make vessels some to honour and some to dishonour so God having more transcendent Sovereignty may make some creatures ever blessed and others during pleasure to remaine in misery 2. It stands not yet with Gods ordinate justice to strike his people where there is no fault The termes of the covenant being pre-supposed none can suffer that have not offended every one upon engagement from God must be happy that is innocent This is plainly implyed in those words In the day that thou eatest thou shalt surely die sinne not and suffer not and more explicitely held out in those words do this and live under death is comprized all evil from which man upon covenant is free that doth not sinne Under life is comprised all blisse which upon covenant all are to enjoy that yeeld full obedience So that the inlet of suffering is from sinne Rom. 5. 12. God having as I may say tyed himself not out of Sovereignty to afflict when man hath not offended 3. When way is made by sinne to divine justice to bring evil upon man yet the reason why this or that evil is inflicted on this or that man is not alwayes mans provocation by sinne All afflictions are not punishments nor yet corrections or chastisements There are often other ends and motives Sometimes God looks solely at himselfe alone at his own glory in his strokes of this we have many instances John 9. 1 2. John 11. 4. The same we may say of the viper upon Pauls hand Acts 28. 4 5. Sometimes he looks at his people in the sufferings that he inflicts 1. The patients themselves laying afflictions upon them not as corrections respecting by-past faults but tryals for discovery of their graces That which God laid upon Job was not for his sinne but to make it appeare that Satan had formed a false charge against him that his whole service of God was upon by-ends and base accounts and that sufferings God appearing against him in contrary providences would presently draw him into all wickednesses It was a sore affliction to Abraham to leave his countrey and his fathers house to offer up his sonne Isaac yet these were no corrections or chastisements that we know but temptations 2. He looks upon others that are no sufferers to bring about mercy to one by the sufferings of another so it was in Josephs sufferings Gen. 50. 20. 4. The corrections that God lays upon the godly are far different from those that he layes upon the wicked His hand upon his own children differs much from his hand upon his enemies God deales otherwise with a Nation that is a stranger to him then he deals with a people that are his own Jerem. 30. 11. Though I make a full end of all Nations whither I have scattered thee yet will I not make a full end of thee but I will correct thee in measure and will not leave thee altogether unpunished Though both suffer yet they do not equally and alike suffer So it is with the Elect and reprobate both suffer from the hand of God but there is great difference in their sufferings 1. They differ in the cause from whence their sufferings respectively do arise The sufferings of the wicked are out of pure wrath wicked men being under a state of wrath The sufferings of the people of God are out of present displeasure but yet out of love Prov. 13. 11. Heb. 12. 6 7. 2. They differ in the end of their sufferings A piece of silver is trode upon with the feet to scoure and brighten it but a worme or spider to crush or spoile it 3. They differ in the respective improvement that either make of them the godly are are bettered by their afflictions their sufferings are their purges and purifications Psalme 119. 67. Their eares are thereby opened for discipline Job 36. 10. the wicked are more and more hardened by them and grow more and more wicked under them Esay 1. 5. 2 Chron. 28. 22. The Sunne hardens the earth but softens the butter and the wax The sufferings of the people of God many times proceed from as high displeasure in God as can stand with love and the more high the sinne is the greater and sorer is his displeasure They work in God as great a dislike as can stand with his purpose not utterly to leave and cast them off When David had sinned in that high manner as he did the Text saith The thing that David did displeased the Lord 2 Sam. 11. ult Few men have had more of Gods heart then he yet we see his heart rises in sore displeasure against his wickednesse We may see how he takes him up for it we can scarce see in all the Scriptures a man so chidden The Prophet reckons up the courtesies and high favours that he had received from God I anointed thee King over Israel and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul and I gave thee thy Masters house and thy Masters wives into thy bosome and gâ—ve thee the house of Israel and of Judah and if that had been too little I would more-over have given thee such and such things And as he had before aggravated his wickednesse in a parable so in expresse termes he further layes it open Wherefore hast thou despised the Commandment of the Lord in doing evil in his sight thou hast killed Vriah the Hittite with the sword and hast taken his wife to be thy wife Then he falls to threatnings three great evils as we may there see follow upon this evil yet all this while that the Lord thus chides him that he thus threatens and beats him he doth not cease to love him as appears in Nathans words verse 13. The Lord hath put away thy sinne some will have love and anger to be inconsistent hatred and wrath inseparable God is angry as they say with none but those that he hates and when anger appears love is no more But all know that this is false among men a father is many times angry with his child that he would be loath to hate It is as false with God he was wrath with Moses but he never hated Moses he owns his with much love when he manifests much dislike and distaste of their present actions 6. These sufferings of the godly must by no means be accounted satisfactions of divine justice as coming from vindicative wrath nor any part of the curse that is due from vindicative justice for sin Having a tendency not to harme but to reforme not to destroy but amend they are only fatherly corrections and chastisements not properly at least as some rigidly understand the word punishments satisfaction was the work of Christ and the whole of the curse was divolved upon him Gal. 3. 13. Papists do distinguish between the friendship that is lost by sinne and the justice that is deserved The friendship that is lost is made up again as they confesse of free grace but the justice deserved must by the offender
hath lost its commanding power then it can give sinne no more being yea it hath lost its own being power of command being of the essence of it If the Law Thou shalt not kill have no power of command then I sin not if I kill If that Law Sweare not at all have no power of commanding then our RANTERS high oaths are no more sinnes then our eating of swines flesh or 〈◊〉 not observing the Feast of the Passeover Where there is 〈◊〉 there is no transgression and a Law antiquated and repealed that the power of command is gone as in the Laws before mentioned is no Law If he still prâ—sse that similitude of the Apostle that a dead husband hath now power of command But the Law to a beleever is a dead husband First I say if he will be pleased to informe me how a dead husband rips up his wives faults how he curbs and keeps her in which he confesses is the Laws office to a beleever then I shall speedily give an account how this dead husband retaines power of command The Argument is as well of force The dead husband hath no power to discover his wives faults to restraine curb or keep her in But the Law is a dead husband to beleevers Therefore the Law hath no such power It lies upon him to answer this argument to free himself from self-contradiction And I would faine see this answered and the other maintained Secondly for more full satisfaction I say that some learned Expositors make the husband in that similitude not to be the Law but sinne which hath its power from the Law So Diodati in his Notes upon the place Man signifieth sinne which hath power from the Law the woman is our humane nature and of these two are begotten the depraved errours of sinne So also Doctor Reynolds in his Treatise of Divorce page 37. setting out the scope of this similitude thus expresseth it As a wife her husband being dead doth lawfully take another and is not an adulteresse in having his company to bring forth fruit of her body to him so regenerate persons their natural corruption provoked by the Law to sin and flesh being mortified and joyned to Christ as to a second husband Master Burges Vindiciae Degis page 218. saith Sinne which by the Law doth irritate and provoke our corruption that is the former husband the soul had and lusts they are the children thereof and this the rather is to be received because the Apostle in his reddition doth not say the Law is dead but we are dead But if he will still contend that the Law is the husband in that place which by reason of corruption hath so much power for irritation and condemnation over an unregenerate man I shall onely give him that advice which Doctor Reynolds in the place quoted gives Bellarmine upon occasion of his interpretation of this similitude Let Bellarmine acknowledge that similitudes must 〈◊〉 be set on the rack nor the drift thereof be streched in such sort 〈◊〉 â—f they ought just in length breadth and depth to match and sit that whereunto they are â—â—â—â—mbled And when he confesseth power in the Law notwithstanding this death to performe diverse offices in the souls of beleever◠〈◊〉 cannot affirme that the law is wholly dead nor deny but that it may have this office of command likewise The power which the Law loseth is that which corruption gave it which is irritation and condemnation Corruption never gave command to the Law and the death of corruption through the Spirit can never exempt the soul from obedience or take the power of command from it Let it be granted that the Law is the husband here mentioned the similitude is this That as the Law through our corruption was fruitful in mans nature to the bringing forth of sinne and condemnation So Christ by the Spirit is to be fruitful in our nature to bring forth works of grace to salvation and so the death of the Law is meerly in respect of irritation or inflaming to sinne and binding over to condemnation not in respect of command That this is the full and clear scope of this similitude beyond which it must not be stretched plainly appeares verse 5. For when we were in the flesh the motions of sinnes which were by the Law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death So that here is nothing against the commanding power of the Law God still keeps up his Sovereignty and by this Law he rules the regenerate I wish our Authour would sadly reflect upon that reason of his The Law is not authorized by Christ to reigne and rule in the consciences of his people For his Fathers peace his own righteousnesse and his Spirits joy There is none that speaks of the reigne of the Law in the consciences of the people of God but God in Christ reigns and by his Moral Law rules for all these reasons So farre are these from excluding his rule by his Law in his peoples hearts If this rule of the Law be destructive to Christs righteousnesse then Christs coming for righteousnesse must needs be to destroy the Law which Christ disclaimes And the rule of the peace of God in our hearts is so farre from excluding his rule by his Law that without it it can never be attained Great peace have they that love thy Law and nothing shall offend them Psalme 119. 165. This is the confidence that we have in God that whatsoever we ask according to his will we shall receive because we keep his commandments 1 John 3. 22. A Commandment hath a commandâ—â—â— power and only they that keep them have this peace ruling in their hearts The Spirits joy and the power of the Law to command are so farre from opposing one the other that the Spirit gives testimony of Gods abode in no other but such as confesse and yeeld to this power He that keepeth his Commandments dwelleth in him and he in him and hereby we know that be abideth in us by the Spirit which he hath given us 1 John 3. 24. And of like nature is that which he further hath Though the Law the former husband be dead to a beleever yet a beleever is no widow much lesse an harlot for he is married to Christ and is under the Law of Christ which is love If the moral Law respective to the power of command be dead then love is dead with it Jesus Christ reduces the ten Commandments into two Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self If then the Law be dead this love from the heart is dead and so a beleever is either a widow or an harlot Master Burges Vindiciae Legis page 12. shews at large that to do a thing out of obedience to the Law and yet by love and delight do not oppose one another which if the Reader consult with his enlargement of it he
case he pleased but will not neither is he bound Sinne no otherwise follows upon reprobation not as a cause efficient but deficient not whereby any thing is removed that is present but that is not supplied which is wanting And Master Ball in his larger Catechism p. 57. Sin is the effect of mans free will and condemnation is an effect of justice inflicted upon man for sin and disobedience But the decree of God which is good is the cause of neither The signes of Reprobation may appear in those that are thus dischurched according to that which is quoted out of Ames but not as an effect of it The severity which God sheweth in not sparing but breaking off these natural Branches is explicitely no more then that which Jesus Christ did threaten against them Mat. 21. 43. That the Kingdome of Heaven should be taken from them and given to a Nation bringing forth the fruits thereof the same which he threatens against Ephesus Rev. 2. 5. in taking away their Candlestick which is the effect of their own sin and not of Gods decree Argument 1. Sixthly If re-ingraffing of the Jewes produceth salvation is by turning them from iniquity taking away their sins according to Gods Covenant then it is into the invisible Church by giving faith But the former is true v. 25. Ergo the latter Answ This Argument well husbanded might haue made three To the first â— say that priviledges enjoyed in a Church-state in Scripture-phrase are the salvation John 4. 22. Seeing Church-members are partakers of sauing Ordinances And the fruition of Ordinances under Gospel-dispensations is a great salvation Heb. 2. 3. And so that Text Rom. 11. 26. all Israel shall be saved must be understood as the last Annotation speaks The body of this people in general shall be brought againe into a way of salvation and re-istablisht into the Church of the whole Israel of God consisting of Jewes and Gentiles And so Diodate That is the body in general shall be put again into a way of salvation and re-established into the Communion of the Church And such men brought into a Church-state are turned from iniquity partially from their former way of iniquity their contradicting and blaspheming having escaped the pollution of the world 2 Pet. 2. 16. of the world that remaines out of the Church of God Their sinne is pardoned quoad hoc and when Moses prayed for the pardon of the sinne of Israel Exod. 32. and God proâ—miseth it 2 Chron. 7. 14. it is so to be understood of a National dardon Argument 7. Seventhly If the re-ingraffing be by vertue of Gods Election and love his gifts of calling then it is into the invisible Church by Election and giving Faith But the former is true v. 28 29. Ergo the latter Answ His Election love and gifts of calling did at the first put them into a visible Church-state and condition Deut. 7. 7 8. The Lord did not set his love upon you nor chuse you because you were moe in number then any people for ye were the fewest of all people But because the Lord loved you and because he would keep the Oath which he had sworne unto your Fathers c. And the same love election and gifts of calling now they are broken off doth re-ingraffte them If this Argument hold it was an invisible Church that was brought out of the land of Egypt Here our Authour sayes with much confidence that he questions not but all Anti-Arminians that understand the controversie will disclaime Master Geree in this answer and acknowledge that the election love gifts and calling meant Rom. 11. 28 29. are by faith into salvation But he is much deceived Those before mentioned understood somewhate and Diodate in his Annotations hath these words God never recals his grace which by absolute decree he wil communicate to some person or Nation to call them to him and to have right to his Covenant Now the election of this people hath been such above all others in the world who being once called have and may fall totally and irreparably which this people cannot without repentance that is to say irrevocable of which God never repents Calvin on the words saith This is to be held that private Election is not here handled but the common adoption of the Nation which in outward appearance seemed for the time to be lost but not cut off from the root And presently after The Apostle argues that the counsel of God whereby he once chose to himself that Nation in peculiar remaineth firme And Paraeus in dubio decimo nono on this chapter understands it of the constancy of the love of God towards his own Nation And most fully in dubio vicesimo where urging Stapletons objection That it seems from this irrevocablenesse of the gifts and calling of God the assurance of grace and salvation cannot follow 1. Because as Stapleton objects and Calvin and Martyr confesse the speech of the Apostle is not to be understood of the election of each particular person but of the common adoption of the whole Nation and this common grace of adoption of the whole Nation was mutual for they fell from this gift To which Paraeus sayes Stapleton's corrupt glosse is easily answered 1. Saith he It is not denied that the Apostle spake this of the Common that is the federal dignity of the Nation of the Jewes and that the irrevocablenesse in God is to be understood yet it is denied saith he that from hence the assurance of particular persons is not concluded yea from the lesse to the greater it is firmly concluded For if the Apostle from common grace do rightly conclude this irrevocablenesse in God much more may it be determined from that grace which is proper Ravanellus in verbum Electio understands Election in v. 28. of common Election as he do also in 1. Pet. 2. 9. Amesius is urged as an adversary yet appears otherwise The Remonstrants giving two answers to this Scripture The second is the self-same in 〈◊〉 with Stapletons To which Amesius replies Coron page 233 234. This is their custome to take one part of a truth and to abuse it for the overthrow or removal of another So that it appears according to him that they spake truth in the denial of this to be meant of the unchangable decree of eternal Election but they abuse this truth in about to avoid the argument drawn from it for perseverance As Jesuites and Arminians do object it so their adversaries freely confesse it I have indeed sometimes in my thoughts doubted how fitly this Text was brought against Arminians for proof of perseverance and estament of assurance yet satisfied my selfe according to what hath been said but since I had any understanding never questioned but it was here applied according to the minde of these Authours to the National priviledge of the Jews the full scope of these Chapters being to dispute the rejection of Israel after
I am not able to reach Nothing with me is more plain then that consent is pre-required in both these covenants Adam I confesse as it is objected was bound to consent yea I will yeeld more that it is no more possible to conceive Adam to deny consent then the Sunne to be without light seeing in his natural motion he was carried in that way of full conformity to God that the Sun may as well be dark as Adam averse from the will or tender of God yet if we could conceive a dark Sunne it could not be a light to rule the day so if we could conceive Adam denying consent to God in the tender of covenant Adam had not been in covenant For fallen man it is clear what held the Pharisees out of the New covenant but their non-consent rejecting the counsel of God against themselves Luk 7. 30. as also those Jews Act. 13. who contradicting and blaspheming judged themselves unworthy of eternal life The covenant was tendered to all those Gentile Nations and Cities where the Gospel was preached and all were bound to yeeld assent but where there was assent of faith there the covenant was entered where assent is denied there they remained strangers from the covenants of promise in the same way of Gentilisme as though the Gospel had never been tendered or the Name of Christ held forth So that these things considered I doubt not but I have made it appear That there is a mutual contract and mutual performances to which persons are engaged not only usually in covenants but in all covenants And that it is of the general nature of covenants that there should be such a convertibility as that both must if not seal some contracts are without seals yet contract or performe and where a seal is vouchsafed must accept of it and that the definition of the covenant in the general is vindicated That God hath entred a covenant properly so called with man with fallen man in which there is a contract of this nature and engagements to mutual performances God condescending to it of grace and man obliged to it by duty yet accepting voluntarily Which as the former might be confirmed by the authority of Divines of eminency Mr. Ball speaking of the covenant of God in the general entred with man saith It may be thus described A mutual compact or agreement betwixt God and man whereby God promiseth all good things specially eternal happinesse unto man upon just equal and favourable conditions and man doth promise to walk before God in all acceptable free and willing obedience expecting all good from God and happinesse in God according to his promise for the praise and glory of his great Name And Vrsin in his Catechisme page 91. defining a covenant in the general nature of it as before he saith it is A mutual agreement between God and man whereby God confirmes to man that he will be merciful forgive their sinnes give them a new righteousnesse his holy Spirit and everlasting life in and by his son the Mediatour In like manner men tie themselves to God for faith and repentance that is by a lively faith to receive this mercy alone and to yeeld true obedience to God And Lucas Trelcatius in loco de foedere thus defines it The covenant is an agreement to God with man concerning eternal happinesse to be communicated to man upon a certain condition to the glory of God And then explaining himself he says When we say an agreement we understand a mutual obligation of God and man by a stipulation intervening that what is promised on both parts may be performed And farther saith There are two parties of the covenant 1. The promise of God concerning everlasting life 2. The obligation of man for performance of the condition prescribed of God the first is free the second is necessary And in conclusion such a bottome I believe is laid in the Introduction that will bear the whole fabrick that follows after Junius and Gomarus are as opposite as may be one to the other in this dispute about the covenant as may be seen in the Appendix to the first chapter But they both agree in this that every covenant of necessity is to have mutual engagements and performances Gomarus denies that the promise Gen. 3. 15. containes the covenant of grace because no conditions are there mentioned And Junius to avoid conditions denies that there is any such thing as a covenant between God and man for if it were a covenant he sayes it must have conditions Therefore according to them both if we grant a covenant we must grant conditions and the full nature of the covenant is in no Scripture laid down where we have not these engagements or conditions laid down likewise Some think to reconcile all this by the various acception of the word Sometimes it is soused in Scripture that the free promise of God is thereby signified and the restipulation of our duty withit God requiring man to engage by covenant to that which he might require did there no promise intervene yet sometimes in Scripture covenant doth signifie the absolute promise of God without any restipulation and of this kinde is that covenant in which God promiseth to give to his elect faith and perseverance to which promise there cannot be conceived any condition to be annexed which is not comprehended in the promise it self So Learned Camero de triplici foedere Thes 1. 2. For this absolute covenant here spoke to I desire the Reader to observe what the same learned Authour hath farther in his third Thesis This distinction of the Covenant doth depend upon the distinction of the love of God for there is a love of God to the Creature from whence every thing that is good in the creature hath wholly flowed and there is the acquiescent love of God in the creature and this the creature hath received not for any thing from it self but from God as it was loved with that first love of God that love for better understanding we call Gods primary or antecedent this Gods secondary or consequent love from that we say doth depend both the paction and fulfilling of the absolute covenant from this depends the fulfilling of that covenant to which is annexed a restipulation not so the paction for that we say depends on the first love This antecedent love is wont to be called Amor benevolentiae which can be no more then a purpose or resolution in God for good to man The second is wont to be called Amor complacentiae a love of delight or content How the former can be a covenant or any covenant properly so called depend upon it as preceding the latter I do not see First this goes before the giving of Christ the gift of Christ is an effect of it Joh. 3. 16. Now God covenants not with man without the Mediator as Camero himself acknowledges and therefore this that precedes can be no covenant made
be greater cannot be determined but when man fell mankinde wholly was lost and unlesse grace save must everlastingly perish As some with the lost Angels must be objects on whom God will glorifie his justice Matth. 25. 41. So others must be vessels of mercy on whom his free grace shall be seen to make them as the Angels of heaven Therefore love is assigned as the alone impulsory motive God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten sonne John 3. 16. God who is rich in mercy according to the great love wherewith he loved us when we were dead in sinne Eph. 2. 5. Of this all that expect to be saved by grace must be tender that it be not obscured Gods designe being to advance it our care must be that it be not lessened In this exercise of free grace God yet keeps up authority and rule power and dominion still is his Man was made of God subject to a Law and under dominion having the law written in his heart from the Creation and he was not divested of it by Adams fall nor yet delivered from it by Christs Redemption Corvinus indeed in his Reply to Moulin cap. 8. sect 7. saith That men under an obligation to punishment are not under any obligation to obedience God will not be served by that man that hath violated his Covenant giving his reason of this assertion To be admitted to serve is a to token of favour which is not vouchsafed as he sayes to menunder guilt and wrath But this is a manifest errour Mans guilt can never rob God of his Sovereignty nor yet disingage man from his duty Standing right with God he is bound to homage Under guilt he is bound both to homage and punishment and to be admitted to serve is not meerly of favour but of dominion and power It was no great favour that Israel in Egypt found in the service of Pharaoh to serve with acceptance is indeed a favour but necessity and duty ties all that are under Sovereignty As man fallen in right is a subject though in his demeanour a rebel So in his regenerate estate still he ows subjection When God became a Saviour to the Elect of mankind he did not cease to be a Sovereigne The children of a King and Emperour know their father to be their Sovereign as by one is well observed The child of God knows God in Christ to be his Lord We are redeemed not to licentiousnesse not to a state of manumission from the command of God but to serve in righteousnesse and true holinesse all the dayes of our life Luke 1. 74. It can be no part of our Christian freedome to be from under the Sovereignty of heaven This Sovereignty of God is two wayes held forth unto us First in keeping up his commandments the power and vigour of his precepts Secondly in his exercise of discipline in chastisement and correction Here I shall assert three things First God in the days of the Gospel keeps up the power and authority of his Law the Obligation of it is still in force to binde the consciences of beleevers Secondly That this Law which God thus keeps up in force is a perfect and compleat rule to those to whom it is given Thirdly That this Law binds as given by the hand of Moses As to the first when I speak thus of the Obligation of the Law I hope I scarce need to tell in what sense I do take the Law Not in the largest sense for any doctrine instruction or Ordinance of any kinde whatsoever Men have their Laws and Directories but I have to deal with the Law of God Neither do I take it for the whole of the Word of God all his will revealed in his Word as it is taken Isa 2. 3. The Law shall go forth of Zion and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem Nor yet as it is taken for all the Scripture of the Old Testament as in that Text of the Apostle In the Law it is written by men of other tongues and by other languages I will speak to this people 1 Cor. 14. 21. Nor yet for the five books of Moses as it is taken in the words of Christ All must be fulfilled that was written in the Law of Moses Luke 24. 44. Neither do I here understand the Ceremonial Law which stood up as a partition between Jew and Gentile Ephes 2. 14. All that did binde the Jews and was not of force from God with the Gentiles is taken off from Christians There was a confession of guilt a beast needed not to have been slain if they had been innocent this held them under hopes that there was sacrifice to take away sinne imposed on the Jewes till the time of reformation Heb. 9. 10. as an Appendix to the first Table fitted to the Jewes state and condition as a shadow of good things to come Heb. 10. 1. Nor yet the judicial Law given to order the Common-wealth or State of that people farther then so much of it as was of nature and then did bind the Gentiles It is the Moral-Law that I meane that Law which was obligatory not only to the Jews but Gentiles for breach of which they suffered Levit. 18. 27 28. Neither do I understand the Moral Law as a covenant upon observation of which life was expected and might be claimed This is utterly inconsistent with the Gospel If there had been a Law that could have given life verily righteousnesse had been by the Law Gal. 3. 21. And this righteousnesse giving life utterly overthrows the Gospel If righteousnesse come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 21. In which sense I deny that the Jewes were ever under the Law The Law was not given as such a covenant as shall God willing be shewn So the Moral Law and Ceremonial Law should militate one against another The Moral Law holding them in themselves looking for a righteousnesse of works and the Ceremonial Law leading them out of themselves unto a sacrifice for remission of sinne Abraham was under no such covenant he had the Gospel preached to him Gal. 3. 8. and so had the seed of Abraham But it still hath the nature of a Law binding to obedience it is for ever a rule for the guide of our wayes That it was once of force is without question and above all contradiction and therefore I need not to multiply Old Testamentâ— Scriptures for it There is no repeale of it it was never antiquated and abolished therefore it is of force Though a Law be urged yet if a repeal may be pleaded there is a discharge That it is not repealed I shall shew and further that it is not capable of any repeal If it be repealed then either by Christ at his coming in the flesh or else by his Apostles by commission from him after the Spirit was given But neither Christ in person nor the Apostles by any commission
shall need to go no farther for refutation nor his own satisfaction Men are wont to expect in children and servants much more in wives both love and obedience If this rule hold they must quit the one and cleave to the other Either they must take to love without obedience or obedience without love These two which cannot be severed if ye love and keep my Commandments this Divinity makes inconsistent God gave Laws saith our Authour to man to declare his own Sovereignty and his creatures duty And we must tell him that to keep up his Sovereignty and his creatures duty he continues his Law They that take power of command from it divest him of his Sovereignty and exempt the creature from duty I know there are many evasions if it might be to shuffle off and evade this doctrine if not wholly denying the Law yet weakening the power of it in Gospel-time Some say that it bindes us as creatures but not as Christians And then it is to be feared that they taking themselves to be above creatures in that they are Christians being raised in a neerer relation to God then meer creatures they will take themselves to be disobliged But if the creature be cast into hell for transgression as a drunkard an adulterer a covetous person what will become of the Christian But it bindes both as creatures and Christians Christ having put his sanction upon it Others say that it bindes the unregenerate part of man but not the regenerate part that is free Paul delighted in the Law of God after the inward man Rom. 7. 22. That is as Interpreters understand so fâ—rre as regenerate How could he delight in it as a Law and not subject to it It seems these think that only wicked ones are bound or rather wickednesse to be alone obliged It will shortly be a mark of unregeneration as it seemes it is with some already to be subject to it They that urge it upon men and presse it as their duty have the name of legal Preachers and stranger from Gospel-mysteries put upon them It is a wearisome thing to rake further in this puddle I hope it is plain in that which hath been said that God holds up this part of his Sovereignty in keeping up his commandment the authority of his Moral Precepts in the hearts of his people CHAP. XI The Moral Law is a perfect Rule of Righteousnesse AS God keeps up his Law for a Rule to his people so it is a perfect and a compleat Rule to those to whom it is given This is a doctrine unanimously heretofore maintained by Protestant Writers but opposed by Papists Arminians and Socinians Papists have their traditions added as well to the Law as to the Gospel which is an accusation of the written Law as imperfect They have also their Evangelical counsels which though they are not commanded yet as Bellarmine speaks are commended as raising Christians to an higher perfection then ever the Law required Socimans with whom many Arminians joyne affirme that Christ hath instituted new precepts of obedience in the Gospel and added them to the commands of the Law such as transcend and exceed all that were delivered in Old Testament times Gerrard having disputed for the perfection of the Law against Papists cap. 14. De Evangelio saith The Popish opinion of new Laws promulgated by Christ the Phoâ—inians which is an other name of Socinians greedily embrace making a fair way for Mahometisme seeing that in the Alcoran it is in like manner said That Moses gave a Law lesse perfect Christ more perfect and Mahomet most perfect of all Gerrard quotes this passage out of the Cracovian Chatechisme in the same chapter Christ came not only to fulfil the Law for us but added new precepts to it These new precepts the same Authour saith they make twofoldâ— Some of which do appertain to manners some to ceremonies or outward rites in worship He names three that appertaine to manners To deny a mans self take up his Crosse and follow Christ Which three precepts my Authour in way of opposition saith belong to the first commandment Peltius in his Harmony of Arminians and Socinians chap. 4 5 6. sheweth their combination against the Orthodox party as in many other things so in this proposition now controverted He there quotes from Socinians these positions That Christ in the New Testament did not only abrogate the Ceremonial and Judicial Law but did much encrease and adde unto the Moral Law That he came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it which fulfilling saith he is nothing else but a perfecting of it and addition of what was wanting That we ought not only to observe those things that are given us of God and not abrogated by Christ but those precepts in like manner that are added by Christ Much more from many Socinians and Arminians may be seen in that Authour to that purpose Dr. Hammond in his Practical Catechisme speaking of Christs Sermon in the Mount agrees indeed with the Papists against the Protestants That Christ doth not here expound Moses and vindicate the Law from false glosses but that he addes to the Law and names many additions to the sixth seventh and other Commandments but dissents from them in that they make these Evangelical Counsels and makes them precepts not precepts of Moses but of Christ added by him to the Law but this with much modesty as though he would not be peremptory in his opinion So that Mr. Burges page 166. handling controversies about the Law saith I shall now handle the perfection of it and labour to shew that Christ hath instituted no new duty which was not commanded before by the Law of Moses And this question saith he will be profitable partly against the Arminians partly the Papists and lastly the Socinians He further saith page 169. That Christ did not adde new duties which were not commanded in the Law because the Law is perfect and they were bound not to add to it or detract from it Therefore we are not to conceive a more excellent way of duty then that prescribed Further if we speak of holy and spiritual duties there cannot be a more excellent way of holinesse this being an Idaea and representation of the glorious nature of God Dr. Ames in his Sciagraphia handling the Decalogue makes this his first doctrine The Law of God contained in the Decalogue is a most perfect Rule for guidance of the life of man He gives foure reasons with an use of information That we esteem this Law as it ought to be esteemed and that as the only Rule of our lives and such a Rule that hath no defect but is perfect in it self and requires all perfection in it Davenant de Justit actual cap. 40. pag. 463. saith The Law of God it self is a most exact and perfect Rule of Holinesse and Righteousnesse And in the proof of it saith This is every where confirmed in
inflicts the Lord 4. His way of dealing as a Father in love and not in vengeance Now turne to Heb. 12. 5 6 7. and there we shall see the Apostle 1. Quoting this Scripture 2. Checking them for not heeding it 3. Commenting upon it Ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children My sonne despise not thou the chastening of the Lord nor faint when thou art rebuked of him For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth If ye endure chastening God dealeth with you as with sonnes for what sonne is he whom the Father chasteneth not These words of the Apostle confirm all the Old Testament proofs before mentioned give a shrewd check to all those that would cast them off and are a full New Testament-proof of the point in hand our aversaries tell us that the children of God in New Testament-times have that great and happy priviledge to be free from all chastisements for sinne The Apostle on the other hand sayes that it is their happinesse to be chastised and would be their sorrow if they were without chastisement For this cause saith the Apostle many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep 1 Cor. 11. 30. There we see judgements inflicted the persons suffering and the cause of suffering assigned The judgements are set out 1. By the quality or kinde such as were visible on the outward man as their sinne was open so was their suffering 2. By their several degrees in which they suffered some weak languishing under infirmities some sick taken with diseases some fallen asleep surprised with death The persons suffering are set out 1. By their multitude many 2. By the application of the stroke Corinthians had sinned and Corinthians suffered The cause is implyed in the illative particle For and exprest in the foregoing words their unworthy addresses unto the Lords Table sinfully eating and drinking they eat and drink their own judgement and though it cannot be said that all were in grace that thus suffered yet there were some at least in grace among them in that the Lord chastened them in the world that they might not be condemned with the world The Lord Christ speaks fully to this in his letter from heaven to Laodicea the Church of Rev. 3. 19. As many as I love I rebuke and chasten As Scripture expresly holds out this truth so it is also clear in reason if God should not hold up his Sovereignty in this way of exercise of discipline upon his children his love could not be continued to them but would be withdrawn from them as we see in Christs words but now mentioned Rev. 3. 19. as also in those words of Solomon and the Apostle Pro. 3. 11. Heb. 12. 5 6 7. The love of God is such to his children and such a league of friendship is past between them say our adversaries that it will not suffer him to strike them We say his love is such that he cannot forbear to strike and will not suffer that they should sinne and carry it with impunity There are indeed some such parents that are so indulgent that children must neither have check nor stroke from them what course soever they take they scarce hear words much lesse do they suffer stripes These call this love but a wiser then they calls it by the name of hatred Prov. 13. 24. He that spareth the rod hateth his sonne but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes Pity will not suffer to make children smart But it is greater pity that the want of smart should bring them to the condemnation of hell Prov. 23. 13 14. With-hold not correction from the childe for if thou beatest him with the rod he shall not die Thou shalt beat him with the rod and shalt deliver his soul from hell A childe in sinne must either be beaten or spared Beating will not be his death but sparing tends to his condemnation The similitude is not ours but the Holy Ghosts One of the most terrible texts in all the Bible may be found as one sayes Hoses 4. 14. I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredome nor your spouses when they commit adultery He spares not some that he may for ever spare them chastening them in the world that he may not condemn them with the world He spares some and everlastingly destroys them 2. Otherwise God would be reconciled to the sinne of his people and in league not only with their persons but with their wickednesse which is most abhorrent to his holinesse We read of Gods reconciliation to the world but never to the wickednesse of the world God may be at peace with those that have sinned not imputing their trespasses but he will never be at peace with sin 3. It will not stand with his honour to suffer his to go on in impunity in these ways Their wickednesse will be said to be by his allowance Men in sin are ready to say as the Psalmist observe that God is such a one as themselves Psalme 50. 21. and that because they sinne and he keeps silence And men of the world will say the same if his people go on in sinne and prosper This the Lord sees and takes care this way to prevent Ezek. 39. 23. And the heathen shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity because they trespassed against me therefore hid I my face from them He will make it appear that he is no patron to them in that which is evil 4. God hath given in charge to Magistrates his vice-gerents for to punish They are revengers to execute wrath upon them that do evil Rom. 13. 4. they are sent of God for the punishment of evil doers 1. Pet. 2. 14. They have no commission to spare upon supposal of any interest in God or grace when they are found in any acts that are wicked What they do God does they acting by his command and by vertue of his commission For further clearing of this point and if it may be to work a right understanding I shall lay down severall Positions 1. God considered in his absolute Sovereignty may inflict sufferings without injustice on his innocent creatures there is no absolute necessity that sinne should go before all manner of trouble Punishment cannot be without a fault that alwayes implies guilt where justice is followed Yet such is Gods Sovereignty that he may lay affliction where there is no transgression We do it upon our fellow-creatures we tread upon wormes that never did offend us God may much more do it upon his creatures yea God does it How much do bruit creatures suffer in the world and unwillingly suffer as the Apostle speaks Rom. 8. 20. and that from Gods hand that hath made them subject to these suffering that which God doth unto one creature he may do unto any creature that which he doth to the meanest he may do to the most noble creature As a potter may
be full and how to be hungry he can beare prosperity and not be puffed up He can be under adversity and not be cast down In the worst of times the just lives by faith Hab. 2. 4. He can make use of every Ordinance for his spiritual advantage The word preach is for his benefit Being mixt with faith when he receives it Heb. 4 2. He knows how to improve the Sacraments for his spiritual growth those seales of the righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. Abel by Faith exceeded Cain in sacrifices Heb. 11. 4. and so do these exceed all unbeleevers in their performances All of these might be farther and more fully enlarged but that it is done at large by better hands Master Ward in his Life of Faith Master Culverwel especially Master Ball in his elaborate treatise on that subject CHAP. XXIII Repentance is a condition of the Covenant of grace THe condition immediately serviceable for mans reconciliation to God we have seen that which respects his reparation in his qualifications to hold up communion with God follows which is Repentance The end of Christs coming in the flesh being to save sinners He saves them not in their sins but from their sins and therefore calls them to repentance and engages all to it that he receives into covenant As God will have a self-outed and beleeving people So he will have an humble and an holy people So John Baptist the forerunner of the Mediatour began his Ministery Repent giving in this as his reason The Kingdome of heaven is at hand that is a New Testament-state in which the covenant of Grace was to be opened and the glorious priviledges of it made manifest Matth. 3. 2. With the self-same words Jesus the Mediatour of the covenant begins his Ministery Matth. 4. 12 17. verses compared From that time Jesus began to preach and to say Repent for the Kingdome of Heaven is at hand To this he resolves to engage those that he receives So it was with the twelve that were men employed to bring Nations into covenant They thus began their Ministery Mark 6. 12. They went out and preached that men should repent Neither let any make these two Faith and Repentance or Faith and Obedience which is comprised under Repentance one and the same and old project to introduce justification by works The Scriptures evidently distinguish them Paul makes them two distinct heads in the Ministery when he preached either to the Jews or Gentiles Acts 20. 21. Testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ They are two distinct heads of Catechisme in the Apostles times Repentance from dead works and Faith towards God Heb. 6. Repent ye and beleeve the Gospel Mark 1. 15. There are those acts in Scripture attributed to Faith that will by no means be ascribed to love or obedience as the taking in of the priviledges before mentioned If Faith work by love as the Apostle speaks Gal. 5. 6. And love be the end of the commandment out of a pure heart and of a good conscience and faith unfeigned 1 Tim. 1. 5. then faith is a distinct thing from love If by Faith the Worthies of old wrought righteousnesse then righteousnesse may be distinguished from it Heb. 11. 33. As Faith and Hope make two Graces so Love a third 1 Cor. 13. 13. It is not the Gospel way to confound them together They must not be divided but they are to be distinguished In this of repentance which is a Gospel-grace and condition of the covenant we may observe First A necessary pre-requisite to it Secondly The essential parts of it A necessary pre-requisite to this of repentance as to the other of Faith is Conviction Compunction Remorse Unto which the name of repentance is often given though it be of farre more narrow comprehension than the whole work yea it reacheth not unto any thing which is of the essence of it Called repentance as some say by a Synechdoche the part for the whole but I rather take it to be a Metonimy Sorrow is rather an adjunct than a part of it yet such an adjunct that still accompanies it and makes way for it as the needle as the Ancients use to expresse it enters the cloth not to stay but to let in the thread An Officer enters an house to throw out one inhabitant and to let in another but not to stay himself It hath its name from paine grief or trouble which affects the soul for sin which must needs follow when once we look upon it with shame and wearisomnesse Who can imagine a man to have his eyes opened to see that through his whole life he hath risen up in hostility and opposition against God hath taken off that stamp which God in creation put upon him run his soul upon everlasting hazard and all of this without sense of shame fear or trouble Who can imagine that the soul can leave so ugly a path as that of sin formerly so pleasant and desired without any grief or trouble of minde that he hath so long held it Or that any will make out for help in a Saviour till they see themselves through sinne in a lost and undone condition I speak not of infants who neither act faith nor repentance but of those of growth whom God works for himself by his Ministers As they have their call by the Word So the Word hath its efficacy in some measure of soul-shaking by the Lawes discovery by which is the knowledge of sinne as Rom. 3. 20. Evangelical allurements on which by some the whole of the work is laid can never I suppose work on the soule without Law-convictions If these Gospel allurements draw to Christ they must draw from sinne and how shall any be drawn from what he does not know nor ever understood either to be evil or dangerous It is with me no lesse a Paradox that a man may be drawn from sin without the discovery of the Law as to be drawn to Christ without the light of the Gospel And to say the Gospel discovers sin as well as the Law taking the Gospel in opposition to the moral precepts as here it must be taken is the greatest absurdity Exem gr If it be questioned whether to take up armes be a sin whether to fight a duel be a sinne whether usury be sin or to marry within the Levitical degrees forbidden be sin shall I determine this out of a Gospel-promise That Jesus Christ came to save sinners That the blood of Christ takes away all sin That in him all that beleeve are justified A thousand of these will contribute nothing to the expediting of these or like questions or the conviction of any under guilt The work must be brought to the rule the action to the line for discovery Upon the Laws convictions there may follow Gospel-aggravations But conviction is the work of the Law as an instrument of the
Exod. 34. 7. when he sets out his name in several particulars this is one by no means clearing the guilty Some indeed have said conceiting with themselves thereby to promote free grace that God justifies sinners as sinners which as it must needs if true bring in the salvation of all à quatenus ad omne valet argumentum then a man need no more but sinne to conclude his salvation and the more sinne the stronger evidence so it is utterly destructive to the Gospel and overthrows the whole work of Christs merit as the Apostle saith If righteousnesse be by the Law then Christ is dead in vaine Galatians 2. 21. So we may safely say If a man be justified as a sinner without a righteousnesse So that the truth is God justifies as righteous what he esteems as an abomination in man that he doth not himself but this in man is an abomination to him He that justifieth the wicked and condemneth the just even they both are an abomination to the Lord Proverbs 17. 15. Secondly Man hath no righteousnesse of his owne to bring in plea for his justification in which he can appeare before God in judgment This will be plaine if we consider the wayes of acquital where proceedings are just and legal This must be either as innocent when a man can plead not guilty to that which is given in charge So did David when Cush the Benjamite did traduce him Psalm 7. 3. If I have done this if there be iniquity in my hands And so did Paul to the charge of Tertullus Acts 24. 13. Upon this account Pilate was willing to have acquitted Christ I finde no fault in this man Luke 23. 4. Or else by way of satisfaction or discharge of the penalty which the Law imposeth so in all penal Lawes when the penalty is borne the delinquent is discharged Man cannot be acquitted as innocent his guilt is too palpable There is no men that sinneth nâ—t saith Solomon 1 Kings 8. 4 6. The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Gal. 3. 22. The Law speaks that language that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God Rom. 3. 19. Man is under that guilt that he is wholly silenced which renders the way of salvation by works impossible Neither can he be acquitted by way of satisfaction where the way of pure justice is held the debtor under charge can never come out till he hath paid the uttermost farthing Mat. 5. 26. Which here amounts to such an heighth that man may be ever paying but never able to satisfie Our guilt is according to the majesty of him whose Law is transgressed and wrath incurred This is seen in Devils and damned souls who bear in their own persons the reward due to their sinnes That man that must suffer it in his own person may well say with Cain My punishment is greater then I can bear Gen. 4. 13. Thirdly Man in this sad and perplexed estate hath yet a righteousnesse of grace tendered him a righteousnesse without the Law but witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Rom. 3. 21. And this is by way of discharge of his guilt by anothers suffering Our name was in the Obligation in case of sinne to suffer death Christ was pleased by consent and covenant with the Father to put in his and as he was thus obliged so he suffered the just for the unjust that he might bring us to God 1 Pet. 3. 18. We brake the Law and he bore the penalty whether idem or tantundem the same in specie or the same in value is scarce worth dispute So that it be yeelded that justice was answered and the Father satisfied and that we come out not on our own but our sureties account And this as I yet conceive is by Christs passive obedience His suffering in the flesh is our freedom his death is our ransome There needs no more than innocency not to die and when guilt is taken away we stand as innocent no crime then can be charged upon us But to reign in life as the Apostle speaks to inherit a crown there is farther expected which we not reaching Christs active obedience imputed to us not adding to ours but being in it self compleat is accounted ours and we are discharged And whereas some say Object that being freed from death upon that very account we reigne in life and therefore in case his sufferings deliver us from death they necessarily confer upon us life there is not nor can there be conceived any medium between them I answer Answ It is true of our natural life and death A man not dead is alive But taking death in Scripture-sense for the wages of sin which comprizes as we have heard all misery and life for an immarcessible crown of glory there may be a medium conceived between them and is not onely conceived but assigned by Papists in their Limbus infantum Neither will it serve to say that Christs active obedience served onely for a qualification to fit him for the work of suffering none but innocent man free from sin could be a sacrifice for sinne seeing Christ had been innocent though he had never come under the Law to have yeelded that obedience His person had not been as ours under the Law unlesse of his own accord he had been made under the Law Gal. 4. 4. Somewhat might be said for the subjection of the humane nature in Christ the manhood of Christ which was a creature but the person of Christ God-man seemes to be above subjection Much may be said for the subjection of the Sonne of David so considered he may say with David I am thy servant and the sonne of thy handmaid but not so of the Lord of David had he not for our sakes made himself a servant We know the mortality of the humane nature yet Christ had never died unlesse he had made himself obedient unto death neither needed he to have served unlesse he had humbled himself Phil. 2. to take upon him the forme of a servant See the confession of Faith agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines chap. 8. sect 5. and Dr. Featlies speeches upon it Fourthly This righteousnesse of Christ whether passive or active or both passive and active is made ours by faith This is our way of interest and appropriation of it to our selves Faith and no other grace this grace and no other Gospel-work gives us title and therefore as it is called the righteousnesse of God so also the righteousnesse of faith These two are promiscuously used and taken for one another Rom. 10. 3 4. Phil 3. 8. Called the righteousnesse of God being the free gift of God wrought by Christ who is God denied to be our own righteousnesse being neither wrought by us or inherent in us called the righteousnesse of faith not of works not of love not of patience or meekness It is alone faith and none of these graces that puts out it selfe to receive it
love in a graciously disposed soul cleaves to Christ for communion but receives him not for justification These two stand as relatives there is no soul entituled to this righteousnesse but by faith and faith is it that entitles to it the beleeving soul hath interest in it Therefore justification in Scripture is ascribed to faith and denied to works when neither faith nor works can beare us out of themselves before the tribunal of God but faith takes hold and the soul by faith rests on this righteousnesse of grace which the Gospel tenders It is true that faith receives the Spirit as well as it receives the blood of Christ Joh. 7. 39. Gal. 3. 14. But this is for another use for the work of sanctification inherent not justification by righteousnesse imputed And it is also true that faith accepts Christ as a Lord as well as a Saviour But it is the acceptation of him as a Saviour not as a Lord that justifies Christ rules his people as a King teacheth them as a Prophet but makes atonement for them onely as a Priest by giving himself in sacrifice his blood for remission of sins These must be distinguished but not divided Faith hath an eye at all the blood of Christ the command of Christ the Doctrine of Christ but as it eyes and fastens on his blood so it justifies He is set out a propitiation through faith in his blood Romans 3. 24. not through faith in his command It is the blood of Christ that cleanseth all sin and not the Sovereignty of Christ These confusions of the distinct parts of Christs Mediatourship and the several offices of faith may not be suffered Scripture assignes each its particular place and work Sovereignty doth not cleanse us nor doth blood command us faith in his blood not faith yeelding to his Sovereignty doth justifie us There are several acts or fruits of justifying faith Heb. 11. But all are not justifying It is not Abrahams obedience Moses self-denial Gideon or Sampsons valour that was their justification but his blood in which faith alone gives interest who did enable them in these duties by his Spirit Paul went in these duties as high as they living in more clear light and under more abundant grace I doubt not but he out-topt them and yet he was not thereby justified as 1 Cor. 4. 4. James indeed saith that Abraham was justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son on the Altar James 2. 21. But either there we must understand a working faith with Piscator Paraeus Pemble and others and confesse that Paul and James handle two distinct questions The one whether faith alone justifies without works which he concludes in the affirmative The other what faith justifies whether a working faith onely and not a faith that is dead and idle or else I know not how to make sense of the Apostle who streight inferres from Abrahams justification by the offer of his sonne And the Scripture was fulfilled that saith Abraham beleeved God and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse How otherwise do these accord He was justified by works and the Scripture was fulfilled that saith he was justified by faith Neither can I reconcile what he saith if this be denied with the whole current of the Gospel The Rhemists indeed understand those texts of the Apostle where he excludes works from justification to be meant of mans moral works done before faith and conversion The works of the Law done without Christ Annot. in Rom. 3. 20 28. As though the Law did not command those duties unto which Christ through faith strengthens a Christian converted by grace And when the Apostle concludes the impossibility of being justified by the works of the Law his meaning should be unlesse grace assist the Law that it may justifie This could not be the Apostle calls it a righteousnesse of God without the Law not a righteousnesse of the Law with addition of strength from the Gospel All works before or after conversion inherent in us or wrought by us are excluded from justification See Ravanellus in verbum Justificatio Num. 3. page 867. This justification wrought freely by grace through faith Rom. 3. 24. is no way consistent with justification by works And what the Apostle speaks of election we may well apply to justification the same medium equally proves the truth of both If by grace then it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace But if it be of works then it is no more of grace otherwise works were no more works Rom 11. 6. And these things considered I am truly sorry that faith should now be denied to have the office or place of an instrument in our justification nay scarce allowed to be called the instrument of receiving Christ that justifies us because the act of faith which is that which justifies us is our actual receiving Christ and therefore cannot be the instrument of receiving This is too subtile a notion we use to speak otherwise of Faith Faith is the eye of the soul whereby we see Christ and the eye is not sight Faith is the hand of the soul whereby it receives Christ and the hand is not receiving And Scripture speaks otherwise We receive remission of sinnes by Faith and an inheritance among them that are sanctified is received by Faith Acts 18. 26. Why else is this righteousnesse sometimes called the righteousnesse of Faith and sometimes the righteousnesse of God which is by Faith but that it is a righteousnesse which Faith receives Christ dwells in us by Faith Ephes 3. 17. By Faith we take him in and give him entertaintment We receive the promise of the Spirit through Faith Gal. 3. 14. These Scriptures speak of Faith as the souls instrument to receive Christ Jesus to receive the Spirit from Christ Jesus The instrumentality of it in the work of justification is denied because the nature of an instrument as considered in Physical operations doth not exactly belong to it which if it must be alwayes rigidly followed will often put us to a stand in the assignation of causes of any kind in Moral actions The material and formal causes in justification are scarce agreed upon and no marvel then in case men mind to contend about it that some question is raised about the instrument But in case we shall consider the nature and kinde of this work about which Faith is implied and examine the reason and ground upon which Faith is disabled from the office of an instrument in our justification and withall look into that which is brought in as an instrument in this work in the stead of it I do not doubt but it will easily appear that those Divines that with a concurrent judgment without almost a dissenting voice have made Faith an instrument in this work speak most aptly and most agreeably to the nature of an instrument The work about which Faith is implied is not an absolute but a relative