the nature of God which is Holiness and Righteousness 2 Pet. 1. 4. And no more is it a true Holiness than this a true Righteousness which are not both in some measure conformed to the Law of God And because they are both alike real beings or qualifications Therefore what Master Baxter saith of Holiness may be no lesse truly said of Righteousness also That a person imperfectly so qualified is yet truly and really so qualified and therefore may truly be called Righteous so farre What he doth Philosophari to the contrary of Righteousness is against both Philosophy and Divinity as hath been before manifested When he hath once opened the perfection of this Righteousness according to the new rule we shall there and then examine it as in its due time and place Let him name but one of the heap and multitude of those Orthodox writers that call our Personal Righteousness Evangelicall in his sense else let him give us leave to conclude that hee makes no conscience of heaping together falsities in multitudes to Ecclipse the truth But who are in his account Orthodox writers though he doth not expressly tell us yet he hath made it easy for us to judge So farre of the former sort of intolerably ignorant viz. the learned teachers He proceeds to the latter Bax. pag. 123. The second sort that shew their gross ignorance of the nature of righteousness are the Antinomians and some other simple ones whom they have misled who if they doe but hear a man talke of a righteousness in himselfe or in any thing he can doe or making his own duty either his righteousness or conducible thereto they startle at such Doctrine and even gnash the teeth as if we preached flat Popery yea as if we cryed down Christ and set up our selves The ignorant wretches not understanding the difference between the two sorts of Righteousness That of the Old Covenant which is all out of us in Christ and that of the New Covenant which is all out of Christ in our selves though wrought by the power of the Spirit of Christ In this and that which followes there is nothing but dirt and wind all unworthy of the labour to transcribe it much lesse deserving an answer to bee given it I should therefore have past it by with disdainfull silence were it not for the respect which I have to the weakest sort of Readers which ordinarily are more affrighted with high and bragging words then wrought upon by sound reasons from the Word of God For preventing of delusion to such I shall therefore say somewhat and there will not bee need that I should say much First then I undertake to maintaine that although there be no man upon earth that hath in words pretended more hatred against Antinomians then Mr. Baxter to make them hatefull to such as are foolishly apt to hate without a cause yet is there no other man upon earth that hath in reality and substance so much honoured and magnified them as Mr. Baxter He makes them even them alone to be the sound Christians the advancers and maintainers of the pure Gospel of Christ against all the falsities and portentous lyes of Antichrist rayling against them as the onely hinderers of the total ruine of Christs Kingdom and the advancing of the Kingdome of Antichrist in the roome thereof as Paramount These he affirms here to be he men supereminently zealous for Christ who if they doe but heare a man talke of a righteousness in himself or any thing that he can doe viz. as ordained or powerful to justifie for so is his meaning or else he saith nothing or maketh his own duty either his Justifying Righteousness or conducible thereto they startle c. as if we preached c. ut suprà O noble spirits these are the men indeed as farre as wee can judge baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire Let me not live one moment longer then the Grace of Christ supports me in such Antinomianism Such have been all the holy Orthodox Reformers Martyrs Teachers and Saints in all the Churches from Luther unto this very day such were the Apostles Let them be accursed that preach another Gospel I would they were cut off that pervert this Gospel saith the Apostle These all are at once Anathematized by Mr. Baxter for Hereticks for daring to be bold in speaking for Christ when himself is impudent to speak for Antichrist But tush all these were but the Angels of the Churches this man is mounted higher to take the Chair among the Seraphims or Seraphicall Doctors Therefore pittieth the childishnesse of this lower order that they have not more sublime apprehensions The ignorant wretches saith hee not understanding the difference between the two sorts of Righteousnesse that of the Old Covenant which is all out of us in Christ and that of the New Covenant which is all out of Christ in our selves Oh intolerable ignorance of all the worthies that have lived in all ages ever since God had a Church upon earth Patriarchs Prophets Apostles Evangelists Pastors and Teachers that none of all these could see that which never was never shall be Yea the most holy Father Christs Vicar with all his Cattell Cardinals Bishops Schoolmen Monks and Jesuits could but kenn it a distance unperfectly untill Mr. Baxter Cui meliore Luto finxit praecordia Titan having lighted his Torch from him that fell as Lightning from heaven brings it here as cleare and visible as the man in the Moon to our view What Lyncean eyes hath he one of Platoes scholars no doubt that had higher speculations then others and could see Ideaes which this man hath discerned more clearly then all his elder brethren that have studied and even spent themselves in the contemplatioa of them But let us leave the man Narcissus like in his amorous doting on his beauty and righteousness while wee present our selves before the Lord who is present only in Christ reconciling the world to himself The objection about Ahab and Nineveh and the answer thereto given wherwith the Explication of this Thesis is closed up I pass by as altogether impertinent to this question of Justification by our own personal righteousnes except either the Objector or the Answerer i. e. Mr. Ri. or Mr. Baxter wil say that either Ahab or those Ninevites were ever truly justified CHAP. XVI Whether Faith in its proper sense or in Mr. Baxters sense the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere i. e. Beleeving as it is an act or worke of man and comprehends in it all duties be it self our righteousness or be imputed to us for Righteousnesse to Justification or both Mr. Baxters Reasons brought to prove the affirmative of all these examined Thesis 23. page 125. BAx In this sense also it is so farre from being an Error to affirm that Faith it self is our righteousness that it is a truth necessary for every Christian to know i. e. Faith is our Evangelical Righteousness in the sense before
explained as Christ is our legall Righteousness Explication This assertion so odious to those that understand not its grounds is yet so clear from what is sayd before that I need no more to prove it For first I have cleared before that there must be a personall righteousnesse besides that imputed in all that are justified And that secondly the fulfilling of the conditions of each Covenant is our Righteoesnesse in reference to that Covenant But Faith is the fulfilling of the conditions of the New Covenant therefore it is righteousnesse in relation to that Covenant I do not here take Faith for any our single act but as I shall afterward explain it Mr. Baxter verifieth the Proverb Noscitur ex comite qui non cognoscitur ex se The affections of the man may bee discerned by his company with whom he is as it were in a confederacy The Holy Ghost pronounceth of the Jews once degenerated into the manners and false-worships of the Canaanits that they were no more children of Abraham but that their birth was of the land of Canaan their father was an Amorite their mother a Hittite when once they had taken the pattern of their Religion from the Amorites and Hittites and diverted from the Word of God and steps of their own Progenitors Abraham Isaac and Jacob and the following Patriarcks and Prophets Ezek. 16. 3. What should we account lesse of Mr. Baxter whom wee finde deriving his Religion from the Papists and their associates the Arminians in contempt of Scriptures and the godly Divines of the Reformed Churches His former assertions That beleevers are still under the curse of the Law after they are in Christ That their Justification is but conditionall both before and after their believing That none is in any sense justified before he believeth That Justification is a continued act during onely so long as we continue fulfilling broken off when we break and repaired when we return to the fulfilling again of the supposed conditions thereof That it is not compleated before the end of our life or as Mr. Baxter out-stripping most of his Masters will have it not before the day of Judgement These all hee cannot deny to be Doctrines held in common by the Jesuits and Arminians and I could were there need alleage the very words of Bellarmine and other Jesuits and of Arminius Corvinus Episcopius Grevinchovius the Apology of the Remonstrants and in most of these even Socinus himselfe whose not onely matter but also their very words Mr. Baxter hath transcribed into our language in the delivery of those Tenents Here againe hee doth in this Thesis lay downe a conclusion before more then hinted at wherein Bellarmine Socinus and Arminius fully agree that Faith is our righteousnesse even Faith it self our Evangelicall righteousnesse viz. to Justification that it is so far from being an error to affirm it that it is a truth necessary for every Christian to know He acknowledgeth it in the Explication to be an assertion odious to some Rational men would therefore expect great strength of Arguments to prove it And what brings hee Nothing but his own Authority which to us is of equal and but of equal authority with theirs from whom hee hath taken it up It is clear saith he from what is said before No lesse clear I acknowledge then the face of a man in a mud-wall for a Looking-glasse 1. I have cleared before saith he besides that imputed that there must be also a personall Righteousness in all that are justified This is not denyed that there must bee such a personall Righteousnesse but that where it is it is there proper and effectuall to Justification is no better cleared then hath been said How the second thing was before cleared by him I referre to that which hath been said of both sides about it If the casting of dust and dirt into the eyes may be properly called clearing of them in this and in no other sense doe I acknowledge the thing to bee cleared by what Mr. Baxter hath before said Where he laies down this caution I doe not here take Faith for any one single act but as I shall afterward explain it he might have spared the labour to tell us so For wee see what himself seeth that so to take it would bee a ruinating blow to the most of the foregoing and following doctrines about Justification conteined in this his book But he goeth forward thus B. Quaest In what sense is then Faith said to be imputed to us for Righteousnesse if it be our Righteousnesse it self Answ Plainly thus Man is become unrighteous by breaking the Law of Righteousnesse that was given him Christ fully satisfieth for this transgression and buyeth the prisoners into his own hands and maketh with them a New Covenant That whosoever will accept of him and beleeve in him who hath thus satisfied it shall be as effectuall for their Justification as if they had fulfilled the Law of Works themselves A Tenant forfeiteth his Lease to his Landlord by not paying his Rent he runnes deep in debt to him and is disabled to pay him any more Rent for the future Whereupon he is put out of his house and cast into prison till he pay the debt His Landlords sonne payeth it for him taketh him out of prison and putteth him in his house again as his Tenant having purchâ—sed house and all to himself He maketh him a new Lease in this Tenor that paying but a Pepper-corn yearly to him he shall be acquit both from his debt and from all other Rent for the future which by his old Lease was to be payed Yet doth he not cancell the old Lease but keepeth it in his hands to put it in suit against the Tenant if he should be so foolish as to deny the payment of the pepper-corn In this case the payment of the grain of pepper is imputed to the tenant as if he had payed the rent of the old Lease Yet this imputation doth not extoll the pepper corn nor vilifie the benefit of his benefactor whoredeemed him Nor can it be sayd that the purchase did onely serve to advance the value and efficacy of that graine of pepper But thus a personall Rent must be payd for the testification of his homage He was never redemeed to be independent and his own Land-lord and Master The old Rent he cannot pay His new Land-lords clemency is such that he hath resolved this grain shall serve the turn Doe I need to apply this to the present case or cannot every man apply it Even so is our Evangelicall Righteousness or Faith imputed to us for as real Righteousnes as perfect obedience Two things are considerable in the debt of Righteousness The value and the personall performance and interest The value of Christs satisfaction is imputed to us in stead of the value of a perfect obedience of our own performing and the value of our Faith is not so imputed But because there must be some personal
signifie But that he means to extoll them he doth enough plainly give us to understand When he saith that the purchase did not Onely serve to advance the value and efficacy of that grain of pepper his meaning must be at least that Christ dyed and by his death hath purchased to the pepper-corn of mans righteousness a value and efficacy in part though not Onely to Justifie us so that our righteousness must go Cheek by Cheek with the righteousness of Christ to Justification Now as if Usury as it Consisteth in taking increase be unlawfull a penny of a hundred pounds taken by way of increase is no less in substance Usury and unlawfull than the taking of Tenn pounds of the hundred so if the adding of our righteousness to the righteousness of Christ for our justification be an unlawfull exalting of our own and depressing of Christs righteousness then to bring our own righteousness with the righteousness of Christ in the least part to justifie is as truly an unlawfull depression of Christs righteousness and advancing of our own as if we brought it in the highest degree wholly and alone to justifie us and so by his account Christ dyed to make man though not the Onely yet in part a saviour of himself And herein to follow his doctrine is the ready way to be a self-destroyer Christ is become of none effect to you whosoever of you are justified by the Law ye are faln from grace said the Apostle to a people that did extoll but in part and not Onely their own righteousness to justification Though it be not Onely poyson which a man eateth yet it there be poyson in it it brings death after iâ— If we magnifie one grain of our own pepper to that height that we make it a part of that righteousness by which to stand at Gods tribunall this one grain will sink us down to hell so hot a poyson is Mr. Brs pepper-corn I shall joyn that which followes in the similitude viz. Bax. But thus A personall Rent must be payd for the testification of his homage He was never Redeemed to be Independent and his own Landlord and Master The olde Rent he cannot pay his new Landlords clemency is such that he hath resolved this grain shall serve the turn With that which is homogeneous to it in the application Bax. Two things are considerable in this debt of righteousness The value and the personall performance or interest The value of Christs satisfaction is imputed to us in stead of the value of a perfect Obedience of our own performing and the volue of our Faith is not so imputed But because there must be some personall performance of homage therefore the personall performance of Faith shall be imputed to us for a sufficient personall payment as if we had payd the full Rent because Christ whom we beleeve in hath payd it and he will take this for satisfactory homage so it is in point of personall performance and not of value that faith is imputed It is not denyed but a personall testification of homage is required We were not Redeemed to be independent or our own Landlords and Masters to serve our selves and walk after our own thoughts No Ye are not your own for ye are bought with a price saith the Apostle Therefore glorifie God in your body and in your Spirit which are Gods 1 Cor. 6. 20. And again He hath given himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works We must live and dye to him that dyed for us in testification of our homage But the thing in question is not whether this homage is to be done but whether when it is performed it be a Cause or an effect of our redemption and justification Whether we are to perform all duty that we may be redeemed and justified or because we are redeemed and justified Whether the relation of the persons go before the relative duties or the relative duties before the relation of the persons Reason tells us that filiall obedience doth alway presuppose the relation of a Son and where there is no Childe there can be expected no Childlike obedience First free and then free service And to this tenor runs the vote and voyce of the Gospel We are delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we may serve him without fear in holines and righteousness before him all the dayes of our life Luk. 1. 74 75. Not that we shall be delivered out of c. because we have so served him all the dayes of our life That we are married to Christ that we should bring forth fruit unto God Rom. 7. 4. Not that we are married to Christ because we have brought forth fruit unto God That he dyed for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him that dyed for them 2 Cor. 5. 15. Not that we must live to Christ that we may live by Christ and obtein life by his death If any man be in Christ he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Not that he must be a new creature to the end that he may be in Christ Mr. Br shakes the whole frame of the Gospel into a topsie-turnie and might as rationally make our glorification the Condition of our sanctification as sanctification the Condition of our Justification and Adoption As for the distinction which he puts in the application between the value and the performance of Faith i. e. in his sense of sanctification making the value of Christs satisfaction to be imputed in stead of the value of a perfect obedience and the personall performance of Faith to be imputed onely in stead of the personall performance of the Law and so our inchoat sanctification for that he means by the performing of faith is imputed to us in place of performing all perfect righteousness unto justification some pretty witty men may be taken with it as a pretty witty fancy But whosoever Loveth the Lord Jesus up to a due jealousie for his honour Cannot but have his heart full of trembling to see the sacred word and mysteries of Christ to be made the play-game of an audacious and frothy wit and eluded yea vilified and enervate with such absurd and windy distinctions that have no footing in the word of God Himself using this distinction with a purpose not to teach but to Cheat the simple For pag. 141. he doth in express words affirm the worthines or value which he doth here ascribe to Christs satisfaction to lye in our performance or works Either he must be destitute of all natural and moral operations of Conscience or an Anti-Hannibal that hath sworn unreconcileable warrs not for God against Rome but for Rome against Christ that in so holy a busines can so frequently and fearlesly act the wanton I shall conclude therefore in the words which Mr. Pemble hath against the brethren of Mr. Br in this point
or conditionall offer thereof to us Nor any thing to the justified and actually declared just in themselves Justification is no longer in a conditionall offer to them but in its absolute being within them Whatsoever therefore he addeth there pag. 43 44. is wide from the question being not limited to the Justification of the New Covenant which is the subject of his Treatise which here he shunneth and talketh extravagantly about sanctification because he cannot confute the absolute justification but that it doth and will stand and standing will not admit a conditional justification to stand with it and by it in its beeing though the offer thereof before it is in beeing be conditionall And this is all which at length he concludeth pag. 45. of the conditionall Covenant of Grace which without all this circuition would have been granted him viz. that it is propounded and offered to mankinde conditionally if they will beleeve and without this faith none hath or shall have the benefit and comfort thereof to themselves and in themselves because all these that do not or shall not being in a capacity to beleeve are reprobates and as many as are elect shall come to Christ and beleeve in him as hath been before shewed What he addeth for the application may have some pertinency to the matter there objected but it hath none to the thing here in question Therefore I passe it by as not concerning us 2. To his Causa sine qua non briefly thus 1 In so tearming Faith he denyes faith to be any cause at all of our Justification for that is but Causa â—quivoca or nomine tenus or titulo tenus hath but the name not the nature of a cause hath no causality upon gives no influx into the effect 2 Neither whatsoever it be is Faith the Causa sine qua non of Justification in that sense as Mr. Baxter taketh and defineth it either in his stricter or larger definition except he will say that no Infants are justified who do not cannot accept Christ much lesse so beleeve as in his larger definition he sets forth faith 3 Faith is not the Causa sine qua non of our justification in God no nor yet in Christs Justification as he tearms it for these are antecedaneous to our faith and our faith not an antecedent to it 4 At the utmost it can be but the Causa sine qua non of Gods declaring and evidencing of our selves to our selves justified and this justification Mr. Baxter so disdaineth and snuffs at that he will not own it much lesse mention it Yet can he not with all his Sophistry name any other act of justification in this life whereof faith can be proved to be the Antecedent Medium or Causa sine qua non 5 Why doth he call faith and all the conqualifications wherewith he loadeth the shoulders thereof and all the works which he makes its Concomitants the Causa sine qua non as if all these with their Colaterall in the other scale of his ballance Christs satisfaction did make up the one and sole Causa sine qua non of our justification can none else be named Besides other the weaknesse and infirmity of the Law to justifie as it removes the impediment of justifiablenesse in Gods Court of strict Justice For had there been a Law given which could have given life verily righteousnesse should have been by the Law Gal. 3. 21. and sin which removes the same impediment might more properly and socially then Christs satisfaction have been placed on horseback in the same saddle of Causa sine qua non had not Mr. Baxter thought Christ would blesse but these would have defiled this golden saddle of his own either making or appropriating to this use and so bespattered and undressed the righteousnesse of his Qualifications and good works that they would never more become fit to ride on horsback in procession with the Holy Wafer Thus his condition and Causa sine qua non must be new modelled ere they will be Canonicall But see we here the mans wit which never fails him at a dead lift What he cannot act by power he seeks to compasse by a stratagem Because he cannot cover the nakednesse of his assertion he labors to make bare ours and cast filth in it that having diverted the eyes of his Reader thither he may forget the vanity of his Condition or Causa sine qua non And thus he doth it B. Here by the way take notice that the samemen thus blame the advancing of Faith so high as to be our true Gospel Righteousnesse Posit 17 20. and to be imputed in a proper sense Posit 23. do yet when it comes to tryall ascribe far more the faith then those they blame making it Gods instrument in justifying In examining all these quoted Theses I have shewed both who they are which blame him or at least his doctrine which was born before ever he commenced such a Doctor viz. All the Orthodox Protestant Divines and Christians and withall for what they blame it viz. as it is Papism Socinianism and at the best Arminianism 3. To which I have also made out their just grounds of blaming it as may be there seen yet to cheat his Reader he cals these those very men as if there were some few contemptible Antinomians lately sprung up when himself knows them to be all the Churches of Christ which since the Reformation have been called Protestants But of what blasphemy or evill fact doth he accuse them That they ascribe more to Faith then those they blame making it Gods instrument in justifying Yea but we have seen or thought we had seen at least just grounds for their so doing how doth Mr. Baxter aggravate it to make it odious B. 1. And so to have part of the honour of Gods own Act. Fie upon the Hugonets and Lutherans if this be true who then will not run from them at Mr. Baxters heels to Rome But the Scriptures make Balaams Aâ—se Gods instrument to rebuke the madnesse of the Prophet Namb. 22. 28 30. 2 Pet. 2. 15 16. The Raven his Instrument to feed Elijah 1 King 17. 6. The brazen Serpent his instrument of healing the Israelites bitten with firie Serpents Joh. 3. 14. Numb 21. 9. The Assyrians his instruments of chastising and reforming his people Isa 10. 5. c. and the very Devil his instrument of trying Job Job 1. 12. and of executing his pleasure upon Ahab 2 King 22. 21 22. Shall we now fall foul with the Scriptures and accuse them that they ascribe part of the honour of Gods own acts to the Asse the Raven the Serpent the Assyrians the Devil by affirming these to be the instruments by which God acted Doth not the seeblenesse of the means and instruments speak out the whole honour of the action to pertain to the Lord Was it to honour his slaves and abase his freemen and subjects the Lords Israel that Solomon made the former
he hath enough manifested himself B. Some think that Faith may be some small low and impulsive cause but I will not give it so much though if it be made a Procatarctick objective cause Iâ— will not contend If he mean any other difference between the impulsive and the Procatartick objective cause besides that which is between the Generall and the Speciall it is past my skill to understand him or to comprehend what he denies and what he grants no doubt either he would not be understood or else he attributes to his righteousnesse of faith and good works an excitation but not an impulsion forsooth of the Grace of God actually to justifie those whom he beholdeth Schild Metaph li. 1. câ— 44. N. 24 25 40. fairly dressed therewith and so the beauty of the object enamors God to love and justifie And what more doe the Pâ—pists teach and so our justification as Gods act is but in posse till our righteousnesse as a sufficient cause brings it into esse or act Thus far of Mr. Baxters causes of Justification in which if he hath illustrated or confirmed any truth of God God is much beholden to him and Aristotle for it For distrusting the succour of the Scriptures he hath left them and brought nothing else but Logical and Metaphysical notions and reasons to prove all that which he hath said CHAP. XXVII Arg. Whether the sinner be justifyed only by the act not the habit of faith And whether it be not ordained to this use by reason of the usefull property which God hath infused into it to receive Christ Whether and in what sense a man may be said properly to be justifyed by faith In which also some things are intermixed about Mr. Baxters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere and conditions of Justification B. Thes 57. IT is the act of faith which justifyeth men at age and not the habit yet not as it is a good work or as it hath in it self any excellency above other graces but 1. In the neerest sense directly and properly as it is the fulfilling of the condition of the new Covenant 2. In the remote and more improper sense as it is the receiving of Christ and his satisfactory righteousnesse It is not for nothing that Mr. Baxter puts here a restriction upon justification by the Act of faith limiting it to men of age Are then elect infants that die before they attain age and strength of reason to put forth their faith into act justifyed only by the habit of faith It seemeth then that the hue and crie hath apprehended the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere as to them and laid it fast from justifying them Again if they are justifyed by the habit of faith as a habit of inherent grace though not such as he here denyeth to have an excellency above other graces what difference doth he put between Justification and Sanctification Doth he not speak the same things here with the Papists Yea in a higher dialect then any of them For they grant to Infants justification only by the washing of Christs bloud conferred upon them in Baptism without any qualification of their own But this man if he thus say justifies them by an inherent righteousnesse of their own But if Infants are justifyed without the act of faith and yet not by its habit how are they then Justifyed but by that which he calleth Christs own justification as a publick person at his resurrection which notwithstanding he utterly denyed Thes 42. and its Explication and if they are so justifyed will it not follow then that justification by the act of faith is Gods declaring and mans applying of his justification to his present comfort and full assurance which Mr. Baxter explodeth as an unsufferable conclusion But dying Infants are to have no use of this present comfort and full assurance therefore it sufficeth them to be justifyed in Christ though not in themselves Lastly or do they depart hence unjustifyed because without actuall beleeving and receiving of Christ and so shall be justifyed in the day of judgment because at the resurrection they shall actually beleeve What a crie do the poor souls in the interim then make in that Limbus insantum And why may not then according to Origen all the Devils and reprobates in hell be then justifyed and saved also because then they may actually beleeve and according to Mr. Baxter the condition of justification lasteth untill that day B. Explication That faith doth not properly justifie through any excellency that it hath above other graces or any more usefull property may appear thus To the excellency of faith above other graces I have nothing to say But to the reasons which he brings to deny the more usefull property of it I shall speak briefly B. 1. Then the praise would be due to faith No more then when God gives us meat the praise of our nutriment and life is due to our teeth because they have a more usefull property to grind and chew the meat then our eyes or ears B. 2. Then love would contend for a share if not a priority This is only said and not proved or declared upon what grounds love should contend B. 3. Then faith would justifie though it had not been made the condition of the Covenant 1. We denie faith to be the condition of the Covenant in Mr. Baxters sense If he would have spoken directly to them against whom he argueth he should have said Then faith would have justifyed though it had never been appointed and given of God as an instrument to receive Christ the justifyer And then we should answer 2. That it is so much as if he had said Then our teeth would have nourished and preserved life although God had never appointed and given them to us as instruments to chew the nourishing meat And thus the Caveat that he addeth becomes uselesse viz. B. Let those therefore take heed that make faith to justifie meerly because it apprehendeth Christ which is its naturall essentiall propertie For none affirmes faith to justifie meerly because it apprehendeth Christ without considering also Gods ordering and fitting it to this office together with his promise and the virtue laid up in Christ to justifie all that do by faith so apprehend him B. That it is faith in a proper sense that is said to justifie and not Christs righteousnesse onely which it receiveth may appear thus 1. From a necessity of a twofold righteousnesse which I have before proved in reference to the twofold Covenant 2. From the plain and constant phrase of Scripture which saith he that beleeveth shall be justifyed and that we are justifyed by faith and that faith is imputed for righteousnesse It had been as easie for the holy Ghost to have said that Christ only is imputed or his righteousnesse only or Christ only justifyeth c. if he had so meant He is the most excusable in an errour that is led into it by the constant
against but according to his own expressed and explicated meaning Bax. p. 108. Explication The Contents of these Positions being of so neer nature I shall explain them here together though they seem so plain and clear to me that they need not much explication and less confirmation Yet because some Antinomians do down-right oppose them and some that are no Antinomians have startled at the expressions as if they had conteined some self exalting horrid doctrine I shall say something hereto Though for my part I do so much wonder that any able Divines should deny them yet me thinks they should be Articles of our Creed and a part of Childrens Catechisms and understood and beleeved by every man that is a Christian I mean the matter of them if not the phrase though I think it to be agreeable to the matter also Egregious Confidence and a sparkish spirit If the Triumphant Chariot were in use again at Rome and that Mr. Br could either not get it or not hold it he would at least give occasion to the world to Epitaph upon him Magnis tamen excidit Ausis he hath bidden fair and stretched wide for it Yet there would be some men that would otherwise Comment upon his bravery of words That they are usually bad wares that will not go off without such bravery of words That Bragg is seldom the best Souldier That thundering words are mostly used when there is wanting strength of reason to support a Cause We shall in some measure be able to judge when we have examined what sound Arguments Mr. Br brings to Confirm his assertions By the way we are to note his subtlety his ingenuity and his gallantry 1 His subtlety in pretending that his Assertions are mainly opposed by Antinomians and that all that he delivers here is out of his pure zeal good man to dash those earth-born monsters that they may do no more harm Doth Mr. Br think that none but strangers in our Israel none but novices in divinity that never saluted the Gospel but at twelve furlongs distance none that ever had acquaintance with this Controversie bâ—tween the Papists and us should read his book that he thinks to blinde the eyes of all with such a mummery Nay let him name one man in any of the reformed Churches that hath been numbred among the Orthodox which dissenteth not in the Chaffy doctrine here delivered from him Or any save the worst or a man worse than the worst Papists that consenteth with him to make our inherent righteousnes the Condition to give us right to Christs imputed righteousness Must Christ and Paul and all Evangelicall disciples be rejected as Antinomians because they became not Mr. Baxters disciples and that before he became their Teacher Or how could they downright oppose this doctrine before he vented it in print Was he so familiar with them as to Communicate to them his Manuscripts Or hath any other since the world began delivered the same assertions in the same words that in opposing them Mr. Br should take himself opposed But he suspends his subtlety a little to shew some though but little ingenuity which is the second thing here Considerable in him Confessing that there are some that are no Antinomians who have startled at the expressions as if they had conteined some self-exalting horrid doctrine And did not this also startle Mr. Br to reexamine what he had written before he Committed it to the Presse Nothing less but he looks over them with a fastidious admiration that they should be so shallow himself being so profound rejecting their authority with the like Contempt that Caesar did Syllaes Tush he was a duus Non potuit dictare so he of these Nequeunt Philosophari And thus in the third place passeth on to his gallantry or rather his arrogance That his doctrines here are so plain and clear that they need little explication less Confirmation That he wonders any able Divines should deny them shall such be termed Divines nay his very Catechumeni the Children under his Catechising much more every man that is a Christian should understand and beleeve them That they should be taken up for our Creed why because profound Mr. Br hath delivered them if not upon this ground let him name that man upon earth that hath delivered or beleeved them before himself became the author of them But at length he somewhat stoopeth from his bravery and tells us that he would have the matter of them at least thus taken into the Canon of our faith and Creed if not the phrase though he think it to be agreeable to the matter also and therefore goeth about thus to defend his phrase and make it good Bax. p. 109. That there may be no contention about words you must take my phrase of legall and Evangelicall Righteousnes in the sense before explained viz. as they take their name from that Covenant which is their rule And I know not how any Righteousnes should be called Legall or Evangelicall in a sense more strict and proper nor whence the denomination can be better taken than from the formall Reason of the thing yet I know that the observance of the Law of Ceremonies and the seeking life by the works of the Law are both commonly called legall Righteousness but in a very improper sense in comparison of this I know also that Christs legall Righteousnes imputed to us is commonly called Evangelicall Righteousness But that is from a more alien extrinsecall Respect viz. because the Gospel declareth and offereth this Righteousness and because it is a way to justification which onely the Gospel revealeth I do not quarrell with any of these forms of speech onely explain my own which I know not how to express more properly that I may not be misunderstood The righteousnes of the New Covenant then being the performance of its Conditions and its Conditions being our obeying of the Gospel or beleeving it must be plain that on no other terms we do partake of the legall Righteousnes of Christ To hold therefore that our Evangelicall or New Covenant Righteousness is in Christ and not in our selves or performed by Christ and not by our selves is such a monstrous peece of Antinomian Doctrine that no man who knowes the Nature and difference of the Covenants can possibly entertain and that which every Christian should abhorr as unsufferable Here we finde Mr. Br at the very top of his gallantry and animosity most probably his fancy had suggested to him a totall rout of all terrene animals at the sound of his precedent glorying and polemicall argumentation as if therefore all this visible world were Conquered and he were marching out of it in triumph as Israel out of Egypt not a dogg being left to move his tongue against him he now challengeth the Heavens and Calls the Holy Ghost ad partes to Come to a reckoning for the impropriety of language which he useth by his penmen in the Scriptures For when he saith
was a voluntary agent Called and Consecrated by the Father to be our Priest Heb. 5. 5. No man taking his life from him but himself laying it down of himself for us and in our stead Joh. 10. 18. Thus he became the purchaser of righteousnes for us and is made of God Righteousnes to us 1 Cor. 1. 30. But all this he did not by the rule of the Law or Covenant of works but of the secret and sacred Covenant made between the Father and him Therefore having mentioned the voluntarines of his suffering in the fore quoted Joh 10. 18. He addeth This Commandment have I received of my Father implying that this his satisfactory obedience in dying for us had its regulating not by the old Covenant of works or any precept of the Law given to man but by the Covenant which had passed between the Father and the Son in reference to man and a speciall positive Commandment from the Father agreeing with the tenor of that Covenant As for our apprehending and pleading the righteousnes of Christ to Justification impudency it self will neither affirm it to be done by the rule of the Covenant of law and works nor deny it to be done in Conformity to the Covenant of grace and rule of the Gospel Or because Christ hath born the penalty of the Lawes breach shall he therefore be Called our legall righteousnes as from the formall reason of the thing Nay both that Christ suffered and the Father received and accepted his sufferings in full satisfaction for our transgressions That the Father sent him to satisfie the justice of his law for us and for his satisfactions sake he doth no more impute to us the breach of his Law All this is the fruit of his grace and in conformity to the Gospel and Covenant of grace not to the Law and Covenant of works Therefore if we give the denomination from the formall reason of the thing we must call it our Evangelicall not Legall righteousnes which is in Christ Touching the other opposite term that any thing inherent in man whether the gifts of grace Faith Repentance Charity c. or their fruits and works should be called our Gospel righteousnes I see no reason for it neither can devise in what other sense they may be so called but by a Catachresticall Ironia which names a thing and means the contrary As the Mounteins are called Montes quia minime movent Mounts or Movers because they do in no wise Move or as the Fames Auri is sometimes called sacra the inordinate desire of money is termed holy quia minime sacra sed prorsus execrabilis because it is in no case sacred but wholly accursed So in no other sense may this righteousnes in self be called Gospâ—l righteousnes in reference to Justification but because it is totally opposite to the doctrine and nature of the Gospel and because the Gospel doth wholly reject and abandon it Mr. Br. peradventure may and will bring other reasons and where he doth it we shall take pains to examine them 4 Why he calls beleeving or Faith to be our Gospel righteousnes and whether it be to any other end but with the Papists upon the same grounds to bring in good works to Justification also If he deny this the whole sequele of his Book will be an enditement of falshood against him CHAP. XIV That which Mr. Baxter brings to confirm the matter of this his Doctrine examined and found both fallacious and empty And what he addeth to mitigate the asperity viz. That we perform these conditions not by our own strength but by the grace of Christ evidenced to be a meer shift borrowed from the Papists Mr. Baxter after he hath thus made a flourish and nothing but a flourish to explain and defend his phrase and make odious the phrase of Scripture now proceedeth to confirm the matter of his doctrine Let us see whether there be any thing Logicall or Theologicall and not meerly sophisticall He hath confessed before p. 109. that some who are not Antinomians but Orthodox Divines have startled at the expressions of his 19 and 20 Positions as conteining in them some self-exalting horrid doctrine therefore will he say something thereto by way of explication and confirmation Now having said something as bad as nothing to take off contention about words what doth he add for the confirmation of the matter of his doctrine He was to have proved 1 That Gospel righteousnes or the righteousnes of the New Covenant consisteth not in the imputation of the righteousnes which is by Christ to us but in our own actuall and personall faith and obedience 2 That we must be righteous in our selves first and then after be made righteous by Christ 3 That the righteousnes of the New Covenant is not sufficient to justifie and save but onely to give us right to the righteousnes of the old Covenant which doth actually and immediately save and justifie 4 That those gifts of grace vertues and endowments that are required to our sanctification are not the fruits but the causes of our justification and conditions of our interest in Christ and consequently that our sanctification hath a priority and goes before justification These were the points in which he acknowledgeth himself to be down-right opposed by some and startled at by others What doth he now say for the silencing of these down-right opposers and startlers Just so much as he that would confute all that Bellarmine had written in three words viz. Bellarmine thou liest Or what brings he for the confirmation of those his assertions wherein he is so opposed Nothing but a fardle of sophisticall fallacies consisting of begged principles and homonymies of words First he clustereth together many Conclusions without either premisses or proofs The righteousnesse of the New Covenant then being the performance of its conditions this is his first Conclusion which by the word then bearing the force of therefore he would insinuate to lean upon some foregoing premisses when contrariwise there is not so much as a peble of four grains to sustein it not a word laid as the foundation thereof It is the thing in question we deny it he brings nothing to confirm it besides his bare affirmation which to us is no more then a pillar of straw to bear up a Castle And its conditions being our obeying the Gospel or believing This is his second Conclusion taken as granted when contrariwise his opposers utterly deny it And here he plaies also with an homonymy of words as if faith and obeying the Gospel which in the Apostles sense are so in his sense also were the same thing covering his poyson untill the feat be done by it It must needs be plain that on no other terms do we partake of the legall righteousnes of Christ I will not say that self-confidence hath made the man mad but rather that he thinks all the world mad and in such a sottish slumber that none can
it to that end and partly as it is the effect of Grace and wrought in us by the Spirit so that the value and efficacy thereof is to be taken not from the righteousnes inherent in us or performed by us but from Gods ordination of it to the end to which himself will make it effectuall and from the vertue of grace and the spirit of grace in whose strength it is performed So also Antoni par 4. tit 9. c. 7. ante sect sect 1 2 3. Osor de Jus li. 6. nu 151 ex Hos Confut l ih 5. pag. 451 452. Andrad Orths. explic li. 6. pag. 181. Pemb. of justif p. 34 35. sect 2. cap. 2. the rest of the Scholasticks Monks and Jesuits affirm that they do not by this doctrine Contribute any thing to mans righteousness or diminish the glory of Gods grace and Christs merits Nay they are the sole advancers of Grace and of Christ for that they attribute due power to them to make mans righteousness that is base and nothing in it self to be effectuall or meritorious to Justification That these Heretikes the Lutherans are the Cursed enemies unto Christ and grace in denying our Righteousness available to justifie and save us so streightening the vertue and power of Grace and of Christ as being unable to infuse vertue and efficacy into our righteousness to justifie and save us but more fully of this in a more proper place The same paint doth Arminius use to make tolerable if not plausible his imputation of the Act of Faith to Justification as his very words are alleaged by Mr. Pemble No marvell then if Mr. Br hath proficiently learned at the feet of such Gamaleels But what force or shew of substance is there in his and their so peevish shifts and evasions It is as he that brake up a neighbours house killed the Master and enriched himself with the Treasure thereof with this mentall reservation that the Act should be without any guilt of Murther before God or of felony before men And what either God or man could then lay any thing to his Charge So Mr. Br with those whom he followeth robs God of the glory of his grace and Christ of the honour of his merits to inrich the righteousness of their own Faith and works therewith but with this proviso first layd in their fancies and after subscribed to with their hands that God and his Christ must not take their grace and righteousnes herein wronged nor mans righteousness extolled nor the actors therein offenders and when they have layd all things so sure what hath God or man to say against them Yet is there one inconvenience and the same a shrewd one that Gods way of reckoning in the point of Justification was fixed before this of Mr. Br and his Masters and without any Consultation with them about it by means whereof it runs right Contrary to theirs And it is much to be feared because he is God he will not now Change He hath in this point set so in direct opposition mans righteousness and Gods righteousness grace and works that both Cannot shall not Consist together but either exclude and frustrate the other It must be onely Gods righteousness or onely mans righteousness according to his rule by which we must be justified he prohibits all medleyes will have no mixture of heaven and of earth of the Spirit and of the flesh the oxe and the asse must not be yoked together in this busines he that brings any of his own righteousness frustrates to himself the Grace and righteousness of God He that trusteth to grace and putts on by Faith the righteousness of God must derelinquish his own righteousness to be found in Gods alone unto Justification Rom. 9. 30 31 32. Rom. 10. 3 4. Phil. 3. 9. 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 grace otherwise work is no more work Rom. 11. 6. And other such like Scriptures which in the more proper place I shall produce What will Mr. Br answer at Gods tribunal for raising his pepper-corn as a mount from which to batter the impregnable grace and righteousness of God If this doth not what can extoll his pepper-corn To conclude what I have to say to the foresaid words of Mr. Br let him not take pepper in the nose as the Country phrase is if I take a grain or two of his own loose powder to blow up his pepper-corn that it may not be abusive to the feeble and simple Christians If these will but consider well these two things first what he means by his pepper-corn secondly how farr he will abase or extoll it they should easily see his subtlety and keep their foot from being taken in this his snare laid for them Both these are to be gathered from himself Touching the former he means by the pepper-corn the whole righteousness of man the entire righteousness which the Law requireth in the full substance though not in the full degree which the Law requireth it all personall vertues and duties which the morall Law injoyned upon men This is cleer enough by what he hath said before hinted by that which he annexeth in the application of this Similitude when he saith Even so is our Evangelicall Righteousness or Faith insinuating that by Faith he means all that Can be brought under the notion of Evangelicall righteousness in his sense which is all that the Law Commandeth and the Gospel approveth as righteousness and in the following part of his Treatise when he Comes to the Anatomizing of his Faith here spoken of he doth in express words affirm seek to confirm it Here is a pepper-corn able like Moses his rod-serpent to eat up all the pepper-corns of the East-Indies Possibly the royall Soveraign was built to fetch it from the East Indies to us it being too great a fraught for any other Shipp in England And it must not be divided for a peece will do no good in this busines but the whole is required Doth not the weakest Christian here see discovered the Cunning of the man that would have them to swallow such a pepper-corn such a Camel into themselves What room would be left then for Christ which of the Pharisees of old or of the Papists in latter ages have more extolled mans righteousness or more fully ascribed salvation to works onely though they used terms equipollent to Cover their falshood yet they did not hit upon the pepper-corn to delude poor souls with an opinion that if there were any difference between their doctrine and the Doctrine of the Scriptures yet was it as small as the weight and worth of a pepper-corn so that they might be followed without danger Touching the latter how farr he will extoll the pepper-corn of our own workes and righteousness to Justification and salvation he doth not here though afterward he doth in express words
or between the not accusing or condemning of a man and the not imputing any thing to him to his accusation and condemnation CHAP. XXV Arg. of the Causa sine qua non or the condition or the instrumentall cause and whether faith be the instrument And in what sense it is so The absurdities wherewith Mr. Baxter chargeth this doctrine removed and those that follow his doctrine in part particularized TO the first Question we must apply our selves somewhat more fully because in answer to the former Questions Mr. Baxter seems to me to have aimed chiefly to the ostentation of his wit and Logicall both acutenesse and profoundnesse to make himself thereby admired and formidable But in answering this and the next he collects in one all his subtilty and Sophistry â—o beguile and deceive if it were possible the very Elect. And indeed if he carry these two Questions in captivity to his own sense and purpose he shall thereby make at least a seeming way by which to introduce all his Popish soul-subverting errours about justification which follow and hang as at the tayle of these Questions His words in the Thesis are B. The Causa sine qua non is both Christs satisfaction and the faith of the justifyed As much as he thought would be objected against his putting Christs satisfaction in the same place and degree of causality as a collaterall with faith he hath spoken to in his answer to the second Question and the firmnesse of this his answer hath been there examined But what concernes faith that which he thinks he shall be opposed in he formes into two Questions Explication pa. 214. 1. Why he makes it not the Instrumentall cause 2. Why he makes it the Causa sine qua non The former which is his 5. Question he applies himself to answer pa. 219. in these words B. To the fift Question perhaps I shall be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of our justification But affectation of singularity leads me not to it 1. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or man Not of man for man is not the principall efficient he doth not justifie himself 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so still man should be said to justifie himself 3. For as Aquinas the action of the principall cause and of the instrument is one action and who dares say that faith is so Gods instrument 4. The instrument must have influx tâ— the producing of the effect of the principall cause by a proper causality and who dare say that faith hath such an influx into our justification Here I know not whether we have more of the subtle serpent or of the roaring Lyon 1. He useth his winding Sophistry to intangle 2. His daring threats to them that being not intangled will be so bold as to contradict him Let us examine what efficacy there is in either or both these and first in his Sophistry To insinuate or as the Apostle saith to creep into the hearts of his Readers to deceive them he tels us Perhaps he may be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of justification It seems he doubted that some of his Readers for lack of acquaintance with many Authours upon this subject would not or could not take notice that it is a new doctrine which he here delivereth and so he should be robbed of the glory of his new invention That the praise thereof might therefore wholly redound to him he tels them he is the first of men that ever saw and taught Faith not to be the instrument of justification that herein he is singular from all men Bâ—t had he not rubbed his forehead that with open face he thus vindicateth to himself that which he hath received from the Priests and Jesuites Let him name himself singular and abhorrent from all Protestants yea from Christ and his Apostles not from all men he is singular and alone in this and most his assertions from the Orthodox from whom but holds it in common with the whole herd of Antichrist to whom he is fallen Doth not Bellarmine deny that faith can truly be said to justifie us except it doth obtain and in some sort merit Justification from God Do not all his brethren with one voice shake off the instrumentall causality of justification and make it as a perfect quality or good work to merit it A two fold subtlety yea falshood is there to be found therefore in this his insinuation 1. That he affirmes himself singular in this point to catch after an usurped praise to himself as if he had seen what none in the world before him had seen 2. In pretending it to be a new doctrine thereby to draw disciples after him in a time wherein the ears of men itch after new in disdain of sound and true doctrines But further to insinuate he tels us that affectation of singularity leads him not to it We beleeve him without oath or protestation It is not the desire of them that are of his hair to trudge single but accompanied with a whole Brigade of disciple under their conducting and seducing unto Rome But let us come to his Arguments B. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or Man But of neither of these Ergo not at all an instrument His Proposition or Major we grant him And it were enough and full to that which can be expected to refell his reasons which he brings for the proof of the minor Yet because my drift is not so much to answer him as to stablish some weak and unwary Christians against his impostures I shall endeavour first to confirm what he denyeth and seeks to shiver and then to examine the strength of reason which he brings against us When he saith in the Minor that faith is the instrument neither of God nor Man in justification What if I should undertake to prove and defend it to be the instrument of both He speaketh here of Justification as taken Passively declared to and termined upon the conscience For if we should mention justification as taken meerly Actively for that internall eternall and immanent act in God not transient upon an extraneous subject but hid in God before the world was or any justifyed or unjustifyed persons began to live or be Mr. Baxter would be ready to deal with us as did the Jewes with Steven Act. 7. 57. stop his ears and cry out against us with a loud voice Blasphemy blasphemy Yet in this sense we acknowledge that saith is neither Gods nor Mans instument of justification But in that sense which alone Mr. Baxter here taketh justification for that gracious act of God by which he dischargeth for Christs sake the sinner from condemnation by vertue of the new
land of Canaan again The same is evident from the words of Moses in Deuteronomy where Moses having in the name of God pronounced the many blessings and whole confluence of secular happinesse to the obedient and to them that after much transgression and many curses for their transgressions should repent and turn and denounced curses upon curses a whole deluge of judgements and temporary afflictions one on the neck of another against as many as should disâ—bey the Commandements c. cap. 28. cap. 29. he doth cap. 30 15 19. Call heaven and earth to witnesse that he had done his duty in setting before them life and death good and evill blessing and cursing inplying the life and death here mentioned consisted chiefly in outward prosperity and adversity stroaking and striking That these were the apples and the rods to allure and terrifie them yet in their minority and under a paedagogie untill faith should come and the Sun of tighteousnesse shine in its splendor that they might walk by faith and not by feeling act from love and not from fear from the Spirit of adoption and not of bondage so that this shadie life promised to a legall repentance is nothing to the life of justification but so far beneath it that it is in no capacity to be used as a proofe about it These therefore serve not at all to drive on Mr. Baxters conclusion In the second place Those Scriptures which he quotes that offer life upon condition of Evangelicall repentance doe not make for him any more then the former For Gospell repentance is taken either in a large or strict sense in the more large sense it is the same with conversion or regeneration and oft times equipollent and the same thing with faith though some little consider it to be so And this is as oft as repentance is put for the one and whole thing required on our part to put us into the actuall and sensible possession of the grace and life of the Gospell as Mat. 3. 2. Mark 6. 12. Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand The summe of their preaching was Repent so Luk. 13. 3 5. Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish 24. 47. and many other of the Scriptures which he quoteth In all these places repentance containeth primarily the change of our relation and but secondarily of our qualifications and manners It is a quidam motus in which acti agimus being moved by Gods Spirit we move the terminus a quo in this motion is self our self-righteousnesse and self-confidences from which we turn no lesse then from our polluted self sinfull self and sinfull wayes The terminus ad quem is God the grace of God inviting us The medinm per quod is the Lord Christ through whom we have accesse to the Father for remission first and then for sanctification also And as the scope of the Gospell requires us to understand in such Scriptures repentance in this sense so neither do the two Greek words rendered in Latine Resipiscâ—ntia in English Repentance refuse this sense For what is that change of the mind of the judgement wisdome and will when it is taken for a Theologicall vertue but a change of these in reference to happinesse A renouncing of and departing from natures groaping and erring directions by our own works and righteousnesse to seek for blessednesse and a cleaving to the directions of the Gospell pointing out Christ as the alone way to it For instance Paul while yet impenitent and unconverted walked by the light of his naturall conscience as it was informed and awaked by the Law and by this rule walked as a strict Pharisee touching the righteousnesse which is in the Law blamelesse Phil. 3. 5 6. and looking as Mr. Baxter doth upon the doctrine of free grace and righteousnesse freely imputed as upon a licentious doctrine was carried with full sails of zeal totally to destroy it I verily thought with my self saith he that I ought to do many things against the Name of Jesus c. which thing I also did c. Act. 26. 9 10. Now when the Lord Christ met him in the midst of his raging madnesse so working upon his heart that he now beleeved in Christ whom he had erewhile persecuted received him and rested on him for righteousnesse whom he had erewhile blasphemed What will ye call this obedience to the faith this closing of his heart with Christ in stead of further dashing against him was it not his conversion his repentance or is the promise of life I mean the life of justification made to any other repentance besides this In this sense therefore repentance is not a quid distinctum a thing distinct from but one and the same with justifying faith or if it be objected that it is somewhat larger then justifying faith I shall not contend but acknowledge that it comprehends whole faith both qua justificat qua sanctificat to justification and to sanctification Yet this hinders not but that these two phrases repentance to life or remission of sins and faith to life and the remission of sins are in the language of the holy Ghost one and the same Where repentance is taken in a stricter sense and some of the Scripture which he quotes seem to promise remission of sins or life to it we must necessarily understand of every such Scriptures that it speaketh of the repentance which is actuated in our first conversion and calling or after it That which is in our first conversion or calling when it is taken in a strict sense is not as in the former sense put as the whole thing required on our parts but seems in words a coordinate with faith to interest us in the righteousnesse and life which are by Christ Such are these Scriptures Repent and beleeve the Gospell repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ Mark. â— 15. Act. 20. 21. and many other But in these repentance and faith together make up no more then in other Scriptures either faith alone or repentance alone in their large sense import and so repentance is taken for self-denyall self-abhorring self-subduing and faith for embracing Christ both these are repentance or faith in their larger sense To no other end doth repentance cast and empty out self but to be filled with Christ nor doth faith receive Christ untill self be let out and evacuated that it may receive him See we it in Paul his casting away his Phi. 3. 8 9. own righteosnesse as dung and losse and putting on of Christ to win and wear him for righteousnesse were two concurrent acts either of one faith or one repentance for we may use after the holy Ghost either term indifferently and repentance here is no distinct thing from faith nor faith from repentance and in naming these two the holy Ghost nameth not two gifts of grace but two acts of the same gift of grace in us so that hitherto the
by the father of it with the name of justifying faith This definition he giveth Thes 70. pa. 279. I put this in the third place not because Mr. Baxter doth so for he hath many things between the former and this but because of its cognation if not identity with the former No doubt he saw the former argument more to shame then help his cause therefore in likelihood he brings it here again in another mode and forme if so paradventure it may relieve him Thus then runs his definition B. Faith in the largâ—st sense as it comprehendeth all the condition of the new Covenant may be thus defined It is when a sinner by the word and spirit of Christ being throughly convinced of the righteousnesse of the Law the truth of its threatning the evill of his own sin and the greatnesse of his misery hereupon and withall of the nature and offices sufficiency and excellency of Jesus Christ the satisfaction he hath made his willingnesse to save and his free offer to all that will accept him for their Lord and Saviour doth hereupon beleeve the truth of his Gospell and accept of Christ as his onely Lord and Saviour to bring them to God their chief good and to present them pardoned and just before him and to bestow upon them a more glorious inheritance and doe accordingly rest on him as their Saviour and sincerely though imperfectly obey him as their Lord forgiving others loving his people bearing what sufferings are imposed diligently using his means and ordinances and confessing and bewailing their sins against him and praying for pardon and all this sincerely and to the end Sponte Cretizantem quis neget esse Cretem Never more dubiousnesse in the most dubious Oracles of Apollo Delphicus then in this definition if indeed it be a definition because Mr. Baxter so calleth it He so speaks all that by all he might astonish some and deceive others yet if he be questioned his words bind him to nothing but that he may goe off and on at his pleasure The subtilissimus Doctor could not more warily have provided himself with evasions so sure that if all the world together should indeavour it none can catch him 1 If we demand of him whether he speak of faith quae Justificat qua Justificat which Justifyeth and as it Justifyeth he leaves us here at a losse and will noâ— tell us 2 In saying Faith as it comprehendeth all the condition c. and by all the condition understanding all the duties which the Law requireth if he be demaunded whether there be a faith which comprehendeth all these or if so whether as parts of it self or things reducible to it or if the latter why are all these or how more comprehended in faith then faith and all other of the rest in his sensu composito comprehended in any one of the rest or if in the former sense whether it be a faith of Gods making or of Mr. Baxters making made in the defining and defined in the making To no one of these our doubts that he leaves upon us by his ambiguity of speaking hath he one word to resolve us so that where to finde an answer to him he leaves us uncertain 3 If we should aske him where he saith in the beginning of of the definition It is when a sinner c. whether he means that the quando is the genus of faith or whether it be a regular definition of an act or habit to posit when it is and not what it is and if so why doth he not define it by a certain rather then by an indefinite time by Anno Mundi or Anno Domini or Imperii or Regni c. that from the Chronicle we may seek and finde it Or if by his quando we can find out the time how shall we find and know the thing Be it that we can hit the time when all that followeth is done and so upon Mr. Baxters authority conclude that then faith is yet do we not remain so uncertain as at first what it is that we may make use of it to justification he speaks nothing to certifie us that from what he saith we might take the occasion to consent with him or dissent from him 4 If we would know from him of all those things at whose being positure and acting he tels us faith is whether they include faith constitutively or else but declaratively whether faith consists of these as the whole of its parts or the genus of its species or the compound of its simples or else whether all these do but declare and evidence the truth of faith in a man If declaratively alone how then do those things which only declare faith any more then declare and evidence Justification by faith and how then holds his conclusion hence that we are justifyed before God by these because so justifyed by faith Or if constitutively as many severall parts and ingredients they make up as it were the body of faith how then doth the holy Ghost oppose faith and works even to the excluding either of other about the point of justifying as in other Scriptures so in that before mentioned Text Eph. 2. 8 9 10. Is there a conflict of flesh and spirit Jacob and Esau Christ and Eaxter in one and the same body and bowels of faith either to destroy the other as to Justification or if faith be made up of works and the holy Ghost doth so frequently in Scripture reject yea accurse works from the justification of the new Covenant how is not faith it self which is nothing else but a body and bundle of works accursed from justification also In none of these ambiguities that he hath left in his Thesis doth he speak one word to saâ—isfie us Lastly where he saith that faith is when all these duties are done sincerely to the end if we demand him whether he mean thaâ— when there is an end of doing them or of the man that doth them that then faith hath its being and not till then and so all other duties act in justifying while we live and faith after all when we are dead or whether he means that as long as these duties are done faith is but when they arâ— not done or when they cease to act faith is not but loseth its being Fuit Ilium ingens gloria Teuerorum I had once a faith and a ravishing joy in beleeving either while I was under sufferings for Christs sake but now my sufferings are ended and I am no more persecuted my faith is expired or while I waited on all the ordinances of Christ but now my sick bed or prison or banishment intercepts me from many of Christs ordinances My faith is lost which of these wayes or in what third sense he will be understood let him that can conjecture but in respect of any thing that we have under his hand in the Thesis he is yet free to choose his meaning so that in all that he
1 c. some name James the son of Alpheus the Brother of Christ and one of the 12 Apostles others James sirnamed Oblias or the Just of whom Jâ—sephus writeth the Author of it adhuc sub judice lis est Or that the matter method and if I may so speak spirit of this Epistle sounds not in one harmony with the rest parts or books of the new Testament but rather after the writings of the books under the old Covenant or after such as stuck still to the old Covenant as Philo Judaeus and others all which Mr. Baxter better knows to have been by many objected then I know how satisfactorily to answer it By these and other reasons some have expunged it from the Catalogue of Scriptures which are of divine inspiration and have reduced it into the kind and number of writings that are usually termed Ecclesiasticall in a good sense not disagreeing any where from the Canon yet not of that dignity as to be accepted as a part of the Canon it self I shall leave these things to be disputed by others and examine the testimonies which Mr. Baxter hence alleageth what and how far it makes for him as the authority of the holy Ghost himselfe Here it is remarkable that Mr. Baxter who followes the Jesuits every foot and inch in the interpreting of this and all other Scriptures from which he would with them set up justification by works like a man made all of zeal perks up to terrifie us from an interpretation contradictory to the text and from using apparent violence to it implying that all the Protestant Churches and Saints which have stood in the defence of the faith of Christ against the Papists now almost 200. years have dealt thus sacrilegiously in robbing this Text of its due sense And the Fryers and Jesuites alone good men have stood up as the fast friends of Christ to maintain this truth of Christ and the spirit and meaning of this Scripture against the violation of the sacrilegious hands of these hereticall Protestants And that himself is now at last stirred up by the Spirit that hath wrought so powerfully upon the Jesuits to vindicate and set forth the true meaning of this Text with the same fidelity and sincerity which they his Masters have used before him Therefore to excite all men to gaze on his ingenuity and sincerity and to admire him as the one alone man among Protestants raised up to undeceive all the Churches that have so long strayed from the holy mother Church he thus like wisedome it self uttereth his voice B. Pag. 297. I dare not teach the holy Ghost to speak nor force the Scripture nor raise an exposition so far from the plain importance of the words without apparent necessity but here is not the least necessity there being not the least inconvenience that I know of in affirming justification by works in the fore explained sense i. e. in the sense which Mr. Baxters sense and reason without any help of Scripture hath devised Men seldome are bold with Scripture in forcing it but they are first bold with conscience in forcing it as one M. Baxter who with onespell hath forced all the large and divine disputes of Paul about justification into a cherristone and hurld it at the feet of his St. Sense there to do homage or to be trampled into the dirt After this his protestation of his integrity zeal and tendernesse of conscience in interpreting Scriptures and the impression which he feels or feigns in his soul which the heretick Protestants have made by not expounding this Scripture in the same words which the Jesuits do Let us see with what tendernesse and fear himself in the next words speaketh of it B If it were but some one phrase dissonant from the ordinary language of Scripture I should not doubt but it must be reduced to the rest But when it is the very scope of a Chapter in plain and frequent expressions no whit dissonant from any other Scripture I think he that may so wrest it as to make it unsay what it saith may as well make him a Creed of his own let the Scriptuee say what it will to the contrary What is this but with the Papists to make the Scripture a nose of wax If St. James speak it so over and over that justification is by works and not by faith only I will see more cause before I deny it or say he means a working faith He that in all this can see one least spark of that professed sincerity which he protesteth in himself and requires in others worthier then himself let him make it out I can see nothing else but fraud doublenesse and falshood 1 When he sayeth that it is the very scope of a Chapter and not only some one phrase that here holds forth justification by works before God it is the same which he hath from Bellarmine Bel. lib. 1. de justif cap. 15. Scopus Jacobi saith he fuit demonstrare fidem veram atque Catholicam ad salutem sine operibus non sufficere c. i. e. The scope of James in his Chapter was to shew that a true and Catholick faith is not sufficient without works to salvation and with as much truth and fidelity doth this man speak it as did the other from whom he learned it This being no more the scope of this Chapter or of James in it then to deny the salvation which is by Christ and to set on men to seek it by the Law 2 That this phrase of justification by works in Mr. Baxters sense is no whit dissonant from any other Scripture whether he means difference in sound or difference in substance is as very a paradox as if he had said that contradictories are not dissonaÌ„t For if this doctrine after Mr. Baxters sense must stand as true doctrine and for the Gospell of Christ then must we cast away almost if not altogether all the other Scriptures of the new Testament as hereticall and limit our selves to this alone and to Mr. Baxters glosse in it to learn true righteousnesse and the way to life For how vain empty and audacious his annihilating of Pauls doctrine about justification with one breath is we shall see in its proper place and finde that he destroyes the genuine scope and meaning of that Apostle in many of his Epistles to sacrifice all to his imaginary scope of James in some few words here delivered 3 When he tels us of wresting and making a Creed c. he proclaims to the World that all the Protestant Churches which have constantly defended justification by faith without works i. e. by Christ Jesus apprehended by faith without concurrence of works c. have wrested and violated the Scripture set up a Creed of their own in despight of the Scriptures speaking to the contrary For what he cunningly and seemingly fastens upon one Mr. Pemble he layes to the charge of all the Protestant Churches there being not one
these two distinguishing Attributes here the thing in question requires them not But his rotten Cause will receive no appearance of support by this Argument without them Againe as to the rest of his Argument why doth hee assume and conclude otherwise than he proposed The Proposition speaks of a Full Iustification and an Everlasting Salvation but the assumption of a Salvation only and the conclusion of a Iustification only without their Attributes of Everlastingnesse and Fullnesse Doth he not know the falaciousnesse of such Arguings why then doth he use it Is it because he is wholly made of it and cannot shun it or because his Cause is such that it cannot stand without it that to use plaine dealing will discover the deformity of it or for the congruity which such a kind of Argumentation hath with the cause fallaciousnesse with falshood Let him either propose what he assumeth and concludeth or else assume and conclude as he proposeth And then he must argue one of the two wayes either first thus Our Full Justification and our Everlasting Salvation have the same Conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of our Everlasting Salvation Therefore also of our full Justification Here the arguing is regular but it is about immaginary things such as neither the word nor the Churches of Christ are acquainted with Wee deny that in Mr. Baxters sence there is any Full Justification as opposite to a maimed true Iustification or any Everlasting Salvation in his sence as opposite to a true spirituall salvation that is temporary and transitory So that his Arguing is the same as if he should argue from Jupiters thunder to Jupiters lightning or from Bellerophons horse to Bellerophons saddle when all these were Fictions had their being only in immagination not in reality Or secondly thus Our Justification and our salvation have the same conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without doubt a condition of our salvation Therefore also of our justification Heere I distinguish the word salvation that it is taken in Scriptures when by it is meant the everlasting salvation of the whole man by Christ sometimes for the state of grace which wee attaine here sometimes for the state of glory above In the former sense we finde it 2. Cor. 6. 2. Now is the day of salvation Luk. 19. 9. This day salvation is come to this house So Acts 28. 28. Rom. 11. 11. Heb. 6 9. and in other places In which sense we are said to be saved when we effectually receive the word of Christ and Christ Jesus to whom that word directeth for Salvation 1 Cor. 1 18. To us that are saved Ephes 2. 5 8. By Grace ye are saved So 1 Cor. 15. 2. 2 Cor. 2. 15. 2 Tim. 1. 9 Tit. 3. 5. and elsewhere In all which iâ— is said wee are not that we shal be saved that Christ hath not that he will save us And the same is further confirmed in the word life where Believers are said to have life 1 Io. 5 12. Everlasting eternall life Io. 3. 36 and 5. 24. and 6. 6 47 54. to bee passed from death to life Jo. 5. 24. All which proveth a life eternall life and everlasting salvation in this world that cannot be lost but shall have its coronation in glory above In this sense wee grant the Proposition so far as we have before granted any condition of justification But we utterly deny the assumption And what Mr. Br. saith sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of Salvation we affirme to be all the doubt the whole thing in question If it be granted of salvation in this sense it must be granted of justification also Because justification and salvation in this sense are not 2 things but one the same It being cal'd justification as we are freed delivered from the state of misery considered as a state of sin and salvation as we are delivered from the same misery considered as a state of wrath and condemnation To say therfore that our justification and salvation have the same condition is all one as to say our justification and our justification or our salvation and our salvation have the same conditions and wee might as well assume and conclude hence Obedience is a condition of our salvation Ergo of our salvation also as of our salvation Ergo of our justification also In the latter sense if Mr. Baxter take salvation for our future glorification then we utterly deny the consequent of the proposition It is false that he saith justification and salvation have the same conditions For what is a consequent of justification is an antecedent of salvation And obedience in Mr. Baxters sence cannot be a condition without the position whereof God doth not justifie because it followes justification and goeth not before it And in this sense I have oft spoken before to the minor and shal have occasion to speak again But let us see how he goeth about to prove his major proposition B. Explic. p. 311. The Antecedent is manifest in that Scripture maketh faith a condition of both Justification and Salvation and so it doth obedience also as is before explained How far any thing of this is true there hath been given an Examination before to his Explanations before B Therefore are we justified that we may be saved Wee grant more in aright sense viz that in being Justified we are saved But what of this B. It would be as derogatory to Christs righteousnesse if we be saved by works as if we be justified by works Therefore we reject both And let Mr. Baxter look to himselfe for maintaining both B. Neither is there any way to the former but by the latter The greater is his sin that teacheth such a way to justification as bars up the way to salvation making it impervious and unpassable to Gods people B. That which a man is justified by he is saved by This is Christs mediation or Christ the mediator for there is salvation in no other nor any other name given us under Heaven by which we may be saved Act. 4. 12. By the righteousness of this One Grace came upon all to justification of life So we are saved by Christ and not by Condititions B. Though Glorification bee an adding of a greater happinesse then we lost and so justification is not enough thereto yet on our part they have the same Conditions This must be because hee will have it to bee the result of all his dispute But he only saith it but proves it not All that he layeth as the foundation of this Conclusion excepting that which in other words is the conclusion it selfe doth not infer it For it being granted what he saith but sheweth not that the Scripture saith it that we are therefore justified that we may be saved that there is no other way to Salvation but by justification and that it be as derogatory to Christs righteousness to be saved as to be
being most drawne from naturall Philosophers and Theologers mounts not above Morality tels us nothing of spirituall things that the Gospel wholly treats of shuns the very word Spiriall as a rock on which all the pride of man might suffer shipwrack and the grace of God in Christ be alone exalted Besides how far thâ—se conditions are to be stretched whether only so far as that only their absence doth hinder but their presence doth not put or inferr justification and salvation as the effects in which sence wee are wont to take the Causa sine qua non or else so far that both their absence doth hinder and their performance produce these effects In these and many other things whereof I shal be forced to speake in its proper place Mr. Baxter will not impart his meaning to us that he may take his liberty to traverse his ground and under the name of Condition ascend and descend run sometimes in a wheele and sometimes in a race play all in sight and least in sight at his pleasure reserving still to himselfe this advantage to help himself with his Conditions widening and straitening them making them the same with or more than his Causa sine qua non having kept the power in his own hand as it shal be most inservient to his ends In the meane while wee are permitted onely to heare the humming and bombing but not to see the buz whether it be a Hornet or a Beetle What hee will not himselfe directly tell us wee must therefore take leave to gather from his writing as well as we can In his Explication of this Thesis even in that part thereof which I have before transcribed being to prove that justification and salvation have the same Condition hee tells us oft that we are both justified and saved by works Here to follow his owne exposition he teacheth pa. 300 that the word By implieth more than an idle presence and concomitancy if they only stand by while the work is in doing it could not bee said we are justified by works That it speaks out works to have their agency and operation in procurement or in that kind of causality which they have And this is the same which under the 17. 18. and 19. Theses he had before delivered of a twofold Righteousness Christs Righteousnes and our Righteousness ours as absolutely necessary as his to salvation both in their kind effectually procuring it So in that which followeth in the explication where to be the condition of our salvation and to have a hand in or give right to justification are put by him as the same thing or as equipollent phrases So that under the word condition he involves all the Papists efficiency and as much as after their and his defining and modifying of Merits is comprehended in their doctrine of Merits In this sense therfore we deny Works or Obedience to be a condition of salvation 1. Because thousands are saved without works viz. all that have been or shal be saved being never in a capacity to work 2. Because the New Covenant in promising salvation makes it to follow grace and faith not works yea grace and faith in opposition to works as hath been before shewed cap. 15. of justification and salvation together And that not by the vertue of that dung and rags and filth of mans righteousness wherwith Mr. Br. filleth the belly of his faith in the largest sense Thes 70. but by the vertue of Christ its object which it receiveth Jo. 1. 12. and of the aâ—undance of the grace and righteousness which it receiveth from Christ in receiving him Ro. 5. 19. 3. Because it is by inheritance as by our union unto Christ wee are made and adopted to bee with him children and joint heirs Act. 26. 18. Ro. 8. 16. 17. Gal. 3. 18. Eph. 1. 11. 14. Gal. 3. 29. and 4. 30. 31. Tit. 3. 7. and else-where and that of Grace freely therfore without works For then should it be of debt and no more of Grace Ro. 4. 4. and 11. 6. 4. Because if it be at all by works then wholly by works Christ is excluded will not profit will be all or nothing do all without works and give no place or partnership to works with him in the business of salvation if we bring any thing of works to save us hee leaves us wholly to our works to save or damn us If ye be circumcised Christ shall not profit you ye are debtors to the whole Law i. e. If ye bring works in part to save you yee must trust wholly to works to save you Christ is become of none effect to you Gal. 5. 2. 3. 4. 5. Neither can they bee a condition in that way of causality to which Mr. Br. professes himselfe to tie it viz as the Causa sine qua non For 1. the property of that kind of causality or conditionality not extended beyond it self can only by its absence deny the effect as in this case the want of obedience and good works can onely deny them which refuse or neglect them to be saved or have right to salvation but by iâ—s presence cannot Ponere as the say i. e. conclude or evince the effect that he which doth them shall live in them or be saved by them no nor yet that they shall be saved For if they can it is by some other and not by this kinde of causality which Mr. Baxter attributes to them 2 Neither doth it as himselfe describes its opperation in its causality to salvation remove the impediments of salvation which are in generall sinne in particular chiefly unbeleefe If good workes can remove these it may save But it can neither remove the guilt of that which is past by way of purging it or satisfying for it neither is it made instrumentall to put us into the possession of Christs satisfaction and purging for it precedes not but follows it whatsoever Mr. Br. hath sayd to the contrary Nor can it stop the flux of sin and unbeleefe but that it breaks out upon every of our good works to make them in themselves evil and damnable and doth no further or otherwise remove than by denying unbeliefe so far as we doe beleeve and the neglect of duties as far as we have diligence and zeal to perform them But this cannot bee called rightly the removing of the hindrances of our salvation therfore it cannot be the Causa sine qua non of our salvation 6. Because salvation is the gift of Gods free grace Ro. 6. 23. Jo. 10. 28. 2. Ti. 4. 8. But it is a payment of justice and not a gift of Grace which is made the wages of works Didst thou not agree with me for a peny Take what thine is by contract and condition of the bargain and go thy way Mat. 20. 13. 14. Wheras contrariwise the free gift hath no other foundation or condition but Gods free love and good pleasure He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy Ro.
heâ—r it tends to the promoting of his cause to affirme it And this alters the Case quoth Ploydon How rightly did Mr. Baxter describe his owne acting in this businesse p. 291. I resisted saith he the Light of this Conclusion as long as I was able It is the light of the Conclusion not of the Premises that swayeth him First hee pitcheth upon this Conclusion Works justifie there was light in this Conclusion it fell out of the Lant-horne of the Jesuits sophistry into his bosome and by that light he is swayed and having taken up the conclusion in such light of its owne from them now he digs downward for day and takes up that which erewhile he shook off as darkness for light to illustrate and prove it So his light conclusion is first formed and afterward he seeks for Crutches and reasons what come first to hand to support it sacrificing here more to hast than to reason lest his idol should fall before he returnes with his props to sustaine it And what if upon new thoughts we shall finde all that is here said all so unsaid again Let us passe to his explication peradventure we may stumble at such a stone before we come off from it B. Explication Heere I have these things to prove 1 that the Justifying sentence shall passe according to works as well as Faith 2. That the Reason is because they are parts of the condition For the first see Mat 25. 21. 23. well done good aâ—d faithfull servant thou hast been faithfull over a few things I will make thee ruler over many things enter thou into the ioy of thy Lord. And most plaine is that from the mouth of the judge himselfe describing the order of the processe of that day Mat. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed inherit the Kingdome c for I was hungry c. So 1 Pet 1. 17. who without respect of persons judgeth according to every mans worke So 2. Co 5. 10. we must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body acording to that he haâ—h done whether good or bad So Rev. 20. 12. 13. They were judged every man according to his works Heb. 13. 17. Phil 4 17. Mat. 12. 36 c. but this is evident already The Scriptures that he brings to prove that the justifying sentence shall passe according to workes as well as Faith are first here put and therefore first to be examined And against his reasoning from them I except 1. as well as Faith is here foysted in being wanting in the position And why heere supplyed but to beguile the simple with a good opinion of his assertion as if he attributed something to Faith also in Christs and Pauls sense When contrariwise he teacheth that Faith hath nothing to doe in this businesse but in the notion of our Act our righteousnesse or worke so that with him to be justified by Faith is to be justified by our owne worke 2. That there is no one of these Scriptures but is alledged by Bellarmin and his fellows against the Protestants and by them fully answered manifested to make nothing for justification or salvation by works scripture after scripture no one of them pretermitted When Mr. Baxter now stands up in Bellarmins place against us is it sufficient for him to tel us what Bellarmin hath said against the truth as if we could not without him know it and to leave unanswered yea unmentioned the hundreds of our side that have retorted upon him his owne arguments to the subverting of his owne cause that by these Scriptures he would have maintained If he would have another answer ought he not to have excepted against the validety of those that have beene already given Is he worthy to heare more from vs that hath stopped his eares against all that so many worthies have said already scorning to take notice thereof Nay when he will onely alledge the Scriptures and not take the labour to tel us what or how he will conclude from them he leaves us not in a capacity to declare so much as our consent with him or dissent from him Yet for the use of the weaker sort of readers that have not ability to make recourse to those learned workes where these controversies are handled or to understand them in that language in which most of them are written I shal speak something in generall to all these Scriptures First of that of Mat. 25. 21. 23. or rather taking the whole parable together beginning at ver 14. and ending at v. 30. granting it on both sides to be the same Parable which Luke recordeth chap. 19. beginning at the 12. and ending at the 27. verse which very few have questioned no one hath had cause to deny then it suits not at all with Mr. Baxters purpose or his Judgement dayes justification For the Kingdome of Heaven and the Lords comming and reckoning with his Servants and retribution of their service is to be taken for Christs comming to preach first in his owne person and then to set up and stablish the Gospel by the Ministry of his Apostles The servants to be reckoned with are principally the Teachers of the Iewes the Talents used or abused are the mysteries of the Gospel revealed though veyled under the Law The matter of the Account is what each by his serious studies and labours had cleared up to himselfe and others of this Gospel and saving knowledge of Christ before his comming for the advancement and advantage of Christ at his comming They which had spent their labours this way received at Christs comming a double measure of the spirit of illumination in the knowledge of Christ and salvation by him and were intrusted with a fuâ—ler measure of this sacred Treasure to bee the dispencers thereof to the world But hee which â—ad wrapt his Talent in a Nâ—pkin and hid it in the earth left the Doctrine of Christ scattered throughout the old Testament under a veile as he found it without searching into it and clearing it up to others was lâ—ft in the state of infidelity rejected and bound over hand and foot by his unbeliefe to perdition And his Citizens which sent word after him wee will not have this man to rule over us we will have a Christ such a one as wee have framed to our selves in our owne immaginations but not this Christ have their doom not only denounced but executed also upon them bring them hither and slâ—y them before me Who are these but the great Body and Nation of the Iewes that professed themselves Citizens and the onely Saints of God but for their refusall of Christ were slaine and destroyed by the sword of the Romans And so the parable comprehends in it a Prophecy of the successe of the Kingdome of Grace now in the way of erecting in its power as to the Iews So saith Luke in that 19. Chapter verse 11. Hee added and spake a parable because
mean the justification of the New Covenant not the justification immanent in God or that which Mr. B. calleth Christs own justification as the publick person Aph. p. 195. 5 They utterly deny morall obedience and good works to be in any other sense a condition of justification but as it is a consequent thereof to evidence it Mr. B. indeed as if he had not enough injured Mr. Burges by making him in some kind a Patron of his Whimsies in prefixing his name to this his Book Dedicating it to him as above others an eminent Fautor of such doctrines would willingly here also draw him quasi obtorto collo to be the Founder of this his Jesuiticall error as he makes him out App. p. 187 188. But I have before shew'd that the preaching of repentance and the preaching of Faith for the remission of sins are in Gospel language one and the same thing If Mr. Burges mean otherwise but so as law confident of the contrary I should put no difference in the authority of Mr. Br and Mr. Burgess in this assertion The same force he useth to draw Dr. Willet to be of his part p. 180 181. where indeed in one clause the Doctor seems to me to have verified that proverb Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus yet without giving thereby any advantage to Mr. B. yea he speaks directly opposit to him 6 They deny all causality of good works to salvation 7 Much more a concausality in the same kind with Faith and the satisfaction of Christ 8 Most of all that they in any rationall sense merit it 9 Or that as they make up the inherent righteousness of man to be a Collaterall with the sacrifice of or righteousness which is by Christ to Salvation so that we are saved by works for works as by Christ and for Christ All this dirt they leave to Mr. B. to lick off from the nailes of the Iesuits bidding defiance against it as a Cursed doctrine What they understand then of works as a condition of Salvation is in this comprized that to salvation already attained they have the relation of an adjunct consequent and effect But to the salvation hereafter to be attained the relation of an Adjunct antecedent and disponent as also of an Argument confirming the hope and assurance thereof They express themselves usually in the phrase of that Father though possibly misunderstood by some Via regni sunt non causa regnandi which some do all should thus construe not that they are the way to the Kingdom above Christ alone being this way but they are the way of the Saints which are Christs spirituall Kingdom according to that of the Apostle We are saved not by works for c. God hath ordained us to walk in them Eph. 2. 8-10 in the way of sanctification are they to be found not in the wayes of iniquity and prophanness who are inrighted by Christ to salvation Let now the vast difference and contrariety in so many particulars between M. Brs. and these Divines opinions about this Question be considered and then let it be judged whether Mr. Br. had not taken his leave of all bashfulness when he would impose on his Readers an opinion that he delivers upon this Argument nothing but what they had taught before him 2 The Testimonies which he cites from Calvin p. 175. Perkins p. 177. do only affirm that the inherent righteousnes of sanctification doth sometimes give the name of righteous persons to beleevers in the Scriptures and this none denyeth But here is no mention made that we are termed rightâ—â—us from the righteousness of our own works as or because they are the condition of our justification which is Mr. Br. Tenet Calvin indeed rightly ascribes it to the imputed righteousnes of Christ from which originally and radically our own unperfect righteousnes is owned of God and our selves righteous in doing it But in no wise affirmeth that this our unperfect righteousnes hath any finger in the procuration of Christs righteousness to be imputed to us But consequentially given a flat denyall of it which is the thing questioned in Mr. B. As for Mr. Perkins he hath in the place alledged nothing relating to the question So that he doth an unexpiable wrong to the name of these famous men to father them with this his error 3 That which he citeth from Perkins p. 176. 178. and from Zanchy p. 179. from Dr. Davenant p. 181. Molinaeus Scharpius and Pareus p. 185. and Mr. Burgess p. 186. are nihil ad rem Nothing to the doctrines of Mr. Br that are questioned and charged as Popish c. He commits a Paralogism in detorting them into his opinions from which they are abhorrent It is a meer ignoratio Elenchi to bring these writers as concluding with him contradictorily to our Conclusions who say nothing against us or for him As those of Scharpius and Pareus p. 185. where he makes thâ— wherein they affirm the substance of the New Covenant in generall to consist to speak for him in contradiction to what we conclude of Justification that is but one speciall part of that Covenant as if all that is affirmed or denyed of the former are so also of the latter The falshood whereof I have before manifested Although Mr. Burgess in his Testimony alledged p. 186. speaks more against Mr. Br then for him yet I make not his Conclusion a part of my Creed as being too peremptory and boldly fettering the hands of Gods grace to Lawes which God hath not imposed upon himself viz. That Remission of sins is given us onely in the use of those Graces which he had before named Had he said ordinarily or mostly in steed of onely I should not have excepted against him But I take him to be so pious and learned that upon a review he will relax and dispense with his onely as not bottomed on the Scriptures there alledged or any other The like may be said to the like speech of Molinaeus p. 185. if he mean so universally as Mr. Burgess speaketh But perhaps neither of them by remission of sins mean Justification but a quid distinctum from it if so then they speak nothing to Mr. Brs purpose The other fore-cited Testimonies out of Perkins and Zanchy labour of the same fallacy having nothing against us in those points in which Mr. Br. professeth himself an adversary to us 4 But it seems he most triumpheth in the testimony of Mr. Ball. Him he magnifieth and exalteth with suparletive praises more then all the great Theologers whom he alledgeth before and after him as if all the rest were but Sycamores to this Cedar This great leaaned and holy Divine as almost England ever bred and why so super excellent for â—ooth he goes on in Grotius that Cassandrian Papist his own words translated And which is there of the Dâ—vines which England hath bred that can be praised for so illustrious an act besides Mr. Br. and him I envy not the
to say for the vindication of his doctrine from so fowl a scandal and blemish And here I shall in the first place onely minde the reader of what hath been before Copiously in its place manifested that Mr. Br. takes up this Feat of arguing from the Papists who to Clear their doctrine of Merit and Justification by works from being derogatory to Christ and his Merits do plead against us That they in no wise lessen the Merits of Christ by teaching that good works do Merit and Justifie But that herein they advance the Merits of Christ in ascribing to them this soveraign vertue and power to give validity and worth to mans good works to Merit and Justifie Nay the Hereticks say they degrade the Merits of Christ in teaching that mans works cannot Justifie or Merit as if there were not force enough in Christs Merits to enable them to it Whether theirs or Mr. Brs Argumentation have more shew of reason to support it I leave to the intelligent reader to judge 2 The whole Argument is Sophisticall and fallacious 1 In that his Argument is not full and wide to the proving of his position The position which by this Argument he pretends to Confirm is in his own words that This doctrine of his is no whit derogatory to Christ and his Righteousness But his Argument is shapen onely to prove that his doctrine doth not derogate from Christs righteousness not that it doth not derogate from Christ himself Were it granted that it doth not derogate from Christs righteousness yet it follows not that it doth not derogate from Christ any more than if a man should ascribe all due praises to Mr. Brs learning but should deny his honesty Charity Chastity verity or other like vertue in him yet because he doth not derogate from the learning of the man he doth not derogate from the man himself in any of his accomplishments Mr. Brs doctrine may derogate from Christ in veiling his grace mercy and fullnes in other Conditions required to the Compleating of his Mediatorship though it did where it doth not ascribe to his Righteousness its due praise and fullness 2 In that he playes with equivocation of words For to shun the deserved hatred which the Papists doctrine incurreth from the Saints of Christ he delivers their doctrine not in theirs but in the Arminian phrase putting under the name and in stead of good works Obedience to Christ For this is an equivocall phrase and as oft as it is used in the New Testament in order to Justification it is the same thing with Faith and differs not a whit from it The obedience of Faith obeying of the Gospel and obedience to Christ signifying nothing else but the deniall of our selves and our own righteousness and our trusting in Christ alone for Justification and salvation as Christ and his Gospel Command in opposition to the voyce of the Law that knowing nothing of Christ speaking nothing of faith saith Doe and work that thou mayest be saved Gal. 3. 12. But Mr. Br. takes this obedience to Christ not in that Gospel but in this legall sense for the fulfilling of the Moral works which the Law requireth to interesse us in the justification which is by Christ and so deceives his reader with the homonymy of the phrase 3 In putting a restricting in his Argument upon the Righteousness of Christ which in his position that he was to prove was left at large and in generall Christ and HIS Righteousness but in the Argument he putts a limitation upon it in the Major That Righteousness which also he explaineth to be onely the Satisfactory Righteousness of Christ as if there were no other but that righteousness in Christ whosoever derogates not from it could not derogate at all from Christs righteousness I may subscribe to the righteousness of Mr. Br. in some Acts of his though I onely desire but finde it not in other Many other Acts of righteousness were required in Christ even as he is our Mediator besides that by which he gave satisfaction to Justice for our Sinns without which his satisfactory righteousness becomes unavaileable to us And he that derogates not from the one may derogate from the other Yet see we the boldness of our Sophister what he restreigneth in the proposition about Christs righteousness in the Assumpeion he leaves indefinite loose generall and without restriction again not that righteousness but HIS Righteousness so making his Argument by his fallacy of four terms to run four-footed 4 By begging the question in Calling good works which with him is the same with Obedience to Christ the Condition of the New Covenant and Justification by Christ Well doth he put it upon himself saying He that maketh them such for neither God nor Chtist ever made them such 5 His Activity and Liegerdemain which he useth to draw off his reader from Considering the palpable sophistry used in this Argument This he seeks to do by giving and prosecuting in the explication of this Thesis a seeming reason that he bringeth to prove his assumption viz. that Christ came not to fullfill the Gospel but the Law and then spending his whole explication about it When not to speak how equivocall and ambiguous the phrase is and in its most literal and grammatical sense the assertion altogether false we utterly deny either that Christ hath fulfilled the works of the Law or the Gospel in our stead otherwise than by giving satisfaction by his death for our infirm and maimed fulfilling of them or that works done to justifie us are as all works of the Gospel but are contrariwise wise wholly works of the Law or that Christ hath any more satisfied for our infirmities in fullfilling the works of the Law than of the Gospel in that sense in which Mr. Br. distinguisheth them It was his part not to say but to prove soundly his assertion if he would not have it exploded for a new and vain fancy rather than to have answered in his explication objections of his own making that scarce touch upon the matter in question This might suffice as a full answer to his Argument to have proved it in so many particulars to be unargumentall no argument or a faulty argument not a Syllogism but a Para-logism Yea not to leave an occasion to any of excepting that the propositions of the syllogism may have some force in them or either of them apart from other to his purpose I shall afford the labour to examine them also To the Consequent of the Major I have many things to say 1 That it is as the whole Argument sophistical a meer declining of not a speaking to the question The word in that is foysted in besides the question and makes that which is said unsaid as altogether besides the question That which he undertakes to prove is in his own words that His doctrine is no whit derogatory from Christ and his Righteousness To prove this see how grossly he acts the
again with the strokes of his Curse so sorely that we shall be healed no more while the world lasteth I have sworn that I would no more be wroth with thee nor rebuke thee Isa 54 9. i. e. I have sworn but never meant to stand to it I might instance hundreds more of such Scriptures wherewith Mr. Brs. glosses and distinctions do as well agree as fire towe together If Mr. Br. did so much honour the very intrals of Gods word as hee doth the backside of Aristotles Topicks he would not dare so to elude and elide them But Gods authority with him must it seems stand or fall as it hath or hath not approbation from Aristotles or Socinus his Reason being submitted to the censure thereof And then what living plant of God can stand where this man brings the Axe of his distinctions to fell and prepare billets in heaps for his Cole-fires B. 2. As to the Covenant of works though he make them Concomitants with Faith in justifying and that the voyce of the New C is after his Assertion the same with the voyce of the Old Do and Live yet he denies his doctrine to be herein Legall Because there is a manifold difference implyed though not expressed between the Lawes and the Gospels justifying by works 1 The Law requireth an obedience or righteousness of works in every number and degree perfect to justification But hee makes the New Covenant or Gospell to require only sincere obedience or obedience perfect in sincerity for the attainment of this end Aph. pa. 133. 316. and Thes 77. pa. 310. and App. pa. 76 77. And the sincere covenanting of this obedience or this sincere obedience covenanted must be thus conditioned else it is not sincere 1 It must follow upon the knowledg of the Nature ends conditions of the Covenant 2 It must be done deliberately and not in a fit of passion or rashly 3 It must be done seriously and not dissemblingly or slightly 4 Freely and heartily and not through meer constraint and fear 5 Intirely and with a resolution to perform the whole Covenant and not with reservations giving themselves to Christ by the halves or reserving a purpose to maintain their fleshly interests 6 It must be the taking and obeying of Christ alone not joyning others in office with him but renouncing all other happiness save what is by him and all government and salvation from any which is not in direct subordination to him Append. pa. 33. These make up a sincere and perfect obedience a sincere and perfect Gospel-righteousness perfect in respect of Evangelicall though not of legall perfection For sincerity is our Gospel perfection being a conformity to the rule of perfection viz. the New Covenant as it is a Covenant a perfection of sufficiency in order to its end which is to be the condition of Justification Aph. p. 132 133. Who now is there of all men that hath eyes in his elbows but seeth distinctly a vast difference between the Laws and the Gospels justifying by works For it is justice which requires perfect but Grace that requireth but sincere obedience to justification All this is without book the dictates not of the Holy Ghost but of Mr. Br. and that spirit which wrought in his Masters from whom he learned it For 1. The Scriptures which he alledgeth in any part of this Treatise to make any part thereof probable have been examined and none of them found to speak for him most against him Neither do these assertions of Scripture that affirm Christ to give or promise that he will give life salvation c. to such or such qualified or working persons as to them that love him or fear him or obey him or to the meek the righteous c. any more infer that these qualifications or works have any proper or improper causality to produce their justification than when the Scriptures affirm him to give grace and life to Centurions Publicans Harlots Sinners Enemies Uâ—godly Chief sinners Samaritans Heathen do infer that their being such had any causality unto their justification 2. Nay the Scriptures utterly deny the Gospel to have to do with the Law in this voyce Do and Live as I have before oft alleged them Not by works of righteousness which we have done but of his Mercy he hath saved us by Faith not of works Not of workes but of Grace And how poor a shift Mr. Br. useth to elude the force of these and the like Scriptures hath been shewed in the examination of his vindicating himself from being contradictive to St. Paul 3. Yea if works in any notion or consideration be brought as coupled with Faith to promote Justification the Scriptures affirm them to destroy the hope of Justification and to repell the grace of Christ by which the Beleevers are justified If ye be circumcised which in Pauls sense there is if yee bring but this one work to forward your Justification by Christ ye are bound to keep the whole law Christ is become of no effect ye are faln from grace and faln under the Curse Gal. 5. 3 4. 3. 10. 4. And if works or obedience in Mr. Brs. sense which is the doing of the moral Righteousness that the Law commandeth be not as much as adjuvant to Justification then surely sincere obedience cannot be helpful where obedience yea perfect obedience is excluded This is and appears to be either an instinct or a distinction of Mr. Brs. own brain not a doctrine of the Scripture for which way shall we turn the leaves thereof to find it 5. Yea how rational or how ridiculous this distinction or gloss of Mr. Br. applyed to those Scriptures which deny justification by the obedience of works I leave both to the seeing and the blind to judg By the works of the law no flesh shall be justified saith the Apostle i. e. saith Mr. Br. by the perfect obedience of works but by unperfect obedience if sincere we may be justified Not of works but of grace i. e. not of works perfectly done but of works unperfectly yet sincerely done so grace and works may be made friends that is Gods grace and mans vain glory may kiss each other as co-equal workers of mans justification Not by works of Righteousnes which we have done but of his mercy c. i. e. which wee have done perfectly but which we have done maimedly yet sincerely If some Festus should hear such a Commentary of Mr. Br. upon Paul he would conclude sure that one of them is beside himself much learning hath made him madd Either Paul that he had not wit or words to express his own meaning that in the whole bulk of his disputes denying unto our works and righteousness indefinitely all operation to Justification doth not as much as with a Parenthesis in any place inform his Reader that he speaks not of Gospel but of legall works not of sincere but of perfect obedience that these are rejected from those necessarily
to salvation to become fools thereunto Are yee so foolish saith he having begun in the Spirit are yee now made perfect by the Flesh That by the Spirit and the Flesh is to be understood Faith and works in order to Justification cannot will not be denyed When therefore Mr. B. teacheth men to seek the beginning of Justification by faith and the perfecting thereof not by Faith onely but by works also he teacheth them to be foolish O foolish the worst fools to salvation and to be wise onely to condemnation This is to be wise according to Mr. B. wisedom in this Tractate that is wise after the Flesh not after the Spirit in seeking happiness in the way of works which the wisedom of the Flesh teacheth not in the way of Faith which the wisdom of the Spirit the wisedom of Christ his Gospel revealeth But all this together with a plain and full discovery of the vanity of this evasion hath been in its due place before held out which would be but a tyring of the Reader here again to be troubled with Onely the generall and chief thing which Mr. Br. both here and elswhere layeth as a foundation to his Justification by works it shall not be amisse briefly to examine here for the prevention of deceit to his Reader before I put a totall conclusion and period to what I have thought fit to except against this Work of his If it prove sandy and unsound his great Colossus of Justification by works falls all to shivers This is his quaint interpretation of faith in all such Scriptures as ascribe to Faith in opposition to works our justification That then by it we are to understand all Gospel duties all that Christ Commandeth not Faith in a distinct consideration from other qualifications and duties but Faith in a collective sense comprizing all morall duties and actions within it which is Faith and all its fruits yea more Faith and all that is reducible to it And thus according to Mr. Br. so oft as we are said to be justified by Faith not by works we must understand that the Holy Ghost meaneth that we are justified by Faith and works done after the tenor of the Gospel not by Faith and works done after the tenor of the Law Behold now the unfathomed depth of Mr. Brs wit and the unlimitted verge of his power His wit surpassing all the wisedom of all good and Orthodox men and Angels of whom no one had ever the reach since the world began to find with all his searching such a bugbear sense lurking in the plain Scripture Texts of the Apostle His power that with the stroking of this Mercuriall rod he makes fire and water life and death hell and heaven to lay down all their enmity each to other and sweetly to coll lodge and incorporate together Who would have thought that Paul who so seriously and sacredly professeth that he had rather in the Church to speak five words with his understanding so that he might teach and edifie others also than ten thousand in an unknown Tongue 1 Cor. 14. 17 19. And in preaching the Gospel discended to the unlearned and babes to feed them with milke to make all plain and easie to their understandings 1 Cor. 3. 2. should yet every where deliver the chief doctrine of the Gospel Justification by Christ in so dark Parables and riddles that none could find it out untill this Oedipus inspired from Socinus and Arminius rose up to unâ—iddle him For let there be named any one Protestant in any age till Mr. Br. held out his Candle to give light to the Sun that ever could dream of this Allegoricall sense after the principles of Origen lurking in Pauls words Or what hinders now but Faith may be turned into works and works into Faith Grace into strict justice and strict justice into free Grace the Law into Gospel and the Gospel into meer Law since Mr. Br. hath made a reconciliation and composure between Faith and Works in the point of Justification But whether this interpretation of Mr. B. be so firm as it is pretty and witty hath been before examined as elswhere so in the Examination of his third Argument for Justification by works drawn from his large definition of Faith which he giveth in his Thesis 70. Here onely I shall mention some phrases or names by which Justifying Faith is described in Scriptures and leave it to the judgment of every intelligent Reader to determine whether works can properly or in any tolerable sense be said to be comprized in faith as acting in the same kind of causality about such acts as those phrases or names imply 1 As Mr. Br. himself in his shorter definition defineth faith it is called our Receiving of Christ Jo. 1. 12. and that not in that wide sense which Mr. Br. fancieth but in that strict sense wherein Paul interprets it viz. the receiving of Christ to be our Righteousnes or receiving abundance of Grace and of the gift of righteousness by him Rom. 5. 16. 2 It is called the directing of the eye or looking to Christ yea to Christ lifted up upon the Cross for healing Io. 3. 14. 3 A coming to Christ for Life Jo. 6. 37. 5. 40. 4 The eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood to everlasting life Jo. 6. 53-56 5 A putting on of Christ as a Garment of Righteousness to cover our nakednesse and filthinesse Phil. 3. 9. Rev. 3. 18. I could add many the like phrases if it were needfull But these may suffice and who is there that sees not these to imply an instrumentality in faith to make Christ ours to Justification Yea and that in faith onely and not in works at all for how can Charity Chastity Mercy righteousnesse and the severall acts of these and other qualifications of which most have our Neighbour or Brother for their immediate Object about which in acting they are occupant be called the receiving intuition of and coming to Christ the eating of his flesh and drinking his blood or the putting on of him for righteousnesse It would seem strange to me that any man waking and not dreaming should conclude such works to be Antecedents and not the fruits of Justification and life by Christ Or that when faith is described by these denominating phrases works also as couched in faith should contrary to their nature be so denominated Nay Faith is thus diveâ—sly named in opposition to works yea to Gospel works For so doth our Saviour answer and determine the question put to him what to do under the Gospel that we might work the works of God i. e. what is to be done on our part that we may be justified and saved This is the work of God saith he that is this is in steed of all doings all workings that ye beleeve in him whom he hath sent Jo. 6. 28 29. which after he expresseth more fully to be a beleeving in him that came down from heaven and
Part 1. p. 277. to the 286. More of Justification see Bellarmine Repentance Faith Works Condition Scripture Lord Prayer Forgiving Love Easie Christ Papists Paul Cozen Grace Causes Reconciliation Degrees K. The kingdome and pardon of God and of Christ are one and the same Part 1. p. 228 229. L. VVhether beleevers are under the Law as a Covenant of works largely discussed against Mr. Br. part 1. p. 61 to 97. Protestants reasons for the Negative ibid. p. 62-66 Mr. Brs Sophistry in stating the question ibid. p. 66-70 The Law not repealed as a Covenant of Works to any but in a right sense nulld to beleevers part 1. p. 71-74 The vanity of the distinctions fallaciousness of the Arguments which Mr. Br brings to prove the Affiâ—mative ibid. p. 75. to the 97 Many abuse the Law in preaching it first not onely to kill but then also to make alive again Pref. p. 11 12. Distinguishing the same works into works of the Law and works of the Gospel viz Paul and Moral Law-giver vid. Lord. Legal or Law teacher vid. Gospel Secular Learning see Arts Sophistry Tertullion Bullinger The doctrine of Faith gives not the Reins to carnall Liberty Part 2. p. 286. to the 295 The doctrine of Mr. Br so accusing it doth se ibid. p. 170 171 c. Do and Live whether and in what respects the voyce of the Gospel and in what sense to work for Life not from Life or from Life not for Life are either and both sound doctrine Part 2. p. 137. to the 153. 158. Part 1. p. 179. Whether Christ Justifie as our Lord and Law giver and that it follow thence we are justified by works as well as by Faith Part 2. p. 64. to the 84. How farr and in what sense onely the affirmative may be granted ibid. p. 79. The question stated ibid. p. 65. Mr. Baxters Arguments to prove the affirmative answered ibid. p. 71. to 84. VVhether Love cooperate with Faith in Justifying Part 2. p. 37. 40. Our Acting from Love to God denieth not a regular Love to our selves Part 2. p. 293 294. M. Mr. Brs Magisteriall and usurped Authority in saying without proving Part 2 p. 252 253. Marks vid. Evidences Metaphysicks see Arts. Mr. Brs doctrine of Merits examined in which he shews himself as high-flown a Papist as any of the Jesuits Part 1. p. 186. to the 194. An Admonition to such Ministers as inconsiderately suck up Mr. Brs doctrines Part 1. p 59 60. What the Moral Law is as considered in it self and in what sense taken Part 1. p. 197-199 VVhat Relation it hath to the severall Covenants ibid. p. 201 202 c. Why the Gospel continues it as a Rule and that it can be no more repealed or abrogated than God un-Godded ibid. p. 199 200 203-206 N. Novelty or Newnes of words and phrases used oft for the Vshering in of errors Part 1. p. 128 129. O. Obscuring see Darkening How all the Offices of Christ concur in our Justification yet nothing concludible thence for Justification by works Part 2. p. 63 64. Origen how great a Scholar and how great an abuser of his Learning and corrupter of the Gospel Pref. p. 33 34. P. VVhether our doctrine by excluding works from justifying be a stumbling block to Papists hindering their conversion and an occasion given to many learned men to turn Papists and therefore unsound Part 2. p. 188 to 197. Mr. Brs doctrine compared with the worst of the Papists and found one and the same with theirs Part 2. p. 215. to p. 222 His doctrine compared with such of the Papists as write more moderately found worse than theirs ibid. p. 223. to the 229. VVhether his doctrine contradicts Pauls or not ibid. p. 234. to the 258. His first Reason refuted viz. that Pauls question was what is the proper Righteousness by which we are justified but his own by what means we may attain this Righteousness though they answer differently to these differing questions they consent in Judgements ibid. p. 239 to the 250. His 2 reason that Paul excludes the works of the Law not of the Gospel vain and Popish ibid. p. 251. to the 257. His 3 reason that Paul under the word Faith implyeth works and obedience vitious in the same kinde with the former ibid. p. 257 258. It is no sound reason that Christ commands not the Perfect Righteousness of the Law because Mr. Br seeth no Reason why he should require what he enableth no man to perform Part 1. p. 215. 217 VVhat Reasons thereof may be given ibid. p. 216 217. Perfect See Sincere and Righteousness Person vid. Work Philosophy vid. Arts. Whether Mr. Brs doctrine be as he contendeth free from Popery Part. 2. p. 209 to 215. VVhether it be possible for us to perform a Righteousness perfect to Justification Part 1. p. 194. 196. Whether and in what sense Praying for pardon may be said to be a condition of pardoning and justifying Pa. 2. p. 31-33 Promises see Qualifie Punish and Punishment vid. Curse and Affliction VVhether Mr. Br hold for Purgatory Part 1. p. 54-56 Q. Promises of life made to persons so and so Qualified describe the Justified but demonstrate not for what they are justified Part 2. p. 40 41. 269. Rules given by our Divines for the right understanding of such promises to persons of such qualifications P. 2. p. 112 c. Quotations without the words of Scripture or shewing how he would argue thence why so frequent with Mr. Br. P. 2. Cha. 2 3 in the beginning thereof R. Whether ReconciliatioÌ„ denotes the same thing with or different from Remission and Justification Part 1. p. 227 228 308 309. VVhether and in what Respects sin may be Remitted before it be committed Part 1. p. 310. to the 313. Whether and in what sense Repentance may be said to officiat in Justifying Par. 2. p. 26. to the 31. Scripture seemingly asserting it examined ibid. What Legal Repentance is ibid. p. 26. What the life promised and death threatened under the Law to this legal Repentance are ibid. p. 26-28 What Gospel Repentance is and how manifold ibid. p. 29-31 Sometimes one with Faith ibid. p. 29 30. In what sense life is promised to it ibid. Repentance either in its large or strict sense how it giveth life ibid. p. 28 29 30. Mr. Brs doctrine of a twofold Righteousness absolutely necessary to Justification the one Legal the other Evangelical this in our selves that in Christ and his Reasons to make good 1 his phrase 2 his matter examined and refelled Part 1. p. 119. to p. 143. His dispute that his doctrine is not derotory to Christ and his Righteousness proved fallacious and false Part 2. p. 259. to the 265. VVhether Righteousness be a Reall Being or else but a Modification of a Being Part 1. p. 149 150. 159. to 161 VVhether the Scripture call men Righteous only for performing the Cnnditions of the New Covenant Part 1. p. 144. to 163.
sinns against the Gospel as well as against the Law Though I have spoken of all these enough of each in its proper place within this Tractate yet somewhat for the fuller Clearing of my meaning may be said here also The first and second I shall for brevity join in one as of no small Cognation As farr as I hold and have declared my self to hold them 1 I have also manifested in due place how they are or seem at least to be grounded upon the Scriptures 2 They are expresly and boldly asserted by many of the most Conspicuous Divines in piety and Learning that any of the Protestant Churches have enjoyed ever since the Reformation 3. And that without the Contradiction or exception of any Church or Orthodox Writer for well nigh a hundred yeares made against it A great and probable Argument that it was the Common Judgement of all the Churches 4. Mr. Rhaeterfordt in his Exercit. Apolog holds it forth not as the private opinion of some particular men but as the Common Judgement of all the Churches And the Remonstrants take it as such For so I remember they oft argue in their Apol. and elswhere Justificatio est purus putus Actus in Deo immanens c. not that they express what Arminius his judgment and theirs after him is in this point but that from this as a conclusion which they knew common to and would not be denyed by any Protestant their Argument would stand firm against them Neither know I any one of the Protestants that hath written against them excepting against it 5 I never read any to make me dissent in judgement from these Worthies that hath given his reasons against it save Mr. Br. alone and he handles the question like a man spoyled with Philosophy and vain deceit as the Apostle termeth the use of exotick learning in purely Gospel matters after the traditions of men and Rudiments of the world not after Christ Col. 2. 8. And his nakedness in such his arguing is enough discovered by a learned Writer whose worth I shall still honour but have not so much as an Ambition ever to match * Mr. Kendal He tells us indeed that Dr Downham hath written against it as delivered by Mr. Pemble But I could not get the book to see his reasons nor know I any thing which he hath written but as I have heard from others Besides I have been told that some of the late Reverend Synod disrelished the doctrine but cannot finde that any one of them hath published his reasons for such a disrelish And Charity will not permit me to harbour the lightest imagination that any of those grave Divines culld and selected out of the whole Nation for their eminency in godliness and learning should without any means used for information and conviction exercise a Tyranny over the Consciences of their lesser brethren to force them into an implicit Faith to beleeve as themselves beleeve specially when doing it they shall put out that which they think at least to be the light of the word in their conscience and in consenting with them without hearing a reason they shall dissent from others whom their Modesty will confess to be of no less deservings in the Church who have given their reasons Yet still I hold 1 that those Scriptures which treat of Justification by Faith do all relate to the transient justification which no man partakes of till he beleeveth 2 That no man is personally justified but onely in Christ the publike person till he be by Faith united to Christ That righteousness and life so discend to us from the second Adam as sinn and condemnation from the first As by the offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation so by the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all to Justification of life Rom. 5. 18 19. In Adam the publike person we were all represented he was all and we all considered in him God saw us in all our individuall persâ—ns in him though we through Adam saw it not so that Aâ—am sinning we all sinned in him and became dead in law and guilty of condemnation before God as if we had been then being and actually sinning Nevertheless as to our selves we were not personally sinners and guilty untill we had a personall being in and from Adam So in Christ satisfying Gods justce for sinn the Elect were all represented as in a publike person satisfying in him by him and so all in him and by him justified and absolved in all their individualls from sinn and condemnation before God Nevertheless we are not personally so justified untill we have a personall being and new being in Christ and from Christ 3. That this Transient Justification is a justifying or being justified before God passed at Gods Tribunall set up in mans Conscience from which he pronounceth absolution to a poore sinner denying himself and resting upon Christ alone for Mercy So that now and never untill now he hath boldness to pierce by Faith into the Holiest and plead his righteousness before him that sitteth on the Mercy-seat Thus our justification which was before in God and in Christ is not at all derogatory to the justification which is by Faith but onely prevents that this latter may not be derogatory to the praise of Gods Grace and Christs merits which have completed all without our subserviency for us and thus God is all seen to be all and our boasting excluded This hitherto is my judgement untill I shall be better instructed Tu si quid novisti rectius istis Candidus imperti And at length if it shall be granted to be an error yet it cannot be Antinomism being a deviation not from the doctrine of the Law but of the Gospel It was not the judgement but malice of Mr. Br that gave it this brand of ignominy 3 To the free absolute and unconditionall Justification I need not to Apologize for my self at all It is to the truly pious of the Ministery to whom my words are directed who among other have given this evidence of your godlinesse that ye have not forsaken your first Faith by declining to Popery or Arminianism what others judge of me is to me a small thing saith the Apostle of such I weigh it not But ye no doubt teach that the very promulgation of Justification runs upon no other condition but Faith alone and upon Faith not as a quality or vertue but instrumentall to apply the righteousnesse of Christ to Justification that works and the universall conditionall Justification which Mr. Br. hath learned of his Masters are to be excluded In this your doctrine is one and the same in sense and substance with theirs that affirm Justification to be unconditionall And it is indifferent to me to deliver the same truth in their words or yours Onely I find that they make use of both the former and this Conclusion as strong Fortresses against Popery and Arminianism which causeth Mr.
thing yet remaineth which I promised to premise viz. what my intention is in excepting against Mr. Baxters book This is not either to oppose him in all things which he hath written therein For sometimes he looks out thorow truths casement that we might take him so a sonn of truth and the less suspect him when he vends his false wares In this case I will not jangle with him whether he speaks truth of envy and subtlety or of good will and sincerity Or 2. in all that shal seem to my judgment Heterodox in his Treatise but only or mainly in those things wherein he joyneth with the Romish Synagogue to maintain their damning doctrine against the truth which is and hath been professed in all the Reformed Churches about Faith and Justification Or 3. in every particular passage wherein he discovers himself in this point to be for Antichrist against Christ for sometimes he delivers himself with such ambiguities and aequivocations like Apollo of old in his Oracles that in pretence of another sense of his words than the more Grammaticall and usuall he may leave a way of issue to himself in case he cannot maintain his words in that sense wherein he would be understood that he may deceive Let it not therefore be thought all granted that shall not be here excepted against and that I approve all whatsoever I do not oppugn For method I desire no other may be expected from me than to follow Master Baxter in order as he hath written and to take up his Paradoxes and most profound and learned mistakes as they fall from him examining them not by the rules of Sophistry but by the touch-stone of the sacred Word These things thus premised we are now to begin to examine the unsavory particulars occurring in the Book it self Mr. Baxters APHORISMS Exorized and Anthorized OR An Examination of and Answer to a Book written by Mr. Rich. Baxter Teacher of the Church at Kederminster in Worcestershire ENTITVLED Aphorisms of Justification THE FIRST PART CHAP. I. Arg. In which Mr. Baxters Popish Doctrine of Implicit Faith is examined and whether the people may admit Doctrine upon trust from their Teachers THE first passage wherein he sheweth himself to smel of Popery in the point of Faith and Justification is before the work it self in the farewell of his Epistle to the Reader pag. antepenult of the Epistle where he doth not obscurely manifest himself to like well enough the Papists doctrine of Implicit Faith and to wish it more favoured and taken up at home among us His words are these speaking to his Congregation Bax. Who I hope do understand that to take upon trust from your teachers what you cannot yet reach to see in its own evidence is less absurd and more necessary than many do imagine A very proper insinuation to a people whom he would have to swallow such Doctrines as in the following Treatise he offers to them to be swallowed As far as he prevails or prevails not with this insinuation so far he hath or hath not men his Disciples This is the very foundation of Antichrists kingdom the authority of men as the foundation of Christs kingdom is the authority of the Scriptures If Mr. Baxter can perswade men to admit and suck in this Doctrine his whole business is finished and all his ends attained If they take upon trust even fundamentall doctrines from their teachers Let Mr. Baxter bring what doctrines he will with him of men and Devils nothing shall be refused all shall be taken upon his Credit By this slight he knew the Pope had gathered and many hundred years held under his vassallage in blind obedience many nations of the earth therefore will not Mr. Baxter baulk it when hee goes about to propagate the Popes doctrine among us But let us see what the Popish implicit faith is and then compare Mr. Baxter with the Papists to see whether there be not in both one mind and spirit The Papists distinguish betwixt Faith and Faith telling us there is an Explicit and there is an Implicit Faith By the Explicit Faith they mean a cleer and distinct knowledg apprehension and believeng of all the Articles and Doctrines of faith which the holy Mother Church of Rome hath prescribed to be received to salvation and that not in a bunch only but in particulars also This Faith they hold needful and expedient in the Clergy as they term their Prelats and Priests who are to rule over more than to teach the people By the Implicite Faith they mean a generall and confused apprehension and believing of all that the Church hath commanded to be taught and believed that it is all good and true though they that so believe know not in particular what the Church hath commanded otherwise than they take it upon trust of their Priests which tell them such and such things are commanded by the Church to be believed This Faith they hold sufficient for the Laity to salvation to believe what the Church believeth and enjoyneth to be true though they neither know what it is nor are acquainted with one least parcell of the word by which they may know it to be true which they have so taken upon trust to believe By the Church they mean the Pope and his Clergy by the Laity the people So that by their Doctrine if the Popes decree things in religion successively never so contrary and contradictory either to other and the titular Clergy follow them and go to Hell for it yet the people have this one supereminent priviledg that their Implicit and Colliers faith saves them as being still the same and unchanged that they believe as the Church believeth though they know not either with the Church or what believing is or what the things are which the Church believeth Compare we now Mr. Baxters words with this popish doctrine and see we if there be any difference I hope saith he you understand When Mr. Baxter saith I hope we are not to doubt but a man of such rare parts hath good grounds for his hope He knew there was means used to make them understand else would he not say I hope you understand and what means but teaching and who should teach them but Mr. Baxter their Teacher But what is it he hopes they understand it followeth That to take upon the trust of your Teachers what you cannot yet see in its own evidence is not c. Here is the Implicit Faith not to ground their opinions and belief in matters of salvation upon the known word of God but upon trust from the Teachers to believe because their Teachers say they belive it And what are the Teachers but what in Popish phrase is termed the Church the Clergy which is in their account at least the Church representative And Mr. Baxter to decline envy useth the plurall number Teachers not as I conceive that the people of Kederminster have more Teachers in ordinary besides himself for he names
and to make his authority the greater to deceive 6. Whether he offends not here and elsewhere against the rule of the Apostle who enjoyneth upon all to take heed of high thoughts of themselves and to be wise to sobriety Rom. 12. 3. i. e. not to mount above their reach and measure And what shall be accounted a wisedom without and against sobriety if not that which intrudeth it self into the things of God which it hath pleased him not to reveal pretending an ability with the key of secular learning to unlock the Cabinet of â—ods Counsells to which the most glorious Angels never dared to approach The Christian Spirit is the meek and modest Spirit where the Scripture is not the instructor contents it self to be ignorant concluding with Tertullian Quis revelabit Tert. lib. de Anima fere in Principio quod Deus texit unde sciseitandum est unde ignorare tutissimum est Praestat per Deum nescire quia non Revelaverit quam per hominem scire quia ipse presumpserit i. e. Who shall reveal what God hath covered whence in such case shall we make enquiry â—ea hence to be ignorant is most fafe It is better not to know by the will of God because he hath not revealed it than to seem to know by man because he hath presumed 7. Whether he doth not cross another precept of the Apostle 1 Tim. 6. 20. peculiarly appropriated to all Ministers under the name and person of Timothy O Timothy keep that which is committed to thy trust avoyding prophane and vain bablings and oppositions of science falsly so called He cannot none can deny the thing committed to Timothies trust to be the Gospel in its verity purity and simplicity This therefore he is charged to keep to make it his business to preserve it alive and inviolated within him to keep and hold himself closely to it without deviating to any other studies as helpfull to salvation Therefore to avoid vain bablings and oppositions of science falsly so called Neither will Mr. Baxter deny and all Commentators affirm the thing to be avoyded here to be sophisticall and philosophical disputes which if intermixed with the Doctrine of the Gospel are here termed prophane and vain babling which hath the name and opinion of science or wisdom in the opinion of men but is falsly so called and reputed Doth not Mr. Baxter here see himself set aside by the Holy Ghost for a prophane and vain babler and his learning and wisdom exploded as shady and false having nothing of substance and truth in it 8. Whether he doth not by this way of disputing as much as in him is uncanonize and make void the word For if he hold with the Apostle that the holy Scripture is sufficient and able to make men wise to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus 2 Tim. 3. 15. why doth he not stick to it what els doth his so oft and foul digressions from it to fetch ayd from his sophistry but argue that he holds the Scripture to be invalid to save and that there is either an equall or greater power in his sophistry to make men wise and perfect to salvation 9. Whether it doth not bewray his Cause to be naught that he knows it to be naught therfore seeks to bear it up with such slights feats as a good Cause needeth not When we see a house propped up on every side at every end with posts stakes and pillars who concludes not surely it is a ruinous and rotten building that needs so many supporters It is not for the maintenance of the Aphorism or Doctrine which Mr. Baxter doth here pretendedly explicate that he doth tye knots and unty them bind and loose with such a hurry of questions and distinctions This doctrine stands firm enough upon its own bottom Conscious he is therefore of a rotten building which he means in the following part of this Treatise to erect and therefore furnisheth himself with so many posts and stakes to under-prop it It is well observed by Mr. Pemble out of Erasmus Malè res agitur ubi opus est tot remedijs It is a certain Pemb. of Justis Sect. 2. Cap. 1 p. 37. sign of an untrue opinion when it must be bolstered up with so many distinctions And if the Cause be naught and the defender know it yet persists to defend it then are the Cause and the man both alike 10. Whether this kind of Argumentation doth not declare Mr. Baxter to be of another spirit from Christ and his Apostles Christ came into the world to preach the Gospel to the poor Lu. 4. 18. to give sight to the blind that they which see not might see Joh. 9. 39. And Paul discended low nurslike with flattering speech unto the weak as to babes in Christ feeding them with milk and not with meat untill they became capable to digest it 1 Cor. 2. 1. 4 3. 1 2. likewise also the rest of the Apostles But this man soareth on high unto the upmost region of the Airy element above the kenn and reach of weak Christians such as he acknowledgeth them for the greatest part to be for whose sake chiefly he wrote this speaking not to the comprehension of any save of such windy ones as himself at least to the delight of no other so elevated seems he with the vain-glory of his own excellencies And do not these contrary operations somwhat argue a contrary spirit moving him I mean contrary to that which moved in Christ and his Apostles 11. Whether it tends not to the quenching of the comfort and hazzarding of the salvation of weak Christians 1 to the quenching of their comfort For when from the pure word of God not sophisticated with the intermixture of mans wisedom and inventions they have attained to believe and joy in believing and living by faith in Christ rejoyce in the grace and light of Gods countenance shining upon them thorow him meeting with Mr. Baxters work and finding therein so holy so incomparable a man for learning and piety scattering so many doubts and puzling questions about the very beginning foundation of our redemption that himself cannot answer himself otherwise than by conjectures peradventure it may be thus and it may be it is so The poor souls are apt to fall foul upon themselves for that they have been so audacious to believe any thing seeing now so many doubts and uncertainties and to account all their former joyes in Christ to be a delusion and being unable to make out the mystery of their redemption to themselves in his sophisticall way they lye down and sink under the burthen of their sorrow as hopeless It tends to the hazzarding of their salvation also For while he goes about to make them philosophicall Christians Popish and Socinian Christians to live not by faith but by sense not by the word of Gods mouth but by reason so far only to believe as they see reasons
2. 15 is the Originall though our Translation hath it and not by childbearing if shee continue in faith and charity and holines with sobriety The meaning is notwithstanding the Popish false glosse given it that although sorrow in Childbearing was first inflicted upon that sexe as a part of Gods Curse for sin yet as many as beleeve shall finde the Curse removed and a blessing in the place thereof It shall be made a happy furtherance to their salvation putting them in minde of their sin that first brought the sorrow and so filling them with self-deniall and self-abhorring that they shall cleave the faster to Christ for salvation by Faith as knowing themselves forlorn in themselves and stand the more fixed and stedfast in charity holines and sobriety The like is to be concluded of the rest of the sufferings which he particularizeth God so dispenseth them that they may be furtherances of salvation to beleevers by working in them humblednes and self-denyall bearing up themselves by faith in Christ alone both for salvation and increase of their sanctification The very pravity of our nature of which he speaketh is left in us not as a curse in wrath but as a means in Gods wisdome and love more to humble us to make us more to cleave unto Christ and an Antagonist against which fighting in the power and spirit of Christ we may overcome and having overcome may obtein the Crown So that these two Arguments are impertinent and nothing to the question To the third I answer that there is nothing els in it but a wresting of Scriptures from their proper sense that they may be subservient to Mr. Baxters ends First that of 1 Cor. 15. 21 22. maketh nothing to his purpose It onely testifieth that as by man came death i. e. by Adam so by man i. e. by Christ came the resurrection But how far both of the members of this proposition reach is manifest by the following words For as in Adam all dye i. e. all that live and die in Adam perish hopelesly and everlastingly So in Christ all shall be made alive i. e. All that are translated out of Adam into Christ The one man being the root of death to himself and all that are in him the other the root of life to himself and to all that by faith shall be ingraffed into him That this is the genuine meaning of the words is evident by the next verse which amplifieth what th'apostle had said in this viz. who are these all that shall be made alive in Christ First Christ saith the Apostle as the first fruits then they that are Christs at his coming Here is no mention of the resurrection of them that are not in Christ Not that these shall not also be raised by Christ but that the Apostle speaketh here not of resurrection in generall but of resurrection to life whereof those that are in Christ do alone partake Even as of those which dye in Adam he speakes of an everlasting death whereof the unregenerate alone partake So that there is not any mention here expressed of the death of beleevers much lesse of the curse and wrath in their death Touching the second Scripture which he quoteth and citeth Rom. 6. 23. The wages of sin is death who doubts but it is so to them that are under the guilt and dominion of sin But what is this to beleevers And the third Scripture is as pat as the two former For this caus many of you are sick many weak many sleep The Apostle here writes to a visible Church in which it appears there were some true and some but formall and temporary beleevers Christ is in the midst of this Church dispensing his discipline The true beleevers by the contagion of the formall professors had somewhat prophaned the Lords Table by resorting to it somewhat disorderly The other had totally violated it by coming to it drunken and so were worse than beasts from their own Tables here now had Christ inflicted chastisements of sicknes and weaknes for the humbling and amending of those that were his but death and vengeance upon them that while they professed faith in him yet were indeed despisers of him and his ordinances What is this to the Curse of the Law upon beleevers Therefore I shall add to Mr. Baxters And if so my and if so if so that wresting of Scriptures will serve the turn Mr. Baxter will surely have the water run in his ground and his fancy stand though Gods truth thereby fall to the earth To the fourth That his phrase is ambiguous and it is not easily understood what so cunning a sophister meaneth by evills Untill therefore he hath discharged his bushell of distinctions putting a difference after his manner between a naturall and a metaphysicall good whereof this evill is a privation between an evill physicall and an evill morall and an evill in a theologicall sense between the evill of sense and the evill of loss and a whole bundle more of evills that he can distinguish into their kinds we know not what he meaneth when he saith that sufferings are in their own nature evills to us If I should answer in one sense he hath the slight quickly to evade to another and to study out all his evills would cost more labor than a hundred such Arguments and all his evills to boot are worthy of As for that which he addeth Doubtles so far as it is the effect of sin it is evill and the effect of the Law also It is as much as if he had said doubtles so far as the Sun is made or is the effect of a thunder cloud it is black and dark and the effect of the Thunderbolt also We deny it to be the effect of sin as the meritorious cause thereof so that the suffering of a beleever should be the curse or revenging punishment of his sin Christ hath born that and so it shall not be in this respect evill nor the effect of the law neither We grant a beleevers sin to be oft the occasion never the proper cause of a beleevers sufferings To the fifth We deny not the sufferings of beleevers to be oft in Scripture ascribed to Gods Anger But it is so ascribed 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set forth Gods dealings to mans dull understanding by a similitude of mans passions that they might be the more easily comprehended Because man in his anger and wrath doth correct most severely therefore the sufferings of the Saints when they are great and grievous are said to come from Gods anger and therefore said to be from his anger to speak out that they are great afflictions such as children receive from their parents when they are most hot in their passion Not that there is indeed any such passion in God 2 In respect of the sufferers apprehension who being weak in faith and too much prejudiced by sense is apt for a season sometimes in great tryalls to conclude himself
the condition yet still the discharge remains Here he followeth Arminius because in this point Arminius over-runs the Papists conditionall saith he till we have quite finished the performance i. e. till we have gasped out the last breath So that in this life there is no discharge but a conditionall promise that possibly we may in the world to come be discharged what is this discharging but Justifying and absolving us from what but from the sinn which we have committed and from the vengeance which the law threateneth such a justification he denyeth to be attainable in this life And this argument he thus urgeth Whosoever is not perfectly justified is still under the law as a Covenant of works But the very Saints are not in this world so Justified ergo they are under the Law c. The second that Justification in the world to come must be procured by mans own willing c. He delivereth plainly enough in that he saith that we must perform yea continue performing the conditions untill we go out of this world and then we may possibly obtein to be justified in the world to come What are the conditions by which we procure the discharge Mr. B tells us afterward as we shall finde Faith and good works These must we observe and continue observing to the end to procure justification after this life ended And so it is by our own strong and lasting endeavours that after the world is ended our sins may be possibly forgiven and we saved Here if we grant unto him that we are Gods hirelings thus to work in his vineyard the whole day the whole term of our life and that Justification is the wages of our work to be paid in the evening i. e. at the end of the world then it will follow indeed what he deduceth hence that untill the world be ended we are still under the Curse of the Law 3 That they that are in Christ may fall away and be damned if they continue in their Apostacy or may after their many apostacies oft renew again their union with Christ and so at last be justified he speaks out fully in telling us It is not one instantaneous act of beleeving but a continued faith that shall quite discharge us that no longer are we discharged than we are beleevers and when we cease to beleeve the Law is still in force and condemneth Either he reasoneth from an unpossible supposition or a possible and usuall Case incident to beleevers If from an impossibility it makes not at all for his purpose If it were possible for him to fall from grace then should beleevers be under the Law again But it is not possible c. ergo they shall never be reduced under the law again But he argueth as from a possible and usuall case and then if we grant him that the Saints may fall away it will follow that they are not absolutely freed from the curse of the law in this life But in granting this we grant our selves to be Popish and may shake hands with Mr. Br. The fourth that no man can in this life be certain of salvation depends on the former For if we cannot be certain of our perseverance we cannot be certain of eternall happines and by necessary consequence it must be concluded also that we are not discharged from the bondage of the Law But we cannot grant the premisses from which such inferences are drawn unless we will grant away our selves also in despair to perdition And therefore we deny to Mr. B all his argumentation here as having nothing of Christ but all of Antichrist in it I mean not to prosecute in this place a dispute against Mr. B about these four pernicious errors which he holds in common with other Papists himself will elswhere minister to me an occasion of speaking more fully to them where he doth not onely touch upon but also professedly handle the most if not all of them Here I shall onely to preserve the simple from his guile manifest upon what fallacious grounds he pitcheth these his assertions They are principally these two 1 That Faith as an infused gift of grace and a part of our inherent righteousnesse doth justifie when it is not onely as the Papists say Fides informis but also Formata perfected both in its duration of time and in all its Concomitants the other habits vertues and gifts of grace such as are love mercy goodness temperance c. and in the fruits and acts of all these which are good works For so shall we finde him in the sequele of this tractate teaching 2 That Faith and all those its Concomitants with their fruits and effects depend upon our freewill to gain and retein refuse and lose them at the pleasure and lust of our corrupt freewill These points being granted all those foure errors will follow as necessary deductions thence But the orthodox Churches hold and the Oracles of the Gospel teach otherwise 1 That our Justification floweth from our union to Christ that All in Adam are under the Law under the Curse unblessed unjustified unpardoned But that all which are in Christ are justified pardoned c. So the Apostle Phil. 3. 8. c. All things are doung to me that I may winn Christ and be found in him not having mine own righteousnes which is of the law but that which is through the Faith of Christ c. Here was the Apostles righteousnes and Justification to winn Christ and be found in him And this union unto Christ is made up principally by the Spirit by which Christ apprehendeth and uniteth us to himself No otherwise is our Justification attributed to faith than as it is the instrument by which we apprehend Christ to our selves as we are apprehended of Christ to himself and bring home into our bosom◠the benefit of this our union to him together with the sense and joy of our Justification by him This I shall have occasion to illustrate and prove more fully before I part with Mr. Baxter and because he will call me to it in another place here I shall say no more of it 2 That our Faith both in its existence and perseverance dependeth not upon the fickle sweek of our own freewill but upon the support of Gods power and unchangeable love and upon the vertue of Christs mediation and faithfullnes of the Mediator though our freewill be mutable yet the gifts calling of God are without repentance i. e. without Change Rom. 11. 29. He that hath begun a good work in you will performe it till the day of Jesus Christ Phil. 1. 6. Though our faith be weak yet we are preserved by the power of God through Faith and salvation Christ hath by his sacrifice purchased to us not onely salvation but faith also both in its being and persevering to apprehend him and it to our persevering Consolation They shall never perish saith he neither shall any man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any one
man or Devill pluck them out of my hands Joh. 10. 28. It is the will of my Father which sent me that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day Joh. 6. 39. If now the word of God stand and the judgement of the Churches that is grounded upon the immutable word of the eternall God then those bug-bear assertions the brats of Mr. Baxters windy distinctions which he brings as arguments to prove the slavish bondage of beleevers under the Law will appear vaporous and so vanish For if our Justification proceed not from the old age or perfection of faith its Concomitants but from our union to Chrst and no otherwise from faith than as it instrumentally closeth us with Christ which no instantaneous Faith that lives and dyes at an instant but a truly living faith can do then it will appear to be a falshood that None is justified in this life Nay all that by a living faith are united to Christ are fully justified in this life And as many as are unjustified here shall not be either justified or saved hereafter Again if our Justification spring from our union with Christ then not at all from our own willing running and persevering And so his two first Arguments fall into shivers 3 If no true and justifying faith be instantaneous and the perseverance of faith in the beleever and of a beleever in the faith depend not upon mans mutable will but upon the all sufficiency of Christs merits and the truth and omnipotency of the most high God then his two latter assertions viz. that of Apostacy from Christ and the other of the uncertainty of salvation fall into shivers also For what more fixed and certain than what by the will of God is bottomed and susteined with the rock Christ and the truth and power of the eternall God None then of his popish arguments here brought do give the least fulture to his assertion that The very beleevers are under the Law as a Covenant of Works The fift Position that all Believers according to Mr. Baxters doctrine must needs be damned ariseth from the Assertion which by the four mentioned Propositions as by so many Arguments he goeth about to prove viz. That untill death they are under the Law as a Covenant of works If so then must they be needs damned 1 Because whosoever is under that Covenant is bound to seek freedome from vengeance and possession of blessednes by the conditions Gal. 5. 3. of the same Covenant But these conditions are unpossible to man in his present feeblenes and corruption viz. the purification of himself from all sin and perfect performance of all obedience Who can perform all this except peradventure St. Francis and Mr. Baxter so that either none or at least they alone can be saved 2 Because whosoever professing the Faith is in the least part under the Law c. is fallen from Christ hath no part in the Covenant Gal. 5. 4. of Grace as I have before proved therefore must necessarily be damned 3 Because whosoever liveth and dyeth under a Covenant of works is under the curse and damnation Gal. 3. 10. That which follows in the conclusion of the Explication of this Thesis acquits me from all mens suspition of doing Mr. B. any wrong in mis-interpreting his meaning in this his dispute Himself acknowledgeth it to be his own sense In all this saith he i. e. in this whole dispute I speak nothing of the directive use of the Law viz. as it is a rule and Counseller to a Christian in all morall righteousnes but how far the Law is yet in force as a Covenant of works because an utter repeal of it in this sense is so commonly but inconsiderately asserted Let him name but one considerable man that ever affirmed the Law repealed that it may appear it is not a slander which he casts upon the Anti-Papists But he proceeds That it is no further overthrown no not to believers then is here explained I now come to prove And we shall come after him to see what he proveth and how far he proveth And that it may appear to all what sincerity is in the man two things are to be kept diligently in mind 1 What he is to prove 2 What he is not to meddle with in proving if he will shew himself honest and not a meer Imposter We utterly deny any repeal or abrogating of the Law as a Covenant of works to them that are under the Law or have not don their Law yea any repeal of the Law at all as I have made to appear Therefore if Mr. B. go about to prove either that the Law is not repealed or that unbeleevers or such as have not done their Law by satisfying for the breaches thereof are still under the Law This is fallacious dealing a proving of that which never came into Question for all acknowledg it without his proving That which he is to prove is that none no not believers are absolutely discharged from the Law but are under it as a Covenant of works to the utmost moment of their life This he promiseth throughout his whole dispute to prove let us attend how he doth it in this 13 Position under which he promiseth to do it CHAP. X. Mr. Baxter's much promised and long expected Arguments to prove Believers to be under the Law as a Covenant of works discovered to be meer impertinencies and Sophistical Impostures And the Question whether the Elect while yet Vnbelievers are so under the Law and in what respects discussed Thesis 13. B. IF this were not so but that Christ had abrogated the first Covenant then it would follow 1 That no sin but that of Adam or finall unbelief is so much as threatned with death or that death is explicitely i. e. by any Law due to it or deserved by it For what the Law in force doth not threaten that is not explicitely deserved or due by the Law 2 It would follow that Christ dyed not to prevent or remove the wrath and curse so deserved or due to us for any but Adams sin nor to pardon our sins at all but onely to prevent our desert of wrath and curse and consequently to prevent our need of pardon 3 It would follow that against eternall wrath at the day of judgement we must not plead the pardon of any sin but the first but our own non desert of that wrath because of the repeal of that Law before the sin was committed All which consequences seem to me unsufferable which cannot be avoided if the Law be repealed Unto these three Arguments he addeth four more in the Explication of this Position which thus follow B. We may plead our non deserving of death for our discharge at judgment 5 And further then Christ in suffering did not bear the punishment due to any sin but Adams first for that which was not threatned to us
Christ and not by the works of the law for by the works of the law no flesh is justified Why then do we draw the poor Gentiles to seek any furtherance to their justification by the observation of the Law by which our selves who were most privileged with it could not be justified but by Christ onely without the law So here Even they that had the law and were not a little zealous for and active in the righteousness of the law had need of a redeemer were justified and saved not at all by the lawes righteousness but onely by Christs redeeming of them What madnes is it then in you O foolish Galathians that are not of the holy stock of Israel but sinners of the Gentiles to seek any help to your justification by the works of the law which could not justifie the very Israelites that were born and brought up in it and not to repose your selves upon Christ alone If Mr. Baxter will pretend any other meaning of the Text besides he shall therein wound and not strengthen his Cause For he speaks of the same persons here to be under the law onely in the hand of a Mediator not under the Curse of the law but under such an administration thereof that even before they actually beleeved in Christ the very person of Christ are affirmed ver 1. to be Lords of all all the inheritance which is by Christ ergo not under the wrath of God before they embraced the Faith of Christ As for the other Scriptures which he annexeth yet further to prove that the very elect before and untill they beleeve are under the Law in the sense so oft manifested let him once shew how he will argue and what he will conclude and upon what grounds from them we shall be ready to answer him In the interim I profess I see not any thing in them more prevalent to his purpose than a nights lodging in a bed of snow and ice to cure the Cough Yet from all these wrested Scriptures he Concludes at last that the deliverance which beleevers have by Christ from the Curse of the Law is a conditionall deliverance viz. if they will obey the Gospel i. e. when they beleeve if they will beleeve not onely while they live but also when they are dead and buried For as we say that a conditionall proposition doth nihil ponere so it is true in the sense of Mr Bax. here that this conditionall promise doth nihil promittere The Condition as long as this world lasteth being still in performing not performed and so nothing obteined Yet will he have this new nothing together with the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law to which we never were none but the Israelites ever have been subject to be the great privilege of beleevers and effect of Christs bloud When we poor souls with our dull eyes can see no more privilege that we have herein by Christs bloud than the worst of infidells and reprobates have for they also â—ave this conditionall deliverance from the curse and freedom from the ceremoniall law And this deliverance saith he is yet more full when we perform the conditions of our freedom And then we are said to dead to the Law Rom. 7. 4. and the obligation to punishment dead as to us ver 6. This is indeed a full and perfect deliverance But what doth he mean in saying when we perform c. either when we are performing the conditions That were a contradiction to himself in what he saith p. 74. that we are not perfectly freed till the day of resurrection and judgement And so also it will be hard for another save Mr. Br. to make sense of the words That the deliverance of beleevers is yet more full when they perform the Conditions are performing the conditions of their freedom i. e. more full when they beleeve than when they do beleeve For if we should grant to Mr. Br Faith to be a condition and not rather a mean or instrument of our justification yet would we grant him no other condition thereof Or doth he mean it is full when they have performed the Conditions it seems then that some of the Conditions are left to be performed in the next world because untill then he tells us we can have no such perfect freedom This is the free Grace of God which Mr. Br boasteth himself so much to extoll p. 79. let him that delights in it be his disciple That which he speaks in the upshott for the mitigation of his harsh doctrine aforegoing that he knoweth this Covenant of works continueth not to the same ends and uses as before c. is but a trick of the Jesuits to give sugar after the poyson which was before gone down to destroy Neither can he make out how beleevers are under the law of nature as a Covenant of works and yet not bound to seek life according to the tenor and condition of that Covenant If any marvell that Mr. Baxter should so waste his spirits in abusing both divine and humane learning to prove the Saints to be still under the Curse under the law as a Covenant of works he will cease to wonder if he take notice of a further aim that he hath therein He would not out of doubt have so much insisted on it had he not looked to a further end in it If the beleevers are still under a Covenant of works as to the Curse wrath and Condemnation much more are they under a Covenant of works as unto life and Justification If the former be once granted he accounts the game wonn as to the latter Therefore doth he so much stirr in the former that he may with the more facility and less contradiction bring in afterwards the latter Justification by works which is his very busines in Compiling this book CHAP. XI Whether as the Covenant of Works was made with all mankind in Adam their representative so the Covenant of Grace was made with all the elect in Christ their Representer What relation the Covenants made with Adam Abraham the Israelites and lastly with us under the Gospel have to that Covenant made with Christ B. Thesis 14. p. 89. THe Tenor of the New Covenant is this that Christ having made sufficient satisfaction to the Law whosoever will repent and beleeve in him to the end shall be justified through that satisfaction from all that the Law did charge upon them and be moreover advanced to far greater privileges and glory then they fell from But whosoever fullfilleth not these conditions shall have no more benefit by the bloud of Christ than what they here received and abused but must answer the charge of the Law themselves And for their neglect of Christ must also suffer a far greater condemnation Or briâ—fly whosoever beleeveth in Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life but he that beleeveth not shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Mar. 16. 16. Jo. 3. 15 16 17 18. 36.
I say much to the 17 18 Aphorisms because they are but as it were a bridge of Mr. Brs making on which to pass over to the following matter Yet that he may not Complain of wrong that he is deprived of the honour of his artificiall Methode I shall transcribe his words and annex some animadversions upon them Thesis 17. Bax. p. 102. Therefore as there are two Covenants with their distinct conditions So is there a twofold Righteousnes and both of them absolutely necessary to salvation Thesis 18. pag. 103. Our Legal Righteousnes or Righteousnes of the first Covenant is not personall or consisteth not in any qualifications of our own persons or actions performed by us for we never fulfilled nor personally satisfied the Law but it is wholly without us in Christ And in this sense it is that the Apostle and every Christian disclaimeth his own Righteousnes or his own works as being no true legal Righteousnes Phil. 3. 7 8. Thesis 19. p. 107. The Righteousnes of the New Covenant is the onely Condition of or interest in and enjoyment of the Righteousnes of the old Or thus Those onely shall have part in Christs satisfaction and so in him be legally Righteous who beleeve and obey the Gospel and so are in themselves Evangelically Righteous Thesis 20. p. 108. Our Evangelicall Righteousnes is not without us in Christ as our legall Righteousness is but consisteth in our own Actions of faith and Gospel obedience Or thus Though Christ performed the conditions of the Law and satisfieth for our non-performance yet it is our selves that must perform the Conditions of the Gospel I close up all these positions together as it were in one Frontispice partly in regard of their neer Cognation in Nature and partly that the profoundnes and dexterity of Mr. Br may the more cleerly appear and that it may be here evidenced to the very senses of all what is said Gen. 3. 1. That the Serpent is more subtle than all the beasts of the field which God hath made The one part of Mr. Brs Gospel we have found in the former part of this Tractate the summe and substance whereof may be thus expressed That Christ Jesus by the will of his Father hath by the satisfaction made to justice for the sins of the Elect obteined that the whole Curse and managing thereof together with the Elect for whom he hath satisfied should be delivered up into his hand And he sheweth himself in this his power an unmercifull High Priest holding his redeemed ones under the Curse wrath and torment in soul and body not giving them deliverance untill the day of judgement He did somewhat before look unto but now really enters upon the second part which is like to the former holding forth a justification in the world to come upon such Conditions as will not bring any unto but certainly exclude all that to this end use and perform them from justification into condemnation Within the Confines of these two essentiall parts of his Gospel he comprizeth all the riches of grace by Christ which whosoever likes it may if he will partake of Such have we already found the Nature of the first part of his Gospel We are now to examine whether the second part thereof be not such as I have here mentioned if not I have wronged Mr. Br if so he wrongs Christ and works against him seeking the damnation of the Elect. And by the very words of these four propositions of his if nothing els were to be added he that is both orthodox and judicious may somewhat judge whither Mr. Br driveth finding him to set up mans righteousnes parallell with Christs righteousnes and equally necessary to our Justification so making man at least a demisaviour to himself and so in effect prove an absolute destroyer of his own soul For whosoever brings any thing besides Christ to his justification falls utterly from Christ righteousnes and salvation Yet while he thus acts the part of one of those evill workers mentiuned Phil. 3. 2. he shews himself an Artizâ—n to deceive the wits of the time no less than Muncer did himself to beguile the witles Common people in Germany He when he was vanquished taken and now under the hands of the tormentor being demanded why he had so deluded the silly vulgar multitude to his own and their ruine breaking forth into a vehement laughter answered Sic voluerunt They would have it so insinuating that because he found them little regarding the solidity and power of the Gospel but itching after novelties he attempered and even sacrified his studies to their humour untill he had subverted himself and them So Mr. Br taking notice of some affected wits that had rather perish and dye for ever by Art that which is falsely called Science or learning 1 Tim. 6. 20. than to live and be saved by the simplicity and plainnes of the Gospel composeth himself wholly to please their humour and make himself their darling handles the Case so finely and artificially that he may kill them softly they never feeling it untill they are dead and ruined for ever One peece of his artifice we have here in his invention of that twofold Righteousnes of the two Covenants absolutely necessary to justification or salvation The one in Christ the other in our selves Christs righteousnes purchasing for us a conditionall justification a possibility of righteousnes bliss in the world to come but the other our righteousnes when once finished and compleated being that which doth the deed and drives the nail to the head making both Christs righteousness and the justification purchased by it to be no longer Conditionally but actually and really ours Provided and alwayes excepted that this cannot be in this life and so the tryall of Mr. Brs doctrine by experience can never be made untill this world be wholly ended This is learning indeed such as neither the dictates of men at least totidem verbis in so fine a contexture of words nor the Oracles of God could ever teach Mr. Br. It is his own and possibly may continue his onely to the worlds end all men els proving themselves too wise or too foolish to joyn with him in this his speculation We thought that the righteousness according to the Covenant under which God hath placed us had sufficed to justification he tells us nay but we are under both the Covenant of works and the Covenant of grace too and must be righteous in the righteousnes of both The world had not the wit untill now nor yet Christ or any of his Prophets or Apostles had it ever in their Consideration to term Christ our legall and our own works and qualifications our Gospel righteousnes Mr. Br first having received it rough hewen from Papists and Arminians teacheth us this piece of distinctionary learning Neither did it enter ever into our thoughts that the righteousness of the Old Covenant was of a more noble â—ace or that the righteousnes
case of offence committed against God or man to repent of it to sorrow for it and at our utmost to make satisfaction for the offence Yea even Faith in Christ is in generall required by the Old Law and Covenant We in no wise ascribe to the Gospel a creating of new points of righteousnes or injoining of new duties which the Law did not at least in generall bind us unto this opinion we leave as proper and peculiar to the Socinians But a modification spiritualizing and appropriating the righteousness and duties which the Law in generall commanded to the now present lapsed condition of man to Gods present offers of grace and our present necessities Yea herein we have Mr. B. consenting to us who Thes 30. and its Explication delivers his judgment herein to be fully one with the stream of Orthodox Divines So that if we should affirm that Christ hath beleeved repented sorrowed c. for us and in our steed it would not thence follow that we pronounce Christ to have performed the conditions of the New but onely of the Old Covenant for us 3 Yet are we far from affirming that Christ in the most strict and proper sense hath so beleeved repented c. for us that we should be taken to have beleeved repented c. not in our selves but in him and by him But the reason why we neither affirm nor hold it is not because that these are our Gospel righteousnes or New Covenant conditions of righteousness and life in the sense before oft mentioned for we have denyed and do still deny them to be such But 1 because it is in question whether the active righteousnes of Christ be imputable to us for justification And 2 if it were yet were it an unchristing of Christ to affirm him to have been ever in such a state and condition that he had need of repentance or faith to the remission of sins He took indeed our nature not the sinfulnes of our nature had our sin imputed to him or as the Scripture phrase expresly speaketh laid on him Isa 53. 6. to suffer and satisfie for it but had no sin of his own to repent of and mortifie then had there not been vertue in his Priesthood sacrifice to have expiated ours And to say that he actually repented sorrowed beleeved c. for the pardon of our sins we confes is a harsh unproper and Catachresticall locution Yet we still hold that the flawes and infirmities of our faith and repentance as well as our other iniquities were laid upon Christ that he hath satisfied divine justice for them by his sufferings and that therefore God imputeth them not to us being once in Christ Otherwise though they are parts of Gospel righteousnes to sanctification the sin and infirmity that is in them in not squaring fully with the Law their rule would bring upon us condemnation These things premissed all the absurdities which to make the assertion odious Mr. B. layeth upon us for affirming our New Covenant righteousnes to be in Christ in the sense mentioned and explained and denying our faith repentance obedience c. to be our New Covenant righteousnesse to Justification vanish into smoke For 1 It implyeth not as he saith it doth blasphemy against Christ as if he had sin to repent of for we utterly deny that Christ hath beleeved or repented for us otherwise then by satisfying justice for our not repenting beleeving c. home to the rule of the Law 2 Nor doth it imply that Jewes Pagans and every one shall be saved because Christ hath fulfilled the conditions of both Covenants for them so that they are culpable in neither For Christ hath not satisfied for the breach of much less fulfilled that which Mr B. called the conditions of the New Covenant as such conditions c. but as precepts of the old Covenant or Law of works Or should I say Christ hath satisfied onely for the Elect will M. B. contradict 3 If it should follow hence that the Elect then are righteous and justified viz. in Christ before they beleeve this would not sound as an absurdity to any other besides them to whom truth is an absurdity as hath been before shewed 4 Neither if it would follow hence that beleeving is needless to justification would it also follow that it is needless to any other use This cannot fall from any other but a prophane mouth and self-seeking man that will have nothing done out of love and obedience to God to glorifie him but all out of self-love for his own benefit onely But I have before proved faith to be needfull to justifie us to bring home into our own Consciences the benefit and evidence of our Justification even Faith acting in us therefore Faith so acting in us is also needful to this as well as to other uses though Christ hath satisfied for the infirmity of it in reference to the Law 5 It were no absurdity to confess the saved and the damned to be alike in themselves and by nature before Justification but that the difference is onely in election and Christs intention Untill then the Holy Ghost pronounceth both to be Children of wrath by nature Eph. 2. 3. both to be ungodly Rom. 4. 5. what then is the difference in themselves But their beleeving and Justification puts a difference in their relation first and then in their qualifications also the one becoming sanctified the other remaining unholy still The rest that is contained in this fifth place hath been objected before and before answered 6 What he saith in the sixth place proceeds from the heat of passion and height of self-confidence not from strength of reason or evidence of Scriptures Which of all the Lawes and precepts of Christ had Justification for its end save that of Faith Or who hath confounded Law and Gospel and overthrown all the Lawes and Precepts of Christ by removing Faith from operating in its office to this end Who hath contradicted the whole scope of Scriptures by denying Christ to be made under the Law to have fulfilled the Law to have born the curse of the Law or its imposing upon all the necessity of duty to perform our selves whatsoever the New Covenant requireth of us to Justification or Salvation But that all which Mr. B. would make conditions of Justification must be such because he will so have it notwithstanding all his bombasticall noise of woâ—ds his great Cry and little wooll will not be grâ—nted him When he brings us his large transcript of New Testament Scriptures I doubt upon due examination they will be found to make not for but against him What he instanceth p. 113 114 115. of Mr. Saltmarsh I cannot deny it neither will I defend it I remember that I did once read this passage in him and it was the same in substance as Mr. B. here transcribes him It is not a grain or two of salt that can make his Argumentation there enough savory unless he mean
us with the leaven of the Papists He saw these 2 Theses which I have examined together viz. Perfection Merits of works if they should come together one in the neck of another without any Calm betwixt them would make so terrible a sound as would be enough to waken and startle all that were but sleeping and not dead for fear the Pope or the Devill had been come to assault them Therfore to keep all quiet he interposeth this Thesis and its explication in which he pulls the ears of our Divines for saying that God doth justifie first our persons and then our duties and actions pag. 134. deinceps in the explication telling us it is a doctrine of dangerous consequence many wayes and except we will take it in his that is in the Popish sense it smells rankly of Popery setts up Justification by works from the very thought whereof he starts startles away as affrighted Notable dissimulation not of a learner but of one learned in the Trade Clodius accusat Maechos Catilina Cethegum He that affirms our Righteousness equall with the righteousnes of Christ to justification that entitles it a perfect righteousnes a meritorious righteousnes is the first man in all the world that fears of the advancing of Justification by works by them whom he hateth for oppugning it If there were that which he calls danger in this phrase or doctrine of setting up such a justification would not himself be the first man to kisse it to eat it up to promote it What is it that makes him to disrelish the phrase so extremely is it not that it inverts his order in Justification that he would have the works to justifie the man when contrariwise this doctrine makes the justification of the person to be the ground of the acceptance of his obedience Is it not the very depth of Satan from which he is moved to guise disguise himself to act Satans part with all guile and subtlety to betray the Saints of Christ and the truth of Christ to damning Popery and yet here and there to transform himself into an Angel of Light a Minister of Righteousnes to blinde the eyes of the simple that they may not espy him untill they be taken in his snare and lost for ever As for the doctrine or phrase it self he knowes our Divines mean this onely when they say God doth justifie first our persons and then our duties actioÌ„s viz. That God having first justified their persons from all the guilt that was upon them doth thenceforth also justifie them in refâ—rence to all the duties which thorow Christ the Mediator they shall perform unto God not imputing to them the imperfections thereof so that they may rest Confident of Gods accepting both the performers and the performance in and through Christ the beloved In this respect and not as Conditions of the New Covenant as Mr. Br dreameth doth the Gospel teach our works to be accepted of God There is yet one link of the Popish Chain wanting without which it will be unperfect and unusefull If it were granted that there is 1 a personall righteousnes of Gods own appointment necessary to justification 2 That this righteousness consisteth in ouâ— own Faith and sanctification or good works 3 That it is a perfect and 4 a Meritorious Righteousness yet all this cannot be effectâ—all either to save or deceive us unless it be a righteousnes also possible for us to perform Thaâ— he may not be wanting therefore to the Popish Cause in any one branch of Popish doctrine he addeth this also Thesis 27 in these words pag. 141. Bax As it was possible for Adam to have fullfilled the Law of Works by that power which he received by Nature so is it possible for us to perform the Conditions of the New Covenant by the power which we receive from the Grace of Christ To which he adds in the Explication pag 142 c. Bax This possibility is to be understood not in Relation to the strength of the Agent But in the Relative sense the Conditions of the New Covenant are possible to them that have the assistance of Grace So that strength which was in Adam to fullfill was a power which he received by Nature But the strength by which we perform is the power which we receive from the grace of Christ If any should have asked him what that grace of Christ is the man was very Coy he could but he would not tell whether it were a Pauline or a Pâ—lagian Grace a grace equally extended both to the Elect and the Reprobats or a grace peculiar to the Elect a grace that comes no further than the ear or a grace operating upon the heart also c. He had other fish to fry and had not the leizure to stay câ—ack these nutts now He bids us to turn over many volumes and specially Parkers Theses to search if possibly we can finde what Mr. Brs judgment would be many years after in this poynt But it is easie to perceive the mans meaning by his gaping in many passages of this book We should have had all this in rank and file in his much promised Tractate of Vniversall Redemption by which as by a second famous atchievement he meant to endear himself to his holy Father but that unluckily there is one of his own spirit step into his Holinesses Parlour to present him with this gift and so anticipated this favour which Mr. Br would have had entire to himself so that now the expected advantage being lost he not using to open his Commodities to sale a day before the Fayr we might possibly for a couple of Capons obtein to know his meaning herein In the mean while it must needs be his intent in reserving to himself what he meant by grace to puâ— upon us a kind of impossibility to say readily yea or nay to his asserted pâ—ssibility of performing the Conditions of the New Covenant by a power which he leaves us uncertain of knowing what it is As for the two fold opposition which he puts in his Thesis 1. between the conditions of the Old Covenant New 2. Between the power which Adam had by nature and the power which we have by the Grace of Christ there is nothing but a windy sound of words therein to deceive his reader into an opinion that he hath some honest and sound meaning in what is here posited or said For neither doth he make any real difference between the conditions of these two Covenants but makes our own Righteousnesse consisting in faith and works to be the substance of the conditions of both Covenants onely he puts a supposed difference in the measure of them One an imaginary perfection of sincerity in doeing them answering to what the New Covenant requireth the other an absolute and gradual perfection in doing them without the least particle omitted or committed besides or against the rigorous exaction of the Old Covenant And this
is a difference made up of a mans dreaming fancy without any least footing that it hath in or sustentation by the Word of God which utterly shakes off all mans righteousness works and qualifications in either and both senses from having any thing to do in the businesse of justification under the New Covenant as hath been in part already and shall be in its due place if God will more fully demonstrated afterward Nor doth he mean 2 things by Adams power by nature and our power by Grace Nature there and grace here to him are one the same For was not the power which Adam had to stand a power received by Grace what a malignant eye hath he so extremely to envie the raies of Gods Grace when they lustre and by their brightness discover the dimnesse and invalidity of mans nature He will own no longer Peter Lombard himselfe to be the Magister if he affirm as hee doth affirm that the power which Adam had to fulfill the conditions of the Old Covenant was not by grace but by nature or what means he by the grace of Christ now doth he under this word point out any other power than every man hath or may have that is no more Christified or Spirituallized now than Adam was then yea than he was immediately after his fall This book of his in many parcels of it doth not obscurely insinuate thus much of him and if we judge amisse it is his fault in writing so ambiguously and refusing to explain his own meaning that ministreth cause and evidence enough so to judge But as to the thing it selfe here posited by Master Baxter wee utterly deny that God hath ever given or any where promised to give unto the best of men in the state of sinfull infiâ—mity such a measure of Grace as might put him into a possibility by the power which he hath received to performe either a righteousnesse effectual and sufficient to justification or a righteousnesse perfect and Meritorious or a righteousnes which as righteousnes and by a worthinesse in it selfe can give him right and title to the righteousness of Christ to justifie him And these are the things which Mr. Baxter here either with the grace or without and against the grace of God contendeth for but neither hath nor ever will have the grace of God from the Word of God to prove and demonstrate though he bangle and bungle never so much with his loose shifts of Sophistry to give out an appearance to them that are more delighted with appearance then with substance as if he had done it CHAP. XVIII Arg. An examination of Mr. Baxters Doctrine about the nature and use of the Moral Law upon what grounds and in what sense and degrees the righteousnesse thereof is required under the Gospel what relation it hath to the Covenants and each of them His Paradox of sincere not perfect obedience required under the New Covenant and his extravagancies about all the rest of these particulars discovered THe three following Theses viz. the 28 29 and the 30th I purposely pretermit without examination not that there is nothing in them which deserveth exception against it but because whatsoever therein calls for examination by the touchstone of the Word is either not controverted between us and the Papists about the point of Justification or else hath been said and answered before or thirdly will offer it self againe more properly to bee answered in the following part of this Tractate where we shall find Mr. Baxter speaking it out more fully then he hath done here in these Theses and their explications To the 31 Thesis pag. 154. as it is considered in and by it self I have nothing to object but to the Explication thereof pag. 155. deinceps I have somewhat to say yet not altogether by way of exception against it but partly also for the substration of some grounds to answer him in things which in the following part of this Treatise hee hath to deliver accordingly as he layes down here for delivering them His words therefore I first transcribe beginning at pag. 155. B. That the Morall Law is yet in force I will not stand to prove because so many have written of it already See Mr. Anthony Burgesses Lectures But to what ends and in what sense the Gospel continueth that Law and commandeth perfect obedience thereto is a question not very easie 1. Whether Christ did first repeal that Law and then re-establish it to sâ—me other ends So some think 2. Or whether he hath at all made the Morall Law the preceptive part of the New Covenant and so whether the New Covenant doth at all command us perfect obedience or onely sincere 3. Whether the Moral Law be continued onely as the precepts of the Old Covenant and so used by the New Covenant meerly for a directive Rule To the first I answer 1. That it is not repealed at all I have proved already even concerning the Covenant of Workes it self and others enough have proved at large of the Moral Law 2 Yet that Christ useth it for other ends and for the advancement of his Kingdom I grant What is here meant by the Morall Law must bee first understood before there can be any well-grounded consenting or dissenting in judgements about the force in which it yet standeth Both the word Law and the word Moral have their ambiguity and are used in divers senses 1. The word Law is taken sometimes onely for a rule or guide or directive to give us light to discern between truth and falshood good and evill lawfull and unlawfull to which also may be added a power therein to command duty and to prohibit what is contrary to duty Sometimes it is taken in a larger sense also comprehending all these things in it and withall a promise of reward to the performers and commination of penalty to its transgressors Here I conceive Mr. Baxter taketh the word Law in the former sense onely because pag. 156. in answer to the first question he distinguisheth and puts a difference between the Covenant of Works and the Morall Law so plainly as if he did totidem verbis tell us that hee understands by the Morall Law the rule and precepts of Holynesse and Righteousnesse as considered apart from the pactionary Adjunct of life and death going with it 2. The word Morall also hath its divers senses sometimes Divines take it in a larger sense for all whatsoever pertaines to manners and then by the Morall Law they understand all the Commandements or Rules which God giveth for the regulating of our manners in reference to the qualifications of the mind and the outward operations also Whether those Commandements bee either of naturall or of positive right written in mans heart at his creation or had their first posituâ—e in time from the word and lips of God Sometimes in a stricter sense for that which doth eminently above other things concern the life and manners And then by the Moral
requires sincere obedience but affirmed that it calls for both sincere and perfect obedience I much doubt I should slander Mr. Baxter if I should say that hee means by sincere obedience sincerely Evangelical obedience For hee will not bee known to know what that is It is besides the Orb of Philosophers Scholasticks and Sophisters in which he moveth But if beyond our beleef he meane so then I shall consent and speak with him When the New Covenant saith Thou shalt obey sincerely i. e. purely according to the Gospel rule which teacheth us to fetch all our guidance in every work of obedience to make it Evangelical from the Word of Christ all our strength to doe it from the Spirit of Christ all our acceptance from our union to Christ presenting all and our selves withall to God through the mediation of Christ doing all not to attain Justification by all done but to glorifie God with the fruits of our thankfulness for the prizelesse gift of Justification conferred upon us in and through Christ When the New Covenant I say hath taught us to obey in a sincerely Evangelicall manner here now the Moral Law steps in and tels us as Mr. Baxter saith wherein and what we must endeavour to doe i. e. What be those duties of Moral holyness and righteousnes which being in this Gospel way performed doe receive a higher title then Moral and become Evangelical Christian and spiritual obeying If Mr. Baxter mean or will mean thus we will go hand in hand wiâ—h him or what shall be more proper give him his due precedency and follow him The next answer put in numb 4. whether it be also an answer to this second Question or intended as an answer to the third Question which else passeth without answer or else to both questions runs in these words B. But that the Moral Law without respect to either Covenant should command us perfect obedience or that Christ as the Mediator of the New Covenant should command us not onely sincere but also perfect obedience to the Morall Law and so hath made it a proper part of his Gospel not onely as a directory and instruction but also as a command I am not yet convinced though I will not contend with any that think otherwise My reason is because I know not to what end Christ should command us that obedience which hee never doth enable any man in this life to performe If it were to convince us of our disability and sinne That is the worke of the Law and the continuing of it upon the old terms as is before explained is sufficient to that But I judge this question to be of greater difficulty than moment The multiplication of nice and unnecessary questions hath been one special means to bring a darkness upon the doctrine of the Word in those parts thereof that in themselves are clear and full of light It sufficeth me to know what hath been a little before proved that the Moral Law both with respect and as considered in it self without respect to either Covenant hath been ever is and shall be ever the perfect rule and directory of Moral obedience And that Christ as the Mediator of the New Covenant hath not dissolved or made voyd any part of the Morall Law or of the Righteousness and duty which the Moral Law requireth in reference to either the sincerity or perfection in performing the same but contrariwise hath avouched the contrary and denounced that whosoever shall break one of the least of these commandements and teach men so i. e. as I conceive shall take liberty by the abuse and misunderstanding of the New Covenant to neglect or be remiss in any part or degree of that righteousness which the Law requireth and teach others the same remisnesse also The same shall be least in the kingdom of heaven i. e. A useless and unprofitable Teacher in the Gospel Church This sufficeth me to know and this the Scripture plainly affirmeth and fully confirmeth Mat. 5. 17. 19. But whether the Moral Law to them that are under the New Covenant and truly in Christ be onely a rule and directory or else a commander also Or whether Christ hath made the Moral Law a proper part of his Gospel these are things Heterogeneous from the former and first devised by those distinctionary Sophisters that to strengthen their doctrine of merits and workes of superogation have distinguished between the precepts and counsels of Christ Sure I am that the Gospel in its strict and proper sense consists not at all in bringing precepts but life grace righteousness peace joy holiness liberty and salvation from heaven and whatsoever else tendeth to the perfect and never ending welbeing of poor souls together with an alsufficient light and direction how to attain all these and manage them being attained to the advancing of the glory of the grace of the giver This is properly the summe of the Gospel and the precepts intermixed with the doctrine hereof no otherwise proper to the Gospel than as they are furtherances to the attainment of them and lights and helps to direct us how to stand fixed in the enjoyment of them and walk holily honourably and worthily in the strength and comfort of them Yet it cannot bee denyed but that still the Law Moral is a perfect rule of all perfect Moral righteousnesse and that Christ hath expunged no part of it but commands all yea writes the righteousnesse of all in the hearts of beleevers that they might will all and delight to doe all not onely after the Moral but after the Evangelical rule through Christ for whose sake their unperfect services are accepted with God as though they were full and compleat This hath been cleared before in our examination of Master Baxters second Answer to the seeond Question and express Scriptures alleadged for confirmation thereof Neither can wee think that the many infinite benefits freely conferred in the way of the Gospel upon us do exempt us from but are obligations upon us unto the fulfilling of all righteousness or that it is our bondage but our liberty to be free from sinne and the servants of righteousnesse The nature of the commands being now altered under the Covenant of Grace from what they were under the Covenant of workes Then they proceeded from meer soveraignty and power now from tender Grace and Love Then had they a sting in the tayle the curse and hell to inflict in case there were not full performance This sting and curse is now carried away in the body of Christ no threat of it to them that are in Christ but the thing commanded for the compleating of our perfection which consists in our conformity with the will and nature of God with this dammage annexed that the lesse perfectly we perform the father off we are yet from our desired perfection There the Lord commanded his servants here the father his dear Children There man was commanded to work in his own strength here the treasury
other sin but final unbelief and rebellion But this finall unbelief and finall rebellion hath its belly so full of other small sins threatned in the womb of their Mother Rebellion as ever a man found of the berries in the belly of a breeding Lobster And in his Appendix pag. 23. he makes finall unbelief the genus to which he attributes but three species of which the first viz. Ordinary finall unbelief is not to bee considered as species specialissima but subalterna which being looked upon as a genus hath so many species or as a species hath so many individuals under it according to Mr. Baxters doctrine as the best Arithmetician in the world saving himselfe will not dare to yeeld up upon his casting the true summe of them to satisfie Mr. Baxters censure therein as it will appear when Mr. Baxter comes to unlace and rip abroad his Justifying Faith in its largest sense Thes 70. To these I might adde many more quaintisies of the same nature breathing out themselves from the veins of this his dispute But all the rest as those already mentioned are but tarrying irons to take up the time of men that are Malè feriati rather love to play with the buttons then to close with the body and drink in the spirit of true Christianity And what other end can Mr. Baxter have in these his chippings and mincings but to shew the delicacy of his wit Whom hath he in the substance of what he speaketh his adversary We grant and teach with him 1. That there is no sin prohibited by the Gospel or New Covenant which is not a sin against the Law and Old Covenant also 2. That finall unbelief and rebellion are sins if not unpardonable as if they exceeded the bounds of Gods grace and Christs merits to pardon them yet which have no futurition of pardon shall never be pardoned in this life or in that which is to come For so hath the Lord declared his purpose in reference to these sins 3. That both the Law and the Gospel concurre in damning such persons the Law as a Covenant of Workes properly for their refusall to submit even till death it self to the will and authority of God requiring Faith in Christ for their redemption from vengeance The Gospel improperly by withholding its shelter from the Laws sentence against them because they would never be perswaded to come under the shelter of it yea more in strengthning the hand of the Law to give them the sorer punishment for the contempt of Gods grace as well as of his Authority and Justice And thus not onely the mountains of their sinnes against the Law but also Christ the Rock shall fall upon them to their greater shivering for that they dared to dash themselves against him and would not be induced to be built against all the stroakes of vengeance upon him This is the summe of all that which Mr. Baxter here in substance saies To what purpose then are his elaborate distinctions of the differing respects and aspects senses and non-senses in which Christ hath either satisfied or not satisfied for mans sins unlesse it be Balaam-like to lay a stumbling block in the way of the simpler people of Gods Israel to occasion their fall to puzzle their judgements and consciences and to make the way of grace which is in it self as discovered by the Lord Christ easie and plaine to be unto them by his evill working therein intricate perplexed and full of snares To all sober men it sufficeth to know 1. That there is no one of their sins in whatsoever consideration it be taken but hath death and hell in the tayl of it 2. That there cannot be any other way of exemption from the death hel which every such sin of theirs meriteth by any other meanes but by the redemption which is by and in the Lord Jesus 3. That the blood of Christ hath in it a perfect efficacy to cleanse from all sin whatsoever no one excepted if it be applyed to cleanse Not the very sin against the Holy Ghost which it hath not power totally to purge out from the conscience if it were truly applyed But therefore is that sin never pardoned and purged from the soul because the Spirit of God never doth nor will apply the blood of Christ to the soul that is guilty of it nor generates Faith in such a soul to run unto and wash in the Fountain of Christs blood that it may be clean Let there be any one sin named of all the sins whereof our corrupt nature is pregnant that is so much a sin against the Gospel but that the purging or not purging away of it the absolving of the conscience from it or retaining of it upon the conscience doth not wholly depend upon the application or not application of the blood of Christ to the soul and I shall acknowledge that I have seen but the Letter and was never yet acquainted with the Spirit and drift of the Scriptures Or suppose we should take a delight to contend about that which is a meer lana caprina whether it be hair or wooll that grows upon the Goats shoulders how feeble might we manifest the reasons to be which Mr. Baxter beingeth to prove that the sins against the New Covenant are not satisfied for by the sacrifice of Christs death As 1. When the Apostle affirmeth Christ to have suffered death for the redemption of the transgressions under the first Testament Heb. 9. 15. Doth it follow thence that he hath not redeemed from the transgressions against the New Covenant also If I say that Christ forgave to Peter or Paul or Mary Magdalen all their sins committed before conversion do I thereby as much as imply that he retains still and revengeth upon them all the sinnes they committed after they were converted Or should one of Mr. Baxters acquaintance say that whatsoever Mr. Baxter preached and wrote untill four or five years since was good and Orthodox doth it follow that all that he hath since preached and written is heretical and erroneous Nay the purpose of the Apostle here is to convince the Hebrews that sought in part for righteousnesse by the Law or Old Testament that it could not make its observers perfect For Christ dyed to redeem the transgressions of them that were under the first Covenant which he needed not to have done if all the Sacrifices under the Law could have purged them And thus the Morall Law is not here at all opposed to the Gospel that the Gospel or New Covenant doe purge the sinnes onely that were committed under and against the Morall Law because all the righteousnesse of the Morall Law could not purge them but the sacrifice of Christ the Mediator of the New Covenant is here opposed to the Leviticall sacrifices under the Legall Covenant What these could not the sacrifice of Christ hath expiated 2. Where he tels us that Christ could not satisfie for sinnes committed against the New Covenant
it so terme this 3. And of as little moment is that which he hath pag. 169. in the Explication of his Definition of Pardon calling iâ— a gracious Act where he blesseth and kisseth the image Tantundem set up by Grotius and polished by himselfe denying it to bee a pardon if it be not in some sort gratuitous or free and asserting that if Christ hath payd for us the idem or the proper debt then there is no place left for pardon and wee have nothing forgiven us For the Creditor saith he cannot refuse the proper debt nor deny an acquittance upon the receipt thereof c. A meer vanity of words without either ground or substance It doth not alway hold firm in trifling debts of money Suppose I have a sonne that having received his portion of my estate from me will forthwith come and pay it me for the debt of some bankrupt debtor that I have cast into prison if indeed it be so agreed upon between my self and my said Sonne and that to this end I gave him such a portion of my estate that he should so doe with it then it were not equity in me to refuse the payment so offered But yet Master Baxter wil not deny that this agreement or covenant between me and my sonne and my receiving of my own monyes in satisfaction for that Bankrupts debt though it be the same to the utmost farthing which hee owed is an act of grace or favour in mee to the said Debtor But in case â—here were no such covenant between me and my said sonne but that I gave him the said portion of my goods for other ends and uses and not to pay the Debts of Bankrupts I suppose then it is in my choice either to receive or refuse the full debt so offered me because he which offerrs it was not bound upon the Bond as Suretie or as Excecutor or Administrator to the Debtor nor is assigned by the Debtor to make payment in his stead What is there in this case binding me to receive the debt from such an hand or to give an acquittance to him that should pay it Much lesse will the case hold in point of Life and Death Suppose some Priest Jesuit or other Traytor were by the Law condemned to dye for Treason committed The day of Execution is at hand Master Baxter interposes and offereth to dye for him Is it not in the power of the chiefe Magistrates to refuse the accepting of the death of the Innocent for the Nocent Or if they doe accept the change is it not an Act of free grace to pardon the offendor accepting anothers sufferings for him Much more is it a gracious act in God to pardon us upon Christs suffering in our stead because hee sent his Sonne and gave him a body wherein to suffer for us Heb. 10. 5. And gives us acquittance having cast him into prison in our behalf untill he had payd the utmost farthing of our debts 4. What hee saith against the ignorant Antinomians in the end of page 169 and in page 170 hee hath sayd before and it hath been before examined and his pepper-corne being crushed hath been found too hot in smell and operation for a humble and selfe-denying Christian to meddle with in the point of Justification Therefore I conclude with him nor further to trouble the Reader with those sensless conceites which have onely a plausible shew of words but no footing in Scriptures or authority from Scriptures to establish them The rest of the Doctrine which hee delivereth in this page 170 and addeth page 171 and 172 I doe in part grant him and what I grant him not wee shall finde againe so involved in his dispute whether Justification bee an immanent or transient Act of God page 173 seq that it shall be more proper there then here to take it into examination In his 173 page Master Baxter enters upon a dispute of great moment whether Remission and Justification be immanent or transient Acts of God Before pag. 93 of this Tractate in a brave challenge of the Antinomians to produce one Scripture testifying Justification to be from eternity hee promised to shew or prove that Justification is not an immanent Act in God Here he addresseth himself to the accomplishment of what he there promised and in doing it he pretendedly draws the sword against the Antinomians as the sole assertors of the opinion which he here with much gallantry seeks to confute Two things then I conceive here to call for examination First how sound the reasons are which he brings to deny Pardon and Justification to be immanent and to prove them to bee meerly transient acts of God 2. What kind of Vermine these Antinomians are against whom Mr. Baxter hath already discharged so many Gun-shots before in this Treatise and findes them nevertheless yet alive and in a capacity to bear so many more shots from him in this and the following parts of this book Before my entrance upon either of these for an introduction to the former that the state of the question may the better appear I shall endeavour with as much fidelity and simplicity as in briefe I may to lay downe the judgements of our Protestant Divines whom he slanders here and every where almost with Antinomianism about this question before mentioned which Mr. Baxter here so much opposeth I mean such of these as hold not that all have taught it to be in some respect immanent in God 1. Then in their disputes against Bellarmine Arminius Socinus and their followers about remission of sinnes and justification they tell us that justification is taken sometimes actively for a judicial act of Gods grace sometimes passively or terminatively as it hath its termination upon beleevers In the former sense it is an act internal and immanent in God not transient upon an extraneous subject or in plain words it is secret abiding and hidden in God himselfe not declared or passing into the knowledg and conscience of man That it is of the same nature with the acts of election and reprobation having its complete being as these before the persons so elected justified and reprobated begin to have being life or faith in them or to doe good or evill But in its passive sense as it is terminated upon and made out to the conscience of a man so it is a transient act of God pronouncing and declaring home to the conscience of a man now living convinced of his sinnes and trembling at the sense and burthen thereof yet resting upon and cleaving to Christ by faith that his sinnes are forgiven for Christs sake and by this act and sentence of God in his conscience the poor sinner becomes sensible and apprehensive of his full discharge and absolution at Gods tribunal thorow Christs satisfaction made to justice for him 2. That justification as taken in the former sense is an Act of Gods supreme Lordship or dominion or else of his good pleasure to use
the Apostles termes by which he freely and without necessity in relation to his justice willeth the salvation of one and willeth not the salvation of another loveth or hateth imputeth not or doth impute sinne according to his own free will But justification in the latter sense is an act of Gods righteousnes or faithfulnesse by which hee faithfully and righteously accomplisheth his promises of grace in just â—ying and absolving them which believe by the sentence of pardon pronounced to their conscience according to the Gospel promise made to beleevers No word of promise went before justification in the former sense to make it an act of justice to fulfill that promise neither could it be an act of his natural justice that by the necessity of his nature he should so justifie and love any for then should none be either loved or saved freely of God when contrariwise it was in his own free choice to love or to hate to save or condemn all or mutatis vicibus to have loved Esau hated Jacob to have willed the condemnation of the saved and the salvation of the reprobated But the word of promise preceded justification in the latter sense which it is righteousnesse in God to fulfill therefore is it an act as well of his justice or righteousnesse as of his free grace 3. That Justification in the former sense is antecedaneous or foregoing to all covenants whatsoever 1. In order of nature though not in time it goeth before that covenant between the father and the son mentioned before in the examination of the explication of Mr. Baxters fourteenth Thesis and consequently before Christs undertaking to make or the fathers Covenant to accept what he should offer in satisfaction for the sinnes of the elect For in order of nature the willing of the end alway goeth before the willing of the means conducing to the end so that Gods willing mans righteousnesse and immunity from sinne and loving him to salvation must needs goe before his willing of Christs satisfying of his justice which was but a mean appointed of God to the constituting of man righteous before him that he might be pure from sinne discharged from condemnation and partaker of salvation which was the end Not that there was any precedency or following after of these acts of God in time for they are both coeternal and before all times Whom God hath loved and forgiven their sinnes them hath he so loved and forgiven in and through Christ from all eternity and through and for the merit of his satisfaction Much more doth this immanent act of justification go before not onely in nature but in time also the other temporary Covenants both the Covenant of workes made with Adam and the Covenant of Grace made after by Gospel promise by Christ or God in Christ to us and with us For these had all their being in time But justification in its other acceptation is subsequent unto and followes after and is an effect of not onely the Covenant of Grace but of faith it selfe which the Covenant of Grace calls for as a mean to attain it None else but a beleiver nor he until he actually beleeveth is thus actually justified or hath pardon of sinnes and absolution from wrath declared and pronounced of God in his conscience And thus to be justified in Christ or in God is one thing and to bee justified in our selves by God through Christ is another The former is an antecedent the latter an effect or consequent of the Covenant of Grace 4. That neither the mediation satisfaction of Christ nor much lesse our faith in Christ nor any of the most noble gifts of grace received from Christ either in their habit or operation do move God to justifie us so as to put into him a will to pardon our sins and accept us as righteous or to change his affection from nilling to will our forgivenesse and happinesse and from hating to love and accept us because he is God and therefore immutable and there cannot be any cause of Gods will rendred any more than of God himselfe For the Will of God is God himselfe and these immanent acts of God are God himselfe acting So that the substration of all that Christ hath suffered and by his sufferings satisfied for us and of all that we doe or can doe to put our selves into union with Christ and a conformity with the Will of God are in no wise the causes or conditions or antecedents of Gods first loving owning and pronouncing uâ— righteous and pure from sinne imputed but the effects thereof For he so loveth and justifieth all that in a Covenant way have been or shall be justified in their own conscience before ever they beleeve or live But that the intervening of Christs satisfaction for our sinnes and our recumbency upon and embracing of Christ so satisfying by faith that we may be justified do ad nothing to God which was not nor alter any thing which was in his will before but do onely lay and make a way by Gods ordination how he from all eternity loving and justifying us in himselfe freely may in a course most convenient to magnify both his truth and righteousnesse and withal his grace and mercy at length actually declare us just in and to our own consciences and for ever acquit us from sinne and wrath to the admiration of Men and Angels And so the former justification is a pure simple free and irrespective act of God having no causality out of himselfe moving him to it but the latter is a foederal Gospel or Covenant justification respecting his own Covenant before made Christs satisfaction already given and pleaded in heaven by Christ and mans faith in the mediator and promiser pleading the promise and the blood of the mediator sealing it upon all which he doth he cannot but actually pronounce and declare to the conscience of the beleiver his perfect absolution from sin and vengeance This latter is indeed the justifying wherof the Scriptures primarily speak as oft as they speak of justification by faith but so as the former is also in such Scriptures implyed Neither is the Scripture silent in reference to the former as considered without the latter or apart from it 5. That although all that are or shall be justified by faith in time i. e. each onâ— in the time when he so beleeveth were justified also in Christ secretly in God before they beleived or yet lived even from eternity Yet is there no man justified by vertue of the New Covenant and promise of the Gospel proclaiming right to the Lord Christ to forgivenesse of sinnes freedome from condemnation heirship to Gods Kingdom and all other benefits of Christs Passion until he doth actually beleeve and embrace Christ thorow him to have all those pretious promises made good and effectual to himselfe Though in Christ he were Lord of all before yet differed he nothing in himselfe from a servant from a child of
wrath his life and righteousnesse were hid with Christ in God He could claim nothing from God by any evidential title but wrath and condemnation though he had right in Christ yet had he no right unto Christ though in Christ all was his because Christ had united purchased and received all into his hands for him yet had he no right to Christ by which to claim a partnership and interest in the kingdome and priviledge of grace was without all true peace of conscience all joy and consolation in the promises of grace under fears and terrors in expectation of wrath and damnation could be sensible of nothing but anger hatred and displeasure against him for sinne knew not himselfe to be one of the children of promise Gal. 4. 28. to be entitled to Christ in whom alone the promises of God are yea and Amen 2 Cor. 1. 20. Therefore as if there had been no Christ no Mediator and reconciler no Covenant of Grace yea no Grace or acts of Grace eternal or temporary in God thorow Christ so he remained under a Spirit either of delusion or of bondage still But now when the father hath drawn him to Christ and Christ hath received him when Christ hath apprehended him to himselfe by his Spirit and he by faith hath apprehended Christ to himselfe for redemption reconciliation remission righteousnesse and whatsoever else is laid up in Christ for him and so hath union and communion with Christ hath Christ in him and is himselfe in Christ Now his justification which was sure before in God and in Christ is also made sure to his conscience He is now justified in his own conscience after the tenor and by the vertue of the Gospel and Covenant and promises of Grace findes and knowes himselfe through Christ absolved at Gods tribunal hath all the evidences for it that possibly he can desire the Word and the Oath of God that by two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to ly he may have a strong consolation Heb. 6. 18. The Word evidenceth and his faith evidenceth the Covenant is now sealed mutually and reciprocally between God and him by beleeving he hath put to his seal that God is true and God sealeth to his conscience by certifying it by his Spirit that his wrath is pacified that all accusations are silenced there is no condemnation to him being now in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. Himselfe may now rest satisfied banishing henceforth all fears and doubts and glorying in the Lord that the fear of death is past it is enough my soul is now alive Christ is made sinne for me that I might become the Righteousnesse of God in him 2 Cor. 5. 21. Now Lord lettest thou thy servant depart in peace for my eyes have seen thy Salvation and in the interim while he is here enjoying a heaven upon earth a kingdome of Righteousnesse joy and peace in the Holy Ghost untill he was incorporated by faith into Christ Christ might indeed plead for him but he had no evidence no shew of title not an article under Gods hand or from his lips to plead at Gods barre for life or pardon 6. That neverthelesse when a man truly beleeveth then may he apprehend justification and remission of sinnes not onely as now first declared and evidenced to his own soul But also as past and compleat before the foundation of the world was laid Because from eternity Christ satisfied in that he undertook to satisfie for the sinnes of the Elect and God from eternity rested in this satisfaction undertaken by Christ and so laid aside all displeasure which without this Covenant between him and his onely Son he might have taken up as wel against them that should afterward beleeve as against them which dye in unbeleef For their justification in time doth à posteriore argue their justification before all times and where faith findes the least rivulet of the great stream sent forth it can it ought by it to ascend up to the very fountain to be filled and satisfied with the deliciousnesse thereof Thus shall we finde the Apostle almost in all his Epistles from the sense of their present enjoyments in Christ to carry upward the Saints to whom he writeth unto the very bosom of Gods eternal grace counsell and good pleasure where all was laid up and treasured for them from all eternity that thence it might in due time be shed forth upon them Faith runs not away rashly and hastily with the gift but delights to enter and pierce through the vail to contemplate and embrace the as well eternal as infinite love of the giver 7. That although no man receiveth the sensible comfort of his justification before he actually beleeveth yet every elect vessell hath besides and without his knowledge the true benefit thereof as to freedome from vengeance throughout the whole time of his infidelity was in Christ beloved accepted and owned of God as righteous in that his sinne was not imputed as fully before as after he beleeved the price of his redemption was paid all his sinnes borne and punished upon the shoulders yea the soul and body of Christ so that himselfe was no lesse exempted from the revenging wrath of God from all obligation to make any part of satisfaction in his own person for his sinnes as hee that was already in Christ by faith So that whatsoever afflictions befell him in the time of his unbelief were not the infliction of the curse as the curse for sinne but sanctified chastisements of a loving father flowing from his grace and favour not from his indignation and hatred against his person though against his sins tending all to his good not to his ruine Else if he should have born the least stroke of Gods revenging justice and in the least pittance have made but one least peece of satisfaction by his sufferings for his offences then either Christ hath made satisfaction for him but in part and is not his whole Saviour and redeemer for that himselfe hath satisfied divine justice in part or otherwise the father hath taken satisfaction twice for the same sins once from the Lord Christ and after that from the offender also But this were to slander either the perfection of Christs mediation or the incorruptnesse of Gods justice both which are unsufferable 8. That the justification which is by faith consisteth not onely in a bare apprehension of our justification and pardon from God for this is onely mans act and no express act of God but first in Gods actual declaration evidencing and certisfying the conscience of man drawn to the barre of judgement set up as it were in the conscience that God hath taken satisfaction to his offended justice from the Lord Christ for all the offenders sinnes and hath for ever quit-claimed and discharged him from all sin and wrath and admitted him into favour and family to be under the dispensations of his grace for ever And then indeed God having by this
act absolved the conscience there followeth also the sense of our remission and justification So that besides this sense and apprehension there are two things in our justification by faith over and above that which was in our eternal justification in Christ viz. 1. A total diffidence and denyal of our own righteousnesse and a trusting and adhering wholly and onely to Christ for pardon and justification 2. Gods act upon our consciences declaring and assuring us that our debt is paid by Christ and we discharged upon the satisfaction which our surety hath made so that the obligation is cancelled and we depart with a full and general acquittance in our consciences Neither of these were there in the former justification i. e. in the justification in the former sense before mentioned and so that there is more than the bare knowledge of our justification in our being justified in the latter sense is evident Whatsoever else is conteined in the doctrine of the Protestant divines about this question we shall have occasion to adde in examining what Master Baxter saith here and afterwards to oppugn it But the chief thing is yet behind may some say viz. the proof of these positions by sound Arguments or by evidencing Scriptures and the main thing to be proved is that there is such a justification as is an immanent and eternal act in God It is Master Baxters lowd challenge pag. 93. Let all the Antinomians shew but one Scripture that speaketh of justification from eternity I will be so charitable as to conceive he expects not that we should produce Scriptures that say in those very words but that which is the Tantundem that say it in sense and substance else if he reject the matter and stick to words I shall challenge him to produce one sentence of all the sermons which Christ preached and in the whole doctrine that he personally delivered which speaketh at all of justification by faith But in words equipollent to Master Baxters the Scripture delivereth this doctrine which he opposeth viz. justification from eternity First What lesse is to be gathered from 2 Tim. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with a holy calling not according to our workes but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the World began What can be said more fully to Master Baxters challenge He will not deny that the word saving doth include in it justifying for so should he both contradict himselfe and lose elswhere more than he can gain here by denying it It will then run thus that we are justified and called of God with a holy calling not according to our works these words destroy the end of Master Baxters opposing the eternity of our justification if our own qualifycation and workes may not come in collaterally with Christ to constitute us justified he little regards whether the act be immanent or transient but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the world began and that is from eternity See the grace of justification and salvation was given us in Christ from eternity Object Master Baxter may probably object that the grace was indeed given us in Christ from eternity that is God had decreed from eternity to justifie us in Christ when we should come to beleeve in him to justifie or save us in time as to call us in time For the grace here mentioned given us in Christ before times is as much affirmed to be the grace of our vocation or calling as of our saving and justifying But our calling must therefore our justification also must be in time And thus by the grace given must be understood Gods gracious purpose and decree to give us salvation and justification So Mr. Baxter I know God hath decreed to justifie his people from eternity But it is done in time page 93. Sol. 1. That Covenant justifying or the declaring of us in our own Consciences to bee accepted as just in Christ is not denyed to be an act accomplished in us in time Nor yet that God decreed from Eternity to declare us in our consciences Righteous when wee should beleeve But the granting of all this nothing advantageth Master Baxters cause For neither doth this Act of God in time terminate upon our conscience nor his eternal decree so to justifie us beleeving in our selves deny that wee were justified in God and in Christ from Eternity 2. It appears not that the Apostle here speaketh of our calling to the participation of Christ and of justification and sanctification by him in time but rather of that calling mentioned Rom. 4. 17. That God calleth those things that be not as though they were As he called Abraham the father of many Nations when he was yet either childlesse or at least was in reference to the strength of nature without having without hope to have that child from whom those nations should issue and accrew to him as their father So God is said to have called us with a holy calling i. e. to have called and reputed us in Christ his pardoned accepted and adopted children even before we had any actual being in our selves Dedit qui erat accepit qui non erat Quis antem hoc facere potuit nisi qui vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam ea quae sunt Aug. de verb. Apost Sect. 3. If by Calling it be pertinaciously maintained that we must understand that which is done by the Ministry of the Gospel yet all this helps not Master Baxter at all in regard of the exclusive clause following not according to our workâ— where our salvation and justification as well as our vocation are denyed to have any dependance upon our own workes and qualifications as conditions thereof And the whole end of Master Baxters dispute against justification as an immanent Act in God is because if that be granted there will be no place for footing our works and qualifications as necessarily precedent conditions of justification And these fall to ground as well as if we were justified without them though in time as if wee were justified from Eternity 4. But how and whether we can truly and properly be said to have received Grace in Christ before all worlds whereby we are saved and justified and yet not to be saved and justified in Christ before the world was will come to bee examined in drawing forth the sense of other Scriptures which I shall annex In the interim this remaines unquestioned that although the Apostle speak here of Justification in our selves in time yet he affirmes it to be according to the Grace given us in Christ before the world so it was in Christ for us before though not in our selves till we beleeve Againe when the Scripture speaking of the Sonnes of Isaac saith of them while yet unborn and consequently having neither done good nor evill Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated Mal. 1. 2 3. Rom. 9. 11 13. And
have no Sabbath under the Gospel but all holyness in dayes and difference between dayes and dayes is taken away so that to sanctifie any one day to the Lord above another is meer Wil-worship and Superstition Upon this ground they actually made use of shooting bowling and other lawful recreations upon the Lords day pronouncing it to be a use of the Liberty which Christ had purchased for them 4. They disrelished altogether that phrase of Justification by Faith as attributing somewhat to man and would that all should rather say that we are Justified by Grace or by Christ or by being found in Christ or by our union unto Christ that the praise of our Justification might be reserved whole and entire to the Grace of God in Christ alone 5. That we are justified by the Passive not the Active obedience of Christ 6. That God seeth no sinne in the justified he knows indeed when they sinne and that they have sinned but the doth not see it because themselves and it are covered under the righteousnes and cross of Christ so that the Father doth not will not see it As if the eternal God had any other eyes besides the eyes of his knowledge to see or that Gods seeing and his knowing were at least disparats and not the same thing 7. That God punisheth not sinne in his people for he seeth not sin in his people and what he seeth not that he cannot punish He hath punished it upon Christ therefore are they free from punishment 8. That whatsoever is not in precise words forbidden in the New Testament that is lawfull for a Christian to doe how strictly soever it be prohibited in the Law and Old Testament So that I have taken notice that when in disputes such and such things have been denyed to be expresly forbidden in the New Testament and that they could not finde any clear testimonies of the New Testament literally forbidding them though before they made it a case of conscience to abstain yet thenceforth notwithstanding all that is said in the Old Testament against it they have taken full liberty to commit it These things were formerly as farre as I have taken notice either all or the chief things branded with the name of Antinomianism And they that held them were called by the most Antinomists or Antinomians because either in all or most of these assertions they either did or seemed to oppose and set themselves against the Law or Old Testament In these last seven or eight years indeed wherein all the Ghosts of all the Hereticks of former Ages have been let loose from hell in full swarms to infest this Nation more then ever the Locusts did the Land of Egypt and men in wantonizing against Christ and his Truth have thought it too little to be Satans budget-bearers in some except they had their packs filled with all varieties of his hell-bred errors so that the Legion of Devils now might be found sometimes in one man which heretofore was distributed into a legion of men By means whereof many Heresies moulded together have gone under one denomination partly through ignorance and partly out of malice both all the dreames of mad Eâ—thusiâ—sts and blasphemies against the Word sometimes and sometimes the very sacred truths of the Gospel of Christ have been exposed to the hatred of the multitude under the title of Antinomianism Men ful of all subtiltie and mischief thus painting Christ in the midst of many Devils that he might be taken for one of them and the truth of his Gospel bee abandoned under the name of Heresie But as to the forementioned tenents in former times charged with Antinomianism I shall say something First those three mentioned by Sleidan as he expresseth them it is very ambiguous whether they were truths or errors Because the words by which he describes them are ambiguous and may be taken either in a good or evill sense 1. That they taught that Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue It is doubtfull what his meaning is 1. Whether they denyed it to be taught simply or secundum quid either that it ought not to be thence taught at all or not to be taught thence as ordained and effectual to justification and salvation 2. It is doubtfull also what hee meanes by the Decalogue whether he means the Ten Commandements considered strictly in their own words as meer Law for so I see not how repentance can be taught properly out of the Decalogue because it commandeth perfect obedience that there may be no need of repentance or as the Doctrine of the said Decalogue is amplified and expounded in other Scriptures where we shall find indeed Repentance required in case of transgression with a promise of temporall deliverances and blessings annexed and so the teaching of Repentance out of the Law be here opposed to the teaching of it out of the Gospel and consequentially the Legall be here opposed to the Evangelical Repentance 3. Or whether his meaning be that they would not have repentance at all taught because they took it to be a meerly Legall not an Evangelical duty therefore pertaining to the administration of the Law not of the Gospel I conceive the Historian being a man singular for his moderation in all that he writes though he speaks of their opinion in the easiest words he may yet meanes that they held it in the worst sense And such have been the Antinomians in these latter times otherwise in a good sense that his words will bear this first tenet deserves not the name of Antinomianism or error To the second if his meaning be that they impugned those that preached the Law to shake the hearts of men into self-denial and to break down the proud confidence of safety and righteousnesse in themselves thereby to make way for the doctrine of Christ into them There is something indeed worthy of blame layd to their charge But if we take his words strictly as they lye viz. that they opposed them which teach that the Gospel is not to be preached untill the Law hath so convinced and shaken the conscience c. I professe my self to be an Antinomian also if this be Antinomianism For what warrant hath any Minister so to teach The commission which we receive from Christ is to preach the Gospel to every creature in all the world Mar. 16. 15. without any restriction whether they be shaken or unshaken And if we continue Law-shakers still among some people untill wee see them thereby shaken into a Palsie of selfe-despairing I know no ground we have to promise to our selves a time of preaching Gospel so long as we live And what answer can be given in such a case to Christ for following our own carnall wisdome and not his commission Neither was it one of Luthers praises pace tanti viri dixerim from the experience of Gods working upon himself which was first the laying of him prostrate by the Law under great horrors and
in his disobedience we all sinned and were condemned in him So also Christ the second Adam in making satisfaction to Gods justice upon the cross sustained the office of a publick person stood in the room of all the Elect bare their sins as imputed to him so that they all in him did their law were in him crucified dead and buried and suffered the paines of hell it self And as he was a publick person in his suffering so also was he in his resurrection having paid the utmost farthing of our debt he rose to receive a full acquittance or justification in his own and our names for all the sinnes for which and all the vengeance which he had suffered for us and we in him The justification and acquittance then given him and to us in his name by the Father is that which out of doubt Mr. Baxter calls Christs own justification yet was not his own so but that it was every elect persons in him Having the meaning of the phrase let us now enquire into the truth or falshood of the Position The Justification saith hee which we have in Christs own Justification is but conditional as to the particular offenders and none can lay claim to it till hee have performed the conditions nor shall any be personally justified till then Even the Elect c. Hee saith much and audaciously as all may see but how strongly doth hee prove it For confirmation saith hee in the Explic. there is enough said under the 15 18 19 20 Positions before And I answer how valid and pertinent to his purpose that Enough which hee there said is I there examined And because he brings here no new reasons I may justly passe it by without giving any further answer Onely it shall not bee impertinent to take notice how ambiguously hee layes downe every clause of this Position to corrupt with an evill sense whom hee can and to evade with the pretext of a good meaning where he cannot deceive if espied and questioned 1. When he saith this Justification is conditional as to the particular offenders none can lay claim c. Though by the whole frame of this his Treatise it is enough evident that he means what he speaks in the worst sense yet his words leave it here doubtful whether he means that our Justification which we have in Christs justification be conditional as Christ hath received it in his or our names or as he having received it for us doth offer it to particular offendors upon conditions upon the performance whereof they shall have it with the fruit and comfort thereof declared and evidenced to their own soules Though the former bee his sense yet knowing with what arguments hee may be encountred That there was an absolute and not a conditional payment made to which not a conditional but an absolute discharge is due That Christ as a publick person standing in our stead received the same justification for himselfe and us from all the sinnes that had been imputed both to him and us but that he received for himself not a conditional but an absolute Justification therefore for us also That if particular offendors be but conditionally justified in Christ then are they not at all actually and really justified in Christ and so the fruit of Christs death being suspended upon conditions may be none at all in case none performe the conditions That it is against the stream of the Gospel which affirms that even upon the cross he hath cancelled or blotted out the hand-writing spoiled the principalities and powers Col. 2. 14 15. redeemed us from the curse of the Law Gal. 3. 13. purged the conscience from dead works by his blood Heb. 9. 13 14. That God was in Christ reconciling the world while the world to himself 2 Cor. 5. 19. and made us accepted in the beloved Eph. 1. 6. And all this before we had a being personally therefore before we performed any conditions Knowing I say how he might be overwhelmed with arguments from the Scriptures by our Divines as hee hath read far more copiously then I have time here to particularize in their works against the Papists and Arminians and might have been more pressed and multiplyed against himself and that Truth is not onely unconquerable but victorious To prevent the inconvenience he leaves a hole by which to escape viz. Hee meant not thus But that our Justification is conditional as to our claim of right therein we are not personally justified have not our forgiveness declared and evidenced to our own consciences till we perform the conditions Such sincerity and integrity is there in Mr. Baxters doctrines 2. When he saith None can lay claim to Justification untill he have performed the conditions nor shall be personally justified till then he leaves it ambiguous whether he mean till his faith obedience and good works which with him are the conditions be in fieri or else in factum esse be begun or else finished and perfected in doing or else fully done His phrase directly points out the latter the whole stream of his disputations in this Book concurs with it Neither is Mr. Baxter such an A B C darian that he need to bee taught to speak Grammatically and to deliver in proper termes his own dictates that we should think him to speak more or lesse then he meaneth saving when he will doe so for his own advantage Unlesse therefore he meant in the latter sense and would be so understood hee would give no advantage by his words to any so to understand him This being then his meaning he leaves us yet in doubt whether he joynes with the Papists here in implying that it is possible to attain perfection of righteousness and so to have fully performed all obedience in this life thereby meriting Justification so winning it at the hardest before he wear it as we have found him in and under his 23 24 26 27 Theses maintaining enough fully behind the curtaine or else with the Arminians in holding that no man is justified in this life and so confounding Justification and Glorification either with the other an assertion worse then Popish wholly contradicting the whole â—enor of the Gospel as Rom. 4. 10. Abraham was justified while yet uncircumcised Rom. 5. being now justified now reconciled ver 9 10. So Rom. 8. 30. Eph. 1. 7. Yea not to stay particularizing the whole sum of the Gospel but because both Papists and Arminians are his cabinet friends that he might please both and offend neither it sufficeth him to shew himself an adversary to the truth wherein he hath them both confederates with him and either with the other it being no difficulty for him to close with both that differ but in words a little but are one in substance like Sampsons Foxes hung together by the tails in a firebrand though their faces look several waies 3. I might no less discover his subtilty in that ambiguous term of Personal Justification as he
Covenant and that pretious Gospell promise He that beleeveth in the Son shall not come into condemnation but is passed from death to life so I affirm faith to be both Gods and Mans instrument Gods effective and mans receptive instrument in relation to justification as shall be beneath more fully explained First it is Gods instrument This justification is but Gods pronouncing and declaring a man to his own conscience to be just and discharged from sin and condemnation through Christ so that he perceives and apprehends himself absolved and doth acquiesce in this absolution One chief instrument by which God doth thus justifie or declare and manifest man to himself just and pardoned is faith This is Gods instrument in the same sense in which Mr. Baxter maketh the promise and grant of the new Covenant to be Gods instrument and that more fully as I in part shewed before For that grant doth but declare a possibility to a man as it is considered by it self to be justifyed promising forgivenesse and life to all that shall beleeve By this act alone no singular person is actually justifyed But now this grant premised when God is pleased to infuse faith into the soul of any singular person by it as by his instrument he declareth that person to himself just and acquitted from condemnation so that he can thenceforth plead out his own justification God hath pronounced them all just and pardoned which beleeve in his Son I so beleeve therefore I am pronounced and declared of God just and pardoned So this faith is the instrument of God for so Lawyers term Deeds and Grants in writing instruments yea instruments of him that makes the Deed or Grant And the promise of the new Covenant or the new Testament is called novum Instrumentum as it is his evidence written not without the man as that Gospell grant but by the finger of Gods Spirit in the hearts of the Elect so that they may read this instrument of Gods writing within their hearts evidencing and manifesting to themselves their justification from God And this is one principall instrument and evidence of God promised under the new Covenant Jer. 31. 31-35 recited as now fulfilled by the Apostle Heb. 8. 8-12 10. 16 17. I will write my Lawes in their hearts c. what Law but the rule doctrine and evidence of life and salvaâ—ion But what benefit by having it written within them more then if it were in writing without them Yes this They shall not need externall teaching to know the Lord for they shall all know me from the least to the greatest What knowledg of God was this whereupon they should not need teachers They shall know him to be their God their Justifyer their Saviour for so much intimate the next words For I will forgive their iniquities and remember their sins no more This was one chief part of the Law or will of God written in their hearts justification or everlasting remission of sins This they should not need to be taught from without the instrument of writing or evidence thereof should be within their own hearts apparent not to others but their own reading And what more principall evidence or instrument of writing within our hearts thus to assure us then our faith engraven by Gods own hand in us I appeal to Mr. Baxter himself whether I wrest this Scripture from its proper sense or if any shall except against me I doubt not but I shall make it good to be the minde of the holy Ghost which I have here given To the same purpose is it that Faith is called the Evidence of things not seen Heb. 11. 1. Whose evidence Gods evidence given us by which he declareth to us and manifesteth to our consciences the invisible things of our justification and salvation and when given then our evidence also by which we not only apprehend but also plead against all the accusations of the Law yea of sin and Satan our actuall justification And that it is called the witnesse of God in us or within us because God by this witnesse as his instrument declares and evidenceth us to our own consciences justifyed 1 Joh. 5. 10. Secondly It is mans instrument by which he applyeth to himself and without which he cannot applie to himself this justification and remission of the new Covenant to know and be sensible of it that he may rest and rejoyce in it being justifyed in himself i. e. in his own knowledge and conscience God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself not imputing to them their trespasses 2 Cor. 5. 19. Reconciliation and Justification as hath been shâ—wed are one and the same thing That we may receive it therefore from him in Christ he gives us as many as are his Elect this living faith as an instrument by which he may apply it and bring it home into our bosomes Therefore is the operation of the soul by faith set forth in the Scripture by a comparison of a mans working by the severall members of the body as by his instruments Calling Faith sometimes the eâ—e of man by which he looketh to Christ crucifyed as the Israelites to the brazen Serpent thence to obtain cure to the wounded and poysoned soul Joh. 3. 14 15. Sometimes the fooâ— of the soul by which it runs and comes to Christ for life and justification Joh. 5. 40. Sometimes the hand of the soul by which it apprehendeth Christ and the justification that is in and by him To as many as received him to them he gave power to become the sons of God even to as many as beleeve in his Name Joh. 1. 12. Sometimes the mouth of the soul by which it eateth and drinketh in Christ with the life that is in him both to justifie and sanctifie He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life Joh. 6. 54. If ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious 1 Pet. 2. 3. Sometimes the armes of the soul by which it embraceth and holdeth in possession Christ with his life and righteousnesse He that hath the Son hath life he that hath not the Sâ—n hath not life 1 Joh. 5. 12. What doth all this imply lesse then that faith is instrumentall to our justification Yea given to us to be the sole instrument on our part by which to apply to our selves the justification offered by God in Christ Or what else is meant by the generall voice of the Gospell pronouncing us to be justifyed by faith but by faith Gods instrument and evidence to declare and manifest it to our souls and our instrument to apprehend and hold it fast and firm to our selves It remaineth now to examin Mr. Baxters reasons by which he assayeth to prove that it is neither mans nor Gods instrument First that it is not mans instrument he thus argueth B. Not mans instrument for he is not the principall efficient he doth not justifie himself Both this and all that which followeth in this his dispute
he hath out of Schiblers Mâ—taphysicks sound enough I acknowledge as Schibler proposeth it in Thesi but fallacious and misapplyed by this man to his Hypothesis Yet what ever it be though not the least portion of Gods word in it let us examine the strength of it It is the principall efficient of the act or effect that worketh by the instrument saith he but man is not the principall efficient therefore worketh not in this businesse by instruments or instrumentall helps I answer 1. not only in resevence to this but to that which also followeth in his Argumentation We are to distinguish between instruments that they are of two kinds effective or receptive Effective so is a knife the instrument of cutting Receptive so is the hand the instrument of receiving Mr. Baxters Arguments are applyed to the former only not at all to the latter For 1. Of an Effective instument it may be said the knife cuts and the Man cuts likewise But a Receptive instrument hath a double relation 1. To the giver 2. To the receiver As if a rich man give a great treasure to a poor man he receiveth it in his hand the receptive instrument of the poor mans inriching is his hand Now if a man should argue as Mr. Baxter doth the hand if it be an instrument it is an instrument either of the giver or receiver not of the receiver for he doth not inrich himself he is not the principall agent inriching not of the giver for he doth not receive any riches but the act of the hand is to receive therefore the instrument of neither nor at all an instrument Who sees not the vanity of such an Argument Yet such is this paralogism of Mr. Baxter I say therefore that the Canons of an instrument which he citeth out of Aquinas and Schibler hold only of effective not of receptive instruments Yet as faith is Gods effective instrument to justifie man and not himself as Mr. Baxter trifleth so these Canons hold of it also in the sense before specifyed 2. I deny the Assumption or Minor he proves it thus Man doth not justifie himself This is an equivocation and besides the question None ever made man the causa prima of his justification none I mean of all those whom Mr. Baxters disputes against Himself indeed and his followers asserting the perfection and merit of mans righteousnesse consisting in faith and good works and affirming that this righteousnesse of man and in man doth give him title to the righteousnesse which is by Christ cannot well be cleared from making man the first tause of his justification But we speak nothing tending to this purpose and in no other sense do we say that man acteth to his justification but by this apprehending and applying to himself the justification of God And in this respect man is not only the principall but also the sole efficient of apprehending or receiving Christ to justification and faith his alone receptive instrument therein by the instrumentall subsurviency of his faith in receiving Christ We make it not mans instrument of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation or of his declaring but only of our applying it to our soules That it is not Gods instrument he hath these reasons to prove B. 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions A meer bull with which he jeers and scoffes not only at all the Protestant Divines but also at Christ and his Apostles as poor sorry animals and asses unworthy to be answered with reasons but with absurd non-sense 1. Faith in one was never used or ordained to be an instrument of justifying another much lesse faith in God to justifie man 2. He can conclude nothing else hence but this God beleeveth not therefore God is not justifyed or discharged from condemnation by the new Covenant 3. He doth in the Magisteriall confidence of his heart implicitely accuse Christ his Apostles and faithfull Teachers in his Church to hold that God is the instrument of our justification that the Principall agent and the instrument are the same thing that the instrument must be in the Agent or cannot be his instrument so that faith must be Gâ—d himself for whatsoever is in God is God himself the immanent acts of God are Gods acting These are all but slanderings of the Lords servants to make odious the doctrine which they deliver 4. We make faith in man not in God Gods effective instrument which he infundendo creat creando infundit and having wrought it in the soul he doth put it also in acting thereby to evidence to man his justification As some great and munificent Lord having laid up a great treasure for one of his poorest and most abject servant in some secret place tels him first what he hath done bestowes it fully and freely upon him but the servant not finding it is never the richer because he hath not the possession of it At length the Lord lights a torch guides his servant to the secret place and by the light of the torch shewes him the treasure which before in the minde and purpose of the doner was wholly his bids him to see and possesse Here the torch is that Lords instrument by which he discovered to his servant the treasure and evidenced him to be indeed enriched So and much more compleatly is faith Gods instrument by which he justifies us to our selves i. e. declareth and evidenceth us to be just and justifyed B. 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so man should be still said to justifie himself Either I understand him not or he speaks words without matter or words that are nothing to the matter in hand He is speaking of justification as of a transient act of God upon man in time This act of God we acknowledge no other but Gods declaring and evidencing man to himself justifyed Gods manifestation or pronouncing his justification to his conscience How man in this act of God should be the causa secunda between God in the action he explaines not and I perceive not That man is the causa secunda between God in the application of justification so manifested I deny not But in this doth man no more justifie himself then is above expressed Or because it is faith in man which we pronounce to be Gods instrument of justifying is therefore man causa secunda or a self-justifyer nay faith even in man is Gods Creature and the same nothing of mans essence Not of our sâ—lves it is the gift of God Ephes 2. 8. May not God lay up his own instruments where it pleaseth his will and wisdome for his own use or ceaseth it to be Gods instrument or in Gods hand when it is laid up in the heart of man for his good Obj. But faith acts not in man without man as the second cause acting it and by such acting his faith man should justifie
further to take his pastime in his Logicall and Metaphysicall learning which may possibly please him but never justifie or save him and partly by shewing the weaknesse of the objection to gull his unwary reader with an opinion of the weaknesse of their cause who are forced with such Egyptian reeds for lack of better pillars to sustain it It is one of the Jesuits principles to fetch armes indifferently either from heaven or hell to storm the Church and truth of Christ and to promote the holy mother harlot of Rome But I am weary following him while he brings nothing but the Socinians right reason to be judge of the Mysterious doctrines of Christ and fear whether it be answerable before God to spend time in answering his babble with babble again for the truth of Christ doth neither stand nor fall by what can be said for it or against it out of the principles or learning of abused Aristotle Let Mr. Baxter call to minde what he hath read as elsewhere so in his adored Schibler in the second book of his Metaph. Cap. 3. in his interserted oration a little before the end of that book pa. 211. of the book printed at Oxford concerning the sophister convinced by an unlearned Confessour after his almost victorious disputes against all the Doctors of the Nicene councell many dayes together If he take it for a truth it may help to convince him that God is more effectually present in disputations about Evangelicall matters when they are totally confined to the Word then when they are handled after the rule and in the Predicament of carnall reason It argues that he undertakes a businesse not for God but against him else would he not cast away spirituall and take up fleshly arms to maintain it But fith Mr. Baxter is Mr. Baxter we shall crave leave to speak the lesse to him henceforth where we find him to have little of the word and reserve our selves to speak more largely where the man for his recreation vouchsafeth to abase himself so low as to meddle with Scriptures B. Quest But though faith be not the instrument of justification may it not be called the instrument of receiving Christ who justifyeth us Ans I do not so much stick at this speech as at the former yet is it no proper or fit exprâ—ssion neither For 1. The act of faith which is it that justifyeth is our actuall receiving of Christ and therefore cannot be the instrument of receiving To say our receiving is the instrument of our receiving is a hard saying 2. And the seed or habit of faith cannot fitly be called an instrument For 1. The sanctifyed faculty it self cannot be the souls instrument it being the soul it self and not any thing really distinct from the soul nor really distinct from each other as Scotus Dr. Orbellus Scaliger c. Dr. Jackson Mr. Pemble think and Mr. Ball questions 2. The holinesse of the faculties is not their instrument For 1. It is nothing but themselves rectifyed and not a being so distinct as may be called their instrument 2. Who ever calleth habits or dispositions the souls instruments The aptitude of a cause to produce its effect cannot be called the instrument of it You may as well call a mans life his instrument of acting or the sharpnesse of a knife the knives instrument as to call our holinesse or habituall faith the instrument of receiving Christ I have before expressed in what sense we make or at least hold faith to be mans instrument in applying Justification to himself And 2. have manifested the testimonies and authority of the Scripture herein so that Mr. Baxter if he list as it listeth him to cavill cavils not so much against all godly Protestant writers whom he opposeth as against the holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of Christ himself and his Apostles whom thorow the loins of those he smites at It is not the first time that he hath accused Christ and the holy Ghost in this manner of impropriety and unfitnesse of expressions in Scriptures And why because they speak not enough logically and in all probability never read thorow Aristotles Metaphysicks But let us hear what he can say here to prove the unpropernesse of that language which calleth faith an instrument of receiving Christ and justification in and by him His reasons are above in his own words rendered To the first I answer Mr. Baxter makes and layes his own principles of Religion and from them as from an impregnable mount he battereth Christ and his doctrine Should we grant him that faith is the receiving of Christ yet 1. How shall it appear otherwise then by Mr. Baxters own Magisteriall dictates that justifying faith is nothing else but the receiving of Christ 2. Why else doth he make it simply and only a quality or act of the soul without the adjection of its originall from above but to ingenerate into the minds of men an opinion that it hath its emanancy and rise from nature from freewill that every man may have and act it if and when he will and that it is not infused of God to be instrumentall by his appointment for the producing of any spirituall effect 3. How doth he prove that onely the act of faith justifyeth Yet 4. If all these dubious things were granted to him his own words therein tend to the confirmation rather then the infirming of the main conclusion which he opposeth that faith is the instrument of justification For if the act of faith be the receiving then must faith it self so acting be the receptrix or that by which we receive Christ but that by which man receiveth Christ is instrumentall to his receiving of justification for Christ is made of God to us righteousnesse he that hath Christ hath life specially this will follow upon Mr. Baxters principle of Christ and justification given to all universally to none in particular he must be made ours therefore by receiving him and if faith doth receive how doth it receive but as an instrument or whereas the well is deep and we have nothing of our own to draw with what shall be the instrument of drawing and receiving if faith be not it 5. And in this lyeth Mr. Baxters Sophism that he puts the act of faith for faith actuated Though the act of faith were the receiving of Christ yet faith actuated and acting is that by which we receive Christ and to say that by which we receive is the instrument of our receiving is not a hard but a proper saying The act of Mr. Baxters hand was the writing of these lines To say that his writing was the instrument of his writing is a hard saying but to say his hand acted in writing was his instrument of writing it is not a hard saying To the second It is wholly Sophisticall For when he saith 1. The sanctifyed faculty it self cannot be the souls instrument because it is the soul it self what is this to the purpose
untill the day of Judgement after Mr. Baxter and what may fall out as touching the apostasie of their souls before that day is uncertain And it being not known of those that should come after him who or whether any would beleeve and persevere in beleeving If of Gods justifying us in our selves i. e. declaring and evidencing us justified we do in some cases acknowledge that God hides his face and evidenceth not his love in Christ in the same degree to all beleevers but in God and in Christ they are still justified and their salvation is sure But Mr. Baxter shakes off this Act of Justification in disdain therefore the absurdities which follow in his conditions in respect of one of the former cannot be avoided I forbear to enlarge my self further in this kinde here having spoken to it before and finding a necessity of speaking more afterward But it will be expected that Mr. Baxters Arguments be rather answered then his conclusion denyed and opposed let us therefore examine them as far as I can finde they are in number two by which he proveth faith to be the condition of justification 1. It is plain and undenyable This I acknowledge is a Noli me tangere strikes dead in the place renders the respondent as mute as a fish Let a wiser man undertake it is past my skill to answer 2. The whole tenor of the Gospel shews that specially such Scriptures as give their testimony of our justification in Christ before faith entred to purifie our hearts When we were without strength when sinners when enemies we were reconciled to God by the death and justified by the bloud of his Son Rom. 5. 6 8 9 10. While we were in our blood polluted Ezek. 16. 6. While yet unborn and had done neither good nâ—r evil Rom. 9. 11. 13. When yet of the world and not served from the common masse of mankinde Joh. 3. 16. God loved us to salvation While yet dead in sins and trespasses he hath quickned and saved us by grace Ephes 2. 5. Blotting out the hand-writing c. forgiving all our trespasses unto us in Christ while yet hanging on the Crosse Col. 2. 13 14 15. making us accepted in Christ the be loved Ephes 1. 6. putting away our sin and perfecting us for ever by the sacrifice and blood of Christ i. e. in Christ offering himself and his bloud in sacrifice Heb. 9. 26. 10. 14. and all this before we had a being who now live much more before we were in a capacity of having any condition in our selves of Justification As also such Gospel Scriptures as affirm this remission or justification unreversible calling it an eternal redemption Heb. 9. 12. a perfecting of us for ever Heb. 10. 14. so that there is no more condemnation Rom 8. 1. no more remembrance of iniquity Heb. 10. 17. no more separation from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 39. and other many such testimonies before in part quoted and partly remaining to be alleadged if occasion shall require all which do concur in one harmony to evince Justification once obtained to depend upon no conditions but to be absolute and indefeasable that if any fall away it is because they only seemed but never were in the number of the truly justified 1 Joh. 2. 19. Whosoever layeth all these together and will not be convinced that Faith in Mr. Baxters sense is the condition of Justification but will beleeve the Gospel it self more then what Mr. Baxter speaketh of the Gospel for any thing that I know he may remain the Disciple of Christ and unconvinced still In the Appendix in the answer to the six and seven Questions or Objections pag. 41. to the 46. Mr. Baxter makes it his task again to prove the justification of the New Covenant to be conditionall and not absolute But so poorly doth he there handle his dispute so unlike Mr. Baxter who when Scriptures fail him is elsewhere wont to play his game with Sophistry which here doth very little help him that unto a discreet man nothing can more breed a suspicion of the goodnesse of the cause then the hard shifts confusednesse contradictions and other weak devices and extravagancies to which so accomplisht a scholar is put even when he hath no opponent but a meer question to make it seem probable How doth the man put himself here into a wood or wildernesse seeking but finding no certain way out acting his wit and study to the highest to expedite himself in a cleer way that might be visible and plain to himself and others and not finding it he at last doth what may be done in such a labyrinth trusteth to groping for what he cannot see And first he seems to have found in the dark a two-fold Covenant of Grace one absolute and the other conditional First then he follows the absolute Covenant if that will or can lead him with certainty to any safety or shew of reason what to speak of it as he makes it contradistinct to the Conditional Covenant or Justification that the former which he cannot deny may stand as a cipher but this be the Numeral and only in power and force here he is carryed in a maze of doubts and rovings not finding where to pitch 1. Pag. 41. Sect. the 42. he would shake off this absolute Justification as a Prophesie and promise made only to the Jews not extending to us but here the Apostle meets him in the way Heb. 8. 8 9. otherwise expounding the Scripture that holds it forth so that this shift fails him 2. He questions whether the Apostle mention it as an absolute promise or else in an opposition to he knows not what but foreseeing what would herein be answered he lets fall this too pag. 42. 3. He brings something which he thinks will hold water that this absolute Covenant of Justification is made with the Elect and not with mankinde in generall What is this to the purpose He is here treating of the New Covenant as it respecteth Justification And what one Scripture can he produce that tels us of all mankinde and not of the Elect only justified In what a straight is the man that in stead of distinctions which were ever wont to be his Egyptian Reed to succour him he is forced to fly to confusions for help For so he confounds together here the promulgation of Justification with Justification in its beeing or with the being of it when these are different As well might he pronounce the rich glutton to be no lesse blessed in seeing then was Lazarus by being in Abrahams bosome as to pronounce all mankinde justified because Christ is conditionally offered to all for Justification We have granted before the promulgation and offer of Justification by the Gospel to be conditionall but the gift and beeing of it to be absolute Neither is there any thing in this offer to our Justification in Christ which is absolute before and without any promulgation
expresse phrase of Scripture 3. From the nature of the thing For the effect is ascribed to the severall causes though not alike and in some sort to the conditions especially me thinks they that would have faith to be the instrument of justification should not deny that we are properly justifyed by faith as by an instrument For it is as proper a speech to say our hands or our teeth feed us as to say our meat feedeth us I shall not have need to speak much to this passage because Mr. Baxter hath before said and I have answered to the greatest part of it in examining his 23. Thes with the explication thereof Here as there I shall defend against him that it is not faith as it is righteousnesse but Christs righteousnesse by which we are said to be justifyed The first reason which he brings to evince the contradictory and contrary conclusion hath been there examined and I will not here actum agere To the second 1. He should have quoted that Apocryphal Scripture which saith He that beleeveth shall be justifyed as if he were not already justifyed I finde it not in the Canonicall 2. Those Scriptures which say we are justifyed by faith say not that we are justifyed by it as it is our righteousnesse or any part of our justifying righteousnesse and those that say it is imputed to us as Mr. Baxter will have it for righteousnesse have been sufficiently spoken to under Thesis 23. And by the way Mr. Baxter is not ignorant that the originall text may be more properly rendred unto or to righteousnesse then for righteousnesse and that the old translation and most of our Protestant Divines so render it neither have I met with any one that declares his dislike of that version And from the text so read what Mr. Baxter can suck out to stablish the righteousnesse of faith not as the same but as a collaterall with the righteousnesse of Christs satisfaction to justification I understand not 3. To his Only only and only I answer 1 That it is not the first time that Mr. Baxter hath taken the boldnesse to teach the holy Ghost to speak properly and fully 2 When the holy Ghost saith That the bloud of Christ cleanseth from all sin 1 Joh. 1. 7. that whosoever is washed therein needs no other washing Joh. 13. 10. that he is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world Joh. 1. 29. that by his one offering he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctifyed by taking away their sins and iniquities Heb. 10. 14 17. That he is made of God righteousnesse to us 1 Cor. 1. 30. that he was made sin for us that we might become the righteousnesse of God in him 2 Cor. 5. 21. That he is all in all Col. 3. 11. Will Mr. Baxter elude all these and a whole century more of the like Scriptures with this evasion yea Christ hath done and is all this in part to us leaving the other part of righteousnesse not perfected by him to be supplyed by faith his collaterall to our justification Or when it is said There is salvation in no other nor any name else given us under heaven by which we may be saved besides Christ Act. 4. 12. and the Apostle professeth it his whole labour to be found in Christ not having his own righteousnesse which is of the Law but the righteousnesse which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith so making Christ put on for righteousnesse the righteousnesse which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith not severall kinds of righteousnesse but one and the same righteousnesse which he opposeth there to his own inherent righteousnesse which he excludeth are not these speeches equipollent to that which Mr. Baxter requireth the Christ only or the righteousnesse of Christ only It is but a flourish wherewith he concludes this argument about the constant expresse phrase of Scripture For let him either produce one Scripture that affirmeth faith by any inherent righteousnesse in it self or of her own conveyed into us to contribute somewhat to our Justification or else confesse his errour to be derived from the scriblings of Bellarmine Socixus Grotius and Arminius where this Doctrine is to be found and not from the Scriptures of Gods inspiration that are wholly against it To his third reason I can say nothing because I understand nothing of his meaning therein or if I doe understand it nothing needs to be said because it hath nothing for himself or against us But to that which he addes of his thinking 1. Let him say whether by them that he saith would have faith to be the instrument c. he doth not mean all the Protestant Churches both Lutherans and Zuinglians or Calvinists as they are by some distinguished whether the best that have opposed them herein have not been the Arminians and from what Rome or Hell these first drank in their opinion he is not ignorant having fished in the same pools after them 2. When he thinks these should not deny that we are properly justifyed by faith as an instrument I answer 1 If they will not deny it will Mr. Baxter with them confesse it 2 The word properly is vox aequivoca a phrase may be said to be proper as it is enough fit and proportioned to declare the meaning of the speaker and in this sense we deny not that faith as an instrument subservient to the principall efficient doth so properly as an instrument can justifie us in our selves or to our own consciences Again it may be said to be proper in opposition to a tropicall way of speaking and in this sense we cannot say that faith doth so properly justifie specially in that extent wherein Mr. Baxter and his Masters will have it to justifie without a trope in the phrase of speaking which I would shew if it were pertinent to the question I shall spare to transcribe at large his next section which he puts under n. 4. of his Explication Because if he meant singly and precisely as he speaks all might be granted in a positive sense without prejudice to our cause or advantage to his viz. that faith doth directly and properly justifie in and to themselves those that were before justifyed in Christ as it is in a good sense the condition of the new Covenant and a means or instrument of Gods stamping by his commandement and promise to the attainment of this justification For this denyeth not that truth which before he kicked at that faith doth so justifie also in regard of that usefull and essentiall property which it hath above all other gifts of grace to be instrumentall to apprehend Christ for righteousnesse Nay even for this cause hath God either ordained and commanded faith to this end because it hath this property or because he hath ordained and given to it this property therefore he not only requireth but
his sophistry hath bin occupant In these two Positions viz and 57 58. Mr. Baxters aym is at two assertions of the Protestants to smite them through viz. the instrumentality of Faith and the vertue which it deriveth from Christs it object to justifie and to set up his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere or act of beleeving under the name of a condition of the New Covenant without any respect of instrumentality that it hath to apprehend Christ or any vertue that it receives from Christ apprehended to justifie This he doth in the last words of the 57. Thesis telling us that faith can be said only in a remote and improper sense as it receiveth Christ to justifie where by receiving he shaketh and shifts off the instrumentality of faith and by Christ the vertue of faiths object into a remote and darke corner as not working at all or very obscurely in our justification But his act of beleeving he exalteth as the proper and formall reason of faiths justifying This he illustrateth in the Explication pa. 230. Suppose Christ had put some other condition of the new Covenant as Love Patience Temperance Mercy c. that could not be instruments of receiving Christ nor have Christ their object to draw vertue from him should not either of these notwithstanding though neither instruments nor in a capacity to have Christ their object from which to have drawn vertue by their own act have justifyed So faith being the condition of the new Covenant doth by its act justifie So argued he under Thes 57. But doubting of the validity of his reasons there either to weaken ours or to stablish his own assertion he addes this Thesis more fully to confirm what he had there endevoured The ground of this is saith he because and because as is before expressed I answer there is no sufficient ground laid for the confuting of ours or the strengthning of his tenent For be it that Christs righteousnesse be ours by divine donation or imputation how doth he build his opinion upon this ground that the act of faith as being the condition c. doth properly justifie He must shew his meaning in words at length and not in figures before he shall win us to build with him straw and stubble upon the ground that is good and fitted to bear a good structure But very remarkably doth he here dispute in opposing Gods donation or giving or our beleeving or receiving of Christs righteousnesse as if they could not both consist together in justifying us at least properly Then it seems we are properly justifyed by the donation of Christ without his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of faith Yea then are we properly and formally justifyed in Christ before we yet beleeved For he will not denie that Gods donation of Christ at least in his sense is before our receiving him And thus with one breath he will throw down all that before with so much labour he hath built But let us see how from this ground he batters our assertions and what force there is in his battery If we look to the Prothesis of his Thesis alone the argument in substance runs to this Tenour Faith doth not justifie us either as an instrument or by vertue of Christ or Christs righteousnesse its object because it doth not justifie us as an instrument or by vertue of its object Who can shake his buildings that founds them on such firme ground That this is the force of his reasoning is evident to them that observe him that by the word receiving he excludes the instrumentality and by Christ excludes the object of faith from any proper acting to justifie us as I said before But we will annex the Antithesis to his Prothesis and so fill up his Thesis and then see what strength there is in the whole to his advantage or our disadvantage What he must prove in his and refute on our part hath been already declared Only in the forecited Prothesis he begs the conclusion that he should have proved Therefore we must lay his whole argument from the donation or imputation alone yet will we put his Argument fully thus If Christs righteousnesse doth not properly justifie us because we beleeve or receive it but because it is ours in Law by Gods imputation or donation then faith doth not justifie as an instrument or by vertue of Christ its object but as it is an act containing the condition of the Covenant But the former is true therefore the latter also I deny the assumption as to the former member thereof the beleeving and receiving c. And Mr. Baxter brings not so much as a gry to prove it And as to the latter member Gods donation c. I deny the consequent of the Major Though Christs righteousnesse justifie us properly because it is ours in Law by Gods donation or imputation yet it followes not that either faith as an act or condition doth so of it self justifie or that it doth not justifie as an instrument and by vertue of its object or as some say its correlate or as others by the communion that it puts us into with Christ this I prove thus not from terms of art but from the authority and testimonies of the most high God 1. From the relation between the brazen Serpent the Type and Christ Jesus the Antitype Joh. 3. 14. The brazen Serpent was of Gods donation to Israel so also was the Soveraigne power that was infused into it to heal but the eyes of the wounded Israelites must be directed unto and fixed upon the Serpent for cure and then vertue issued from it to heal So was the son of man lifted up with vertue in him to heal Christ with this vertue is of Gods donation yet this donation hinders not but that our faith as an instrument must be directed to and fixed upon him alone for justification and so that justifying vertue or righteousnesse in him comes from him upon us to justification It is no more the act of faith that of it self because a condition if indeed a condition doth it then the act of the eye cured the wounded without vertue drawn by it from its object 2. From the cure of the woman which had the bloudy issue Marke 5. 25. it will not be denyed that the vertue by which she was healed was of divine donation yet it was brought home to her not by the instrumentall service of her hand touching Christs garment for the multitude touched his garments and thronged him yet had no benefit by it verse 31. But her faith apprehending Christ himself so said the Lord Thy faith hath made thee whole verse 34. yet not the act of faith as a condition but faith as an instrument by which the poor woman drew vertue from Christ its object Jesus perceived that vertue had gone out of him verse 34. So it was not the vertue of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or act of beleeving but of Christ beleeved
imforming and giving life and vertue to it an act apprehending Christ as its object in whom all its vertue lyeth the cloud or darknesse in which Christ dwelleth as God was formerly in a cloud or darknesse upon mount Sinai and in the Temple or as all our Divines say the hand by which we receive Christ made of God righteousnesse to us and in us Gal. 3. 27. 1 Cor. 1. 30. 2 Cor. 5. 21. That the life of justification consisteth not in works at all nor in faith considered in a sense divided from Christ but in Christ our life living in us so that the life which we live is by the faith of the Son of God by the recumbency of our souls by faith upon the Son of God which is our life and that this is to live by faith Gal. 2. 20. Col. 3. 4. Gal. 3. 11. That Christ with all his righteousnesse to remission and salvation is given us freely of God not sold as by Judas to his enemies and so made ours without money without price without fine or rent In the Covenant of grace there is nothing smelling of a Simoniacall contract it is wholly of Gods giving not in the least particle of our purchasing Isa 9. 6. Joh. 3. 16. Isa 55. 1. That the life and justification which are by the second Adam descend to us in the same manner with the sin and condemnation from the first Adam But these descended by our naturall union and communion with the first Adam not by our imitation of him For death reigned from Adam over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam Therefore also righteousnesse and justification descend to us by the union and communion which we have with the second Adam Christ Jesus and not from our imitation of him and configuration to him for when we were yet enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son Not but that every one to whom the sin and condemnation of Adam once descended are thenceforth imitators of and configured to Adam or that they to whomsoever the righteousnesse and justification of Christ have descended do not thenceforth become imitators of and are configured to the image of Christ but that these imitations and configurations do follow and not goe before such union and communion declaring not producing the sin and condemnation which are from Adam or the righteousnesse and justification which are from the Lord Christ Rom. 5. 11. 19. And this is a sound Argument which the Apostle bringeth to prove that works can in no respect justifie or save For we are Gods workmanship saith he created in Christ Jesus to good works which God hath ordained before that we should walk in them Ephes 2. 9 10. where we may take notice that good works are Gods end in saving or justifying us from sin But the means do alway in order of nature go before and not follow the end in execution I mean though not in intention That we are first in Christ the justifyer and in possession of the justification that is by him and then being new created in Christ to the image of God are inabled to do good works That God hath ordained before that we should walk in them being saved or justifyed not that we should be saved or justifyed by them That the righteousnesse of God by which we are justifyed is from faith to faith not begun by faith and ended in works which according to the Apostle is a beginning in the spirit and a seeking to be perfected by the flesh Rom. 1. 17. Gal. 3. 3. Should I proceed so far as the Scriptures as a leading thread would guide me for the confirmation of justification without works I should be taken as exorbitant For the rest I shall refer the reader to such writers as have handled the point of justification against the Papists or to the disputations of the Apostle himself against the false Apostles who taught the same doctrine with Mr. Baxter though not expresly in the same words They taught that we cannot be saved by Christ by faith in Christ alone except we be circumcised and keep the Law or do the works which the Law commandeth Act. 15. 1 24. Mr. Baxter teacheth in this his 60. Thesis that B. The bare act of beleeving is not the onely condition of the New Covenant but severall other duties also are parts of that condition If we take together with his words that which in the precedent Chapter we have manifested to be his meaning in these words and that by the bare act of beleeving he understands faith without and in opposition to works for himself knoweth that it is his Pontificall-Arminian-Socinian not our Protestant Evangelicall doctrine which holds out justification by beleeving as either a bare or a cloathed act or work then he teacheth the same doctrine for which the Apostle anathematized the false Apostles and arch-church-troublers in his time Gal. 1. 7 8 9. 5. 12. And what the Apostle hath against them is against Mr. Baxter their own son I will not say in the faith but in perverting the faith and Gospell For neither did they deny faith but Mr. Baxters bare faith faith without works to be effectuall to justification Against this assertion common to him and them if there were no other Scriptures contradicting but what I have alleaged no arguments brought by our Divines to subvert it and to establish the contrary doctrine but what have been here expressed and implied al which are scarce a drop of their ful bucket yet doth Mr. Baxter declare any finglenesse of heart or sincere aime to advance the glory and truth of God in suppressing all this and all the rest in silence so to beguile his more Logicall then Theologicall readers whom he knowes to be more acquainted with Sophistry then Divinity with exotick scriblings then Canonicall Scriptures with an opinion that the stream of Scriptures runne all to his Mill and that we have nothing from the Word favouring our cause Neither let any object that our Churches do only deny the merit of works not the necessity of them as a condition to justification Herein I shall have a fit place to speak afterward as to Mr. Baxter and as it is his plea to lenifie his self-arrogating assertion In the interim to manifest the simplicity of our gudgeons that are apt to swallow the most portentous errours if offered to them involved in fine terms of logicall notions among whom some that erewhile did prosecute with bel book and candle some to death some to banishment some to sequestrations whom they thought but to smell a little of the perfumes of the purple whore These very same men now having inriched themselves with the spoyles of them whom by their outcries they erewhile pursued are mad to drench themselves with the very dregs of the cup of fornication which is in the hand of the whore and kisse the lips of Mr. Baxter which hath blessed with plausible words the doctrine
Scriptures which Mr. Baxter quotes to prove that repentance as a really distinct thing from faith justifyeth do wholly fail him For as our Divines well say against the Papists though these two acts must needs cooperate together viz. the casting out of self and the receiving of Christ yet it is the latter alone that doth properly and instrumentally justifie by receiving the justifyer and his righteousnesse the former act doth but disponere materiam as one saith not too catachrestically doth but put a man as it were in a justifiable posture and capacity doth but obiâ—em tollere pluck out and cast away the barre that might fasten the door against Christs entrance and this it doth not as a distinct vertue from faith but as a subservient act of faith to its receiving of Christ Lastly those of the forequoted Scriptures which speak of repentance in a strict sense advantagious to life after conversion and that which the Papists and Mr. Baxter call the first justification as 2 Cor. 7. 10. and some other these speak of repentance indeed really distinct from faith being an effect or fruit of faith But this repentance is in no other sense called repentance to life then as by it the Saints sometimes recover the sense and comfort of their justification that had for a while laid fainting in them or as it is impowred from above to repair confirme and increase the life of sanctification in them And this is besides the question in hand whether repentance justifyeth I shall therefore pretermit to speak futher of it And thus have we one file of his Scripture quotations examined and do finde that all which he would thence deduce to confirme a collaterall officiating of repentance as a thing really distinct from faith together with faith to justification stands him in no stead at all The second duty which he nameth as an equall condition with faith of our justification is praying for pardon and forgiving Pag. 230. others In this though he follow Bellarmine yet he holds not himself to Bellarmines words but having overtaken him runs beyond him Bellarmine thus speaketh having mentioned before two things that justifie Thirdly saith he Spes obtinendae veniae est etiam dispositio ad justitiam et remissionem peccatorum i. e. Hope of forgivenesse is also a disposition to righteousnesse and the remission of sins Mr. Baxter outruns him and saith that praying for pardon and forgiving of others too are conditions of pardon but suppose that I do hope and pray for pardon and forgive others too shall I then be forgiven Mr. Baxter will not promise that but if I do that caeteris paribus then forsooth I may hope well but what is this sensus compositus or caeteris paribus viz. if I do this and all that else is to be done i. e. all the duties which either Law or Gospell commands me But I demand if all this be done am I then justifyed Neither will he grant me this I am then conditionally justifyed as I was before I did any thing yea more I am now a probationer for justification and upon my bene se gesserit my good behaviour I am justifyed for an hour possibly untill I be unjustifyed again but if I do all and never cease to do all either while I am living c. or when I am dead there may be possibly a day when there be no more days when I may if all things faie well be justifyed But further that all may faie well will he tell me what the caeteris paribus the rest conditions are that I may perform them all and not misse in number Thus far possibly he will condescend to make known some of them and to give me some generalls of the rest and make known the materia prima in which the substantiall formes lurk yea the genera and the species that are such subalternatim but the species specialissimas infimas together with their individuals he either will not or cannot particularize the seed of Mr. Baxter in this kind is more numerous then the seed of Abraham more then the starres of heaven then the sands of the sea for multitude yet if one be wanting I am as far from justification as if I had nothing So blessed a man will Mr. Baxters conditions make me But let me on the contrary part demand of Mr. Baxter Suppose a person truely in the Covenant of grace vitally in Christ if he have never a one of these additory conditions actually moving in him is not his justification and glory as certain as anothers that hath all the conditions Mr. Baxter dares not deny the supposition to be possible for then shall he exclude all dying Infants from the kingdome of heaven which in another book of his it is said he flatly denyeth the consequent therefore cannot be denyed that justification before God is as sure without as with these conditions and so no condition at all to be granted of our justification save that which may assure and declare it to our selves What mis-spent time will it be then to bawl about two or three of many decads and centuries yea myriads of conditions by disputing whether they be conditions when if we know not and have not all the rest it shall go as well with those that have none of them as with them that have all to one I had almost said when these all brought as conditions in Mr. Baxters sense to Gods tribunall will without doubt condition him that brings them to condemnation But because Mr. Baxter and his disciples may be angry if we hear not what so great a Master saith for our own safety we will attend to hear what Scriptures he alleageth The first he brings from the prayer of Solomon 1 King 8. 30 39. Hear Lord thy servants when they shall pray towards or in this place and forgive them and give to every man according to his wayes What will hence follow either ergo whosoever prayeth in or towards Solomons Temple in Jerusalem shall be forgiven so far as forgivenesse consisteth in giving to every man according to his ways or shall be forgiven as to the famine and pestilence c. ver 38. mentioned so as he pray caeteris paribus though he be never forgiven as to hell fire or ergo there was a time when prayer for pardon was a condition of forgivenesse viz. when the Temple stood at Jerusalem if prayer were made in it or towards it but now since the desolation of the Temple this condition for the space of 1600. years hath been out of force Let him conclude better for himself from these premises if he can I can conclude no better thence to the maintenance of his assertion And it is worthy of consideration to take notice how extremely the Apostles logick and Mr. Baxters logick do differ From the like promise of salvation made in Scriptures to them that pray for it the Apostle concludes that we are justifyed and saved by faith thus
Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall Rom. 10. 13 14. be saved How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved His argumentation runs thus Whosoever do rightly call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved but beleevers only call rightly upon the name of the Lord ergo beleevers only shall be saved He argues here from the effect to the cause from acceptable prayer to faith from whence it floweth concluding that salvation is promised to prayer not as it is an act performed in its self but as it is a fruit of faith ascribing all the furtherance unto salvation by prayer to faith that breaths it out and all the efficacy which faith hath to salvation to the Lord i. e. the grace of God or Christ the Mediatour beleeved in So making faith to be that which in the vertue of its object saveth and not prayer either in its act or in respect of the spirituall disposition of the heart to pray And with the Apostles argument from prayer to faith I might also argue to manifest that the Scriptures which Mr. Baxter quoteth to prove that forgiving of others is a collaterall condition with faith to justification or forgivenesse have no force in them to prove such a conclusion viz. Mat. 6. 12 14 15. Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtours for if we forgive men their trespasses your heavenly father will also forgive you but if ye forgive not men their trspasses neither will your heavenly father forgive your trespasses Mat. 18. 35. So likewise shall my heavenly father do to you also if ye from your hearts forgive not every man to his brother their trespasses The like also in Mar. 11. 25 26. When ye stand praying forgive c. as in the former Scriptures Luke 6. 35. Forgive and ye shall be forgiven Isa 5. 15. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick and if he hath committed sins they shall be forgiven him Joh. 14. 13 14. Whatsoever ye shall aske in my Name I will do it c. 1 Joh. 5. 15. Whatsoever we aske we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him The rest have nothing of sound much lesse of substance to the purpose for which they are quoted How much these Scriptures together with those of the former bunch that were intended by Mr. Baxter for the foysting in of Repentance and of the next bundle that he would have to force in all the works of love and obedience into the office of justification may prevail with some simple and ignorant persons I know not For these not being able to compare Scripture with Scripture and spirituall things with spirituall nor to search into the pith and bottom of Scriptures are carried as the Apostle saith with every wind and sound of doctrine whither their seducers will But I do not comprehend what Mr. Baxters designe is who having compiled this work chiefly if not only for the reading of the Learned should fardle up together these Scriptures to deceive such for the very quotations will send them not only to the Scriptures but also to the Commentators upon these severall Scriptures where they must needs find him and the Jesuits so wresting from them the same doctrine and Mr. Baxter so fully answered in their answer to the Jesuites that his Readers will not be able to decide which is the verier Jesuit he or those whom he followeth I had a thought therefore to transmit the Reader to the Commentators But to manifest to the simple how little there is in substance in these quoted Scriptures making for Mr. Baxter I shall interpose these few things 1 That the Scriptures are all of Gods inspiration concenting together in oâ—e harmony no where dashing either against other no more then God their Author dasheth against himself so that we must necessarily conclude that neither all nor any one of these Scriptures doth in its proper and genuine sense contradict those before alleadged Scriptures of justification by faith and not by works by faith without works by the righteousnesse of faith and not by our own righteousnesse by the law of faith in opposition to the law of works c. as before If then these Scriptures should bring in justification and remission but in part by our own works and righteousnesse Scripture would here be set in commotion against Scripture and God against God 2 Mr. Baxter doth here make this work of forgiving and praying for forgivenesse as also in the next place all love obedience and the works thereof not simply conditions of justification and forgivenesse which in some sense far from Mr. Baxters some of our Theologists admit but collaterally and in the same relation with faith and this is the highest toppe of Papall presumption not the worst of Jesuits speak more derogatorily to the depressing of Gods grace or more proudly to the exalting of mans works worth and righteousnesse 3 From this doctrine of his it would follow that praying and forgiving others must be such a condition of justification that where it is there is justification where it is not there is not justification the positing or not positing of the one including the summe of the other for so it is with faith He that beleeveth shall be saved he that beleeveth not shall be damned Mark 16. 16. so Joh. 3. 36. Will Mr. Baxter say so of forgiving others and praying for forgivenesse are all that do it justifyed dares he to say it No otherwise but with his caeteris paribus and sensu composito if he doth this and all things else which a Christian should do And thus I might also make every civill and indifferent Action the condition of justification A mans sleeping by night and working by day his eating when he is hungry and drinking when he is thirsty his improving of his groundâ— before he sowes them and sowing them when improved and reaping them when the crop is come to maturity all these and the like may be as well called conditions of justification for these also caeteris paribus when all things else are done which a Christian should do do stand as full in strength to justification as those works which Mr. Baxter particularizeth yea this caeteris paribus makes sin guilt ungodlinesse perdition c. more properly conditions of justification then any of those which Mr. Baxter nameth for without the actuall being of those none can be justifyed in Christ before God For Christ Came not to call the righteous but sinners to Repentance Mat. 9. 13. He hath shut up all under guilt under sin that the promise of righteousnesse by the faith of Jesus Christ might be upon all that beleeve Rom. 3. 19 22 23 24. He justifyeth the ungodly Rom. 4. 5. And saveth that which was lost Mat. 18. 11. Are these duties to be performed coordinately with faith that we may be justifyed surely rather then those which Mr. Baxter nameth for these still go before
passed thorough after men are dead With hundreds more of the same kind and worth wherein it seems Mr. Baxter here would imitate them to ingratiate himself into their favour As for the residue of Mr. Baxters quotations in this place they are for the most part if not all urged in another place to prove works the condition of our glorification and future salvation and untill then I forbear to answer them But lest any in the interim should stand doubting at any of the Scritures hâ—re quoted promising either love or life or grace or glory to men thus and thus qualifyed and conceive that such qualifications are the ground and condition together with faith to in right us in that which is promised I think it fit to premonish by the way what all Protestant writers have â—maintained and cleared against the Papists that the ground of our right in such selicities promised is not the qualifications or works of the person but the new relation of the person so qualifyed his union with Christ justification and adoption before God Such promises not being made to all but to the Saints in Christ so doing I shall clear it up to you by a similitude Isaac promiseth his son Esau his blessing but bids him go a hunting and bring him venison and then in eating it he will blesse him what was that which enrighted Esau to the blessing that was the ground or condition upon which Isaac would blesse him the venison caught and dressed nothing lesse for if a 1000. others should have presented him with a 1000. pieces of venison at severall times all dressed and fitted to his appetite the blessing should have been reserved entire for Esau and they all have been sent away empty as appeareth by his dealing with Jacob presenting his made venison how agreeing so ever the dish was to the palate of the old Patriark yet he will examine thorowly who it is whether his very son Esau that brings it before he gives the blessing It was not then the venison but the sonrship yea primo-geniture of Esau that was the ground and condition of Isaacs promise to blesse him So is it also to his justifyed and adopted ones in Christ that the Lord saith Aske and ye shall have seek and ye shall finde knock and it shall be opened to you Run and ye shall obtain Overcome and ye shall be crowned Love and I will love you Be mercifull and I will be mercifull to you Humble your selves and I will lift you up and a thousand more such promises of grace as far as they hold forth spirituall and saving blessings they are the Childrens bread dispensations of God within his own family no stranger hath part in it or right to it Let the world those that are not beloved aske seek knock run fight c. the Lord may possibly out of the goodnesse of his providence infinitenesse of his wisdome and bounty of his nature reward with corporall and temporall good things their carnall and temporall endeavours but untill by the spirit of adoption they are through faith united to Christ they have no right by the new Covenant to make claim to the spirituall and saving blessings promised neither are they any otherwise to be ratifyed to any but as they were beloved of God in Christ before there were any such qualifications and motions in them as Mr. Baxter cals conditions as hath been before declared Yea suppose that Esau could not have brought the venison to his Father had been hindered or drawn aside from seeking it or seeking could not find it or finding could not have taken and brought it should the promise and purpose of Isaac to blesse him for this cause have failed He performed not the condition he shall therefore be bereaved of the blessing Nothing lesse for the generall and fundamentall ground and condition the relation of a son of the first-born son stood still fixed unto which the good will of the Father and the blessing in the Fathers purpose was entailed In like manner though a child of God fail in some of the works and qualifications which Mr. Baxter cals conditions of the new Covenant yet this makes not the promise of the Covenant or the beneficence of the Covenanter promising to be void because these are grounded so far as they are grounded out of God upon Christ our union unto Christ and new relation to God in Christ All which I doubt not shall be made manifest in its own place only what hath been said I thought fit to be said by the way for the prevention of doubts and perplexities that might ingage the weak reader before we come thither I should here have put an end to what I had to say to his first Argument drawn from Scriptures having spoken to all that in this place are quoted saving those which he brings again elsewhere for which place I have put off my examination of them But that p. 310. he comes with a new supply Lest therefore I should make another work of it there or minister occasion to any of saying that where his Argument is most fortifyed there I shun and shrink from answering I shall examine here also what force such of those Scriptures as have not been here quoted and examined have to prove justification by works and so much the rather because he tels us there that the assertion is evident from these following Scriptures B. Mat. 12. 37. By thy words thou shalt be justifyed and by thy words thou shalt be condemned Justification and Condemnation seem here by our Saviours testimony to depend upon the sinfull and blamelesse use of our tongues Ergo upon works We may grant all in our Saviours sense without advantaging Mr. Baxters cause or endammaging our own For the Lord Christ here directeth his words to those Legall Jewish Pharisaicall Justiciaries who stuck fast to the righteousnesse of the Law for justification and in zeal thereof blasphemed as in the precedent part of the Chapter upon which this dependeth is to be seen Christ and his Gospell This blasphemy Christ here reproveth and smiteth with a weapon fetcht out of their own Armory Even your own law forbids such evill words and blasphemies holding forth Justification and Condemnation not only upon condition of good and evill works but words also so that there is nothing spoken of the justification of the New but of the Old Covenant only A reprehension and commination pat to them to whom it was denounced the threat of the Law to them that refused the Gospell and were and would be under the Law But this is nothing to the justification of the new Covenant that followes the rule of the Gospell The next Scripture not contained and examined in the former sardle of quotations is B. 1 Joh. 1. 9 If we confesse our sins God is faithfull to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from our iniquities Here confession another work seems to be a condition of forgivenesse and justification
altering his judgment is because that opinion would not subserve to his justification by works which he hath so pertinaciously determined to set up that whatsoever of sacred or humane Authority he meets with opposit to it he shoulders it out of the way and whatsoever occurres out of any sink and puddle making for it he takes up as a treasure But the Meritoriousnesse of Christs Legislative and Kingly office to satisfie for our sins being laid as a groundwork he thought it seems would tend much to the exalting of the works done by the Commandement of King Jesus to justification therefore he took it up from Grotius and made use of it as a paved way to Justification by works which here almost from the same grounds he urgeth And so we see that from the very beginning to the end of this Tractate all that he hath conspireth and aspireth to this end justification by works and to elude all that the Gospell hath against it But let us come to examine his Assumption to this Argument and what he brings for it B. Thes 66. Christ is not in any one part or work of his office alone the object of justifying faith as such but Christ in his entire office considered is this object viz. as he is Redeemer Lord and Saviour In a good sense we might grant him both all this and all the substance of all the Arguments which he brings to prove it For none of the Protestant Churches have denyed but maintain 1 That all the offices of Christ are needfull and cooperating to and in the worke of Mediatourship that Christ not only as our high Priest but also as our King and Prophet made satisfaction for us and makes his satisfaction effectuall to us 2 That the object of justifying faith is Christ in all his offices King Priest and Prophet 3. That these offices of Christ are not to be severed by us because counited and coworking in him He layes not down nor puts from him any one of his offices when he either justifyeth sanctifieth or illuminateth c. but doth all and every of them as Lord Saviour and Teacher Yet when all this is granted to him his cause is never the stronger nor ours at all the weaker Nay he declares himself guilty of the fault wherewith he chargeth the innocent viz. of separating Christs offices holding him forth to us as redeeming us only as our high Priest governing and giving Lawes to his Church only by his Kingly office enlightening us in the truth only as our Prophet when contrariwise we teach that Jesus Christ i. e. the Anointed of God in all his offices and anointings is made unto us of God wisdome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption not wisdome in one only of his offices righteousnesse in another c. but all in all as the Scripture witnesseth 1 Cor. 1. 30. Neverthelesse we deny not but some acts and benefits of Christ are to be attributed more properly and peculiarly to one then another office of Christ yet so that the cooperation of the other offices therein is nor wholly to be denyed But this we deny that there is any other fountain opened for the washing away of our sins but the bloud of Christ only or any other satisfaction made to the justice of God but by the sacrifice of Christ alone yet so as this bloud and sacrifice as they are primarily our high Priests so are they our Kings and Prophets also howbeit the bloud and sacrifice of one Christ alone And herein we follow the Scriptures leading threed which affirm not only the Priest to have dyed for us but our Prophet or Shepheard also I am the good Shepheard and give and lay down my life for the sheep Joh. 10 11 15. He came not to be ministred unto but to minister and to give his life a ransome for many Mat. 20. 28. viz. to seal the doctrine with his bloud which he had taught with his lips and to make the way through the veil of his flesh thorough his bloud which he had taught to be the only way into the Holiest to the Father And as the Shepheard so the Lord and King also It was the LORD that was betrayeâ— 1 Cor. 11. 23. crucifyed 1 Cor. 2. 8 killed Act. 3. 15. and raisâ—â— again 1 Cor. 6. 14. Even the Lord of glory and Prince of life Therâ—fore it is that the holy Ghost cals it the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 2â— The Lords body and the Lords bloud 1 Cor. 11. 27 29. And needfull was it that Christ as Lord and King with all his power should thus grapple with sin death and hell on our behalfe how else should he have vanquished them and having spoyled these Principalities and powers made a shew of them openly and triumphed over them Col. 2. 15. And without this victory his death had been to us vain our enemies had remained unconquered and our selves unransomed The strong man had not been driven out by a stronger then he Luk. 11. 21 22. Thus we neither divide nor separate the offices of Christ one from another but conjoyn them all in the death and passion of Christ by which alone we beleeve and teach that the Lord Priest and Prophet Christ Jesus hath made satisfaction for our sins But we utterly deny that which Mr. Baxter drives at that Christ as our Lord that is as a Lawgiver and to speak in Mr. Baxters words Thes 31. as he doth establish the morall Law commanding perfect obedience and forbidding every sin as exactly as under the Covenant of works is the object of justifying faith as justifying This was that great and principall article which Luther with so much vehemency defended against the Papists viz. that Christ is Luth. in Gal. Cap. 2. 20 alibi no Moses no Exactor no giver of Lawes in reference to justification but a giver of grace a Saviour c. pronouncing it an accursed â—and hellish doctrine which the Papists taught that he justifyeth as a Law-giver that they which so paint him out make him not a Christ but a Fiend or Devill The state of the question then is betwixt him and us not whether Christ as Lord as well as Saviour but whether by the sacrifice of himself for us or else by giving Laws and Commanding all duties of obedience to us also be the object of justifying faith as justifying i. e. whether our faith by obeying Christ in the works of righteousnesse as well as by cleaving to Christ crucifyed do justifie We maintain that the death of Christ or Christ dying for us is alone offered to our faith for justification he contrariwise that Christ as commanding the duties of obedience is the object of faith as justifying Our Assertion that Christ suffering for us is the alone object of justifying faith as such may be confirmed by many Arguments One Argument may be drawn from the offerings and sacrifices of the old Testament and the sacraments both of the old and new Testament
Such as these have exhibited or do still exhibit Christ to us for redemption or justification such is our faith still to receive him But these all have exhibited and do exhibit Christ not as a Law-giver but as an offering or sacrifice for our sins therefore under this notion our faith is to receive him to justification So all the sacrifices circumcision paschal Lamb c. under the old Testament directed the faith of men to Christs sacrifice to the bloud and wounds of Christ for purging c. Or if any will say as he may truly say that circumcision typified also the renovation of the heart by the Spirit of Christ himself may answer himself that this was to sanctification and not to justification 2 The whole stream of the Gospell leads our faith to Christ crucifyed or dying for justification As the serpent was lifted up in the wildernesse so shall the Son of man be lifted up viz. upon the crosse that whosoever beleeveth in him should not perish but have everlasting life John 3. 14 15. I determined to know i. e. to preach among you for your knowledg nothing else but Christ and him crucifyed 1 Cor. 2. 2. If I be lifted up I will draw all men to me signifying what death he should die Joh. 12. 32 33. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud c. Joh. 6. 47 58. Whom God hath set forth as a propitiation through faith in his bloud Rom. 4. 25. Being justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 9. The bloud of Christ cleanseth from all sin 1 Joh. 1. 7. The Lambe of God sacrificed that taketh away the sins of the World Joh. 1. 29. Having made peace through the bloud of his Crosse Col. 1. 20. And reconciled us in the body of his flesh through death Ver. 21 22. Having redemption through his bloud even the sorgivenesse of sin Col 1. 14. He hath purchased his Church with his bloud Act. 20. 28. Having boldnesse to enter into the Holiest by the bloud of Jesus by the new and living way which he hath consecrated through the veil of his flesh Heb. 10. 19 20. He was wounded for our sins and bruised for our iniquities and by his stripes we are healed Isa 53. 5. God forbid that I should glory in any thing but in the Crosse of our Lord Jesus Christ Gal. 6. 14. I might even weary the Reader with allegations of Scriptures every way as pertinently and properly making Christ dying for us the object of faith as justifying And I challenge Mr. Baxter and all his admirers to produce one Scripture proving Christ as a Law-giver to be the object of our faith to justification If they cannot do it let it be acknowledged as an audacious and daring presumption in Mr. Baxter from his own authority without and against the Word to lay it down here as a position and principle of Religion 3 If the death and sufferings alone of Christ and not his giving of Lawes and commanding duties of righteousnesse be the sole and entire satisfaction which he hath given to the justice of God for us then Christ in his death and not at all in his Laws and Commands of such duties is to be made the object of our faith for justification But the former is true therefore the latter also Both the consequent and consequence of the Proposition must needs be granted by all Protestants though not by Remonstrants and Socinians which hold the imputation of the obedience of Christ to us by which he hath satisfyed Gods justice that he for us and we in and by him have done our law that his satisfying obedience is by imputation so fully made ours to justification as if we had done it our selves which is the doctrine of all Protestant Churches But Mr. Baxter hateth this phrase of imputation of Christs obedience will not cannot admit it for then he destroyes and pronounceth all at the best to be erroneous whatsoever he hath spowted out for sacred doctrine he grants the imputation of nothing else but our own faith and works to justification so that after his principles the consequence is not so clear Let us see therefore whether also after and upon his own grounds it may stand firm and undenyable 1 Then Mr. Baxter Thes 18. affirmes our Legall righteousnesse as he cals it i. e. that righteousnesse by which the Law is satisfyed for our breaches of it to be in Christ and in calling this Legall righteousnesse ours and the satisfaction therein made ours he doth imply that the satisfaction of Christ is the thing that being made ours is that which justifyeth us This he speaks out yet more plainly pa. 218. telling us that Christs satisfaction must be made ours else we cannot be justifyed that so far as by imputation no more is understood then the bestowing of Christs satisfaction on us so that we shall have the justice and benefits thereof as truely as if we had satisfyed our selves in this sense he granteth the imputation of Christs satisfactory righteousnesse and thus according to his principles that act or those acts of Christ by which he made satisfaction for us or rather Christ in these acts is to be made the object of our faith as justifying According to this rule pa. 54. he makes the Active righteousnesse of Christ considered as such part of the satisfaction together with the Passive and to lay a ground for that which he here inferreth pa. 57 he affirms that among other parts of Christs righteousnesse or Active obedience his assuming of the humane nature his establishing and sealing the Covenant his working miracles his sending his Disciples to convert and save the world his overcoming death and rising again c. which were all works most proper to his kingly office to have been meritorious and satisfactory And all this to lay a foundation for what here and Thes 72. he buildeth viz. Christ as a Law-giver as well as a Redeemer is the object of justifying faith as such and that obedience to his Laws as well as faith in his sufferings hath to do in our justification We finde then Mr. Baxter making Christ in his Legislative righteousnesse upon this ground alone to be the object of justifying faith as therein he in part satisfyed for our disobedience Therefore hoc nomine and in this respect must the consequence of the proposition stand firm with him viz. If only the death and sufferings of Christ and not at all his Legislative righteousnesse be the sole and entire satisfaction c. then Christ in his death onely and not c. is to be made the object of faith as justifying For in that righteousnesse alone by which Christ satisfyed is faith to apprehend him to justification by his own rules The Assumption then remaines alone needfull to be proved viz. that Christs death and suffering alone is the entire satisfaction This is clear to them which will not wilfully retain beams in their eyes from these Scriptures which affirm the
himselfe our Divines give an interpretation to this one passage that may declare it though it hath a seeming yet not to have a reality of dissent from the rest Because if this be Canonicall and from the H. G the H. G. cannot contradict himselfe In expounding this dispute of James therefore the Protestants take notice of a two fold homonymy of words one in the word Faith the other in the word Justifying both which Paul and James use but use them the one in one and the other in another sence so that though they seeme somwhat to differ in words yet in sense they speake the same thing 1. They say as when Paul speakes of Faith to justification by Faith he meanes a true and lively Faith which fetcheth power from the merits of Christ to Iustifie and from the spirit of Christ to Sanctifie so Iames here battereth under the name of Faith a bare profession and boasting of Faith which some Hypocrites leaned on to Iustifie them being wholly destitute of Faith indeed that is alive and effectuall to draw from Christ matter both to Iustification and Sanctification 2. They say that as Paul takes the word Iustifying for remission and absolution before God so James takes it as oft as he requires here works to Iustifie for the declaration of the truth of our Faith and Iustification before men Yet let not this their distinction if it may fitly be so termed and exposition bee taken up unlesse it hath sufficient grounds from the Text to beare it up I shall begin first with the latter because Mr. Baxter there begins That Justification by works is by James understood the declaring us to man to have true Faith and to be Iustified by it they bring these reasons to prove 1 James himselfe even in expresse words affirming it ver 18 Shew me thy Faith without thy workes and I will shew thee my Faith by my works where he tels us that by Iustifying he means the shewing or declaring our Faith and Justification not to God but one to another And thus he denieth Faith which is not Shewed by works to Iustifie i. e. to Shew or declare us to men Iustified 2. ver 21 where he saith was not Abraham our Father justified by works when he had offered Isaack his Son upon the Altar doth he speake of Gods Iustifying Gen. 15. 6. him or declaring him to be justified unto men Not the former for God had justified him by Faith many yeares before and there was no diâ—uption according to Mr Baxters doctrine in the intervall by any apostacy made by Abraham that of justified he became unjustified and needed here to be justified anâ—w How then was hee justified by offering his Sonn Can there be any other way not repugnant to reason devised but this that God here by proving and bearing him up in so searching a proof and Temptation to shew so matchless an act of obedience did declare to the world that his Faith was in sincerity his feare and love unfained so that all must be restrayned from charging him with selfe respects and Hypocrisy in all the professions that he made towards God Or what less is to be drawn from those wordâ— from Heaven Gen 22 12. upon this act of Abrahams obedience Now I know that thou fearest God seeing thou hast not witheld thy Son thy onely Son from me Did not God know what was what himselfe had wrought in Abrahams hart before this tryall of him doth he need outward actions to manifest to him what is in the heart within M. B. so much cleavs to theÌ„ that make all things which God doth to flow from his prescience that he will not ungod God so much as to deny that he knew as perfectly before as after tryall Why saith he then now I know but to intimate that now he had given a strong evidence both to the present and future generations to know that God knew and therby to convince men of all ages that they also must know the truth of Abrahams Faith feare and justification 3. The same might bee said of Rahabs justification by workes in receiving the Messengers and letting them forth another way ver 25. Did such a work as this justifie her before God or obtain to her remission of sins and deliver her from everlasting vengeance when there cannot be the least probable conjecture that shee had then any Faith in Christ or had ever heard of a Christ to come Then let us disclaime that Fabulam de Christo as one of the Popes termed the Gospell Righteousness is by workes without Faith without Christ and Stapletons glosse â—apleton Anrid p. 82 83. upon Pauls Iustificamur fide i. e. non absque side we are justified by Faith i. e. not without Faith because Faith is necessary to justification though not without works sufficient to it must be rejected as too Evangelicall And then also how shal Mr Baxters Thesis not fal which makes workes collateralls with Faith in Christ to justification workes can do it without Christ But if all this intrench upon Blasphemy then was shee justified by workes to men to the Israelites who by this Act toward them had so farr evidenced her fidelity to them and their cause that thereupon shee was taken into Covenant with them delivered from the ruine which befell Iericho and after as it were adopted or naturallized into the Common-wealth of Israell Ye have one part of the exposition and the grounds of it which Mr Baxter concealed that the unwary reader might despise it as groundlesse Mr Baxter opposeth it tellâ— us it is false and it may appeare thus B. p. 294. The Worlds Iustification frees us but from the worlds Accusation to which it is opposed And therefore it is but either a Iustification from Mans Laws or else a particular Iustification of us in respect of some particular Facts or else an usurped Iudgement and sustification for they are not constituted our Iudges by God and therefore wee may say with Paul it is a small thing with me to be judged of you or of mans judgement And so a small thing to be justified by men from the accusations of the Law of God But the justification in James is of greater moment as appears in the Text. For 1. It is such as salvation dependeth on ver 14. 2. It is such as followeth only a saving Faith But the world may as well justifie us when we have no faith at all I therfore affirm 1. That the world is no lawfull judge of our righteousness before God c. 2. Nor a competent capable judge and cannot passe any certain true sentence c. 3. If they could yet works are no certain Medium or evidence wherby the world can know us to bee righteous For there is no outward work which an hypocrite may not perform and inward works they cannot discern c. So that if it bee not certain that the Text speaketh of justification before God I scarce know
had said it is such a justification as justification dependeth on or such a salvation as salvation dependeth on The Apostle there speaks of a dead and barren Faith of a profession not a being of Faith and by an interrogation bearing the force of a strong Negation by saying Can Faith or the saying that he hath Faith save him he means and saith it cannot save him and that is the same with him as if he had said it cannot justifie him Here wee have indeed an idle dreame of Faith that cannot save But a Iustification that cannot justifie or cannot save or can justifie and not save is as far from James as neare to Mr. Baxter B. 2. It is such as followeth only a saving faith But the world may as well justifie us when we have no Faith at all That the justification of the New Covenant in which God evidenceth by faith to us that we are justified in Christ or the justification which consisteth in the evidencing by works to men the truth both of our Faith and Gospel Justification so far that in charity they are to regard us as truly beleeving and truly justified do both follow either saving faith or that which in charity to them that profess it men are to account a saving faith none denieth But it will not hence follow that works justifie us at Gods Judgement seat because they follow faith that declareth and evidenceth us to our selves to be so justified He comes with a new supply pa. 296. B. Once more 1. Was Abrahaem justified before men for a secret Action 2. Or such an Action as the killing of his only Son would have been 1. Had the Action been kept secret from men it could not have justified him before God or men Not before God for no actions as actions are the ground of his justifying us as hath bin already abundantly proved Nor before men for this action could not have declared the truth of his faith to them that never heard of the man or his Action But God having ordeyned him to bee a Father of the Faithfull and pattern of all beleevers to the worlds end and to confer Blessedness with Abraham upon all that walk in the steps of the Faith of our Father Abraham Ro. 4. 9. 12. hath recorded this Action of his to justifie and magnifie the truth of his Faith to all that in all ages shall beleeve and to incite them by his patterne by the like eminent obedience to justifie their Faith also to others 2. We are not to enquire what the evil world will judge of such an Action but whether Abraham or rather the spirit of God working in and by Abraham did not give in this Action a sufficient demonstration to convince the evill world much more the saints chosen out of the world of the truth of his Faith Which conviction if the evill world will carnally neglect or cursedly oppose it shall leave them the more inexcusable in the day of Judgement B. Was not he the Justifier beer which was the imputer of Righteousness but God was the imputer of Righteousness ver 23. Therefore God was the Justifier So I leave that Interpretation to sleep This is one of his extravagancies He hath all this while disputed of Justification by works what he cannot prove of works now he proves of Faith James saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousness Was it imputed to him of God for a partiall or for a perfect righteousness If but unto righteousness in part let him prove it or stand guilty before God for perverting his word If in the whole then is there no place left for works to challenge a part Or let him produce from James the like sentence of works imputed to Abraham to Righteousness else he puts the handle of his Argument into our hands to retort it upon him Abrahams Faith was imputed to him by the testimony of Iames to righteousness Ergo by the testimony of Iames works were not so imputed to him So his Epiphonem I leave that interpretation to sleep is the only sound thing that he hath spoken to this question For he hath said nothing that hath any power to awaken much less to rowze it So that it may sleep and that securely and in safety because they are but false Alarms that he soundeth against it The second interpretation as Mr. Br. terms it or as it is indeed the second homonymy or different sense of words wherin our Divines affirm Iames and Paul to speak in sound one but in meaning disagreeing eyther from other is in the word Faith as hath been sayd Paul when he attributes justification to Faith without works means a living faith fruitfull in good works Iames where he denies Faith without works to justifie means a dead faith a meer profession of faith that hath neither life nor being much less fruitfulness in good works That Iames takes the word Faith in this sense appears by these Reasons from the Text it selfe 1. From the scope of his dispute which we shall find to be as I sayd to beat down the presumption of carnall professors who reposed the hope of salvation wholly upon a bare profession of faith though the faith wherof they boasted had no vertue to sanctification obedience and to prove that alone to be a justifying Faith which is alive to good works This even Cajetan himself one of the pillars Cajetan in Jacob. of the Romish Church giveth as the scope of the Text as I have shewed he further expresseth himself thus Adverte hic prudens Lector quod Iacobus non sentit Fidem sine operibus mortuum esse c. Quoniam constat nos per fidem justificari etiam sine operibus sed sentit fidem sine operibus i. e. renuentem operâri vel non paratam operari esse mortuum esse vanam non justificare That is Let the prudent Reader heer note that Iames means not that faith is dead without works to accompany and help it in justifying us for it is evident that faith justifieth even without works but his meaning is that faith without works that is that refuseth or is not in a readiness to good works is dead vain and justifieth not Thus he makes the scope of James heer to prove that an idle and fruitless faith is not a saving or justifying faith So that we find it easier in this argument to find the truth from the very Papists than from Mr. Br. 2. From the 14. ver where James putting the question of faith without works saith not indefinitely can faith but annexeth the article to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can this faith save Is there power in such a faith to save which hath no power to sanctifie In like maner as heere ver 20. What in our Translation is rendred faith absolutely is there also in the Originall put with the restriction of the same article that faith which is without works is dead 3.
justified by works will it follow for all this that justification and salvation have the same conditions on our part The reasoning is one and the same in reason as if I should thus argue Having 1. slandered the Scriptures and said they say what I say I should further proceed Therefore are we created that we may be saved neither is there any way to salvation but by creation It would be as derogatory to the grace of God to be created by our own working as to be saved by our own working Therfore though Glorification be adding of a greater happinesse than we had by Creation and so Creation is not enough therto yet on our part they have the same conditions The reasoning after the Principles of true Protestants would not in its conclusion though in its premises seem altogether absurd Because they affirm the absolute will and good pleasure of God without any conditions on mans part in Mr. Baxters sense of Conditions to be the alone cause both of his creating and saving us But after Mr. Baxters Principles it would bee both absurd and odious for so our good works must bee the condition of our Creation because they are so of our salvation that we must be created by ouâ— sincere obedience bâ—cause by it we are saved and that our sincere obedience must go before our Creation because they so do before our salvation and so when we have perseveringly obeyed without a being we shall at length bee created and have a being They that are taken with such Arguments I doubt are in the number of them that are made to be taken 2 Pet. 2. 12. And who can hold that which will away Mr. Baxter saw the wall gaping and ready to fall before hee had finished it therfore hastens to plaister and dawb it thus B. Yet heer I say still our full Justification because as I have shewed i. e. said our first possession of it is upon our meer Faith or contract with Christ But I think our glorification will be acknowledged to have the same conditions with our finall justification at the bar of Christ and why not to our entire continued justification upon earth These are but words comparing that which is reall with that which is but imaginary We still deny such a full and finall justification at the bar of Christ compleating that which was but unperfect conditionall and reversible heer upon earth All that hee hath said to prove it hath been examined and found insufficient We look for proof indeed and meet with nothing but words They that are once possessed of it by faith are fully and finally possessed of it His peremptory and bold conclusion is now come even upon his own grounds to I think and why had hee not kept his thoughts to himself untill he had known reason enough for rationall men to have concluded with him yet upon this thought he addeth and why not to our entire continued justification upon earth To which we need say no more in answer but this because wee must not build any Article of our Faith upon the thoughts of men but upon the word of God To the objection which hee supposeth some may make and to which he answereth before it be made against him I say no more but let him answer our reall not imagined objections and such we shall so long defend untill by the light of the word wee finde them unworthy of defence The Scripture which hee brings to prove the perseverâ—nce of Faith to be the condition of our persevering justification runs thus Heb. 3. 14. We are made partakers of Christ if wee hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast to the end Here perseverance is made a declaration and evidence of the truth of our Faith and of our participation of or Communion with Christ at present not a condition either of our justification or the perseverance therof By this it shal be evidenced that ye are truly in Christ and justâ—fied by him if ye persevere for thâ—se that fall away wâ—re but seemingly never truly in Christ They that are his in truth continue so to the end Like that v 6. We are the house of Christ if we hold fast our confidence to the end compared with 1 Jo. 2. 19. They went out from us but they were not of us for if they had been of us they would without doubt have continued with us but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us So the perseverance or not persevering of these would manifest who had been who had not been truly pertakers of Christ and the house of his habitation not the condition of their persevering justification for then should it be for a time at least the condition of the perseverance of their justification who were never truly pertakers of Christ and consequently in Mr. Brs. phrase had never a beginning of justification Hitherto of what Mr. Baxter hath said to confirme the Proposition Hence he descendeth to prove the Assumption That Obedience is an undoubted condition of our salvation That wee may not here beat the winde we do first understand his obedience to be the obedience of good workes else is it the same with Faith as I have shewed and that of Faith in Scripture sense and not in Mr. Baxters large unscripturall and uncircumscriptive definition So much also many of the Scripture testimonies which hee alleadgeth here elswhere which I shal reduce to this place declare Yea himself in many places before hath set to his hand that it is his meaning 2. We understand him here by Salvation to mean that which he a little before calls glorification and not simply the salvation which is one and the same with Iustification But 3. We except against him that whereas without ceasing he beats our eares even into deafnesse with that Roman Rampant Exotick word CONDITION scarce uttering a sentence which he doth not blesse or curse with it though hee know the holy Scripture hath upon this Argument not the least mention of it that wee might thence learn that it is but borrowed from the Papists and improved much by the Arminians with whose common language through his familiarity with both parties hee is more acquainted than we can be who have no trafficque with them yet he will not fully make knowne to us the meaning of the word whether the signification thereof be boundlesse or within what limits it is bounded whether it comprehends under it all the necessary Antecdents of glorification or no if so whether it comprehends not under it as well much disobedience as obedience and works of the Divel as of God as the Cansas sine quibus non we shall obtaine salvation by Christ Or whether by Conditions we must understand onely Duties and if so whether those alone which go before or else also those that accompany and follow justification and glorification And withall whether those duties as morall or as spirituall because his Divinity
upon what terms salvation runneth under the Legall or old Covenant B. Rev. 22 14. Blessed are they that doe his commandements that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in by the gates into the City The doing of Christs commandements heer is the same which Heb. 5. 9. is called the obeying of Christ and the meaning of both is there explained Faith which Christs commandement calls for gives right to the tree of life and to all the priviledges of the new Hierusalem B. Ja. 1. 22. 23. 24. 25. What he would infer from the three former of these verses hee saith not and I dream not Any other three verses in the whole Bible might have been quoted as pertinent to his purpose as these as far as my dull brain can comprehend To the 25. if by the Law of Liberty he understands the Law of the Old Covenant or of the Decalogue and by blessed everlasting salvation as he erewhile termed it then hee prescribes salvation hence to bee sought by the Law and not by Christ by the covenant of works not of grace and so the salvation of man shall stand or fall upon these terms as hee doth or doth not forget to doe all that is commanded in the Law and Christ must not be at all looked after heer is no mention at all of him and thus to argue is worse than Popish even Jewish But if he understand by the Law of Liberty the Gospel then hath it the same sense with the former Scriptures teacheth us to seek salvation in a Gospel way as a free gift from free grace as children of liberty whom the son hath made free and not as children of bondage by works He that doth thâ—s shall be blessed in this his deed Some of our Expositors I know expound it another way yet not with but against Mr. Baxter B. Ma. 5. 1. to the 13. To this enough hath been sayd a little before in this Chapter B. Especially Mat. 5. 19. 20. The former verse runs thus Whosoever therfore shal break one of the least of these CoÌ„mandments and teach men so to do the same shal be least in the Kingdom of Heaven But whosoever shall do and teach them the same shal be great in the Kingdom of Heaven Christ here speaketh of Teachers under the Gospel And the sense as may be gathered from the precedent verses is this Whosoever under a pretence of the liberty of the Gospel shall take to himselfe or instill into others a licentiousnesse to break the Commandements of the Law or to neglect any of that holiness and righteousness which is the matter of the Law that man shal be an instrument of little yea of no use in the Gospel Church But whosoever shal so learn and teach Christ as in and thrrough him to take into his owne and presse upon other mens affections and practise all the duties of holiness and righteousnesse which the Law requireth in a Gospel way this man shall be an instrument of great good in the Gospel Church as one that hath learned and teacheth Christ to salvation and to sanctificâ—tion also If this in its substance be not the meaning of this Scripture I know not the meaning of any one Text of Scripture The latter which is the 20. verse is read in these words Excâ—pt your Righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdome of Heaven True Theirs was their owne Righteousness the Righteousnesse of works which could never satisfie for or expiate their unrighteousness Except we trample this as dung in respect of confidence in it to put on Christ for righteousness who hath both satisfied and expiated we shall never enter into the spirituall Priviledges of the Kingdome of Grace much lesse into the joyes of the Kingdome of glory What is there in either of these verses to promote Mr. Baxters salvation by Works B. Mat. 7. 13. Enter ye in at the strait gate for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction and many there be that go in therat But strait is the gate and narrow the way that leadeth to life and few there be that find it And will Mr. Br. take up the broad and vulgar way of expounding this broad and that narrow gate and way That by the broad way and wide gate are to be understood the way of prophaneness Atheisme Lust Luxury Carnall security c. and by the strait Gate and narrow way strictnesse of life and conversation unless he ride in this common Rode there is nothing to be found that will square with his purpose But that this interpretation is wide from the scope of Christ will appeare 1. by comparing Luke with Mathew who Luke 13 24 thus renders the words of Christ Strive to enter in at the strait Gate for many shall seeke to enter in and shall not bee able Whence it appeares that both these Gates and Wayes are such as men seek to enter into life by And was there ever that man so mad so void of the naturall light of reason and conscience that did strive to enter into life by Prophanenesse Lust Atheisme and impure living Doth not the Apostle tell us that the most stupified among the Heathen do so far know the judgement of God as to know these things to be worthy of death Rom. 1. vers ult â— When it is said of the narrow way and gate few there be that finde it if it should be understood of the strictness of Morall holinesse and righteousnesse it might well be said few there are that enter by it but to say few there be that finde it is not agreeable to reason For who is there that findes it not The very Light of nature teacheth all men this naturall way to life by the strictnes and perfection of their naturall and morall righteousness And this is the greatest beam in their eye blinding them that they cannot see the straight and effectuall way indeed What then is the strait gate and narrow way to life wherof Christ heer speaketh Let Christ himselfe interpret himself I am the way I am the door by mee if any man enter none can come to the Father but by me Jo. 10. 9. and 14. 6. The way into the holiest i. e. into heaven consecrated or new made for us through the vail of Christs flesh saith the Apostle Heb. 10. 19. 20. or let Mr. Br shew that the Gospel owneth any other way to life This is the way that few find when Peter had seen and spoken but of a glimpse and glance of it Blessed art thou Simon Bar-jona saith our Saviour for flâ—sh and bloud hath not revealed it to thee but my Father which is in heaven Mâ— 16. None can enter into it except the Father draw him Jo 6. 44. Except he be taught and have learned of the Father ver 45. And great striving must there be against ouâ— own wisedome before we can
reason or ground of their glorification because the Grace of Christ mentioneth them is to lay the honour of Christs Grace in the dust They that shall be glorified even when Christ of his infinite Grace extolleth their service done to him shall depresse themselves that the entire prayse may bee his Lord when did wee thus and thus minister to thee what ever did we of any worth that thou shouldest owne it as a service to thee what thou imputest is no otherwise our observance but in thy acceptance It is therefore denyed that the justifying sentence as Mr Baxter termes it shall passe in the last day either for or according to works otherwise than hath beene before granted And if wee shall not at last be glorified according to and for our workes but that Mr. Brs. proofes in this particular faile Then is his labour lost in going about to prove the second particular that the reason hereof is because they are parts of the condition It must first appear that it is before wee trouble our selves to know in what respect it is so So that we will not contend about the second particular with him to deny what he concludeth that workes concurre in the same concausality with Faith to our glorification 1. Not to evidence the truth of our Faith nor secondly as the righteousnesss which the Law requireth not thirdly as a meer signe by which God doth discern our Faith nor fourthly as a mere sign to satisfie the justified person himselfe nor fiftly to satisfie the condemned world of the sincerity of our Faith All this we grant and further adde in the sixt place nor as a condition in Mr Baxters sense of our glorification And because none of these or other wayes therefore not at all The Scriptures which he brings pa. 322. n. 5. that seeme to hold forth the promise of glorification for our workes are of the same nature with those examined in the former Chapter alleaged by him and all as those gathered by the Papists to his hand and either do conclude no more than what a little before we have in this Chapter granted or pertaine to some of those ends of such promises of life which God maketh to our obedience specified in the former chap. I shall therefore here pretermit to speak to them because Mr Baxter alleageth them to another end here viz to prove that the mention of these works to judgement is more than to signifie their sincerity to the condemned world as in the end of that Section he expresseth himselfe And this we deny not So that it were impertinent to examine the premises where the conclusion is granted CHAP. IX Whether according to Mr. Baxter Doe and live be the voice of the Gospel as well as of the Law The question stated and resolved whether and in what respects Believers must act or work from life not for life IN the eighth place as naturall motions are strongest when they come neerest to their period and center so at the conclusion of his Aphorismes pag. 3. 4. and so onward to the end he multiplies Argument upon Argument or rather twisteth many arguments together in one under the notion of Queries The substance of all may bee gathered together into this one Syllogisme That Doctrine which by necessary consequence draweth after it many intolerable absurdities mischiefs and soul-damning evills must needs be a falsâ— doctrine But so doth the Doctrine of justification by Faith or by Christ instrumentally received by Faith without the addition of works in a concausality with Fâ—â—â—h or Christ Ergo It is a false doctrine The Proposition is granted him The Assumption hee goeth about to cleer and make good by enumerating the particular absurdities and mischiefs that are consequentiall to this Doctrine And this he doeth by way of interrogations bearing the force of strong Affirmations I shal examine them in order The first query he puts in these words B. Doth it not needlesly constraine men to wrest most plaine and frequent expressions of Scripture A simple negation would here best suit with so untoward and audatious a question Neither shall I say any more to it but admonish the Reader to take notice that hee doth in these words frame an enditement against Christ his Apostles and all that beare the name of Protestants for sacriledge in wresting the holy Scriptures And that 1. Though he doth not and why but because he cannot bring any one Scripture which they have so wrested 2. And thereby affirmeth plaine enough to the capacity of every understanding reader that the Papists and Arminians alone have purely and truely interpreted the Scriptures as to the point of justification whom himselfe therefore followeth as their obedient disciple And 3. shewes us no reason therof but leaves us to conjecture what his meaning is viz that the Scripture is no farther Canonicall than after the interpretation and sense which the holy Mother Church alloweth it Nay we retort the argument upon him Iustification by works constraines the assertors thereof not onely to wrest many Scriptures but also to destroy and nullifie the whole Gospell and Salvation of Christ Therefore it is false doctrine This first query was but a warning peece but who can stand to beare the force of the second The man as if hee had newly come forth of Vulcans shop is all fiery spits out nothing but lightening and thunderbolts blowing into the bottome of Hell all that stand in his way How formidably he layes about him they that dare to come so neer may finde partly in this second querie it selfe but principally in his Appendix pag. 76. c. and in the highest strength of his wrath pag. 83. and onward to the end of pag. 98. First his querie here runs in these words B. pa. 324 and 325. 2 Qu Doth it not uphold that dangerous pillar of the Antinomian doctrine that we must not work or perform our duties for life and salvation but only from life and Salvation That we must not make the attaining of Justification or salvation an end of our endeavours but obey in thankefulnesse onely because we are saved and Justified A aâ—ctrine which I have else where confuted And if it were reduced to practise by all that hold it as I hope it is not would undoubtedly damn them for he that seeks not and strives not to enter shall never enter Now if good workes or sincere obedience to Christ our Lord be no part of the condition of our full justification and salvation who will use them to that end For how it can procure justification as a meanes and not by way of condition I cannot conceive In what part of the world Mr. Baxters elsewhere lyeth in which his confutation of this doctrine is to be found I know not I am not inquisitive to know I have enough in this and desire not to fish in any more of his foule waters But in pronouncing this doctrine of working and performing duties not for life buâ— from
once revealed to us and made ours in possession or in hope ought so to spiritualize us so to swallow us up into the spirit that we should no longer walk after the flesh but after the spirit to delight in the Law of God in all the holiness and righteousnes which the Law teacheth after the inner man He that seeks not so to doe hath hugd in his arms a dream of Christ not Christ himselfe hath had him possibly in his fancy never in his heart and conscience Hee that hath effectually met with God in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe and there tasted the love of God or rather God which is love hath suffered a Metamorphosis and is changed all into love hath so beheld God shining in Christ as in a glasse that he is transformed into the same image is or would bee wâ—olly configured to the likeness of God Yea we grant more that the truly justified and adopted ones of the Lord may perform these works of naturall righteousness which the Law commandeth with respect to and expectation of the future glory which shall be revealed to them and conferred on them for Christs sake as a reward of such their imperfect service yet not a reward of debt purchased by and due to their works but of free gift and grace from their indulgent father who of his infinite love and bounty is wont to recompence the mites of his dear childrens labours with the talents of his grace and bounty not because they are worthy but because he is gracious yea Grace and Love it selfe Ro. 4 4. 5. Goe ye into my vineyard and whatsoever is right or meet ye shall receive Mat. 20. 7. It must bee a boundless reward what such a father shall think right and meet to bestow upon his dear children Their reward shall bee proportioned not to the pittance of their poore service but to the riches of their fathers bounty and uncircumscriptiveness of his treasure The respect of such infinite treasure in their fathers hand and the riches of his love to bestow it in largest dimensions upon them with a gracious respect to their dutifulness and service should serve as a strong motive and attractive to them to be still doing for him When I was yet in my bloud hee loved and cleansed me Ezek. 16. 6 -9. When dead he quickned me Eph. 2. 1. When without strength to work when a sinner when ungodly when an enemy he gave his son to die for me and reconciled me to himselfe What will he now doe for mee so quickned reconciled washed and justified having attained strength if I employ that strength in his service Ro. 5. 6-10 Now wee are the sons of God but it doth not yet appear what wee shall bee onely wee know that when he appears we shall bee like him having therefore this hope we ought to purifie our selves as he is pure 1. Jo. 2. 25. 3. Thus are the saints to draw encouragement to obedience from the consideration of the reward or rather from the infinite love and bounty of the rewarder 3. That they which are out of Christ yet under the means of Grace and Ministry of the Gospel must performe all pure Gospel duties which the Law requireth onely in generall and implicitely but the Gospel specifieth expresly to the severall ends to which the wisdome of God hath severally related them some to justification some to sanctification by Christ Jesus It is their duty to hear learn study and meditate upon the doctrine of Grace and mystery of Christ duly to prize and value it to desire gasp cry and pray for the effectuallizing of it to themselves to embrace and receive Christ to repent of their long estrangedness from him to deny themselves and cast away all opinion of and confidence in their owne righteousness that Christ alone may bee embraced and the dung being cast out they may bee replenished with that which is indeed the Treasure and all this that they may bee justified and saved not by and for these duties so performed but by and for Christ to whom they seek and strive in all these duties to come into union All this the Gospel both tacitely implieth and expresly teacheth and the Law also in generall and inclusively commandeth as hath been sayd Thus the Kingdome of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force Here stil Christ is al to justification salvatioÌ„ Faith the alone instrument to receive him All the other actings are but subservient to Faith in this its instrumentall service to make way for it As when a treasure is offered by a munificent benefactor to a poor beggar the grace of the benefactor and pretiousnesse of the treasure is that which inricheth him and the hand the alone instrument to receive it yet must the eye guide him the understanding prompt him the wil move him the feet carry him and other actings of the minde and body bee subservient to him that the hand may rerceive that which inricheth him At length when all is done such a begger hath more apparent grounds of boasting that hee hath been and done somewhat to his owne enriching than the best of us that we have been or done any thing to our own Justification For though the Benefactor hath poured upon him freely of his own mercy not for or upon condition of his crying running to him emptying his hand of what was in it before and stretching it forth to bee filled with the treasure profered him yet the benefactor gave him neither a heart to desire nor wisdome to value nor light to guide him nor feet to carry him nor a hand to receive the treasure conferred It is otherwise in our Justification by Christ God freely gives it in Christ and all the power will actings and instruments by which we come into the possession of it Neither when we affirme all these to be our duty while yet unjustified doe we thereby affirme that all must be done before we can bee justified The grace of God oft prevents our operation in most of these justifying us by Faith before we have time to put our selves upon many of these operations In this sense I know none that denieth an obligation upon sinners to act and worke for their justification and salvation 4 They that are justified ought to be still active and industrious in all the duties of the Gospell tending to their confirmation in the Faith stablishment in Christ illumination in the misteries of the Gospell denyall of themselves and seeking to be wholly swallowed up into the Lord Iesus that they may be dayly more filled and ravished with fuller assurance and comfort of their justjfication salvation by him This we find the Apostle making his taske Phill. 3. 8 9 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. And hereunto tend the many memento's scattered by the holy Ghost in the Gospell watch pray take heed beware stand fast hold fast Run fight strive continew c. All which tend to the
live the other sayth Live and doe this the one sayth Doe this for life the other sayth Doe this from life But I have provedfully that the Gospel saith also Doe this for life 1. Now hee manifesteth wherin the haynousnes of the doctrine of this Book and the intolerable damnable wickedness of the Author consisteth viz. in his blindness that hee did not foresee what Antichristian doctrine Mr. Baxter would afterward divulge to the world and say hee had fully proved it but for lacke of this foreknowledge doth heer deliver the contrary truth of Christ prepossessing the minds of men therewith against Mr. Baxters future impostures But 2. Let him not say he hath fully proved but let him fully prove that doing and works as the Scriptures doe oppose the same to faith and receiving of Christ in which sense this Author speaketh are injoyned by the Gospel to justification of life or the life of justification and then let him expect that his Gospel shall stand and the Gospel of Christ lie prostrate at his feet 3. Because Mr. Baxter will never bee able to prove this the true Disciples of Christ will still hold this as one principle difference between the two Covenants that the one requires us to seeke life after the tenour of Justice the other after the tenour of Grace The one bids us to seeke it by Works the other by Fayth The one presupposeth the originall righteousness given us in Adam bidding us by it to follow after happiness the other offereth Christ unto us as the fountain of life both of Justification and Sanctification calling upon us to receive or beleeve in him for both that both may be ours when Christ is ours He is our life and when Christ our life not works our life shall appear we also shall appear with him in glory This is all that this Author meaneth in this passage as himselfe makes evident If in this he be an Hereticke let mee live and die with him in his Heresie To prevent mistake I meane heere the Covenant of works in Mr. Baxters sense throughout this his Treatise viz. the first Covenant made with Adam B. So in his second part page 190. his great note to know the voyce of the Law by is this That when in Scripture there is any Morall worke commanded to bee done eyther for the eschewing of punishment or upon promise of any reward temporall or eternall or else when any promise is made with the condition of any worke to bee done which is commanded in the Law there is to bee understood the voyce of the Law A notorious and dangerous mistake which would make almost all the New Testament and the very Sermons of Christ himselfe to bee nothing but the Law of works I have fully proved before that Morall duties as part of our sincere obedience to Christ are part of the condition of our salvation and for it to be performed And even Faith is a Morall duty It is pity that any Christian should no better know the Law from the Gospel especially one that pretendeth to discover it to others About the matter heer delivered by this Author enough hath been spoken before in examining what Mr. Baxter hath sayd in many parts of his Aphorisms contrary to it Touching the proofe of the contrary Assertion Mr. Baxter hath sayd no more than nor so much as Bellarmine had sayd before him and left prepared to his hand Hee should therefore more properly have sayd Not I but Bellarmine hath fully proved and therefore fully because Mr. Baxter so affirmeth As to the Assertor of it why doth hee pitch upon this Author alone when Calvin Fulk Mr. Fox as I have before Chap. 15. alleadged and quoted them Dr. Amesius Medul Theol. lib. 1. cap. 22. Se. 19. In a word all Protestant Divines from Luther till this present time have in substance and most of them that have occasion to pitch upon the same Subject have even totidem verbis delivered the same doctrine as to mercenary or rewards of debt having learned the same from the Apostle why doth he single out this one as a singular man Let him with Bellarmine Stapleton Maldonat and the rest of that hair roar out against all the Reformed Churches A notorious and dangerous mistake c. A herd of Hereticks and ignorant Animalls It is pity that any Christian should no better know the Law from the Gospel especially such as pretend to discover it to others As to his Morall duties and even Faith as a Morall duty to bee performed for salvation hee speaks like such morall men as nature now blinded and corrupted formeth whose principle it is Naturam ut optimam ducem sequi to follow Nature and naturall instinct or Reason as their best guide knowing not spirituall things because the Naturall man cannot receive them If he savoured so much the Gospel as Philosophy why doth not the phrase which Christ his Apostles use of the spirit and spirituall things so much delight him as that of the Philosophers Morall and Moralities As much was Christs offering himselfe a sacrifice and giving satisfaction to the Justice of God a Morall duty and so not meritoricus for us because due to God from him by the Law for himselfe as Faith in Christ and other purely Gospel duties subservient unto Faith For both these duties on Christs and on our part are comprehended under this one generall of the Law of nature Whatsoever I shall command thee thou shalt doe I shall leave the justification and salvation by Morall Faith and Morall duties to Mr. Baxter and with the Apostle through the Spirit wait for the hope of Righteousnesse by Faith Gal. 5. 5 B. So in the next page 191. he intelerably abuseth the Sripture in affirming that of 2. Thes 2. 12. to be the voice of the Law and so making Paul a Legall preacher Is then every teacher after Mr. Baxters Canon which declares what the voice force curse and condemnation of the Law is a Legall and Anti-Evangelicall preacher So he affirmes Paull to bee if he speake out what the curse and condemnation of the Law is Then not onely Paul but Christ also and all his Apostles are Legall not Gospel preachers For he will not deny them to have so made out the Law in its force c. Or when the Apostle in that quoted Stripture speakes of their Damnation which would not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousnesse doth he not leave them under the damnation of the Law for not embracing the Gospell doth not the Law hereby take occasion to damne them the more deeply for neglecting and rejecting the truth The proper office of the Gospell is not to condemn but to save Onely when its salvation is contemned it yeelds backe the contemners under the greater guilt to the Law to power out on them the larger if not largest measure of its curse and wrath Do not thinke saith our Saviour to the Iewes that rejected his Gospell
dead from further labouring and moving to this end For what righteousness what works can bee sufficient to such an atchievement So obedience to the Faith is nipt in the very budde where there is a sense and conviction of a mans naughtiness and nothingness 3. By taking off the spirits of a Christians love joy and alacrity in beleeving and serving when a humble and selfe-denying soul is once choaked with Mr. Baxters Doctrine that all the benefit which he hath or can have by Christ is to be only a probationer for justification and life even to his dying day that till then hee is but conditionally pardoned and conditionally adopted that Gods love to him may be anon turned into hatred his sinnes againe imputed and himselfe hurried into hell That his safety still depends upon his own works righteousnes no peny no Pater noster that the grace of God is let to farme for fine and rent no one promise of the word in all this his Booke being alledged by Mr. Baxter which I can remember of any support which the beleever shall receive from God in the state of Grace but all Selfe doe and selfe have This Doctrine eyther benummeth and freezeth up all a poore Christians love and delight in serving God emasculating his spirits to obedience or reduceth him under a yoke of bondage making him to worke possibly but in feare not of love as under the rod or rather in the fire fearing death and hell all his life time And whether this bee saving in Mr. Baxters accompt obedience or disobedience let them that are spirituall judge 4. By turning the very obedience of his Disciples into disobedience and rebellion The best works done to be justified by them and for them are the greatest abhomination in Gods accompt his Grace and Salvation are either denied or refused when wee bring works to appropriate it to us Rom. 4. 4 5. what is righteousnesse in its matter is sin in its end Therefore shall wee finde still that whosoever are admitted to those that seek to ingratiate themselvs by their good works though done in Christs name are hurled off from Christ I am not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance I know you not depart from mee yee workers of iniquity More joy for one sinner that repenteth than for ninety nine just persons that need no repentance For a more full and satisfactory answer to the Argument contained in this Quere I leave the Reader to the perusing of the Protestant Divines that have written upon this Subject and abundantly refuted this calumny of the Papists what I have here said is rather an addition to them then a full answer to the Quere which I leave to be fetcht from them What he speakes in the Amplification of this Quere needeth no large examination First he grants That love and thankfulness should be enough to hold us to obedience and duty and will bee so when all our ends are attained in our ultimate end then wee shall act for these ends no more c. How untowardly doth this passage and and another passage of the former Quere hang together what he pronounceth here that love and thankfulnesse should be enough to hold us to duty without doing for justification and salvation and that which here should be and hereafter shall be our perfection the same he affirmes there if practiced will undoubtedly damne the Practicer So according to Mr. Baxter if a Christian endeavour sincerely to do what he should and to come as neere in this life as it is possible to the perfection which he shall enjoy in the future hee shall undoubtedly bee damned for it Who then goes about to drive obedience out of the world he or they whom he opposeth What use is to be made of the affections of feare desire hope and care to the attainment of our great ends hath been enough discussed in the examination of the former Quere and would be a meere Tautology here to do it againe Let it be proved once that God hath left Justification by workes to be a motive to obedience it shall be granted to bee a help to the destroying of Obedience to take downe this one Motive But if contrariwise Justification of sinners by Works and Morall Obedience bee erected not by God but by the Devill Mr. Baxters neither Sophistry nor Oratory shall induce us to leane upon the Devils crutch both to the forfeiting of our Justification and turning our Obedience into sin CHAP. XII Whether the doctrine of justification by Faith without workes be a soul-cozening doctrine or harden the people in a soul-cozening Faith what the doctrine of Faith which the Protestant Churches holde is and how farr from deserving this Calumny with something about the facility or difficulty to perswade the multitude to such a Faith HIs fourth Quere by which as by another Argument he goeth about to make odious and to destroy justification by Faith without works runs thus B. pag. 326. Doth it not much confirme the world in their soul cozening Faith surely that Faith which is by many thought to justifie is it that our people doe all most easily embrace that is the receiving of Christ for their Saviour and expecting pardon and salvation by him but not withall receiving him for their Lord and King nor delivering up themselves to be ruled by him I meet not with one but is resolved in such a Faith till it be overthrowne by teaching them better They would all trust Christ for the saving of their soules and that without dissembling for ought any man can discerne Are all these men justified c. A Chip of the same blocke with the former in the use of it Mr. Baxter as he hath learned of them from whom he hath received it levels against the very heart of Christ and his Gospell Had hee said with Iames that to say we have Faith and not to have workes is to cozen our souls I should have said with him But in that he speaketh not of a soul-cozening profession of Faith but layeth so horrid an imputation upon Faith it selfe this gives us cause to examine what Faith he meaneth that we may be able to discern whether that Faith or else Mr. Baxter by defaming it goe about to cozen our souls and so embrace the true friend and reject the Cheater This cozening Faith according to Mr. Baxter must needs bee that which squareth not in its nature and manner of justification with the justifying Faith viz. that Gospell Faith which neither as a deed and worke as a worke of Morall duty and worke of our owne righteousnesse of our perfect and meritorious righteousnesse doth begin and but begin to inright us to Christ and justification by him leaving to eyther vertues and works to perfect it but as an instrument ordeyned and given us of God by which we receive Christ alone offering up himselfe a sacrifice for us to bee cur whole righteousness to justification and that without
thought to justifie his meaning is which all the Protestant Churches and Divines teach and which our people doe all most easily embrace is the receiving of Christ for their Saviour and expecting pardon and salvation by him but not withall receiving him for their Lord and King nor delivering up themselves to be ruled by him Let him now name that one Church or one Theologist in any one of the Protestant Churches that hath so taught and divided the receiving of Christ as Lord and King from receiving him as Saviour and pardoner in justifying Faith or els confess that he hath drunk deeply into the Jesuits prenciples that all equivocations frauds lyes slanders and whatsoever is worse than these are all not only lawfull but also meritorious when practiced for the advancâ—ment of the Triple Crown and the Holy Mother-Church of Rome We do indeed divide works from Faith and banish them from having any concausality with it in justifying But let Mr. Br. produce one that hath divided Christ the King from Christ the Saviour or denyed him in either Title to be the object of justifying Faith or any one that hath taught that to be a justifying Faith which expecteth salvation from Christ but will not deliver up the soul to be ruled by him I chalenge Mr. Br. to vindicate herein his reputation and to manifest that he followeth the dictates of Naturall conscience at least and not of wilful malice against the truth by naming one that hath taught any such thing The Protestant Churches and Writers are so cleer herein that they do not divide from justifying Faith the very Assent that there is a God that hee made the world that he drowned it and repair'd it that Christ was the Son of the Virgin Mary that hee was born at Bethlehem circumcised at eight days old disputed among the Doctors turned water into wine and did many miracles or whatsoever els the Scriptures in the least things affirme to be true All this the justifying Faith assents to neither can it not assent to every truth of the word yet it so assents not as justifying In this act it knows nothing but Christ and him crucified Much lesse do they so divide as Mr. B. here against knowledg and conscience objecteth They so far shew themselves abhorrent from it that they utterly deny any to come to the Kingdom of glory but through Christs Kingdom of grace But the Doctrine it self which here he reneweth about the object of Faith Christ as our Lord as well as our Saviour I have examined before in answer to his fourth Argument Thither I send the Reader for satisfaction what the Protestants hold and upon what grounds here it is besides the matter to fall into a new dispute about it It shall suffice here only to examine the new Argument which he brings to prove that the Doctrine which holds forth justification by Faith is a soul-cozening but that which teacheth justification by works is a soul-saving doctrine For this is his meaning in what he disputeth here of Christ the Saviour and Christ the Lord made the object of justifying Faith as hee hath largely explayned himself before And if hee mean not so all that he here sayth is but a hunting after Grashoppers in the snow to fight with them For none is there to be found opposing what he sayth in the words and phrase he useth But himself is a sure Interpreter of himselfe and we must take him as himself hath explayned his meaning And then his Argument is drawn from the easinesse or difficulty of receiving the one or the other Doctrine It must be a soul-cozening doctrine which all are easily perswaded to be cozened with Thus wee find him expressing himself in that part of the Query which is before transcribed Our people saith he do all most easily embrace it I meet with no one but is resolved in such a faith till it be overthrown by teaching them better They would all trust Christ for the saving of their souls c. And in the following part of the Querie B. Let any Minister but try his ungodly people whether they will not all be perswaded very easily to believe that Christ will pardon and save them c. But whether it be not the hardest thing in the world to perswade them really to take him for their Lord and his word for their Law and to endeavour faithfull obedience accordingly Surely the easinesse of the former and difficulty of the later seemeth to tell us that it is a spirituall excellent necessary part of justifying Faith to accept unfeignedly Christ for our Governour and that part which the world among us will most hardly yeeld to and therefore hath more need to be preached than the other Were he a true Israelite in whom there is no guile which speaketh all this might be granted him But because he hath fully declared that he meaneth by receiving Christ for our Saviour justification by Faith in Christ the Redeemer and by receiving him for our Lord and Governour justification by works nothing can be safely granted to him The whole summ of his Argumentation amounts to this syllogism That doctrine of Justification which the multitude doth easily embrace is a soul-cozening doctrine but that which they are not without much difficulty perswaded to receive is a soul-saving doctrine But the multitude easily embraceth Justification by Faith alone and not without difficulty Justification by works Ergo the former is a soul-cozening the latter a soul-saving doctrine He must acknowledge that he thus argueth or argueth nothing or nothing to the question To the Proposition I distinguish first about the meaning of the terms And first about the word embracing or receiving betwixt a vitall or effectuall and a meerly historicall embracing betwixt a reall receiving and an assent of the judgment that the thing is to be received or more plainly beleeving and a mans saying he doth beleeve or his profession of Faith 2 Between that which is easie or difficult in it self or to mans naturall ability and that which God makes easie by the concurrence or leaves difficult by the with-holding of his grace Having thus distinguished in whatsoever sense he takes the Terms I deny both Consequenâ—â— of the Proposition For if he mean onely an externall assent to the verity and goodness of the doctrine All men which have reason in their understandings and freedom in their wills do with the like facility choose that which is made out to them to be good and refuse that which is made out to them to be evill Or if he mean a vitall and effectuall embracing the doctrine of Justification is alike difficult to all that are of the carnall multitude It is a spirituall doctrine and the naturall man receiveth not cannot receive spirituall things 1 Cor. 2. 14. Again if he mean an easines and difficulty in it self and to mans naturall ability The true doctrine of Justification is alike difficult yea unpossible to all effectually
the integrity and purity of its celestiall endowments Without spot if this be but half Christ which is the other half 2 Or because he understands by whole Christ Christ in the fruits of all his offices as is most probable whether he will deny them to receive whole Christ which apply not all the severall Acts and Fruits of his severall offices to one and the same end but to severall ends to which his wisedom hath appropriated them Suppose a son of some Luke that is a Physician a Minister of the Gospel and a Father in his Family If the sayd son shall make use of the Acts and Fruits of all these Offices of his Father not at all to one end but to the severall ends to which they are proper of his Art and Physick to cure his diseased body of his Gospel-doctrine to illuminate his understanding and heal his wounded soul and of his provision of victuals to preserve his life and nourish his body and not of physick word and bread together for one and the same the nutriment of his body shall this man therefore be said not to own and receive his whole Father but half of him Even so the Offices of Christ are various and his actings in them tend to various ends some to our quickning som to our enlightning some to our justification some to our sanctification c. Do I take but half Christ because I apply not all the Actings and Fruits of all his Offices to my Justification only and none of them to the other honourable ends to which he hath appointed them who can bear the absurdity 3 Whether it be possible for any man according to the rule and tenor of the Gospel by a lively faith to apply to himself the satisfaction of Christs death and yet to remain unpardoned and unjustified or for such a one to abide unspiritualliz'd and unsanctfied If not then the reason why the multitude which profes they trust Christ for the saving of their souls as Mr B. is pleasd to phrase it do remain unjustified is because they profess but have not a lively faith in his death and not as Mr. Br. saith for want of I know not what Moral Theological decompounded phantastical sincerity consisting in laying hold on the half of Christ i. e. either his wounded and not his whole parts or Christ the Mediator not the Mediator Christ I can no better distinguish his meaning sith himself hath refused to do it Of the same nature is that which he hath pag. 328. B. Though some thinke nothing is preaching Christ but preaching him as a pardoning justifying Saviour Indeed among the Turks and Indians that entertain not the Gospell it is necessary to preach his pardoning office yea and the verity of his Natures and Commission Therefore when the Apostles preached to Jews and Pagans they did first and chiefly teach them the person and offices of Christ and the great benefits which they might receive by him But when they preach as James to be professors of the Christian Faith they chiefly urge them to strive to enter to fight that they may conquer to run that they may obtain to lay violent hands upon the Kingdom c. Either all this relates to Justification or it is meer babble in the Ayr sound without sense or substance as much to his purpose as was his that trudged about all the Town from shop to shop to buy two penny-worth of Circumstance for the cure of his tooth-ach For his quere is whether our Doctrine which teacheth Justification by faith without works do not confirm men in their soul-cozening Faith If all doth relate to justification then let him that can find help me without help I cannot find as much as a grain of reason in all or any part of it such reason at least as befits Mr. Br. who grounds all his Religion upon reason To the first Clause I stand stupified not knowing how to preach Christ to justification but as Christ the Justifier to pardon but as Christ the pardoner or to salvation but as Christ the Saviour Should I preach him as a condemner to justification as an unpardoning Judg to salvation As to his justifying me as he is a Law-giver either there hath been wanting something in Mr. B. dexteriry of teaching or in my docility to apprehend I am yet to be taught this lesson All that he hath said hitherto hath made it but odious and absurd and here hee saith no more to perfect it To that which follows the absurdity of it doth enough confute it self Who can endure to hear that the Apostles when they preached to Jewes and Pagans did and we if we should be sent to preach to the Turks and Indians must first preach Christ alone to justification and so generate in them a soul-ct zening faith But when once they become professors of the Christian Faith then the Apostles did and we must teach them better urging them no longer to cozen their souls with faith in Christ the Saviour but by their own works to justifie and save themselves He that delights in such a Gospel let him be Mr. B. disciple It seems he is angry with James for not helping him erewhile in his great exigency that he singles out him from all the Apostles to father him with this intolerable doctrine But whether James give him herein any relief hath been before examined As for the rest of the Apostles let Paul give the Testimony for himself and them There is one Lord and Mediator Christ Jesus one Faith one Baptisme one Lord and Father of all Ephe. 4. 5. 1 Tim 2. 5. Not two Christs and two Faiths one to cozen at first and the other to save the soul afterward If Paul or an Angell from heaven should preach any other Gospell then what you have heard from me at first while Pagans let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8. Therefore many years after the Romans and Galathians had been professors of the Christian faith he seeks to root them fast by faith alone in Christ and not to start from their first principles reducing such as went a whoring after works to help faith in justifying them pronouncing them accursed and Apostates from Christ that should so fall off from their first liberty in Christ That all obedience yea faith in Christ to all obedience vertue and good works is to be preached and urged upon them that profess the Christian faith is so true that he is but a maimed preacher of Christ that doth it not but all to sanctification not to justification This is the true Preacher of Christ that preacheth Christ to good works not works to win Christ that seeks to bring us into Marriage-union with Christ that we may bring forth fruit to God Rom. 7. 4. Not that we should bring forth bastard-fruit from another that we may be married to Christ But this is not Mr. Brs. business he speaks of fruit to justification To conclude what I have to say to this
not Trid. Conc. in the forecited place the only Condition of the New Covenant but severall other duties also are parts of that Condition I desire no more of those that deny this but that the Scripture may be judg Whosoever shall reduce the contrary Doctrine Bell. de Justif lib. 1. cap. 13 c. into practice viz. to seek salvation and Justification by faith only not at al by works it wil undâ—ubtedly damn him Those other duties that justifie are Repentance praying for pardon forgiving others Love sincere obedience works of Love i. e. all good works not faith alone or some of these works and vertues with it but all must have their concurrence to justifie Aphor. p. 235 236 237. 325. Nay so far are both parties from this Faith that Faith onely justifieth that Both teach we are justified by Works only For We are still said to be justified by Bell. de Justif lib. 1. Faith which is an Act of ours Append p. 80. Morall duties are part of the condition of our salvation aâ— for it to be performed And evâ— faith is a Morall duty So thâ— Daventria So Pemble cites the Papists objecting Treat of justif p. 37. according to Mr. Brs. doctrinâ— Morall works and duties alonâ— as such are required of us to Jâ—stification and not Faith it seâ— this way usefull but as a moraâ— work and duty Append. p. 80. When the Apostle saith by worâ— and not by faith only hee plainâ— makes them concomitant in procurâ—ment Bell. de necessitate operum ad salutem or in that kind of Causalâ— which they have especially seeing â— saith not as he is commonly inteâ—preted not by faith which is â— lone but not by faith onely â— the phrase Justified by works tâ— word by implyeth more than an â—dle concomitancy If they should onâ— stand by while Faith 〈◊〉 all â— would not be said we are justifiâ— by works Aph. p. 299 300. Faith in the largest sense as comprehendeth all the conditions See Weimrichius l. 1. in Epist ad Romanos c. 3. p. 207. the N C is when a sinner c. do beleeve the truth of the Gospell aâ— accept of Christ as his only Lord aâ— Saviour c. and sincerely thouâ— imperfectly obey him as his Lord foâ— Osor lib. 3. de Instit n. 70. giving others loving his people beâ—ring all what sufferings are imposeâ— diligently using his Means and Orâ—nances c. And all this sincerely â— to the end Aph. Thes 70. Apâ— Bel. lib 4. de Justif c. 10. Qu. de veritate honor operum p. 243. This personall Gospell-righteoâ—ness is in its kind a perfect Righâ—ousness and so far we may admit the doctrine of personall perfection Aphor Thes 24. The first point of Justification and that which is but a point the first point must needs be a very small pittance Bell. de Juâ—if lib. 1. â—ap 20. Malden in Matth. 9. of it I grant to be Faith alone but the accoÌ„plishment i. e. the perfitting thereof is not without the joynt procuremeÌ„t of obedience Aph. p. 302. In a Larger sence as promise is an obligation and the thing promised is â—el de Mer. called Debt so the performers of the Condition are called worthy and the thing promised is called Debt Thes â—ea all the â—apists as â—lleaged â—y Cal. Inst â—b 3. ca. 14. â—ect 12. â—ap 17. â—ect 3. 15. 26. Yea in this Meriting the obligation to reward is Gods ordinate Justice and the truth of his promise and the worthiness lieth in our performance of the Condition on our part Aph. pa. 141. As it was possible for Adam to have fullfilled the Law of works by that Bell. lib. 4. â—le Justif â—ap 1. power which he had received by nature So is it possible for us to fullfill the Conditions of the New Covenant i. e. the righteousness which the Law requireth by the power which we receive from the Grace of Christ But whether this be grace or no grace Pelagius his imaginary or the Gospel real grace he wil not let us know so that herein the Papists are more ingenious than he for they express themselves plainly of effectuall Grace indeed Thes 27. The Doctrine of Justification by Hos in Conâ—ut pa. 140 â—b 3. Faith onely tendeth to drive obedience out of the world For if men do once beleeve that it is not so much Canis inprefat in Andr. Vega Andr. Vega de Justif in Epist prefat Osor de Justif lib. 2 7. as a part of the Condition of their Justification will it not much tend to relax their diligence And it doth much confirm the world in their Soul-cozening Faith c. Aphor. pag. 325 326. It was not the intent of the Father Trident. Cone Sess 6. cap. 14 16. Sess 14. cap. 8 9. Bel. de Purgatorio Bel. de Poenitent lib. 4. or Son that by this satisfaction the offenders should be immediately delivered from the whole Curse of the Law and freed from the evill which they had brought upon themselves but some part must be executed in soul and body and remain upon them at the pleasure of Christ And this Curse is upon not onely affenders in generall but also upon the Elect and beleevers Aph. p. 65 66 68. Not till the day of Resurrection Judgement will all the effects of Sin Bellarmine and all his fellows Bel. de Justif lib. 4. cap. 7. Syn. Trid. ib. can 12. and Law wrath be perfectly removed from the beleevers justified Beleevers after they be justified are under the Law as it is a Covenant of works for life and death Aph. p. 78 79. 82. Onely a conditionall but not an absolute Andr. Vega de Fide operibus q. 2 So also Thomas Seotus Bellarmine discharge is granted to any in this life When we do perform the coÌ„dition yet still the discharge remains conditionall till we have quite finished our performance and where the condition is not performed the law is still in force shall be executed A. p. 82. The justification of beleevers in this life is conditionall ut supra Men that are but thus conditionally Bellarmine prosecuteth this Argument at large pardoned and justified may be unpardoned and unjustified again for their non-performance of the conditions and all the debt so forgiven be required at their hands so that there can be no certainty of perseverance to salvation Aph. Thes 44. He seems in the explication to lenifie his assertion but to it I have spoken before Our Legall Righteousnes is not personal or in our selves and in our own qualificatioÌ„s actions c. but wholly without us in Christ Our Evangelicall Bel. de justif Lib. 1. Righteousness consisteth in our own Actions of Faith Gospel obedience This is the onely Condition of our interest in the Righteousness of Christ Now by reason of this personall righteousnes consisting in the Recâ—â—tude of their own dispositions
and touching the righteousness thereof were blameless When contrarwise the Gentiles had walked inordinately lawlesly after the instinct of their own nature and lusts of their own hearts servants to idols and devills not to God For this Cause they Contended that they by this their righteousness had that the Gentiles by means of their unrighteousness had not right to the redemption and Justification which are by Christ That the Gentiles in stead of the naturall holiness before mentioned must become Proselytes and so the ascititious or adopted Children of Abraham becoming Jewes must receive the seale of the Covenant Circumcision in their flesh receive and be brought under the Law and become personally righteous in keeping it Else they could not be saved by Christ Act. 15. 1 24. Their bare Faith in Christ without their own righteousness and works could not make them partakers of the tighteousnesse and salvation which are by Christ And who seeth not here that Mr. Brs doctrine is one and the same in generall with theirs that were the first heretical troublers and subverters of the Church of Christ But against this plea of the beleeving Jewes the Apostle layeth his Contradictory Conclusion That both the Circumcision and the uncircumcision they that had and they that had not all or any of these kinds of righteousness were made partakers of Justification through Christ onely by Faith in him That our own prejacent works and righteousness are nothing to further nor our former unrighteousness and sinn any thing to hinder our Justification but Faith in Christ is all He that beleeveth is not condemned he that beleeveth not is already condemned whether he be Jew or Gentile clean or unclean outwardly because as he had said before ver 22 23. There is no difference For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God This Conclusion that Faith alone without our prejacent or concomitant works and righteousness do make the righteousness which is by Christ ours to Justification he proveth soundly in the 4th Chapter 1 From the example of Abraham the Father of the Faithfull By what means Abraham found and obteined the Justification which is by Christ by the same means all now obteine it that are Justified But Abraham found or obteiaed it not by his own righteousness or works but by Faith Therefore so do now all that are justified The proposition he leaves as standing so firm on its own pillars that none will dare to seek the demolishing thereof The assumption he proves in both its members that it was not by his own righteousnes either Natural i. e. derived from parents and ancestors for they were Idolaters and served other Gods Josh 24. 2. Or faederall in the Jewes sense for he was justified before he was circumcised and after received Circumcision as a seal of the Righteousness of Faith ver 10 11 of this 4th Chapter to the Romans or Legal For he was so Justified 400 years before the Law was given Or personall by the works of righteousness which he had done For then first he should have had matter of boasting that he had done something towards his own Justification ver 2. And secondly then his justification should have been reckoned not of Grace but of debt and so the glory thereof should have redounded to Abraham and not to God ver 4. And if by no one of these kinds of his own then not at all by his own righteousness That it was by Faith he proves by clear Testimony of Scripture ver 3. Therefore the conclusion stands that we are justified also by faith without works That Faith and not any righteousness of our own makes Christs righteousness ours Another Argument he draws from clear and evident Scripture witnessing that the righteousness and justification which consisteth in the forgivenes not imputing and covering of sinn is made ours without works therefore by Faith alone ver 6 7 8. When in these two Arguments none can deny but that the righteousness and Justification which Abraham obteined and which Consisted not in the doing but in the imputing of righteousness and in the pardoning and not imputing of sinn is the Justification which is by Christ and when the Apostle laboureth not at all to prove this to be The proper Righteousness to Justification but takes it as granted and unquestioned all must acknowledge that his question was not What righteousness it is that Justifieth whether Christs or ours But when all his dispute is confined to this one point to prove that this righteousness by Christ is made ouâ—s not at all by works but altogether by Faith what rational man can be so swayed by a Spirit of Contradiction as to say with Mr. Br. that St Pauls question was not to make out by what means this Justification by Christ may be made ours Whosoever will see these two Arguments further and fully illustrated and amplified together with more arguments to these annexed let him peruse the residue of this 4 Chap. And if he return with his Reason sound and brings not this verdit that it is impudence not judgement in Mr. Br. to state Pauls question as he doth Then am I a stranger both to Paul and Reason Again when the Apostle still insisting upon the same subject setts forth the priviledges of them that are justified by Faith doth withall affirm that while they were yet sinners Châ—ist dyed for them and so they became Justified by his bloud and being yet enemies are reconciled to God by his death Rom. 5. 1 8 9 10. thereby implying that there is nothing of our own works and righteousness except sin and enmity against God be such that doth or can Concurr to our justification so leaving justification to Faith onely it is evident that his principall question was not whether we are Justified by Christ but whether Faith alone or works with Faith are appointed of God in order to Justification I shall forbear to cite short testimonies from other Epistles of the Apostle evincing this Truth and pass to his Epistle to the Galathians in which he wholly levelleth to this mark It cannot be denyed by Mr. Br. himselfe that the Apostle there disputeth not of a legal but Gospel Justification and that this is a Justification onely by Christ that when he saith If any man if we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel c. his meaning is not a Justification out of Christ for this should be a legal not a Gospel Justification but any other way to the Justification which is by Christ save that which we have preached let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8 9. Herein it was agreed between the Apostle and the false Apostles that Christ is the alone Justifier and that salvation is onely by him and to this all the seduced ones among the Galathians assented Else had they been Apostate from Christ to the Law and not to another Gospel as the Apostle terms it Gal. 1. 6. And from their beginning in the Spirit to seek
hine libet it makes me not onely to wish but even to hold my self almost in a desart as impatient of the company of some of our distinctionary Rabbies that admire and are ready to blesse themselves at the wit and profoundness of such wilde barbarous prophane senseless distinctions of this incomparable man that hath not his Peer in England when in this piece of his worth there is not a ploughboy so rustick but would easily whistle so prophanely in this kinde as he And if the reason were given to Mr. Br. why he is in this artifice more full than others it might be given in the Poets words Non tibi plùs cordis sed minùs oris in est Bax. pa. 309. 3 Paul doth by the word Faith especially direct your thoughts to Christ beleeved in For to be justified by Christ and to be justified by receiving Christ is with him all one Though I might except in some sense against this assertion yet because I cannot apprehend waking what he dreams sleeping how he will from this assertion prove that Paul either doth not exclude works from Justification or doth not attribute it to Faith alone I leave it unexamined If by Receiving Christ he means our taking him as our Lord to be obeyed in all his Commandments that we might thereby be justified enough hath been said before in the examination of his 66 72 73 Thes in answer to the fourth Argument that he brings for justification by works unto it I refer the reader Bax ibid. 4 And when he mentioneth Faith as the Condition he alwayes implyeth Obedience to Christ Therefore beleeving and obeying the Gospel are put for the two summaries of the whole Conditions The vanity and falsity of this assertion hath been discovered in the examination of his 62 70 Theses in which is Comprehended his 2 Argument for Justification by works What is there said being perused will take off I suppose from the reader all expectation of any more to be here said to it Onely by the way all may note 1 That what he saith here labours of the same disease with the former it is onely said not proved We must all sit at the Feet of this Gamaleel and beleeve because this great Doctor and Magister noster hath spoken it 2 That although it be the Popish Cause which he here mainteineth yet he with a holy Craft makes use rather of the Arminian than Popish Phrase the more easily to beguile the simple Calling works not as the Papists do plainly Works but Obedience to Christ and Obedience to the Gospel How doth he fitt his bait to be swallowed by gudgeons that cannot discern a line from a halter He knows there is a generation of men that detest swines flesh yet feed every morning upon pistles of pork as the greate â—â—elicacie Change the name and they disaffâ—ct not the substâ—nâ—e 3 Yet what he here saith he hath received in matter though notiâ—n words from Stapleton the Priest and his fellows We are justâ—â—ed saith the Apostle by Faith not by works i. e. saith Stapletâ— not by works without faith but by works and Faith that is saith Mr. Br. not by works or obedience out of Faith but by works implyed in Faith Let him that can decide which of these two is the finer Sophistâ—r and Papist 4 And no less harmoniously do Pauls words and Mr. Brs exposition and distinction upon them agree together than a harp and a harrow Paul affirms Justification or imputation of Righteousness to be without works Rom 4. 6 Mr. Br expounds his meaning to be without works which are not but by works that are implyed in Faith As good a distinction as if I should distinguish between the brains that a man hath out of his head and the brain which he hath in his head How great is his self-Confidence that he should think such absurd distinctions should take with any rationall man onely upon this Authority because such a Cathedral scholar hath said it And when Paul saith so frequently Not by works but by Faith he should mean by Faith works also implyed in Faith This were to affirm that Paul in the delivery of the sacred doctrine of the Gospel speaks by Contraries and that what things he setts in opposition we must take to be in a Conjunction so that if he had said a man seeth with his eyes not with his heels we must understand him to mean that he seeth with his eyes and heels together or with his heels implyed in his eyes What he addeth of beleeving and obeying the Gospel that they are the two summaries of the Gospel hath been before examined and both found to be the same thing Obedience to the Gospel being nothing else but the hearts submission to the voyce of Christ and doctrine of the Gospel in stretching forth faith to apprehend Christ alone to Justification illumination sanctification c. resting upon him both for salvation and for grace and power to walk worthy of it as hath been more fully before expressed Thus much in way of examination of the third part of his vindication viz. that his doctrine in nothing dissents from Pauls And in this poynt I doubt not but we have found Paul and him no less Cohering than Christ and Antichrist CHAP. XXII Whether there be any validity in Mr. Brs Apologizing for his Doctrine that it is not derogatory from the Righteousness of Christ THe 4th part of his vindication is to free his doctrine of Justification by works from being derogatory to Christ and his righteousness Here unto his endeavours bend in many parts of this his Tractate In stead of all I shall mention onely two or three places which Comprehend the summe and whole of all the rest Bax. pa. 307. The Righteousness which we must plead against the Lawes accusations is not one grain of it in our Faith or works but all out of us in Christs satisfaction Again Appendix pa. 78. Our dooing or works are required not to be any part of our Legall Righteousness nor any part of satisfaction for our unrighteousness but to be our Gospel Righteousness or the Condition of our participation in Christ who is our Legall Righteousness and so of all the benefitts that come with him What his meaning is he expresseth Aphor. Thes 79. pa. 313. in a Syllogism thus This Doctrine is no whit derogatory to Christ and his Righteousness For He that ascribeth to Faith or obedience no part of that work which belongeth to Christs satisfactory righteousness doth not derogate in that from that Righteousness But he that maketh Faith and Obedience to Christ to be onely the fullfilling of the Conditions of the New Covenant and so to be onely Conditions of Justification by him doth give them no part of the work of his Righteousness Seeing he came not to fulfill the Gospel but the Law Ergo c. I shall speak onely to the Syllogism because in it is fully Comprehended all that Mr. Br. hath
Gospel Condition and necessary Antecedents to be really but a Cloke to hide his diminution of Christ and exaltation of sinfull man A Syrens song to draw poor souls to dash against the Rocks and be drowned in the gulph Why had he not made our works conjunctly vvith Christs satisfaction in his Thes 56. the procatarctick and meritorious cause of our Justification as well as he doth the satisfaction of Christ conjunctly with our Faith or obedience in the same Thesis the Causa ssne qua non thereof Had he so done could he have ascribed more to vvorks under the name of a Meritorious cause then he doth under the title of a poor improper Causa sine qua non But by so doing he should have shewed himself in the light when contrariwise he that doth evill hateth the light neither cometh to the light lest his deeds should be reproved Let now any of his Disciples produce I will not say one Arminian but one Socinian Papist yea or Jew that ascribes more to works then this man in derogation from Christ and Grace else let him cease to be a follower of him or openly and ingenuously profess that he followeth him as a Jew Papist or Socinian and consequently that he hath made not Mr. Br. but Mr Brs Masters his Master also in the doctrine of Justification And that in advancing self so high as to affirm he meriteth no less fully and properly then Christ himself hath or could have done For his merits are in order to Gods ordinate not naturall justice But to shew the vanity of his distinction here how carelesly he eludeth the holy Scriptures as meer shaddows and play-games the Apostle denyeth man in this or that or in any sense to be justified by works He saith not Not by works as the efficient or meritorious cause or as the Medium or Antecedent or Condition or Causa sine quâ— non lest any man should boast but positively and peremptorily not by Works as by Faith yea not by works in any acceptation upon any score and accompt Mr. Brs chippings therfore have no more force then a chip to make the Holy Ghost to unsay what he hath said And it is as good sense as if I should say Mans bread doth not apparrell him as it is the maker or matter or instrument or merit of his clothing but as it is the antecedent or medium or condition or Causa sine qua non of his apparrelling when contrariwise it doth not at all in any sense apparrell him CHAP. XXIV Mr. Baxters Sophism to prove that his Doctrine of Justification by Works doth not at all derogate from the Doctrine of Faith examined and found to be meer vanity BEcause the Scripture attributeth Justification to Faith without works and to Faith in opposition to works excluding works and requiring Faith alone to apprehend the Righteousnesse which is by Christ and denominating it the Righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. The Righteousnesse which is of Faith Rom. 9. 30. 10. 6. in opposition to the Righteousnesse of works He easily seeth that he shall be excepted against for his antiscripturall doctrine in making Faith and works Concomitants in the same kind of causality and procurement of Justification Therefore he makes it his sixth task to vindicate this his doctrine from all derogation from Faith and from all unscripturall confounding of Faith and works together To prove himself as innocent in this as in all the rest he brings these Reasons B. Thes 62. 1 Because though he makes Works and Faith to be the Conditions of our Justification yet according to Scripture phrase Faith may be called the onely Condition of the New Covenant 1 Because it is the principall Condition and works but the lesse principall And so as a whole Countrey hath oft its name from the chief City so may the Conditions of this Covenant from Faith 2 Because all the rest are reducible to it Either being presupposed as necessary Antecedents or means or conteined in it as its parts properties or modifications or else implyed as its immediate products or necessary subservient means or consequents All without Book one of Mr Brs Mysticks that hath no one sound of Gods word patronizing or favouring it Witnesse Mr. Br. who neither in his Thesis nor in its Explication hath alledged one Scripture to make it good Is Pythagoras come among us in a new body speaking nothing but Parables and Paradoxes which vulgar capacities can no more comprehend then they can Plato's Idea's or Democritus his Atomes If so it shall be needfull for him to injoin upon his Schollars as he did of old five years dumbnesse or silence Els if the mouth of a very Asse should be open it would rebuke the madnesse of the Prophet for delivering things so contradictive to the word to himself and to reason 1 To the word and the Holy Ghost speaking by it who every where opposeth Faith and works as to Justification making them to exclude not to infer or imply either the other By faith therefore not at all by works not by works therefore by faith alone But this man puts them in a conjunction makes Faith and works together the Condition of our justification from thence to conclude that Faith is the onely Condition and justifieth alone So much a greater Artist is Mr. Br. then the Holy Ghost and so ambitious of the praise of wisedome that he thinks himself to be but a vulgar idiot if his wisdom be not stretched Nine whole words by measure beyond and above the wisedom of the Holy Ghost 2 Contradictive to himself For Aph. p. 300. He denyeth that which he calleth an idle Concomitacny of works with Faith that they onely stand by while Faith doth all and concludes that they act together with faith in the same kind of causality to procure Justification and so denyeth that we are justified by Faith onely Here contrariwise he denyeth all such co-working of works with Faith but that faith may be said to be the onely Condition and to justifie onely 3 Contradictive to reason also and yet this next to Condition he seems to honour as the greatest God it must be to the Goats and sheep of the mountains not to Christs sheep to men that have reason that Mr. Br. must deliver this doctrine That we are justified not by faith alone but by works also yet it stands nevertheles as a firm Maxim faith is the onely condition or justifieth alone If the lips were shut and sealed up yet reason would use a ventriloquy or force a way thorow the ears to reclaim against such an absurdity If I should so reason of Condemnation the contrary to Justification that when the blind lead the blind and both fall into the ditch when seducers pervert those that are made to be taken and destroyed and so all utterly perish and are damned That tho all are damned yet it is but the leader and seducer alone that is damned he for all that he hath
seduced and they all but damned in him their principall and leader Would not Mr. Br be one of the first that would cry out at such an Arguing as absurd and not Logicall Yet because he is a man made up of the very spirits of Reason and brings his Reasons that his Assertion agrees with right reason according to the tenor of the Gospel I shall produce two or three in steed of many Gospel Scriptures and lay by them his Reasons to see how pertinently they will agree as a Commentary with the Text. The Holy Ghost tells us Eph. 2. 8 9. We are saved by Grace through faith not of works lest any man should boast Mr. Br. Comments upon this Text thus i. e. Principally by Faith least any man should boast principally of himself But not of works principally to exclude this principall boasting yet lesse principally of works also that man may also boast lesse principally of himself Or thus according to his second reason Of Faith and not of works unreducible to Faith lest any should boast yet of works also that by some relation or cognation are reducible to Faith that of such works we might boast Shall we call this a hatchet or a Comment upon the Text. Which of these Explications is the more absurd Or as if in this latter that runs more smoothly then the former we might not conclude so wisely of any morall vertue or duty When we are said to be justified by any or all good qualifications and works we are said to be justified by Mercy or Chastity or Wisdom onely because all other vertues and works are reducible to this by some one or other kind of relation or cognation Again Rom. 4. 16. It is of faith that it may be of grace the Antithesis whereof is given ver 4. Not of works that it might not be of debt The Comment which Mr. Brs first reason gives to this Text is Nay it is both of Faith and works works are comprehended in Faith as the lesse principall in the principall So that the meaning of the Text is that it is principally of Faith that it may be principally of Grace but lesse principally of works that at least less principally it may be of debt also His second reason thus Comments It is of Faith that is of Faith and works reducible to Faith that it may be of Grace not of works unreducible to faith such as are murther witchcraft Sodomy blasphemy c. that it may not be of debt Again Tit. 3. 5. Not by works of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us i. e. saith Mr. Br. Not principally by our works but according to his mercy Yet lesse principally by our works and not according to his mercy Or not by works of righteousnesse done by us that are not but according to Gods mercy that is reducible to Faith What else to make of it when he hath taught me I may divulge I might annex many Texts of the same nature upon which these two reasons of his set as Comments will speak out so much of sense as the Commentator doth in them of Conscience But I have fully both examined and anâ—wered before all that is comprised in this Thesis where I took occasion to weigh every branch thereof under the notion of his second Argument which he brings to prove Justification by works To it I refer the reader for fuller satisfaction B. 2 That he doth not derogate from faith in yoking works with it in the joynt procurement of justification because he doth not ascribe to works an equall part with it in this office or businesse but makes faith the more principall and works but the lesse principall part of the Condition granting our first Justification to be chiefly by faith and the second Justification onely by Obedience and ascribing the beginning or first point of Justification to faith alone and but the continuance and consummation thereof to works Aphor. Thes 74. p. 302 311 312. And in many other parts of his Book All this hath been fully and oft answered before Here onely I shall intreat the reader to retein in mind what hath been before pointed at 1 That the Gospel mentioneth not knoweth not any such distinction of a first and second Justification by Christ but speaks onely of one justification That this doubling of Justifications is but a juggling fancy of the Papists by them first created and by Mr. Br. licked into a finer mode and form for the pillaring up of their Justification by works which hath no proppage from the word 2 That according to Mr. Brs principles who caseth both together in one kind of causality it cannot be discerned how otherwise then by bare and glozing words any pre-eminence can be given so as duly to belong to Faith above and before works in this businesse 3 That even where and in what respects Mr. Br. gives a pre-eminence it belongeth more properly to works then to Faith Because the consummation and perfitting of Justification is so far more excellent then the beginning thereof as that which is perfect then that which is unperfect And herein he equalizeth and in som phrases seems to prefer works to Faith in their operation to perfect what is begun 4 That the Scripture affirms not onely the first but also the last point and period the consummation as well as the beginning of Justification to be by Faith By the Gospel the righteousnesse of God viz. which he giveth us to Justification is revealed from Faith to Faith saith the Apostle he saith not from Faith to works but from Faith to Faith that is omitting other Interpretations partly ridiculous and partly invalid and besides the scope of the Apostle from Faith inchoat to Faith growing and consummat or coming neerer and neerer to consummation This Exposition the choicest of our Divines give as both properly agreeing with the drift of the Text and as owned and patronized by the like phrase in other Scriptures From strength to strength Psal 88. 7. From glory to glory 2 Cor. 3. 18. which even all acknowledge to be understood from one to another from a lesser to a greater degree of strength and glory So also of this phrase from faith to faith And thus not onely the beginning but also the increase and consummation of Gospel Justification in our own Consciâ—nces before God is here attributed to Faith which as it groweth to more and more strength by apprehending more and more revelations of the Gospel so it more and more declareth and evidenceth to the soul the certainty of our Justification to the continuall stablishment and increase of our peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And thus the Magis and Minus is in us not in God and whatsoever of increase there is is from Faith not from works Nay the same Apostle tels us it is a most unglorious task which this uncomparably wise and profound man undertakes viz. to teach them that are wise
to be received both as a justifier and sanctifier declareth him to have descended from heaven both to justifie the ungodly and to sanctifie the justified That he is made unto us of God not onely Righteousness but Sanctification also To justifie us by an imputed and sanctifie us by an inherent righteousness The one by the effusion of his bloud the other by the infusion of his Spirit That his office is not onely to satisfie justice for us that we may live but also to new principle and create us that we may live to God Not onely to redeem us from all iniquity but withall to purifie us into a peculiar people zealous of good works In whom both these works are not in good measure neither of them is in any measure effectually accomplished That sanctification is the purchase of Christs bloud but the immediate effect of his Spirit merited by his death but Conferred and Communicated by his life as all power both in heaven and in earth is given into his hand and as he is ascended on high to give gifts to men That both imputed and inherent righteousnes as termined and actually existent in and upon man proceed from his union unto Christ That Sanctification is as great and glorious a work as Justification and our real as our relative holiness and righteousness Neither could it be discerned so cleerly how we were quickened in Law raised from the dead who were dead in sinns and trespasses and so passed from death to life from Condemnation to salvation by the forgiveness of sinn were we not also quickened raised up from under the death and bondage of sinn no more to serve sinn but as alive from the dead had our fruit and living motions to practicall holines and righteousness That as well our sanctification as our Justification is in Christ and both from him derivable to us by Faith in him That Faith is qualified by God to apprehend Christ both to purifie us by his bloud and to sanctifie us by his Spirit and so becomes instrumentall both to Justification and sanctification yet by a twofold Act as the Condemned Traytor extends one and the same hand to receive from his gracious Prince a pardon of his Treason and a Commission to be his vice-gerent in some Noble and magnificent office therein to serve his Prince promote the welfare of his Countrey and make his own name and person famous and pretious in the eyes of all men among whom his present vertuous behaviour and Noble atchievements may wipe off and bring to oblivion the stain of his former delinquency That one and the same a chief end of our Justification by Christ is our sanctification the fruits thereof here inchoat and increasing hereafter Consummate and perfected Therefore are we delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we may serve him without Fear in holiness and righteousness Luk. 1. 74 75. Therefore are we dead to and delivered from the Law by the body of Christ that we should be married to another even to him that is raised from the dead that we might bring forth fruit to God and serve not in the oldness of the letter but in the Newness of the Spirit Rom. 7. 4 6. Christ hath made us Kings and Priests or a Royall Priesthood unto God to offer up living sacrifices acceptable to God through him 1 Pet. 2. 5 9. Rev. 1. 6. To our instalment therein are pre-required the sanctification of Consecration and the sanctification of habitual righteousness and holiness infused into us and set in actual operation in us The former of these is done chiefly by the sacrificed bloud of Christ sprinkled upon the Conscience and the sacred vestiments of his Righteousness put on by Faith as was typified primarily of Christ the High Priest and secondarily of the Priesthood of Saints under the kingdome of Christ by the Consecration of Aaron and his sonns with the bloud of the Altar sprinkled on them and the putting on of holy vestiments upon them their own being Cast off Lev. 8. The latter Chiefly by the Spirit of Christ in livening enabling and acting them to the work and worship for which they are Consecrated and I know not but this may be also figured in the ordination of the Priests under the Law by the Anoynting oyl in the same Chapter mentioned and used That differs but little from Justification as termined to this its end This differs not at all from sanctification when it is taken in the sense wherein the scriptures often and our Divines still use it when they distinguish between Justification and sanctification viz. in its active sense the inspiration of the habits of holiness and righteousness in its passive sense the same habits inspired into the soul Whosoever wanteth either of these prerequisits to this sacred office we grant him to be but a titular Priest a Mock-Saint For without Consecration to offer as a Priest speaks him an usurper And to profess Priest and not to offer speaks him a rebell and revolter We own no sanctification by the Spirit of Christ which hath not Justification by his bloud in order going before it nor any Justification or forgiveness by the death of Christ which hath not sanctification by his Spirit in order of nature following it Thus we do not as the Papists and Mr. Br. learning from the Papists object calumniously exclude works from the life of a Christian but assert them to be necessary to a Christian life so necessary that without them whosoever is Capable of working is no Christian Though we exclude them from Justification yet we include them in sanctification their habits as parts in the whole their acts or themselves acted as fruits thereof Nay we do not deny in a good sense some kind of Causality which they have to sanctifie that is to the increase of sanctification To him that hath it shall be given and he shall have more abundantly Well done good and faithfull servant thou hast been faithfull in a little I will make thee Ruler over much c. saith our Saviour Ask and ye shall have seek and ye shall finde knock and it shall be opened to you The ground or earth which drinketh in the Rain which cometh oft upon it and bringeth forth herbs or fruit c. is neer to a blessing But that which bringeth forth bryars and thorns is rejected and neer to cursing c. Heb. 6. 7 8. with many other the like Testimonies of Scripture which it would be superfluous here to recite How then do we in the least measure blunt the edge of mens affections to good works by teaching that they do not justifie when we affirm them necessary to sanctification If Mr. Br. should affirm that Bread and Wine and other Creatures appropriated to mans nutriment are not ordeined of God to Clothe him or that his garments are not ordeined of God to Feed him doth he therein minister to me just Cause to exclaym against him that
or else be free and absolute and in what sense it may be granted to be Conditional pa. 1. p. 108. to 118. The numerousnesse and withall unprofitablenesse of the Conditions which Mr. Br. assigneth part 2. p. 31 32. His vain ascribing to Conditions part 2. p. 26 83 108 109 c. 272 273. His Reasons to prove it examined part 1. p. 353 to 356. The hurtfullness of the contrary doctrine which Mr. Br mainteineth part 1. p. 351-353 His dispute to prove it still after we are in Christ to remain Conditional par 1. p. 292. to 308. VVhat the judgment of the Protestant Divines in this point is part 2. p. 17 to 22. 204 205. The promulgation offer of it may be granted Conditionall but once in being and possession it is absolute part 1. p. 355 356. The rashnesse of some Ministers in closing with Mr. Br. in this his Popish Arminian doctrine pa. 2. p. 22 23 25 237. Whether the Covenant of Grace were originally made between the Father and the Son and what the Covenant was and upon what terms so made p 1. p. 99. to 107. What relation all the other Covenants made in time between God and man had to this ibid. Mr Br. after the Papists distinguisheth between the Commands and Counsels of the word part 1. p. 213 214. The doctrine of Justification by Faith alone not a soul Cozening doctrine p 2. p. 173 c. Beleevers not under the Curse as the Curse or revenging punishment for sin part 1. largely discussed from p. 24. to p. 61. The Question stated ib. p. 32. c. The Reasons brought by the Protestant Writers to prove the Negative against the Papists ib. p. 33. to 37. Mr. Brs Arguments for the Affirmative ib. p. 29-31 His Arguments answered ib. p. 38. to 49. How many wayes popish and pernicious this his doctrine is ib. p. 49. to 62. D Darkening in stead of cleering Truths common to Mr. Br. with the Papists part 1. p. 5 9 10. The Death and blood of Christ onely expiatory and satisfactory to Justification part 2. p. 64 65 67. to 70. VVhether Justification admit of Degrees or magis minus part 1. p. 286. to 291. VVhether the Devil shall manage the accusation of men in the day of Judgement part 1. p. 281. Distinctions in Divine matters not grounded upon the word viz. Arts Sophistry Doctrines not to be judged of after the personall splendour of their Authors pref p. 4 5. Doe viz. Life and Live E VVhether it be Easie to perswade men to embrace Justification by Faith but difficult by works part 2. p. 181. to 184. Sanctification a sure Evidence of Justification so convertibly pa. 2. 176. to 178. In what respects good works do so Evidence ib. F Faith without works not competent to justifie according to Mr. Br. part 2. p. 4. How farre he followeth the Papists in the doctrine of implicit Faith part 1. p 1 2 3 c. His doctrine herein directly pointed against the Protestants ib. p. 4. We must not admit doctrine of Faith upon the authority of our Teachers ib. p. 6. The evils attending the doing thereof ib. p. 7 8. Mr. Brs wild and irregular definition of Faith to prove justification by works discovered to be ridiculous pa. 2. p. 56. c. The doctrine of the Protestants about Faith and works part 2. p. 174. c. What Mr. Br. meaneth by Faith or his To credere part 2. p. 71. c. How different Mr. Brs sense is from some of the Protestant writers that with him call Faith the Condition of justification part 1. p. 349 350. Forgiving of others not a Condition of Gods justifying and forgiving us part 2. p. 31 33 c. to the 37. Mr. Brs Fraud in hiding all that the protestants have written against his popish doctrines part 2. p. 17 18. 128 129. G The Genius of men when conspiring is apt to draw each other into truth or error pref p. 10 11. By what means the Gospel was so much and so suddenly propagated at the begining of the Reformation by Luther pref p. 39 40. How the further propagation of it was stopped ib. p. 40 41. Gospel Comforts are Antidotes against sin and carnall liberty not fomenters of it par 2. p. 162 163 167 168. Mr. Brs Reasons to prove his doctrines not to be legall and against the Gospel examined part 2. p. 266. to p. 276. Whether or in what respects Christ hath or hath not satisfied for sins against the Gospel as for sins against the Law p. 1. p. 219-227 Whether works as holpen by Grace justifie part 1. p. 139. to 143. Mr. Br. the papists vainly make this their common plea to excuse their arrogance in ascribing justification to works ib. p. 175 176 H Whether beleevers ought to serve for fear of Hell part 2. p. 155-157 Hiding viz. Fraud I What the judgment of many learned protestant Divines hath been and is about justification as an Immanent and eternal act in God part 1. p. 231. to 238. What Scriptures they bring to prove the affirmative ib. p. 238. to 247. Mr. Brs dispute against them examined ib. p. 248-262 Faith the Instrument of justification p. 1. p. 330. And the some both Gods and mans Instrument and in what sense each is such ib. p. 332 334 336 to 341. Mans Instrument 334-336 342-348 Mr. Brs cavils against this doctrine answered ib. p. 358. to 361. 364. to 368. 370. Whether believers as well as the reprobates shall be judged for according to their works in the last day largely discussed against Mr. Br. p. 2. p. 124-136 Whether the Scriptures which speak in the future tense of justifying do denote the day of Judgment p. 1. p 278-280 Judgment viz. Devil 282. The State of the question between Mr. Br and the Protestants about Justification by works Part 2. p. 4 5 6. Justification by works denyed ibid. c. Scriptures produced to prove that Workes have no part with Faith in justifying ibid. p. 10. to 17. The Scriptures cited by Mr. Br to prove the contrary assertion examined ibid. Chap. 3. VVhether according to his own principles he rightly calleth Faith the more and works the less principall Condition of Justification ibid. p. 49. 51 278 279. And if so whether this proveth that when we are said to be justified by Faith onely we are said to be justified by works also and yet justified by Faith alone ibid. Or whether the Reducibleness of all works to faith in some kinde prove it ibid. p. 49 50 52 53-56 278 279. Justification considerable in 3 respects 1 in God 2 in Christ 3 in our own persons and how in every of these Part 1. p. 89 -91. Mr. Brs distinction of justification and pardon into Title of Law and sentence of Judgement Constitutive and Declarative virtuall and Actuall examined and proved unscripturall and vain and his reasons to prove a Justification in the day of Judgement answered
VVhether the inherent Righteousness of Beleevers be perfect Part 1. p. 181 to the 186. Whether Faith as our Righteousness Justifie Part 1. p. 366-368 S. What to judge of some passages that fell from Mr. Saltmarsh his pen. Part 1. p. 138. Salvation twofold the state of Grace and of Glory Part 2. p. 104 105. In the former sense it is the same with Justification ibid. p. 105. Whether in the latter sense it runs upon the same Conditions with Justification ibid. p. 105 Mr. Brs arguing for the affirmative proved fallacious and invalid ibid. p. 102 oth e 1 12. The Scriptures which he alledged to prove works the condition of Salvation found incompetent and invalid to prove it ibid. p. 116. to the 123. As soundly may we argue from Justification to Salvation that it is universally conditionall as convertibly p. 1. p. 331. Satisfaction vid. death Schoolmens Learning and studies described Pref. p. 37 38. Mr. Br. pretends to admit the Scripture as Judge in the Controversie of Justification by works but fallaciously Pa. 2. p. 7 8. What Scriptures he produceth to prove Justification by works pa. 2. p. 25 c. These all collected by the Papists to his hands ibid. These severall Scriptures examined whether they make for him ibid. p. 25. to the 48. His calumny that the Protestants wrest and implyedly that the Papists truly expound the Scriptures ib. p 9 85 86 87 89. Whether and in what respects God doth see or not see sinn in his pâ—ople Part. 1. p. 70. to 72. Signes vid. Evidences Similies prove not but illustrate what is proved Part 2. p 172. Sincerity what it is Part 1 p. 210. Whether the Gospel requires Perfection or sincerity onely ibid. p. 208. to the 217. Part 1. p. 270. Reasons ministring doubts of Mr. Baxters much applauded sincerity Pref. p. 5. to the 9. Mr. Brs oft excusing himself from affectation of Singularity true yet examined upon what grounds it is true and that he doth it Part 1. p. 331. Whether and how far Mr. Brs doctrine is tainted with or free from Socinianism part 2. p. 229. to the 234. Mr. Brs Sophistry and the evils thereof discovered p. 1. p. 8. to 21. 284. to 281. Sophisticall distinction how pernicious part 1. p. 180 189 278 382. How incoherent with the mind of Christ ib. p. 350. Whether to affirm that Christ Suffered the idem for us denies pardon and free grace part 1. 229 230. T Tertullians judgment of secular intermixed with Divine learning in Gospel matters pref p. 34 35. The Testimonies of those eminent writers whom Mr. Br. citeth as Patrons of his opinion manifested to be against him not for him part 2. p. 197-208 W Word alone competent to determine in Gospel matters pref p. 16 18. to 21. Works and duties co-ordinate with Faith to justifie according to Mr. Br. part 2. p. 4. what duties and works these are ib. p. 5. In what consideration and sense he makes them to justifie ibid. How far we are justified by them before men viz. Charity Mr. Brs and the Papists arguing from St. James for justification by works examined and refelled part 2. p. 184 to 102. His arrogant ascribing to works under his Causa sine qua non or condition part 2. p. 274-276 VVhether when we are said to be justified by Faith works be comprized in faith part 2. p. 281. to 284. How apt mans nature is to put it self under the Covenant of works part 2. p. 285 286. Mr. Brs untoward question answered whether if God had ordeined any work or vertue to justifie it should not have done it part 1. p. 379. c. In what sense our Divines say God justifieth first the person then his actions pa. 1. p. 193 194. Covenant of works see Law More of works see Life and Live Grace and Justification In what sense and respects the Scripture calleth the Saints worthy part 1 p. 187 188. FINIS
yet it follows not thence that the same Righteousnes performed is a perfect righteousnes though it be sufficient and effectuall to the end to which God ordeined it to be performed God required the use and sound of Trumpets and voices to destroy and lay levell with the earth the strong walls and Towers of Jericho and the washing in Jordan to Cleanâ—e Naaman of his Leprosie and the washing in Siloam to Cure the Man that was born blinde of his blindness These were ordeined as severall Conditions in order to those severall ends and being performed became sufficient and effectuall to the attainment thereof Shall we say then that the performance of these Conditions was their perfect righteousnes which performed them So neither if God had appointed Faith which according to Mr. Br is sanctification as a Condition of our Justification is the performance thereof our perfect righteousnes 3 This sufficiency of that which Mr. Br calleth perfect righteousnes in order to its end is no more in from it self than the before-mentioned noyces and washings were in themselves to the attainment of their ends But the sufficiency thereof is wholly from the righteousness faithfulnes and all sufficiency of God to fullfill the promises of his grace So that what he saith of beleeving in the highest degree and beleeving in sincerity is besides the matter in question Both together if they could be performed according to the tenor of the new Covenant not being of sufficiency to make up a perfect righteousnes Therefore we conclude in Mr. Brs words That our Righteousnes formally considered in relation to the condition of the new Covenant is so far from being a perfect Righteousness that it is none at all I have nothing els to say against that wherewith he concludes his explication of the Thesis enumerating the many respects in which this imaginary righteousnes of man is imperfect and consequently sinfull But this that it displayes the sin and impudency of the man that he will call that a perfect righteousnes which himself confesseth to be so deficient rotten and unrighteous Thesis 26. pag. 137. In the 26 Thesis he addeth to the perfection of Mans righteousnes merit or meritoriousnes also In my exception against him upon this point I shal take notice 1 of his position or asserting of this doctrine 2 of his lenifying mitigating the roughnes thereof that it may go down the more gently pleasantly In both which it shall suffice to shew that he speaketh the same things with the Papists his Masters that in their Tone also though I do not ex professo undertake a full Confutation of the doctrine it self leaving the reader to fetch it from those many Orthodox Divines that have copiously unanswerably done it against professed Papists In this I shall seemingly cross yet really follow Mr. Brs method putting first what was the first primary purpose of his heart to hold out unto the world viz. that our Righteousnes is meritorious though in a pretty subtlety he puts it last both in the Thesis in its explication and last that which he puts first viz. his limitation mitigation of so arrogant a doctrine which he doth so trimly â—eatily that if his reader be a fool it is possible he may think Mr. Br to deny and not to assert here the doctrine of merits though there were never any of the worst Papists that hath asserted it higher than Mr. Br here doth His assertion of merits then runs in these words in the Aphorism it self B In a large sense as promise is an obligation and the thing promised is called debt so the performers of the Conditions of the New Covenant are called Worthy and their performance Merit though properly it is all of Grace and not of Debt Rom. 4. 4 10. And all those Scriptures which he annexeth and I have before in adding this to the 24th Thesis transcribed 1 His assertion of Merit in mans righteousnes is here layd down in a Connexive proposition The performers of the conditions of the new Covenant are called Worthy their performance Merit If both members of the proposition be not true if either fail the proposition is false But where doth he mean these are so called in the Scriptures which he here annexeth all men will it is questionles his meaning is that all shall conceive For to say that they are so called by Popish Writers were to make his doctrine suspected not accepted But neither in these nor any other Scriptures are they so Called therefore his proposition is false The 13 first Scriptures alleaged affirm the contrary deny all worth all merit in our persons righteousnes pronounce the reward to be of grace not of debt a gift not a payment given freely without desert all this so fully that it appears the Holy Ghost had an aim not onely to stop the mouths of the mercenary Jewes then but also of the Popish Justiciares now whom he foresaw as enemies to the doctrine of Grace And the last six Scriptures here alleaged prove onely that the Scriptures call the Saints worthy but neither in these nor in any other Scripture can he finde that their performances are called merit or their Justification here or glorification hereafter debt 2 By the way we may take notice of his fallacious sophistry to deceive the simple in making the whole worth of the performers to consist in their performances because the performers of such an act are called worthy therefore there must be merit and worth in the performance Which is grounded upon as good reason as if I should say The Murtherer of Vriah and the abjurer of Christ were counted worthy of justification and glory Therefore was there an unproper worth at least in the ones murther the others abjuration to Justice save them None of these nor any other Scriptures do affiâ—me in express words the performers of the conditions of the new Covenant Worthy much lesse as they are performers and least of all that the performance hath worth or merit in it 3 Besides there is a great difference between Gods Dignari mans DignuÌ„ esse between Gods accounting or reckoning man worthy mans being worthy in his own deserts so that those Scriptures Lu. 20. 35. Lu. 21. 36. 2 Thes 1. 5 11. that speak of Gods accounting men worthy do not import or imply any worth in a mans own qualifications performances but a worth which God hath put upon him by imputation viz. Christ in them the bloud of Christ sprinkled upon their Conscience Christs merits imputed to them they being found in Christ the righteous not in Adam the unrighteous As the Israelites were accounted worthy of deliverance from destruction which fell upon the Egyptians in the day of Gods passing over Egypt but how worthy surely not in respect of their own righteousnes but in respect of the worth of the Paschal Lambs bloud sprinkled upon their door-posts In this sense is also that
of Rev. 3. 4. to be taken And hereunto runs the whole tenor of the Gospel making not our own righteousnes works but Christ in us the hope of Glory i. e. all the ground and worth upon which we may Cherish within our selves a lively hope of glory Col. 1. 27. 4 The word worthy in Scriptures oft signifieth Meet beseeming answerable to as Ma. 3. 8. Bring forth fruits worthy of Repentance Eph. 4. 1. Walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called Col. 1. 10. Walk worthy of the Lord. The meaning is that we should bring forth fruits beseeming the repentance which we profess walk agreeable unto in ways becoming our holy vocation answerable to the Grace of God in the Lord Jesus Christ not to make our selves worthy of the gift of repentance of so high a vocation of so glorious a Christ to be conferred upon us And in the same sense are those other scriptures Ma. 10. 11 12 13 37 22. 8. alleaged here by Mr. Br to be taken Where those that are termed worthy or unworthy of Christ and his Gospel are meant to be such as carry themselves in a way becoming or not becoming Christ and his Gospel preached to them Without any hinting at an imaginary worth or Merit in their performances that might make them deservers of Christ and the grace of the Gospel as is easie to be made out from the very Texts here alleaged if there were need thereof Thus it appears to be false either that in a larger sense promise is an obligation the thing promised is called Debt or that the performers of the coÌ„ditioÌ„s are called worthy their performance merit in the scriptures And consequently neither the fallacies nor the falsities of Mr Br do any thing avail him here to the setting up of Mans the frustrating of Christs Merits which is the scope of his levelling The explication in reference to this part of the Thesis hath nothing that may be called an addition to it Onely there pag. 141. as here in describing the third kinde of meriting he tels us that The obligation to reward is Gods ordinate Justice the truth of his promise the worthines lyeth in the performance of the Conditions on our part He doubted it seems that we would have taken him notwithstanding that which he had said equipollent with this in the Thesis to have had some seed of Christian modesty humility remaining in him that he had not totally forsworn all self-deniall unless he should express therefore hath expressed himself at the ful here to be ful of self-arrogance But in this doth he declare his intolerable contempt of the word that having himself quoted at the least 13 testimonies of scripture all with one harmony affirming that Gods Gospel dispensations are free of meer grace mercy without any reference to our works righâ—eousness that Gods grace mans works or worth cannot stand together but that they destroy either the other in reference to Justification salvation That mans merit in any respect without difference is a subversion and denyall of Gods grace in all respects For all this he shall find that will but peruse the 13 first scriptures which Mr B. quoteth in this Thesis yet he doth elude all w th this frothy distinction in the beginning of the same Thesis True Our Performances cannot be said to Merit in the most strict proper sense c. but in a larger sense they may What is this but to oppose the sacred verity of the most high God with the froth of mans wit what Scripture shall henceforth stand in its venerable Majesty authority if the boldnes of a corrupt worm shall thus puff it to nothing Of all other men I conceive Mr Br hath most need to make grace alone free Mercy his refuge For of all that I have met with accounted Members of any of the reformed Churches I never found any whose very meritorious services as he terms them such as this work of his is have more provocation in them But thus farr of his assertion which we have found full of the Leaven or rather to be the Leaven it self of the Scribes and Pharisees both of the former and latter ages Let us see now how he lenifieth sweeteneth it that his sacrilege in robbing God of the honour of his grace appear not B We ascribe not Merit saith he in the Thesis to our works as Merit is taken in its most proper and strict sense seeing there is nothing in the value of it or any benefit that God receiveth by it which may so entitle it Meritorius Neither is there any proportion betwixt it and the reward but in a larger sense as promise is an obligation and the thing promised is debt c. Yet in the explication p. 138 he grants to man a capacity of Meriting somwhat at the hands of God in this sense also lest he should seem to acknowlege that there are some of the worst reprobates yea devills that have not at all merited from God But of these he Concludes p. 139. that it is a poor kind of Meriting which they can boast of yet without some Merit that of good from the Justice of God he will not leave them destitute But in the Conclusion of the explication pag. 141. he adds somewhat more to take off the harshnes of his self-ascribing doctrine of Merit thus B This kinde of Meriting is no diminution to the greatnes or freenes of the Gift or Reward because it was a free and gracious Act of God to make our performance capable of that title and to engage himself in the foresaid promise to us and not for any gain that he expecteth by us or that our performance can bring him Lo ye now the strength of this mans wit that can blow heaven earth into a confusion with one breath with the next breath sett both into their due place and order again Nothing inferior is the slight of his wit to the slight and dexâ—erity of that head-mans hand that is reported so nimbly to execute his office that having cut off the head he left it standing without any wagging upon the shoulders still So this man hewes off the honour of Gods grace yet leaves it in all its glory without diminution still Yet let us reckon with the man a little Can he name any one of the worst Papists or Jesuits that doth attribute Merit to mans works in a higher degree than or doth not when he hath extolled mans Merits salve the grace of God as finely as himself Are not his words and theirs about Gods Grace and mans merits the same Doth he add any thing here of his own that he hath not learned of them We cannot merit saith Mr Br in the most strict and proper sense Why Alas saith he There is nothing in the value of our works or any benefit that God receives by them that may
Law they understand sometimes the Decalogue or Law of the ten Commandments Sometimes the Law of Nature or naturall Righteousness imprinted in mans heart at his first creation Here taking it for granted that Mr. Baxter meaneth by the Morall Law the doctrine of the Law considered as a rule of Righteousness not as a Covenant of Works If 1. he mean by the Morall Law all Commandements both of naturall and positive right I deny the Morall Law so taken to be in the whole and in every part now in force If 2. he mean by it the Decalogue or Law of the tenne Commandements as it was given upon Mount Sinai in time so himself knoweth it to bee the judgement of many Divines that it bound the Nation of Israel alone was not at all given to the Gentiles doth not at all bind us that are not of the Naâ—ion of Israel otheâ—wise then it clears up to us the Law of Nature written in our hearts which dâ—th bind us or as the duties thereof are required of us in the New Testament by the Lord Christ whom we acknowledge to be our King See Zanchius Tom. 4. lib. 1. cap. 11. Thes 1. Where he fully handles and confirms this assertion adding moreover Sic etiam insignes Theologi omnes sentiunt i. e. All Divines of note aâ—e of this judgement Withall that there are some things contained in some of the ten Commandements not pertaining to the jus naturae save in their genus and that somewhat remote I know Mr. Baxter will not deny and if I thought any else would question it it were easie to be demonstrated But if he mean by the Morall Law the Law of Nature as aforesaid as it is written in the heart yea as it is further illustrated either by the book of the Creatures or by the Decalogue as it is epitomized in Tables of stone and explained and amplified in both Testaments so I grant the Moral Law to be still in force viz. as a directive of Moral obedience still What Mr. Baxter addeth viz. to what ends and in what sense the Gospel continueth that law and commandeth perfect obedience thereto is a question not very easie is to me a strange speech in many respects For 1. I cannot see how the question can be difficult to him that will not Nodum in scirpo quaerere make the plaine wayes of God rugged by filling them up with bryars and thorns To the same most honourable ends and in the same sense is it continued for and in which it was first given I mean to the same ends in general though not in every far remote particular First to make his glory elucent in this Microcosm this choice peece of his Workmanship Man is the glory of God saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 7. How but as he bears the image of God not onely in rule and dominion but also in wisdome holyness and righteousness to manage that authority and rule wherewith the grace of God hath invested him And this glory of God upon man is by so much the more conspicuous by how much the more perfectly he resembles God in wisdom righteousness and holyness Besides it was both given and continued to direct and enable man in some measure to render to God his Pepper-corn as Mr. Baxter terms it in testification of his homage and thankfulnesse both for the favours received and for the favours promised without the guidance of the Morall Law written without us yea within us also we should though our affections were never so sweetly sanctifyed for lack of sound illumination present God with wild grapes in stead of grapes with an abomination instead of due obedience and devotion And are not these ends as requisite in the state of mans Renovation as they were in the state of his innocency Yea further unpossible was it that Christ should not continue the Morall Law no lesse unpossible then it is for God to be unrighteous or not God He came to fulfill all righteousnesse not to destroy any one branch of naturall and essential righteousness The Morall Law is the image of God in which we may read the nature of God The rule and platform is in God himselfe originally this is but an extract from it and abstract of it Christ came to restore it not to quench it to set it up in man to perfection not to deface it by any diminution For so should he have abased the glory of his Father shining in his living image And lastly not to have commanded perfect but a maimed obedience thereto had been against the rule of righteousness which bids us to render to every one his due his whole due To God the things that pertain to God yea the whole that pertains to him All is but a Pepper-corn to a whole kingdome of Grace held and of glory expected from him and should not Christ require the payment of a Pepper-corn whole and entire without diminishing or dividing it But the truth is that the question is difficult to bee answered without crushing Mr. Baxters Gospel Justification by Works not in reference to Christs Gospel Justification by free Grace with it the Commandement of perfect obedience to the Morall Law sweetly cohereth The command of perfect obedience to the Morall Law as a condition of Justification leaves all men hopelesse of Justification sure to condemnation for ever Because none can perform the condition in this life But when we are justified freely by the blood of Christ and then by way of answering the grace of our Justifier with our reall thankfulness we are bidden to render our obedience more and more perfectly not slacking our endeavours untill we come to full perfection Though we attain it not in this present life yet our not attainment doth but encrease our self-abasement and make us feele that Christ is our all and we are nothing but doth in no wise destroy our Justification or lessen the joy of the Holy Ghost and peace of conscience which are bottomed only and wholly upon Christ and not upon our selves at all Now let us see how he will make the question difficult to us as it must be to him First saith he it is a question Whether Christ did first repeale that Law and then re-establish it to other ends So some think A meer windy question of such as delight to play with God in contempt as the Froggs with Jupiters Log. Where are those some thinkers No lesse rationally might they feign that the Lord Jesus pluckt down his Father Josephs house re-edified it to this other end that men might goe in and out no more at the doors but at the windows Mr. Baxter washeth his hands clean from having a finger in this pye Nay saith he I have proved already that it is not repealed at all even concerning the Covenant of Works it self i. e. That Christ is so farre from taking from us the perfect rule of righteousnesse that he however hee be called a Saviour yet hath left all
Qu. 14. that he so layeth this position that he may thereby lay a ground-work for Justification by works Doth Dr. Preston to this end make Christ as Lord the object of Justifying Faith or any where affirm him to be offered as a Law-giver or Commander of morall works and duties to our justifying Much less doth he affirm that such works have any thing to do with Faith in justifying A notable skill hath Mr. Br in confounding when he should divide and distinguish and in distinguishing when there is no need as either may serve to his purpose He knowes that Dr. Preston when he treats of the New Covenant comprehends under it the whole doctrine and all the Promises of Grace made Yea and Amen in Christ as the same Christ is given to us not onely to Justification but also to regeneration illumination sanctification and whatsoever the Grace of the Eternall Father hath made him to us And when he treats of Faith he handles it as the instrument by which not onely Justification but also all the other benefits of Christ may be made ours in receiving Christ the treasury spring of all appropriated to us Therefore in describing the New Covenant he describes it in generall as the womb of all the blessings which are attainable by Christ and not of Justification and Salvation alone And in describing Faith he describes it as the instrument by which we apprehend and appropriate to our selves not onely Christ as righteousness and salvation but also as wisedome and sanctification yea all that tends to the perfecting of a poor sinner to our selves Therefore is it that he speaks more largely of the Covenant and treats more fully of it then needed if he had been to speak of it onely to Justification and Blessedness and that he speaks of Faith more largely and mentioneth other acts of it then are required to this one end And necessarily must he so do else should he have maimed both the Covenant of Grace and the Faith of Christ Here whatsoever Dr. Preston speaketh of the Covenant and Faith in generall of which some part belongeth to the interessing of us to sanctification and other blessings which are by Christ Mr. Br to beguile his Reader confoundeth and confineth to Justification as being spoken of it alone When contrariwise the Doctor doth enough cleerly express the distinct benefits of the Covenant and the distinct acts of Faith receiving the distinct benefits in the very words which he alledgeth out of him App. p. 117. Thou shalt receive the gift of Righteousness wrought by him for an absolution for thy sins and for a reconciliation with me This is our Justification And thereupon thou shalt grow up in love and obedience towards me This is our sanctification But suppose he should have affirmed that Faith as it cleaveth to Christ not onely for the sprinkling of his blood for Justification but withall for the effusion of his spirit to sanctification and the shedding forth of his beams for illumination and the stretching forth of his Almighty arm for supportation c. doth in all these acts justifie as some Divines do seem to speak though without prejudice to their reputation not enough advisedly yet both he and they are so far from making either the most spiritual knowledge and wisedom which are the immediate fruits of illumination or love righteousnes and holines and their acts or works which are the immediate fruits of sanctification to be in any respect usefull to justification that they utterly deny peace joy and hope the immediate fruits of Justification to be any way effectuall and usefull in this business But I find not Dr. Preston any where laying that ground-work much less erecting such a building on it To the five last points if Mr. Br hold them in that which I have expressed to be Dr. Prestons sense yea which himself expresseth to be his own sense I have nothing to say against him The tenth onely excepted to which I must be also mute because neither doth Mr. Br alledg what the Doctor saith and I have not that Treatise of his to inform me But all this is but a playing with holy things he might as well have said Dr. Preston consents with him in confessing there is a God a Christ a Justification a man a sinner to be justified as have said most of what he hath here said We expected he should have produced testimonies of other Divines speaking in common with him what he speaks in common with the Papists in opposition to the doctrine of the Protestants In his Appendix p. 167. and thenceforth to the end of the Book he brings a new supply of Testimonies which he intituleth Bax. Sayings of excellent Divines added to satisfie you who charge me with singularity I shall examine so many of them as have any shew of agreement with Mr. Br in those things wherein he fights against the doctrine of the Protestant Churches Bax. 1 He alleadgeth Dr. Twisse his discovery of Dr. Jacksons vanity p. 528. What one of our Church will maintaine that any one obteins actuall Redemption by Christ without Faith esspecially considering that redemption by the blood of Christ and forgivenesse of sins are all one Eph. 1. 17. Col. 1. 14. How prettily would he here instill into the thought of his Reader that Dr. Twisse is a man of levity here a subverter of Antinomianism whereof in his Aphorisms p. 173. he complained him to be a Pillarer that here he subverteth Justification from eternity whereof elswhere he is an assertor Nay here he speaketh of the Justification which is by vertue of the New Covenant of the obteining of it actually to our selves This neither Papist nor Protestant neither Dr. Twisse noâ— Mr. Br ever affirmed to be without Faith Bax. 2. Bishop Hooper cited by Dr. Jackson Christ onely received our infirmities and originall disease and not the contempt of him and his Law Expounded by Dr. Twisse against Dr. Jackson p. 584. His meaning in my judgment is onely this that Christ hath made satisfaction for the imperfection of our faith and holiness although we continue therein untill death But he hath not made satisfaction for the contempts and hatred of his word c. in case men do continue therein unto death Here is nothing of that which Mr. B. hunts after that Christ hath satisfied for no offence no infirmity committed against the New Covenant but this alone is the sum of it that they shall have no benefit by Christ no one sin committed against the Law or Gospel pardoned to them who live and dye impenitent and unbelievers According to that of our Saviour Jo. 8. 24. Therefore I said unto you ye shall dye in your sins for if ye beleeve not that I am he ye shall dye in your sins B. 3 Alstedius Distinct Theol. cap. 17. p. 73. The Condition of the Covenant of Grace is partly Faith partly Evangelicall obedience or holiness of life proceeding from Faith in Christ 1 In
how different a sense from Mr. B. the Protestants take the word Condition hath been before expressed 2 But in that sense in which they that use it take it it is one thing to be the condition of the New Covenant another to be the condition of Justification which is but one of many benefits of the Covenant of Grace Had Alsteed in the Explication of himself affirmed holiness of life a condition of justification we should have had it at the full from Mr. B. About the second thing wherein he alledgeth this mans testimony I know no man questioning Mr. B. Neither is his next Testimony alledged from Sadeel any thing of all the things wherein Mr. B. joyneth with the papists against the Protestants therefore I spare the labour to transeribe it B. 4 Rivet in disputat de satisfactione God was not bound to accept the satisfaction performed by another though sufficient c. Therefore there was a necessity that a Covenant should intercede and God himself propound a Mediator That there must an agreement intercede on his part who was satisfied without which the satisfaction had been in vain Idem ibid. Thes 4 5 6. The act which in satisfaction God performeth is of a supreme judge relaxing his own Law and transferring â—he penalty of it upon another so that in this relaxation Gods supreme dominion may be observed c. And by the transferring the penalâ—y from the sinner and exacting it of the surety the relation of a party offended as such is remâ—ved from God c. Jâ— 4 12. God did relax his Law as being positive and so relaxable it is abrogate c. The rest is off from the Quâ—stion To what purpose he here produceth the Testimony of this famous Doctor except it be to declare his consent with himself and Grotius that the Law is not abrogated but relaxed onely by means of Christs mediation I know not If so Rivet hath nothing for him but much directly against him 1 He affirms what no rationall man ever denied that the Grace of God is free and not bound How else should it be Grace 2 Yea it is free not onely from Co-action but from absolute necessity also Onely the purpose of God being presupposed that he would so save by grace as that no one title of his justice should fall it was necessary there should be the interceding of a Covenant and a Mediator But is this to any other purpose then what he concludes with viz. to fill up the vacant pages p. 188. 3 That there must also an agreement or Covenant to this end pass between the Father and â—he Son is ours not his doctrine 4 The relaxation of the Law in passing this Covenant between the Father and the Son is the common doctrine of all protestants as also that this is an act of Supream dominion of God that is under no Law But when this Covenant is ratified so that Christ becomes the undertaker and God the accepter of satisfaction in relation to them for whom the satisfaction is made so that the penalty of the Law as to their sins is transferred upon Christ whether the Law be not so abrogate to them that they are no longer under the Curse of it is the thing in question And here Dr. Rivet gives his verdit for us against Mr. B. That to these the Law is abrogate and God no more stands in the relation of a party offended against them What more proper sword-man could he have brought forth to have hewn in pieces his own Cause B. 5 Dr. Twiss vindic grat and against Cotton consid of Til. Syn. Dort c. What doth he mean by citing the Testimony of this Doctor so frequently and catching fragments from him whom he knows in the whole bulk of his works to destroy what himself would set up yea though he complains against him for erecting the main pillar of Antinomianism will he at length become his Disciple and build pillars with him Dr. Twisse doth enough wash his hands from Mr. Br doctrine even in these passages here cited from him as I could fully manifest But because I see the task would be tedious to examine particularly every particular testimony which he citeth The same persons speaking in severall of the quoted places the same thing and many speaking no more then one at once hath said before I shall therefore abridge my self in shewing in generall the dissenting judgment of those writers from him however he would deceive his Reader with a credulous opinion that they consent with him This will be done with an easie labour when contrariwise to speak singularly to every singular testimony would not yeeld forth fruit worthy the labour First then all the Testimonies of Dr. Twisse Append. p. 172 173. That of Junius p. 173. of Pareus Piscator Aretius p. 174. Dr. Willet p. 179 180. Mr. Burges of Justification p. 187. are here compiled to tell them that are no friends to the doctrine of grace though it alone must befriend them if they will be saved that all these Divines consent with him in his doctrine fiâ—st of a universall conditionall redemption or justification purchased by Christ without any more effectuall satisfaction made to the justice of God for them that shall be saved then for them that shall be damned and secondly that morall obedience and good works are Concauses or Collaterall conditions with faith to justification To manifest how faithfull he is in these his allegations I shall briefly express what the judgment of all Protestants is about these points that the advised Reader may judge whether these dissent from the rest and prepared the way for Mr. Br to prosecute his Assertions 1 They grant that the promulgation of righteousnes life is to be made universally conditionally to all God knoweth who are his but the Heralds of his grace know not Therefore by the command of Christ they are to testifie this word of life to all without exception promising upon condition of beleeving in the name and by the word of Christ righteousness and salvation In mean time they meintein Christ hath satisfied onely for those that the Father hath given him so effectually as that by vertue of Christs purchase they shall receive power from above to beleeve unto salvation 2 They are wont oft to use the word salvation as the Scripture also doth for glorification hereafter and so take it as a distinct thing from justification and involve into the condition of salvation more then into the condition of Justification 3 By the word Condition they understand oft all the necessary antecedents and sometimes also the necessary consequents either of justification or salvation But so as they term such Antecedents the conditions without which going before those ends cannot be attained and those Consequents the conditions without which following we cannot attain the certain knowledge that we are justified and inrighted to glory 4 That as oft as they speak of conditions of justification they