if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded unto many i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. q.d. If the sinne of Adam being but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an inconsiderate stumbling or a sinne proceeding from incogitancie and Adam hmselfe but one hath yet beene able to involve many i. his whole posteritie all that shall be borne of him in death and condemnation much more must it needs be conceived that the grace i. the gracious intent purpose of God towards men and the gift by that grace viz. of righteousnes justification by such a man as Iesus Christ is who is both God and man should abound unto many i. justifie and save with farre greater efficacie power and authority and as it were with an higher hand all those that by spirituall regeneration and a true faith shall descend from him The strēngth of of the Apostles reasoning and inference in this passage Scripture lyeth in this The salvation of the world faith he must needs proceede with farre higher hand by Christ then the condemnation of it did or doth by Adam Because 1. The foundation and ground worke of the one was the free and gracious intent and purpose of God which is a stronger and more active and lively principle or spring to set all the wheeles and worke on going that depend upon it then a permissive decree onely which as seemeth here intimated and imployed is the maine foundation the other viz. the condemnation of the world by Adam had in respect of God This permissive decree though it be as cleare as the other in respect of the event and comming to passe of such things as are comprehended in it yet is the motion of it but slow and heavie in comparison of the other Gods permissive decrees are chiefely executed by second meanes or by occasion of his withdrawing himselfe and leaving the creature to it selfe but his gracious decrees have his heart and soule and strength and might in their execution And secondly that which is the more proper and immediate cause of the difference here laid downe by the Apostle the condemnation of the world as touching matter of provocation and offence given unto God proceeds onely in the demerit and strength 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of one inconsiderate act of sinne and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from one onely meere man whereas the salvation of the world advanceth in the strength of such a righteousnesse attonement or justification as was procured indeed by one man but this one man was Jesus Christ who is valuable with thousand thousands of men and ten thousand times ten thousand thousands So that what he hath purposely and with all his might done for the justification and salvation of the world must needs be of an incomparable farre greater efficacie to carry these before it then the stumbling or unadvised sinne of one poore meere and meane man in comparison can be to procure the condemnation of it Onely I desire that it should be here considered and remembered that there is nothing said in all this Conclusion any wayes to extenuate either the demerit or guilt of Adams sinne beneath their just proportions and degrees but onely to shew that there is a great excesse of merit in the obedience of Christ above the rate and proportion of demerit in the disobedience of Adam There being these and other differences betweene Adam in his condemning the world and Christ in his Act or Worke in saving it it is evident that all such arguments or reasonings which are drawne from specialites and particularities of agreement betweene them are invalid and insufficient except they have some other foundation to beare them That which makes a true and lively Faith instrumentall in Justification Conclusi 11 SECT 17 is nothing that is essentiall or naturall to it whether descent propertie or act but somewhat that is extrinsecall and purely adventitious viz. the force and efficacie of that will good pleasure ordination covenant and appointment of God in that behalfe As it was neither the stature nor comelinesse of Aarons person nor his descent from Levie nor his grace nor his wisedome nor his knowledge nor any service formerly done by him either unto God or his Church nor any thing that in any proprietie of speech could be called his that made him an high Priest but Gods calling him unto and investing him with that honour and function he might have beene all that hee was otherwise and might have done all that hee did otherwise and yet without this anointing and appointment from God another might have beene high Priest and not he So might Faith have beene Faith both in the Originall and descent of it from the Spirit of God as likewise in all that native beautie and excellencie that belongs to it yea and put forth all those acts which otherwise it puts forth as to bring men to Christ to lay hold of Christ c. and yet never have attained the honour that is now put upon it never have beene instrumentall in Justification And as the same anointing or calling from God which were confer'd upon Aaron would have made any other man Priest though of another Tribe though lesse gracefull of person of meaner gifts and abilities every-wayes than Aaron was had they beene conferred upon him so had any other grace as love patience temperance or the like the force and power of the same covenant or ordination from God to assist them it cannot be conceived but that any of these would justifie as effectually as faith it selfe now doth Therefore it is unquestionably evident that Faith doth not justifie as it relates to Christ or as it apprehends him or redemption by him or the like because all these and such like properties or acts as these are essentiall and naturall unto Faith I meane to such a Faith as we speake of and that Faith which hath not or doth not all this is no true lively or effectuall Faith or instrumentall in justification Wherefore if Faith should justifie in regard or by vertue of any of these it should justifie by it selfe or by some dignity quality or act that is proper to it or inherent in it Hence it is that Scripture still suspends the justifying power or propertie of Faith upon the will free grace and good pleasure of God but never upon any act or qualitie proper to it selfe This is the will of him that sent me saith our Saviour Ioh. 6.40 that every man that seeth the Sonne and beleeveth in him should have everlasting life c. clearely implying 1. That it is not any seeing of Christ either corporally or spiritually nor any beleeving in him that could carry eternall life had it not the efficacie of the will of God to strengthen it thereunto And 2 that had this Will of God fallen in conjunction with any other grace or act of
deliver them out of trouble or the like And this doubtlesse is the most frequent signification of the word of all other Thus Psal 145.7 They shall abundantly utter the memory of thy great goodnesse and shall sing of thy righteousnesse that is of thy clemency and grace towards thy people So Psal 51.14 Mica 6.5 besides other places without number Fourthly that gracious purpose and intent of God towards his elect for giving them saving Faith in due time is sometimes called the righteousnesse of God Thus 2 Pet. 1.1 those beleevers to whom Peter writes are said to have obteyned like precious Faith with him through the righteousnesse of God c. Fiftly that which is of most concernment to the question in hand by the righteousnesse of God is sometimes meant that Iustification or that way method or meanes of Iustification whereby God Iustifieth and makes men righteous Thus Rom. 3.21 The righteousnesse of God which is without the Law i. that way and course which God hath found out for the Justification or making men righteous which consists not in the observation or works of the Law is said to be manifested being witnessed by the Law i. the writeings of Moses and the Prophets So the verse following the righteousnesse of God which is by the Faith of Iesus Christ In the like sense the word is also used Rom 1.17 Rom. 10.3 In all which places with their fellowes by the righteousnesse of God is meant that Iustification or way of making men righteous which God himselfe out of his speciall wisdome and grace hath found out and recommended unto the world as being farre differing from that way of Iustification which the wisdome of the flesh and the thoughts of men run so much upon viz. by workes and observation of the Law In the same kind of expression mens owne righteousnesse signifies Rom. 10.3 that way or meanes by which they intend or seeke to be Iustified Some Divines of great worth and fame affirme Iustitiae veâ—abulum in Scripturis se mper notas Dei bonitatem Miseriâ—ordians salutem redemptionem nunquam vere adhibetur ad id significandum quod vulgo iustitiam dicimus neÌ„pe affectum illum quo Deus ad scelera et peccata vindicanda propendet irae iudicij vocabula ad hoc significandum potius adhibentur Cameron Myroth in ve 21. cap. 3. ad Rom. p. 178. that the word Iustitia Justice or righteousnesse in Scripture never signifieth that which is commonly called Justice in God that is that nature or affection in God which inclineth him to punish or take vengeance on sinne this they say is usually expressed by those terms wrath and judgment but either the goodnesse mercy and salvation of God or the like But whether this observation will stand or no I make some question For in the sixt place I conceive that sometimes that very affection in God mentioned viz. his severity against sinne and sinners is expressed by this word righteousnesse In this sense the word I conceive may well be taken Rom. 3.25.26 c. that he i God might be Iust and a Iustifier of him which is of the Faith of Iesus that is that God might appeare and be declared to be a severe Judge and punisher of sinne and yet iustifie and acquit all those from sinne who beleeve in Iesus Christ Seventhly Christ himselfe sometimes seemes to be called the righteousnesse of God as Esa 42.21 The Lord is well pleased for his righteousnesse sake So Esa 51.5 c. Now Christ may be called the righteousnesse of God because he is the great Author or Mediator of that righteousnesse or Iustification which God vouchsafeth unto the world Lastly the society and company of those that are made righteous or iustified by God through Christ are called the righteousnesse of God 2 Cor. 5.21 of which phrase we shall speake further in this Distinction Againe 2º this word Iustice or righteousnesse SECT 3 when applied to men sometimes signifieth that generall frame of the heart or soule consisting of all those holy dispositions and affections which are found in some degree in every true-borne child of God In this sense God himselfe attributeth righteousnesse unto Noah Gen. 7.1 Thee have I seene righteous c. In this sense righteousnesse is opposed to the corrupt and sinfull frame of the heart in the estate of unregeneratenesse and a righteous man to an unregenerate man This sense is obvious in Scripture Secondly the fruits works or actions arising from such a frame of heart are sometimes called righteousnesse Thus it is used Act. 10.35 1 Ioh. 3.7 and elsewhere Thirdly that particular and speciall disposition which inclineth a man to deale uprightly and according to the rules of equity with all men and is opposed to fraud violence oppression c. together with the worke and fruite of such a disposition sometimes goeth under the Name of Iustice or righteousnesse See Gen. 30.33 Deut. 1.16 Esa 33 15. besides many other places Fourthly and with more concernment to the point in hand Iustification it selfe in the passive sense declared in the former distinction is sometimes by a metonymie of the cause for the effect expressed by the word righteousnesse Thus Gal. 2.21 If righteousnesse i. Justification come by the Law i. by the works of the Law then Christ is dead in vaine So Rom. 10 4. Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse i. for Justification to them that beleeve So ver 5. Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law c. i. sheweth wherein that Justification consisteth which is to be attained by the Law if men will seeke to be justified by it So againe Ro. 5 17 The guift of righteousnesse i. of Justification and ver 18 by the righteousnesse of one c. i. by the iustifying of one as the former translation reads it and that I conceive more agreeably to the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather by one iustifying i. by one procurement of Iustification the gift came upon all men viz. that beleeve unto Iustification of life meaning that Christ by one and the same meanes used for the iustifying of men purchased and procured the Justification of all those that should beleeve be they never so many and that such a Iustification which shall be accompanied with salvation See more instances of this signification of the word Rom. 8.4 Rom. 9.30 Rom. 10.10 1 Cor. 1.30 c. with divers others Thus also in the same propriety of speech to make righteous and to iustify are but the same as to make wicked and to condemne Compare Rom. 5. ver 19. with ver 18. Fiftly sometimes Christ himselfe is by an ellipsis of the efficient or procuring cause very usually in Scripture called the righteousnesse of men i. the Author or procurer of their Justification or righteousnesse as Ier. 23.6 33.16 c. In the same figure of speech he is elsewhere called our hope our life our sanctification our redemption c.
himselfe is iustified with the same Iustification wherewith sinners are iustified and consequently hath sinnes forgiven him aswell as they Because that communion which is betweene Christ and us who beleeve is but one and the same Communion and wherein Christ partakes aswell as we Therefore if the same forme of Iustification be found in him which is in us the same Iustification must be found in him or on him likewise 2º That communion which is betweene Christ and those that beleeve cannot be the formall cause of Iustification because it is no righteousnesse nor conformity with any Law either directly or indirectly either properly and precisely or by way of equivalencie and interpretatively himselfe likewise affirming p. 138 that in the act of iustification God makes men righteous by the perfect righteousnesse and full satisfaction of Christ expressing hereby if be expresseth any thing the formall cause at least according to his owne apprehension of Iustification So then the communion which is betweene Christ and us being a farre differing thing from the righteousnesse and full satisfaction of Christ it followes as well agreeably to his owne pen as to the truth it selfe that the Communion he speakes of is not the formall cause of Iustification 3º The formall cause of Iustification SECT 19 must needs be as we shall hereafter further demonstrate the proper impression or effect of the act of Iustification and consequently the effect of God who justifieth or exerciseth that act that is of God the Father as himselfe rightly supposeth p. 137. whereas that Communion betweene Christ and us which hee speakes of ariseth and floweth as himselfe also acknowledgeth in the passage cited from the Holy Ghost Therefore unpossible it is that this Communion should bee theformall cause of Iustification 4º This Communion betweene Christ and us is a consequent of our Iustification and taketh not place hath no being till after we be fully and compleately iustified This himselfe likewise upon the matter acknowledgeth in the words cited affirming that it ariseth and floweth from the Spirit which God sheds on us through Christ c. Now that the Spirit is not shed upon us till after or upon our beleeving and consequently till after we be iustified for Iustification followeth Faith as close as imagination it selfe can imagine is evident from those and many the like Scriptures This spake he of the Spirit which they that believed in him should receive c. John 7.39 And God which knoweth the heart gave them witnesse viz. that they truly beleeved as appeares from the former verse in giving unto them the Holy Ghost even as he did unto us Act. 15.8 Then Peter said unto them Amend your lives and be Baptized every one of you in the Name of Iesus Christ for the Remission of sinnes and yee shall receive the guift of the Holy Ghost Act. 2.38 They were to beleeve before they were Baptized but the receiving of the Holy Ghost is promised after See further to this purpose Act. 6.5 Act. 8.15.16 Act. 11.17 with the 15. Act. 19.2 c. So then the Communion that is betweene Christ and us flowing from the Spirit which God sheds on us through Christ and this act of sheding being still performed by God after or upon our beleeving and consequently after or upō our compleate Iustificatiō it undeniably followes that this Communion cannot be the formall cause of our JUSTIFICATION because this is accomplished and accomplished it cannot be without the formall part or cause of it in being before the other receives it's being 5º SECT 20 If the communion that is betweene Christ and us were the formall cause of Iustification Christ himselfe might be truly said to be iustified by the same act of Iustification with us This is evident because the Communion spoken of relates aswell to him as to us and is inherent in him as much as in us and whatsoever partakes of the same forme or formall cause with another is doubtlesse in respect of this form capable of the same denominatiō with it If the forme of that Iustification be as well or as much in Christ as it is in us Christ may as wel be said to be iustified thereby as we But to say that Christ should be iustified by that communion which is betweene him and us is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a hard saying to the tender cares of Christians Therefore certainly though that Communion which is betweene Christ and us be a sweete and precious thing yet is it not the formall cause of Iustification no more then Samuel was therefore Isaak Abrahams Son because he was a good Sonne like him And 6o. If the Communion betweene Christ and us be the formall cause of Iustificatton then is not the reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to Christ and of his righteousnesse and full satisfaction to us this cause also which is yet affirmed by the same Author and with the same breath This consequence is pregnant and conquering because this reciprocall imputation is an act of God the Father and so supposed by the Author himselfe and if rightly understood not with any variation from the truth whereas the Communion mentioned floweth from the Holy Ghost as hath bin already observed and is here likewise expressely affirmed Now unpossible it is that two acts really differing the one from the other should ever so combine or incorporate as to make the forme or formall cause of any thing which as hath bin said is alwaies a single and simple being and voyd of composition This reason stands in force though we take his reciprocall imputation which he joynes with his communion to make up the forme of Iustification in a passive sense viz. for the effect of that act of God whereby he maketh that reciprocall imputation For neither can two effects really differing ever so complie or consent together to simplisie one the other as to raise a third thing or being betweene them of simplicitie enough to make the formall being of any thing 7º Neither can this reciprocall imputation taken by it selfe be the formall cause of Iustification because 1º it comprehends and includes two severall and distinct acts of God or two distinct and severall effects of two such acts of his The imputation of our sinnes to Christ is an act or effect really differing from the imputation of his righteousnesse and satisfaction unto us This is evident because as the rendring Christ obnoxious unto death is a thing really differing and of opposite consideration from the making of us righteous and capable of life so the acts by which these are effected must needs be really differing also the one from the other Now as hath bin already argued it is unpossible that any forme or formall cause should be made of any pluralitie of ingredients or be a composition made of severall things really differing the one from the other 2º It is impossible that this reciprocall imputation should be the forme we inquire after because only the beleeving sinner
it and related to it some greater it may be and more dangerous then it selfe and some lesser Now when a mans judgement is match'd into a stock or linage of error suppose it be but with the lightest and least dangerous in all the tribe yet is he engaged hereby to owne and maintaine all the rest of the same descent and blood be they never so foule and dangerous and if he be true to his principles cannot But do it Gen. 19.20 So that Lots plea to the Angell for the sparing of Zoar is it not a little one is at no hand to be admitted for the sparing of an eror A small eror cannot lightly be favored or connived at but that great errors will be comprehended in the indulgence also The foundation of a building may be endammaged and at last perish by the raine or wet that salls through the roofe and settles upon it So may the judgment soone come to be corrupted and tainted in the great and fundamentall points of Religion if it hath once miscaried in others that seeme at first to be of harmlesse consequence and farre enough off from the foundation Therefore it was a provident and prudent saying from whomsoever it came Minimum non est non negligere minima that is It is not a thing of the least consequence to looke after things that seeme to be of the least The judgment will corrupt and putrifie aswell downwards as upwards though I conceive it corrupts soonest and fastest upwards A man that at first sets in and couples himselfe with a great or fundamentall error is farre more apt to embrace and swallow all lesser errors depending thereon then he that is first tainted with a lighter error only is to admit of those that are more dangerous though of the same stock lineage Therfore Fourthly to condemne or censure the teaching and searching out of any truth but what is of precise and absolute necessitie to be knowne unto salvation as impertinent and needlesse favours of much ignorance and prophanenesse For 1. what understandingman will undertake to make any such umpirage betweene the things or truths of God that shall determine these or these by name and no other to be of absolute necessitie to salvation Or where hath God given any Commission or authoritie to men to make any such election and reprobation as this amongst his divine truths Secondly it is much to be feared that those that are so wise as not to trouble themselves about knowing any thing but what is of an absolute and peremptory necessitie to salvation will prove so foolish as not to know so much He that will constantly walke as neere the edg or brink of a ditch or pit as is possible runn's a desperate hazard of falling in first or last It is a saying of Chrysostome that it is not possible for a man to be saved without a continuall reading or studying spirituall things (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Hom. 3. do LaZ Thirdly to desire or care to know nothing more in the things of God then what is of precise necessitie to salvation is farre more unfavoury then to labour or care for nothing more in outward things as in meates drinks apparrell c. then what is of absolute necessitie to keepe life and soule together or not to eate one morsell of bread more or drink the least drop of water more then without which nature must of necessitie give up the Ghost As such a desire or resolution as this in the way of nature were very unnaturall and neere unto monstrous so is that temper and frame of Spirit hardly if at all consistent with the nature of grace which disdeigneth the knowledge even of the sweetest and most pleasant truths if it apprehends a possibilitie of being saved without them Fourthly to censure the knowledge of all things as impertinent which are not simply necessary to salvation is to involve the farre greatest part of the Scriptures themselves and much more of the writings of the best of men otherwise in the same condemnation For who lightly can conceive that the knowledge either of the Historicall or Propheticall part of the Scriptures is of that precise and indispensable necessitie to salvation which we speake of Nay it is evident from that passage in the Scriptures themselves Joh. 20.31 that the Gospell written by this Evangelist alone is sufficient to salvation and consequently that the rest of the Scriptures are not of that austere and strict necessitie thereunto But these things are written saith the Holy Ghost in this place that ye might beleeve that Iesus is the Christ the Sonne of God and that beleeving ye might have life through his Name Fiftly as to attempt to be wise above that which is written is presumption and offensive unto GOD on the one hand so not to attempt or desire to be wise up to that which is written is as AUGUSTINE somewhere termes it damnable unthankfulnesse and every whit as much if not more displeasing unto GOD on the other hand Certainly there is no piece of divine inspiration but is too sacred and precious to be offered up upon the service of sloathfulnesse and contempt Sixtly and lastly to this particular if things were duly examined and compared together I beleeve it would be found that the knowledge even of those things which are not of so absolute a necessitie to salvation is of greater consequence and more to be desired in it selfe then salvation it selfe at least then salvation considered only as the good and benefit of the creature As to generous huntsmen the game is ever more then the prey the nature and quality of the exercise more desirable then the Venison so to dispositions eminently spirituall and heavenly that mystery of the will of God as the Gospell is somewhere called the wonderfull cariages and contrivances of that profound and glorious project of his by Jesus Christ to bring about their salvation is more precious and of sweeter contemplation at least ought to be both to them and others then that salvation it selfe which they attaine by it especially if it be look'd upon as their own concernment only It is the saying of Calvin that the glory of God alone Vua Dei gloria preferri meretur centum mundu Calvin deserv's to be preferred before an hundred worlds Now there is no such rise or advantage for the soule to glorifie GOD as the cleere and full knowledge of him in his Christ It is not the salvation of his creature simply but this salvation as effected and wrought about by the way of JESUS CHRIST that is the first borne of all the discoveries and manifestations of the fulnesse of GOD. Againe Fiftly to vindicate the innocencie of the Treatise yet further from the crimes of fruitlessenesse and impertinencie it is considerable that as ignorance error and mistake in any one point of the Gospell whatsoever though it seemes farre remote from any thing which we call
Mistresse I have only the fourth and last and indeed the least and lightest imputation of unseasonablenesse to wipe off and then I trust the Discourse will be innocent The troublesome workings of the times the labouring both of Church and State as it were in the fire for the present will I make no question be pleaded by many as repugnant and much dissuasive to the publication of such a piece as this This offence I hope will be thoroughly healed by these and the like lenitives First the publication of it at least of part of it was intended whilest all things were yet in peace amongst us Secondly as the mother cannot chuse her time wherein she shall bring forth or the child be borne but must be content with the time which God and nature have appointed her though it be in never so many respects unseasonable for her so neither had I liberty to carve an opportunity to my own minde liking for the putting forth of this piece but was by a speciall hand of necessitie and providence cast upon this season such as it is My time was some yeares since but Gods time it seemes was not till now 3. When a man is fallen into a kennel and become all mirie and durty thereby it is not unseasonable for him to take the first opporitunity he can meet with to wash and make himselfe cleane In like manner when he is dangerously wounded there is no place for scanning opportunities or fitnesses of seasons wherein to be healed Those numberlesse base reproaches and forged cavillations and slanders under which I have a long time suffered far and neere yea and yet suffer daily not only in City and Country but in Kingdome and Kingdome yea aswell beyond the Seas as on this side are I conceive in the judgment of all reasonable men an authentique dispensation unto me to neglect curiositie of times or seasons for my vindication Fourthly nor do I conceive what ill aspect such a subject as this can have upon the times or affaires of the Church or State depending Those that are Interessed in the procuration of these have doubtlesse both their hearts and their heads and their hands full of imployment otherwise and during the time of these ingagements will have little list or leysure to traverse writings of this nature Or if they should I know not what antipathie the Doctrine here maintained should have either to the prudent or peaceable composure of our troubles Nay Fiftly certaine I am that if the Doctrine of Justification that is the opening of the dore of life and salvation unto men be more seasonable at one time then another the advantage lyes for times of troubles and dangers of feares and distractions in the world When can it be of deeper and deerer concernment to the soule to see with Stephen the Heavens open then when the earthly house of this Tabernacle as the Apostles metaphor is begins to be shaken and is ready to fall as it was with Stephen when he saw that vision Sixtly the fittest season for a calme and quiet debating of matters in controversie between parties engaged is when both parties are involv'd in the same condition of danger or trouble The Martyrs in Q. Maries daies being together in prison argued their differēces in points of Religion as Election Reprobation c. with more meeknesse moderation and mutual equanimitie then in al likelyhood they would have done in fullnesse of peace and liberty on both sides Wee have many examples in History where a common enemy proved a mediator between those that were at variance before yea and were like so to have continued had not the attonement bin made by a way or meanes displeasing to both I meane by a danger threatening both Seventhly and lastly to support so great and important a truth of the Gospell as that contended for in the Discourse is by a faire interpretation a meanes farre more likely to advance both the peace and safety of Church and State and to heale the sores and troubles of both then any waies to prejudice or set back the cure It is much to be feared that among many other grounds and causes of that sore controversie which God is at this day and hath bin some yeares past pleading with the land and his people in it these three have done their parts and help'd forward the displeasure First that those to whom God hath graciously revealed himselfe amongst us and withall endued with guifts and abilities for such a purpose have rais'd the line of Evangelicall knowledg among us so little above what was delivered unto us by our first Reformers We have done little else with that talent of Gospell-light which God at first gave us as a stock to set up and Trade withall for him but only put in a Napkin We have scarce added an haires breadth to our stature in the knowledg of Christ wheras a cubit at least might well be expected from us Secondly that which is worse and of more provocation then the former by our unworthy symbolizing with the Church of Rome in that ignoble Principle of hers so dishonourable to Heauen to beleeve as the Church beleeveth we swallow down many of those misprisions and mistakes in matter of Religion which were found in our first Reformers and teach them for Doctrines and Orthodox truths As if it were not lawfull to thinke that there may be more light in the aire when the Sunne is risen in his might upon the earth then there was at the first dawning and breaking of the day Thirdly and lastly and that which is more unworthy the Name of Christians then either of the former we have quite lost as it were and let fall amongst us many precious truths and streynes of the Gospell which God by the hand of the former generation had conveyed over to us and entrusted us withall An instance whereof may be that very point of truth which is so copiously handled and defended in this Treatise and withall so fully demonstrated to have bin delivered unto us by Luther Calvan Musculus and other worthies of that band Now that such a negligence and sinfull deportment of a Church or people towards God as this is a just occasion of his breaking out in wrath and judgement upon them may be gathered from Rev. 3.11 Hold that fast which thou hast saith the Lord Christ to the Church of Philadelphia that no man take thy Crowne implying that either the loose-holding but especially the letting goe of any Gospell truth which somtimes a Church hath had in custodie and professed indangers the Crown of it that is the peace safety and continuance of it Therefore to endeavour to keepe an ancient truth alive which was ready to die amongst us is rather a meanes to ease and lighten the burthen of that guilt which lieth upon us and consequently to turne away or to abate the displeasure of God and so to further the healing of the Land then any waies to
to 68. CAP. 4. The non-imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the sense ruling in this Controversie argued from Rom. 3.21 The argument made good against an objection From p. 69. to 72. CAP. 5. The said non-imputation further prooved and established from Rom. 5.16.17 compâ—â—ed together with an objection answered The sufficiencie of the Answere attested by Galvin Musoulus Luther Melancthon Beza Zanchie Fox and Chamier From p. 73. to p. 83. CAP. 6. A further proofe for the imputation of Faith in the sense explained against the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ in the sense refused from Philip. 3.9 From p. 84. to 88. CAP. 7. Further proofes for the imputation of Faith as aforesaid from such Scriptures wherein Justification is ascribed unto Faith as Rom. 3.18 Rom. 1.5 c. with 4 objections against the cariage of these Scriptures answered From p. 88. to 92. CAP. 8. The Non-imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the sense first rejected cleerely argued and prooved from Gal. 3.12 being the last of our Scripture proofes From p. 93 to 98. CAP. 9. The Jmputation of Christs righteousnesse in the sense challenged disproved from the incompetiblenesse of it to many if not to all beleevers without exception in respect of many particulars wanting in it which must be found in a Law-righteousnesse appropriable unto them Two objections against this argument answered From p. 98 to p. 106. CAP. 10. A second argument against the said Imputation drawne from the precise and exact proportion and fitnesse of that righteousnesse for the person of Christ alone as being the only Mediator between God and men with two objections answered From p. 107 to 117. CAP. 11. A third ground against the said Imputatison viz. the non-necessitie of it with an objection anwered the answere pleading for intirenesse of justification in remission of sinnes alone absolutely consemans with the judgement of Calvin (a) That Calvin placed Iustification simply and absolutely and not comparatively in Remission of sinnes alone see fully proved part 2. c. 7. Sect. 15. p. 213.214 of this Discourse relieved by Parâ—us in some passages which Bellarmine and some others would wrest to a contrary interpretation From p. 118. to 135. CAP. 12. A fourth demonstration against the saia Imputation viz. the dissolving or frustration of the Evangelicall Grace of Adoption with an objection Answered From p. 136. to p. 144. CAP. 13. The fift and sixt grounds against the said Imputation The former the taking away the necessitie of Repentance the latter the necessitie of Christs death with two objections against the former and as many against the latter Answered From p. 145. to 150. CAP. 14. A seaventh ground against the said Imputation viz. the taking away for givenesse of sinnes with an objection answered From p. 151. to 153. CAP. 15. Enforcing an eight Reason against the Imputation questioned viz. a manifest compliance with that dangerous error that God seeth no sinne in his people From p. 153. to 155. CAP. 16. A ninth Demonstration against the pretended Imputation viz. the confounding of the two Covenants with two objections propounded and answered From p. 154. to 157. CAP. 17. Three Arguments more managed against the already-impugned Imputation all of them drawn from the meritoriousnesse of that righteousnesse according to the professed tenets of those against whom we argue which is said to be imputed From p. 158. to 164. CAP. 18. Three further Reasons against the opinion prerejected with an objection propounded against the last of them and Answered The first drawne from the unsoundnesse of this assertion that Beleevers wrought righteousnesse in Christ The second from the non-imputation of the passive obedience of Christ in the letter and formalitie of it The last from the non-intermedling of the Ceremoniall Law with Iustification From p. 165. to 169. CAP. 19. Five further Demonstrations of the conclusion undertaken for The first drawne from the non-imputation of our sinnes to Christ in the letter or formalitie of them The second from the uncleannesse of this saying that God should looke upon us as worthy of that Iustification which we receive from him The third from the erroneousnesse of this that men are made formally sinfull by Gods act of imputing Adams sinne The fourth from the absurdity of this that there is a double formall cause of Iustification The last from the evidence of this truth that there is no necessitie of bringing in this imputation either in respect of the justice or mercy of God or for the salving or advancement of any other Attribute From p. 170. to 179. CAP. 20. Foure Reasons more to streng then the Conclusions taken into protection The first drawne from the insufficiencie of a Law righteousnesse to justifie those that have once sinn'd though personally performed The second from the non-obligation of any man to keeps the Law for his justification The third from Gods requiring only Faith of men to their justification with two objections answered The last from the imputation of Faith made unto Abraham From p. 180 to 187. CAP. 21. The last Reason propounded against the Imputation of Christs righteousnesse drawn from the Non-imputabilitie of the Law or the righteousnesse thereof with an objection answered and some things considered about the Imputation of Adams sinne Of the Second PART CAP. 1. THe method and contents of the Second Part of the Discourse p. 1 2. CAP. 2. Fourteene Conclusions laid down and prooved to give further light into the Controversie depending and to repare a way for answering the remaining objections The first is this Hee for whose sinnes a plenary satisfaction hath bin made is as just and righteous as he that never sinn'd p. 3. 2. There is no medium or middle condition between absolution from all sinne and a perfect and compleate righteousnesse p. 3.4 3 Adam till his fall by sinne was compleatly righteous and in an estate of Iustification before God p. 4.5 4. Perfect remission or forgivenesse of sinnes includes the imputation or acknowledgment of the observation of the whole Law p. 5.6.7.8 5. He that is fully acquitted and discharged of his sinnes needeth no other righteousnesse to give him a right or title unto life p. 8 9. 6 That satisfaction which Christ made for sinne and whereby he procured remission of sinnes for those that beleeve consists only in that obedience of his which is commonly called Passive and not in that subjection which he exhibited to that common Law of nature which we call Morall p. 9.10 7 If Christ had kept the Law for us that is in our stead during his life so that we might be counted perfectly righteous by the imputation thereof unto us there had bin no occasion or necessitie of his dying for us p. 10.11 8. That union and communion which Beleevers have with Christ doth no waies require or suppose any such imputation of his righteousnesse unto them as is conceived p. 11 12 13. 9. No other imputation of Adams sinne to his posteritie can be proved
directly and entirely with it Thirdly If the interpretation that is set up against it cannot stand before the circumstance of the context about it Fourthly and lastly when the judgment of able learned and unpartiall men is found in perfect concurrence with it If these considerations be sufficient to furnish out an interpretation with authority and power then shall we need no more Scriptures to vindicate the innocencie of our affirmative viz. that Faith is that which is imputed by God for righteousnesse in Iustification the truth of our negative inseparably accompanying it viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is not imputed but only that one Chapter Rom. 4. For the first SECT 3 the Letter of this Scripture speakes what we affirme plainly and speakes no parable about it yea it speakes it once and twice yea it speakes it the third and fourth time and repenteth not Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousnes v. 3. Againe but to him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted unto him for righteousnes ver 5. So againe We say that Faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse ver 9. And yet againe And therefore it was imputed unto him for righteousnesse v. 22. The same phrase and expression is used also ver 23 24. Certainly there is not any truth in Religion not any Article of the Christian beliefe that can boast of the Letter of the Scripture more full expresse and pregnant for it What is maintained in this discourse concerning the imputation of Faith hath all the authority and countenance from the Scriptures that word can lightly give whereas the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ in that sense which is magnified by many hath not the least reliefe either from any expresse sound of words or sight of Letter in the Scriptures Secondly for the scope of the place this also rejoyceth in the interpretation given viz. SECT 4 that the word FAITH should be taken properly and in the Letter in all those passages cited and from tropes and metonymies it turneth away Apparent it is to a circumspect Reader that the Apostle's maine intent and drift in this whole discourse of justification extending from the first Chapter of the Epistle to some Chapters following was to hedg up with thornes as it were that false way of Iustification which lay through works and legall performances and so to put men by from so much as attempting to goe or seek that way and withall to open and discover the true way of justification wherein men might not faile to atteyne the Law of righteousnesse as he speaks elsewhere before God that is in plaine speech to make known unto them what they must doe and what God requireth of them to their justification and what he will accept at their hands this way and what not As our Saviours answer was to the Jews asking him what they should do to worke the works of GOD meaning for their justification This saith he is the worke of God i. All the workes of God requireth of you for such a purpose that you beleeve in him whom he hath sent Iohn 6 28 29. So that that which God precisely requires of men to their justification instead of the workes of the Law is FAITH or to beleeve in the proper and formall signification He doth not require of us the righteousnesse of Christ for our Iustification this he required of Christ himselfe for it that which he requires of us for this purpose is our Faith in Christ himselfe not in the righteousnes of Christ that is in the active obedience of Christ as hereafter is shewed Therefore for Paul to have certified or said unto men that the righteousnesse of Christ should be imputed for righteousnesse unto them had been quite beside his scope and purpose in this place which was plainly and directly this as hath been said to make known unto men the counsel and good pleasure of God concerning that which was to be performed by themselves though not by their owne strength to their justification which he affirmeth from place to place to be nothing else but their Faith or beleeving To have said thus unto them that they must be justified by Christ or by Christ's righteousnesse and withall not to have plainly signified what it is that God requires of them to give them part and fellowship in that righteousnesse or justification which is by Christ and without which they could not be justified had bin rather to cast a snare upon them then to have opened a dore of life and peace unto them And therefore he is carefull when he speakes of Iustification or redemption by Christ often to mention Faith as the meanes whereby this redemption is communicated unto men See Rom. 3 25. Rom. 5 1 2. By the light of which and such like expressions the sense and meaning of those Scriptures are to be ruled wherein justification or Redemption by Christ are taught without any expresse mention of Faith as Rom. 3 24. Rom. 5.9 c. as likewise of those wherein justification by Faith is affirmed without expresse mention of Christ or any thing done or suffered by him As Rom. 3 28.30 And here by the way I cannot but reflect a little upon the unsavorinesse and inconsideratnesse of their conceipt who to avoyd the strength of the interpretation given of these Scriptures will needs force themselves contrary to all Interpreters both ancient and moderne that I have yet met with and most apparantly contrary to the most apparant scope of the Apostle throughout this whole disputation to suppose that the Apostle doth not here speake of that Faith of Abraham whereby he was justified or made personally righteous before God but of such a Faith only as God did approve of and commend in him and impute unto him as a particular act of righteousnesse in such a sense as that act of Phineas mentioned Num 25 8. is sayd to have beene imputed to him for righteousnesse Psal 106 31. Alas Paul was now in the heat of his Dispute concerning the great and weighty businesse of Iustification travailing as it were in birth with his Romans tâ—ll he had convincingly satisfied them from the Scriptures that the way of Iustification was not by the workes of the Law but by Faith in Iesus Christ Now how importune and impertinent to this designe had it beene for him to interpose a whole Chapter only to prove that which was never doubted of nor questioned by any To wit that Abraham did well in believing God and was approved by him for it His businesse here was not to argue what was lawfull and what was unlawfull or whether Abraham was justifiable in his act of believing God But to demonstrate and shew how and by what meanes a poore miserable sinner might come to be justified and accounted righteous before God which he clearly and fully demonstrates to be by way of Faith or beleeving from the example of Abraham
thing into the similitude of a truth at pleasure that can beleeve or conceive that Christs preaching on the Mount ordaining Disciples reproving the Scribes and Pharises working miracles and the like which were parts of his obedience to the Law should be imputed to a woman â—or example instead of her obedience and love and faithfulnesse to her Husband and that she should be reputed before God to have performed all these duties according to the strict forme and exigencie of â—he Law because Christ performed the forenamed duties and these by imputation are made hers CAP. X. A second ground against the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ in the sense formerly rejected drawn from the transcendencie of the nature of it A Second Reason SECT 1 why the active obedience or righteousnesse of Christ cannot in the parts and proprietie of it be imputed unto any man whatsoever for righteousnesse may be contrived and cast into this frame That righteousnesse which is exactly and precisely fitted to the person and office of him that is mediator betweene God and man or Redeemer of the world cannot be imputed unto any other man for his righteousnesse But such is the righteousnesse of Christ a righteousnesse precisely fitted to the person and Calling of a mediator c. Therefore it cannot be imputed unto any other man whatsoever for righteousnesse unto him The minor proposition I conceive will be yeelded without much striving If any man will undertake to finde any such flaw in the righteousnesse of Christ that doth amount to the least degree of an incongruitie or inconsistencie with his office of mediator attempts no lesse then the undermining the foundations of the peace of the world and laying the hope of the salvation of men in the dust Such an High Priest saith the Apostle Heb. 7.26 it became us to have i. that it was necessary we should have if we looked for salvation by him that is holy harmlesse undefiled separate from sinners c. And woe unto the world if the least either spot or blemish could be found in this High Priest or his righteousnesse Therefore I presume that the deere interest which every man layeth claime to in the truth of this proposition will secure it from all violence of contradiction from any man So that if there be any thing weake and unconcluding in the Argument it must be sought for in the major Proposition Therfore let us cause that to passe through the fire and see whether any flame will kindle upon it The tenor of this was that that righteousnesse which is exactly fitted to the person and office of a Mediator cannot be imputed for righteousnesse unto any other man How a conceipt of any such imputability should lodge quietly in any mans thoughts I confesse I cannot comprehend The whole generation of Disputers for that imputation SECT 2 which we oppose generally interpret the phrase of having the righteousnesse of Christ imputed by being cloathed with this righteousnesse of Christ or with the robes of his righteousnesse Now then he that assumeth this righteousnesse of Christ unto himselfe and apparelleth and arayeth himselfe with it represents himselfe before God not in the habit of a just or righteous Man but in the glorious attire of him that makes men iust and righteous the great Mediator of the world whose righteousnesse hath heights and depths in it a length and breadth which insinitely exceed the dimensions and proportions of all men whatsoever And as John speaking as is probable of his transfiguration in the Mount or whether it be of any other manifestation of his glory it is not much materiall useth these words Joh. 1.14 We beheld his glory as the glory of the only begotten of the Father meaning that the glory wherein Christ then appeated was so supertranscendently glorious and excellent that it exceeded the rank and quality of the creature whether Angel or Man and was meet only for him to weare that was the only begotten of the Father i. the naturall Sonne of God the greatnesse of the person could not but have bin acknowledged by that vestment of glory which he then had on so may and must it be acknowledged and said of the righteousnesse of his life that it was peculiarly appropriated to him that was the only begotten of the Father the great Saviour and Redeemer of the world Neither did that glory of his which Iohn saw further transcend the condition of the creature then the glory of this righteousnesse doth Now then for a silly worme a sinfull and contemptible creature to take this robe of unmeasurable Majesty upon it and to conceit it selfe as great in holinesse and righteousnesse as Iesus Christ himselfe for that is the spirit that rules in that opinion to teach men to assume all that Christ did unto themselves and that in no other way nor upon any lower terms then as if themselves had personally done it whether this be a behaviour and deportment of soule of that grace and acceptance on High which many have suffered themselves to be perswaded of whether it will rellish well in the eye of jealousie or no I earnestly desire that men would make it a matter of Conscience seriously to consider and re-examine All the parts of his righteousnesse all the acts of obedience that he performed he performed them as one that had received the spirit without measure i.e. there was a weightinesse and worth in them which did fully answere the fullnesse of that grace that was given unto him above all his fellows a title of honour wherewith the Holy Ghost is pleased to honour the Saints yea those acts of obedience though hee wrought them in the humane nature or as he was Man yet by reason of the neere neighbourhood and streight combination of the God head in the unitie of the same person they could not but receive excellent impressions from that also The righteousnesse was in all the parts and circumstances of it such as became God himselfe in personall union with his creature the humane nature Now whether that be not to be accounted robbery and that of a high nature for the creature to assume an equality of righteousnesse whether by imputation or however with God himselfe I leave to the sober and unpartiall thoughts of men to consider But especially there are some streyns in this righteousnesse of Christ that cannot be appropriated or applyed unto any other whatsoever without notorious and manifest impiety All that Christ taught and preached on earth was part of his righteousnesse and obedience For I have not spoken of my selfe saith he Ioh. 12.49 but the Father that sent me gave me a commandement what I should say and what I should speake Therfore when he speaketh these and many such like words I am the light of the world Come unto me all that are wearie and heavie laden and I will refresh you c. is it meet for any other to conceive them as spoken by himselfe in his owne
forgivenesse of a mans own sins and imputation of Christs righteousnesse if it should be true yet is it no wayes necessary neither is it any waies apparent that these are parts of the same whole of one and the same iustification neither is there any thing expresly delivered in any part of the Scripture to establish it Therfore it is no wayes probable even in these respects that when Paul placeth a mans righteousnesse before God in the forgivenesse of his sinnes that he should doe it by the figure Synecdoche onely mentioning one part and implying another Againe SECT 8 2. if forgivenesse of sins be but a part and the worser halfe of our iustification then when the Scripture saith We are iustified by his blood as Rom 5.9 the interpretation must be we are justified by halfe through his blood but the better of our iustification must come another way For by his blood or death we cannot have his active righteousnesse imputed to us So where it is said againe vers 16. that the guift viz. of righteousnesse by Christ is of many offences unto iustification if the guift of many offences iâ— the forgivenesse of a mans sins will not amount to a iustification without the imputation of a legall righteousnesse joyned with it we must give a checke to Pauls pen as the High Priests did unto Pilate Joh. 16.21 Write not the King of the Iewes but that he said I am the King of the Jewes So must we say unto Paul doe not write that the guift is of many offences unto Iustification but the guift is of many offences and of many acts of righteousnesse too imputed to Iustification Pauls pen had made more hast then good speed as we say to come at Iustification before its time And thus we must draw blood instead of milke out of many other Scriptures besides these to nourish that opinion of the imputation of a formall righteousnesse for Iustification if you meane to keep it alive for the sincere milk of the word will not nourish it Thirdly that forgivenesse of sinnes is a mans entire and compleat Iustification and that there is no such further piece or part of it as is pretended concerning the imputation of Christs righteousnesse will appeare from hence because that end for which this imputed righteousnesse of Christ is thus brought into the businesse of iustification viz. to be the right or title of the iustified to their heavenly inheritance is otherwise supplyed by the wisdome and counsell of God and that in a way more Euangelicall and of more sweetnesse and deernesse to the children of God viz. by the grace of adoption or Son-ship as we shall further shew God willing in the reason following Fourthly SECT 9 if men will have the active righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto them for one part of their iustification by it selfe and the passive obedience or death of Christ for another part by it selfe and so separate and divide the benefit of his active obedience from that which we have by his passive in Iustification this is a method or course to destroy and lose both the benefit of the one and of the other For if men substract the righteousnesse of his life upon a conceit that that will doe them service alone which it will not doe as we shall see afterwards then must they want it in his death or in his blood and so that wil be ineffectuall too If it had bin possible under the Law for a man to have separated those qualifications which God required in the Beast for sacrifice as viz. the Sex the soundnesse spotlessenesse c. from the Beast it selfe neither would these qualifications separated from the sacrifice have bin of any use to the man neither would the Beast without these have made a sacrifice of acceptation So neither will the active obedience of Christ profit men if they separate it from the passive Joh. 12.24 neither will the passive it selfe be found it selfe In the cleansing of the Leâ—e the blood of the flame Syarrow was to â—e joyned and mixed with pure water in an â—â— then vessell and the person cleansed to be sprinkled with â—â—th Lev. 14.4.5.6 that is an attonement or expiation for sinne according to the will and purpose of God except we bring in the active to it For as it is most true which the Apostle affirmes Heb. 9 22. Without shedding of blood there is no remission of sinnes so is it as true that without shedding of righteous blood there is no remission neither And howsoever the personall union of the humane nature with the Godhead in the person of Christ was the great qualification requisite in his person to make the sacrifice of himselfe compleatly satisfactory for the sinne of the world yet was it as God willing we shall hereafter demonstrate more at large but a remote qualification in this respect there being a necessity not onely in respect of the decree and purpose of God but of other ends and conveniences also that this qualification we now speake of the fullfilling of the Law should intervene and come between that union and his sacrifice In the mean time whilest I would not have the active obedience of Christ separated from the passive nor againe the passive from the active in respect of this common and joynt effect of forgivenesse of sins or justification ariseing from a concurrence of them both yet would I not have Christ in his mystery tumbled up together on a heap for this would be to deface the beauty and excellencie of that wisdome which shines forth gloriously in the face thereof I would have every thing that Christ was and every thing that Christ did and every thing that Christ suffered to be distinguished not only in themselves but also in their proper and immediate effects respectively ariseing and flowing from them severally A pluralitie of causes may meet together in one and the same effect and yet the diversitie and difference of their severall operations and influences contributing towards the raiseing and produceing of such an effect may easily be distinguished and apprehended The goodnesse of the soyle the labour of the Oxe the Plough the seed that is sowne the Husbandmans paines in ploughing in sowing his skill in both the raine given from heaven to water that which is sowne all these and such like meet together in one joynt and common effect at the time of Harvest viz. the Husbandmans benefit or increase Yet is there scarce any man so much a stranger to the method and principles of Husbandry but can assigne to every one of these causes their proper and speciall effect though all meeting together in that great and common effect we speake of the soyle is for one purpose the Oxe for another the Plough for a third c. So is it true that all that Christ was and all that he did and all that he suffered meet together in that great and common effect the salvation of them that beleeve
his Children is of that opinion which mainteyneth men to be compleatly righteous by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the letter and formality of it But as sometimes it comes to passe that a man falling into love with a woman that hath a great charge of Children hanging upon her having maried the mother would willingly wrangle or beate the Children out of dores and turne them off to begg so it is often seene that when men have unadvisedly imbraced an opinion seeming in their eye a beautifull and lovely truth and did not at first before they were wedded to it apprehend and consider what rugged and harsh consequences it had attending upon it they shift and turne and winde themselves about every way to quit themselves of that dishonourable charge wherewith they finde themselves by reason of their opinion encumbred withall But how men that will owne an imputation of a perfect righteousnesse can with any tollerable appearance of reason shift off from themselves the opinion of Gods not seeing sin in those that are cloathed with it is I confesse beyond the line of my apprehension If God could see no sinne in Christ because he was perfectly and compleatly righteous how he should see it in any that are as compleatly and perfectly righteous as he and that with the same righteousnesse wherwith he was righteous is a riddle that cannot be made out but by him that plougheth with a better heyfer then yet I have met with any CAP. XVI Propounding a ninth Demonstration against the pretended imputation viz. the confounding of the two Covenants IT is true SECT 1 many that hold the way of imputation are nothing ashamed nor afraide of this consequent the confounding of the two testaments or covenants of God with men that of the works with that of grace and vice versa that of grace with that of works These conceive that God never made more covenants then one with man and that the Gospell is nothing else but a gracious aide or reliefe from God to helpe man out with the performance of the first Covenant of works so that that life and salvation which is said to come by Christ shall in no other sense be said to come by him but only as he fulfilled that Law of works for man which men themselves were not able to fulfill and by imputation as by a deed of guift makes over that his perfect obedience and fulfilling of the Law to those that beleeve so that they in the right of this perfect obedience thus made theirs by imputation shall come to inherit life and salvation according to the strict and rigid tenor of the Covenant of works Doe this and live But as far as I am able to conceive men may aswell say there was no second Adam really differing from the first as no second Covenant differing really from the first and that mount Sina in Arabia is the same mountaine with mount Sion in Judaea and that the Spirit of bondage is the same with the Spirit of Adoption and that Isaak and Ishmael were but the same Child If the second Covenant of Grace were implicitly and tacitly conteyned in the first then the meaning of the first Covenant conceived in those words Doe this and live must be thus Doe this either by thy selfe or by another thy surety and live There is no other way to reconcile them or to reduce them into one and the same Covenant If this were Gods meaning in the first Covenant that keeping the Law either by a man himselfe in person or by another should equally serve the turne and a man should live by either then 1º it must follow that a Mediator was promised before the fall for this Covenant was struck with man in Innocencie 2º that Adam either understood not his Covenant that was made with him or else knew of a surety and redeemer before his fall at least as being in a readinesse for him in case he should fall 3 if keeping the Law either by a mans selfe or by another were in Gods meaning in that Covenant a sufficient meanes of life then any other surety any other Mediator would have made the reconciliation aswell as he that was God and man For God might have created a meere man with abilities to have kept the Law as fully as Adam or any of his posterity was bound to doe 4 and lastly if the fulfilling of the Law by any surety whatsoever were a sufficient meanes of life unto Adam and his then was the death of Christ no waies necessary because Christ had perfectly kept and fulfilled the Law before his death Againe 2 SECT 2 If the first and second Covenant were in substance the same then must the conditions or teâ—ms of agreement in both be the same For the conditions or terms of agreement in a Covenant are as formall and essentiall a part of a Covenant as any other thing belonging to it Though there be the same parties Covenanting and the same things Covenanted for or about yet if there be new articles of agreement it is really a new bargaine and another Covenant Now if the conditions or terms of agreement be the same in both those Covenants then to DOE THIS and TO BELEEVE Faith and works are really the same whereas the Scripture from place to place makes the most irreconcileable opposition betweene them But it may be there are some that are more shie of this consequence that stick not to hold the imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the sense opposed and yet demuire upon an identitie of the two Covenants they doe not conceive this to be the fruite of that wombe Wherefore to prove that the mother hath no wrong at all in having this dead child layed by her side for her owne I thus reason Where the parties covenanting are the same and the things covenanted for the same and the conditions or agreement the same there the Covenants are every waies the same But if the righteousnesse of the Law imputed to us be the agreement or condition of the Now Covenant all the three persons things conditions are the same Therefore the two Covenants first and second the old and the new are every waies the same because as concerning the other two the parties Covenanting and the things covenanted for it is agreed on both sides that they are the same If it be Objected and said That the righteousnesse of the Law imputed from another and personally wrought by a mans selse are two deffering conditions therfore it doth not follow that the Covenants should be the same To this I Answere that the substance of the agreement will still be found the same notwithstanding the works or righteousnesse of the Law are the same by whomsoever wrought If Adam had fulfilled the Law as Christ did he had bin justified by the same righteousnesse wherewith Christ himselfe was righteous If it be yet said that Imputation in the second Covenant which was not in the first makes a reall difference
imputeing Adams sinne unto them because then an act of God should be as it were the life and soule of that sin which is in men Therfore men are not made formally just or righteous by any act of God imputeing righteousnesse unto them The Argument I conceive is of no easie solution to those who maintain the imputation it selfe of this righteousnesse and not the righteousnesse imputed to be the form of justification Which yet I conceive to be an apprehension every whit as rationall as that which on the other hand maintaineth the righteousnesse it selfe of Christ imputed to be this forme For whether we conceive of justification either under the notion of a relation being a new condition come upon the person justified which seems to be the best and truest notion of it or whether we conceive it as a passion besides which two I know no predicament a I nature that can be put upon it certainly no righteousnesse whatsovâ— properly so called much lesse the righteousnesse of another then of the person justified can be the forme of it It is unpossible that one predicament or predicamentall being should informe another and that righteousnesse whether we speake of that which is habituall or that which is actuall belongeth neither to the predicament of relation nor to that of passion is better known to Logicians then to be made matter of disputation The oyle in the cruse doth not yet faile SECT 5 There are some drops still of further reason to exaucthorize the opinion of this imputation If justification consists partly in the imputation of Christs righteousnesse partly in remission of sinnes then must there be a double formall cause of justification and that made up and compounded of two severall natures really differing the one from the other But this is unpossible Ergo. With the rod of this Argument Calvin scourg'd those Fathers of Trent for joyning regeneration or infusion of grace with remission of sins in justification as we heard before which supposing him a man but tolerably sound or sober in his intellectualls is a demonstration in abundance that his meaning never was to place Iustification in any imputation of righteousnesse really distinct from remission of sins but that his apprehensions in this point were praecise et formaliter the same with this Country-mans of latter times who calls Remission of sins that righteousnesse which is imputed (a) Remissio peccatorum est justitia imputata Chamier Panstrat t. 3. l. 21. cap. 19. see 10. Idem sunt justificatio et Remissio peccatorum Vismus Cat. part 2. Qu. 60. sect 3. Whose meaning by the way is not as some of the opposite party in this cause have catch'd and quarrel'd with like expressions from others as if God in justification did imputeremission of sins unto men and in this sence remission of sins should be called the righteousnesse which is imputed but that God really remitting and forgiving mens sinnes such remission and forgivenesse may well be called an imputed righteousnes partly because it is no absolute legall or text righteousnesse but a righteousnesse by interpretation or construction of favour partly because such a righteousnesse as it is it is notwithstanding given in the strength and mediation of the righteousnesse merit and satisfaction of another which is Christ Let us yet heare and not be wearie what both reason and Religion can further speake against this imputation so much spoken for SECT 6 If such imputation be necessary in justification Argum. 20 this necessity must be found either in respect of the justice of God because otherwise he could not be just in pronouncing men righteous or in respect of his mercie or for the salving or advanceing of some other Attribute c. But there is no necessity of bringing in such an imputation into justification in respect of any of these Therfore it is brought in without any necessity at all and consequently must of necessity be cast out againe The Protectors of it themselves assigne no other necessity of it but onely in respect of Gods justice God they say cannot salvâ justiciâ with the safety of his justice pronounce a man righteous that is not righteous their meaning is according to the strict and literall righteousnesse of the Law But to this I answere First that there is nothing at all necessarie to be done either by God himselfe or by man about the justification of a sinner by way of satisfaction to the Justice of God since that one offering of Christ of himselfe upon the crosse Otherwise there must be found somwhat defective or wanting in that satisfaction If the justice of God be fully and every waies satisfied and provided for by the death of Christ as concerning the Iustification of sinners doubtlesse there remaines nothing further as necessarie to be done either by God or by man or by any other creature for the satisfaction of the same Justice Therfore if God should impute the righteousnesse of Christ unto men in this case some other end or pretext for it must be sought out not any provision for or satisfaction to his justice The infinite valour of Christs passives must not be abated or drawn down to make way for an imaginatie exaltation of his actives The necessity of Faith to Iustification which is a necessity confessed and acknowledged by all â—â—yâ—th not in reference to Gods Justice as if any man satisfied that either in whoâ—e or in part by beleeving but the necessity of it respecteth either his wisdome or the counsaile of his will as the Apostles expression is Eph. 1.11 He judged it not meet not counted it unjust to save men in any other way by the satisfaction of Christ then by the way of Faith This is the WILL of him that sent me saith our Saviour Ioh 6.40 not the righteousnes or Iustice of him that sent me that every man which seeth the Sonne and beleeveth in him should have everlasting life If there were nothing else to hâ—nder but want of satisfaction to divine iustice doubtlesse the whole world should be saved Vehemens in Deâ— est ad homini benefaciendum affectus quem eousque puratus est extendere quâ—â—â—l IVSTICIA vlle modo permittit Corvin Cersur Anatom p. 79. without any more adoe And therfore by the way that saying of Arnoldus in his Censure of Molineus p. 79. is deeply taxable except he can best â—â—e himselfe to make an aâ—tonemâ—nt for the hardnesse of his text with a soft interpretation There is saith he a strong affection in God to doe good to man and this affection he is still ready to act or exercise as far as ever his justice will give him leave Secondly whereas it was sayd that God cannot SECT 7 with the safety of his justice or truth pronounce a man righteous that is not so indeed with a legall righteousnesse litterally and properly so called I answere that doubtlesse he may aswell and as truely pronounce and cal that man righteous that
is the same a perfect fulfilling of the Law imputed to him So that besides that perfect remission of sinnes which hath beene purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ for those that beleeve there is no neede of indeede no place for the imputation of any righteousnesse performed by Christ unto the Law because in that very act of remission of sinnes there is included an imputation of a perfect righteousnesse or to speake more properly and with Scripture exactnesse that act of God whereby he remitteth and pardoneth sinne is interpretatively nothing else but an impuattion of a perfect righteousnesse or of a fulfilling of the Law Compare Rom. 4. ver 6. with ver 7. and 11. Even as that act of the Physition by which he recovereth his patient from his sicknesse may with full proprietie of speech be called that act whereby he restoreth him to his health this expression were but a plaine interpretation of the other and no more nor any thing else in substance but it And so that Act by which the Sunne dispells the darkenesse may indifferently be called that act by which hee fills the Aire with light And as the Physitian doth not heale the disease by one act and recover or restore health by another act really differing from it but doth both by one and the same act healing the disease and restoring of health being but two differing names or considerations of one and the same thing In like manner God doth not heale sinne that is forgive sinne by one act and restore the life of righteousnesse that is impute righteousnesse by another act at all differing from it but in and by one and the same punctuall and precise act hee doth the one and the other forgivenesse of sinnes and imputation of righteousnesse being but two different names expressions or considerations of one and the same thing And as it is but one and the same person that is sometimes called Iesus and sometimes Christ and the person Iesus is sometimes called by the name of Christ to import and signifie that he is an annointed one and againe the person Christ is sometimes called by the name Iesus to signifie that he is a Saviour even so one and the same act of God is sometimes called forgivenesse of sinnes and sometimes an imputing of righteousnesse and the forgivenesse of sinnes is sometimes called an imputing of righteousnesse to shew and signifie that a man needs nothing to a compleate righteousnesse or justification but the forgivenesse of his sinnes and againe the imputing of righteousnesse is sometimes called the forgivenesse of sinnes to shew that God hath no other righteousnesse to conferre upon a sinner but that which stands in forgivenesse of sinnes So that these two termes or expressions imputing righteousnesse and forgiving sinne do but aide and assist one the other towards a full explication of the nature and importance of that act of God which sometimes goeth under the one name and sometimes under the other If it be here demanded SECT 5 but how can God be said to impute a righteousnesse to a man which never was nor ever had a being no righteousnesse at least of that kinde whereof we now speake having ever beene but that perfect obedience which Christ performed to the Law I answer 1. That there is as expresse and compleate a righteousnesse in the Law as ever Christ himselfe performed yea a righteousnesse more proper and appropriable to all sorts and conditions of men than that personall righteousnesse which Christ himselfe performed as was shewed at large in the former part of this Treatise And what if it be said that God in remission of sins through Christ from and out of the Law imputeth to every man that beleeveth such a righteousnesse as is proper to him This I am certaine is a thousand times more agreeable both to reason and to the Scriptures then to hold an imputation of such a righteousnesse that is of such a systeme and frame of actions which were indeed a righteousnesse to him that wrought them the Law requiring them of him but can be a righteousnesse to none other person whatsoever the Law requiring the same acts for no man is therefore just or righteous because he doth the things which the Law simply requireth but because he doth those things which the Law requireth of him in reverence to his personall condition calling and relations in every kinde A man may be as wicked and sinfull by doing that which the Law requireth of another man as by doing that which the Law prohibiteth unto all men But of this enough already But 2. To the Objection propounded I answer further that to say God cannot impute a righteousnesse which never had a being i. which never was really and actuually performed by any man is to deny that he hath power to forgive sinnes Because for givenesse of sinne is an imputation of righteousnesse as hath beene proved yea and of such a righteousnesse which as the Scripture teacheth us is without workes Rom. 4 6. Rom. 3.28 c. i. a righteousnesse not consisting or made up of any workes performed to the Law by any man and what is this but such a righteousnesse as never had a being Conclusi 5 Hee that is fully acquitted and discharged from his sinnes SECT 6 needeth no other righteousnesse to give him a right or title unto life See Mr. Gataker against Gomarus p. 27.34 c. The Reason of this is evident also Death is the wages of sin and of sin only being due to no creature in any other respect nor upon any other terme whatsoever and therefore cannot in a way of ordinary justice be inflicted by God upon any creature but for sin Now he that is free from death and no wayes obnoxious thereunto See Mr. Bradshaw Iustific p. 79. cannot but be conceived to have a right unto life there being neither any middle condition betweene death and life wherein it is possible for a reasonable creature to subsist nor againe any capacity of life but by some right and title thereunto Adam whilst his innocency and he stood together and whilst he was free from sinne had a right and title unto life yea and had the possession and fruition of it given unto him for how could he be threatned with death Gen. 2.17 who was not actually possessed of life though he had not yet performed the Law either by himselfe or any other for him in any such sence as is contended for by some as of absolute necessitie to give a right and title unto life and if he had not a right unto life by his freedome from sinne but was to purchase this right by an actuall fulfilling of the Law it would be known what quantities of obedience to the Law hee must have paid before he had made this purchase and how long he must have obeyed and kept the Law before this right and title unto life would have accru'd unto him For had he lived a 1000.
vertuous dispositions as essentially requisite to make him a man capable of such deservings may be said to be imputed to them i. they have a benefit accrueing to them from such education and dispositions of his though not immediately but by the intervening of those worthy acts and services performed by him In this sense not only Achans sinfull and sacrilegious act of taking away the wedge of gold and Babylonish garment but the bitter roote it selfe that bare this cursed fruit I meane his covetousnesse may be said to have bin imputed unto all those of his house that were punished with him for that sacrilege In this sense likewise aswell the habituall holynesse of Christs person as the morall righteousnesse or active obedience of his life may be said to be imputed to those that beleeve in him because these were essentially and directly requifite to make his death and sufferings justification and life and salvation to them as hath bin further opened in the former part of this Treatise But because this signification of the word is somewhat remote and unusuall and hath no manner of counteuance from the Scripture Piscator Paraeus with other learned and Orthodox Divines have simple denyed all imputation of the active righteousnesse or obedience of Christ and doubtlesse the Doctrine of Iustification as it is layd downe in the Scriptures would not at all suffer if the expression were layd aside altogether Seventhly a thing may be said to be imputed to a man when he is looked upon or dealt with as if he had some true worth or qualification in him whereunto there are speciall privileges belonging when as yet he hath not the worth or qualification indeed but comes to have right to the privileges notwithstanding in some other way In this sense righteousnesse is said to be imputed to him that beleeveth Rom. 4.6.11 c. that is he that truely beleeveth in Christ is looked upon by God and partly hath and partly shall have and injoy all the privileges and blessings which do belong and are annexed by covenant or promise unto a perfect and compleate Law-righteousnesse though there be no such righteousnesse found in him because Iesus Christ by his death and sufferings hath purchased a right and title for him to these privileges and blessings which title is actually derived and settled upon him upon his beleeving So that to say God imputeth righteousnesse to a man is but in effect to say that God lookes upon him with the same grace and favor wherewith he would looke upon him if he were properly and legally righteous indeed and had never sin'd and intends all the further privileges and blessings of such a righteousnesse unto him In such a sense as this when a man take's likeing to and loves another mans child and intends to settle his estate upon him he may be said to impute Son-ship unto him because though he be not his Son yet he confer's the rights and privileges of a Sonne upon him as viz. fatherlike affection and his inheritance Eightly SECT 9 one thing may be said to be imputed to a man for or instead of another when the rights and priviledges which originally and properly belong to the one are yet exhibited and conferr'd upon him upon the performance of the other or againe when upon the committing of one offence he is charged with the guilt and inconveniences of another the guilt and evill consequences whereof are more notorious and manifest Thus he that provideth not for his owne especially for his houshold hath the sinne of denying the Faith i. the Gospell imputed unto him 1 Tim. 5.8 because the evill consequences of both sinnes are much the same but yet are more readily acknowledged as likely to arise from the latter In this sense also the Faith of him that beleeveth is said to be imputed to him for righteousnesse Rom. 4.3.5 c. because the same privileges which originally and more apparantly did belong unto and were setled by God upon a legall righteousnesse or immunity from sinne do now belong unto and are setled by Covenant and promise from the same God upon beleeving Ninthly and lastly any matter of profit benefit or advantage which any waies accrueth or is coming towards a man whether by way of due debt or of free donation and grace or the like may be said to be imputed unto him accordingly Thus Rom. 4.4 the reward viz. of justification and life is said to be reckoned or imputed to him that worketh i. that shall deserve it by a perfect observation of the Law of debt and not of grace The meaning is that if any man should be rewarded by God with life and happinesse upon his perfect obedience to the Law such a reward would be generally taken and looked upon by men as no matter of grace or favor from God but as a matter of right and due debt to such a man There is no word or terme to my remembrance belonging to the dispute in hand or to the Doctrine of Iustification in generall more incumbred with variety of significations then this of Imputation and consequently more obnoxious to mistake and misunderstanding There is scarse any proposition can be framed wherein this word is used indefinitly and without speciall limitation or explication but may both be granted and denied according to a different sense and acception thereof As for example such propositions as these The active obedience of Christ is imputed The active obedience of Christ is not imputed The passive obedience of Christ is imputed The passive obedience of Christ is not imputed c. are either true or false according as the word imputed is understood and taken in them Therefore speciall care must be had how and upon what termes this word passeth or be admitted in the present Controversie Obedience to the Morall Law may be said to be required of men two waies or in two respects Distinct 5 SECT 10 First by way of iustification that a man thereby may be esteemed perfectly righteous by God and accordingly have all the privileges of a compleate righteousnesse conferred upon him Secondly by way of sanctification that he may testifie and expresse his subjection unto God and his unfeigned desire of pleasing him in all things In both respects this obedience was required of man in his estate of innocencie and is still required of the Holy Angells yea and was required also of the Lord Iesus Christ himselfe Compare Mat. 3.16 with Iohn 15.10 c. But since the fall of man it is not nequited of him by way of justification in the sense expressed but only in a way of sanctification This is evident by these a consideratios First because a man being once touch'd with sinne and failing in the least point of obedience as all men were and did in the fall is not capable of any such obedience to the Laâ— whereby it is impossible for him to be justified no though he should keepe the Law with all possible
description of this cause given of Iustification is God himselfe Father Son and Holy Ghost considered is one and the same simple and intire essence though this act of justification as that of creation and some others besides is in special manner appropriated to the first person of the three the Father as other acts are to the other two persons Redemption to the Son Sanctification to the Holy Ghost c. in both which notwithstanding all the three persons being but one and the same intâ—re and undivided essence must needs be interesâ—ed Thus Rom. 8.33 where it is said that it is God that justifieth it is meant by way of appropriation of God the Father because there is mention made of Christ the second person immediately it is Christ that is dead c. Now that God is that kinde of cause of Iustification which hath bin attributed to him and no other is evident from the description of this cause formerly layd downe Sect. 4. of this Chapter For 1º that he is a cause of Iustification is the consent of all men without exception besides the Scripture lately cited Rom. 8. is full and pregnant this way It is God that justifieth 2º that he is neither the matter nor the forme of Iustification is sufficiently evident of it selfe neither did ever any man affirme either the one or the other of him and besides we shall cleere this further when we come to inquire after these causes 3º that he is not the end or finall cause of Iustification appeares from that property or condition of this cause mentioned Sect. 3. viz that it is to be atteyned or receive it's being by meanes of that thing whereof it is the end which cannot be verified of God or his being in respect of Iustification inasmuch as these no way depend upon it This likewise will further appeare when we come to lay downe the finall cause Therefore 4º and lastly he must of necessity be the efficient cause of Iustification there being no fift kinde of cause whereunto he should be reduced Secondly SECT 10 that he is the principall efficient cause and not instrumentall is evident also because he is not assum'd acted or made use of by any other in or about the justification of a sinner but himselfe projecteth the whole frame and cariage of all things yea and manageth and maketh use of all things instrumentally concurring or belonging thereunto It is God that justifieth the Gentiles by or through Faith Gal. 3.8 so Rom. 3.30 c. God maketh use of Faith and so of his word and of the Ministers of his word to produce Faith in the hearts of men and consequently to justifie them but none of these can be said to act or make use of God in or about this great effect Thirdly that he is the Naturall efficient cause of Iustification according to the notion and description of this cause given Sect. 5. is evident because in the exercising or putting forth this act of Iustification he acteth and worketh out of that authority and power which are essentiall and connaturall to him and not out of any superadded or acquired principle of art or otherwise whereof he is wholly uncapable It is true he is moved to the exercise of this act of â—ustifying men by somewhat that is extrinsecall and not essentiall to him viz. the intercession of the death and sufferings of Christ yet the act it selfe in the exercise of it proceeds by vertue of that authority and power which are estentiall to him as hath bin said No creature can be said to justifie or forgive any man his sinnes no not by Christ but God alone Who can forgive sinnes but God onely Mar. 2.7 Fourthly SECT 11 the Morall or internall impulsive cause of Iustification as it is an act of God is that infinite love goodnesse mercy sweetnesse and graciousnesse in God himselfe towards his poore creature Man looked upon as miserable and lying under condemnation for sinne This was the moving and procuring cause of the guift of Christ and his death and sufferings from him and consequently of that justification which is procured and purchased by Christ and his sufferings So God loved the world that hee gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever beleeveth in him should not perish but have everlasting life viz by Iustification through him Ioh. 3.16 Fiftly the externall Morall or impulsive efficient cause of this act of God is the Lord Iesus Christ himselfe in or through his death and sufferings or which is the same the death and sufferings of Iesus Christ God looking upon Christ as such and so great a sufferer for the sinnes of men is thereby strengthened and provoked to deliver those that beleeve in him from their sinnes and that condemnation which is due unto them i. to justifie them The Scripture is cleere in laying downe this cause Even as God for Christs sake freely forgave you viz. your sinnes i. justified you Ephe. 4.32 Those words for Christs sake are a plaine and perfect character of that kinde of cause we now speake of This with the former i. both internall and externall impussive or moving causes are joyn'd together Rom. 3.24 And are justified freely by his grace here is the inward impulsive cause of Justification through the Redemption that is in Christ Iesus viz. by meanes of his death and sufferings here is the outward moving cause we speake of Neither can the Death and sufferings of Christ with any shew of reason or with any tolerable construction or congruitie of speaking be referred to any other cause in the businesse of justification but the impulsive only He that would make Christ the instrumentall cause of Iustification (a) Mr. Walker Socinian discovered c. p. 138. discovers himselfe to be no great Gamaliel in this learning and had need thrust his Faith out of doores as he doth in many places and not suffer it to have any thing at all to doe about his Iustification least his Christ and his Faith should be corrivalls and contend for preheminence therein And yet more repugnant to reason is it to make either Christ himselfe or any righteousnesse of his whatsoever either the matter or materiall cause of Justification which yet the Socinian Discoverer doth (b) Ibid. p. 139 or the forme or formall cause thereof which is done by some others But that is a streyne of unreasonablenesse above all the rest to make either Christ or his righteousnesse both the formall and materiall cause too of this great act of God we speake of the Justification of a sinner these causes being of so opposite a nature and different consideration as hath bin described and yet even this conceit also hath found enterteynment with some To this kinde of cause we now speake of must be reduced also the active or personall righteousnesse of Christ as farre as it hath any influence into or any waies operates towards the justificatioÌ„ of a siner For though it be not satisfactory
righteous to inferre and conclude a particular and determinate manner of rigteous-making from hence as viz. by imputation of this obedience there being other waies or manners of righteous-making as hath bin proved hath no power nor authority at all of an Argument in it Another text imployed in the service aforesaid SECT 11 is found Rom. 8.4 That the righteousnes of the Law might be fullfilled in us who walke not after the flesh but after the spirit From the former clause it is argued that the righteousnes of the Law can in no sence be said to be fullfilled in us but only by the righteousnes or obedience of Christ unto the Law imputed to us But to this also I Answere 1. That some both learned and Orthodox Rom. 4.8 cleared understand this clause of sanctification rather then of justification and by the fullfilling of the righteousnes of the Law that Euangelicall obedience to the Precepts thereof which all those that truly beleeve in Christ doe in part performe and desire and strive to performe more perfectly This was the exposition of Ambrose of old and seems to be the judgement of Peter Martyr (a) Quomodo autem praecepta legis in nobis impleantur per communionem cum Christo qui pro nobis mortuus est ita potest declarari quod illis qui credunt in eum spiritus conceditur quo vires corum instaurantur us obedientiam legis praestare possint non quidem perfectam et absolutam c. P. Marty ad Rom. 8.4 upon the place Nor is this exposition rejected by Musculus though he inclines more to another in which propension I shall willingly give him the right hand of fellowship So that however this place is not so cleere or demonstrative for the pretended Imputation But 2. That by the righteousnesse of the Law which is here said to be fullfilled in those that beleeve cannot be meant the righteousnesse or active obedience of Christ imputed is evident from hence because it must of necessity be such a righteousnesse and such a fulfilling in beleevers which may be apprehended as a proper and sutable effect of Christs condemning sinne in the flesh immediately preceding in the end of v. 3. The very purport and frame of the context plainly sheweth this relation between them and that the latter was intended by God as a fruit or end of the former For what the Law could not doe saith the Apostle in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his own Sonne in the likenesse of sinnefull of flesh and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh That the righteousnesse of the Law might be fullfilled c. That ratiocinative particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that imports the fulfilling of the righteousnesse of the Law in those that beleeve to be a naturall and direct effect of or thing intended by God in Christs condemning sinne in the flesh Now unpossible it is that the active obedience of Christ or the imputation of it should be any proper effect of his condemning sinne in the flesh For by this expression of condemning sin in the flesh Interpreters generally agree and besides it is a thing evident in it selfe that the Apostle meanes the abolishing or taking away the guilt or the accusing and condemning power of sinne by the death of Christ The phrase of condemning sinne to note this by the way is metonymicall the antecedent put for the consequent condemning for disabling to accuse or being a means of the condemnation of another which we know are the consequents or effects of any mans being condemned in course of Law The testimony of a condemn'd person against any man is of no force in Law But to our purpose how the abolishing or taking away the guilt and condemning power of sinne by the death of Christ should be a means of the Imputation of the righteousnes of his life I am no wayes able to conceive or comprehend no more then I am how the present fullnesse of the stomacke should be a means to make a man stand in need of a second dinner immediately For certaine it is See the first and fourth Conclusions in the second chapter of this latter part p. 3.5 c. as hath bin reasoned home elsewhere in this discourse that he that hath the guilt of his sinne purged and taken away by the death of Christ needs no other righteousnesse nor imputation whatsoever for his justification or acceptation in the sight of God no more then he that is full needeth the honey-combe 3. It is a very uncouth and hard expression SECT 12 to call the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to beleevers a fulfilling of the righteousnesse of the Law in them For that clause in them still notes either a subjective inhesion of some thing in persons or else some kind of efficiencie Now the Friends themselvs of that Imputation which we oppose unanimously and constantly affirme the righteousnesse of Christ to be subjectively and inherently in himselfe only and to become ours onely by imputation which they still make a modification contradistinguished against subjective inhesion So that in this sense the righteousnesse of Christ cannot be said to be fulfilled in them Nor can they say that the righteousnesse of the Law or of Christ is fulfilled in them in a way of efficiencie for they are not the workers of this righteousnesse Therefore an imputed righteousnesse can in no tolerable construction of speech be said to be fulfilled in men 4. If by the righteousnesse of the Law we understand that entire and compleate obedience which every beleever according to the great varietie of their severall conditions callings and relations stands bound to performe it can with no agreeablenesse to truth be said to be fulfilled in them by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse unto them Because as hath bin largely proved in the former part of the Discourse there is scarce any beleever if any at all but stands bound in a way of duty to God and his Law to the performance of many particular acts yea of many kindes of acts of obedience which are not to be found nor can it without sinne be conceived that they should be found in all that golden catalogue of workes of righteousnesse performed by Christ Therefore the righteousnesse of the Law in the sense declared which is the sense stood upon by our adversaries cannot be said to be fulfilled in those that beleeve only by the active obedience of Christ imputed to them 5. Neither doth the originall word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is here translated righteousnesse signifie obedience unto or conformity with the Law but rather that justification which was the end and intent of the Law but that it was disabled through the weaknesse that is the sinfulnesse of the flesh to ataine it ver 3. And so Calvin Piscator Musculus with divers other learned Interpreters and Tremellius out of the Syriaque render the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by the Latine word
grace besides Faith they would have carried eternall life after the same manner and with as high an hand as beleeving now doth Naamans leprosie was cureable onely by the waters of Iordan why because the will and decree of God concerning this effect were upon these waters and upon these onely Abana and Pharpar or any other River whatsoever would have done as much had the same decree of God concurred with them When causes have an intrinsecall and naturall power and efficacie to produce their effects it is very improper if not ridiculous to ascribe such effects to the will and good pleasure of God As to say it is the will of God that the grace of patience should make a man patient or the grace of humility should make a man humble or that such an element as we call fire should burne or the like though there be a truth in them yet there is so little savour or weight of truth in them that such sayings are not worthy the holy Ghost and neither these nor any of their fellowes of like importance to be found in the whole Booke of God So to say that it is the Will of God that beleeving in Christ should justifie and so save men if beleeving in Christ simply as it is beleeving in Christ did it were an eccentricall expression and no where to be parallell'd in the Scriptures I might adde many other Scriptures as Ioh. 1.12 where it is said that to those that received Christ i. that beleeved in him God gave the power or prerogative to be his Sonnes i. decreed that such should be Sonnes unto him and by vertue of such a decree really made them such upon their beleeving which clearely shewes that beleeving in Christ as such doth not make a Son of God but receives this power or prerogative by especiall guift from God which gift might have beene given to any other grace as well as beleeving So Eph. 2.8 By grace ye are saved through Faith viz. in Christ therefore Faith doth not save simply as or because Christ is the object of it but by the efficacie and force of that gracious and good pleasure of God whereby he hath covenanted with his creature that such a Faith shall save it which good pleasure or Covenant of God with men concerning Faith is called Rom. 3.27 the Law of Faith which Law is that which gives it that strength and power which it now hath to justifie and save It were easie to make this pile of Scriptures large but those that have beene touched are sufficient to shew which way they generally incline in this particular Neither is that common plea SECT 18 which is so frequently insisted upon to prove the contrary viz. that Faith justifieth in relation to its object or as it receiveth and apprehendeth Christ or Christs righteousnesse or the like of any value if it be duely considered The strength of the argument is usually bound up in this similitude As the hand is said to enrich a man because it receives the money or treasure whereby he is inriched so Faith must needs be said to justifie because it receives Christ who is our righteousnesse and by whom we are justified To this I answer that it is not simply the taking silver or gold with the hand that enricheth a man no nor the silver or gold so taken that simply enricheth him A man may be never the richer for receiving great summes of money of silver and gold nay a man may be much the poorer and more miserable for receiving or taking money if he receives or takes it contrary to the Lawes As when a thiefe breakes into an house and takes away much treasure with him or puts forth his hand to take a mans purse by the high-wayes side his hand in these cases cannot be said to make him rich because it receives treasure neither doth the treasure so received make him rich but poore and miserable because now he is obnoxious to the sentence of the Law and ownes his life and all he is worth besides unto it Therefore if a mans hand enricheth him by receiving that which doth enrich him it doth it not simply as it receiveth it for then it should doe it alwayes and in all cases whatsoever but it doth it by vertue of that Law or agreement of the state where he lives which secureth a man in the quiet possession and enjoyment of such money or treasure as hee lawfully receives to his owne use So though Christ be a treasure of righteousnesse and justification in himselfe it doth not presently follow that whosoever takes hold on him or beleeves in him should presently be made righteous or justified by him but here must intervene some Law Covenant or Decree from God to establish and authorize such a beleeving or laying hold on him to be a mans righteousnesse or justification Wee doe not suppose they can but for argument sake we will suppose that if the Devills should beleeve on Christ hoping or expecting to be justified by him as men doe who beleeving are justified yet they should be never the nearer any justification by him though he be a treasure of righteousnesse Why because God hath made no Law Promise Covenant or agreement with them that they should be justified by Faith therefore if it were possible for them to beleeve as men doe yet Christ would be no more any righteousnesse unto them than now he is Much more might be said and may be said elsewhere for the evidencing of this Conclusion but here I would hasten In the meane time I desire to explaine my selfe a little further touching this Conclusion onely in two words When I denie that Faith justifieth in its relation to its object or as it layeth hold on Christ I am farre from saying or conceiving that any Faith should justifie but that onely which layeth hold on Christ yea I grant and verily beleeve that whereas there are many other acts of Faith besides beleeving or laying hold on Christ as viz. to comfort and strengthen and purifie the hearts of those that beleeve and the like yet that decree or good pleasure of God which I conceive makes Faith justifying concurres with it towards this great effect onely in that act of laying hold on Christ and not in any of the other So that in this sence I grant hold that Faith may be said to justifie as it layeth hold of Christ comparatively viz. as this act of Faith is distinguished from those other acts which it likewise produceth it doth not justifie either as it comforts or as it purifies the heart c. but onely as it relateth to Christ and layeth hold on him This onely is that which I deny that this act of Faith whereby it receiveth or layeth hold on Christ hath that in the nature or inherently in it or any otherwise or by any other meanes then from the will and good pleasure of God which makes it availeable unto justification It hath no foundation