confidence towards God to purifie our hearts and to work by love c. They are all of them promoted and furthered by the Doctrine we teach for what is it that gives us boldness towards God but the merit and perfection of Christs sacrifice whereby the mouth of the Law is stopped the accusations of Satan are all answered and the justice of God is fully satisfied Again What other means is there so effectual to purifie our hearts to constrain us to love him c. as the freeness absoluteness and immutability of his love to us who whilest we were sinners and enemies reconciled us to himself by the Blood of the Cross and blotted out our sins as if they had never been committed § 10. Mr. Cr. censure of Curcellaeus's Opinion is just and seasonable who judgeth these Differences amongst Christians about Justification to be of so small concernment that they ought not to breed a controversie For surely they are none of those foolish questions and strivings which we are bid to avoid if there be any point in the whole Doctrine of Godliness for which we ought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Saint Jude speaks to contend earnestly This challengeth our utmost zeal for the maintenance of it seeing the glory of Gods Grace the dignity of Christs Blood and the comfort of our own souls lies at stake in the issues of it our life peace and everlasting Salvation is concerned herein There is no truth that the Apostle doth so frequently press and so earnestly contend for as this Article of our Free Justification That no works of ours do concur to the procuring of it Mr. Calvin hath observed That if we were accorded with the Church of Rome in all other points save in this one particular the distance between them and us is so great That it is impossible we should ever be reconciled And I must needs say That I see no material difference between them and our Adversaries about this matter § 11. Mr. Cr. in the close of his Prefatory Discourse tells the Reader Thou art beholding to the Learned Author for the penning of this Tract but for the publishing of it to another And Mr. W. hath framed it in the form of a Letter to a private Friend that the Reader might guess he had no hand at all in publishing of it whereas a near Kinsman of his assured me That Mr. W. in a Letter to himself had confessed that his Sermon came abroad by his own appointment which I do the rather believe knowing his relation to the Stationer for whom it was Printed However I am glad that it is made publick that this point may be the better cleared by a deliberate examination of the utmost that can be said against it onely I wish that this task had lighted upon some other man who hath more leisure and better abilities to undertake it that so precious a truth might not suffer through the unskilfulness of a feeble Advocate How much the Reader is beholding to Mr. W. for Penning or Printing of his Sermon will appear in the issue of this debate CHAP. V. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Introduction Text Doctrine and Proofs are briefly considered HAving passed Mr. Woodbridges Out-works we shall now proceed to survey the Fort it self which in his own conceit is built so impregnable That nothing consistent with the Scriptures can be brought against it How ever I am not discouraged from attempting it knowing That strong holds more unlikely to be vanquished have been laid flat and level with the ground Lam. 4.12 2 Cor. 10.4 5. In his Preface he tells the worthy Sir to whom he communicated his Notes That he will not trouble him with his Introduction to the Text or the Applicatory part of his Sermon It was very little that he spake in either but I well remember that he began and concluded with a great mistake In his Introduction he told us that the scope of this Epistle was to prove That we are justified by Faith i. e. as he explained it That we are not justified in the sight of God before we believe and that Faith is the condition on our part to qualifie us for Justification whereas the scope of the Apostle as shall be shewn more largely hereafter was not to assert the time of our Justification but the matter of it he intended not to shew when but wherewith we are justified to wit not by Works or Righteousness in us but by the Righteousness of Christ freely imputed to us which we apprehend and apply by Faith By taking Faith in a proper sense as a condition required on our part he accuseth the Apostle of Self-contradiction who all along denies That we are justified by works seeing Faith considered as a condition is a work of ours no less then love In that part of his Application where he addressed himself to unbelievers he told them That Christ was not a High Priest or Advocate to them and that they had no Court of Mercy to appeal unto which was all one as if he had said Christ did not die for them and that they had no more ground to believe in him then the Devils themselves and consequently that their case was desperate and irrecoverable though final unbelievers have not Christ for their High Priest for he neither died nor prayed for them Joh. 17.9 Yet he performed both acts of his Priesthood scil Oblation and Intercession for all that were given him by the Father long before the Conversion of many of them He laid down his life not onely for those sheep that were called but for those also that were not then gathered into his fold Joh. 10.15 16. And in the seventeenth of John he says expresly That he prayed not onely for them that did believe but for them also that should believe in him Vers. 20. Though it be true That Christ shed not his Blood for Reprobates yet we know not who are reprobated until it shall be made manifest by their final unbelief Indeed we cannot say to an unbeliever That Christ did die for him and we have as little reason to say That Christ did not die for him seeing the Word doth reveal neither and by affirming the latter we do quite bar up the door of Hope which ought to be held open to the worst of sinners Our duty is to declare That Christ is come into the world to save sinners and to exhort all men every where to believe him We were as good bid the Devils to believe as those for whom Christ is not a High Priest it is in vain for any to believe in Christ if he never prayed nor offered up himself a Sacrifice unto God for them but seeing Mr. W. hath not troubled his Friend with these passages I shall not trouble the Reader any longer about them § 2. That the Saints or true Believers under which notion he writes to the Romans are justified by Faith We do readily yeeld it to be a truth
or adulti yet to all the Elect to whom the effects of the Covenant and Seals do onely really belong it is real and absolute It is no other then the Sentence of God himself declaring his non-imputation of sin unto them and their deliverance from death by Jesus Christ § 12. 2. Internally in foro Conscientiae at their effectual Vocation when the Lord by the Preaching of the Gospel doth powerfully perswade their hearts to believe in Christ for the Elect themselves before Faith have no knowledge or comfort either of Gods gracious volitions towards them or of Christs undertakings and purchases in their behalf In which respect they are said to be without Christ and without God in the world Eph. 2.12 and Gal. 4.1 They are compared to an Heir under age who differs nothing from a Servant though he be the Lord of all By Faith we come to see that everlasting love wherewith we were loved and that plenteous Redemption which Christ hath wrought for us for which cause Faith is called The evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 And God is said thereby to reveal his Righteousness from Heaven to us Rom. 1.17 And to reveal his Son in us Gal. 1.16 Now in this sence men are said to be justified by the act of Faith in regard Faith is the medium or Instrument whereby the Sentence of Forgiveness is terminated in their Consciences which is daily made more plain and legible by the operation of the Spirit sealing and witnessing unto them their peace and reconciliation with God Whereas unbelievers look on God as their enemy and consequently all their life time are held in bondage through the fear of wrath A true Believer hath peace liberty and boldness towards God he looks upon all the Promises as his own inheritance interprets the Providences of God even those which Reason would construe in another sence to be Fruits of Love and not of Wrath. § 12. Now because this Declarative Sentence by Faith is like the name written in the White Stone Revel 2.17 Which no man knoweth saving he that hath it Many whom the Lord doth justifie are accounted by the world to be but Hypocrites others again are justified of men who are not justified in the sight of God the Lord therefore hath another way of justifying his people to wit In foro mundi when he shall publickly and in the hearing of the whole world pronounce that gracious sentence Come ye blessed of my Father c. Matth. 25.34 Whereunto some have referred those words of the Apostle Acts 3.19 Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. But who so pleaseth to consult with Erasmus Beza and Ludovicus de Dieu upon the place shall finde there is a great mistake in our English Translators and that no such thing was intended there by the Holy Ghost I grant that the sins of the Elect may be said to be then blotted out not that the remission of their sins shall be put off or is not compleat till the last day and till they have performed all the conditions required of them but because this gracious sentence shall be then publickly declared and shall bring forth its Eternal Effect of Life and Glory And in this sence I conceive those Scriptures may be understood which speak of our Justification as a future thing as Rom. 3.30 2.13 c. § 13. Now though we have ascribed Justification unto several times or periods yet do we not make many Justifications Declared Justification whether it be in foro Ecclesiae in foro Conscientiae or in foro mundi is not another from that in the minde of God but the same variously revealed as an Acquittance in the heart of the Creditor and in a Paper a pardon in the heart of a Prince and inrolled is one and the same this manifested and the other secret and though there are never so many Copies written forth in several hands they do not make many Acquittances or many Pardons being but the Transcripts of one Original So though God doth at sundry times and in divers manners declare his well-pleasedness towards his people yet is their Justification but one and the same which is perfect and compleat at once being his fixed and immutable will not to deal with them according to their sins but as Just and Righteous Persons By that which hath been said it doth appear in what sence we assert The Justification of Gods Elect before they believe Now what little weight there is in those Objections which are commonly brought against this Assertion will be more manifest when we have examined Mr. Woodbridges Treatise Whos 's first quarrel against us is for that as he conceives we give too little unto Faith P. 2. But as it is no disparagement to the Blood of Christ that it doth not move and incline God to love us or to will not to punish us so it is no disparagement to Faith to say That it doth not concur with the Blood of Christ in obtaining our Justification but that by apprehending the Gospel it reveals and evidenceth to us that Justification which we have in Christ the proof whereof is the task of the next Chapter wherein I doubt not but I shall be able through the help of God to put by all those wretched consequences which Mr. W. hath endeavored to father upon this Position That Faith serves to evidence to us our Justification CHAP. VIII Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Exceptions against our saying That Faith or the act of believing doth justifie no otherwise then as it reveals and evidenceth our Justification are Answered THe first Charge which he brings against this Gloss as he calls it is That it is guilty of a contradiction to the Holy Ghost It is well known sayes he that the Apostle in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians sets himself on purpose to assert the Doctrine of Justification by Faith in opposition to Works The Question between him and the Jews was not Whether we are declared to be justified by Faith or Works but whether we are justified by Faith or Works in the sight of God or before God And he concludes That it is by Faith and not by Works c. Though all this be granted yet it proves no contradiction to the Holy Ghost in our Assertion We acknowledge that the Question between the Apostle and the Jews was not about the declaring of our Justification nor about the time when we are justified no nor about the condition upon which we are justified but concerning the matter of our Justification or the Righteousness whereby we are justified or by which we are accounted righteous Now the result of his dispute is That we are justified by Faith and not by Works but then the Question will be How Faith is to be taken whether sensu proprio or metonymico whether we are to understand it
his Instr. Adversus Libertin who as I shall shew anon are no Enemies to the Doctrine which I do here maintain That sort of Christians in former times were called Eunomians from Eunomius their Leader of whom Saint Augustine gives us this Character Fertur usque adeo fuisse bonis moribus inimicus ut asseveraret quod nihil cuique obesset quorumlibet perpetratio ac perseverantia peccatorum si hujus quae ab illo docebatun fidei particeps esset i. e. It is reported That he was such an Enemy to all goodness that he affirmed though a man did commit or lie in any kinde of sin it should never hurt him if he had but that Faith which he taught Of the same strain were the Gnosticks who for their filthy lives were called Coenosi The dirty Sect. Augustine observes That there were many of this spirit in the Apostles days as the Nicholaitans the Disciples of Simon Magus Basilides Valentinus who abused some passages in the writings of Paul to be as it were Panders to the flesh who because the Apostle had affirmed That a man is justified by Faith without works concluded That if men did believe Etiamsi malè operarentur facinorosè flagitioseve viverent Though they lived never so wickedly they should be saved Which filthy Dreamers as Jude calls them occasioned the Epistles of James Peter John and Jude the cheif scope of which is to shew the unsoundness of that Faith which doth not work by love and that they are not Believers who do not bring forth the Fruits of a holy life Now me thinks Mr. W. should have more charity then to rank his Antagonists with such filthy Swine § 4. Mr. W. is not ignorant I dare say that many Godly Learned Men have asserted the Justification of Gods Elect in foro Dei before Faith who were never accounted Antinomians I am sure Mr. Pemble hath hitherto been known by another name I mention him the 〈◊〉 because he was Divinity Reader in that Society where I my self and this Author for a while under me had our education In his Book of the Nature and Properties of Grace and Faith he delivers his Judgement to this effect That the Elect even whilest they are unconverted they are then actually justified and freed from all sin by the death of Christ and God so esteems of them as free and having accepted of that satisfaction is actually reconciled to them And a little after Our Justification in Gods sight was purchased for us by Christ long before we were born for it is in vain to think with the Arminians That Christs merits have made God onely Placabilem not Placatum procured a freedom That God may be reconciled if he will and other things concur but not an actual reconciliation No it is otherwise Full satisfaction to Divine Justice is given and taken all the sins of the Elect are actually pardoned This was concluded upon and dispatcht between God and Christ long before we had any being either in Nature or Grace yet this benefit was ours and belonged to us though we knew not so much till after that by Faith we did apprehend it as Lands may be purchased the Estate conveyed and setled on an Infant though he know nothing of it till he â—ome of age Mr. Rutherford I dare say was never suspected to be an Antinomian yet in his Exercit. Apologet. a Book which Mr. W. in my hearing heretofore hath extolled to the skies he hath said as much as any of us against whom Mr. W. hath levelled this opprobrious name Sanc prius quà m electus credit cessit c. Verily saith he before any of the Elect do believe the wrath of God and all the effects of his wrath are removed from their persons by vertue of Christs satisfaction And near the same place he speaks to this purpose Though we are not justified passively or terminatively i. e. The gracious sentence of God is not terminated in our Consciences till we do believe yet our justification actively considered as it is in God who is the onely justifier was compleat and perfect before we had a being and in this sence Faith is not the Instrument of our Justification Dr. Twisses Judgement in this point is sufficiently known The Righteousness of Christ saith he was ours before we did believe ours I say in respect of right because in the intention both of the Father and the Son it was performed for us though not in respect of possession and enjoyment because we have not the sence and knowledge of it whereunto we do attain by Faith For Faith coming which the Spirit of God works in our hearts the love of God to us in Christ is then perceived and acknowledged Whence it is That the Righteousness of Christ is said to be imputed unto us by Faith because we cannot know and discern that it is imputed to us but by Faith and then we are said to be justified with that kinde of Justification and Absolution from sin which breedeth peace in our Consciences Where he also gives us two Arguments to prove That Justification in foro Dei goes before Faith Was this famous Doctor an Antinomian Of all men Mr. W. who is now entered upon his Labors and reaps the Harvest of that Seed which the Doctor with much sweat and many Prayers hath sown at Newbery hath least reason to account him so I must needs tell him He will not honor himself by aspersing the name of this blessed man If Mr. W. had consulted with the Writings of his own forefathers I suppose he would have given the adhearers to this Doctrine more civil language Mr. Parker his Grandfather a man whom his Enemies admired for his Learning and Piety in his Book Descensu Christi ad inferos hath this excellent passage Justificatus Christus dicitur cum resurrexit 1 Tim. 3.16 Nosque in eo resurgente justificati Rom. 4. ult quia istâ— solutio i. e. Suscitatio patris actualis justificatio fuit illius quidem à peccatis aliorum pro quibus satis dedecit Nostrum vero à peccatis propriis pro quibus ille vadimonium praestitit i. e. Christ is said to be justified when he rose from the dead 1 Tim. 3.16 And we to be then justified in him Rom. 4. ult Because that discharge to wit His Fathers raising him from the dead was an ACTUAL JUSTIFICATION of him from the sins of others for which he had satisfied and OF US from our own sins for which he became a surety It doth not a little justifie them that drave away this Reverend man from his Native soyl that a Grand-childe of his own a Minister and a Minister in these times should brand him with Heresie § 5. To these might be added many more who have not hitherto been known by the name of Antinomians Mr. Calvin saith That our Justification in respect of God doth precede our Faith Zanchius in his
Faith in the propitiation and atonement of Jesus Christ whereby their defects and obliquities are done away § 6. 4 Whereas he addes That it was a poor answer which I gave to Mr. Good That God was well pleased with his Elect whilest unregenerate though not with their unregeneracy 1. As far as it concerns my self I shall subscribe to his censure I am poor but he is rich I am empty but he is full But 2. he may be pleased to take notice that a far richer man then himself in all kinde of learning both Humane and Divine hath given the very same answer unto this question Mr. Pemble distinguisheth between Gods love to our persons and Gods love to our qualities and actions A distinction which sayes he parents are well skilled in who put a difference between the vices and persons of their children those they hate these they love even when for their vices they do chastise their persons The case sayes he is the same between God and the Elect his love to their persons is from everlasting the same nor doth their sinfulness lessen it nor their sanctity increase it because God in loving their persons never considered them otherwise then as most perfectly holy and unblameable in Jesus Christ c. It is a strange inference which he draws from my words That because I said God is well pleased with the persons of his Elect whilest unregenerate that afterwards he is well pleased with their unregeneracy also He might as well impose this absurdity upon the Prophet that because he saith Ezek. 16.8 Thy time to wit of unregeneracy was the time of love Surely not of their unregeneracy but of their persons then unregenerate that therefore the Prophet supposeth that after their Conversion God did love their unregeneracy or that corruption of nature which remained in them Such quibbles are unbeseeming serious Christians § 7. I shall adde but a word to clear up the difference between the actions of regenerate and unregenerate persons And first we say that the best actions of unregenerate men are impure and sinful which though they are pardoned unto all the Elect for the sake of Christ yet they are not acceptable to God but in themselves most abominable and loathsome in his sight Prov. 5.8 Tit. 1.15 Isai. 1.13 c. Secondly Though as the Orthodox acknowledge the best works of the best men have not in them that Inherent purity and holiness which can stand before God without the mediation of their High Priest yet they may be said to be acceptable and pleasing unto God not onely comparatively because they are better then the works of unregenerate men or then the sinful works of such as are regenerate but absolutely and that two ways 1. Abstractly and in themselves or as they ought to be done and thus Faith Hope Love c. are acceptable to God for they are that spiritual worship and service which God looks for and delights in Joh. 4.23 Micah 6.8 Gal. 5.5 6. Phil. 3.3 And in this respect a meek and a quiet spirit is said to be of great price in the sight of God 1 Pet. 3.4 2. Concretely as they are acted by us or do pass through our hands and so they are acceptable to God as they are washed and cleansed in the blood of Christ 1 Pet. 2.5 Our spiritual sacrifices are made acceptable to God in Jesus Christ or by his taking away the sin and defilement that adheres unto them Our High Priest doth not procure the acceptance of those works which in their whole abstract nature are sinful such as are all our works before Conversion and the fruits of the flesh after Conversion he obtains forgiveness but not acceptance for them But now those works which come from the Spirit of God and are sinful onely through the mixture of our corruptions as sweet water which passeth through a sink these he makes acceptable to the Father by taking away the imperfections and defilements that adhere unto them § 8. The next Scripture which Mr. W. hath brought in by way of objection against himself is Rom. 5.10 When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son To which he answers That Christs death was the price of our reconciliation and so it is through the death of Christ that we are reconciled be it when it will be that we are reconciled Against this answer of his I shall offer these Exceptions 1 It offers a manifest violence to the Text to say That we were reconciled is as much as we shall be reconciled when we have performed the terms and conditions required of us 2 If our reconciliation to God did depend upon terms and conditions performed by us then is it not through the death of Christ that we are reconciled unto God we should be more the cause of our reconciliation then Christ is for he that performs a condition to which a benefit is promised doth more to the procuring of it then he that makes or obtains that conditional grant notwithstanding which he is never awhit the near of the benefit unless his own act do concur 3 The Apostle declares That this reconciliation was made when we were enemies Ergo Before our believing or the fulfilling of any condition on our part For Believers are not enemies 4 If his meaning were no more then this that it is through the death of Christ that we are reconciled be it when it will that we are reconciled then this clause when we were enemies would be superfluous and redundant whereas the main emphasis of the Text doth lie therein as is evident from the gradation which the Apostle makes Vers. 6 8 10. 5 The Apostle in 2 Cor. 5.19 affirms That our Saviour did not onely pay the price of our reconciliation but that God did so far accept of or acquiesce therein that upon the payment of it he did not impute our sins unto us i. e. he justified us for the Apostle Rom. 4. defines Justification to be the non-imputation of sin 6 And lastly That which he grants yeelds the matter in question viz. The immediate actual reconciliation of sinners upon the death of Christ for if Christ by shedding of his blood paid the total and full price for our deliverance from the curse of the Law then were we actually set free from the obligation of it for when the debt is paid the debtor is free in Law it is unjust to implead a person for a debt which is paid § 9. Secondly To illustrate and confirm his Answer he makes use of Grotius his distinction of three moments or periods of the Will of God 1 at Enmity 2 Appeasable 3 Appeased 1. Before the consideration of the death of Christ God saith he is at enmity with the sinner though not averse from all ways and means of reconciliation 2. After the consideration of the death of Christ and now is the Lord not onely appeasable but doth also
within them that they have quite forgotten nay some have utterly denied the Christ without them that God-man who is the onely Propitiation for our sins How much cause then my Brethren have we of continuall thankfulnesse unto our God who in so generall a defection hath been pleased to keep us that we are not led aside with the deceivablenesse of this unrighteousnesse and to lead us to that rock which is above us For how ever the world doth account of Pharisisme yet they that have any acquaintance with the mind of God know there can be hardly named a greater sin then the establishing our ownâ— righteousnesse It is the good pleasure of God for which everlasting praise be given unto him to reveale those things unto babes which are hiden from the wise and prudent The Gospel hath been and will be a mystery to the worlds end Humane reason cannot conceive how men should buy without mony or become rich by stripping and emptying of themselves attain unto righteousnesse by renouncing and abhorring their own righteousnesses Hence it is that the Doctrine of an unconditionate Covenant and the Free Justification of a sinner is looked upon by our learned Rabbies as such a foolish and ridiculous conceit A great Master in our Israel speaks strangely of it Unconditionate promises saith he beget onely an irrational fallacious foundationless Faith which the bigger it swells the more dangerous it proves And a little after he calls the Faith and Hope begotten by such promises A dependance on some fatal chain some Necromantick trick of believing thou shalt be saved and thou shalt be saved nay on Satan himself some responce of his Oracle c. And not much before It is a miracle says he that they who believe this Doctrine of unconditional Prâ—mises are yet restrained from making this so natural a use of it from running into all the riots in the World I remember a good Note of his from John 7.48 That the greatest Schollars are not always the soundest Christians We see Christianity is not Book-Learning nor is Faith attained to by strength of parts I should might I be so bold humbly ask this Learned Doctor Whether the Faith and Hope of all the Saints we read of in the Scripture were an irrational fallacious and foundationless Faith Now let him shew us any one of them that in his addresses unto God did ever plead a Conditional Promiseâ— That of Hezekiah 2 King 20.3 is of a peculiar consideration I remember Luther calls it Stulti loquium Hezekiae Others that excuse it say That Hezekiah draws his Argument not from his own works but from Gods he reasons from what God had done for him that he would do more and bestow the mercy which then he needed But besides him from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelation we do not finde that any of Gods people have used any other plea unto God or have had any other support for their Hope and Confidence then his free promises of Grace and Mercy not onely the woman of Canaan the Publican and such as they were but Abraham Jacob Moses David Paul c. have all of them Fled for refuge unto these promises their Faith never knew any other bottom or foundation besides this Is it an irrational thing to receive life as a gift and not as wages It were very strange if the Mercy and Faithfulness of God should not be as sure a Foundation to relie upon as our own Works I will be bold to say Whosoever do build upon other Foundations besides the free Promise of Mercy they will have no better success then he who built his house upon the Sand Matth. 7.27 They may perchance when it is too late experiment the fallacy they have put upon their own souls The Doctor is as much mistaken in the use of the point as he is in the Doctrine to say That the natural use of it is to run into all the riâ—â—s in the world he might have taken notice where the Holy Ghost makes another use of it Tit. 2.11 Luke 1.74 2 Cor. 7.1 And right reason would have suggested that the freer the Promise is the more is the love and bounty of the Promiser shewn Now Love naturally begets Love Publicans saith our Saviour will love those that love them and can a man believe so great a benefit as the free remission of his sins and not love him that hath remitted them Possibly a man that hath received this Grace but in the notion may draw such untoward conclusions from it but for any true Believer to sin upon this ground is as impossible as that light should become darkness 1 John 3.3 9. I must confess the loose and unevâ—n walking of many Professors hath given too much occasion unto Adversaries to Blaspheme this Doctrine And though it be unjust in them to charge the faults of Professors upon their Profession yet you cannot but see how much it concerns them who have hope of Salvation through Christ alone to vindicate the honor of this Grace and by their exemplariness in wel-doing to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men The vindication of this Doctrine lies as much upon private Christians as it doth upon Ministers the strongest Arguments against it are but the Suppositions and Consequences of carnal Reason which are soonest confuted by a holy Conversation in which respect illiterate men may be irrefragable Disputants and women may nonplus the learnedst Doctor And therefore whilest I am in this Tabernacle I shall not cease to stir you up by putting you in remembrance of these things though you know them and are established in the present truth Some of you know how unwillingly I undertook this Publick Imployment being more inclined to the Truel then the Sword to build up my Hearers in their most Holy Faith then to engage in Controversies against Opposâ—rs And truly nothing could have induced me to it but the tendency of the Work to your Edification that the simplicity of the Gospel may abide amongst you and that you may stand fast in the Truth which you have received being able to answer the cavils of them that do oppose it It was not least in my eye That our honest Neighbors who by the evil arts of some that affect preheminence have been prejudiced and disaffected towards us may see and satisfie themselves Whether we believe and contend for any other Faith then that which was once delivered â—nto the Saints for surely they will have but little comfort in separating from us without a cause I must needs tell them their account at last will not be with joy who have rejected the counsel of God against themselves Whatsoever success this Discourse may finde with others I doubt not but it will be an acceptable service unto you I desire that it may provoke you to be more instant in Prayer for me that â—tterance may be given me and that my
which â—e endeavored to maintain against those blessed Martyrs of Jesus Christ Barns Hierome and Garret who sealed the contrary Doctrine with their dearest blood 1 The effect of Christs passion hath a Condition the fulfilling of the Condition diminisheth nothing from the effect of Christs passion 2 They that will injoy the effect of Christs passion must fulfil the Condition 3 The fulfilling of the Condition requireth first knowledge of the Condition which knowledge we have by Faith 4 Faith commeth of God and this Faith is a good gift It is good and profitable for me to do well and to exercise this Faith Ergo By the gift of God I may do wel before I am justified 5 By the gift of God I may doe well towards the attainment of Justification 6 There is ever as much Charity towards God as Faith and as Faith increaseth so doth Charity increase 7 To the attainment of Justification is required Faith and Charity 8 Every thing is to be called freely done whereof the beginning is free and set at liberty without any cause of provocation 9 Faith must be to me the assurance of the Promises of God made in Christ if I fulfil the condition and love must accomplish the condition whereupon followeth the attainment of the Promise according to Gods Truth 10 A man being in deadly sin may have Grace to doe the works of Repentance whereby hee may attain to his Justification Never did the child saies G. Joy so lively resemble his own Father as these Articles do expresse the Bishop of Romes Anti-christian Doctrine And as for his choise Notion of Justification by Workes as they are our New Covenant Righteousnesse I finde it was a shift of the Papists long agoe The said Doctor Barnes having cited this passage out of Bernard I do abhor whatsoever thing is of me c. See saies he Bernard doth despise all his good works and taketh him onely to Grace Now had he no works of the New Law as you call them I shall not trace Mr. B. any farther there being now in the Presse as I am informed a large and full answer to his Paradoxicall Aphorismes by a faithful Servant of the Lord Jesus a workman that needs not to be ashamed though I heartily wish that the work may provoke others unto shame who have more strength leisure and far greater helps for such undertakings then Country Ministers I dare say that they who sate at the stern in our Vniversities heretofore such as Reynolds Whittaker Davenant Prideaux c. would never have indured to see so many Popish and Arminian books far more dangerous then the Ranters blasphemous Pamphlets shew their heads but would have sent forth their Antidotes to correct their poison I doe speake the more freely to stir up others of greater abilities then my selfe to undertake this cause least it should suffer overmuch through my weaknesse in managing it We were wont to say that if a man doth plead for the King all is to be taken in good part the design of this Discourse was to plead the cause of the greatest King that no flesh might glory in his presence who of God is made unto us Wisdome Righteousnesse Sanctification and Redemption though the Advocate hath not holpen the Cause yet the goodnesse of the Cause may excuse the Advocate I shall desire thee to read without prejudice and either to read all or none for that which is curtaild in one place is more explained in another If thou reapest any good from what I have written I know thy returns will be according to my hearts desire Praises unto God and more fervent prayers for Thy Servant in the Work of the Gospel W. EYRE The Third day of the Ninth Month. 1653. Justification without conditions OR The Free Justification of a Sinner justified CHAP. I. Shewing the occasion of this Discourse and the rise of the Controversie which is here debated SInce it hath pleased the Lord to reveal the riches of his Son unto me and to make me a Steward and Dispenser of this Grace unto his People the cheif design of my Ministry hath been to bottom my hearers upon Christ alone that they might have no confidence in the flesh but in that perfect and everlasting Righteousness which he hath wrought For which end it hath been my care frequently and clearly to demonstrate to them both the sole-sufficiency and efficiency of Christ in the work of Mans Redemption that he is able to save unto the utmost and that no work of ours either before or after our Conversion doth share with him in the glory of this atchievement In a word That there is no cause without God concurring with the precious and invaluable merit of his Blood to present us holy unblameable and unreprovable in the sight of God Which truth as it shines clearer then the Sun throughout the Scripture so it appears unto me to be of greatest moment when I consider the concernment thereof both to God and Christ and to the precious souls of Gods Elect I know nothing that gives so much glory unto God and Christ as to proclaim him the onely Saviour and that besides him there is none other that we ow the whole work of our Salvation from the beginning to the end unto Christ alone and surely there is no point in the whole Doctrine of Godliness which contributes so much to the Peace Security and Fruitfulness of the Saints as this doth It affords the greatest encouragement to sinners to believe to believers to hold fast their confidence firm unto the end and to serve God with a willing minde in Righteousness and true Holiness all the days of their life § 2 Now though this truth be so evident and my intentions in pressing it such as have been mentioned yet it hath hapned unto me as unto many of my betters to be mistaken and by some of my own Profession who insinuated into the people That I taught a new Gospel made Faith and Repentance to be needless things for no other reason that I know of but because I dare not give them that honor which is due to Christ in making them concauses with him in procuring our Peace with God and in obtaining our Right and Interest in all the Benefits which he hath purchased for they themselves are my witnesses would they speak their knowledge as to matter of Fact that in all my Exercises though usually something of Christ be the Doctrine which I handle yet the use that I make of it is to press men unto Faith and Holiness Nay I challenge all my Adversaries to say that ever I positively spake so much as one syllable to lessen the esteem of Inherent Holiness though I am not ashamed comparatively to say as the Apostle doth That I count all things but loss and dung that I may win Christ Jesus Phil. 3.8 But otherwise I thank the Lord if I should speak
Aphorisms who denies That Christs obedience is the material the imputation of his Righteousness the formal cause of our Justification or that Faith is the Instrument by which we do receive it he plainly ascribes the same kinde of causality unto Christ and Faith making them to differ onely secundum magis minus that Christ is the sine qua non principalis and Faith the sine qua non minus principalis he might have listed sin in the same rank which too is a sine qua non of our Justification That Faith and works in a larger sence are meritorious causes of Life and Blessedness Now we say with Mr. Cr. 1 That God is the efficient cause or the onely Justifier that he hath no motive or inducement but his own Grace and Love to will not to punish us and to give to us his Son thorow whom we have Redemption◠and Deliverance from the curse of the Law We say too 2 that Christ is the onely meritorious cause of our Justification taking Justification pro re volita for a transient effect of the Will of God that Jesus Christ hath by his death and satisfaction fully procured and merited our Discharge and Absolution from the penalty of the Law which we deserved by sin For which cause he is said to have purged our sins by himself i. e. Without the help and assistance of other means Heb. 1.3 There are many who ore tenùs in word do acknowledge That Christ is the meritorious cause of our Justification that in deed do deny it The Papists in the Councel of Trent say That God is the efficient the glory of God the final the death of Christ the meritorious cause of our Justification But yet we know that they allow not this effect unto it unless other things do concur on our parts they say That Faith Charity c. do Impetrare remissionem suo quidem modo mereri Obtain and after a sort merit forgiveness though not by their own worth and dignity yet by vertue of Gods Covenant and Promise Too many of our Protestants setting aside the word merit which yet Mr. B. thinks may be admitted do tread directly in their steps they ascribe as much unto works as Papists do It is a poor requital unto Jesus Christ to call him the Meritorious cause of our Justification and in the mean while to deny the merit of his death as to the immediate purchases thereof and to ascribe at least a partial meritoriousness to other things 3 I shall go further with Mr. Cr. I freely grant him which I believe Mr. W. will stick at That Faith is the Instrument by which we receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ unto our selves whereby the gratious sentence of God acquitting us from our sins is conveyed and terminated in our Consciences We say indeed That Faith doth not concur to our Justification as a proper Physical Instrument which is a less principal Efficient cause Mr. Rutherford saith well That Faith is not the Organical or Instrumental cause either of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation thereof on our behalf By believing we do not cause either our Saviour to satisfie for our sins or God to accept of his satisfaction Every true Believer is perswaded That God hath laid aside his wrath and displeasure towards him for his sins having received a sufficient ransom and satisfaction for them in the death of his Son Sed hoc fides non facit saith he sed objectum jam factum praesupponit Faith is a Receptive not an Effective Instrument an Instrument not to procure but to receive Justification and Salvation which is freely given us in Jesus Christ. It is called an Instrumental cause of our Justification taking Justification passively not actively or in reference to that passive Application whereby a man applies the Righteousness of Christ to himself but not to that active Application whereby God applyeth it to a man which is onely in the minde of God Therefore Calvin calls Faith Opus passivum a passive work § 4. Mr. Cr. proceeds This Doctrine saith he hath in all ages been opposed and obscured sometimes by open Enemies sometimes by professed Friends and such as would be accounted the great Pleaders for Free-grace It is most true That this Article of Free Justification hath and will be a Bone of Contention to the worlds end It is the cheif cause of all those contests and quarrels which have arisen between the Children of the Free-woman and the Children of the Bond-woman Mr. Fox hath well observed It is so strange to carnal Reason so dark to the World it hath so many enemies that except the Spirit of God from above do reveal it Learning cannot reach it Wisdom is offended Nature is astonished Devils do not know it Men do persecute it Satan labors for nothing more then that he may either quite bereave men of the knowledge of this truth or else corrupt the simplicity of it It is not unknown what batteries were raised against it in the very infancy of the Church how the Wits and Passions of men conspired to hinder it what monstrous consequences were charged upon the Doctrine and what odious practises were fathered upon them that did profess it never was any truth opposed with so much malice and bitterness as this hath been and by them especially that were most devout and zealous But when it could not be withstood and stifled Satan endeavored then to deprave and adulterate it by mixing of the Law with the Gospel our own Righteousness with Christs which corruption the Apostle hath strenuously opposed in all his Epistles and more especially in that to the Romans and Galatians where he excludes all and singular works of ours from sharing in the matter of our Justification For the eluding of whose Authority carnal Reason hath found out sundry shifts and distinctions As that the Apostle excludes onely works of Nature but not of Grace Legal but not Evangelical works and that our works though they are not Physical yet they may come in as Moral causes of our Justification It is certain That the most dangerous attempts against this Doctrine have been within the Church and by such as Mr. Cr. calls Professed Friends who have done so much the more mischief in regard they were least apt to be suspected Justification by works was generally exploded amongst us whilest it appeared under the names of Popery and Arminianism which since hath found an easie admittance being vented by some of better note such as would be accounted Pleaders for Free-grace § 5. Mr. Woodbridges Discourse saith Mr. Cr. deals not with the Errors of Papists Socinians Arminians but with Antinomian Error How unjustly our Doctrine is called Antinomian hath been shewn before and Mr. Cr. may be pleased to take notice That Mr. Rutherford accounts the Opinion we oppose the very cheif of the Arminians Socinians and Papists Errors about Justification to wit That
us totally passive in this work Rom. 3.24 26. 8.33 Eph. 2.8 We can no more justifie our selves then raise our selves from the dead Eph. 2.1 5. or then we could give our selves a being when as yet we were not Vers 10. Man is so far from being the total or principal Cause of his Justification that he is no cause at all by ascribing the least causality or efficiency to man in his Justification we derogate from the Grace of God in Jesus Christ. § 4. Others do take Faith in a proper sence as the Papists Socinians and Remonstrants amongst whom though there be some difference in Expression yet they all agree in this That by Faith in this Proposition A man is justified by Faith is meant the act or habit of Faith or such a Faith as is accompanied with faithful Actions The Papists say That Faith and other inherent Graces though in their own nature they do not deserve Justification yet through the merits of Christ and Gods gracious acceptance they do procure and obtain the forgiveness of our sins Though they ascribe a meritoriousness to Faith it is but in a qualified sence Faith saith Bellarmine doth but Suo quidem modo mereri remissionem after a manner merit remission scil By vertue of Gods Promise and Covenant who hath annexed forgiveness unto this condition If a King saith he doth promise a Beggar a thousand pound a year upon no condition then indeed the Beggar doth not deserve it but if it be upon condition that he do some small matter as to come and fetch it or to bring him a Posie of flowers then he doth deserve it because the promiser is bound unto performance And in this sence Mr. B. ascribes a meritoriousness to works But the chief difference between them and us lies in this We say a man is justified by the imputation of Christs Righteousness they That we are justified by inherent Righteousness or by doing of Righteous Actions such as are Faith Love Fear c. Ipsa fides in Christum saith Bellarmine est justitia Faith it self is our righteousness And that it doth justifie us impetrando promerendo inchoando â—ustificationem Arminius and the Remonstrants though they have exploded the word merit yet they attribute as much to Faith and faithful Actions as the Papists themselves Dico saith Arminius ipsum fidei actum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere imputari in justitiam idquè sensu proprio non metonymicè The very same is affirmed by Vorstius Bertius Episcopius and the rest of the Remonstrants Their Opinion in brief is this That God in the Legal Covenant required the exact obedience of all his Commandments but now in the Covenant of Grace he requires Faith which in his gracious acceptation stands instead of that obedience to the Moral Law which we ought to perform Which say they is procured by the merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect faith to be perfect Righteousness § 5. Some of our late Divines who seem to disclaim the Doctrine of the Papists and Arminians say the very same who explain themselves to this effect That Faith doth justifie as a condition or antecedent qualification by which we are made capable of being justified according to the order and constitution of God The fulfilling of which condition say they is our Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God Mr. B. is so fond of this notion That although in one place he findes fault with the length of our Creeds and Confessions yet he would have this made an article of our Creed a part of our Childrens Catechisms and to be believed by every man that is a Christian so apt are we to smile upon our own Babes Though I honor Mr. Baxter for his excellent parts yet I must suspend my assent to his new Creed I shall prove anon That Faith is not said to justifie as an antecedent condition which qualifies us for Justification but at present I shall onely render him the Reasons of my disbelief Why I cannot look upon Faith as that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified I shall not insist upon it though it be not altogether unconsiderable that this notion is guilty of too much confederacy with the aforenamed enemies of the Christian Faith for though it is no good Argument to say That Papists Socinians c. do hold this or that therefore it is not true yet it will follow That such and such Tenents have been held by Papists c. and unanimously opposed by our Protestant Writers therefore they ought to be the more suspected and especially such Tenents of theirs as are the cheif points in difference between us and them as this is Our Brethren that have started this notion do take Faith as the others do in a proper sence they attribute as much to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere as Bellarmine Arminius or any other Faith it self says Mr. B. is our Righteousness There was never any Papist so absurd as to say That our Faith Love c. are perfect Legal Righteousness but that God judicio misericordiae non justitiae doth account and accept of it instead of perfect Righteousness For my part I must confess that I can see no dâ—fference between them but in Expression The Papists do acknowledge the satisfaction of Christ and that he is the meritorious cause of our Justification They say indeed That we are not justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed but by a Righteousness inherent in us or righteous actions performed by us And what do our Brethren say less less then this But I shall not follow the Parallel any further § 6. The Reasons which turn the Scales of my Judgement against this notion That our Faith or Faithful Actions are that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified Are 1. If we are not justified by our own works then our believing c. is not that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified but we are not justified by our own works Ergo. The Assumption is written with a Sun beam throughout the Scripture Tit. 3.5 Not by works of Righteousness which we have done Rom. 11.6 If it be of Works then were Grace no more Grace It is the cheif scope of the Apostle throughout this and the Epistle to the Galatians to prove That we are not justified by works The sequel of the Proposition is as evident Because Faith and Obedience to Gospel Precepts are our works It is man that believes and obeys and not God though we do them by his help and assistance yet they are our acts or works so that consequently we are not justified by them in the sight of God The Papists to elude the force of this Argument say That the minde of the Apostle was onely to exclude from Justification works of Nature and not of Grace works which we our selves do by our own strength without the help
if it had been performed in their own persons Now if Faith and new Obedience be that Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified then doth the Gospel also propound for our Justification a Righteousness inherent in us and performed by us and so consequently there remains no material difference between the Law and Gospel especially seeing the same duties are prescribed in both If any shall say That the Gospel precepts do not require such exact and perfect Obedience as those in the Law their Assertion will want a Proof nay these and such like Scriptures do prove it to be utterly false 1 John 3.16 Matth. 5 44 45. 1 Pet. 1.15 16. A defect in degrees is a sin against the Gospel as well as against Legal precepts To these I might adde all those Arguments which our Divines have used against Justification by Inherent Righteousness but this may suffice to shew That Faith and Obedience to other Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God § 11. Now briefly my sence of this Proposition We are justified by Faith is no other then that which hath been given by all our Ancient Protestant Divines who take Faith herein Objectively not Properly and explain themselves to this effect We are justified from all sin and death by the satisfaction and obedience of Jesus Christ who is the sole Object or Foundation of our Faith or whose Righteousness we receive and apply unto our selves by Faith Yet I say it doth not follow That it was not applied to us by God or that God did not impute Righteousness to us before we had Faith We that believe are justified by the Righteousness of Christ it is no good Consequence Ergo We were not justified in the sight of God before we did believe but now that we may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Speak the truth in love I shall give the Reader a clearer account of my Judgement concerning this Matter in the following Chapter CHAP. VII Wherein the Question about the time of our Justification is distinctly stated and these two Propositions A man is justified before Faith and A man is justified by Faith reconciled THat we may avoid mistakes I shall briefly declare 1 What we do understand by Justification 2 What by being justified in the sight of God And 3 when we are justified in the sight of God As touching the first of these It would be but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a needless expence of time to enter upon a large discourse concerning the signification of the word and the difference between Justification and Sanctification We all know that Justification in general is the making of one just and righteous Now there are two ways whereby a person is made or constituted righteous viz. by Infusion or by Imputation 1. By Infusion when the Habitual Qualities of Righteousness are wrought in a person by any means whatsoever and these habits are put forth in a universal and perfect Conformity to the rule of Righteousness And thus no man was ever justified since the fall for as the Apostle speaks Rom. 3.10 There is none righteous no not one no man whether regenerate or unregenerate is righteous with Inherent Righteousness neither his Internal Habits nor External Actions are exactly commensurate to the rule of Righteousness the Church acknowledgeth that her righteousnesses i. e. Her best compleatest and exactest Righteousness were as filthy rags Isa. 64.6 And the Apostle accounted his own Righteousness but loss and dung in reference to his Justification Phil. 3.8 9. 2. By Imputation or gracious Acceptation as when God doth not account or charge a mans sins upon him but accepts him as just and righteous deals with him as a righteous person or as if he had never sinned This latter is that Justification which we are now treating of God justifies a man when he accounts and esteems him righteous § 2. The next thing propounded was What is meant by the sight of God This phrase is variously used 1 Sometimes it relates unto the thoughts or knowledge of God as Heb. 4.13 All things are naked and manifest in his sight i. e. God hath a clear and distinct knowledge of all things whatsoever And thus a man is justified in the sight of God when God knows and esteems him to be just and righteous 2 The sight of God relates more peculiarly to his Legal justice for although in articulo providentiae in the Doctrine of Divine Providence Seeing and Knowing are all one as Job 28.24 He looketh to the ends of the Earth and seeth under the whole Heaven i. e. He knows and takes notice of all things both in Heaven and Earth yet in articulo justificationis in the Doctrine of Justification they are constantly distinguished throughout the Scripture and never promiscuously used the one for the other God is never said to cover blot out or wash away the sins of his people out of his knowledge but out of his sight Levit. 16.30 Psal. 32.2 and Rom. 4.2 7. Psal. 51.9 God sees their sins for whom his Law is not satisfied Nehem. 4.5 In regard that his truth and justice doth oblige him to take notice of and punish them for their sins Again He sees not their sins for whom he hath received a full compensation because it is contrary to justice to enter into judgement against a person who either by himself or surety hath made satisfaction for his offence And in this respect God is said not to see the sins of his people which yet he knows to be in them which doth not detract from his omnisciency but exceedingly magnifies his Justice and that perfect atonement which Christ hath made in their behalf so that all that are cloathed with the Innocency Righteousness and Satisfaction of Christ they are justified in the sight of God i. e. Divine Justice cannot charge them with any of their sins nor inflict upon them the least of those punishments which their sins deserve but contrariwise he beholds them as persons perfectly righteous and accordingly deals with them as such who have no sin at all in his sight 3 A late Divine of singular worth hath another Construction of this phrase In the sight of God who observes that the word sight though it be for the form active yet for the substance of it it is rather passive and therefore it is not attributable to God as it is to us but in God it signifies his making of us to see and we are said to be justified in his sight when he makes it as it were evident to our sight that we are justified But with due respect to that learned man whom I highly honor for his worthy Labors I conceive this phrase must have some other meaning in this debate for else that distinction of Justification in foro Des in foro conscientiae which hath been made use of by all our Protestant Divines and whereof there is great need in this present
to his people when he purposed in himself not to deal with them according to their sins when the Father and the Son agreed upon that sure and everlasting Covenant That his Elect should not bear the punishment which their sins would deserve The Remonstrants do acknowledge That non-imputation or remission of sin is an immanent act in God Quam Deus in sua ipsius mente efficit We are commanded to forgive one another as God hath forgiven us now we know that our forgiveness is principally an act of the heart As when a man purposeth in himself not to take revenge he doth then forgive But of this we shall have occasion to speak more largely in our Answer to Mr. Woodbridges first Argument 2. That which doth secure men from wrath and whereby they are discharged and acquitted from their sins is Justification but by this immanent act of God all the Elect are discharged and acquitted from their sins and secured from wrath and destruction Ergo. The Assumption onely will need to be proved which is abundantly confirmed 1 by those places which make mention of Gods unspeakable Grace and Love towards them from everlasting For what is the Love of God but his velle dare bonum his fixed and immutable Will to bestow upon them the greatest good that they are capable of Now when God set his love upon them he said unto them Live Ezek. 16.6 This Will of God did secure them from death and destruction it was a real discharge from condemnation But 2 more plainly from the words of the Apostle Rom. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect. The Proposition is either a Universal Negative No Elect person can be justly charged with sin or a Universal Affirmative All Elect persons are free from the charge of sin Which way soever we take it is evident That the Proposition is Universal Now if this priviledge did belong onely to Elect Believers as some would limit the Text the Proposition were false for though all true Believers are Elect persons yet all the Elect are not Believers It is as if one should say Omne animal is rationale and to excuse it say That by Omne animal he meant omnis homo and to prove the Expression Legitimate should alledge that homo is often called animal which is true but very impertinent to prove that omne animal may be put for omnis homo § 5. All that I have yet seen alledged against this Member of the distinction That Gods will not to punish is not Justification is of little moment It is objected 1. That hereby Justification and Election are objection 1 confounded I answer That it follows not they may be both of them immanent eternal Acts and yet not confounded For Election and Reprobation are eternal immanent Acts yet they are not confounded Indeed all different immanent acts are but one simple act in God in whose Decrees there is no Priority or Posteriority seeing as Hilary speaks Omnia penès Deum aequabili aeternitatis infinitate consistunt Yet in our consideration they receive sufficient distinction from their various Objects and our various Applicatâ—on of them And thus Election and Justification are distinguished Election includes both the end which is the glory of Gods Grace and all the means from the beginning to the ending conducing thereunto His will not to punish includes precisely and formally onely some part of the means 2. It is objected That Justification imports â— change of the objection 2 persons state to wit Ab injusto ad justum which cannot be attributed to the simple and unchangeable Decrees of God I answer That if Justification be taken for the thing willed viz. The delivery of a sinner from the curse of the Law then there is a great change made thereby he that was a childe of wrath by Nature hath peace and reconciliation with God But if we take it for the Will of God not to punish then we say Justification doth not suppose any such change as if God had first a will to punish his Elect but afterwards he altered his will to a will not to punish them The change therefore of a persons state ab injusto ad justum ariseth from the Law and the consideration of man in reference thereunto by whose sentence the Transgressor is unjust but being considered at the tribunal of Grace and cloathed with the Righteousness of Christ he is just and righteous which is not properly a different state before God but a different consideration of one and the same person God may be said at the same time to look upon a person both as sinful and as righteous as sinful in reference to his state by nature and as righteous in reference to his state by Grace Now this change being but imputed not inherent it supposeth not the being of the Creature much less any inherent difference in the state of the Creature no more then electing love makes any inherent present change Though the state of the loved and hated are different in the minde of God yet not in the persons themselves till the different effects of love and hatred are put forth objection 3 3. Others have objected That hereby we make void the death of Christ for if Justification be an immanent act in God it is Antecedent not onely to Faith but to the merits of Christ which is contrary to many Scriptures that do ascribe our Justification unto his blood as the meritorious cause To which I answer That although Gods will not to punish be Antecedent to the death of Christ yet for all we may be said to be justified in him because the whole effect of that will is by and for the sake of Christ. As though electing Love precede the consideration of Christ John 3.16 yet are we said to be chosen in him Eph. 1.4 because all the effects of that love are given by and through and for him Gods non-punishing of us is the fruit of his death yet his will not to punish is Antecedent thereunto objection 4 4. Others say we may as well call his will to create Creation and his will to call Calling and to glorifie Glorification as his will to justifie Justification We Answer That there is not the same Reason for creating calling and glorifying all which do import an Inherent change in the person created called glorified which forgiveness doth not it being perfect and compleat in the minde of God § 6. These things being weighed in the ballances of an equal Judgment I suppose the phrase would not sound so harsh as it doth to many however were the thing it self granted That there was in God from Everlasting an absolute fixed and immutable will never to deal with his people according to their sins but to deal with them as righteous persons this Controversie were ended For 1 Gods non-imputation of sin to his Elect is not purely Negative as the non-imputation of sin unto
of the Act or of the Object of Faith We have shewed before that the Apostle in his disputes about Justification in these fore-mentioned Epistles where he opposeth Faith to Works he takes Faith in a Tropical sense for the Object and not the Act of Faith for else there had been no ground for him to make any opposition at all between Faith and Works and in affirming That we are justified by Faith he had contradicted himself in saying That we are not justified by Works seeing Faith or the Act of Believing is a work of ours no less then love And therefore it is evident that the Apostle when he concludes That we are justified by Faith and not by Works understands by Faith the Object thereof to wit Righteousness imputed and not inherent which by way of distinction and opposition to the other he calls the Righteousness of God because it is out of us in Christ God-man The reason why the Apostle calls the Object by the name of the Act Christs Righteousness by the name of Faith besides the elegancy of the Trope is because Faith ascribes all unto Christ it being an act of self-dereliction a kinde of holy despair a denying and renouncing of all fitness and worthiness in our selves a going unto Christ looking towards him and a roulling of our selves upon his Alsufficiency So that in the Apostles sense we deny not That Faith justifieth in the sight of God Faith I say taken objectively to wit For Christ and his Righteousness it is for his Merits and Satisfaction alone that we are accounted Just and Righteous at Gods Tribunal But if Faith be taken properly for the Act of Believing we say indeed That it onely evidenceth that Justification which we have in Christ. Nor is this any contradiction to the Holy Ghost who ascribes our Justification in the sight of God to Chrâ—st alone § 2. Next he calls it A most unsound Assertion That Faith doth evidence our Justification before Faith Is the Apostles definition of Faith Heb. 11.1 Faith is the evidence of things not seen An unsound Assertion Though some do ascribe more to Faith then an Act of evidencing yet I never met with any one before that did totally deny this use thereof All the knowledge that we have of our Justification is onely by Faith seeing it cannot be discerned by Sence or Reason either we have no evidence of our Justification and consequently do live without hope or if we have it is Faith that doth evidence it to our souls Now let our Justification be when it will if Faith doth evidence it it will follow That our Justification was before that Evidencing act of Faith for actuâ— pendet ab objecto the Object is before the Act. But I will not anticipate Mr. Woodbridges Reasons § 3. If sayes he Faith doth evidence our Justification it is either improperly as an effect doth argue the cause as laughing and crying may he said to evidence reason in a Childe c. Or else properly and thus either immediately and axiomatically or remotely and syllogistically 1 Faith doth not evidence Justification improperly as the Effect doth argue the Cause I shall readily grant him that Faith doth not justifie evidentially as a mark sign or token but as a knowledge and adherence unto Christ our Justifier as that Organ or Instrument whereby we look not upon our Faith but upon Christ our Righteousness and by the same Faith do cleave unto him They that make Faith a condition of our Justification use it but as a sign or as an argument affected to prove That a person is justified seeing that where one is the other is also where there is Faith there is Justification and for this cause innumerable other signs and marks are brought in to evidence this sign which are more obscure and difficult to be known then Faith it self nay which cannot be known to be effects of Blessedness but by Faith whereby poor souls either walk in darkness live in a doubting and uncertain condition all their days or else compass themselves about with sparks of their own kindling and walk in the light of their own fire fetching their comfort from Faith and not by Faith from Christ. Though I might fairly pass by this Branch of his Dilemma it being none of my Tenent and favored more by his own then my opinion yet I shall briefly give my fence of his Reasons That Faith doth not evidence Justification as a sign § 4. His first Reason is because then Justification by Faith would not necessarily be so much as Justification in our Consciences A Christian may have Faith and yet not have the evidence that he himself is justified Many Christians have that in them which would prove them justified whiles yet their Consciences do accuse and condemn them To which I Answer 1. That Mr. W. may be pleased to consider how well this agrees with that passage of his Pag. 15. Where he alledgeth the words of the Apostle 1 John 3.20 to prove That if our hearts do condemn us God doth much more condemn us 2. I should grant him That if Faith did evidence our Justification onely as a sign or some remote effect thereof like other works of Sanctification it would be but a dark and unsatisfying evidence 3. Whereas he sayes That doubting Christians have something in them that would prove them justified either it is something that precedes Faith or something that follows Faith or else Faith it self First Nothing that precedes Faith doth prove a man justified secondly Nothing that follows Faith is so apt to prove it as Faith it self because it is the first of all Inherent Graces it is by Faith that we know our Love Patience c. to be Fruits unto God whereas some make doubting to be a sign of Faith they may as well make darkness a sign of light it being in its own nature contrary thereunto and therefore it must be proved by Faith it self 4. Though a true Christian may have a doubting accusing Conscience as doubtless there is flesh and corruption in their Consciences as well as in their other faculties and there is no sin whereunto we have more and stronger temptations then to unbelief yet wheresoever there is Faith there is some evidence of this Grace as in the least spark of fire there is light though not so much as in a flame And the least twinkling Star gives us some light though not enough to dispel the darkness or to make it day There are several degrees of Faith there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong Faith and a weak Faith Now the least degree of Faith carries some light and evidence therewith and according to the measure of Faith is the evidence and perswasion of our Justification § 5. Secondly He urgeth If Faith did evidence Justification as an effect of it then we might as truly be said to be faithed by our Justification as to
therefore his suggestion in the Minor Proposition That we interpret the phrase of Justification by Faith meerly of Justification in Conscience is false and groundless But let us weigh the force of his Argument a little more distinctly the sum of it then is this Justification by Faith is not Justification in our Consciences for then we should be concurrent Causes with God in the formal act of our Justification The formal act of pronouncing us just must be attributed unto us which the Scripture attributes unto God alone making us but passive therein Rom. 8.33 4.6 8. To which I answer That the pronouncing of us just is not the formal act of Justification but the imputing of Righteousness and the non-imputing of sin which is the act of God alone whereas the pronouncing of us just and righteous is in Scripture attributed to others besides God and yet no robbery is done to God As for instance the Minister of Christ pronounceth the Word of Grace and Forgiveness and therefore is said to remit and forgive sin Whose sins ye remit they are remitted Joh. 20.23 Is he therefore joyned with God in the formal act of Justification Yet all Protestants grant him the office of pronouncing Remission though they deny him the power of giving Real Remission which would make him arrogate that which is peculiar unto God So though we say That Faith doth declare and reveal to our Consciences the sentence of Absolution yet we do not thereby derogate from God or attribute that to Faith which belongs to God We grant that as to our Justification in the sight of God which is properly Justification we are meerly Passive we contribute nothing at all either Physically or Morally by way of Merit or Motive That God should account us righteous and not impute to us our sins This work was done without us and for us by Christ with his Father it hath no other cause but the Grace of God and the Merit of Christ. He and he alone purged and washed us from our sins in his own blood Revel 1.5 Heb 1.3 Now in regard of our Passiveness in this act of our Justification we say That Faith hath no hand at all in procuring obtaining and instating us in this Grace for if we did any thing though never so little in order to this end we were not Passive but Active Yet we say That as this gracious sentence of our Justification is revealed and terminated in our own Consciences so Faith hath an Instrumental efficacy we are therein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agents with God 2 Cor. 6.1 And the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beareth witness with our spirits Rom. 8.16 And therefore though we are no where exhorted to justifie or to make our selves righteous in the sight of God yet we are oftentimes bid to grow in Faith and to press forward to more assurance in believing our peace and reconciliation with God 2 Pet. 1.5 3.18 Rom. 5.1 § 14. This Concession of Mr. W. That a man is wholly Passive in his Justification gave occasion to the first Argument I offered to his consideration it being as I conceive a flat contradiction to the cheif scope and intendment of his Sermon which was to derive to Faith at least a Federal or Moral causality in our Justification I am sorry I should have so much cause to complain of his injurious dealing not onely in that unworthy language he is pleased to give me but in casting my Argument into another form then that wherein I proposed it In his report it runs thus If we were altogether Passive in being justified then we are justified before we believe In which form I confess it is obnoxious to more exceptions then one for besides the Grammatical part which is very harsh the Logical consequence may be justly blamed Though the consequent be true yet it is not a true consequence it is not rightly inferred from the Antecedent Though we are Passive in our Justification yet it doth not follow from thence That we were justified before we believed A man is Passive in the first act of his Conversion yet it were absurd to conclude therefore a man was converted before he had a Being or ever heard of the Gospel But the Argument as I proposed it was as followeth If we are wholly passive in our Justification then our Faith doth not concur to the obtaining of it or we are not justified by the act of Faith in the sight of God But according to you we are wholly Passive in our Justification Ergo Faith doth not concur unto our Justification or we are not justified by the act of Faith His Answer hereunto I could not very well heed by reason of my distance from him and the rudeness of some people who do go for Professors that stood about me but as I conceived it was to this effect That Faith doth necessarily concur to the Application of this Priviledge whereunto I replied But the Application of this Benefit is not Justification the one being Gods act the other ours His Answer in Print we are sure is authentick let us see therefore how well he hath now quitted himself from the guilt of this contradiction 1. He calls the Argument A childish Exception a peece of witchery and wonders it should proceed out of my mouth I must confess I cannot but wonder to hear such language from a civil man much more from a Minister and more especially from one who hath sometimes owed me more respect let the prudent judge whether there be any ground for this hideous clamor 2. He shapes some kinde of answer to the Sequel That though Faith be a formal vital act of the soul in genere Physico yet the use of it in Justification is but to qualifie us passively that we may be morally capable of being justified by God And again Faith is required on our part which though Physically it be an act yet Morally it is but a Passive condition by which we are made capable of being justified according to the Order and Constitution of God Now here 1. I shall desire the Reader to observe how much Mr. W. is beholding to a Popish Tenent opposed by all our Protestant Writers to support his cause which is That Faith goes before Justification to dispose us for it c. Bellarmine undertakes to prove that Faith doth not justifie alone because there are other things to wit fear hope love penitency a desire of the Sacraments and a purpose of amendment of life all which sayes the Jesuite doe prepare and dispose a man for Justification as well as Faith Against whom all our Protestant Divines which my little Library hath obtained do unanimously affirme That Faith doth not dispose or prepare us for Justâ—fication Now were they all bewitched as well as we who would not subscribe to this Popish Dictate 2. I shall leave it to the Reader to judge whether my Argument or his Answer doth deserve
this censure when he hath weighed the reasons I shall give That Faith cannot be said to Justifie by way of disposition or as a passive condition morally disposing us for Justification CHAP. IX That Faith doth not justifie as a condition required on our part to qualifie us for Justification IN regard that the main Point in difference between me and Mr. W. lyes at the bottom of this Answer I shall make it appear we are not said to be Justified by Faith in a Scripture sence because Faith is required of us as a passive condition to qualifie us for justification in the sight of God § 1. That Interpretation of the phrase which gives no more to Faith in the businesse of our Justification then to other works of sanctification cannot be true The reason is because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith and in a way of opposition to other works of sanctification Rom. 3.28 Gal. 2.16.3.11 But to interpret justification by faith meerly thus That Faith is a condition to quâ—lifie us for Justification gives no more to Faith then to other works of sanctification as to repentance charity and all other duties of new obedience which Mr. W. and others of the same affirmation make to be necessary antecedent conditions of Justification Mr. B. includes all works of obedience to evangelical precepts in the definition of Faith in which senâ—e I presume no Papist will deny that we are justified by Faiâ—h alone taking it as he doth for fides formata or faith animated with charity and other good works And therefore Bellarm. disputing against Justification by Faith alone sayes that if wee could be perswaded that Faith doth justifie impetrando promerendo suo modo inchoando Justificationem which is granted him if Faith be an antecedent federal condition disposing us for it then we would never deny that love fear hope c. did justifie as well as Faith Dr. Hammond sayes expressely That neither Paul nor James doe exclude or separate faithfull actions or the acts of faith from Faith or the condition of Justification but absolutely require them as the onely things by which we are justified Which in another place he goes about to prove by this argument That without which we are not justified and by which joyned with Faith we are justified is not by the Apostle excluded or separated from Faith or the condition of our Justification but required together with Faith as the only things by which as by a condition a man is justified But without acts of Faith or faithfull actions we are not justified and by them wee are justified and not by Faith onely Therefore faithfull actions or acts of Faith are not by the Apostle excluded or separated from Faith or the condition of our Justification but required together with Faith as the onely things by which as by a condition a man is justified It is evident that he and other abetters to this notion attribute no more to Faith in our Justification then to other works of sanctification Now this was witnessed against as an unsound opinion a pernicious error and utterly repugnant to the sacred Scriptures c. by Mr. Cranford amongst the London Subscribers Decemb. 14. 1647 and by Mr. W. himselfe if I mistake not amongst the Subscribers in other Counties It seems by Mr. W. they were bewitched when they gave their hands unto that Testimony § 2. That Interpretation of this phrase which gives no more to Faith then to workes of Nature I meane such as may be found in naturall and unregenerate men is not true The Reason is because a man may have such works and yet not be justified But to interpret Justification by Faith that Faith is a necessary antecedent condition of our Justification gives no more to Faith then to workes of Nature as to sight of sin legall sorrow c. which have been found in naturall and unregenerate men as in Cain Saul Judas c. I presume Mr. W. will say that these are necessary antecedent conditions in every one that is justified for if these be conditions disposing us to Faith and Faith a condition disposing us to Justification then are they also conditions disposing us to Justification for causae causae est causa causati if these legall works are conditions of Faith they must be according to Mr. Woodbridges Tenet conditions of Justification and consequently they are in eodem genere causae with Faith it selfe quod erat demonstrandum § 3. 3 That by which we are justified is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification but Faith considered as a meer passive condition is not in the sence of our adversaries a proper efficient meritorious cause of Justification therefore wee are not said to bee justified by Faith as a passive condition or qualification required to make us capable of Justification The assumption is granted by our opponents at least verbo tenus who doe therefore call it a meer sine qua non which Logicians make to be causa ociosa nihil efficiens and a passive condition to exclude it from all manner of causality in producing the effect though for my own part I look upon conditions in contracts and covenants as proper efficient meritorious causes of the things covenanted which do produce their effects though not by their innate worth yet by vertue of the compact and agreement made between the parties covenanting But of this we shal have occasion to speak more by and by It remains only that I should clear the major that That by which we are justified is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification which appears 1. By the use of these Propositions by and through in ordinary speech which note that the thing to which they are attributed is either a meritorious or instrumentall cause of the effect that follows as when we say a Souldier was raised by his valor it imports that his valor was the meritorious cause of his preferment and when we say a Tradesman lives by his Trade our meaning is that his Trade is the means or instrument by which he gets his living So here in the case before us when it is said a man is justified by Faith it implyes that Faith is either the meritorious or instrumentall cause of his Justification as if it be taken objectively for Christ and his merits it is the meritorious cause of our Justification in foro dei or if it be taken properly for the act of believing it is the instrumental cause of our Justification in foro conscientiae 2. From the contrary phrase as when the Apostle denies that a man is justified by Works and by the Law without doubt his intent was to exclude Works from any causal influx into our Justification Now that which he denies to Works he ascribes to Faith and therefore Justification by Faith implies that Faith in his sense hath a true causality or proper efficiency in our
when Noah offered up his burnt-offerings to God The Lord smelled a sweet savor c. Gen. 8.21 So when Christ offered up himself a sacrifice of atonement the Lord smelled a savor of rest and was fully satisfied for the sins of his people 3 There is no reason can be given why those words should be terminated to the person of Christ seeing that God was never displeased with him nor had our Saviour any doubt or suspition of it and therefore it was altogether needless that God should declare his well-pleasedness to him in his own person 4 The well-pleasedness of God is to be extended unto them for whom Christ offered up his sacrifice but Christ did not offer up his sacrifice for himself but onely for sinners Ergo. § 3. Well haec non successit alia aggrediamur via his next Exception therefore is That if we should extend it unto men the exception 2 words prove no more then that it is through Christ that God is well pleased with men whensoever it be that he is well pleased So that in his sense I am well pleased is as much as I will be well pleased with them when they have performed the terms and conditions required on their part A gloss which I dare say was never dreamed of by any Expositor before himself Here 1 let the Reader observe how bold he makes with the Holy Ghost for when God tells us he is well pleased to say no he is not now but he will hereafter is not to interpret but contradict the Scripture 2 His gloss contradicts it self for if our reconciliation with God doth depend upon terms and conditions performed by us then it is not through Christ alone that God is well pleased with men whensoever it is and Christ is at most but a partial cause of our reconciliation § 4. But to render his Paraphrase more probable he hath cited divers other places where as he pretends Verbs and Participles of the Present tense have the signification of the future Though says he the Verb in this place be not the Present tense but the first Aorist though it be the Aorist what is that to the purpose seeing as every School-boy knows the Aorists have the signification of the Preterperfect tense and not of the Future and if that enunciation will hold in the Preterperfect tense as Beza grants then is it much more true in the Present tense But to his Allegations I answer 1 That in most of his instances there is no necessity to feign a change of Tenses as John 4.25 Messiah cometh i. e. The promise of the Messiah draws nigh to be fulfilled So Chap. 5.25 The hour is coming and now is c. The dead did then hear the voice of the Son of man both in his own and in his Disciples Ministery So 2 Cor. 3.16 the Verbs are most properly rendred in the Present tense When Israel shall or doth turn unto the Lord the vail is taken away for as Cameron notes their Conversion to God doth not precede the taking away of the vail but both are at the same time Rom. 8.24 By hope we are saved The enunciation is true and emphatical in the Present tense for in many other places the Saints are said to be saved and to have eternal life whilest they are in the body John 3.36 5.24 6.54 56. Col. 2.10 Eph. 2.5 8. Tit. 3.5 1 John 5.11 12. They have here the beginnings or first-fruits of that Salvation the complement and perfection whereof they as yet do wait for they have now the joy and comfort of their Salvation thorough Faith and Hope because Hope looks upon the promises of God not as doubtful but as sure and certain Heb. 11.1 2. They are now sayed by Hope or they shall never be saved by Hope for Hope that is seen is not Hope in the world to come they are saved by sight and not by Faith or Hope So that Text 1 Cor. 15.57 is most properly rendered Thanks be unto God that giveth or hath given us the victory through Jesus Christ. For the Saints have already obtained victory over death and the grave in Christ their Head Rom. 8.37 In all things we are more then conquerors And John 16.33 Be of good cheer I have overcome the world So Heb. 10.35 Your confidence hath a great recompence of reward to wit In the present effects which it did produce as inward peace joy c. according to that of the Psalmist Psal. 19.11 In keeping thy statutes there is great reward But 2 if I should grant what he desires that in all these places there were an Heterosis of Tenses for I acknowledge this trope is frequent in Scripture yet this great flourish will amount to nothing unless he had shewn by the circumstances of the Text or the nature of the thing that it must be so expounded here for if men had liberty to feign Enalloges of Numbers Cases and Tenses at their pleasure it were easie to elude the meaning of the plainest Texts § 5. 3 Those words Heb. 11.6 Without Faith it is impossible to please God do not conclude what he would have them to wit That God is not wel-pleased with his Elect in Christ before they do believe for the Apostle speaks there of mens works and actions and not of their persons No man can please God without Faith no not Believers themselves their Religious Services are not pleasing to God unless they are done in Faith for bonum est ex causa integra Now Faith is a principal ingredient in the Saints obedience for if it be not done in Faith it is not done in love Gal. 5 6. And consequently it is not fruit unto God Rom 7.4 Gods wel-pleasedness with his Elect is the immediate effect of the death of Christ for that which raised a partition wall between God and them was the breach of the Law now when the Law was satisfied for their sins this partition was broken down his favor had as free a current as if they had not sinned And therefore the blotting out of our sin and our reconciliation with God is ascribed solely and immediately to the death of Christ as in many other Scriptures so particularly Ephes. 1.6 7. 2.13 14. Col. 1.20 21. 2.13 14. 2 Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself he did not onely act towards it as Mr. W. glossed those words in his Sermon but saith the Text he did not impute their sins unto them for whom Christ died The actual blotting out of sin sayes Mr. Perkins doth inseparably depend upon satisfaction for sins and satisfaction with God doth necessarily imply the very real and general abolishment of the guilt and punishment of sin That which makes our persons acceptable to God is the Righteousnes of Jesus Christ but now our actions are not pleasing unless they are conformable to the rule and all necessary circumstances do concur the cheif whereof is
The ground whereon he builds these Assertions is a very sandy foundation to wit That the death of Christ was not solutio ejusdem but tantidem not the payment of that which was in the obligation but of something equivalent and therefore it doth not deliver us ipso facto but according to the compact and agreement between the Father and him I answer 1 Whether the death of Christ be solutio ejusdem or tantidem as it is a satisfaction or payment of a debt so the discharge thereby procured must needs be present and immediate for that a debt should be paid and satisfied and yet justly chargeable implies a contradiction But 2 Mr. W. might have thought we would expect a better proof then his bare word That the death of Christ is not solutio ejusdem seeing the Holy Ghost shews First That Christ was held in the same obligation which we were under He was made under the Law not an other but the very same that we were held in Gal. 4.3 4. Ergo he paid the same debt that we did ow. Secondly That the Curse or punishment which we deserved was inflicted upon him Gal. 3.13 The whole wages or curse that is due to sin is Death and this Christ under-went for us Heb. 2.9 14. Isai. 53.4 5. What is it to die or to bear chastisement for another but to undergo that death which the other should have undergone If it be objected That the death which we deserved is Eternal such as the damned endure our Divines have answered long ago That Christs death was such in pondere though not in specie in potentia though not in actu The dignity of his person raised the price of his temporary sufferings to an equipollency with the other Mr. Owen says well That there is a sameness in Christs sufferings with that in the obligation in respect of Essence and equivalency in respect of the Adjuncts or Attendencies Thirdly The laying of our sins upon Christ Isai. 53.6 subjected him to the same punishment which our sins deserved Fourthly If God would have dispenced with the idem in the first obligation Christ need not have died for if the justice of God would have been satisfied with less then that penalty threatned in the Law he might as well have dispenced with the whole So then his inference That the death of Christ doth not deliver us ipso facto being destitute of this support will fall to the ground of its own accord § 14. M. W. grants That if the debtor himself do bring unto the creditor that which he ows him it presently dischargeth him but the payment of a Surety doth not And why not Amongst men there is no difference so the debt be paid it matters not whether it be by the Principal or his Surety the obligation is voide in respect of both The case is the very same between Christ and us Secondly This Exception makes the payment of Christ less efficacious for the discharge of our debt then if it had been made by us whereas it is infinitely more acceptable to God then the most perfect righteousness performed by us But sayes he the payment of a Surety is refusable Not after that he is admitted by the creditor and taken into Bond with or for the principal debtor It is true God might have refused to be satisfied for our debt by a Surety but seeing he ordained his Son to be our Surety and entered into Covenant with him from everlasting to accept his payment on our behalf the debt which he hath fully satisfied cannot be charged again either upon the Party or Surety without manifest injustice But the Father and the Son have agreed between themselves that none should have actual reconciliation by the death of Christ till they do believe Shew us this agreement and we will yeeld the cause As for the Scriptures which he hath mentioned they speak of no such thing John 6.40 This is the will of him that sent me That every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life This Text and others like it do onely shew who have the fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ to wit they that believe The other Text Gal. 5.2 4. is palpably abused to serve his turn The Apostle doth not say Without Faith Christ shall profit us nothing but if we joyn any thing with Christ as necessary to attain Salvation we are not Believers or true Christians our profession of Christ shall profit us nothing and the reason hereof is because these two principles cannot be mixed A mans righteousness before God is either all by Works or all by Christ and therefore whosoever attributes any part thereof to Works he wholly renounceth Christ. At the sixth Verse he attributes that to Faith which he denies unto other Works In Christ Jesus saith he neither circumcision nor uncircumcision availeth any thing but Faith which worketh by love But as the Godly learned have well observed the intent of the Apostle here was not to shew what it is that doth justifie but what are the Exercises of Divine Worship in which Christians should be conversant He doth not say That Faith working by love is available to us before God or in the sight of God but in Christ i. e. In the Church or Kingdom of Christ which consists in Righteousness Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost though neither Faith nor Love are available to justifie us yet they are available i. e. Acceptable to God as acts or duties of Spiritual Obedience they are the onely acceptable service which we can perform to God The last place he hath mentioned is as little to the purpose as the rest 1 Joh. 5.11 He that hath not the Son hath not life True he doth not say That all who have not Faith except final unbelievers have not the Son or any benefit by him § 15. But says Mr. W. if our Adversaries could prove That it was either the Will of God in giving his Son or the Will of Christ in giving himself to the death that his death should be available to the immediate and actual reconciliation of sinners without any condition performed on their part it were something to the purpose but till this be done which indeed can never be done they were as good say nothing Had not prejudice cast a mist before his eyes the Scriptures which have been brought already would be proof sufficient What clearer Testimony can be desired of the Will of God and of Christ in this point then those Sacred Oracles which shew us First That Christ by the Will of God gave himself a Ransom and Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savor unto God in behalf of all the Elect Joh. 6.27 Heb. 5.10 10.9 10. Secondly That this Ransom was alone and by it self a full adequate and perfect satisfaction to Divine Justice for all their sins Heb. 1.3 10.10 12 14. 1 Joh. 1.7 Thirdly That God accepted
notwithstanding all that he hath done for us we had been eternally miserable unlesse we had also contributed our owne endeavours How derogatory this is to Christ and contrary to the Scriptures is sufficienâ—ly manâ—fest Ninthly If it were the Will of God that his people should have strong consolations and that their joy should be full then it was his Will that their peace and reconciliation should not depend upon termes and conditions performed by themselves For as was noted before out of Calvin it is impossible that any soule should injoy a firme and settled peace whose confidence towards God is grounded upon conditionall promises and sayes the Apostle our Salvation is by grace to the end that the promise might be sure unto all the seed implying that if it depended never so little upon our works wee could not bee sure thereof and consequently wee must walke in darknesse and see no light § 7. Tenthly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the reconciliation of his Elect whilst they live in this world then it was his Will that it should procure for them immediate and actuall reconciliation without the intervention of those conditions supposed to be required of them and the reason of this consequence is because they cannot performe all the conditions required of them till their last breath this being one that they must persevere to the end and the nature of conditionall grants is such that the benefit cannot be had and injoyed till all the conditions are performed So that if the reconciliation of the Elect did depend upon the conditions pretended they should not only not have reconciliation before Faith but not before death which is contrary to innumerable Scriptures which doe declare that the Saints are perfectly justified and so immutably reconciled unto God that nothing shall be able to separate them from his love though their Sanctification be imperfect yet their Justification is as full and perfect as ever it shall be it doth not grow and increase as the other doth but is perfect at first And therefore baptisme which seals unto us the forgivenesse and washing away of all our sins not originall only but actuall also is administred but once in all our life time to shew that our Justification is done all at once at the very first instant wherein the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to us Ezek. 16.8 9. Act. 13.39 1 Joh. 1.7 Col. 2.13 14. § 8. Eleventhly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should certainly and infallibly procure the reconciliation of his Elect then surely it was not the Will of God that it should depend upon terms and conditions on their part because that which depends upon future conditions is as to the event altogether uncertain it is possible it may never be by the non-performance of the condition But this hath been alleadged before Twelfthly If God willed this blessing to his Elect by the death of Christ but conditionally then he willed their Reconciliation and Justification no more then their non-Reconciliation and Condemnation and stood as it were indifferent to either event but doubtlesse his heart was more set upon it then so see John 6.38 39. John 17.21 22 24. The consequence is cleare for if he willed their Justification onely in case they should beleeve and repent then he willed their Damnation in case they doe not beleeve and repent and then it will follow that he willed their Justification no more then their Damnation nay most probably he willed it lesse because we are more prone to Infidelity then we are to Faith and to hardnesse of heart then we are to repentance I adde to this § 9. Thirteenthly If God willed unto men the benefits of Christs death upon any condition to be performed by them it will follow that God foresaw in them an ability to performe some good which Christ hath not merited Conditionall reconciliation necessarily supposeth Free-will For either God willed it unto men upon a possible or impossible condition not upon an impossible condition for that is inconsistent with the Wisdome of God if upon a possible condition the possibility thereof ariseth either from Gods Will or from Mans it is possible either because God will bestow it or because man can performe it Our adversaries cannot mean it in the former sence for God will bestow upon us nothing but what Christ hath purchased and Christ hath purchased nothing save what God hath promised in his Covenant Now Mr. W. denyes that the promise of Faith is any part of the Covenant or any effect of it p. 32. and others that are for this conditional reconciliation look upon it as a ridiculous conceit that God should promise men Salvation upon a condition and that he should work this condition in them and for them so that in the upshot we shall be beholding cheifly to Free Will an opinion so absurd that in all ages it hath been exploded by humble and sober minded Christians it being palpably contrary to the Scriptures which shew that every man by nature is without strength dead in treaspasses and sins that we cannot so much as think a good thought that it is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure If any shal say that God did will that by Christ wee should have Faith and after that reconciliation Though this be granted them it will follow notwithstanding that our reconciliation is an immediate effect of the death of Christ as Mr. Owen hath invincibly proved in his answer to Baxter p. 34. and then all the controversie will be about Gods order and method in conferring on us the effects of Christs death and whether God doth enable a man to perform good works before his person is reconciled to God Some Reasons for the Negative have been given before § 10. Fourteenthly If God did will that our sins should be accounted unto Christ without any condition on our part then it was his Will that they should be discounted unto us without any condition and the Reason thereof is because the charging and accounting of them unto him necessarily includes our discharge the imputing of our sins to Christ was formally the non-imputing of them unto us Gods accounting of them unto him as hath been shown was a reall discounting of them from us for they could not be accounted or charged upon both without a manifest contradiction in the thing it selfe and in the Justice of God But God willed that our sins should be accounted to and charged upon Christ without any condition performed by us for he actually suffered for them before we were Ergo. § 11. To these Arguments from Scripture I mighr adde many plaine Texts which doe declare that our reconciliation is the actual and immediate effect of Christs death as Col. 1.14 Eph. 1.7 We have redemption not we shall have the forgivenesse or non-imputation
Faction are but ridiculous termes yet the things themselves are reall evils the one being an offence against Civill and the other against Ecclesiasticall peace If this Author had shewn wherein I had offended against either of them I doubt not but I should have cleared my selfe at a just Tribunal For 1. I have ever been so far from factious Combinations or attempting any thing against the Civil Peace that as I verily beleeve it hath not been the least cause of my troubles that I have alwayes prayed for and pressed subjection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the â—owers in being had others of my calling done the like the disaffections of the people against the present Government had not been so great as yet they are in these parts 2. As for Schisme I know no ground that he hath to charge me with it for Schisme cannot be but where communion is or ought to be held now to my best remembrance I never refused to hold Christian comunimon with any person or persons with whom by the Rules of Christ I conceived I ought It is true we receive not all within that Parochial circuit wherein we live unto communion in Church Priviledges because either they refuse to make Profession of their Faith and to declare their subjection to the Ordinances of Jesus Christ and so they separate from us and not we from them or else they are such as in their practises do contradict the profession which they seem to make like them Tit. 1.16 And as for Members of other Churches we are ready to give them the right hand of fellowship unlesse the person or the Church to which he belongs lyes under the guilt of any publick scandal If he doth accuse me of Schâ—sm because I have refrained going to some Lectures that are preached in this City I doubt not but the wise will be satisfied with a just Apology I doe not conceive that Christians are bound to frequent every Lecture that is preached near them the obligation to this Duty must needs be determined by Christian prudence and we ought to follow that which we conceive hath the greatest tendency to Edification Now I confesse I have rather chosen to deprive my selfe of that benefit which sometime I might injoy then to wound my Conscience by keeping of silence when I hear the Truths and Servants of God declaimed against Dr. Jackson a man large enough in the point of communion grants that there is just cause to separate from the communion of a visible Church our practise doth not amount so high when we are urged or constrained to professe or beleive some points of Doctrine or to adventure upon some Practises which are contrary to the Rule of Faith or Love of God and in case we are utterly deprived of freedome of Conscience in professing what we inwardly beleeve for which he cites 1 Cor. 7.23 Yee are bought with a price be yee not Servants of men For sayes he although we were perswaded that we might communicate with such a Church without evident danger of damnation yet in as much as we cannot communicate with it upon any better termes then Servants and Bondslaves doe with their Masters we are bound in Conscience and religious discretion when lawfull occasions or opportunities are offered to use our Liberty and seek to our Freedom rather then to live in bondage Let them allow us that liberty which we offer to them to discusse and examine the Doctrines which they do deliver and if they shall be found erroneous to professe against them I shall not often decline such opportunities § 10. But says Mr. W. the contending about this matter will harden and discomfort more soules in an houre then the opinion it selfe will doe good to while the world stands 1. It seems he is of Curcaelleus his mind that the matter in question is of so small concernment that it ought not to breed a controversie I marvel then he should offer himselfe a Champion on either part especially in a place where he had so little to doe and where his humility might suppose there were others as able as himselfe to defend the notion which he stickles for No man will imagine that he ingaged in this controversie upon conscientious principles if he judgeth the Point in question to be of little moment For my part I cannot looke upon that as such a trifle which doth so nearly concern the glory of Gods Grace the vertue and efficacy of Christs Blood upon which alone poor Souls can with confidence and security build their hopes of Eternall life 2. I have shewed before that the Doctrine it selfe is guiltlesse both of hardning and discomforting the soules of men and if these effects doe insue the pressing of it in a Christian way they are accidental and consequently ought not to be charged upon the Tenent I know none that are discomforted by these Debates but such as the Apostle speaks of Who are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth For having pinned their Faith on the sleeves of others they are jealous of their credit least they should be thought to have builded on a sandy foundation CHAP. XVI Of Mr. Woodbridges Answer to the third Objection which he hath framed concerning our being in Covenant with God before beleiving THis last he scoffingly cals the great Argument which as he hath proposed it was none of mine We fell upon our discourse of the Covenant upon his saying that Christ was not justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant whereunto I replyed If the New Covenant were made with Christ then Christ was justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant But the New Covenant was made with Christ Ergo. He denyed the Assumption But by the way let me give the Reader the Reason of the Sequel which is as followeth The New Covenant containes all the Promises which God hath made to the Head and the Members both to Christ Personal and to Christ Mystical the same Covenant is conditional to him and absolute to us a Covenant of Works to him but a Covenant of Grace to us Now if it be one and the same Covenant by which Christ and we are Justified though in a far different manner scil he by Works and we by Grace he by his own Righteousnesse and we by his then his Justification was by vertue of the New Covenant that we are justified by We read but of one Covenant that was made with Christ by and according unto which he was justified when he had paid the debt which he had undertaken To confirme the Assumption That the New Covenant was made with Christ I alleadged 1 the Judgement of the late Assembly who in their larger Catechisme have laid down this Proposition in terminis The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his seed First he denied the Allegation though I beleeve at
things whatsoever which we stand in need of and are good for us Now I say that Promise or Covenant by vertue whereof we obtain both Grace and Glory good things present and future is not conditional to us I say to us for to Christ it was conditional though to us it be free to him it was a Covenant of Works though to us it be a Covenant of pure Grace there is not so much as one blessing doth descend to us but he hath dearly bought it even with the price of his own blood for which cause he is called the Mediator Witness and Surety of the New Covenant § 2. 2. When we say the New Covenant is not conditional we understand a condition in its proper and genuine sense as the Jurists use it in reference to mens contracts and bargains A condition saith Dr. Cawel is a rate manner or Law annexed to mens acts or grants staying and suspending the same and making them uncertain whether they shall take effect or no. And our English Papinian Conditio dicitur cum quid in casum incertum qui potest tendere ad esse aut non esse confertur To the same purpose the Expositor of Law terms A condition is a restraint or bridle annexed and joyned to a promise by the performance of which it is ratified and takes effect and by the non-performance of it it becomes voide the person to whom it is made shall receive no commodity or advantage by it Hence is that Maxime amongst Lawyers Conditio ad impleri debet priusquà m sequatur effectus i. e. The condition must be performed bâ—fore the Grant or Promise becomes valid In this sense we say The Covenant which God made with Adam was conditional God annexed to the promise of Life the condition of Obedience Do this and thou shalt live The stability and success of that promise did depend upon his performing of the condition he failing in his part the promise became voide Now we deny that the blessings of the New Covenant do depend upon this or any other condition to be performed by us Lawyers do distinguish of a twofold condition 1 Antecedent and 2 Consequent The Antecedent condition being performed doth get or gain the thing or estate made upon condition the Consequent condition doth keep and continue it As for instance If I fell a man a Farm on condition he shall pay me five hundred pounds present and forty shillings nay be it but six pence per annum for the future the payment of the five hundred pounds is the Antecedent condition which gives him possession of the Farm the forty shillings or six pence per annum is the Subsequent condition and that continues his possession and if he fail in this latter the Estate is forfeited and in Law I may re-enter upon the Farm as if no such bargain had been made between us Now we say further That the Blessings of the New Covenant require not onely no Antecedent but no Subsequent condition to be performed by us there is nothing on our parts that procures our Right and Interest nor yet that continues and maintains our interest in them The Lord Jesus is both the Author and the Finisher of our Salvation it is by and through him that we are made Sons and doe continue Sons are made Righteous and doe continue Righteous that we Obtain and do Injoy all the effects of the New Covenant § 3. I am not ignorant that the word Condition is sometimes taken improperly for that which is meerly an Antecedent though it contributes not the least efficiency either natural or morall towards the production of that which follows it A condition properly taken is a moral efficient cause which produceth its effect by vertue of some compact agreement or constitution between persons omnis conditio antecedens est effectiva a condition properly so called is effective of that which is promised upon condition Now I say not onely conditions in a proper sense but all certaine and constant Antecedents though they are not expressed or included in their Federal constitution so as that the Promise doth depend upon them may in a vulgar sense be called conditions of those things that follow them and in this sense our Divines doe commonly call one benefit of the Covenant a condition of the another as that which is given first of that which is given after Thus Dr. Twisse makes inherent holinesse to be causa dispositiva or the sine qua non not of Justification but of Salvation or Glorification because the one alwaies precedes the other Many other do expresse themselves in the same manner It is evident that some benefits of the New Covenant in their execution and accomplishment doe follow others though we have a right unto them all at once for as much as that flowes immediately from the purchase which Christ hath made yet we have not possession of them all at once but in that order and manner as God is pleased to bestow them Christ hath procured both Grace and Glory for his Elect yet he gives Grace i. e. Gracious Quallifications as Knowledge Faith Love c. before he brings them to the possession of Glory in which sense I conceive it is that the Scripture annexeth Salvation unto Faith and other works of inherent Holinesse Matth. 5. pr. Heb. 12.14 c. because these are certain and infallible Antecedents in all that shall be saved none who live to years of understanding are saved but they that doe beleeve the Gospell and shew forth the fruits of it in a suitable conversation If in this sence onely Faith and Repentance be called conditions of the Covenant to wit because they are wrought in all those that do injoy the ful effect of the Covenant I will not contend § 4 Yet I think it fit rather to forbear this expression 1 Because it is so improper to call a part of the Covenant the condition of it Chamier though he often useth the expression yet hee acknowledgeth that Faith is called a condition verbis minus propriis And a little after Fidei conditio non est antecedens sed consequens non est causa salutis sed instrumentum apprehendendi gratiam i. e. Faith is not a proper antecedent condition but an improper or consequent condition it is not a cause of salvation but only the instrument whereby we receive and apply it Mr. Rutherford himselfe though he cals them Libertines and Antinomians who say the Covenant of Grace is not conditionall yet almost in the same breath he hath let fall these words To buy without mony and to have a sight of sin is the condition of our having the water of Life but the truth is it is an improper condition for both wages and worke is Free Grace I confesse improper locutions ought to be borne with when they serve to illustrate truth but this I conceive doth exceedingly darken it 2 Because of the advantage
though he started aside as well as Saul yet the Covenant made with him was not thereupon dissolved and broken § 8. 3. Because if there were any condition required in the New Covenant to intitle us to the Blessings of it it would not be a Covenant of pure Grace so that the asserting of conditions in the New Covenant doth by necessary consequence overthrow the nature of it for as Austine hath observed Grace is not grace unless it be every way free and the Apostle before him Rom. 11.6 If by grace then is it no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace but if it be of works then is it no more grace Our Salvation is ascribed to Grace not onely inclusively but exclusively Ephes. 2.8 9 Tit. 2.5 All the Blessings of the New Covenant are called Gifts Rom. 5.17 18. 6.23 and gifts that are given freely 1 Cor. 2.12 Rom. 3.24 To give a thing freely and conditionally are contradictories he that parts with any thing upon conditions doth as it were sell it The works and conditions which men perform in the Prophets phrase are their money Isai. 55.1 2. A condition performed makes the thing covenanted for a due debt which the promiser is bound to give so that if the Blessings of the Covenant did depend upon conditions they would not be of grace but debt and men by performing those conditions would be at least in part their own Saviours Now what can be imagined more derogatory to the Grace of God Object True may some say it would derogate from the grace of God if we attributed such a meritoriousness unto these conditions as the Papists do unto works but we do not do so To which I answer 1 That the Papists assert no other works and conditions to be necessary to Justification and Salvation then what our Adversaries do 2 Neither Papists nor Arminians do ascribe any more meritoriousness to works then our opponents They grant there is such an infinite distance and disproportion between the Blessing promised and the conditions required of us that in strictness of Justice they do not deserve it onely expacto seeing God is pleased to promise so largely upon condition of so small a pittance of service we may be said to merit by performing the condition and in this sence Mr. Baxter will tell you That the performers of a condition may be said to merit the reward The Papists never pleaded for merit upon any other account Mr. Calvin observed long ago how much they please themselves with this simple shift supposing that hereby they shall evade whatsoever Arguments are brought against them Though Mr. B. seems to mince the matter calling his conditions but a sine qua non and a Pepper corn c. he attributes as much if not more to works then the Papists Arminians and Socinians have done the Papists will not say That works do merit in a strict and proper sence Smalzius calls their fides formata a meer sine qua non and a known friend to the Remonstrants Doctrine amongst our selves dubs it with no better name then a sleight unconsiderable despicable Pepper corn most pitifully unproportionable to the great rent which God might require and to the infinite treasure of glory he makes over to us And again That mite of Obedience Faith and Love But now Mr. B. goes a step beyond them in that he ascribes a meritoriousness to works which the Arminians and Socinians have not dared to do 3 I would ask whether the condition required of Adam were meritorious of eternal life I presume no man will say it was in a strict and proper sense there being no proportion between the work and the wages but yet that condition did lessen the freeness of Divine Grace The Grace of God was not manifested so much in saving man in that way as in giving life unto him freely And therefore to put our Justification and Salvation upon the same terms must necessarily eclipse the Grace of God in the New Covenant Object But some may say there is a great difference the conditions required of Adam were legal conditions but the conditions which we stand for and assert in the New Covenant are Evangelical Conditions I answer That the sound of words doth nothing at all alter the nature of things all conditions performed for life are legal conditions The precepts both of Law and Gospel have the same matter though not the same end but when Gospel duties are made conditions of Justification and Salvation there is no difference Object Yes may some say Evangelical conditions are more facile and easie then the Legal were Are they so Let them consider again whether it be more easie for a man that is dead in trespasses and sins to believe in Christ to love God to hate sin to mortifie his lusts c. then it was for Adam in his innocency when he had a natural inclination to obey God to abstain from the fruit of one Tree when he had a thousand besides as good as that there can be no condition imagined more facile and feasable then Adams was But if it were so yet would the reward be debt and not grace As he that hath his peny by contract hath as much right to it though he labored but an hour as if he had endured the heat of the whole day We say Gradus non variat speciem it is not more grace but all grace that doth denominate the Covenant a Covenant of Grace § 9. To these Reasons there might be added many more which because they have been mentioned before upon another occasion I shall not stand upon them 4. Because all the pretended conditions of the Covenant are promised in the Covenant Now it is absurd to make any thing a cause of itself or a means and condition whereby it is procured 5. Because the asserting of conditions in the Covenant attributes unto men a power and ability to do good not onely before they are justified but before they believe For if all the promises of the Covenant are conditional then the promise of Faith is conditional and consequently a man must be supposed able to perform some good and acceptable work to God before he believes whereas without Faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Conditions in a proper sence do necessarily infer the liberty of mans will unto that which is good for as the Remonstrants do define it A condition is a free act which we absolutely may perform or not perform by Freewil not acted by the predeterminating grace of God A Conditional Covenant and Freewil are inseparable the former supposeth the latter Whether Mr. W. will own the Consequence I am not able to say however that there is no such power or ability in the Natural man to do that which is good might be irrefragably demonstrated from sundry Scriptures as Gen. 6.5 Eph. 2.1 2. 1 Cor. 2.14 2 Cor. 3.5 Rom.
7.18 Phil. 2.13 c. 6. Because if the Covenant were conditional no man in this life could attain to any assurance of his own interest in the blessings of it but must live always in a wavering and uncertain estate as to the hope of eternal life that hope of Salvation which is built upon conditional promises is as Calvin observes always wavering and tottering for conditional promises belong to none but unto them who have performed the condition If remission of sins were promised unto us not absolutely but conditionally as upon condition that we do believe repent and persevere Tum says Rutherford remissa nulla omnino peccata sunt in hac vita c. i. e. Then it must follow that no mans sins are remitted in this life no man is justified here which is contrary to many plain Scriptures as Rom. 4.10 5.1 8.30 Ephes. 1.7 1 Cor. 6.11 § 10. 7. Because the Scripture shews that there is the same proportion between Adams conveying sin to his seed and Christs conveying Righteousness to his Seed Rom. 5.16 The imputation of Adams sin did not depend upon the personal sinful acts of his posterity so neither doth the imputation of Christs Righteousness depend upon the good works and actions of Gods Elect but as by Adams sin all his posterity became actually sinners even they that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression i. e. Actually in their own persons even so by Christs Righteousness all the Elect to the end of the world are constituted righteous before they have performed any works or conditions in their own persons 8. Because if the Covenant were conditional then Infants and Ideots though elected could have no interest in any of the blessings therein promised in regard they cannot perform the conditions upon which they do depend and consequently dying without Faith they must needs be damned § 11. ◠and lastly If they to whom the Covenant belongs had a right and title to all the blessings of the Covenant before their believing and turning unto God then are there no conditions required on our part to intitle us to the blessings of it But they to whom the Covenant belongs scil the Elect had a right and interest in all the blessings of the Covenant before their believing c. Ergo. The Assumption shall be proved in our Answer to that Argument which Mr. W. hath retorted upon us from Jere. 31. wherewith we shall enter the lists in the next place CHAP. XX. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges chief Argument against the Absoluteness of the New Covenant is answered and this Position That God is the God of his people before they do believe and repent rescued from his contradictions FRom the Scriptures before mentioned wherein the tenor of the Covenant is recited Mr. W. hath advanced this Argument against us If God be not the God of any nor they his people before they believe then none are in Covenant with God before they believe but God is not the God of any before they believe Ergo. As for the Proposition says he he is destitute of sense that shall deny it I say so too if that clause of Gods being the God of any be taken comprehensively and in its full latitude for their having interest in God and in all the blessings which God hath intended to his people but if it be taken for the actual enjoyment and possession of any one or more of those blessings as sometimes it is he is as much destitute of sense that shall affirm it for then the sense of it is this If none do know or have the comfort of this priviledge that God is their God before they believe then none are in Covenant with God before they believe this consequence is false for there is a wide difference between having an interest in God and the blessings of his Grace and our knowledge thereof or our enjoyment of those blessings Interest and Possession are not equipollent and reciprocal God may promise some one benefit in order to our possession and enjoyment of others though not to give us a right and interest in them We say that by Faith we have the knowledge and comfort of that reconciliation which Christ hath made between God and us though we cannot say that we obtain a right and interest therein by Faith Thorough Faith we come to know that God is our God though our believing doth not make him to be our God But the Assumption viz. That God is not the God of any before they believe is obvious unto just Exception which he hath endeavored to prove after this manner If God promise to give Faith that we may be his people and he our God then till that Faith be given he is not our God nor we his people But God promiseth to give Faith that he may be our God and we his people Jere. 31.33 Heb. 8.10 Ezek 11.19.20 36.25 c. 37.23 24 26 27. We have shewn before that the Scriptures mentioned do utterly refuse to protect the Minor and that all the particular promises contained in them are parts or effects of the Covenant and not means to bring us into Covenant The having of a new heart doth not make God to be our God but because he is our God he gives us that blessing and all things else § 2. That God is the God of his people before they do believe and are converted is evident unto me from these grounds First If God be their God whom he doth peculiarly love and whom he hath chosen and separated to himself from the rest of mankinde then is the Lord a God unto some before they believe the consequence is clear because God hath loved and chosen some in that manner from everlasting Jere. 31.3 Eph. 1.4 Now this was not an ordinary common love such as he bears unto all Creatures but a peculiar distinguishing love whereby he willed to them the greatest good even that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned Eph. 2.4 See John 17.23 24. But God is their God whom he doth peculiarly love and hath chosen and separated to himself Ergo. For what is it to have the Lord for our God but to be appropriated to God to have such an interest in God as others have not to be the objects of his speciall love It was Israels prerogative above all the Nations of the world that they had the Lord to be their God now the Lord became their God by setting his love upon them and chusing them to be a peculiar people to himself Deut. 7.6 7 8. and by separating them from other people Lev. 20.24 25. The Lord Ezek. 16.8 declares concerning spirituall Israel that they became his whilst they were in their blood that ere ever they were washed and adorned had any amiable qualities in them he sware unto them and entred into Covenant with them which swearing as it refers to spiritual Israel must be understood of that Oath which he made to Christ
Predestination If Gods decree be absolute Nemo vigilet nemo jâ—junet nemo libidini contradicet c. The Papists say It follows That if we be justified by Faith onely then we need not do good works The Remonstrants and their followers say That if a Believer cannot fall from Grace then need he not fear to commit any sin whatsoever Nor do these Consequences flow any whit more naturally from our Tenent then they do from these Doth it follow That because all the Elect are by means of Christs death actually reconciled unto God and freed from the condemnation of the Law That therefore men may live as they list that they need not hear believe and obey the Gospel How doth this sow pillows under mens elbows or lull asleep in security more then the Doctrine of absolute Election Seeing as all men are not elected so neither are all men reconciled unto God nor can any man know That he is elected and reconciled unto God but by and thorow Faith which Faith is wrought in men by the Preaching of the Word and doth certainly produce a holy life § 7. I confess I am yet to seek of the Reason of his other Deduction That this Assertion of actual reconciliation before Faith overthrows the comfort of true Believers and destroyes the ground nature use and end of Faith Is it an uncomfortable Doctrine to tell men That we are not sharers with Christ in effecting of our peace with God and in procuring the pardon of our sins and that Christ hath finished this work before we knew it Is it not much more comfortable to poor souls that Christ hath absolutely and by himself obtained forgiveness for sinners then that he hath procured this Grâ—â—e but conditionally upon condition we perform such and such 〈◊〉 for which we have no strength or ability in our selves Whence have the Saints drawn all their comfort Surely not from Faith or any other work of theirs but by Faith from Christ and from the perfection and al-sufficiency of his Sacrifice Not onely the Protestants but the Papists themselves though in the Schools they contend for the dignity and congruity of works that they are Moral causes or necessary conditions of Justification and Salvation yet on their death beds they utterly renounce them they exhort men in distress of Conscience to roul themselves wholly upon Jesus Christ. In a form prescribed for visiting of the sick the Priest or Minister was enjoyned to put these Questions to the sick party Dost thou believe to come to glory not by thy own merits but by the vertue and merit of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ And dost thou believe That our Lord Jesus Christ did die for our salvation and that none can be saved by his own merits or by any other means but by the merit of his passion Whereunto when the sick person answered affirmatively I do believe it the Priest is bid to exhort him in this wise Go to therefore as long as thy soul remaineth in thee place thy whole confidence in his death onely have confidence in no other thing commit thy self wholly to his death with this alone cover thy self wholly intermingle thy self wholly wrap thy whole self in his death c. Dangerous saith Bernard is the habitation of those that trust in their own works And in another place Ubi tuta c. What safe â—est or security can the weak soul finde but in the wounds of his Saviour As he is mighty to save so dwell I there with most safety Parisiensis in his Book of Divine Rhetorick Thou must beware saith he in thy striving with God that thou dost not build upon a weak foundation which he doth that trusts in his own works Gerson often inculcates this That before the tribunal of God we must onely plead the merits of Christ Bishop Gardner though he would not have this gap to be opened to the people yet he acknowledged it to be the most comfortable Doctrine to such as were in his condition he being then on his death bed Which is the more to be observed because in his life time he had stickled so much for our Adversaries Conditional Justification Bellarmine himself when he had written divers Books for Justification by Inherent Righteousness in the end concludes That for fear of vain-glory and by reason of the uncertainty of our own works Tutissimum est c. It is the safest way to place all our trust in the Mercy of God and of Jesus Christ so that we may say as Moses Their rock is not as our rock our Enemies themselves being Judges Deut. 32.31 § 8. Mr. Cr. hath not the least reason to charge us with destroying the Ground of Faith for the Ground of Faith is either Fundamentum Quod or Fundamentum Quo. Material and Personal or else Doctrinal and Ministerial We say with all true Christians That the onely Material or Personal Foundation whereupon a poor soul can build securely for Life and Justification is Jesus Christ Now the Doctrinal Foundation whereby our Faith is united to the former we affirm with Calvin and many more that it is Gratuita misericordiae in Christo promissio The free promise of Mercy in opposition to those Conditional Promises which send men partly to Christ and partly to their own works and therefore our Adversaries are much more obnoxious to this Censure of Destroying the Ground of Faith who allow it no other support then Conditional Promises whereby mens hope and confidence is made to lean more upon themselves then it doth on Christ much more upon their own works then it doth upon his Righteousness The forementioned Author hath well observed That if our Faith doth relie never so little upon our own works it cannot possibly stand fast that soul will never attain to any setled assurance of his Salvation that builds his Faith upon such a sandy foundation § 9. The nature of Faith receives not the least prejudice by our Doctrine for if we define it as most of our old Protestant Divines have done Certa indubitata persuasio A firm and certain perswasion of the favor of God and the pardon of our sins it confirms our Tenent for mens sins must be pardoned before they can believe it or else of necessity they must believe a lie All men know that the object doth precede the act unless it be when the act gives a being to the object Or if we make it to be fiducia the trust or reliance of the soul upon Jesus Christ it receives no small encouragement from this consideration That Christ hath finished whatsoever was necessary by Divine appointment for the Justification of sinners not expecting the least condition to be performed by us for that end Our Faith is never so impregnable as when it rests entirely upon Jesus Christ. And as for the ends and uses of Faith which are cheifly to give us boldness and