel quod idem reipsa est pro nobis coram Deo astaâ—… seu apparet atque interpellat quae omnia verba ad Christi Regnum translata sunt per similitudinem ab illorum Pontificum Officio ductam quod erat omnia modò enumerata in terrestri illo Sanctuario propriè verèque perficere This we take notice of in the first place that Christ offers himself for us in Heaven which is all one stands or appears and intercedes for us before God all which words are applyed to the kingdom of Christ by a Metaphor taken from the Office of those High-priests which was properly and really to perform the things fore-mentioned in that Earthly Sanctuary So that now according to this mans Sentiments the typical umbratile Priests under the Law did that really and properly which Christ the onely True and proper High-priest performs but in a shadow And I do the more wonder at the Confidence of the Man who could to this purpose quote Hebr. 7. which Chapter plainly sets Christ's ever living to make Intercession for us upon this bottome that he hath an unchangeable Priesthood But p. 149. he comes close up to our Authors apprehensions Itaque consequens est Interpellationem nequaquam propriè sed per translationem quandam Christo tribui nihilque reverà aliud ejusmodi loquendi formis significari quam Christum divinitùs sibi concessâ potentiâ omnia quae ad salutis nostrae Rationem pertinent summo studio perficere Hence it followes that Intercession is not at all properly but by Allusion ascribed to Christ and that nothing else is signified by those forms of speech but that Christ by a Power granted him from God doth very earnestly perform all things that belong to the Business of our Salvation And how sweetly does our Author syncretise with him Government of the Church sending the Spirit are called his Intercession And his Reason is as pretty as his Doctrine because like the Intercession of the High priest under the Law it 's founded on his Expiation and Sacrifice The strength of this Argument if it has any will be easily seen If Christs Intercession be founded on his Expiation then his Governing the Church is called his Intercession But the former is as true as what 's most so Ergo the latter is True also The Assumption is but a meer Presumption one part of Christ's Priesthood is not founded upon another but both are equally founded in his Unction and that Authority which he received from his Father but it 's the Consequence of the former Proposition which I would see a little more clear for methinks they hang untowardly together Suppose Christs Intercession were founded upon his Sacrifice for what I can discover his governing the Church sending his Spirit raising the dead may be Acts of his Kingly Power as they have alwayes been Let this whole matter be layd even with the type Aaron did not only offer Sacrifice to God upon his Altar but he went into the most holy plâ—…ce to make intercession for the people Was his Intercession founded on his Oblation or both his Power to Offer and Intercercede grounded upon his Office that he was High-priest Intercession then signifies not the Administration of a Mediatory Kingdome which has Men for its immediate and proper Object but the Administration of an everlasting Priesthood which has God for its Object though managed on the behalf of Men so it has signified this sixteen hundred years and so it is like to doe till we see stronger Engines to unfix the Notion of it Hitherto of the Nature of Christs Offices which he sayes is a true Account of his Mediatory kingdome but I say it 's the most false absurd and Idle account that ever was given by any but our Author and his partizans of the Socinian misbelief and is neither reconcileable with the Truth nor with it self one instance whereof we have in this last Paragraph That sayes he to which we commonly appropriate the Name of Regal power is his Intercession Commonly indeed but not truely so called and yet in the close he tells you that Intercession signifies the Administration of a Kingdom which how it should doe and not pertain to his kingly Office I cannot make out And now from the Nature of Christs Kingdome he proceeds to the
also the Love Honour and Admiration of them for whom he endured it And if some few Holy men be a little Transported with the Love of Christ methinks it 's easily pardonable very few die of that Disease no danger this Age should be Hot in the fourth Degree of Love to a Redeemer that our Author should be necessitated to Write a Book for fear it should Poyson us For my part I meet with no such Paroxisms of Divine Love that his Iulip should be so much cry'd up but I would fain please my self with this that whilst he seems Frigidam suffundere his Real Design is to make us all more in Love with Christ by a Spiritual Antiperistasis 2. This gives great Reverence and Authority to his Gospel that it was Preacht by so Great a Person as the Son of God And therefore whilst he is in the good Humour let him Retract those Severe and Toothed Satyrs wherewith he has Torn and Lasht those poor Honest Men for loving his Person but Neglecting his Laws when he tells us here The greater Reverence we have for his Person the more sacred Regard we have for his Laws Perhaps he was then under an Accession of Gout Stone or Cholick or some of the peevish Distempers which made him so Testy and Teachy with his best Friends but now he 's a little come home to himself he 's in as Sweet Treatable and Debonaire a Humour as one could wish if it would but last I confess some may think that All this is nothing but a Complement which he passes upon Christ's Person or a little Holy-water he sprinkles in his Face and that there Lurks a Snake under these fair Flowers For he plainly makes Laws and Gospel Edaequate and Commensurate Terms This gives Reverence to the Gospel for Laws always partake of the Fate and condition of the Law-giver The Gospel as Contradistinguisht to the Covenant of Works denotes the glad Tidings of Salvation by a Mediatour or the joyful News that there was Forgiveness with God that He might be feared As contradistinguisht to the Old Testament-state it is the glad Tidings of the Son of God sent into the World that taking upon him our Nature he might therein become a Curse for us and by his perfect Obedience to the Law might Purchase and Procure Eternal Life And are Christs Laws and His Gospel become Convertible Is there no Revelation No Promise Nothing done for us which cannot come under the Nature of a Law The Laws of Christ then are Holy and Just and Good that the Greatness of his Person Consiliates Reverence and due Regard to them we acknowledge that Law and Gospel are words of equal Extent we deny and do think our Author will be harder put to it to prove Christ to signifie Law than to signifie Gospel Much less are we satisfied in his Comparison Numa pretended he received his Laws from the Goddess Aegeria to procure a greater Veneration to them Thus God c. Say you so Did God procure Veneration for his Laws with such a cunning Trick a Pia fraus as Politick Numa did Or is Christ grown an Instrument of Government as he tells us hereafter Gods Justice is Well I hope he Meant honestly or else it will be somewhat hard to be tied to Mean just as he Means 3. The Greatness of his Person gives great Authority to his Example for he came to be our Prophet and our Guide to Teach us by his Precepts and his Life Believe it this is something like The World is well amended since pag. 5. For then Preaching the Gospel was the Exercise of his Regal Power And now here he has brought it into Decorum again and at present is under a Pang of Modern Orthodoxy But his Example gives us an Evident Demonstration wherein the Perfection of Humane Nature consists for he lived up to the Perfection of Humane Nature and the only way to be Perfect is to Live as he Lived Why then I doubt we must never be in any sence Perfect all the days of our Lives for in the very next Page he proves That Christs becoming Poor though he was Rich a Servant though he was Lord of Life are such Expressions of Love as we can never fully Imitate and so Adieu to all Perfection to the Worlds end It was indeed Prudently done to Imitate the Wisdome of Nature to Plant his Antidote so near his Poyson that if he scatter'd Infection in one Page to fortifie our feeble Spirits against the Impressions of it in another A little Observation will Dismiss this Period And 1. One would think that to live as Christ lived was not so much the way to Perfection as Perfection it self Your dull Syntagmatical Divines use to distinguish between the Means and the End or the way to the Wood and the Wood it self but great Spirits are above Pedantick Laws and therefore to please all Parties for once let the way to be Perfect be to be Perfect 2. I observe that the Scripture owns some to be Perfect who never lived all out nay nothing near so well as Christ lived 1 Chron. 15. 17. The heart of Asa was perfect all his days and yet we read that In his Disease he sought not to the Lord but to the Physitian he took not away the High places he was wroth with the Prophet Hanani and put him in Prison and yet perhaps our Author can Evade That notwithstanding this he might come up to his Pattern for Christ himself once or twice put on the Person of a Iewish Zealot There was then a time when a man might have been perfect and yet not Live up to the absolute Perfection of Christ but I perceive it s lost and is to be numbered amongst the Resperditae of Pancirol To conclude How far Christ is to be Imitated is a Question of greater Difficulty than at first sight may be Imagined Some Works he performed as God others as Mediatour and others as a Man Those which he performed as God the Miraculous Operations of the Deity none need be disswaded from Imitation of for no stronger a Reason than because 't is Impossible To Raise the Dead cast out Devils Cure Diseases with a Word or Touch are Matter of our Admiration not Imitation I know indeed some of our Modern Schoolmen will tell us That though we cannot Imitate Christ herein to the height yet we may imitate him as far as we can Thus though Raising the Dead be a little too Many for you yet you may come to the Grave of your dead Friend command him to come forth but if he be Sullen and will not stir hand nor foot let him take his Course and lie there still like his Grace in cold Clay clad You have done your Duty and may satisfie your Conscience that you have Imitated Christ as far as you can by as Useful a Figure as any is in Rhethorick called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Works which Christ performed as Mediatour though
mere tenderness of Conscience lest you should do him an Injury Our acquaintance with Christs Person teaches us no new Doctrine but only acquaints us with the Reason of the Old ones We learn from the Gospel that God pardons Iniquity Transgression and Sin and from the same Gospel we understand what Influence the Personal Sufferings of Christ have upon our forgiveness with God We learn from the Scriptures That God heareth the Prayers of his People offer'd in the Name of Christ And from the same Gospel we learn what the Intercession of Christ at the right Hand of the Father does contribute to the answer of our prayers The Person of Christ reveals no other much less greater and deeper Mysteries than are revealed in the Gospel only that upon the account of Christs Person his Offices his Undertaking we have a satisfactory account how those things which the Gospel reveals should be Possible and Feasible Thus Rom. 3. 26. we find that God is the Iustifier of him that believes And Faith that Resolves all its acts into the Veracity and Authority of the Revealer is ready to assent to and acquiesce in that Revelation But suppose God will gratifie the Inquisitiveness of our Spirits and clear up Matters to the satisfaction of our Trembling because guilty Souls the Gospel reveals all this to be in Christ He is set forâ—…h to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood Rom. 3. 25. In him is the Righteousness of God declared Upon His account God appears to be Iust even then when He is the most Gracious free and soveraign Iustifier of a Sinner If then at any time our Faith shall stagger how the Blood of Christ could be a Propitiation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Pacification with God for us we are presently Relieved from the Consideration of that Person whose Blood it was viz. The Blood of Him that is God Acts 20. 28. and therefore of infinite Value But because this will hardly pass when we tender it in Payment we have one to be our Voucher whose Word will go further than the Doctors Bond and it is our Authors own dear self Pag. 19. This assures us of the Infinite value of Christs Sacrifice God cannot but be well pleased when his Son undertakes to be a Ransome The clear and full account therefore of the deep Mysteries and great Difficulties in our Religion are to be Salved from a due Consideration of the Person Natures Offices Undertaking Active and Passive Obedience of Christ but the Revelations of all these things are Wholly Only and Entirely due to the Gospel There is one thing which I shall touch upon by the way That for any Doctrine or Proposition which his Adversaries do Abett he exacts Rigorously and they are bound to produce express Revelations Scripture to a Letter a Tittle but for any of his own phancies A feeble Conjecture some far-fetcht Consequence shall serve the turn well enough Such Laws did his Master Volkelius Lib. 3. de ver â Relig. Cap. 11. p. 62 once Impose upon the world That whosoever should bring a Text to prove that the Church of Old had the Promises of Eternal Life must bring one that did assert it Apertis Luculentissimisque verbis In plain express Terms Ay no doubt it must be written with a Sun-beam that will enlighten their minds who have no mind to see but if it be drawn with a Charcoal it will do when it s pressed to serve their Hypothesis Now though I much Question whether we be Obliged to abide by these new Laws of Disputation yet thus much is out of Question that our Blessed Saviour thought he quoted Scripture when he only drew an Inference from it Iohn 7. 38. He that believeth on me as the Scripture hath said out of his Belly shall flow Rivers of Living Waters But 3. As I am dissatisfied with our Authors Inference from the Doctors words so I am much more with the Reason that he assigns to make good his Inference His Inference is That the Doctor from Christs Person learns greater deeper Mysteries than Christ hath Revealed in his Gospel The Proof is this For so he adds soon after That these properties of God his pardoning Mercy Christ hath revealed in his Doctrin in that revelation he hath made of God and his Will The Sinews and Nerves of which Argument lie visible The Doctor asserts That these properties of God are revealed in the Gospel Ergo It 's plain that He asserts they are not revealed in the Gospel That is in broad English he denies because he affirms Or he says the Snow is Black because he proves as well as he can that it 's White Let none ever hereafter despair of the greatest Impossibilities this is one of the most hopeful Essays towards the Squaring of the Circle the Doubling of the Cube and setting on Foot a perpetual Motion And what cannot that Wit be able to do that can prove the Doctor affirms these Mysteries are not because he says they are in the Gospel I confess when first I read this Passage in our Author I examin'd the Doctors words with all possible care nay I wrested them almost in pieces and wrackt them most cruelly to try if with my weak strength I could extort any such conclusion from them and when I had tired my self was forced to sit down by this Determination that either our Author or all his Readers are certainly Frighted out of their Wits But yet there 's something follows in the Doctors that will yield matter of Cavil But the Life of this Knowledge lies in an acquaintance with Ghrists Person wherein the express Image and Beams of this Glory of his Father doth shine forth That is as our Author pretends to Gloss it from the Doctor These things are clearly eminently and savingly only to be discovered in Jesus Christ. I was apt to think at first sight that he might have some dreadful Pick at those words In his Person the express Image and Beams of this Glory of his Father shine forth But I soon Cured my self of that Suspition by remembring that pag. 32. Our Author himself was pretty well contented Christ should be so called upon the account of his Divine Nature although to please all Parties he had found out a Temper that he should be so called in respect of his Doctrines and Revelations And therefore without more ado I was satisfied that the Grudge lay against those other words The Life of this Knowledge lies in an acquaintance with Christs Person Now if I might presume so far upon my Acquaintance with the Doctors meaning as I think any one may it 's no more but this That whereas the Scripture every where reveals to us that God is a God pardoning Iniquity Transgression and Sin Exod. 34. 6. Yet the Matter is Clog'd with considerable Difficulties and attended with great Objections for the same Text assures us that He will by no means clear the Guilty Both the parts of this
sayes he for though it be not exact and perfect in every thing yet if it be sincere we shall be accepted for the sake of Christ by vertue of the Covenant that he hath Sealed with his Blood But I am afraid he has conjured up a Spirit that he cannot lay again with so sorry a Charm For 1. I do not find that God has abated any thing of his Law but is as peremptory as ever for Do this and live Nothing will please God less than exact and perfect Obedience though in the Covenant of Grace he is pleased to admit Another a Mediator to doe it for Believers I had rather he would hear the Reverend and Learned Bishop Reynolds upon Psal. 110. p. 492. In point of Validity or Invalidity there can be but Five things said of the Law 1. Either it must be Obeyed and that it is not for all have sinn'd and come short of the Glory of God Rom. 3. 23. Or 2. it must be Executed upon Men and the Curse and Penalty thereof inflicted and that it is not neither for there is no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jâ—…sus Rom. 8. 1. Or 3. it must be Abrogated or extinguish'd and that it is not neither for Heaven and Earth shall sooner pass away If there were no Law there would be no Sin for sin is the Transgréssion of the Law And if there were no Law there would be no Iudgement for the World must be judged by the Law Or 4. it must be Moderated and favourably interpreted by Rules of Equity and that it cannot be neither for it 's inflexible and one jot or tittle must not be abated Or lastly the Law it self remaining the Obligation thereof notwithstanding must towards such or such Persons be so far forth dispensed withall as that a Surety shall be admitted upon a Concurrence of all their Wills who are therein interested God willing to Allow Christ willing to Perform Man willing to Enjoy both to doe all the Duties and to suffer all the Curses of the Law in behalf of that Person who in Rigor should have done or suffer'd all so that the Law nor one jott or tittle thereof is abrogated in regard of the Obligation therein contained but they are all reconciled in Christ Thus far he But 2. That Sincerity which he talks of is indeed allow'd in the Gospel in the Matter of Inherent Righteousness and Sanctification there it has a proper and excellent place but comes not into the business of Iustification at all And 3. This Sincerity will be but a Cover-slut for the Omission and Neglect of our Duty for if Sincerity will do the work without Universality and Integrity of Obedience the best way will be to shrowd our selves under a profound Ignorance of Gods Commandements and then the less we know of Gods Will the safer we are under the shelter of Sincerity And 4. The Question will be How much shortness of Obedience will this Sincerity compound for It may be our Author will prescribe a Drachm of Sincerity to a Scruple of Disobedience but then Another will make a Grain of Sincerity a very little upon a knifes point serve to sweeten a whole Pound of Defect in Duty and thus every Mountebank with a dose of his Electuary of Sincerity will pretend to heal mens Consciences of those wounds that Sin has given them 5. Whereas our Author addes that we shall be accepted for the sake of Christ it 's a meer Iuggle for when he comes to enquire What Influence the Righteousness and Death of Christ have upon our acceptation with God he professes he can find nothing in the world but that God will pardon us if we believe and obey the Gospel p. 320. which doubtless he would have done without him But this is onely to make the same use of Christ that Politicians doe of the Foxes Case to piece the Lyons skin when it 's too short just so must Christ serve to eke out the shortness of their Obedience with his own and when they have stretcht their own Righteousness upon the Tenters as far as it will hold to be beholden to Christ for the Rest God for Christs sake does indeed accept our imperfect Duty Obedience Service and pardon the shortness of it according to the Tenour of the Covenant of Grace but not that it should thereby stand for our Iustification which we have onely upon the Account of what he has done and suffered for us made ours by accepting him upon his own Terms 3. We are come with much adoe to the third and last Addition that these men make or are supposed to make to the Gospel Viz. Concerning our Wisdom to walk with God To which thinks Doctor Owen there is required Agreement Acquaintance Way Strength Boldness and aiming at the same End and all these with the Wisdom of them are hid in the Lord Iesus It were worth the while to transcribe the Doctors discourse upon all these Heads but our Author has saved me the Labour The summe of all is this That Christ having expiated our sins and fulfilled all Righteousness for us though we have no Personal Righteousness of our own but are as contrary to God as Darkness is to Light and Death to Life and an universal Pollution and Defilement to an universal and glorious Holiness and Hatred to Love yet the Righteousness of Christ is a sufficient nay the onely Foundation of our Agreement and upon that of our walking with God Now without doubt our Author would have his Reader believe that the Doctor has said all this and that he intends we may have Communion with God whilest we continue thus I confess at the reading hereof I was amazed knew not what to think Have I been all this while so narrowly watching the Doctor that a false Print much less a false Doctrine could not escape me and is our Author come after me and findes all this filth and abominable stuffe Once again therefore because I durst not trust my own Eyes or Ears and am under a Vow never to trust our Authors Tongue or Pen speaking evil of the Doctor I took down the Book and what I find I will transcribe and let all the world judge Com. p. 119. The Prophet tells us that two cannot walk together unless they be agreed Amos 3. 3. Untill Agreement be made there is no Communion God and Man by Nature or whilest Man is in the state of Nature are at the greatest Enmity He declares nothing to us but wrath neither do we come short of him yea we first began it and continue longest in it In this state the wisdom of walking with God must needs be most remote from the Soul He is Light and in him is no Darkness at all we are Darkness and in us is no Light at all he is Life a living God we are dead Sinners dead in Trespasses and sins he is Holiness and glorious in it we wholly defiled and an abominable thing he is Love
following of Adam as the Pelagians vainly talk but it is the corruption of the Nature of every Man whereby Man is very faâ—… gone from Original Righteousness and is enclined to Evil. So that in every Person born into the World it deserveth Gods Wrath and Damnation Surely here 's something that deserves our most serious Thoughts That which deserves Damnation at Gods Hands deserves consideration at ours He that can carry about with him daily a depraved Nature enclined to evil running counter to Gods Will and not lament it with a bitter Lamentation has taken some of our Authors Hypnoticks and how to bewail it without being sensible of it is a Mysterie perhaps as deep as any of those we owe to his Discovery And is not this to Reproach Christ himself Mat. 9. 12 13. They that be whole have no need of the Physitian but they that are sick Ay says he these are Metaphors and I will Rail them out of Credit and Countenance immediately Well you shall not fall out with Christ for a Metaphor if I can help it Read the Next words I come not to call the Righteous but Sinners to Repentance And they must be sensible sinners that will regard the Call of Christ or think they need Repentance Another Quarrel he has against the Practice of their Religion is That they hold it absolutely necessary that we be sensible how Impossible it is for us to Attone the Wrath of God to have any righteousness of our own that can bear the severe Scrutiny of his Iustice. Be it so if there be no Remedy It seems then if we could work up our Imagination into a Presumption that Gods Anger against sin is very small and our Righteousness very great so great as to endure the severe Scrutiny of Gods Iustice we might purchase this Gentlemans favour But the Gospel has taught us otherwise Rom. 3. 10. That there is none righteous no not one That by the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified in Gods sight ver 20. But he lays about him and Reproaches the Spirit of Bondage the Spirit of Adoption and at last falls a Reviling Christs own Words We shall says he in his fleering way never Value and Prize Christ and go to him for Salvation till we are Convinc'd of the necessity of him and driven to him by the Threatnings of the Law and the Promise of Ease and Rest is made only to the weary and heavy Laden and those only shall be satisfied who Hunger and Thirst after Righteousness Really this Doctor Owen and his Fellows are dangerous Persons I wonder not now that some think it not fit they should live a day That ever they should be so bold to read or quote Matth. 5. 6. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after Righteousness for they shall be filled or that other place Matth. 11. 28. Come unto me all you that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest or to mention Galat. 3. 24. Wherefore the Law was our School-master to bring us unto Christ But did they make the Scriptures or coin and invent these words of their own heads or has our Author a License to expose the Expressions of the Holy Spirit as well as the Doctors Surely an awfull regard to the Authority of Jesus Christ speaking in them might have commanded some Reverence to them and controlled this unbridled liberty of prostituting Sacred Matters But thus much and too much of what they make of Conviction And now says he being thus stung with Sin it is time for us to look up to Christ as the Israelites did on the Brazen Serpent that we may be healed But is this Gentleman indeed a Minister a Teacher of others the Rector of St. George Buttolphs-lane and knows not that he reproaches Christ himself Ioh. 3. 15. And as Moses lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderness even so must the Son of Man be lifted up that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have Eternal Life And does not Christ himself authorize the Parallel That as none were healed in the Wilderness but those onely who sensible of pain looked up to the Brazen Serpent as Gods own Institution to which a Promise of healing was annexed so neither can we receive any benefit by Christ till under a deep sense of our sin and misery we accept of and close with a Redeemer whom the Father has held forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood for the Remission of sins But this is not all Now we must begin to see his fulness and perfection and suitableness to the wants and necessities of our Souls that he is our Attonement our Wisdom our Righteousness and all that we can desire or need Well and if they do conceive Christ to have both fulness and suitableness of all Grace and Mercy in him I hope it 's neither Felony nor Treason neither We have an Assurance Heb. 4. 15. That Christ is such a Priest as is touched with a feeling of our Infirmities and was in all points tempted like unto us yet without sin there 's great suitableness and we are encouraged to come boldly to the throne of Grace that we may obtain Mercy and find Grace to help in time of need and there 's fulness And surely our Author does sometimes pray to Christ at least he is enjoyn'd by the Litany to say O God the Son Redeemer of the World have mercy upon us miserable Sinners Now if he can indeed discover no suitableness no fulness of Grace in Christ to answer the needs and wants of those miserable Sinners he had better save his Breath to cool his Pottage It is further charged upon them That when the sense of their sins and unworthiness makes them afraid to come to Christ they have recourse to their Acquaintance with Christs Person to answer their Doubts and quiet their Consciences Which charge though it has a Tincture and dash of our Authors good Nature in it they can easily bear and do confess that when the sense of their sins and Unworworthiness at any time discourages them from Comeing to God for the Pardon of sins they do relieve themselves from the Gospel which has spoken great things of the Ability and Readiness of a Mediator to save humble and repenting Sinners that are willing to receive him as God has offer'd him in the Covenant of Grace They do there find that Christ came into the World to save the chiefest of Sinners such as had been Blasphemers Persecutors and Injurious and yet have obtained Mercy that Christ in them might shew forth all long-suffering for a Pattern to them that should afterwards believe on him to Everlasting Life 1 Tim. 1. 15 16 17. And do further believe that to deny this is at once to renounce the whole Gospel and if it be not a Fruit of down-right Infidelity and Atheisme yet most apparently leads thither Our Author having destroy'd the Living begins to prey upon the Dead
than the Gofpel allows The Question then shall never be stated by me thus Whether we must Obey or no Keep the Commandments of Christ or no And that upon Peril of Eternal Damnation But whether out of this Obedience of ours may be gathered that righteousness in which we may safely venture to appear before the Iudge of all the Earth in the great day as that which we resolve to stand and abide by venturing our all upon it This is that the Doctor thinks the Apostle reproved Rom. 9. 31 32. Israel which followed after the Law of righteousness hath not attained to the Law of righteousness because they sought it not by Faith but as it were by the Works of the Law Where the Apostle Intimates that though we do not directly seek a righteousness by the Works of the Law yet to do it Obliquely and Indirectly is destructive and that the Doctor intends no more no other than this is evident from the words our Author calls in And though I would have walkt according to my own mind yet now I give up my self to be wholly guided by thy Spirit This Netled our Authors Conscience and he takes Sanctuary in the most wretched Subterfuge that ever betrayed it's Confider What a pretty Complement does the Soul make to Christ We are now sheer gone from the Truth of the Principle to the Truth of the Heart in receiving it If it proves a Complement in the Mouth of an Hypocrite yet in Thesi its a Truth That whoever receives Christ upon his own Terms does renouncing his own will and way give up himself wholly to be ruled by the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures At this wiâ—…d rate I have often heard a silly Quaker answer this Proposition Iesus Christ that Died at Jerusalem is the Saviour of the World Ay says he but doest thou witness that from the Light within 2. Others make Obedience necessary upon the account of Christs Fulness But this he says makes it no otherwise necessary then as we are necessarily passive in it However if it be necessary upon any account it 's enough to make him blush that flatly Charges it upon them to say it 's not necessary But to be passive in our Obedience is all the Soul means in giving up it self to be ruled by the Spirit of Christ. Then the Soul means Nonsence For to give it self to be ruled by the Spirit has something of Activity in it Our help and asistance to give up our selves is from the Spirit but the giving up is an an act of the Souls 'T is the Believer that obeys and yet the ability to obey is from the Holy Ghost It 's the Creature that works and yet its God that works in him to will and to do of his own good Pleasure Phil. 2. 13. It 's the man that believes and yet he believes according to the working of Gods mighty Power Ephes. 1. 19 20. What is it else that he prays to the Spirit for O God the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son have Mercy upon us miserable sinners But all this might have been Superseded had our Author duly Recollected what he has Subscribed and openly given his Assent and Consent to in the 10th Art of the Church of England We have no power to do Good works acceptable to God without the Grace of God preventing us that we may have a good Will and Working with us when we have that good Will Allow but the Doctor the Benefit of the Clergie and he will need no more to bring him off though that very Article would prove our Authors Neck-verse In the Work of Grace the Spirit Acts according to the Nature of the Subject which is here the Rational Creature He gives not new Natural Powers but a new Moral ability to Exercise them he bestows not a new Will Physically but enlarges it from its Fetters discharges it from its Slavery and powerfully though Gently enclines it to Gods Testimonies not destroying its radical self-determining Power and hence I conclude our Author is but sorrily Skilled in the true meaning of souls when they Profess a subjection to Christ. The Soul meant honestly she had no Mental reservation none of these Quirks and Tricks but plainly and sincerely Designed to give up her self in all Obedience to her Lord and Saviour She in her Text intended very singly but our Author has Commented upon it Knavishly I said so indeed in haste another would have said perhaps Foolishly for what more Idle Chat could he have Learn't from the good Women his Neighbours at Billings-gate than a willingness to obey against ones Will. This is all our Author is willing to own of the Grounds of our Obedience but I shall help his weak and frail Memory a little though to his great Regret Doctor O. Com. pag. 212. Obedience says the Doctor is necessary as a Means to the End N. B. God hath appointed that Holiness shall be the Means the Way to that Eternal Life which as in it self and Originally is his Gift by Jesus Christ so with regard to his Constitution of our Obedience as the Means of attaining it is a Reward and God in bestowing of it a Rewarder though it be neither the Cause Matter nor Condition of our Justification yet it is the Way appointed of God for us to walk in for the obtaining of Salvation And therefore he that hath hope of Eternal Life Purifies himself as he is Pure and none shall ever come to that End who walketh not in that Way for without Holiness it is impossible to see God The bare Repitition of which words are as plain and full a Rebuke to all our Authors Dirty Nasty Reflections as a reasonable Creature can desire But these things we shall meet withall anon and therefore here they shall lie ready in Banco till our Authors Leisure shall call for them I had now eased my self and my Reader of any further Vexation in this Section had I not unhappily overseen one Passage in Mr. Watson from which our Author thinks he has some Advantage The words are these Evangelical Truths will not down with a Natural Heart such a one had rather hear some quaint Point of some Vertue or Vice stood upon than any thing in Christ c. Which he thus Canvasses Such sanctified Souls and Ears loath all Dull Insipid Moral Discourses which are perpetually Inculcating their Duty on them and Troubling them with a great many Rules and Directions for a good Life which he is pleased to call the Quaint Points of Vertue and Vice Good Sir be not angry have but a little Patience and all will be well to your Hearts Content Mr. Watson does not Inveigh against your Poynant Invictives against the one or your most Elaborate Encomiums of the other Run down sin at the highest rate of Zeal and Fervency you can render Prophaneness as Odious and expose her for a Fulsomè sâ—…urvy Baggage if you please Invent new Names for her
despised As that they argue from Fancies and Imaginations from some pretty Allusions Similitudes and Allegories which have no certain shape Yet I am well assured that no man was ever more firmly bounden and indebted to an Allegory than our Author unless I saw him clapt up for one upon Execution in the Kings-Bench pag. 6. He did but meet with the word Salem upon the Road and he presently spies the New Ierusalem coming down from Heaven in it pag. 161. He had heard that Eve was taken out of Adams side and he sets his Allegorical Machine awork and hales the Church taken out of Christs crucified Body Out on 't Though to Qualifie the Matter he says it was but with a Quasi as it were or if he might so say but by and by he grows more flesht with Success and Peremptorily concludes That the Church is taken out of the crucified Body of Christ which says he in the Mystical sence answers to the Womans being taken out of the Man and from this pretty Allusion grounds his Interpretation of Ephes. 5. 30. 1 Col. 21. 22. Although the state of Innocency had no proper instituted Types however the passages of Gods Providence therein may be accommodated by the Penmen of the Holy Scriptures Infallibly inspired to Illustrate Evangelical Verities But let a taste of these things stay the Readers Stomach a while and if his Mouth waters at such Theology he shall have his Belly full even to Surfeit of such Luscious Allegories in due time Thus much to his first Argument taken from the uncertainty of this way of arguing 2. His second Reason follows drawn also from the uncertainty of this way of arguing For thus his Argument runs This way of reasoning will serve any mans turn Which is nothing but the uncertainty of it and had not our Author who alway argues as occasion serves from the Essential differences of things told us it was another reason it might have Militated under the colours of the former But he puts in a Caveat against all the World but himself and his Brethren For though it will serve any mans turn yet you must always Interpret it with this restriction who have any Quickness and Vigour of Fancy which clearly cuts out all the rest of Mankind as shall appear from the Fag end of this Section What remains of this Discourse is laid out upon the Equipping of another Scheme of Religion from an acquaintance with Christs Person Where in the Quickness and Vigour of his Fancy doe Triumph The World shall now see I that they shall what other-guise work our Author can make on 't when he comes to the Trimming of this Matter than those clumzy Fellows ever could who have attempted that way and shall see that Scanderbags Sword and Arm together can work Wonders It 's ordinary to find the Physitians Trencher loaden with that Meat which he Prohibits his Patient upon pain of Death If any else had presum'd to have finger'd this Theme he had got a rap o th' Knuckles and yet here we find our Author up to the Elbows in 't Great Spirits know how to give Laws to others and yet themselves to Live above them I have openly owned it that this Section is unanswerable and that my Reader may not Censure me for a Dictator I am Obliged to give him an Account of the Impregnableness of it The Scheme which he here presents us withal is not supposed to be his own Iudgment but meerly an Imitation of other Mens way though the Copy out-doe the Original If therefore any one shall Essay to Answer it he comes over you I did but play the Fool because I supposed others had done so and I was willing to let you see I could do it as neatly as another To meddle therefore with the substrate Matter and main Doctrine thereof would be lost Labour to Examine whether it be stufft with Orthodox or Heterodox propositions shall be all one to me but one thing I confess I am tempted to search into because he Boasts so highly of his Skill in it how easie it is to present us with many more Schemes with fair Colours Exact and regular Proportions and artificial Connexions viz. Whether there be that regular proportion betwixt his Confidence and his Performance whether he has put such fair Colours upon things but that the Morphew of the skin shines through the Ceruss whether his Matters be Linckt together with such artificial connexions Or whether the Sun in the Firmament and as the Battoon in the Chimney coâ—…ner do not as well shake hands that is whether the Wind-Mill be not alive for all Don Quixot 1. He tells us Since we see Christ come in the Nature and Likeness of a Man nothing dreadful in his Countenance having all the sweetness of Innocency his Miracles Great and Glorious but not Frightful and Astonishing his Almighty Power displai'd in Methods of Love and Kindness healing the Sick dispossessing Devils c. From all this we may safely Conclude He came upon an Embassy of Peace to assure the World of Gods good Will to them and to Reconcile the Differences betwixt God and Man Now for my own part my Eyes are not a whit Dazled with the fairness of his colours nor my Thoughts much ravisht with the exactness of the Symmetry of this Piece For 1. It 's very Disproportionable to his main assertion How unsafe and dangerous it is to found Religion upon an acquaintance with Christs Person Whereas in this Period he assures us We may safely conclude thence that Christ was an Ambassador of Peace that he came to reconcile the Differences betwixt God and Man Which I promise you makes a shrewd Hole in Religion 2. It bears no better proportion to its self for I hope the Reader has not forgotten how he is Erecting a Scheme of Religion from an acquaintance with Christs Person not taking in Gospel Revelation Now here he supposes Christ to have been the Eternal Son of God leaving his Fathers Throne coming into the World which he could never have concluded from his Person had he seen him in the flesh unless the Mystery of it had been revealed to him from above Math. 16. 16 17. Thou art Christ the Son of the Living God Blessed art thou Simon Bar-Iona for flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee but my Father which is in Heaven 3. He pretends to gather Christs design in coming into the World from his Person Miracles Behaviour and sweet demeanoâ—… towards men yet here we want Proportion if we may believe himself pag. 76. Had we seen Christ in the flesh and been witnesses of the many Miracles he wrought of his Death upon the Cross and his Resurrection from the dead had he not acquainted us with the End and Design of all this we might have ghess'd our selves weary and never have hit upon the right But Now what a happy change is here we may safely Conclude now who could not sorrily Ghesse
for his safety He wounded men that they might seek after healing and laid load upon their guilty minds that they might be content to take his Yoke upon them And that this is so 1. We have an Argument which is Instar omnium a Thousand Reasons by it self That is what our Author says That we must be affected with all the Arguments of Christs Incarnation c. so as to be sensible of the shame and folly of our sins Now how a man should be ashamed of sin till he sees its vileness and baseness and how he should see its vileness and filthiness till it s brought to the Test of Gods Holy Law which is the Rule of righteousness the Measure of Good and Evil is past my Conjecture Nay further that shame which fills a Soul does not merely arise from a sence of the Souls vileness but as compared with Gods Holiness who is a God so Pure so Holy c. that the Soul may well be ashamed and filled with Confusion of face to appear before him Now shame upon the account of the filthiness and dread upon the account of the guilt of sin are very near Neighbours Shame expresses the Souls sence of its own unworthiness to appear before God upon the score of its baseness and deformity and Fear expresses but the sence of Gods Authority which he hath Impressed and Stampt upon his Holy Law with the Souls reflection upon it self that it has violated that Law and thereby become liable to that Penalty which his own guilt has bound him over to And this was clear in Adams case He was Naked and therefore ashamed he was guilty and therefore feared to appear before this Holy God and Iust Iudge Now our Author will allow it lawful to fetch Arguments from Christs Incarnation Life Doctrine Death and what you please to make us ashamed of sin but by no means to be afraid of the Great God But the very truth is none say that it is the duty of Men to be Distracted and Unhinged in mind with slavish fears and Hellish apprehensions of Gods Justice But that this Dread may possibly run up some poor Creatures so high as to a literal distraction when the apprehensions of the Curse due to the Transgression of a righteous Law of a Holy and Jealous God shall overset a weak Judgement and dark Mind that sees its danger but no way to escape sees its Disease but not its Cure its sin with the demerits thereof but not a Saviour with his Merits and at once considers that Wrath of God which it concludes to be unavoidable and knows to be Intollerable 3. That our Saviour did use the Law and it's Terrors to awaken the Souls of men to a due apprehension of their sin and their danger thereupon the whole Tenour of the New Testament prove It was the Method of his Precurser Iohn the Baptist he laid this Ax to the Root of the Tree Mat. 3. 10. denouncing against them That every Tree that brought not forth good Fruit should be hewen down and cast into the fire And where-ever the Pharisees got it yet a warning they had got to flie from wrath to come The Apostle Paul both felt it and Preacht the use of the Law for Conviction of sin with all its Consequents and leading the sinner to Christ He felt it Rom. 7. 9. When the Commandment came sin revived and I died he saw himself a dead and lost man He Preacht also the Use of the Law Gal. 3. 24. to be a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. What use our Saviour in his own Person made of the Law may be seen from Matth. 5. and also chap. 23. where he thunders upon the dead and secure Consciences of Sinners with Arguments taken from the Law of God and the dreadfull Curse annex'd to the violation of it And though our Author will allow no more than an Awfull regard and reverence for God who is a holy and righteous Iudge and an irreconcileable Enemy to all Sin yet when a Sinner shall be throughly convinc'd that he is so and shall know that the wages of Sin is Death and that he that gave forth this Law and must sit in Iudgement upon him is both a Holy and a Righteous Iudge and an Irreconcileable Enemy to all Sin there will be more than an awfull regard and reverence for this God unless he have the faculty to tell a Sinner how he may stand guilty before his Judgement-Seat and not be filled with horror and unspeakable amazement But I see our Author can be both more severe than Christ where his severity is not due and more mercifull too at other times when his Clemency will destroy He will dawb over the chinks of their Consciences with untemper'd Mortar and skin over their wounds very smoothly he will not have men feel the workings of the Law nor any amazing terrours of Gods wrath Though it be hard to conceive how a Soul should see Sin and not see Gods wrath or seeing it not be terrified and amazed with it But such was not the Way and Method nor such the End and Design of Christs coming He never preach'd Peace when Destruction was nigh he accommodated not his Doctrine to the Lusts and Tempers of Sinners but Acted according to his Commission Isa. 61. 1 2. Preaching the Acceptable year of the Lord and the day of vengeance of our God But our Author has imposed it upon himself as his constant Method to discourse pro re natâ to fit the present purpose for pag. 3. of this excellent Piece he had told us That the Gospel of Christ is as severe a Dispensation as the Law which dooms men to Eternal misery that live not very vertuous and innocent Lives And they must be very vertuous and innocent ones indeed who escape that doom for just now he assures us That God is a righteous Iudge and an irreconcileable Enemy to all sin After all this storm there are yet a few drops behind which we may do well to shelter our selves from if we can He falls into some heat against our having Christ offer'd to us to be our Saviour against the Beseechings of Christ against Covenanting with Christ which is well express'd by Contract and Espousal And for this there is good warrant 2 Cor. 5. 20. As though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled to God This was Scripture before he was born and will be so when he is gone and therefore he may speak his pleasure against Christ and his Gospel But he has a License and let him make the best on 't for our parts we hope we shall not be Scoffed out of the Concernments of our Souls and Salvation and if that must Anger him let him repeat over the Alphabet or which will do as well Turn the Knot of his Girdle behind him To conclude the Persons whom our Authors lot is fallen out to reproach Doe build their Faith
Doctrine and a wide Gap to all Rebellion What a pitiful plight were Princes in if the Foundations of Government the Essential reasons of the Peoples subjection were to be Discanted upon by every Churchman The Childs relation to his Father does not consist in his filial Obedience but is the reason of it The Subjects relation to his Prince does not consist in Subjection but is the true Ground of it The Wife her relation to her Husband does not consist in her submission to her Husband but is the Spring of it A disobedient Child is a Child still he cannot shake off the relation a rebellious person though he deserves not the honourable Title of a Subject yet he is a Subject and cannot put off that relation An untoward Wife is a Wife still and every act nay many acts of Disobedience cannot dissolve the Copula For otherwise the way to be rid of a relation would be to Violate the Duties of it and then all future Disobedience would be no sin Because when the union is once Null and the relation dissolved there 's no Foundation upon which the Superiour can build a claim to Duty and this would be a short Cut and save abundance of time and Charges in sueing out a Divorce For let but the Wife disobey and the union which consists in Obedience Vanishes A little Divertisment will now be seasonable both for our Author and his Readers and therefore he will give us a plain Account of the only cause that can justifie Separation In the mean time it seems there is a Cause though but one only Cause that will justifie it and separation will not always argue Sâ—…hism And now all you that would know the one the only one Cause in all the World that can justifie a Separation from a true Church draw near and give your attention 1. When any Church prevaricates in the Laws of Christ. Prevaricates How many thousands of Schismaticks will shrowd themselves under the Covert of that one Word He has opened a Gate at which three Coachful of Separatists may Drive all-a-Brest If then a Church shall pretend to give us the Laws of Christ in Scriptis such was the Knavery of a Cardinal in the Consistory before the Conventicle of Trent and yet by Preaching and Practice destroy those very Laws or the Ends of them if the Church of Rome shall talk Big words of Holy Mother Church and yet embrace in her arms as her Children the vilest Varlets and shut out none but the Good unless now and then an old Fornicator or some such like Vermine that want Money to Buy off or Commute for Penance this is an unworthy Prevarication and if it shall certainly appear will justifie a separation 2. When it corrupts Religion And this will go a great way I promise you in some particular Churches Corruption may be by Addition Substraction Multiplication or Division The end of the Keys may be perverted those shut out whom Christ would receive and they admitted whom Christ would exclude It may strike with the back of the spiritual Sword when it should use the edge and wound with the edge when it should sleep in the Scabbard Christs Religion may be corrupted by mingling our own inventions with this pure and plain institutions and then we have a cause or a piece of a cause that paves our way for separation as broad as that by which Israel departed out of Egypt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 five in a rank 3. When it undermines the fundamental design of Religion which is to make men good and vertuoùs So that though they do not openly assault it by battery and escalado yet if they shall secretly undermine Godliness by denying the office of the holy spirit in Creating men to good and vertuous works and teach men to trust to their own natural strength and shall craftily oppose the Doctrine of the Scriptures and the Church of England That the condition of man after the fall is such that he cannot turn by his own natural strength without the Grace of God preventing him that he may have a good will or if they shall disown the satisfaction of Christs death upon the cross to Gods holiness and his justice founded thereon which is the bottom of our return to God and of our holy walking with him why then farewell as far as the shooes of the Gospel will carry you 4. When we cannot obey our spiritual rulers without disobeying the Laws of Christ when Christs commands and they forbid when he forbids and they command then we have our pasport to be gone and travel to the utmost ends of the Earth These are those four things all in one that will justifie a separation from a particular society and if our Authour would preach this Doctrine to his Parishoners he might leave it to them to make the Application But now on the otherside if the Church we live in acknowledges the Authority and submits to the Laws of Christ we are bound to live in Communion with it Very true but not true for our Authors Reason because this Unites us to Christ which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but go on when nothing is made the condition of our Communion which is expressely forbidden by the Laws of the supreme Lord we acknowledge his Authority in our subjection to our spiritual guides Now here are many things might be opposed 1. Let it be considered whether an implicite prohibition from the supreme Lord be not sufficient to make a condition of Communion unlawful and I cannot but wonder that our Authour in this case is all for an expresse prohibition when perhaps that may signifie a Command if he follows but his own rule not to interpret phrases by the sound of words But 2. In submitting to such conditions of Communion as are not expressely forbidden the Question is whether herein we submit to Christs authority and this I confesse I stick at And the Reason of my doubtful hesitation is this Because it supposes an acknowledgment of Christs Authority where he has not interposed his Authority supposes him to speak where he is silent and to Command obedience where he commands nothing nay where he has forbidden though not expressely forbidden that condition Now as I am not bound to obey an inferiour Magistrate unlesse his particular command be warranted by his Commission though it be not forbidden in his Commission so it seems I am not bound to Obey a particular Church in a particular imposed condition if not authorised by Christs instructions though it be not forbidden there at least no such refusal of obedience can be interpreted to be a disowning of Christs Authority because he is supposed to have determined neither Pro nor Con. If we turn back to p. 164. Our Authour has these words No man can be said to submit himself to his prince who denies subjection to those subordinate Magistrates who act by his Commission so no man can be said to resist his Prince who
the decking with Ornaments and aâ—…dorning with Iewels the representing true Believers accepted with God through a better Righteousness than their own 2. The Reader would admire to hear these glorious Gospel-Promises recorded in the Old-Testament thus interpreted to bare skin and bone But our Author confesses he swarms with prejudices against the Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness When Prejudice sits upon the Bench it 's like to go very ill with poor Truth that stands at the Bar. As a Bribed Fancy will admit the most feeble Appearances for plain Demonstrations of what it longs should be True so a mind fore-stalled with prejudice will despise the clearest evidence for what it desires to be false And we need no other instance of all this than our Author 's great Indisposition and Averseness to receive the present Truth And 1. I perceive he is very much stumbled at one thing That in all our Saâ—…iour's Sermons there 's no mention of his Imputed Righteousness Now because the same Charity that commands me not to lay a stumbling-block in the way of my Neighbour enjoyns me also to remoâ—…e it out of his way or however to help him over it the ensuing Considerations will afford him that Civility if he please to accept it 1. If our Saviour had mentioned the Imputation of his Righteousness a thousand times over he could easily have evaded it at his rate of answering for he might have said This is but to interpret Scripture by the sound of words or if that had been too frigid that it 's sufficient to say The words may possibly have another meaning though he could not tell what that should be or that by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness no more is meant but the Accepting of our own Righteousness which Christ has commanded in the Gospel 2. It may be of good use to him to consider Whether Christ's Silence raised his prejudice against the Doctrine or his own prejudice against the Doctrine raised the conceit that Christ was silent in it Whether it was the want of an Object to be seen or the want of eyes to see the Object For most men are deaf when they have no mind to hear and blind when they have no will to see For 3. Christ in his Sermons has plainly revealed the case to be such between God and man that without a better Righteousness than their own they are all lost for ever Matth. 5. 19. He that breaks the least of these Commandments shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven that is shall never come there Now the universal Suffrage of all mens Consciences is That there is no man that lives and sins not and therefore Christ has determined upon him that he shall never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven I never yet heard that God has dispenced with one jot or tittle of the Moral Law but Do this and live is as strictly exacted as ever So that unless a Surety be admitted and the Righteousness of another owned the case of all the Sons of Adam is deplorable and desperate To deny then the Righteousness where in the believing sinner may stand before this Righteous and Holy God is to affirm the Eternal Damnation of all the World 4. Christ has plainly discovered to us such ends of his Death and Sufferings as evidently prove the impossibility of being justified by our own Righteousness Matth. 20. 28. He gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Life or Soul a Ransome a Redeâ—…ption-price for instead of many Which is no whit less than that of the Apostle 2 Cor. 5. 21. He was made sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him And the same with Isa. 53. 10. It pleased the Lord to bruise him when he shall make his Soul an Offering for sin c. Again Matth. 26. 28. This is the Blood of the New-Testament which is shed for the Remission of the sins of many Whence it 's plain that God in pardoning sin in justifying and accepting the sinner has such a respect to the Satisfaction of Christ in our stead as may properly be called the Imputation thereof to us 5. Though Christ mention not the Imputation of his Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet has he mentioned that Righteousness which it's certain from the Scriptures must be imputed to Believers or they can have none of that benefit by it which they are said to have Matth. 3. 15. Christ fulfilled all Righteousness and vers 17. In him or upon his account God is well pleased comes to delight in Believers whom he accepts in the Beloved Ephes. 1. 6. ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He hath graciously accepted us in his Beloved one Hence it is the Holy Ambition of all the Saints 2 Cor. 5. 9. to be accepted of him or in him ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That regard then which God has to the Obedience of Christ as the Reason for which he accounts a Believer righteous we judg may commodiously be called the Imputing of Christ's Righteousness to them without the Leave License or Faculty of our Author A second Prejudice that is deep-rooted in our Author's breast against this Doctrine is That Christ exacts from men a Righteousness of their own if they would find mercy with God A Righteousness of their own Ay but let them be sure they come honestly by it The Righteousness of Christ must be made ours or else we shall never find mercy with God We must also have another Righteousness of our own an Inherent Righteousness if ever we expect to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and find mercy with God in his great Day But what is that Righteousness for which we are just and accepted with God But for the removing of this small prejudice may he please to consider 1. How easie it is to vapour and make a flourish with those Texts that require an Inherent Righteousness as a necessary Qualification for Eternal Salvation and yet how hard to produce one place that mentions our own Inherent Righteousness as that which answers God's holy Law makes Reconciliation with God and constistutes the sinner spotless and blameless before God the Holy Righteous Judg yet such a Righteousness we want and such a one we must have 2. Our own Righteousness is very pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ being the fruit of Faith and following after Iustification So says the Church of England Artic. 12. But says She Works done before the Grace of God and the Inspiration of the Spirit are not pleasing to God for as much as they spring not out of Faith in Christ Artic. 13. Which two Articles I shall leave to our Author to confute at his best leisure A third Block which I perceive lies in his way is That our Saviour should never once warn his Hearers to beware of trusting to their own Righteousness But 1. Christ preach'd to the Iews who had had warnings â—…now to beware
Justification of a believing sinner But though I agree not with him in the Reason of the Name let him make the best of it Now says he this Righteousness consists in a sincere and universal obedience to the Commands of God That 's Magisterially dictated however But where may we find this Righteousness It 's contained says he in the Terms of the Gospel We are as wise as we were before Why then we are posted over to Rom. 1. 17. The Righteousness of God is revealed from Faith to Faith Evident it is hence That the Gospel reveals that Righteousness by which we are justified and as evident that the Righteousness of God and of Faith are the same thing under divers Considerations but that the Righteousness of God consists in an universal obedience to Commands or that these are the Terms of Iustification it speaks not one syllable only it speaks aloud that our Author had a very loving Inclination it should be so Then we are turned over to Matth. 6. 33. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness What then Why It is called the Righteousness of God It is called What is called without all peradventure the Righteousness of God is called the Righteousness of God not only there but where-ever else we meet with the Expression But what are we the nearer Why this is the same with the Righteousness of his Kingdom But what Kingdom and upon what account and in what place is the Righteousness of God called the Righteousness of the Kingdom But go on Now the Kingdom of God signifies the state of the Gospel Well proceed And the Righteousness of God or of his Kingdom signifies that that Righteousness which the Gospel prescribes which is contained in the Sermons and Parables of Christ Ergo c. Quod erat Demonstrandum Round-about our Coal-fire And now who can be so hard-hearted as not to allow our Author rarely qualified to Reform the Religion of Christendom What man would not be content to be argued out of his Seven Senses with such potent Demonstration 2. We must observe farther if at least it be farther that this Righteousness of God which he commands and rewards â—…is the Righteousness of Faith or Righteousness by the Faith of Christ. We have heard so The Gospel commands us to believe in Christ for Justification for he is our Righteousness This will not undo us yet But Faith is often taken objectively for the Gospel of Christ. Faith is sometimes so used but that Faith in Christ is so used we wait for evidence He produces it from Acts 24. 24. Felix sent for Paul and heard him concerning the Faith of Christ that is concerning Righteousness Temperance and the Iudgment to come But here our Author is taken napping 1. He corrupts both the Original and the Translation unless he has other Bibles than are come to our hands for neither the Greek nor the English say He heard him concerning the Faith of Christ which words are more liable to a perverse insinuation but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning that Faith which is in or upon Christ. 2. He prevaricates with his Reader most palpably in making those words concerning Righteousness Temperance and Iudgment to come to be an Exegesis of the foregoing words The Faith that is in Christ Whereas the Apostle argued with Felix about the Nature of these things wherein he knew he was Defective to awaken his secure and sleepy Conscience to consider what need he had by Faith to fly to Christ for a better Righteousness than his own The Apostle took the true Method of Gods Spirit to insist upon Righteousness to convince him of his Injustice Bribery upon Temperance or Continence to convince him of his Adultery and upon Iudgment to come to alarum him with the righteous Judgment of God that so being terrified by the Law he might more gladly entertain the Doctrine of Faith in Christ for Righteousness wherein he might stand before God which otherwise his proud unhumbled heart would never have brook'd and submitted to 3. His Next step is towards the deciding the Controversie about the way of Abraham ' s being justified before God And a great and weighty Question it is for Abraham being called The Father of the Faithful it might seem strange that the Father should be justified one way and his Children another when Believers are therefore and only therefore his Children because they walk in the steps of his Faith Rom. 4. 12. And seeing as our Author Confesses he was set forth as a Patern of our Iustification It were to be admired If the Exemplar and the Copy the Archetype and Ectype were of Divers kinds It will be of good use therefore to enquire What way Abraham was justified Though the best way to resolve it is to enquire What way Believers under the Gospel are justified Now the Apostle is very punctual herein Rom. 4. 11. Abraham received the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that Righteousness might be imputed to them also Look what way Abraham was justified the same way are all true Believers justified for he is Father of the faithful and they his Children only because they tread in the steps of the same Faith but Abraham was justified by Faith by the Righteousness of Faith and in a way of Imputation whatever these Expressions signifie therefore Believers under the Gospel are justified by Faith by the Righteousness of Faith and in a way of Imputation Again Gal. 3. 6. Even as Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for Righteousness v. 7. Know ye therefore that they which are of Faith are the Children of faithful Abraham Where the Apostle demonstrates that the sameness of a Christians Faith with Abrahams is as able to denominate him one of Abraham's Children as if he came out of his loyns Ver. 9. So then they which are of Faith are blessed with faithful Abraham If they have the same Faith with Abraham they shall have the same Blessing with Abraham for says he v. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us that the Blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through Iesus Christ. All the advantage the Gentiles receive by Christ and they need no more to make them perfectly and eternally blessed is that Abraham's Blessing may come upon them But if we have not Abraham's Faith we must never expect a part in Abraham's Blessing Nay says the Apostle v. 8. Abraham had the same Gospel preach'd to him that we have The Scripture foreseeing that is the Spirit of Christ which gave forth the Scripture that God would justifie the Heathen through Faith preached before the Gospel to Abraham Now the preaching of the Gospel is the Spirits Engine for the begetting a true saving and lively Faith If then Abraham had the same
Which two things are more different than any of his three kinds of Faith Noah was an Heir of Righteousness that is he inherited those advantages which come by Righteousness he had the peaceable fruits of Righteousness As a Son by being his Fathers Heir inherits the Purchases Possessions Honours of his Father Thus Noah by being an Heir of Righteousness enjoyed whatever Priviledges the Promise of God had entailed upon Righteousness Noah was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Heir of Righteousness where Righteousness is not Geâ—…itivus materiae but efficientis It denotes not that Righteousness was the thing he inherited but the true Reason why he inherited those blessings Righteousness answers not to the Possession but to the Ancestor not what but from what he inherited And this is clear from this one Consideration That Noah was righteous before God before that particular Revelation was made to him He was not made righteous because he believed that particular Revelation but God made him that particular Revelation because he was already righteoâ—… Gen. 6. 8 9. Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord Vers. 9. Noah was a just man and perfect in his Generations and Noah walked with God Vers. 13. God said unto Noah The end of all flesh is come before me Ver 14. Make thee an Ark of Gopher wood Ver. 17. And behold I even I do bring a Flood upon the Earth He proceeds to Abraham Who in obedience to the divine Revelation left his Country went into a strange Land offered his son Isaac which seem'd to thwart that former promise In Isaac shall thy Seed be called i. e. That from Isaac should proceed that numerous Off-spring which God had promised Abraham and yet he was so well assured of the power and faithfulness of God that whatever Impossibilities Humane Reason suggested he would neither disobey Gods Command nor distrust his Promise Now here would arise several Queries As 1. Whether then Abraham's Religion was of the right stamp seeing it would not approve it self to his Reason and Whether Abraham's Reason was not Carnal that suggested Impossibilities against God's Promise and Whether our Author had he been in Abraham's Circumstances ought not by his own Principles to have disobeyed and distrusted God both in his Precept and Promise because they did not approve themselves to his Reason 2. It might be enquired What inference he will make from hence and that he tells us is That the Faith whereby Abraham and all good men were justified before God was such a firm belief of the Being and Providence of God and all the particular Revelations God made to them as made them careful to please God in all things Now this is still the Question and is like so to continue for any assistance we are like to have from our Author's Arguments But 3. There is one thing that I shall particularly examine Whether that Promise Gen. 21. 12. In Isaac shall thy Seed be called be made good in that numerous Off-spring that issued from Isaac ' s loyns Now if any regard might be had to the Apostle he would soon decide the Controversie Rom. 9. 7 8. In Isaac shall thy Seed be called that is they which are the children of the Flesh are not the children of God but the children of the Promise are counted for the Seed See here now the vast difference in mens judgments In Isaac shall thy Seed be called id est says our Author from Isaac should proceed that numerous Off-spring No says the Apostle In Isaac shall thy Seed be blessed id est The children of the Flesh are not the children of God but the children of the Promise are counted for the Seed Again Rom. 4. 16. Therefore it the Promise is of Faith that it might be sure to all the seed not only to that which is of the Law but to that which is of the Faith of Abraham who is the Father of us all Gal. 3. 29. And if ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams Seed and Heirs according to the Promise 4. It were easie to evidence that what the Apostle speaks of Abraham's Faith in offering up his son related not to the Act of it whereby he was justified but to the Evidence of his Justification His third sort of Faith follows § 3. From hence says he we learn what Faith in Christ is which is now imputed to us for Justification From hence From whence If we never learn what faith in Christ is better than from the Faith of Abel Enoch Noah and Abraham which are the whole Heavens asunder each from other as he has ordered the matter we must be content to be ignorant of it till our lives end For who could learn the special Nature of one thing from another that differs from it in the kind But let us give him the hearing Our faith in Christ must signifie such a stedfast belief of all those Revelations which Christ hath made to the World as governs our lives and actions Why so To make our faith in Christ answer to the faith of Abraham and all good men in former Ages without which the Apostles Argument from Abraham ' s being justified by faith to our Iustification by faith is of no force There is a necessity then granted that our faith in Christ and Abraham's do answer one another lest the Apostle should be reproach'd with a Non-sequitur Now to perform this instead of making Abrahams to be a faith in Christ as it really is he debases faith in Christ as low as if not below the faith of Abraham He pretends to under-prop the Apostles Argument but really he undermines it and whilst he seems to provide an Expedient that his Reasonings may not be invalidated he renders them more than Nugatory For 1. How can faith in Christ answer to the faith of all those good men in former times Abel Enoch when their's was Faith without Revelations but faith in Christ is a Faith grounded upon Revelations The Motive of their Faith was Natural Demonstrations the Reason of ours is Revelation The Object of our Faith in his sense is Eternal Life but whether they had any such thing in their eye our Author will not grant for he that will not allow Abraham whose Faith was grounded upon Revelations to have had any spiritual Promises will less allow those poor good men the priviledg whose Faith was only built upon Natural Demonstrations 2. How can faith in Christ answer to the faith of Abraham He has laid it down as the bottom of this Discourse p. 252. that The different sorts of Faith result from the different Objects and Motives of it But Abraham's Faith had different Objects and Motives from ours as he tells us And therefore it 's of another nature sort and kind than ours for so he says expresly The Apostle takes notice of two kinds of Faith and faith in Christ makes a third Now will it not be hard for the Apostle to maintain his great Principle That Abraham is the
Christ and so they far exceed and outstrip any thing the Moral Law being become weak through the flesh could assist the sinner in for so they are said actually to procure pardon of sin actually to make Atonement and reconciliation Lev. 17. 11. I have given you it the blood upon the Altar to make an Atonement for your souls for it is the Blood that maketh an Atonement for the soul 2 Chron. 29. 24. The Priests killed them the Sacrifices and they made reconciliation with their Blood upon the Altar to make an Atonement for All Israel Now let him shew me where ever Atonement Reconciliation are annext to the Actual performance of the Moral Law It is true that the Original design of the Moral Law was Justification but not the Justification of a Sinner but Man being now become such the Law is utterly uncapable of reaching it 's Primitive end and it 's as true also that Sacrifices upon their own Account could not supply that defect but as directing the sinner to him who is the grand Propitiation and from whose Death they received all their virtue and efficacy 3. As to his being of the Stock of Israel of the Seed of Abraham c. they might expect some favours thence but that any was so far bewitched as to believe that all of the Stock of Israel and the Natural Seed of Abraham should be justified cannot be proved 4. For external Civility and blamelessness of Conversation It would have gone a great way in our Authors account at any other time pag. 384. he asks the question with some heat and briskness what live a blameless innocent honest smooth life and yet live in some sin or other Paul would have past for a Righteous person upon his producing the Ticket of a blameless Conversation in that Section though in this he is rated at for a Hypocrite and all that 's naught but what-ever Paul was or was not whilst a Pharisee it makes no great matter to the business in hand seeing he has so freely and openly disowned what-ever was his own Righteousness after Conversion in the matter of Justification before God But to Confirm all this says our Author 〈◊〉 must observe a double Antithesis in the words We must what whether we can or no whether it be there to be observed or no what if there be but 〈◊〉 single Antithesis in them It 's no matter we must observe a double Antithesis if we will purchase our peace and quiet I promise you this Antithesis is a very hard word Graecum est non potest intelligi And I should assoon chuse to swallow Dr. Iacomb's Conjunction at which our Author made such a sowre face in the beginning of this Section as this crabbed Antithesis much more then a Double Antithesis but what is this Double Antithesis Why says he The Righteousness of the Law is opposed to the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Christ. And my own Righteousness opposed to the Righteousness of God There 's your double Antithesis Now says he the surest way to understand the meaning of this is to examine how these phrases are used in Scripture but in my mind it will be a surer I am sure a more Rational way to examine first whether indeed there be such a double Antithesis in the words as he pretends or whether a single one will not content the Text And the surest way to understand this is to examine the words themselves And be found in him not having my own Righteousness which is of the Law But that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith Now if any one can find a double Antithesis or in plain English a double Opposition in these words he must have eyes like a Cat which some say can see as well by Night as by Day or however as well i' th' dark as without light Not having my own Righteousness which is of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There 's one member of the Antithesis where the Righteousness which is of the Law is a plain Exegesis there 's another hard-word for you of my own Righteousness and not any thing distinct from it My own Righteousness which is of the Law and then comes the other member of the Antithesis But that which is through the Faith of Iesus Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the repetition of the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as every hungry Graeculist knows is as much as videlicet The Righteousness by the Faith of Christ namely or that is to say the Righteousness which is of God by Faith and thus Beza Non habens meam justitiam nempe quae est ex lege sed eam quae est per fidem Christi id est justitiam quae est ex Deo per fidem who for a smattering in that Language will not envy our Author So that nothing could by the Wit or Ignorance of Man have been more groundlesly absurdly and ridiculously invented than this double Antithesis And 1. Let us observe how ill-favouredly it was contrived The Text-order is this My own Righteousness which is of the Law That which is the Faith of Christ even the Righteousness of God by Faith Now if any man would needs have a double Antithesis to do him some special service it should have been laid between my own Righteousness and that which is by the Faith of Christ and then between That of the Law and the Righteousness of God by Faith but on the contrary our Author without any provocation without any umbrage of a pretence from the Text like old Iacob crossing his hands has laid them in saltire My own Righteousness to the Righteousness of God and the Righteousness of the Law to the Righteousness by the Faith of Christ. 2. Supposing all that he can desire how does this double Antithesis confirm that which he contrived it to confirm viz. that my own Righteousness signifies an external Righteousness only It has been an old saying that one absurdity being granted many more will easily follow And yet so hard is this Gentleman put to it that granting him a many absurdities he cannot make one follow but yet the Reader shall hear what he would serve out of this double Antithesis 1. The Righteousness of the Law as you have already heard is an external Righteousness which consists in Washings Purifications Sacrifices or an external conformity to the Moral Law So we have beard indeed once and again affirmed but never confirmed The double Antithesis was brought to confirm it and that must confirm the double Antithesis I desire therefore once for all to hear where the Righteousness of Law the Moral Law is said to consist in Externals The Righteousness of the Law is that Righteousness which the Law requireth but the Law requires an internal Conformity of heart to our outward Actions and of both to the Law of God
therefore the Righteousness of the Law consists also in an internal Conformity The Law condemns none that bring the Righteousness of the Law but the Law condemns those that bring only an external Conformity therefore external Conformity is not the Righteousness of the Law and from hence we may be abundantly satisfied what was that Righteousness of his own which the Apostle renounces That which was his own Righteousness that he renounces but an internal inherent Righteousness was his own Righteousness therefore that he renounces The Minor I prove The Righteousness of the Law was his own Righteousness Not having my own Righteousness that is of the Law but the Righteousness of the Law was an inherent internal Righteousness therefore his own Righteousness was an inherent and internal Righteousness The Minor I prove That which the Law prescribes and commands is the Righteousness of the Law but that which the Law prescribes and commands is an internal and inherent Righteousness and therefore the Righteousness of the Law is such a Righteousness That which God requires his Law requires but God requires Truth in the inward parts whether in Ceremonials or Morals therefore the Law requires the same And is it not now an unparalleld piece of Non-sence to call that the Righteousness of the Law which both the Law and the Author of it do aâ—…hor External Conformity alone is so far from being the Righteousness of the Law that it 's the Unrighteousness of the Law But hence the Reader will begin to get a glimmering into the true Reason that necessitated our Author to study this device of a double Antithesis viz. that Paul's Righteousness which he â—…nounced might not seem to be the Righteousness of the Law which God required though not in order to Justification for if his own Righteousness be the Righteousness of the Law and he so peremptorily renounces his own then he renounces the Righteousness of the Law also and what that is this one Consideration is enough to convince us of That the Law requires an absolute perfect entire Conformity of the whole Man to it's demands and claimes without which no man can expect to be Iustified by it And seeing such is the Case with poor impotent Man that he cannot answer it's demands and claims he can never reasonably expect it should do him that service but now see the frailty of our Authors memory for just above he told us the surest way to understand the meaning of this was to consider how these Phrases are used in Scripture and yet when he undertakes to give us the true meaning of this Phrase The Righteousness of the Law he cannot afford to give us one single Scripture to lead us into the true meaning of it 2. The Righteousness by the Faith of Christ says he is an internal Righteousness Oh but that should have been proved soundly proved not begg'â—… or borrowed much less stollen for it 's the main thing in Question and of all things in the Syllogism we should not stand to Courtesie for the Conclusion why says he it 's call'd being born again becoming new Creatures rising again with Christ c. But still proof proof is wanting for we think that those expressions do not denote that Righteousness whereby we are constituted Iust in the sight of God but Holiness and Sanctification of Nature which the Gospel evidently distinguishes from that Righteousness whereby we are Iustified but let him have line enough Hence says he The Apostle tells us that the Reason why God sent Christ into the World in our Nature to die as a Sacrifice for our sins and to confirm the Covenant was that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us N. B. who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit Well! what is that Righteousness of the Law Christ came to fulfil why says he Learnedly from Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Righteousness of the Law that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which the Law was design'd to work in them but was too weak to effect it by Reason of the greater power and prevalency of sin i. e. the inward holiness and purity of mind which was represented by those externalCeremonies Most incomparable and very like himself It was but the other side of the leaf that he told us that the Righteousness of the Law consisted in Washings Purifications Sacrifices or an external Conformity to the Moral Law but now the Case is altered and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is grown 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inward purity and holiness of mind It may not be amiss to call these things over again 1. If the Righteousness of the Law be only an external Conformity as he told us just before then Christ came into the World to fulfil in us only Ceremony and Hypocrisie for he tells us just now from the Apostle Rom. 8. 3 4. God sent Christ into the world that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us Or 2. If the Righteousness of the Law be inward holiness and purity of mind then St. Paul who rejects the Righteousness of the Law in the matter of Justification before God rejects also inward purity and holiness of mind for that purpose but whether we are to believe pag. 264. or pag. 265. as the honesterof the two I cannot tell nor am much concern'd at present 3. If it be true that the Righteousness of the Law be that inward purity of mind which the Law was design'd to work in us then what is become of that Antithesis which he coyned between the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness by the Faith of Christ I am very serious and desire to be resolved for he tells us here that the Righteousness of the Law is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the inward holiness and purity of mind and then tells us immediatly after that the design of the Gospel is to work that inward holiness and purity Now why St. Paul should renounce inward holiness which was the Righteousness of the Law to attain inward purity which is the Righteousness of the Gospel is to me a Mystery as deep as any of those I have met withal in your Systematical Divines To shut up this point The Righteousness of the Law is that which the Law requires and his friend Dr. Iacomb has furnish'd him with such a Syncretism of Learned Men as may cut his Comb and spoyl his Crowing over his Adversary Significat eam rectitudinem quae praecipitur in lege P. Mart. Iustitia quam lex exigebat Vatab. Totum quod lex praecipit A. Lap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsa legis praecepta Perer. Iustitia legis est justitia quam lex praecipit Estius Implere justum legis est totum quod lex praecipit efficere Tolet. Ut justificatio legis id est ut justitia quam lex praescribit exigit impleretur Stap. Ut adimpleret opus praeceptorum legis Vers. Aethiop Ut nos impleremus omnia quae
in lege Mosis per se honesta sunt Grot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is any thing that God hath thought meet to appoint or command his People Dr. Hammond And now for to divert his Reader he has sprung us new game but I shall adjourn the Consideration of what immediately follows that we may not be bewildred and lost in a wood and shall fall in with him at p. 273. where he reassumes the present Subject Thus yâ—…u see says he how the Apostle opposes the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith not as an Inherent and Personal Righteousness to an Imputed Righteousness but as an External and Ritual to an Inherent and Substantial Righteousness but we have seen no such matter as yet and do believe we are not like to see it And the rather because he has thrown in a very suspicious word that would make any one think that though he sets a good Face upon the Matter yet he has little confidence in the Truth of his own Notions The Truth is lays he The Righteousness of the Law and of Works in the New-Testament signifies only an External Righteousness which cannot please God Now I began to think thus with my self Does the Righteousness of the Law signifie one thing in the New-Testament and another in the Old-Testament Does it signifie a real Inherent Substantial Righteousness in the Old and a Ritual External Righteousness in the New Sincerity in the one and Hypocrisie and Ceremony in the other this is very unaccountable Surely thought I when the Apostle argues with Jews or Judaizing Christians he speaks in their Dialect speaks to their Capacity speaks that he may be understood speaks ad idem They that had read Ps. 119. 144. The Righteousness of thy Testimonies of thy Law is everlasting would wonder to hear the Apostle speak against the Righteousness of the Law but alas he only equivocated and had a mental Reservation in his Sleeve and understood all the while Ceremony and hypocrisie But this is a Riddle which because our Author has made of his own Mother-wit he is the fittest Man alive to interpret it 3 His Second Antithesis is between my own Righteousness and the Righteousness of God and he is considering with himself in what sense they are opposed But there 's no great difficulty in this says he for the Apostle himself tells us that by his own Righteousness he means the Righteousness of the Law and by the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith and therefore he will give this the gentle wipe and away But now he has quite spoiled the Humour of the double Antithesis for if by his own Righteousness he means the Righteousness of the Law and by the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith then there 's but one single Antithesis between his own Righteousness which is of the Law on the one part and the Righteousness by the Faith of Christ even the Righteousness which is of God by Faith on the other part but at these rates he might have given us a treble quadruple sextuple Antithesis and have rung as many changes when his hand was once in upon two Bells as others can do upon six The Apostles Words indeed were clear very clear till our Author found it necessary to obscure them to deprave the Truth conciliate some small reverence to errour to which two Heads I foresaw from the first his whole Discourse might be reduced And thus much we are secured of That the Apostle has repudiated his own Righteousness from any concern in justification and that we may not doubt what that was he tells us 't is that of the Law What the Righteousness of the Law signifies is evident that which always bore that Name that which the Law commands and prescribes viz. An exact Conformity to the Law of God in Spirit Soul and Body so far as 't is attainable or not attainable He assures us next what he owns and adheres to viz. The Righteousness of Christ which is also called The Righteousness of God He further acquaints us how we come to be interessed in this Righteousness and that is by Faith and that we may not ignorantly or wilfully mistake Faith for the Doctrine of Faith he assures us that it 's by Believing by which we obtain this Righteousness Rom. 3. 22. The Righteousness which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe To shut up his learned Exercitation or scholastical Dissertation or Diatriba of Antitheses our Author will favour us with a Reason nay with an obvious and the most obvious Reason why this Righteousness of the Law is called their own Righteousness because forsooth this Legal Righteousness was a way of their own chusing not of God's Appointment Now here he most falsly supposes that by the Righteousness of the Law is only meant a Righteousness made up of the Works of the Ceremonial Law but I think something has been offered to dash that fancy out of countenance I am in haste and intreat our Author to accept of short answers 1. God has not appointed a Righteousnes made up out of any observances of the Moral Law to be that Righteousness wherein Sinners shall stand justified before him If any will demand Iustification thereby God will demand exact and perfect Conformity If therefore Sinners will chase this way 't is their own Righteousness and it 's time to give it a bill of divorce God has not appointed it 2. External Washings External Conformity c. were no Righteousness at all much less the Righteousness of the Law that which it required to form a Righteousness and therefore chuse it or not chuse it this is nothing to the purpose The Apostle renounces his own Righteousness which is the Righteousness of the Law And this is further evident from Rom. 10. 3. which our Author quotes but miserably perverts For they being ignorant of Gods Righteousness and going about to establish their own Righteousness have not submitted to the Righteousness of God Here is then the same Antithesis again between their own Righteousness that of the Law and the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Jesus Christ and the opposition is so direct and diametrical that 't was impossible to establish their own but they must shake off all subjection to Gods Righteousness The Question then will be Whether we are to be justified by a Legal or an Evangelical Righteousness And to this our Author agrees in words but his Words intend quite another thing from the Truth For by the Law he understands the Law of Moses and let that pass too for once But then by the Law of Moses he understands only the Ceremonial Law though sometimes he is content to take in External Acts of Conformity to the Moral Law and thus by a Legal Righteousness or the Righteousness of the Law he understands one made up of External Observations only wherein the Apostle has clearly
to work in us that Internal Holiness and Purity which is the Perfection and Accomplishment of the Figurative and Typical Righteousness of the Law which he gives us in other words p. 267. What the Law could not do i. e. govern our Minds and Passions this God effected by sending Christ into the World to publish the Gospel to us and to confirm all those great Promises and Threatnings contained in it with his own Blood This is indeed a parcel of excellent Divinity but that it 's wholly destitute of truth For 1. he supposes That that Law whose weakness the Apostle assigns as the Reason of Gods sending his Son was only the Ceremonial Law the Falshood whereof I shall demonstrate if that be not too great a word for any mans Mouth besides his own by and by 2. He insinuates that the whole of Christs being a Sacrifice for our Sins lay in confirming the New-Covenant the Falshood whereof the next Section will give us direct occasion to evince 3. He makes the whole business of the Ceremonial Law to represent inward purity and perhaps to effect it whereas though some of the Ceremonies did represent inward purity yet the main of their design was to lead to Jesus Christ and particularly Sacrifices which represented that Atonement and Reconciliation which Christ in due time should make with God on the behalf of Sinners Col. 2. 17. The Law had a shadow of good things to come but the Body is of Christ. 4. He scandalously charges it upon God that he appointed a means to an end which was found too weak to reach his End As if God must try conclusions and make experiments before he could be certain whether his design would take and his appointments reach their End 5. He renders Christ's Coming into the World unnecessary for what though the Ceremonial Law could not effect that inward Purity yet I hope God had means to effect it unless he will say all the World till Christ's Coming were whited-Walls and painted-Sepulchres For what was become of the Moral Law all this while had it no power to effect that End 6. He tells us p. 269. That the Reason why the Law of Moses was abrogated was because it could not make men good But then the Moral Law was either able to make men good or it was not If it was not why was not that abrogated also If it was able and had its effect then what need of Christ to come into the World to effect that which the Moral Law was able to effect without him But the true Reason why the Ceremonial Law is expired is because the Lord Jesus Christ has answered and fulfilled all that is represented When the Sun is risen the Shadows fly away there was no formal abrogation either made or necessary to be made it expired of course when Christ had made good what-ever the Ceremonies had exhibited to their Faith 7. He tells that Christ came to work in us that inward Purity represented by the Ceremonial Law but for all his good-morrows when he is throughly catechifed Christ's working is no more than those sufficient arguments and motives to excite their own wits whereby they might work it themselves and I cannot tell whether he will deny that the Jews had sufficient motives and arguments for that end under their Law 8. He contradicts himself which is no news for whereas he had said p. 265. That the Law was designed to work in them inward purity He says p. 269. That the Law nursed them up in a ritual and external Religion and taught them to serve God in the Letter by Circumcision and Sacrifices or an external Conformity to the Letter of the Law And then I hope God could not justly blame them much less damn them for being Hypocrites if they did as well as and no better than his own Law taught them Nay he adds That the Gospel of Christ alone teaches us to worship God with the Spirit and to offer a reasonable Sacrifice to him This is strange Doctrine but it 's less matter for that if it be but true But was not God always a Spirit and did he not always teach his People to worship him with their Spirits How osten does God complain that they drew nigh him with their Lips when their Hearts were far from him which he could not well do if he taught them no better It 's a Riddle to me that these Ceremonies should represent inward purity and yet not teach it when they had no way to teach that Purity but by representing it 'T is true the Gospel teaches us to worship God in the Spirit in opposition to Ceremonies but God always taught his People to worship him with their Spirits in opposition to Hypocrisie Psal. 51. 6. Thou desirest truth in the inward parts Did God institute a Law a Law so chargeable and burdensome and all to teach his People to worship like Parrots to mumble over their Mattens and like Puppets to make an outward noise without a rational Principle to guide it If they had no reasonable Service why were they reasonable Creatures But a little more reverence of the Divine Majesty would confute a great deal of such blasphemy Let us now seriously consider the Text and 1. It will be necessary to enquire what that Law is whose weakness the Apostle assigns as the reason of God's sending his own Son And for all the Authors presumptions I am well satisfied it was not the Ceremonial Law for what if the Ceremonial had proved weak what if it had been resolved into its first nothing the Moral stood still where it always did and what need of Christ's Coming into the World upon that account There was a time when the Ceremonial Law was not created and what if it had been again repealed and annihilated things had been but in statu quo But that the Law here mentioned is the Moral Law the Connexion of the Apostle's Words his Premises out of which he draws his Conclusion will abundantly manifest In Chap. 7. v. 7 He tells us he had not known sin except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet But sin taking occasion from that Law wrought in him all manner of Concupiscence v. 8. Nevertheless he clears the Law v. 12. The Commandment was holy and just and good had an intrinsick goodness righteousness in it and this he calls v. 25. The Law of God Now the Apostle having said v. 10. That this Commandment of the Moral Law which was unto life in God's Original Institution he found to be unto death Nevertheless Chap. 8. v. 1. he assures us That there is no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus and he shews how Sinners are brought from under that Condemnation v. 3. What the Law could not do in that it was weak through the Flesh God sending his own Son c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That impossible thing of the Law where the Apostle adding the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
intimates that he spake of that Law whereof he had made mention before which was the Moral Law that Law which saith Thou shalt not covet that Law which is holy just good that Law which is eminently the Law of God and not that which carries the name of the Law of Moses 2 But what was that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the impossible thing of this Law There are many things that this Law cannot do It can lay a Command upon the Creature but it cannot give strength to obey the Command it can offer the Promises of Life to the obedient and shake the Threatning over the Conscience of the Rebellious but meeting with depraved Nature it cannot redintegrate lapsed Nature it can wound but it cannot heal it can condemn but it cannot absolve a Sinner But yet there seems to be some one thing which above all other impossibles is absolutely impossible for this Law to do for man and that is to justifie him before God For so he had said and proved Chap. 3. 20. By the Deeds of that Law shall no Flesh be justified in his Sight But 3. How comes the Law to be so weak for certainly it had once such a Power in its primitive appointment and was fitted to give life to the Obedient for we must not dare to think that the Wise God ever appointed a Law or the meanest thing in the World but it was fitted to reach all those Ends which in his Holy and Secret Counsel he designed it to How then comes this Law the Moral Law to be so weak If any of the Sons of Adam can produce an Obedience every way such as the Law demands it is able to give Life Eternal still The Apostle answers us It 's weak through the Flesh it was not made weak but became weak through our weakness The Law is as strong to reward still if we were but as strong to obey as ever But 4. How did Christ remedy and help us in this desperate Case for if we cannot live by the Law we must die by the Law The Apostle resolves us God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful Flesh and in the truth of humane Flesh and for sin condemned sin in the Flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is as an offering for Sin So near is the relation between the Sacrifice and the Sin that is laid upon it that they are called the same 2 Cor. 5. 21. Christ was made sin that is he was made an Offering for sin For so 't is exprest Isa. 53. 10. When thou shalt make his Soul an offering for sin The Greek therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does but imitate the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies both the Sin and the Sin-Offering thus then Christ supplyed the Laws weakness he who knew no sin was made sin and as he was made sin for us so are we made the Righteousness of God in him Christ could no otherwise be a Sinner but by imputation nor we otherwise Righteous than by the Imputation of his Righteousness As the Offenders guilt under the Law could not otherwise be laid upon the head of the Typical Sacrifice but by God's Imputing it so neither could our Sin otherwise lye upon the Head of Christ but by his own voluntary Susception and thereupon God's Righteous Imputation but these things we shall meet with professedly in the next Section There is a Metaphorical expression still behind which our Author cannot digest whereupon when he has thrown away a little and truly but a little wit he will ease us of the tediousness of this Discourse The expression which sticks so hard with him is that of the Apostle Ephes. 3. 8. The unsearchable Riches of Christ. Now though at another time I would try a fair fall with him whether this and many others which he thinks it enough for their reproach to call so be a Metaphorical Expression or no yet I have not leisure at present to attend that Service for my part I think that riches is more properly and literally predicated of that Grace that is treasured up in the Lord Jesus than of all that paltry trash which has got the vogue in the Dialect of deluded Worldlings but I am weary and shall therefore only make a defensive War of it What is then this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this unsearchable Riches of Christ Why even here these Men cannot agree for some are zealous for it that what-ever is meant by unsearchable Riches yet by Christ is meant Christ himself others amongst whom our Author professes his Name by the unsearchable Riches of Christ understand the Gospel which St. Paul preached to the Gentiles And is it not a small thing that he should stand so stifly upon it for us to entreat 1. That the Glorious Person of Christ his Offices his Natures his Obedience his Life his Death with their proper Springs and Causes their special ends and designs might come in for a good share of the Gospel But 2. The Gospel preached is the opening of the Treasures of Wisdom Knowledg and Grace that are in Christ. Those Riches are or were unsearchable as they lay hid and deep in the Counsels and Purposes of the Father and the Son so far as they are revealed in the Gospel they are not unsearchable But what is meant by Riches why Riches says he signifie only an abundance This 't is to be wise above the common sort of ordinary Mortals most men I dare say have hitherto thought that Riches carry in their first Notion preciousness as well as plenty A handful of Gold is more truly Riches than a heap of Pebbles but then what are unsearchable Riches why they are so called because the Gospel is not a narrow and stinted thing is not confined to a particular nation as the Law was but is offered to all mankind c. I shall not cope with him in his Grammatical skill for therein he is unmatchable but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has formerly signified that which cannot be traced that whereof we have no foot-steps and such are the Riches of Christ such the Counsels of God to reconcile the World to himself by his dear Son A Mystery whose knowledg depends upon Divine Revelation whereof we have not the least track in nature no more than of a Ship in the Sea an Eagle in the Air or a Serpent upon a Rock The Light of Nature is Dark the Tongue of the Creature Dumb the Book of the Creation a great Blank and he alone that was from eternity in the Bosom of the Father whose Name is Wonderful Counsellor was able to reveal and give us notice of them One small brush at Mr. Brookes will conclude this Section for 't is impossible for our Author to conclude without reviling and what evil has this good Man done Oh he has spoken a little too prodigally in commendation of Christ and it 's a standing rule that whoever will give our Saviour one good Word shall
of these two is more accepted of God He that performed equal Obedience upon more feeble encouragements or he that upon stronger Motives yet gave but equal Obedience If Reason might determine this Controversy it would clearly carry it for him that bore equal burden with less strength performed equal duty upon less inducements If then this be all the influence that the Obedience and death of Christ have upon our Acceptation with God that thereby we have got a greater help to obedience the best Answer to the Question had been that it has no influence upon our Acceptance with God § 2. His Answer signifies nothing or very near it For the Question was What Influence Christ's Active and Passive Obedience have upon our Acceptance with God And he has framed an Answer to another Question What Influence Christ's Active and Passive Obedience have upon our Obedience Which is quite another thing If Christ's Obedience have any influence upon our acceptation with God then God for Christ's sake must accept us and our Obedience for the sake of Christ which otherwise he had not would not have done and Christ must be supposed to have done and suffered something which had such an influence upon God as to procure the favour of God towards our persons and services which without that consideration had not been could not be procured But if this be all That God has made us a Promise to accept that Obedience for Christ's sake which without any respect to Christ would have accepted though not say be would accept then if our obedience be little Christ will not make it reputed much if imperfect Christ's Obedience will not render it perfect and thus in plain Terms The Sacrifice of his Death and Righteousness of his Life procure no acceptance at all no not the least of our Persons or Obedience with God 3. His Answer is so like nothing as cannot be discerned from nothing The Question was What influence Christ's Righteousness and Sacrifice have upon our acceptance with God The Answer is God for Christ's sake entred into a New-Covenant with Mankind c. which is to leave the Question just as he found it and if he leave it no worse it 's pardonable for it will be enquired still What influence the Righteousness of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of his Death had upon God to move him to enter into such a Covenant Under what Notion did his Life and Death operate upon God Did Christ make a proper Reconciliation and Atonement with God Was his Death a proper Sacrifice Did it expiate the Guilt of Sin No! not a syllable of all this only for fashions sake it must be said to have had An influence though what it is or how it had that influence he cannot tell But he will speak to these things more distinctly 1. What influence the Death of Christ has upon our Acceptation with God But it is to be supposed that we have had our Answer and must sit down by it That God was so well pleased with the Sacrifice of Christ's Death that for his sake he entred into a New-Covenant with Mankind The Proof is all in all Why this is plain says he in reference to his Death Hence the Blood of Christ is called the Blood of the Covenant Heb. 10. 29. It 's plain that God for Christ's sake entred into this Covenant because his Blood is called the Blood of the new Covenant but yet it 's not so very plain neither A man may possibly mistake it for all that he has said to satisfy him well But then Christ is called the great Shepherd and Bishop of Souls through the blood of the everlasting Covenant Heb. 13. 20. but I can find no such Scripture well However The Blood of Christ is called the Blood of sprinkling which speaks better things than the Blood of Abel Heb. 12. 24. which is an Allusion to Moses his sprinkling the Blood of the Sacrifice wherewith he confirmed and ratified the Covenant between God and the Children of Israel c. I expected it would come to this at long run God entred into the Covenant for the sake of Christ's Death because his Death confirmed the Covenant A very trim Reason The confirming of a Covenant supposes a Covenant in being If then all the design of the Blood of Christ was to confirm and ratifie a Covenant it will not follow that therefore God did enter into such a Covenant for the sake of the Blood but therefore he did not I deny not that the Death of Christ was a great Confirmation of the true Covenant of Grace to our Faith For what stronger Confirmation could the most jealous Soul desire of the reality of free Grace promising to pardon sin and bestow Eternal Life upon believers than that the Son of God himself should first take upon him our Nature and in that Nature offer up himself to God to atone and reconcile him to us that he should make satisfaction to God's rectoral Iustice and pay the price of our Redemption thereby removing out of the way of our Faith the grand impediments of it the Justice of God and the Commination of the Law which stood in the way of our Pardon and Salvation But to obviate our Author's design I shall a little divert the Reader with the consideration of these Propositions 1. The Confirmation of such a Covenant as he has described viz. a Promise of the Pardon of sin and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel was not the main end of the Death of Christ 1. Because there is such an end ascribed to his Death which the Death of no other person in the world could in any wise reach but now to confirm the Gospel and all the Promises thereof was an end which the Death of another might reach therefore this was not the main end of the Death of Christ. The crucifying of Peter the Martyrdom of Paul were a great Confirmation of the Doctrine which they Preached the Doctrine which they Preach't was the Gospel and all its Promises yet neither was the Death of the one or other able to reach the great Design of the Death of Christ 1 Cor. 1. 18. Was Paul Crucified for you Or were you Baptized into the Name of Paul None could be Crucified for Sinners in that way that Christ was Crucified for them into whose Name they might not be Baptized but into the Name of no mere Man might they be Baptized therefore no mere Man could be Crucified for sinners in that way and for those ends which Christ was Crucified for Paul suffered Death for the Churches good but not in the Churches stead He dyed to Confirm what he Preacht and he Preacht the Covenant of Grace with all its Promises yet he was not Crucified for the Church his Soul was not made an Offering for sin God laid not upon him all our Iniquities his Death was not a Sacrifice of Propitiation And yet all this may be said of Paul's
Truth for which end had there been nothing more in 't the Death of the Martyrs had clearly out-gone it But it 's high time to recollect our selves and return into the way again for those pittiful things which stand for proof that this was all the design of the Death of Christ call aloud for examination The Blood of Christ says he is called the Blood of Sprinkling which speaks better things than the Blood of Abel Heb. 12. 24. which is an allusion to Moses his Sprinkling the Blood of the Sacrifice whereby he confirmed the Covenant between God and the Children of Israel Heb. 9. 20 21. For when Moses had spoken every precept to the People according to the Law he took the Blood of Calves and Goats and sprinkled both the Book and all the People saying This is the Blood of the Testament which God hath ordained for you Thus the Blood of Christ is called the Blood of Sprinkling because by his Blood God did seal and confirm the Covenant of Grace as the sprinkling of Blood did confirm the Mosaical Covenant There are four things which I shall offer any one of which cleared up will shew the vanity of this Period § 1. The Blood of Christ is not called the Blood of Sprinkling which speaks better things than the Blood of Abel only in allusion to the Sprinkling of that Blood which confirmed the Mosaical Covenant There is a further a higher design in the Expression The Blood of Abel cried to God from the Earth for vengeance upon the Head of Cain and with the same importunity does the violation of every Law of God sollicite Divine Justice against the Transgressour and that with great justice For the same God who hath establisht his Holy Law in the Promise Do this and live hath bound and confirm'd it also with the threatning If thou sinnest thou shalt die Such dreadful things did the Blood of Abel shed in defiance of the Law speak to God But O what sweet how much better things does the Blood of Christ speak It speaks better things to the Justice of God than if the Sinner himself should suffer his utmost Indignation It speaks better things to the Law than if the Sinner had felt the weight of its severest Curse It speaks better things to the Conscience than if we had wrought out our inward Peace by our own Righteousness It satisfies God's Justice answers the Law and quiets the Conscience And in reference to this use of the Sprinkling of Blood viz. the Atoning and Reconciling of God is the Blood of Christ called the Blood of Sprinkling and to this the Apostle refers Heb. 11. 28. By Faith Moses kept the Passeover and the Sprinkling of Blood that he who destroyed the first-Born might not touch them The Apostle evidently points to Exod. 12. 14. The Blood shall be to you a token upon your Houses and when I see the Blood I will passe over you and the Plague shall not be upon you v. 21 22. Kill the Passeover and you shall take a Bunch of Hyssop and dip in the Blood and strike the Lintel and the two side-Posts and none of you shall go out of his House until the Morning Now here are several things observeable 1. That it was a respect to the Blood of the Paschal-Lamb duly used and applyed in consideration whereof God would not destroy them with the rest 2. That if they expected any benefit from that Blood they must abide under the shelter and protection of it 3. This Blood must be sprinkled upon the Lintel not upon the Threshold to mind them as the Jews observe that they ought not to trample it under their Feet And surely that Blood which turns away the deserved wrath of God from their head might claim more reverence than to be trampled under their feet 4. That this Blood thus sprinkled was considerable in God's eyes as it was the Blood of such a Lamb so chosen â—…t of the flock without any spot or blemish and so slain precisely according to God's appointment I just proportion the Lord Jesus Christ is called expresly our Passeover 1 Cor. 5. 7. Christ our Passeover is Sacrificed for you Now as the Blood of Christ has the same influence so it has the same plea It has the same Influence upon God it turns away his Anger he has a respect to the Blood of Jesus under this Blood do we take shelter and Sanctuary and therefore it pleads with us that we account it not a prophane and unholy thing for that will be interpreted a trampling under foot the Son of God himself Heb. 10. 29. which is to despise all the Grace and Mercy of God for what-ever Mercy we receive from God it is through the intervention of that Blood § 2. The whole concern of the Blood of Christ is 〈◊〉 exprest by the Blood of Sprinkling Sprinkling was one way and but one way of employing the Blood of the Sacrifices but it must be shed before it could be sprinkled and therefore sprinkled because it had been shed as a Sacrifice What-ever other use there was of the Blood of Sacrifices yet the efficacy of all was derived from this that that Blood had been once shed at the Altar Lev. 17. 11. It was Blood upon the Altar and that not merely as Blood but as it was the Life-Blood of the Sacrifice substituted in the room of the offender that made an Atonement for their Souls And this is evident in that the Blood of many of the Sacrifices for sin atoneing expiating Sacrifices were not sprinkled but only shed at the Altar What an unrighteous dealing is this then with the Blood of Christ to allot it no service but only the Confirmation of a Covenant because it 's called the Blood of sprinkling whereas the Blood of the Sacrifices of old as it was sprinkled did not express all the ends and uses of the Blood of Christ. § 3. That which comes home to our Author is this The whole design of the Blood of sprinkling 〈◊〉 not to confirm a Covenant As Blood was larger than sprinkling of Blood so sprinkling of Blood was larger than the confirming of a Covenant 1. The Blood of the Sacrifice was sometimes sprinkled 〈◊〉 turn away God's Anger thus in the Passeover and thus in that very place which our Author insists upon Heb. 9. 19. which the Apostle cites from Exod. 24. 5 6 7. where we read of a twofold Use of the Blood First one half of the Blood of the Burnt-Offering and the Peace-Offering which had been shed at the Altar Moses sprinkled upon the Altar Now all the use of Blood upon the Alâ—…r was Atonement Propitiation and Reconciliation of God Secondly With the other half of the Blood Moses consecrates and dedicates the People to the Lord to walk before him according to the Tenour of that Covenant whereas then he will argue that the Blood was sprinkled only to confirm a Covenant because one half of it was reserved for that
both be reconciled to God and what did the removal of Ceremonies contribute to that end But says he This New-Covenant belongs to all Mankind to Gentiles as well as Iews there 's now no distinction of Persons no Man is ever the more or less accepâ—…able to God because he is a Iew or a Greek very true I wonder when ever it was otherwise Our Author could have Answered himself from p. 27. Those particular favours that God bestowed on Israel were not owing to any partial fondness and respect to that People but the design of all was to encourage the whole World to Worship the God of Israel And that the Jews were not accepted for their Ceremonial Services we may easily believe if we can but believe what he tells us Pag. 269. The Law of Moses 〈◊〉 them up in a ritual and external Religion taught them to Worship God in the Letter by Circumcision Sacrifices and an external Conformity to the Letter of the Law but the Gospel aloue teaches us to worship God with the Spirit to offer a reasonable Service to him And if he can but assure me that the Gentiles were never the less accepted of God because they were Gentiles I dare give him my Warrant that the Iews were never the more accepted of God for their Judaism according to those Measures which our Author has given of their Religion which it seems was mere Pageantry 2. Concerning Redemption he acquaints us what it signifies both to Iews and Gentiles 1. As to the Iews They says he are said to be redeemed from the Curse of the Law by the accursed Death of Christ upon the Cross Gal. 3. 13. Because the Death of Christ put an end to that legal Dispensation and sealed a New and better Covenant between God and Man It 's well he could find any thing small enough to be the proper and immediate effect of the Death of Christ but who shall reconcile the Apostle and our Author The Apostle says Christ redeemed them by being made a Curse for them Our Author says No he only put an end to that Legal Dispensation The Apostle says they were redeemed by a price paid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He brought them out with a price which he expresses in words at length 1 Cor. 6. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye are bought with a price No says he Christ's Death put an end to that legal Dispensation The Apostle says they were redeemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from under the Curse No says he 't was only a freedom from the legal Dispensation Two suppositions he makes use of to give a Colour to his matters 1. Sect. That the Iews were under no other Curse but that of the Ceremonial Law Now 1. He should have been sure that the Ceremonial Law was a Curse It 's a wonder to me what grievous sins the Iews above all the World should commit that God should put them under such a Curse as should need the Death of Christ to redeem them from it especially what great Crimes had Abraham been guilty of that God should thus Curse and plague him with Circumcision which yet the Scripture calls the Seal of the Righteous Faith Rom. 4. 11. 2. It would be considered whether ever God gave a Law to any People in the World besides them that in its own Nature was a Curse Our Author once told us p. 196. That it pleased God to Institute a great many Ceremonies in the Iewish Worship to awe their Childish minds into a greater Veneration of the Divine Majesty And truly better so than worse better be frighted into Obedience than not at all Obedient But that ever God designed it for a Curse is past my apprehension 3. The Ceremonial Law in it's constitution end and design was a great Blessing there they had Pardon of sin Atonement Reconciliation exhibited and sealed to them Lev. 17 11. 2 Chron. 29. And all this could be no curse but to those who loved their sins better than the pardon of them and to such every Blessing of God would eventually prove a Curse 4. It will appear they were under a greater curse than what arose from the burden someness or their violation of the Ceremonial Law viz. That Condemnation which came upon all Men by the Fall of Adam Rom. 5. 12 13 14. 17 18 19. Such a Curse as was Common not only â—…o Iew and Gentile but to every individual under both capacities Rom. 3. 9. We have proved both Iews and Gentiles that they are all under sin ver 19. That every mouth may be stopped and all the World become guilty before God ver 23. For all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God And therefore all had need of free justification by Grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ ver 24. 5. The Jews were under a curse upon the Account of their violation of the Moral Law and their not duly attending to the true ends of the Ceremonial Law but if the violation of a Law would make it become a curse then the Moral Law was become a curse too and then they had need of a Redeemer from the one as well as the other though both were blessings in themselves The Ceremonial Law in particular had this great blessing in it That as it discovered to them the demerit and Wages of sin in the slaying of the Sacrifices so it discovered a remedy two in the Sacrifices slain for them which directed them to look through them beyond them and above them to him who was the Lamb of God slain from the Foundation of the World All this was no curse 2. Sect. He supposes that the Text Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath Redeemed us from the curse of the Law being made a curse for us relates onely to the Iews Whereas the Apostle adds to obviate that Cavil That the Blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles Christ is made a curse for them upon whom the Blessing of Abraham came by his Death but the Blessing of Abraham came upon the Gentiles by his Death therefore Christ is made a Curse for the Gentiles And that the Law from the curse whereof both Jews and Gentiles were Redeemed by Christs being made a Curse for them is the Moral Law I have endeavoured to evince in the last Section but whether to our Authors content or no I know not One thing more he supposes that Christs Sealing a New Covenant is Redemption But there must go more than the sealing of such a Covenant as he has described There must be the payment of a Price to Iustice or there can be no Redemption To Redeem is properly to buy back again that which was forfeited and such were Sinners Their Persons forfeited to Iustice their Mercies escheated into the hands of the Law Now comes a Redeemer and gives himself to God as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Counter-price a valuable Consideration to Answer the demands of Justice and the claims of the Law and
reputed the onely Children of God He removes that small Objection telling them Christ had already removed them in his Flesh in his Person he was the summe and substance of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having already in his Flesh or Person made void the Law of Ordinances and already dissolved that Partition Wall He that has Reconciled you to one God has also brought you into one Church which he repeats again ver 16. That he might Reconcile both unto God in one Body by the Cross having slain the Enemy thereby or in himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here are first the Parties Reconciled Jews and Gentles Secondly to whom they are Reconciled to God Thirdly the Fruit of this Reconciliation to God They are brought into one Church amongst themselves Fourthly The Means whereby they are Reconciled to God that so they might be capable of being United into one Church and that is by the Cross of Christ or by himself on the Cross who bare our sins on the Tree 4. The Apostle shews the way and means of promulgating this Peace which he had made with God and that was by the publick Preaching of the Gospel ver 17. He Preached Peace he made Peace with God and then Preached it to the Gentile World He that had procured good will towards men Preaches Peace on Earth How little ground now had our Author to say That we are said to be Redeemed by the Preaching of the Gospel when the Preaching of the Gospel is nothing but a Declaration of that Redemption which Christ has made of Jew and Gentile with God and the way and Method to be partakers of the benefit of it And now to draw to a close of this Matter let us re-view our Authors Doctrine of Redemption The Redemption of Iew and Gentile he makes to differ as much as the Faith of Abraham and that of Christians 1. They differ in the matter of Redemption that which they were Redeemed from The Jews they were Redeemed from the Ceremonial Law the Gentiles they were Redemed from Idolatry and impure practises 2. They differ in the manner of procurement for the Jews Christ says he by his Death put an end to that Legal Dispensation and so their turn is served that little Redemption that they needed which is all our Author can afford them was Actually accomplisht by the Death of Christ which was a proper and immediate cause of their Redemption such a one as it was but then the Gentiles they were Redemed after another fashion by the Preaching of the Gospel whereby they were turned from Idolatry and impure practises And this shall be called Redemption because it were dangerous to ascribe it to the blood of Christ for an Obvious Reason that he knows of but because the Scripture says we are Redeemed by the Blood of Christ and gives that Blood a concernment therein therefore to stop the â—…uth of the Scripture it shall be said we owe the Preaching of the Gospel to the blood of Christ. 3. There is one thing more from whence our Author flatters himself with hopes of great success and that is by mis-representing the Analogy between the Iewish Sacrifices and the Sacrifices of Christ Two things he attempts 1. To shew what it is under the Law to which the Death of Christ his Ascention into Heaven and presenting his Blood to God does Answer 2. What it is under the Law to which his Intercession Answers Which project of our Authors has been contrived and managed with a great deal more subtilty by those who would storm or blush to see their Arguments thus miserably abased 1. To the former of these he expresses himself thus Now as the Death of Christ upon the Cross and his Ascention into Heaven and presenting his Blood to God in that most Holy place did answer to the first sprinkling of the Blood under the Law which confirmed the Mosaical Covenant as the Apostle Discourses in Heb. 9. c. In which few words he has heaped up more absurdities and follies than another must hope to bring into twice as many For 1. Here is a supposition of Christs presenting his Blood to God in Heaven distinct from his Intercession which when he shall offer to prove it may be time to consider it 2. He supposes that Christs Ascention into Heaven answered the first sprinkling of blood under the Law A most ridiculous supposition For what is there in sprinkling that answers to Ascention or bears the least Analogy to it Surely these Gentlemen that create such parallels and fancy such uncouth resemblances must have some mad design in their Heads which nothing will subserve but such forced allusions And I do not now wonder that he should so tediously rail at the use of Allusions in others for they will deserve the most of scorn that can be thrown upon them if they be all like his own 3. That the Death of Christ upon the Cross did Answer the sprinkling of Blood under the Law which confirmed the Covenant is very true but then 1. It must be remembred in what respect it confirmed the Covenant not meerly as a witnessing to the Truth of what he has preach'd but as Answering the demands and claims of the Governing Iustice of God as we have before shewed 2. It must be remembred also that it was not such a Covenant as he has imposed upon us but the true Covenant of Grace wherein God promises to give that which our Author will not own the New Heart New Spirit and New Obedience 3. That to confirm a Covenant was not all the design of it's sprinkling but diverting of the wrath of God procuring his favour c. So the Blood of Christ has greater ends than confirming of the Truth he taught viz. the appeasing Gods just displeasure procuring his Actual Love pacifying of the Conscience cleansing the Soul 4. He supposes also that the Apostle Discourses to this purpose Rom. 9. which is to make the Apostle accessory to his own groundless fopperies who is indeed perfectly innocent of these crimes For 1. The sprinkling of the blood which the Apostle mentions Heb. 9. 9. in that mentioned Exod. 24. 6. Now there was another sprinkling of blood Antecedent to that which we read of Exod. 12. to which the blood of Christ did Answer and to which the Apostle refers as is evident from Heb. 11. 28. Heb. 12. 24. 2. The sprinkling of Blood Heb. 9. 19. being the same with that Exod. 24. 6. shews evidently that as the whole concern of the blood sprinkled at that time was not confirming a Covenant but Atoning God So the whole concern of the blood of Christ is not taken up in confirming a Covenant much less such a thing as he will mis-call a Covenant but in Reconciling God to Man paying a price of Redemption to God c. 3. That the Apostle carries another Argument is evident For 1. The Typical Interest which those Sacrifices had in Redemption were accomplish'd before the
rewards of Acceptation as righteous when they are not righteous and this for Christs sake then either there will be some immediate proper effect found ouâ—… for the Obedience of Christs Life and Death or else all comes to no more than this That God will Accept us righteous or unrighteous that is right or wrong 3. I would observe also That he supposes God to have dispensed with the Moral Law Which is News to me and I confess I doe not believe it nor shall I till I hear it confirmed Some Errors though speculative are daâ—…ble and such may this prove For if we like Fools goggled in with the Rhetorical Divinity of this Age should Trust to Gods Abatements of his Law and at last it should prove that God loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity as such we were in a most wretched miserable and undone Condition merely by Trusting to Indulgence I demand therefore good Counter security of our Author That God will deal with me as righteous though I be not so in the Account of his Law unless I be considered as found in Christ not having my own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is by the Faith of Christ the righteousness of God by Faith The Moral Law is the Image of Gods Mind his Nature transcribed into his Law and one jot nor tittle of this Law shall ever pass away How much of this Law God will dispense with what part of it or what degrees of the violation of it is to me unknown and if with any whether he may not possibly dispense with the whole by the same Reason is more than our Authors Principles can inform me he that may dispense with one part of it may with another and so of the rest For where to stop or put bounds to such a Dispensation as comes from the Grace of God is very impossible to determine unless we knew the true bounds of Gods Grace And whereas our Author talks of the rigour of the Law there 's nothing of it rigorous in its own Nature and the least particle of it would be impossible to be observed according to its exact demands if it were made the Law of our Iustification He that breaks the Law in one point is guilty of all and the Curse is denounced against him that confirms not all that is written therein to doe it 4. The Difficulty remains to this day Why God should be so pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christ that he should allow the Disobedience of Another And it will remain for ever a Difficulty both why God should inflict Evils upon the Posterity of Adam for his sake or deal with them as righteous who in the Account of his Holy Law are not righteous for Christs till we understand the true Nature of the Two Covenants the one made with Adam and all his Natural seed the other with Christ and all his spiritual seed both which Seeds were to stand or fall according as their respective Heads and Representatives should acquit themselves in point of Obedience and Disobedience towards God and his most holy and righteous Law The same liberty that he has taken I question not but he will give and I shall be very modest in a few Enquiries 1. May we enquire Whether what he allows of Influence to Adams Sin upon his Posterity will satisfie the Apostles Intendment The Apostle asserts v. 18. That by the offence of one judgement came upon all to Condemnation v. 19. That by one mans Offence many were made Sinners And there are these things considerable 1. That Adams Sin had this Influence upon Posterity that they were made Sinners also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transgressors of a Law for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deviate from a Rule to come short of a Mark that is set us to aim at as Suidas observes 2. That the Posterity of Adam were so made sinners that they were lyable to condemnation Iudgment came upon them to Condemnation This I Observe because some talk as if they were Sinners in jest but God lets the Sons of men know that they are obnoxious to Condemnation for the Offence of that one Man 3. The Apostle shews how they were made sinners and how they were liable to Condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were so by a Constitution God did not infuse sin into them and make them sinners Inherently but they were made so by a Law-constitution And it was needful that the Apostle should clear that Point because the Vindication of Gods Iustice called for it For how could God deal with them as sinners in respect of Condemnation who were not first sinners in respect of Guilt Guilt and Condemnation do Reciprocally prove each other To assert them to be sinners proves them liable to Condemnation and to assert them liable to Condemnation presupposes them to be sinners for what is Condemnation but the evil of Punishment inflicted for the evil of sin committed Nor can it consist with the Righteousness of the Iudge of the whole Earth to treat them as sinners as to Punishment who were not first so as to Guilt contracted To clear therefore the Righteousness of God that he may be Iust when he Condemns we must understand that the sin of Adam is one way or other made the sin of his Posterity Several ways there are Contrived to Salve this Difficulty some say as was noted before that Adams sin being Imitated by his Posterity they become sinners and so liable to Condemnation A dull Contrivance which our Author himself will not allow who asserts that God was so displeased with Adams Disobedience that for his sake he Entailed many Evils upon his Posterity but if there be nothing more but the Infection and Contagion of his Example then it 's not for Adams Sin Fault or Offence that they are made sinners but for their own In Defiance of the Apostle and his way of Reasoning the very truth is God made a Covenant with Adam and in him with all his Natural Posterity Adam was not only the Natural Parent but the Moral Head and Representative of all his Seed and therefore according to this Righteous Law of God his Offence was theirs what he forfeited they forfeited what he lost they lost he sinned they sinned he came under the Condemnation they came under it also And this does fully satisfie the Apostles Reasoning By one Mans offence many were made sinners by one Mans offence Iudgment came upon all to Condemnation And God has given us pregnant Instances of his Righteous procedure in Punishing the Members of Political Bodies for the Offences of their Political Heads 2 Sam. 24. Thus he Punisht Davids sin in Numbering the People upon the People who were Innocent in his Transgression personally and to say as some have ventured to say That the People had sins of their own for which God might Righteously punish them is to say a great Impertinent truth For whatever sins
they had of their own for which God might justly have dealt thus with them yet God Declares that this was the Impulsive cause of their Punishment even the sin of David with whom the People having a Political Union as our Author phrases it they made but one Body in the sight of Vengeance And when others say That this was but a temporal Punishment and therefore it will not hold that God should punish the Posterity of Adam spiritually for his Transgression they say they know not what For God will not be Unrighteous and Unjust in Punishing the Sons of Men for that sin which is none of their own in the smallest thing from a Thread to a Shooe-latchet and the Rule of Justice in this Case is the Law for if the Law was back'd by a Sanction of Spiritual and Eternal threatnings then 't is Just with the Law-giver to Inflict the Punishment upon all that are under the Law our Union with Adam was another a stricter Union than the Israelites had with David it was Spiritual the other Civil External only And therefore according to the Law of Union and Relation though the Israelites could only suffer for Davids sin temporally yet the Posterity of Adam may by Righteous Judgment of God for Adams sin suffer Eternally And now let us briefly see whether our Author comes up to any thing of the Apostle or no God says he was so highly displeased with Adams sin that for his sake he Entailed a great many Evils Miseries nay Death it self upon his Posterity Nay but says the Apostle they were constituted sinners Iudgment and Condemnation came upon them though they had not sinned after the Similitude of Adams transgression the same Iudgment which in the Sanction of the Law was threatned against Adams sin and now to Fob and Flam off this with Evils Miseries and never tell us what they were not how it could be Just with God to Entail the least Evil upon them or touch a Hair of their Heads for the sin of another with whom they had no privity of Interest is to Reduce the sin of Adam as near to Nothing as he has Reduced Christs Righteousness 2. May we enquire also VVhether that Influence which he allows to Christs Obedience reach the Mind of the Apostle The Apostle affirms that By the Obedience of one many were made Righteous and that by the Righteousness of one the Free-gift came upon all to Iustification of Life v. 18 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many or the many of whom he Treats shall be constituted Righteous For as all that were in the first Adam all his Natural Seed were by vertue of a Legal Constitution Ordinance and Appointment of God made sinners in the Transgression of their common Head and Representative so all the Spiritual Seed and Posterity of Christ which the Father had promised to give him as the Reward of his Death and Sufferings are by vertue of a New a better Law-constitution made Righteous by the Righteousness of their spiritual Head and Representative And therefore the Apostle v. 14. tells us expresly That Adam was the Figure of Christ He did exactly represent the Headship of Christ towards all his spiritual Posterity in that Headship which he bore towards his own Posterity But the Apostle has said enough in this Chapter to stomack the Pride and Restifness of humane Wisdom nothing more grating upon the Spirit of a Gallant than that he should be made a sinner by the sin or owe his Righteousness to the Righteousness of another This is the summe of the Apostles Discourse As the Posterity of Adam were made sinners constituted such by a Law and dealt with as such by God so are the Posterity of Christ made Righteous by such another way of Justification But then I assume The Posterity of Adam could not be made sinners by the sin of Adam otherwise than by the Imputation of Adams sin therefore the Posterity of Christ could not be made Righteous otherwise in the sight of God than by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness The Posterity of Adam could not possibly be made sinners by Adams first sin any other way than by charging it upon them according to the Terms of that Law under which he and they stood nor are the Seed of Christ capable of being made Righteous in Gods sight by the Obedience of Christ otherwise than by Imputing it to them according to that New Covenant-constitution called the Law of Faith and Righteousness under which Christ and Believers do now stand But if the word Imputation do Disgust our Authors delicate Ears let him call it what he pleases provided the Apostles Argument be satisfied and his main Design secured let us now see how our Author comes up to the Apostle God says he was so well pleased with the Obedience and Righteousness of Christs Life and Death that for his sake he bestows the rewards of Righteousness on those who according to the Rigour of the Law are not Righteous Wherein our Author and our Apostle come not near one another by many Leagues 1. Our Author says God bestows the reward of Righteousness on them that are not Righteous But our Apostle says we are made Righteous by the Obedience of Christ before we can be accounted Righteous by God The Holy God will not account half Righteousness for a whole one sinners may mock themselves but they cannot mock God That which the Law requires must be had the Apostle tells us 't is to be had in Christ By his Obedience through the Intervention of the Law-constitution of Faith and Righteousness Believers are made Righteous 2. Whatever is Lurking under the darkness of these Expressions The Rewards of Righteousness the Rigour of the Law yet this we may be sure of that all come to this in the Up shot That God for Christs sake has made a New Covenant of Grace which Pardons our past Sins and Follies and rewards a Sincere though Imperfect Obedience I can compare our Authors Copia Verborum his Variegated Equipollent Phrases and Expressions to nothing so well as that of the Chymists when they endeavour to bind Hermes or in plain English their fixing of Quicksilver they can Model it into many accidental Forms and Shapes and yet the Cunning versute Creature will be Mercury again do what they can unless some will compare it to the Young-mans Mistress in the Fable that Brided it for a day or so but yet upon the sight of her old Game put off her Personated self and reassumed her real self again Such Feats of Activity have we shown us ever and anon by our Author he can turn his words into more Shapes than Proteus tell us of this and that but when he comes to himself All the Influence that Christs Obedience has upon our acceptance with God is that we owe such a Covenant to it as he has described to us and Contrived for us Tells us That God for Christs sake has entered into a
God might have held us close and tyed us up to the Terms of the Old Covenant and righteously have exacted of us a Personal compleat Obedience to every jot and tittle of the Law as the Condition of Justification but though he has not abated of his Law yet he has admitted a Surety called therefore the Surety of the Covenant not only because he has undertaken for God but for us also for a Mediator is not of one Gal. 3. 19. And our receiving this abundance of Grace is not the Receiving of inherent Grace into us but our accepting by Faith this New gospel-Gospel-Law or Constitution of God with the whole Man closing with this gracious way of Justifying a Believer by Christ. But here our Author unhappily crosses me the way with one of his id est's That is says he Those who by the Gospel of Christ which is called Grace the abundant Grace of God are made Holy and Righteous To which I say as I have sometimes said That the Gospel as he describes it is not the Grace of God but a real Doctrine of Justification by Works blanch'd a little to make it vendible 2. The Gospel as it is a Revelation of Grace is not the whole of the Grace of God the Gospel reveals more Grace to be in God in Christ in the Holy Spirit for us than the Revelation of it There is an Operation of Grace upon us a Constitution of Grace with us as well as a Revelation of Grace to us but this he will grant us That Righteousness is called a Gift so far good But is it really a gift or onely called so as Christs is called a Redeemer called a High-Priest called a Sacrifice I doubt this will prove nothing but Phraseology at last He answers 1. Negatively It 's called a gift because it is not owing solely to Humane Endeavours Not solely But then it may be almost and very near altogether owing to Humane Endeavours The Grace of God may come in for a share though a poor pitiful share as he would not exclude the Righteousness of Christ wholly totally from having any concernment in our Iustification so out of his generosity he will not shut out Grace wholly from interposing in our Sanctification Haerebit in aliquâ saltem parte Well commend me to the memory of honest I. G. who though a high trotting Arminian would allow Free-grace ninety nine parts in the Conversion of a sinner provided always and upon Condition nevertheless that Free-will might have one in a hundred But what a Company of Rigid Bigots are these Calvinists that will not abate one ace not forgo a single Unite in a Hundred but they pretend they have no Commission to compound between Free-grace and Free-will and that God will not put his Right to arbitration and indeed it were hazardous for what sad terms had our Author made for the Rich effectual Grace of God had the determination been put into his hands Righteousness is not owing solely to Humane endeavours Natural strength free-will humane ability shall have ninety nine parts in the Dividend and Grace that deserves all must be content with one single lot and perhaps a smaller pittance And now what if this will not denominate it a gift just so much as you add to these Humane Endeavours you substract from free-grace and whether that little that very little concern that grace has in this work shall denominate it a Gift or that much that very much which Humane Endeavours have in it No gift must stand to the Courtesie of the Criticks and great Masters of Language 2. Affirmatively It is wrought in us says he by supernatural means by those powerful arguments and motives and Divine assistances which God in infinite Love hath afforded the World by Iesus Christ. I cannot express the transport of my mind at the first sound of these words supernatural means powerful arguments Divine assistances I began to suspect our Author was turn'd Calvinist as he suspected Dr. Owen was turned Arminian and with equal Reason for I presently found my Errour The word Grace has a Considerable Name and carries a good repute in the Scriptures and therefore our Author will behave himself as decently towards it as he can afford But what is the meaning of these supernatural means Why to speak liquidly Means of Supernatural Revelation at best but of no supernatural Operation Some arguments suggested which the light of Nature could not discover and some institutions which depend meerly on the will and pleasure of God for his powerful arguments and Divine assistances they are such Motives as being given by God externally are left to the self-determining power of that great Idol Free will For when all is done 't is the man who Converts himself but this and a great deal more will not satisfie the claim of effectual Grace in the Conversion of a Soul to God Who by the same power whereby Christ was raised from the dead works Faith in the Soul Eph. 1. 19 20. Who works in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. Who gives us the new Heart and causes us to walk in his Statutes Ezek. 36. 26. Who takes away the resistibility of the Soul the stony heart and Circumcises the Hearts of his People to Love the Lord their God with all their heart Deut. 30. 6. But with such Cantings did Pelagius cover his abominations talking of ineffable grace wonderful grace when all was but Revelation or Grace the Name suborned to destroy Free and effectual Grace the thing it self After all these windings and turnings our Author will give us a fair account How we may be said to bâ—… made Righteous by the Righteousness of Christ I hope it shall be an honest account as well as a fair one and then it 's welcome but whose hopes could have been so vain as to flatter him he should live to see an account and a fair account too given by our Author of such a Paradox But we attend Not that his Actual Obedience is reckoned as done by us which is impossible There 's the Negative And this seems to go a great way in the Account How we may be said to be made Righteous by anothers Righteousness Because it 's impossible we should be righteous by anothers righteousness But why is this so impossible There 's no more impossibility in it than that Adams Disobedience should be reckoned as mine which if it be not let men shift and evade with all their cunning they shall never be able to justifie Gods procedure with his Posterity in entailing evils many evils and Death it self upon them for Adams sake if they be not guilty of the Crime Suppose we had been in Adams place had committed his sin eaten the forbidden Fruit in his stead in our own Persons what had the penalty been in our Authors Judgment but evils a great many evils Death it self And what in the Apostles account but Iudgment unto Condemnation
Matter of Justification before God and when it was attainable and it shall be once more the proper sence of being made righteous in Heaven where the spirits of just men are made perfectly perfect but to us in the way it 's not the proper sence of being made righteous but a Figurative sence as we may call an Aethiopian white because his teeth are so and it must be a stretching Synechdoche that will denominate a Christian Righteous by inherent Righteousness if he shall compare the Attainments of a Pilgrim with the perfect Law of God but the proper sence of being made righteous is that of the Apostle Rom. 5. 20. By the Obedience of one Man many shall be made righteous made so perfectly and compleatly by the Constitution of the Law of Righteousness and Faith for thus we are compleat in Christ Coloss. 2. 10. through whom we are presented to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unblameable and unreproveable in Gods sight so pure that there is not a spot or blemish to be found in a Believer in the sight of God himself which upon the Account of inherent Righteousness is impossible Inherent Righteousness is properly Righteousness for so much as there is of it but it is so imperfect that it will not denominate any man properly righteous in the sight of God 2 There is another thing which mightily discomposes this kind of Argumentation We may be said to be made righteous by the Righteousness of Christ in a proper sence Why so Oh! Because the Righteousness of Christ is one of those great Arguments of the Gospel that forms our Minds to the Love and practice of Holiness and so makes us inherently righteous Which is this The Righteousness of Christ and our Righteousness hang so loosely and contingently together that it seems very absurd to ascribe the Effect of the latter to the former If indeed the Righteousness of Christ did properly necessarily and infallibly produce an inherent Righteousness in us it were warrantable to say we were made righteous by it but when the Connexion is so accidental so uncertain that the Effect depends upon our own Free-will as in the New Theology it does we cannot properly be said to be made righteous in this sence by his Righteousness For when all these Arguments and Motives have done their best That which does the work is Free-will and Humane Endeavour and therefore properly are we said to be made Righteous by them 2. Sect. A Forensick sence which is this The Grace of the Gospel accepts and rewards that sincere and Evangelical Obedience which according to the Rigour and Severity of the Law could deserve no reward This Forensick is a hard word and if I might presume to soften it a little with Interpretation it should be thus A Forensick sence of Justification is a sence borrowed from Courts of Judicature where the Judge absolving or acquitting a Prisoner of those Crimes wherewith he stood charged does not doe it by making him innocent or honest by infusing into him the Habits of Vertue but onely declares That according to the Evidence he is found Innocent Righteous Just and therefore as the Law acquits him so the Judge as the Minister of the Law declares him to be acquitted Now the Question is Whether our Author has given us a true Forensick sence of Iustification or no His Sence is this The Grace of the Gospel accepts and rewards that sincere and Evangelical Obedience which according to the Severity and Rigour of the Law deserves no reward which seems to me so far from a Forensick sence that it 's the Forensick Non-sence of Justification for does a Judge pronounce and declare him righteous whom the Law says is unrighteous Can he justifie him whom the Law condemns The Judge sits not there as a good Natur'd Man with a Chancery of Charity in his own breast but as a Righteous Governour to render to every man according to his works weighed in the Ballance of that Law by which he is to judge And shall we dare to fancy that the Grace of the Gospel will pronounce that Man righteous reward that Man as righteous who is not righteous by the Law of God if that be the Law by which he must be Condemned or Acquitted I will grant that in a Criminal Cause which by the Law deserves Bodily Punishment if the Constitution of the Law will Allow it the Judge may lay the Punishment of the Guilty Person upon another who will freely undergoe it or that which is equivalent in the eye of the Law to it and acquit him that in the first Consideration of the Law was not innocent Let us apply it God is the righteous Iudge of all the World and by his Eternal Holy Law he will Judge the Sons of Men so true is God to his own Law that he will not acquit and justifie him whom the Law condemns nor Condemn him whom his Law Acquits nor is it possible he should To say the Sinner is righteous by the Verdict of his Law when by the Verdict of the Law he is not righteous is not consistent with the Veracity of that God who cannot lye But there is another Law the Law of Righteousnesse and Faith which Sovereign Grace has set up and this admits the satisfaction of Another admits a Sacrifice a Surety even Jesus Christ the righteous whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness that he may be just and the Iustifier of him that believes in Iesus If now according to the Terms of this New Law of Grace the Righteousness and Sufferings of this Jesus may be accepted for the Delinquents then will there a genuine sence of a Forensick Iustification be found out Yet let us examine these things further 1 The Grace of the Gospel says he accepts and rewards that sincere Obedience Let it be supposed he means the Grace of God declared in the Gospel yet this is so far from being Grace that it is not good Moral Vertue Is that Grace or something that deserves Another Name to declare an Offender to be righteous when he is not so to pronounce he has kept the Law when he has broken it and yet thus must the Grace of the Gospel speak if it declares him righteous in a Forensick sence who is a Violator of the Law and yet has no Substitute to keep it for him Here is some Provision made for an Imaginary Grace to the destruction of real Iustice whereas in the true Covenant of Grace there is a blessed Accord of all Gods Attributes Mercy and Truth have met together Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other 2 If it be the Grace of God or the Gospel that accepts this sincere Obedience then how do we owe this to the Righteousness of Christ what Influence has that upon God to move him to accept and reward that sincere yet imperfect Obedience which his Law will not accept This is the thing
to Christ we must go to Him And therefore Faith which is the Instrument of this Union is very Luckily called coming to Christ from whence it is very evident that to believe in Christ is to go to Him for Salvation Which Metaphors of coming and going are a very Intelligible Explication of Believing But does this Gentleman think we have not sins enough of our own to answer for but we must be Responsible for all the faults the Black-Jaundies of Malice can find in Scripture Or does he Fancy that we Penn'd the Scriptures and therefore must lie at Stake for all the Incongruous expressions that he is able to suppose in them Well thanks be unto God that the Scriptures never yet found a Match able to Cope with them For 1. It 's apparently false which he says These Metaphors of coming and going are a very Intelligible explication of Believing Whenas indeed Believing is that which Explicates those Metaphors of Coming and Going With the same Fore-head he might have reviled Christ for Interpreting the Preaching of the Word by the Sower Sowing his Seed whereas the Sower sowing his Seed is explicated by the Preaching the Word 2. Faith says he is very Luckily called coming to Christ. I shall spare him that Ignorant Expression that Faith is called coming to Christ No Sir not Faith but Believing not the Peace but the Acting of that Grace is so called But I shall not wave his blasphemous Flirtings of the holy Spirit What ever Expressions he has used to express Faith or its Acts by were upon advice with his own wisdom who will not learn of him how to guide the Heads and Hearts and Tongues and Pens of his Amanuenses in revealing to us the Mind and Will of God He has better Authority to Justifie Quod scripsi scripsi than either Pilate who once really Crucified Christ Or that other who has often Crucified him in Essigie It was advisedly so called but unluckily reproached 3. Those Metaphors of coming and going do very aptly and Intelligibly express the Motion of the Soul in its turning from sin to God by Faith in Jesus Christ For as in all Local Motions there is a Term from which and a Term unto which we move so in this Spiritual Motion there is a State or Term from which we pass that of Sin and Enmity against God and another to which we pass that of Holiness and Peace with God Our Saviour thought meet and we are to Acquiesce in his Sovereign Wisdom sometimes to employ a Metaphor in the Explicating of a Metaphor Mat. 13. 19. Then comes the wicked one and catcheth away the word that was sown in his heart ver 21. Yet hath he not Root in himself ver 22. The deceitfulness of Riches Choak the Word and yet till of late he was never branded for unintelligible explicating of his Notions If now the Reader would have an Instance to what Height encouraged Prophaneness may rise let him read what follows But when the Soul is come to Christ is this enough No sure the Soul then must receive Christ as St. Iohn tells us 1 Ioh. 12. To as many as received him to them he gave power to become the Sons of God That faith which serves us for Leggs to goe to Christ must be a Hand to Receive him and to apply all his Merits and Fulness and Righteousness to our Souls And now when we have Received him we must embrace him in our Arms too as good old Simeon did when he found him in the Temple which is a little nearer Union as plainly appears from the Example of the Patriarchs who saw the Promises afar off and embraced them Heb. 11. 13. and now we have Christ we must trust and lean upon Him as we are often commanded to doe which signifies that Act of Faith whereby feeling our own weakness as unable to support our selves we do lean and rest on Christ and if leaning be not enough we may make a little more bold and Roll on him as appears from Psal. 37. 5. Roll thy wayes on the Lord as the Original Gal signifies which is that Act of Faith whereby we being weary and heavy laden with sin and seeking Ease at last discharge our load and cast it on Christ and this is plain from the phrase of Believing in Christ and on him for what can that signifie but leaning and rolling on him laying and building our selves on him as on a Foundation And now we have thus brought our Souls to Christ we must commit them to his trust to take charge of them and if they perish it shall be his fault he must give an account of it Thus St. Paul did 2 Tim. 1. 12. I know whom I have believed and I am perswaded that he is able to keep that I have committed unto him against that day and Now we must hide our selves in Christ from the fierce wrath of God as the Dove in the Rocks But this is not enough yet for we must be cloathed with the Righteousness of Christ. And when we are thus united to Christ and made one with him then All Christ is ours as the Apostle tells us All is yours and ye are Christs and Christ is Gods The Merit of his Death is ours to free us from the Guilt and Punishment of sin and his Active Obedience to the will of God his Righteousness is ours for our Justification as is plain in that he is called The Lord our Righteousness and as I. O. well observes we are reconciled to God by the Death of his Son and saved by his Life Rom. 5. 10. And now I hope there 's none needs question but our Author is laid in with a Competency of those Endowments that may enable him to Deride the whole Bible from the first of Genesis to the last of the Revelations If our Author does not judge with others about the Meaning of these phrases and Expressions of Scripture he had the liberty for ought I know to discover and if he must needs to expose their Mistakes but to droll upon the very Expressions of Scripture without reference to any Interpretation and if to any to that which is most evidently the True is a Degree above the superlative of Blasphemy Let others admire which of his Talents they see good for my own part I read more of Ignorance in it than of all his other Characters 1. One gross piece of Ignorance is that he makes the Patriarchs embracing of the Promises explain Simeon's embracing Christ in the Temple 2. That in his goodly supposed Method of the Souls coming to Christ he fancies first that we have Christ and trust and lean upon him and yet after a while as if it were a new degree of Faith he tells us we must commit our Souls to him 3. He fancies that to come to Christ to receive him to embrace him are several Acts of Faith distinguished by some Intervals of time But let us hear the guilt of these Scriptures and
his little Glosses Why they offend against his great standing Rule Interpreting things by the sound of words For says he what better proof can you desire for all this than Express words Really the Laws upon which we must be permitted to discourse with our Author are very severe for p. 78. he laid it down as a Law of the Medes and Persians that none must dare to Draw one Conclusion from the Person of Christ which his Gospel hath not expressely taught Well we accepted the Tearms and have brought him expresse and expressely express words and do speak as Volkelius commands us dilectis luculentissimisque verbis and yet we are never the nearer for now we offend in trusting to the sound of words Just thus did Procrustes entertain his Guests wracking out them that were too short and lopping off their feet that were too long for his Bed All men I perceive are awake to their Concerns in this Rule as well as our Vigilant Author When it is urged that Christ is called expressely God the True God He that was in the beginning by whom were all things made who upholds all things by the Word of his Power the Socinians have now a compendious Answer Ay this is to interpret Scripture by the sound of words And the Atheist has an inckling of it too he can subscribe all the Scriptures as True but when you urge him that God created all things out of Nothing that he is the Owner Governour Iudge of the whole World they are provided with a short Answer Yes this is interpreting Scripture by the sound of words And whether every Drunkard Swearer Adulterer all the Rakehells and Rakeshames upon Earth may not in time make their advantage of it I cannot tell That Ministers do but fright them with a sound of words Thus have some dealt with the Sacerdotal Office of Christ He is a Priest they confess he offer'd a Sacrifice was a Propitiation made an Atonement did expiate sin but have a care you do not interpret these things as the words sound he did indeed something like a Priest offer'd something like a Sacrifice but truely and properly he was nothing did nothing of All this It had been therefore more plain-heartedly and ingenuously done had our Author written a Confutation of the Scripture proving that the Spirit did not speak intelligibly but All in good time he has Materials ready for the work P. 100. The wildest and most extravagant Opinions that were ever yet vented under the Name of Religion have pretended the Authority of Scripture for their Patronage And yet he knew how first to break its head and then make it a Playster This famous Rule of our Authors may be applyed to all things under the Sun but there are two Principles onely that he will examine by it at present 1. The spiritual Impotency of all men without grace to perform that which is Acceptable to God This says he they prove wonderfully from our being dead in trespasses and sins and therefore as a Dead man can contribute nothing to his own Resurrection no more can we towards our Conversion I wonder when the Scripture will be able to speak so plain that deaf men will understand it One would have thought the Spirit of God should never have chosen that Expression of being Dead in trespasses and sins to signifie what mighty power and abilities the Creature has to Obey But we are instructed better from this usefull Caveat not to interpret Him by the sound of his words for now we must understand by Being dead Being Alive and proportionably by Sins and Trespasses we must understand Duty and Obedience and then to keep close to our Instructions and far enough from the sound of words To be Dead in Sins and Trespasses is to be Alive to all Duty and Obedience And thus that other vexing place Rom. 5. When we were without strength in due time Christ dyed for the ungodly must be Paraphrased When we were strong and Active and had no need of Christ he dyed for the godly And this I think if that be good for ought is very remote from grating our Ears with the unpleasant sound of words Ay but says our Author This is true of Natural Death but will be hard to prove of a Moral Death Hard to prove Methinks we want his wonted out-facing Confidence But why so hard to prove Has not the Spirit of God selected those words borrowed from the Condition of one Naturally dead to instruct us in the true Condition of one Morally dead It 's true of a Natural and therefore not of a Moral Death Nay it 's therefore true of a Moral Death because it is so of a Natural Death What wild Similitudes would he impose upon the Holy Scriptures Even as one that 's Naturally dead can contribute Nothing to his Resurrection just so one that 's Morally dead can contribute something to his Conversion This is the great Illustrator of dark Metaphors But wherein doth this Morall Death consist Oh says he In the prevalency of vicious habits contracted by long Custom which was the Case of the Heathens whom the Apostle there speaks of which do so enslave the Will that it 's very difficult though not impossible for such Persons to return to the love and practice of Vertue But who can tell whether by enslaving the Will which is a Luscious Metaphor our Author would not have us understand enfranchising the Will lest we should border too near upon a sound of words But I am not illuminated with our Authors Reasonings For 1 Moral Death doth not consist in the prevalency of vicious Habits it is the general Condition of all men born into the world who are privatively Dead in respect of that Life we all once had in the first Adam and Negatively Dead in respect of that Life which is attainable by the second Adam And in those dayes when men studyed not Aequivocations to subscribe every thing and believe Nothing it was not question'd in the Church of England Art 10. The Condition of Man since the Fall is such that he cannot Turn and prepare himself by his Own Natural Strength and good Works to Faith and calling upon God wherefore we have no power to doe good works pleasant and acceptable to God without his Grace preventing us that we may have a good Will and working with us when we have that Will. But 2 Supposing that this Moral Death did consist in the Prevalency of vicious Habits contracted by long Custom yet such may be the prevalency of them into such a slavery may the Will be brought that it may be not onely diâ—…ficult but impossible without the effectual assistance of the Spirit for the Sinner to return to God Ier. 13. 23. Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the Leopard his spots then may ye also doe good that are accustomed to doe evil Whence the Prophet shews that such is the prevalency of a vicious Habit contracted by long Custom
and therefore it is to be noted that the Apostle rises higher in his earnestness v. 8. Yea doubtless q. d. Did I say that I once looked upon all as loss for Christ. I will speak a bolder word than that I count all but loss dung filth that I may win Christ and be found in him not having my own Righteousness and that he speaks of that esteem and value he had of his present Righteousness is yet further evident from this that it was in reference to a future day the day of Iudgment that he might be found in Christ in that day not sticking to his own Righteousness Two things our Author returns to this 1. It 's a sufficient Answer to say they need not signifie so I confess for want of a better the Answer may pass A bad shift is better than None and half a loaf is better than No-bread but if a Man had a better it was the sorriest Answer in the World I see when men are prest with express Scripture and yet are resolved cost what will to adhere to their own Conclusions it 's adviseable to cast about to turn their thoughts into all shapes imaginable to hunt for the extremest possibilities If a Word a Phrase an Expression is but capable of another sence let it be probable or improbable true or false agreeable to the scope of the place or alien all is a case something must be said that they may not seem to say Nothing And if they can say it 's possible it may be otherwise as who cannot though they do not believe themselves they hug themselves for their ready wit and applaud themselves for grave Respondents A little matter will blow away this dust Let them show where ever My Righteousness is otherwise used and then let them boast of a bare possibility 2. My own Righteousness says he can signifie no more than that wherein he placed his Righteousness I beg his pardon for that It signifies more than that wherein he placed his Righteousness whil'st a Pharisee and a great deal less than that wherein he placed Righteousness after Conversion in order to Justification But if the Apostle renounced what-ever he placed his Righteousness in then either he placed it in Inherent Righteousness or not If not then how dares our Author place his Righteousness there where the Apostle durst not If he did ever place his Righteousness in it then here he openly declares before the World that he Renounces it But says our Author what necessity is there to understand this of inherent holiness We have shewed you the Necessity before and shall do hereafter An External Righteousness serves most mens turns very well not so well neither as he may Imagine And this is the Righteousness by which the Pharisees and amongst the rest St. Paul whilst he was a Pharisee expected to be justified but stay a while 1. We have proved that the Apostle not only renounced that Righteousness what-ever it was that he had whilst a Pharisee but that which was his own at the time when he made that solemn Renunciation of it what-ever he had attained or might possibly attain all went that he might be found in Christ in the great Day 2. The Pharisees were generally bad enough in all Conscience and he need not make them worse It 's a sin we say to bely the Devil It doth not appear that the Pharisees expected to be Justified before God by an external obedience only without sincerity It was not their Principle though Hypocrisie as to many Individuals might be their Practice The Case is frequent before our Eyes a Drunkard a common Swearer c. will tell you they Hope to be saved though they are wicked but none durst ever assume the Impudence to expect Salvation because he was wicked No he will repent when he can intend it and trust to the general grace of God and some such reserves which our Modern-Pulpit-Drollery has furnisht him withal 3. As to Paul whilst he was a Pharisee if we take his own word for it when he was none he was no Hypocrite he every-where vindicates himself as to that His Persecuting was his great Crime in which he protests his sincerity Acts 25. 9. I verily thought with my self that I ought to do many things contrary to the Name of Iesus and 1 Tim. 1. 13. he avows he did it ignorantly He durst appeal to his very Enemies how he had lived from a Child Act. 25. 4. My manner of life from my youth know all the Iews if they would testifie and makes a solemn Protestation before the Sanhedrin Act. 23. 1. That he had lived in all good Conscience to that very day That others of the Pharisees were Sober Conscientious men I do not at all question and the discourse of Paul's Mr. Gamaliel Act. 5. shows that he had a great deal more Religion in him than most of those who to carry on a design rail at them for Hypocrites Ay but says our Author what his Righteousness was he tells us V. 6 7. Circumcised the eighth day of the stock of Israel c. So that My own Righteousness which is of the Law is so far from signifying an inherent Righteousness a vital principle of Holiness that it only signifies an external Righteousness which consisted in some external Rites as Circumcision and Sacrifices or external Priviledges as being of the Seed of Abraham or an external Civility and blamelessness of Conversation This proceeds upon a double false supposition 1. That the Apostle renounces nothing but what he had attained whilst he was a Pharisee 2. That whatsoever he had renounced V. 6 7. did constitute his Pharisaical Righteousness For 1. I must cut him off Circumcision that was no part of his own Righteousness a priviledge it was but nothing performed by him and therefore could not expect Justification by it unless our Author will grant that he had a spice of the Doctrine of imputing the Obedience of Another to him for Iustification 2. For Sacrifices the Apostle mentions them not renounces them not for he understood too well their use and proper End in the Iewish Church that they were their visible Gospel and did lead to Christ whom now he owned though then he was ignorant of him The Conscientious and believing use of Sacrifices might put in for a place in Justifying the Sinner with better right than such Obedience to the Moral Law as man was able in his present state to perfom 1. Consider them as mere acts of Obedience wherein the thing done is not so considerable as the subjection of the Conscience to the Authority of God the Soveraign Law-giver which in this Case is most signal for here is only the will and pleasure of God for the Reason of that costly and operose seruice whereas Moral duties are vouched for by the suffrage of the Light and Reason of Nature 2. Consider them as instituted for their peculiar end the leading and conducting of Faith to
Covenant made a Covenant his Righteousness and Obedience have procured a Covenant are the Meritorious cause of a Covenant when the total Summe of all is no more than this That God has promised to Pardon and Save us if we Believe and Obey the Gospel though we Obey not perfectly So that at last it 's our own Obedience that Recommends us to God our own Righteousness for which we are Iustified Whereas the Apostle is Peremptory That by the Obedience of Christ we are constituted Righteous His Conclusion is therefore this That the Righteousness of Christ is not the formal Cause of our Iustification but the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous and rewarded as Righteous I perceive the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Obedience of his Death are like to prove something ere long One while they Confirm and Seal another while they Procure and at last they Merit a Covenant I cannot but Examine particulars though I have often done it 1. The Righteousness of Christ is not the Formal cause of our Iustification Indeed I think it is not Never any Man in his Wits affirmed it so Give but us leave to call it the Material cause or the Meritorious cause immediately and properly of Justification and he shall take Formal cause and deal with it at his pleasure I think I have a Commission from all the Systematical Divines of Germany the Voluminous Tigurines and Bulky Low-Dutch with those few that are left in England to make a Bargain with him Hard and Fast That the Righteousness of Christ is not the Formal cause of our Iustification 2. Says he It is the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous A Meritorious cause sounds very high if it had an honest Meaning But what has it Merited Iustification By no means What then Any particular Mercy or Priviledge or Blessing By no means for then it would be a proper cause of it there 's an Exact and Severe proportion betwixt the Reward and the Work in all Merit What is it then the Meritorious cause of Why of a Covenant But are we made Righteous by the Covenant Not at all only we are declared Righteous But how does the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Obedience of his Death Merit such a Covenant at Gods Hands Nay That he will not tell us God was well pleased with them but why he should be so is a Secret which must be reserved for the coming of Elias 3. The last thing I shall Exmine is his Exceptions against our Interpretation of the Apostle 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall be made Righteous says he is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall be Iustified Well I agree to him But then I say the former Expression explains the way of our being Iustified that it is by Vertue of a Gospel-Law-Constitution or Appointment of God who considering all Believers as one with their Redeemer does Constitute them Just and Righteous there 's the Formal Cause in the Righteousness of Christ there 's the Material Cause of Justification as all the Posterity of Adam are constituted Sinners and liable to Condemnation by the Constitution of the old Law as Represented by him their Common Head 2. He excepts That the Apostle tells us ver 17. Who they are that are Iustified by Christ and shall Reign with him in Life not those who are Righteous by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness to them But I do not hear the Apostle telling me one such word whatever he has told our Author privately by way of Cabala I hear him saying plainly That as by one Mans offence many were made sinners so by one Mans Obedience many were made Righteous And because I cannot devise how possibly one Man should be made a sinner dealt with as a sinner Condemned and Judged as and for a sinner by another mans sin unless he be some ways or other guilty of sin and because it is not the making of that one mans sin their own by Immitation and Example that the Apostle speaks of but by a constitution of a Covenant or Law Therefore till I can find a better Term to express the Doctrine by I shall call Gods charging Adams sin upon his Posterity to their Condemnation his Imputing it to them And then because I cannot neither devise with my self how one man should possibly be made Righteous by the Obedience of another but that others Obedience must some way or other become his own and because to say Christs Obedience is ours by Imitation of his Example is to cross the Apostles paralel and to cross the Truth for we Imitate it but in part and very Imperfectly therefore I shall take the Freedom also to call Gods constituting Believers righteous by the Obedience of Christ his Imputing that Obedience to them for their Justification provided always that when more convenient and expressive Terms shall be found out to satisfie the Apostle this of Imputation be left indifferent Well but if not these who are then Why those who have received the abundance of Grace and of the Gift of Righteousness these are justified by Christ these shall Reign with him in Life It 's very true the Apostle does tell us no less And I cannot imagine how he should more fitly describe a justified person that others may know him and he should know himself than by the Fruits and Effects of Justification such as abundance of Grace are For whatever our Author thinks of the Apostle he does not use to describe a thing by it self or something equally obscure but by that which is more known and Obvious than the thing described and therefore the Apostle seems not to describe Justification but a justified Person by Sanctification They that have received abundance of Grace and the Gift of Righteousness these are justified Persons not that Justification is from any Inherent work but that the justified Person is only known to himself to be such by an Inherent work and to others by the fruits of it This answer I will deal truly with my Reader came next to hand I had it from our Author and I presumed he would accept a bad one of his own before a better of another mans The Apostle says he tells who those are that are thus justified by Christ Nay then thought I that will kill no body for a justified Person may be described by his Qualifications and yet his Righteousness wherein he stands accepted before God not consist in those Qualifications But to deal plainly with him I do humbly conceive that the Apostle describes an Imputed Righteousness by that expression They which receive the abundance of Grace and the Gift of Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was the over-flowing and Redundancy of Divine Love to accept a Surety to fulfill all Righteousness and Suffer for us and abundance of Grace too to let us in by Faith into the Righteousness of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of Christs Death