doth justify us and deserve our Justification unto us for that were to count our selves to be justified by some Act or Vertue that is within our selves but the true understanding and meaning thereof is that although we hear God's Word and believe it although we have Faith Hope Charity Repentance Dread and Fear of God within us and do never so many Works thereunto Yet we must renounce the Merit of all our said Vertues of Faith Hope Charity and all other Vertues and good Deeds which we either have done shall do or can do as things that be far too weak and insufficient and imperfect to deserve remission of our sins and our Justification and therefore we must trust onely in God's Mercy and that Sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour Christ Jesus the Son of God once offered for us upon the Cross to obtain thereby God's Grace and Remission as well of our Original Sin in Baptism as of all Actual Sin committed by us after our Baptism if we truly repent and turn unfeignedly to him again And at the end of the same 16. and beginning of 17. Page You see that the very true meaning of this Proposition or Saying we be Justified by Faith in Christ onely according to the meaning of the Old Antient Authours I is this We put our Faith in Christ that we be justified by him only that we be Justified by God's free Mercy and the Merits of our Saviour Christ onely and by no Vertue or good Works of our own that is in us or that we can be able to have or to do for to deserve the same Christ himself only being the Cause meritorious thereof All this we most heartily approve of But we doubt whether our Authour will join with us in it because he says the Papists own this That Christ onely is the Meritorious Cause of our Justification And if it be so Lett. pag. 6. then according to his reckoning the Church of England and we may be both Papists in the point of Justification notwithstanding that the said Homily was written purposely against the Papists and we have all subscribed to it It may be our Authour has so accustomed himself to call Men Papists when ever he is angry with them that he cannot forbear it and therefore as he used to call the Church of England Men Papists so now being angry with us his Passion may have excited him to bring his Habit into Act and to rank us also among Papists in the point of Justification But we leave this and proceed to what is more material and that is that if we be not Justified by Works because they do not nor cannot merit Justification then it will follow that for the same reason we are not Justified by Faith because Faith can no more merit Justification than Works This Objection the Authour or Authours of the Homily foresaw and answered it by confessing that Faith doth not Justify us on the account of its meritorious Nature but on another account Their Words are these As great and as godly a Vertue as the lively Faith is yet it putteth us from it self and remitteth or appointeth us unto Christ for to have only by him remission of our sins or Justification So that our Faith in Christ as it were saith unto us thus It is not I that take away your sins but it is Christ only and to him only I send you for that purpose forsaking therein all your good vertues Words Thoughts and Works and only putting your trust in Christ And in the Third Part Pag. 17. Nevertheless because Faith doth directly send us to Christ for remission of our sins and that by Faith given us of God we embrace the Promise of God's Mercy and of the remission of our sins which thing none other of our vertues or works properly doth therefore Scripture useth to say that Faith without Works doth Justify Thus far that Excellent Sermon And this is the same thing which we maintain That God hath chosen Faith above all other Graces and Vertues to be the receptive applicative Condition or moral Instrument and Means of Justification because it hath a proper and peculiar aptitude and fitness for that use being both of an illuminative and receptive Nature and as it is of an illuminative Nature it assures us that we can be Justified by no Satisfaction and Merit but that of Christ and so it sends us to him alone for Justification Then as it is of a receptive Nature it embraceth the Promise and takes hold of him and his Righteousness as held forth to us in the Promise that thereby and for the Satisfaction and Merits thereof alone and for no other thing we may be Justified In this sense we hold that we are Justified by Faith onely and that Faith is the onely receptive applicative Condition of Justification Yet this hinders not but that Repentance is the dispositive Condition of Justification The Homily saith expresly that Faith doth not shut out Repentance but that they are present together and that by Faith we trust only in Gods mercy and Christs Sacrifice to obtain thereby Remission of all Sins Original and Actual if we truly repent and turn unfeignedly to him again Part 2. pag. 16. Which words manifestly shew that they held Repentance to be a Condition of Justification but it cannot be according to the Authours of the Homily either a meritorious Condition for there is none such at all possible nor a receptive applicative Condition for that is the office of Faith onely Therefore it must be a dispositive Condition And then after one is Justified it is evident that they held sincere Obedience to be indispensably necessary to his continuing in a Justified state and obtaining Eternal Salvation For they say in Part 3. pag. 17. that if after we are Justified and made Members of Christ we care not how we live whether we do good or avoid evil Works we make our selves Members of the Devil and surely that is inconsistent with a Justified state Therefore to prevent our becoming Members of the Devil again sincere Obedience from a Principle of Faith and Love is indispensably necessary And that this was their true meaning is further evident from the Sermon of Good Works Part I. pag. 29. Where they quote and approve the saying of Chrysostom concerning the penitent Thief The words are This I will surely affirm that Faith onely saved him If he had lived and not regarded Faith and the works thereof he should have lost his Salvation again Indeed this is but a Supposition and we have no reason to think that if he had lived longer he would not have been careful to lead a Life of Faith and Holy Obedience yet if the antecedent be supposed the consequent necessarily follows that he would have lost his Salvation again For as it is in the Sermon of Faith To them that have evil works Second Part p. 24. and lead their Life in disobedience and transgression or
sorrows and pains than to hear that this is the Command of God this is the voice of Christ the Bridegroom that they be surely perswaded that Remission of sins or Reconciliation is given not for our worthiness but freely through Mercy for Christ's sake that the benefit may be certain As for the word Justification in those passages of Paul it signifies the Remission of sins or Reconciliation or imputation of Righteousness that is the acceptation of the Person And in the same Article the paragraph concerning good works This new life then should be obedience towards God And the Gospel preaches Repentance nor can there be Faith but in those who repent because Faith comforts Mens hearts in contrition and fears of sin c. Moreover we also teach concerning this Obedience that they who commit mortal sins that is wilful presumptuous sins against Knowledge and Conscience are not just because God requires this obedience that we resist our corrupt lusts and affections But those who do not resist but obey them against the Command of God and do actions against their Conscience they are unjust and they neither retain the Holy Spirit nor Faith that is confidence of Mercy For in those who delight in sin and do not repent there cannot indeed be that Trust or Confidence which may seek for remission of sins This passage of the Augustan Confession we thus understand that habitual reigning wilful sin against Conscience and without Repentance is inconsistent with a state of Grace and Reconciliation And we think that all Protestants except Antinomians are agreed in this One passage more and we have done with this Confession of Faith It is in the same 20th Article of Faith a little before the passage last quoted There is no need here of disstations about predestination and the like For the promise is universal and it takes nothing from works yea it stirs up to Faith and to Works that are truely good For remission of sins is transferred or removed from our Works unto God's Mercy not that we may do nothing but much rather that we may know how our Obedience pleaseth God in our so great infirmity This was the first Protestant Confession of Faith written by Melancthon Received by the Protestant Churches subscribed by their Ministers and that not onely by Luther and those of his Party but even by Calvin also It was likewise subscribed by seven Princes and Dukes in Germany and by the Magistrates of Cities and presented unto the Emperour Charles V. in the Year 1530. We hope then it will not be denyed but that this Augustan Confession contains the true Doctrine of the Gospel in the points of Justification by Faith and of the necessity of Repentance unto the obtaining pardon of sin and of sincere Obedience unto the obtaining of Eternal Salvation And if so then our Doctrine in those points is likewise the true Doctrine of the Gospel for it is the same with that of the Augustan Confession as to those Matters of which we treat From the Augustan Confession and the Testimony of many Princes Pastours Cities and Churches who subscribed and received it we come to the Articles of the Church of England which we have all subscribed the 11th Article concerning Justification we most heartily embrace and acknowledge that it is a most wholsome Doctrine and full of comfort that we are justified by Faith onely in that sense which is more largely explained in the Homily of Justification to which the Article expresly refers us and which by consequence we have subscribed by subscribing the Article It is called a Sermon of the Salvation of Mankind by Christ onely and a very good Sermon it is worth a thousand of our Authour's Letter which deserves not to be mentioned the same Day with it For understanding then the true and full meaning of the Article of Justification we must have recourse to the Homily or Sermon of Salvation In which Excellent Sermon pag. 13. We read as followeth London Edit 1673. That though according to the Apostle we are justified by a true and lively Faith onely and that that Faith is the Gist of God Yet that Faith doth not shut out Repentance Hope Love Dread and the Fear of God to be joined with Faith in every Man that is Justified but it shutteth them out from the office of Justifying So that although they be all present together marke that they do not onely necessarily follow and flow from Faith in time but when we are first Justified they are present together with it in him that is Justified yet they Justifie not altogether nor the Faith also doth not shut out the Justice of our good Works as necessary to be done afterwards of Duty towards God for we are most bounden to serve God in doing good Deeds commanded by him in his Holy Scripture all the Days of our life but it excludeth them so that we may not do them to this intent to be made good by doing them For all the good works that we can do be imperfect and therefore not able to deserve our Justification c. Again in the second part of that Sermon pag. 15. Nevertheless this Sentence that we be Justified by Faith onely is not so meant of them that the said Justifying Faith is alone in Man without true Repentance Hope Charity Dread and Fear of God at any time and season Nor when they say that we be Justified freely they mean not that we should or might afterwards be idle and that nothing should be required on our parts afterwards Neither they mean not so to be justified without good Works that we should do no good Works at all But this saying that we be justified by Faith onely freely and without Works is spoken for to take away clearly all Merit of our Works as being unable to deserve our Justification at God's Hand and thereby most plainly to express the weakness of Man and the Goodness of God the great infirmity of our selves and the Might and Power of God the imperfectness of our own works and the most abundant Grace of our Saviour Christ and therefore wholly to ascribe the Merit and Deserving of our Justification unto Christ onely and his most precious Blood-shedding This Faith the Holy Scripture teacheth us this is the strong Rock and Foundation of Christian Religion this Doctrine all Old and Antient Authours of Christ's Church do approve this Doctrine advanceth and setteth forth the true Glory of Christ and beateth down the vain-glory of Man this whosoever denieth is not be accounted for a Christian Man nor for a setter forth of Christ's Glory but for an Adversary to Christ and his Gospel and for a setter forth of Mens vain-glory Again pag. 16. The true meaning and understanding of this Doctrine we be Justified freely by Faith without Works or we be Justified by Faith in Christ onely is not that this our own Act to believe in Christ or this our Faith in Christ which is within us
both they and the Synod which approved their Suffrage and gave them great thanks for it did all of them believe that there is and must be a great and holy change wrought on us and holy Dispositions and Qualifications bestowed on us before we are immediately able and that we may be able to believe and repent and consequently before we are justified Yea our Divines expresly reject it as the first Arminian Error against that part of the third and fourth Articles which relates to Regeneration and Conversion unto God by Faith and Repentance That in Regeneration there are no spiritual Gifts infused into the Wills of Men. Pag. 91. This Arminian Errour they disprove and amongst other Arguments against it Pag. 92. they use this for one As the Will of a meer natural Man is said to be vicious from a certain inbred and inherent wickedness which in a wicked man even when he doth nothing is habitual so again we must acknowledge that in the Will of the regenerate there is a certain Righteousness or Goodness as it is in the Original given and infused by God which is presupposed unto their Religious Actions St. Austin in many places setteth forth this habitual Righteousness or Goodness And Prosper calls this goodness of the Will Prosper de vocat Gentium lib. 1. c. 6. superni agricolae primam plantationem the first planting of the Heavenly Husbandman Now a Plantation Notes something ingrafted in the Soul not an Act or Action flowing from the Soul Thus our Divines at Dort whereby we see that it is a branch of Arminianism to deny that there is any Holy Habit Seed Root or Permanent Principle of Grace or any Spiritual Qualification wrought in the Soul before Justification And we find that long ago Robinson one of the rigidest Seperatists from the Worship and Discipline of the Church of England yet Religiously adhered to her Doctrine in this Point we are upon for thus he writes in Defence of the Doctrine of the Synod at Dort Robinsons Defence of the Doct. of the Synod at Dort p. 109. Pag. 132.133 That a man may have his Sins pardoned who yet wants all brotherly Love and goodness the Scriptures every where deny Mat. 6.14 15. 1 Joh. 3.14 15. Mark 11 24 25. Rom. 8.1 Psal 32.1 2. And afterwards in the same Book By the Word and Spirit saith he God regenerates Men or gives them Faith and Repentance which they must have before they can believe or repent as the Child must have Life before it can live or do Acts of Life and must be generated or begotten before it have Life or Being Regeneration therefore goes before Faith and Repentance Here we see that old rigid zealous Nonconformist held that there must be a real great change made on a Man a Holy Principle must be put into him and Holy Qualifications bestowed upon him before he can believe and repent and consequently before he can be justified Pag. 56. Again before in the same Book he saith expresly that Rom. 8.29 30. Shews plainly that our Predestination or Election goes before our Calling and our Calling before our Justification And in the same Page Gods chusing a Man whether in Decree from Eternity or by Actual and Effectual Calling and calling of him out of the State of Sin by giving him the Spirit of Faith and Grace goes before his believing for he cannot believe before he have Faith nor have it before God give him it but his actual saving by Justification and Glorificaton follows after Faith The same Truth is witnessed unto by Mr. Ball in his Treatise of Faith Part 1. p. 1.36 Every one saith he is not fit to receive the Promise of Mercy the Enemies of the Gospel of Christ Worldlings Hypocrites and all in whom Sin reigneth can have no true Faith in Christ he is only sit to receive Mercy who knows that he is lost in himself and unsatiably desires to be eased of the heavy burden of his Sins Faith is a Work of Grace of the Essicacy of Gods Spirit whereby we answer to the Effectual Call of God and come unto him that we might be partakers of Life Eternal And if saving Effectual Calling be precedent to Faith the subject of living Faith is Man savingly called according to the purpose of Gods Will. We can teach no Faith to Salvation but according to the Rule of Christ Mark 1.15 Repent and Believe the Gospel no Remission but according to the like rule Luke 24.47 Acts 2.37 38. Our last Witness is Mr. Gataker who saith God doth not actually remit or release Sin until he give Grace to repent Gatakers shadows without substance p. 55. which in the Gospel Phrase and Method goes constantly before pardon c. We might easily bring many more of our Reformed Divines to witness unto this Truth but these are sufficient to shew that it is the old Protestant Doctrine generally received in the Reformed Churches that there is and must be a real Holy Change a seminal permanent Principle of Spiritual Life some Holy Dispositions and Qualifications wrought in us by the Spirit of Christ before we are justified by Faith in the Blood of Christ And here by the way we must tell our Author what it may be he doth not know First that if he will believe Bardwardin Let. p. 13. with whom he saith God blessed England against the Pelagians then he will find it to be a Branch of the Pelagian Heresie that there is no Gracious Principle no Holy Disposition or Qualification wrought in us before our Justification For Bradwardin saith so expresly Bradward de causâ dei lib. 1. Cap. 43. p. 397. Asserunt ambae partes residuae opinionis Pelagii remissionem peccati Justificationem injusti praecedere gratiam tempore vel naturâ That is Both the remaining parts of the Opinion of Pelagius assert that Remission of Sin and the Justification of the unjust go before Grace in Time or in Nature Thus Bradwardin and then he falls a Confuting of this Pelagian Opinion by such Arguments as most manifestly shew that by the Word Grace there he meant not the Good-Will Love and Favour of God but the Effect of it upon the Soul even a Gracious Gift communicated unto and a real Holy change wrought in the Soul whereby of ungracious it is made inherently Gracious and of unjust and unholy it is made inwardly Just and Holy This Grace this Gracious change he maintains to be in Order before Remission of Sin and the Denial of this Grace this Gracious change before Remission of Sin he declares to be a Branch of Pelagian Heresie We thought fit to let the World know that what by some is accounted pure Gospel Doctrine now was in former times accounted a part of Pelagius his Opinion and that even by Bradwardin whom our Authour so highly commends Yet at the same time we must declare that we do by no means approve Bradwardins way of Confuting
but a Protestant Bishop and a zealous Protestant who held Rome to be Mystical Babylon and the Pope to be Antichrist as appears from what he wrote in Tortura Torti pag. 183 184 185 186 187. Now this zealous Protestant in his 17th Sermon of the Nativity on Psal 2.7 writes thus We had well hoped Christ would have preached no Law all Gospel he Bp. Andrews Volume of Sermons pag. 161. That he would have preached down the old Law but not have preached up any new We see it is otherwise A Law he hath to preach and preach it he will He saith himself Praedicabo Legem So if we will be his Auditors he tells us plainly we must receive a Law from his mouth If we love not to hear of a Law we must go to some other Church For in Christs Church there a Law is preached Christ began we must follow and say every one of us as he saith Praedicabo Legem Christ will preach a Law and they that are not for the Law are not for Christ It was their quarrel above at the 3d. verse they would none of Christ for this very cause that Christ comes preaching a Law and they would live lawless They would endure no Yoke that were the Sons of Belial Belial that is No Yoke But what agreement hath Christ with Belial 2 Cor. 6.15 The very Gospel hath her Law A Law Evangelical there is which Christ preached And as he did we to do the like look but into the grand Commission by which we all preach which Christ gave at his going out of the World Goe saith he Mar. 28.19 preach the Gospel to all Nations teaching them what to observe the things that I have commanded you Lo here is commanding and here is observing Page 162. So the Gospel consists not only of certain Articles to be believed but of certain Commandments and they to be observed Now I know not how but we are fallen clean from the term Law nay we are even fallen out with it Nothing but Gospel now The name of Law we look strangely at we shun it in our common talk To this it is come while men seek to live as they list Preach them Gospel as much as ye will but hear ye no Law to be preached to hold or keep them in And we have Gospelled it so long that the Christian Law is clean gone with us I speak it to this end to have the one term retained as well as the other to have neither term abolished but with equal regard both kept on foot They are not so well advised that seek to suppress either name If the name once be lost the thing it self will not long stay but go after it and be lost too The Christian Religion in the very best times of it was called Christiana Lex the Christian Law And all the Antient Fathers liked the term well and took it upon them To conclude Gospel it how you will if the Gospel have not the Legalia of it acknowledged allowed and preserved to it if once it lose the force and vigour of a Law it is a sign it declines it grows weak and unprofitable and that is a sign it will not long last And Page 165. he saith 1. There is the benefit of this Law what he doth for us 2. And then what we are to do for him our duty out of this Law The benefit is the Gospel of this Law the duty is the Law of this Gospel And Page 166 They speak of Laws of Grace this is indeed a Law of Grace nay it is the Law of Grace not only as it is opposite to the Law of Nature but even because it offereth Grace the greatest Grace that ever was This was Printed and Published in the Year 1624. and that vvas before most of us vvere born And yet even then the Gospel vvas expresly called the Nevv Lavv of Grace by Bishop Andrews and therefore it is no nevv Word vvhich we have lately invented And not onely Bishop Andrews vvho vvas every vvhit as expert as our Authour can be in making a jingling noise vvith Words vvhich vvas more in fashion then than it is novv but the famous Dr. Twiss vvho vvas used to a Scholastick close way of reasoning both says and proves that the Gospel is a Lavv. Therefore he shall be our last Witness in this Cause Novv in his Ansvver to an Arminian Book called The Synod of Dort and Arles reduced to practice he plainly asserts as we do that God deals with Men not meerly as an absolute Soveraign arbitrary Lord but as a Ruler and Governour according to a known Law in giving unto them or with-holding from them the subsequent blessings and benefits of the new Covenant His Words are these Now like as the act of God's decree Pag. 40.41 42. is of the meer pleasure of God no temporal thing being fit to be the cause of the eternal decree of God in like sort the giving of Faith and Repentance proceeds meerly of the good pleasure of God According to that God hath mercy on whom he will Rom. 9.18 And to obtain mercy at the hand of God is to obtain faith Rom. 11.30 But as for Glory and Salvation we do not say that God in conferring it proceeds according to the meer pleasure of his will but according to a Law which is this whosoever believeth shall be saved which Law we willingly profess he made according to the meer pleasure of his will but having made such a Law he proceeds according to it No such Law hath he made according whereunto to proceed in the dispensation of the grace of Faith and Repentance In like manner the Dr. there distinguishes between the denyal of Special Grace of Faith and Repentance and the denyal of Glory As for the first the denyal of Special Grace to some when God gives it to others the Doctor says that God proceeds therein according to the meer pleasure of his Will but as to the second his own Words are these As touching the denyal of Glory and inflicting damnation God doth not proceed according to the meer pleasure of his will but according to a Law which is this Whosoever believeth not shall be damned And albeit God made that Law according to the meer pleasure of his will yet no wise man will say that he denies glory and inflicts damnation on men according to the meer pleasure of his will The case being clear that God denies the one and inflicts the other meerly for their sins who are thus dealt withal And in the next Page Like as God inflicts not damnation but by way of punishment so he doth not bestow Salvation on any of ripe Years but by way of reward Yet here also is a difference for damnation is inflicted by way of punishment for the evil works sake which are committed but Salvation is not conferred by way of Reward for the good works sake which are performed but meerly for Christs sake Thus
uncere Obedience to be a Legal but an Evangelical Condition of the Covenant of Grace and consequently that in our Judgment they do not hold the same Place and Office in the New Covenant of Grace which personal perfect sinless Obedience had and were to have had in the first Covenant of Innocency and of Works Object But saith our Authour in his Appendix Pag. 39. It is the Achillaean Argument of the New Divinity that Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience is our Evangelical Righteousness and that Righteousness is our defence against the charge of Vnbelief Impenitence c. And what then Why in the following Pages he so shapes it as might best serve his Design which was to make the People believe that we set up our own Righteousness in the place of Christ's and maintain that Men must be Justified by their own Righteousness and not onely by Christ's And so he trips up Achilles Heels by the Fallacy of many Interrogations But it will be no very difficult Task to scatter this Mist which he hath cast before the Peoples Eyes In order thereunto let it be considered 1. That the Substance of this Argument was not invented by any amongst us dead or alive that we know of but some in this Nation having read it in some very eminently learned forreign Divines particularly Ludovicus de Dieu at large and the Holy Humble Learned and most Acute Placeus they received it and improved it as useful to clear some seeming Difficulties in Scripture obiected to us by our Adversaries the Papists 2. Consider that this way of reconciling James with Paul in the matter of Justification for the Substance of it was taken up also by the Learned Turretin 3. That it doth not appear that all of us ever expressed our selves in those Words for the clearing up of the seeming difference between James and Paul 4. That those who do take that way do not impose it upon others We know there have been many ways taken by Reformed Divines to expound James so as not to contradict Paul And some considerable difference there may seem to be among Divines in the methodizing and expressing of their Notious of those Matters But yet there appears to be very little difference amongst them as to the things themselves Indeed upon the Matter all seems to come almost to the same thing And particularly let it be considered 5. That this way of Interpreting James his Justification by Works and reconciling it with Paul's Justification by Faith seems to differ from the more common modern Opinion mostly in the manner of expression which some of us think most agreeable to the Scripture Phrase But we leave every Man to express his Notions as best pleaseth him provided that if he do not use Scripture Words yet he do not contradict Scripture sense And therefore 6. We desire it may be considered that this way of expounding James which we are now speaking of doth not in the least contradict the Holy Scripture but rather serves to explain it if it be understood as it ought to be in the true genuine sense of its Authours For 1. Though they say that our Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience is an Evangelical Righteousness as indeed it is yet at the same time they declare that this Evangelical Righteousness is no other thing but the Condition of the new Covenant on our part whereby we are interested first and still keep our interest in the satisfactory meritorious Righteousness of Christ by and for which alone we are justified from first to last They do not say that this Evangelical Righteousness which is the Condition of the Covenant doth satisfie God's Justice for the least sin either against Law or Gospel or that it doth properly merit to us the least good so much as a Cup of Cold Water They give unto Christ alone the whole Glory of having by his Righteousness satisfied Justice for all our Sins and merited to us all our Mercies So that our Authour was we think a little impertinent in putting his question page 41. What is that Righteousness which justifies a man from the sin of Vnbelief For he knows well enough that the Worthy Divines as he deservedly calls them with whom he has to do in that Argument have published it to all the World under their hands That assoon as a Man who was before an Unbeliever begins through Grace sincerely to believe in Christ and to repent of his Unbelief and of all his other sins immediately thereupon Christ's satisfactory meritorious Righteousness justifies him from his sin of Unbelief and from all his other former sins both Original and Actual that is God by and for Christ's Righteousness justifies him from them upon his believing and repenting And as our Authour knows this to be true so he hath honestly confessed it in the end of the same Paragraph Will any man says he dare to tell a person who is troubled in Conscience about his sin of Vnbelief that Christ's Righteousness is his legal Righteousness against the charge of sins against the Law but for Gospel-charges he must answer them in his own name I know our hottest opposers would abhor such an answer and would freely tell such a Man that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin and that his Justification from his Vnbelief must be only in that Righteousness which he so sinfully had rejected while in Vnbelief and now lays hold on by Faith Here the Truth comes out at last and in effect he gives the lye to his own false accusations of the Lord's Ministers and acquits the accused For if his hottest Opposers freely tell People that the Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin and that their Justification from the sin of Unbelief must be only by the Righteousness of Christ then how can those things be true whereof as was observed before he had accused us in page 6 28 33 and page 39. That we bring our own pitiful Holiness into Justification and make it sit on the Throne of Judgment with the precious blood of the Lamb of God Ex ore tuo c. But 2. The Authors of the Argument we are upon never said wrote or so much as thought that can be known That our sincere Faith and Repentance is a Defence or Justification against a charge of Unbelief or Impenitence given in against us by God for they knew full well without being taught it by this Authour That the God of Truth cannot be the Authour of a Lye which he would certainly and evidently be if he should charge us with being Unbelievers and Impenitent at that very time when he knows that by his own Spirit and Grace we sincerely believe and repent But that which the aforesaid Excellent Divines said is yet to be seen in their Writings and it is this That our sincere Faith and Repentance is a Defence and Justification against any false charge of Unbelief and Impenitence that is or possibly may be given in against
Souls whose lot it is to be led into the Ditch by such blind guides But good Sir how doth it appear that our answer is wrong and yours only is right Why may not both be right and why must not both be right and both concur to make up one entire answer and full advice to a wicked man who under Conviction comes and asks Ministers what he must do to be saved If you had behaved your self in this matter like a fair adversary or an honest Man you had given in our answer fully without curtailing it for you know in your conscience that in such a case our full Answer and Advice to a Man is that he must do both he must both believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and repent of mourn for and turn from his Sins The Conscience of Truth extorted this Confession from you in your appendix page 41. as we observed before That your hottest opposers would freely tell such a man that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin Why did not you then if you be an honest man give in our full answer and refute it if you thought it was wrong If you say that Paul did not give such a full answer and advice to the Goaler Acts 16.30 31. but bid him believe only in the Lord Jesus Christ and thereupon promised him Salvation without advising him to repent and turn from his sins We answer It is true Paul bid the Goaler believe in the Lord Jesus Christ but it is utterly false that he bid him only believe there is no such exclusive particle in the Text and though the Sacred Historian Luke mention not expresly that Paul bid the Goaler repent yet it doth by no means follow that because Luke doth not say expresly that Paul bid the Goaler repent therefore he did not bid him for it was never Lukes intention to set down in his History every Word or Sentence which Paul at any time spoke to the People Nay in the very next verse Acts 16.32 Luke says that Paul and Silas spake unto the Goaler the Word of the Lord and to all that were in his house but he doth not tell us particularly what that Word was Nor doth our Authour know nor can he with a good Conscience say that it was not an Advice and Exhortation to repent to mourn for his known sins and to leave and loath them assuring him that thereupon God would have mercy on him and pardon his sins and save his Soul for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake If our Authour say that as he cannot be sure of the negative that he did not so we cannot be sure of the affirmative that he did preach the necessity of Repentance to the Goaler We answer that we can prove and do thus prove the affirmative 1. Because it was a part of the Apostles Commission to preach Repentance unto all People as well as Faith in Christ for which see Mark 16.15 16. compared with Luke 24.47 48. But Paul was an Apostle therefore he acted according to the Apostolical Commission 2. Because Paul baptized or caused the Goaler to be baptized and it was necessary that Repentance should be preached to him and professed by him before such an one as he were admitted to Baptisme 3. Because Paul himself tells us as his words are recorded by the Sacred Historian Luke that it was his common Practice to preach Repentance as well as Faith unto all those whom he Converted or intended and endeavoured to convert unto the Christian Religion Thus did he at Lystra Acts 14.15 He exhorted the people to turn from their vanities unto the living God which made Heaven and Earth c. Thus also at Athens Acts 17.30 31. He commanded them all from the Lord to repent and perswaded them so to do by a most powerful Motive and Argument taken from God's being Rector and Judge of the World and from his having appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by Jesus Christ and will then justifie or condemn reward or punish every man according to their works and this he assured them of by an Argument taken from Christ's Resurrection from the dead Again in Acts 20.21 he tells us That Repentance towards God and Faith towards our Lord Jesus were the sum and substance of his Sermons these were the two subjects that he â—ordinarily preached upon both to Jews and Gentiles And lastly in Acts 26.20 22 23. we read that he declared openly to Ring Agrippa that from the first time he was miraculously called to be an Apostle his business had been to preach Repentance and Faith From all which we conclude that we have good reason to believe and assert the affirmative that Paul did not preach Faith only but that he preached Repentance also to the Goaler and withal we challenge and defie our Authour to prove the Negative that Paul preached not the necessity of Repentance but of Faith only in order to his Salvation But saith our Authour page 15. No wit or art of man will ever find a crack or flaw in or devise another or a better answer than Pauls to the Goaler believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved We Reply It is far from the thoughts of any of us or of any good Christian to find fault with or to go about to mend Paul's Answer to the Goalers question all that we say is that his whole answer is not set down expresly by the Historian Luke and we have proved it A truer Answer cannot indeed be given than it was but a fuller may be given and we have proved it was given by Paul though not particularly expressed by Luke This may satisfie any reasonable Man for we are sure it cannot be confuted Yet for the farther satisfaction of all Men if possible we will here transeribe and set down a passage of Mr. Venning a famous Congregational Minister once in this City It is in his Sermon called the way to true happyness preached before the Lord Mayor and Aldermen January 28. 1654 5 on Matth. 7.21 page 10 11 12. I ground it further saith he on this Rule which is an undeniable one and for not attending whereunto we have had so many needless groundless and unprofitable disputes in the World The Rule is this That the Scripture doth often yea very usually put particular Duties for all Religion and therefore annexeth Salvation to distinct Graces Sometimes it is he that believeth shall be saved Elsewhere he that calleth upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved Here it is He that doth the will of God Now all these and the like are complex and comprehensive propositions and contain more in them than they make shew of for God speaks much in a little Acts and Duties of Religion being as Moralists speak of their Vertues inter se connexae linked together in a Golden Chain Religion is not this or that piece but the whole which is usually expressed in a word or
to the end And then he proceeds saying This is the way Beloved wherein we find Jesus Christ our saving health the High Priest of our Offerings the Guardian and Helper of our weakness Lastly In Page 102 105 106. He that hath Love in Christ let him keep the Commandments of Christ c. Blessed are we Beloved if we have done the Commandments of God in the Concord of Love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that through Love our Sins may be forgiven us For it is written Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered Blessed is the Man unto whom the Lord imputeth not sin neither is there guile in his mouth This Blessedness hath been unto those who were chosen by God through Jesus Christ our Lord to whom be Glory for ever and ever Amen Thus Clement who was Paul's Fellow-Labourer Phil. 4.3 and who may well be presumed to know his Mind as to these Matters and we see evidently by his Words that he held as we do that Faith and Repentance are both antecedently necessary to Justification and pardon of sin and further that sincere Obedience to Christ's Commandments in a course of holy living is indispensably necessary to the obtaining of Eternal Life and Glory in the Everlasting Kingdome of our most Glorious God and Saviour But some may possibly say what did Clement mean by writing as he doth that our sins are forgiven us through Love Is that an Orthodox Expression We Answer What did our Saviour mean by saying Mat. 6.14 15. If ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you but if ye forgive not men their trespasses neither will your Father forgive your trespasses And again what did our Saviour mean by saying Mark 11.25 When ye stand praying forgive if ye have ought against any that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you your trespasses Were these Orthodox Expressions If they were Orthodox as doubtless they were and it were Blasphemy to think otherwise then so is the expression of Clement Orthodox for the Expressions are alike upon the matter and the meaning is the same Clement by saying that our sins are forgiven through Love meant no more but that our forgiving our Neighbour his Trespasses against us which is an Act of Love is a Means of God's appointment whereby we obtain the forgiveness of our sins from God through Christ We do not doubt but this was Clement's meaning and we are sure it was our Saviours When he said Mark 11.25 If ye have ought against any forgive that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you Our blessed Lord who is the faithful Witness makes God's forgiving us to be the End and our forgiving our Neighbour to be a Means indispensably necessary to be used by us for obtaining that End So that we obtain the forgiveness of our sins through Love in a very sound and Orthodox sense even as sound and Orthodox as Christ's Gospel is In the second place we bring the foresaid Testimony of Origen to prove that the real change which is wrought in the Soul by a sincere Repentance is antecedently necessary to dispose and prepare us for obtaining the promised Blessing of Pardon of sin which is an essential part of Justification It is in his Third Book against Celsus of the Cambridge Edition pag. 154. The Passage in Origen begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Which we will give the sense of in English for the use of our Authour After these things viz. which had been objected and answered before he Celsus takes upon him to charge us with that which is not granted by the more rational judicious Believers though perhaps it may be thought so by some foolish or ignorant Christians that as some Men are overcome by and under the Dominion of a tender compassionate natural frame and temper of Mind so God being overcome by and under the power of a merciful compassionate nature towards them that are in misery he relieves and pardons miserable Men though they be wicked if withal they be of a pitiful merciful nature◠But though they be otherwise good men yet God rejects them if they be not of such a pitiful compassionate Nature Which is most unjust For according to our Faith God doth not relieve so as to pardon and receive into his Favour any wicked Man unless he be first turned unto virtue that is converted like as he doth not reject any that is now become a good Man But neither doth he relieve or shew mercy unto any Man of a merciful Nature meerly because he is of a merciful Nature taking the word Mercy in the sense that the vulgar or common People use it in but those that greatly condemn themselves for their sins so as thereupon to mourn and bewail themselves as lost and undone by reason of the evil they have done and withal give evidence of a signal change such as becomes true Penitents God grants to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Grace of Repentance that is the Gracious Fruit and Benefit promised to Repentance even to them who have changed their most wicked course For unto such is given as by Act of Oblivion a pardon of their past sins through the vertue that comes to dwell in their Souls and casts out the vice and corruption that possessed them before Or if at first they attain not unto a confirmed habit of vertue yet there is a notable change in the Soul which proceeds so far as that it is sufficient according to the proportion of it to purge out and take away the great abundance of wickedness that was in it before so as it can hardly ever get into the Soul again Thus far Origen In which Testimony of his there are several things worthy of our observation 1. Origen did not write this meerly as a private Christian or Teacher of the Church declaring what was his own private Opinion but as the great and famous Apologist in his time for Christ the Christian Church and for the Truth of the Christian Religion against the Heatheus particularly against Celsus a very learned Heathen who had written learnedly and spitefully against Christ and against Christians and the Christian Religion 2. Whereas Celsus had charged Christians with an absurd impious Opinion as that they believed That God pardoneth wicked Mens sins and receives them into his Favour if they be of a good Nature of a soft pitiful compassionate Temper before there pass a real change upon them before they repent before they turn from sin and return unto God in Heart and Affection Origen deuyed the Charge and affirmed that no rational intelligent judicious Christian believed any such thing that if any Christian did at all believe that God justified and pardoned a wicked Man before he had repented of his sins and returned unto the Lord they must be some foolish simple ignorant People and yet he would not absolutely grant to his Adversary that there
this Father Why even God for none is so much a Father as he none so affectionate as he Thorefore he shall receive thee his Son although thou hast prodigally spent that which thou hadst received from him although thou returnest naked yet he will receive thee because thou art returned And he will rejoyce more in thy return than in another mans sobriety Sed si poeniteat ex animo but it is on condition that thou repent from thy heart that thou compare thy hunger-starved condition with the plenty of thy Fathers hired Servants that thou forsake the swine those unclean beasts that thou come back to thy Father though he be offended with thee saying Father I have sinned nor am I worthy to be now called thine By this we plainly see that Tertullian preached the necessity of sincere Repentance antecedently to the obtaining pardon of sin Next to Tertullian we alledge blessed Cyprian for a Witness of the same Truth Thus then he writes Dominus loquitur c. Operum Cypr. Tom. 1. Epist 18. edit Colon. Agrip. An. 1617. The Lord speaketh and saith to whom shall I look but to him that is humble and still and trembleth at my words Seeing we ought to be all such they then much more ought to be such whose Duty it is to endeavour that after a grievous fall they may obtain God's favour and mercy by true Repentance and great humility In his 52 Epistle to Antonianus page 59. Dominus in Evangelio c. The Lord in the Gospel setting forth the goodness and kind affection of God the Father saith What man is there of you who if his Son ask of him bread will give him a stone Or if he ask a fish will give him a Serpent If ye then who are evil know how to give good gifts unto your Children how much more shall your heavenly Father give good things to them that ask him The Lord here makes a comparison between a Carnal Father or a Father of the Flesh and the Eternal and large goodness and kindness of God the Father Now if it be so that this evil sinful Father upon Earth who hath been grievously offended by his sinful and wicked Son yet if afterwards he see him reformed and having forsaken the sins of his former Life and being by the sorrow of Repentance amended and changed to sober and good manners and to the Discipline of Innocency or to a Holy course of Life he both rejoyceth and is glad and having received him whom he formerly had cast off he embraces him with the desire of a Fatherly Joy How much-more doth that One and True Father who is Good Merciful and Kind yea Goodness Mercy and Kindness it self rejoyce in the Repentance of his Children neither doth he threaten wrath to the penitent nor punishment to them that mourn and lament But he rather promiseth them pardon and favour Whence the Lord in the Gospel saith They are blessed who mourn for he that mourns moves compassion Whereas he that is stubborn and proud heaps up to himself the wrath and punishment of the judgment to come And in the same Epistle page 60. Scimâ—s juxtd Divinarâ—m Scripturdrum fidem ductore hortatore ipso Deo ad agendum poenitentiam peccatores redigi veniam atque indulgentiam poenitentibus non denegari We know according to the Faith of the Holy Scriptures God himself being both the Author and Exhorter that Sinners are brought to Repentance and also that forgiveness and favour is not denyed them when they do repent And in his eighth Epistle to the Clergy and People after he had told them that according as it had been revealed and foretold by prophecy the Enemy had got power over them and had raised a terrible Persecution against them because of their Divisions and Contentions their breaking the Lords Commandments and sleepy way of Prayer and after he had most passionately exhorted them to give themselves much to Watching and prayer to earnest frequent fervent Prayer Night and Day and had pressed them thereunto both by precept and example of Christ and his Apostles who spent Days and Nights in Prayer and had likewise encouraged them thereunto by telling them that Christ prayed not for himself and his own sins but for them and for their sins he added as it is in pag. 16. of that Book Quod si pro nobis c. i. e. which if it be so that he the Lord Jesus labours and watches and prays for us and for the pardon of our sins how much the more should we continue in Prayer and Supplication We have Jesus Christ our Lord and God to be Advocate and Intercessour for our Sins if so be or on condition that we repent of our sins past and confessing and being sensible of our Faults whereby we now at this present time offend the Lord we promise that for time to come we will walk in his ways and fear his Commandments By this that we have cited and by much more that we could cite out of Cyprian it may evidently appear that that blessed Martyr of Jesus was far from being of Opinion that God pardons the sins of his People before they repent Indeed to tell People that God pardons their sins before they repent it is falsa misericordia false or deceitful Mercy it is not curare sed si dicere verum volumus occidere the way to cure but if we will speak the Truth to kill Souls in the Judgment of those Ancient Elders and Deacons who wrote the 31. Epistle to Cyprian page 37. and Cyprians himself was of the same Judgment for thus he writes in the same Book pag. 143. Qui peccantem c. That is De lapsis Tom. 2. He who flatters a sinner with sweet and pleasant words gives him occasionto sin and doth not restrain but nourish his sinful lusts Whereas he who at once both reprovesâ— and instructs his brother by giving him more solid and firm counsel he helps him forward in the way to Salvation Whom I love saith the Lord I rebuke and chasten So the Minister of God ought not to deceive the People by cunning and cousening compliances but to provide sound and saving Remedies for their Souls He an ignorant unskilful Chirurgion who is afraid to feel with his hand the swelling is hollowness of wounds and whilst he keeps the corrupt humour close shut up in the secret recesses of the bowels he increases it and makes the wound more dangerous The wound must be opened and incisions must be made and the Malady must be cured with a stronger and sharper Remedy even by cutting off and taking away the flesh that is corrupted and putrified Let the sick Person cry out and complain as he will by reason of the pain which he hath not patience to endure yet afterwards he will thank the Chirurgion when he finds that he is cured Thus Cyprian and sure this is sufficient to shew that he would never have said that it