<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2011-08-29</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Alexis Jakobson</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>*Proofed title page(s).
*Reviewed structure.
*Checked division-marking material at heads and feet of divisions (HEADS, CLOSER, OPENER, ARGUMENT, EPIGRAPH, SIGNED, BYLINE, etc.).
*Added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate.
*Checked for N=""s.
*Checked ^s.
*Checked placement and completeness of PBs.
*Checked for foreign, damage and missing-page GAPs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, &abque;s, ABBRs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A29414">
<STC T="W">B4521</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">11872623</BIBNO>
<VID>50154</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE STATE of the DIFFERENCES Now Depending and Agitated about Ju&s;tification, And &s;ome other POINTS of RELIGION: Declaring plainly Wherein both Sides AGREE, and wherein they DIFFER.</P>
<P><HI>OONDON,</HI> Printed for <HI>Thomas Cockerill,</HI> at the <HI>Three Legs,</HI> over-again&s;t <HI>Stocks-Market.</HI> MDCXCII.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="account">
<PB REF="2" MS="y">
<PB N="3" REF="2" MS="y">
<HEAD>A Brief Account of the State of the Dif|ferences now depending and agitated about JUSTIFICATION, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></HEAD>
<P>I Thought it might much conduce to the &s;ervice of Truth and Peace, to State plainly the Points that are in pre&s;ent Di&s;pute among us. For I find many are led to one &s;ide and another, and yet under&s;tand not aright the Grounds of what they do; but are led by their Affections, animated with Pa&s;&s;ions, and the re&s;pect they bear unto mens Per&s;ons. And in many things I ob&s;erve the Di&s;pute is about Words, when both Sides mean the &s;ame Thing. Now &s;o far as I can gather, both from Di&s;cour&s;es and Writings on one Side, and the other, I &s;hall here &s;et down wherein both Sides agree, and wherein they differ; If they have declared their minds plainly and &s;incerely, and will &s;tand to their own A&s;&s;ertions, and not revoke what they have granted. Now the more &s;ober and judicious on both Sides agree in the&s;e things.</P>
<P N="1">1. Both Sides agree, That there is an Eternal Election of a determinate number of Per&s;ons to Eternal Life.</P>
<P N="2">2. Both Sides agree, That all the&s;e &s;hall be certainly Called, Ju&s;tified and Saved.</P>
<P N="3">3. Both agree, That eventually none others &s;hall be Saved; though they yield, That if any others &s;hould Repent and truly Believe, they might be Saved, which is more than can be &s;uppo&s;ed of the Fallen Angels: And that no Adult Per&s;ons do peri&s;h merely and only becau&s;e they are not Elected.</P>
<P N="4">4. Both agree, That there is no Ju&s;tification by the Law of Works, but by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t alone; and that
<PB N="4" REF="3"> not by the Effects of his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s it &s;elf.</P>
<P N="5">5. Both agree, That there was an Eternal Compact be|twixt the Father and the Son in the Covenant of Redempti|on about man's Salvation: A Council of Peace betwixt them both, and Antecedent to Chri&s;t's Sufferings.</P>
<P N="6">6. Both agree, That &s;omething is required to be done by men in order to their Ju&s;tification; and that they are not merely Pa&s;&s;ive in it; and none are Ju&s;tified from Eternity, but only in the Decree of God; nor actually Ju&s;tified, either by the Death or Re&s;urrection of Chri&s;t, till they actually Believe.</P>
<P N="7">7. Both agree, That what God requires of man to do, it is his Grace that enableth him to do it; and the improvement of Nature or common Grace, is not &s;ufficient of it &s;elf, much le&s;s Meritorious of &s;pecial Grace.</P>
<P N="8">8. Both agree, That whatever Qualifications God work|eth in man, as they do not Merit Ju&s;tification, neither are they the Righteou&s;ne&s;s wherein he is Ju&s;tified before God.</P>
<P N="9">9. Both agree, That though Ju&s;tifying Faith is always accompanied with other Graces, yet it is Faith alone that doth Ju&s;tify a Sinner in the &s;ight of God; and that not as a moral qualification, as other Graces are, but as a recipient in&s;tru|ment, receiving Chri&s;t and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s as a free gift tendred to Sinners in the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P N="10">10. Again, both agree, That it is Chri&s;t's Obedience, both Active and Pa&s;&s;ive, that is the meritorious and mate|rial cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, and not any Obedience perform|ed by our &s;elves.</P>
<P N="11">11. Both agree, That the Covenant of Grace is ab&s;olute to the Elect; tho conditionally admini&s;tred in the Preaching of the Go&s;pel; as, <HI>He that believeth, &s;hall be &s;aved; and he that believeth not, &s;hall be damned.</HI></P>
<P N="12">12. Both agree, That a man is Compleatly ju&s;tified as to his State at his fir&s;t Believing; and that there is not a &s;econd
<PB N="5" REF="3"> Ju&s;tification to perfect the fir&s;t, but only declarative at the Day of Judgment, and by good Works in this World.</P>
<P N="13">13. Both agree, That Ju&s;tification con&s;i&s;teth not only in the Pardon, or not imputing of Sin, but in the imputing of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, whereby a Sinner is reputed and ac|cepted as Righteous in the &s;ight of God, and &s;o differs from Sanctification by infu&s;ing Grace.</P>
<P N="14">14. Both Sides agree, That no Works men perform, are acceptable to God, but through Faith, and the Mediation of Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="15">15. Both agree, That Je&s;us Chri&s;t is the only Mediator of the New Covenant, and the Surety of it both on God's Part and Man's; and therein doth di&s;charge the Office of a Mediator.</P>
<P N="16">16. Both agree, That Je&s;us Chri&s;t was without all Sin, Holy, Harmle&s;s, and Undefiled; and though he had the Sin of all his People imputed to him, yet God never looked upon him as formally a &s;inner, as he looks upon wicked men.</P>
<P N="17">17. Further both agree, That more is required to our compleat Salvation, than to our fir&s;t Ju&s;tification; as in Marriage, mutual Con&s;ent doth enter Per&s;ons into the Married &s;tate; but many more Duties are required, as con|ditions of the Marriage Covenant, to be performed after|wards.</P>
<P N="18">18. Both al&s;o agree, That the Moral Law is &s;till in force as a rule of life to Believers, though it is aboli&s;h'd as a Cove|nant of Works, &s;o as to live by doing it, though done by the &s;pecial help of God's Grace; and that every Tran&s;gre&s;&s;i|on doth in its own nature de&s;erve Death &s;till.</P>
<P N="19">19. Both agree, That &s;ome preparatory Work upon the Soul u&s;ually goes before Ju&s;tifying Faith; yet that it is not the like in all; nor any further nece&s;&s;ary, than to make the Sinner willing to come to Chri&s;t, and to accept of him as offered in the Go&s;pel. And that a Legal Repentance, wrought by the Spirit of Bondage, may be before Ju&s;tifying Faith.</P>
<P N="20"><PB N="6" REF="4">20. Both Sides agree, That tho no Act of Obedience con|curs with Faith in our Ju&s;tification, yet all Ju&s;tifying Faith contains in it a purpo&s;e of Future Obedience, and will cer|tainly bring it forth.</P>
<P><HI>And it's hoped that both Sides agree to exalt Chri&s;t, and the freene&s;s of Grace in man's Salvation, and Holine&s;s and Righteou&s;ne&s;s among men; and not to expo&s;e their pre&s;ent Liberty to Hazard, or Religion to Contempt, by any pa&s;&s;io|nate heats; which are the fruits of the fle&s;h, and not that true Zeal which is the grace of the Spirit.</HI></P>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<HEAD><HI>The Differences, wherein they Di&s;agree.</HI> Which I &s;hall &s;tate impartially on both Sides.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. THAT the Go&s;pel is a Law of Grace, wherein God as a Soveraign Rector, doth di&s;pen&s;e Pardon, Adop|tion, and all &s;aving Benefits to men, according to the Terms of the Moral Law, as it is mitigated in Chri&s;t, and &s;ome other Terms of Faith and Repentance required by the Go&s;pel: yet not without re&s;pect to the Merits of Chri&s;t herein, which they term a &s;ubordinate Righteou&s;ne&s;s; wherein others differ from them, and &s;ay, that this is not a Covenant of Grace, but a milder Covenant of Works: wherein a man is ju&s;ti|fied before God by &s;ome Works done by him&s;elf, tho done by the help of Grace, and through the Merits of a Mediator are accepted with God. For the Apo&s;tle, &s;peaking of <HI>Abra|ham</HI>'s Ju&s;tification, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.3. mentions none of his Works, but &s;aith, <HI>Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> And doth make our Ju&s;tifying Righteou&s;ne&s;s to con&s;i&s;t in a gracious Act of God upon the Sinner, in covering, and not imputing his &s;in; And not in any Works of his own, either of Nature, or of Grace, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.7, 8.</P>
<P N="2">2. That Chri&s;t made a Compact with the Father for us
<PB N="7" REF="4"> in a di&s;tinct Covenant by him&s;elf; and was not ever him&s;elf a Party in the Covenant; and was not as a Surety bound in the &s;ame Bond with men; but as a Surety, giving a Bond of his own to obey the Law, and &s;uffer death for us, and to pay our Debts owing to the Law, or Ju&s;tice of God. Whereas o|thers &s;ay, this is a great mi&s;take; and &s;ay, That Chri&s;t came under the &s;ame Law that man was under, <HI>Gal.</HI> 4.4. and there|by became obliged to give obedience to the Law; and not on|ly &s;o, but to &s;uffer the penalty of the Law: For tho&s;e that had broken the Law, being in the &s;ame Bond with them, as the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.16. <HI>That the promi&s;es were made to Abra|ham, and his &s;eed;</HI> which Seed, he &s;aith, is Chri&s;t. And the Covenant God made with <HI>David,</HI> was made with him as a Type of Chri&s;t, and with his Seed, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 18.50. So that God &s;aith of this &s;eed, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 89.33. <HI>If his children break my law, I will vi&s;it their iniquities with &s;tripes, but my loving-kindne&s;s I will not take from him,</HI> that is, Chri&s;t; <HI>nor break my Covenant with him,</HI> as it follows in the new Ver&s;e.</P>
<P>And in the Covenant of Redemption it &s;elf, made before the foundation of the World, Chri&s;t &s;tood not alone in that nei|ther. For then all the Elect were cho&s;en in Chri&s;t, <HI>Eph.</HI> 1.3. And Grace was given them in Chri&s;t then, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.9. before the world began. So that they judge it a great mi&s;take to &s;ay, that the Covenant of Redemption is only pleadable by Chri&s;t him&s;elf: For tho part of that Covenant re&s;pect him&s;elf only, that he &s;hould come into our Nature, and &s;uffer, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> yet then he undertook for all that God gave him, to bring them to glory.</P>
<P N="3">3. Further, They &s;ay that God lookt upon Chri&s;t's Obe|dience as a valuable Con&s;ideration only, why he &s;hould make a Covenant of Grace with men; and that there was no ne|ce&s;&s;ity that Chri&s;t &s;hould come into the nature of man, and be made under the Law, and &s;uffer death for our &s;ins, from the nature of the work of our Redemption, but only from the de&s;ignation and appointment of his Father thereunto.
<PB N="8" REF="5"> And if he had appointed him to perform &s;ome Heroick Acts of Obedience in any other nature, or of another kind, it might have been as available for our Redemption, and as meritorious for us, as what he did perform.</P>
<P>But others look upon this as a great Error, and &s;ay, That the nature of the work of our Redemption did nece&s;&s;arily re|quire, that Chri&s;t &s;hould not only merit for us, but make &s;a|tisfaction, which they don't con&s;ider; and &s;hould &s;atisfy Ju|&s;tice in the &s;ame Nature that &s;inned, and perform obedience to that Law which man had broken, and bear the Cur&s;e of that Law which man was under, to redeem him from it. For it &s;eems nece&s;&s;ary that God &s;hould &s;ecure the Honour of his Law, and Ju&s;tice of his Government.</P>
<P N="4">4. They will not allow Chri&s;t to do and &s;uffer what he did, as a Publick Per&s;on, repre&s;enting all the Elect, compre|hending a Spiritual Seed in him&s;elf, as the fir&s;t <HI>Adam</HI> did his Natural Seed, &s;o that the Elect may be &s;aid to obey, &s;uffer, and &s;atisfy Ju&s;tice in him. Though they yield, that he did do all this for them. For then, they &s;ay, the Elect may be &s;aid to merit in him, as Chri&s;t merited; and to be Re|deemers of the World, as Chri&s;t was; and to perform &s;in|le&s;s Obedience, as Chri&s;t did.</P>
<P>But others judge this a great mi&s;take: For the Apo&s;tle in the fifth Chapter to the <HI>Romans,</HI> doth parallel the two <HI>A|dams,</HI> and &s;aith the fir&s;t was the <HI>Figure of him that was to come.</HI> And that all Mankind &s;inned in him, and not only by him, through the Corruption of Nature derived from him; <HI>And as in Adam all died, &s;o in Chri&s;t are all made alive,</HI> 1 Cor. 15. All died, not only by him, but in him. Even Infants that have committed no actual Sin; As an In&s;olvent Debtor may be &s;aid to pay the Debt in the Sureties paying it for him, or in his &s;tead. Or if a Friend dies for a Malefactor, the Malefactor may be &s;aid to &s;atisfy the Law in him.</P>
<P>And the Objections again&s;t this, they an&s;wer them thus.</P>
<P>That though Chri&s;t merited, yet it doth not follow, that
<PB N="9" REF="5"> tho&s;e that are ju&s;tified in his Merits, did merit in him. For Chri&s;t and they are not the &s;ame per&s;on naturally, but only legally; as the Client and the Advocate, the Surety and the Debtor. And Chri&s;t's Merits did ari&s;e from the Dignity of his Per&s;on, and his voluntary Undertaking that for us, which he was not antecedently obliged unto; which is not the ca&s;e of tho&s;e whom he undertook for.</P>
<P>A Surety that pays another's Debt, may merit from the Debtor; but the Debtor is not at all concern'd in that Merit, but only in the Di&s;charge that he receives thereby. So, if a Believer is ju&s;tified in the &s;inle&s;s Obedience of Chri&s;t, doth it therefore follow, that he mu&s;t be accounted no Sinner? Is it nece&s;&s;ary that a Debtor who pays his Debt in a Surety, be Partaker of all the Endowments and Qualifications of his Surety? Or be judged &s;o to do? It may be yielded that here|by a Believer is ju&s;tified in a more excellent Righteou&s;ne&s;s than his own, tho it &s;hould be perfect, or than <HI>Adam</HI> had in innocency; but not that we &s;hould be accounted in all re|&s;pects as righteous as Chri&s;t him&s;elf was; tho it &s;eems ne|ce&s;&s;ary that we &s;hould be ju&s;tified in a Righteou&s;ne&s;s which &s;hould an&s;wer to the Infinite Ju&s;tice of God offended by man's Sin. And if any object, Chri&s;t fulfill'd not the whole Moral Law, not performing many Duties required of us, as of an Husband, a Father, <HI>&amp;c. An&s;wer.</HI> He that performs all that the Law requires of him, fulfils the Law. Thus Chri&s;t did; and &s;o being under the Ceremonial Law, he performed all requir'd of him by that Law: And being al&s;o in the Go&s;pel-Covenant, he did all required of him there. He did not in|deed repent, becau&s;e not required of him, not being a Sinner. And if it be objected again, That if our debt be paid in Chri&s;t, and we ju&s;tified thus in him, What need any thing more to be done by a &s;inner for his di&s;charge? They An&s;wer to this, That though the Elect Believer is thus virtually and funda|mentally di&s;charged and ju&s;tified in Chri&s;t's Obedience; yet God hath appointed Faith to be the mean or way whereby
<PB N="10" REF="6"> he &s;hould be actually ju&s;tified: God having &s;o provided, that his Grace &s;hould be di&s;pen&s;ed in a way that might con|duce to his own Glory, as well as man's Salvation. May not a Surety who pays the Money to di&s;charge the Debtor, re|quire &s;omething from him to do, whereby he may be made &s;en&s;ible of the kindne&s;s he hath &s;hewn him?</P>
<P N="5">5. Again, &s;ome &s;ay, There are no habits of Grace, but the influences of the Spirit are in&s;tead of them; which is a mi|&s;take, for this denies all Sanctifying of the faculties, growth in Grace, di&s;tinctions of Grace in Believers, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. Again, &s;ome &s;ay, That the &s;ufferings Chri&s;t under|went, were not the very &s;ame that were threatned in the Law, and the damned &s;uffer; but only equivalent to them. For they &s;ay, Chri&s;t &s;uffered not the lo&s;s of God's Image in his Soul, as man did as a Puni&s;hment for &s;in. To this it's an&s;wer'd, This is to &s;ay, That Chri&s;t mu&s;t become a Sinner that he may &s;ave Sinness; when, if &s;o, he could not &s;ave them at all. Cannot a Surety pay a debt for the di&s;charge of the Debtor, unle&s;s he become as wicked as, it may be; the Debtor is? Chri&s;t was never &s;ick, and yet &s;ickne&s;s came upon mens bodies as a fruit and puni&s;hment of Sin. Chri&s;t &s;uffered the <HI>Idem</HI> of that Puni&s;hment that was due to man for Sin, &s;o far as might con&s;i&s;t with the work he came upon, which was to Redeem and Re&s;tore man: And he redeemed man by his Blood, and re&s;tores him by his Spirit. Had he &s;uffered the Lo&s;s of God's Image, he could not have performed perfect Obedience to the Law; he could not have offered up him|&s;elf a pure Sacrifice for Sin; he could not have been a pattern of perfect Holine&s;s to his People; <HI>But it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, &s;in only excepted,</HI> Heb. 2.17. Was man under the Cur&s;e of the Law? So was he. Was man by Sin deprived of the light of God's Countenance? So was he for a time. Was man to &s;uffer the &s;ence of God's wrath? So did he. Was man to die, and to return to the Earth out of which he was taken? So did he. So that he &s;uffered
<PB N="11" REF="6"> the &s;ame kind of Puni&s;hment that was due to man. It's true his &s;ufferings were not Eternal, becau&s;e he paid the debt to the full, which the damned in Hell cannot do; and therefore al&s;o they de&s;pair, which Chri&s;t never did, becau&s;e he knew he &s;hould and could deli|ver him&s;elf, which they know they cannot do, and therefore de&s;pair. So that in this there is a Difference.</P>
<P N="7">7. Another Difference is about the Moral Law, That it doth not remain as it did, requiring perfect Obedience, and threatning death to every Trangre&s;&s;ion &s;till. Which is judged an error: For Chri&s;t tells us, <HI>Mat.</HI> 6.18. That <HI>heaven and earth &s;hall pa&s;s away, but not one tittle of the law.</HI> Luk. 16.17. <HI>And that he came not to de&s;troy the law, but fulfil it.</HI> Only there is provi&s;ion made in the Blood of Chri&s;t for the Pardon of &s;ins again&s;t the Law, to Penitent Believers. So that &s;ome lower degrees of Obedience are not come in the room of that per|fect Obedience which was at fir&s;t required by the Law.</P>
<P N="8">8. That no Believer ought to have re&s;pect to any benefit to him|&s;elf in any Duties he doth perform. Which is judged a great mi&s;take: For may we not ask that we may have, and &s;eek that we may find, as our Saviour &s;peaks? And look to the recompence of reward, as <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> did, for what we either do or &s;uffer for God in this World? And by the &s;ame rea&s;on we &s;hould not have re&s;pect to another's good neither.</P>
<P N="9">9. That not only the guilt, but the filth of Sin was laid upon Chri&s;t: That is, the obliquity of the very act; and the rebellion that is in it again&s;t God was charged upon Chri&s;t as guilty of it; which is judged a very fal&s;e and bla&s;phemous Error. Whereupon they &s;ay, Chri&s;t became odious to his Father, and abhorred by him when he Offered up him&s;elf a Sacrifice, <HI>an offering to God of a &s;weet &s;melling &s;avor,</HI> Eph. 5.2. Chri&s;t indeed had our &s;in imputed to him, and the &s;ence of God's wrath again&s;t &s;in in his Soul; whereby God te&s;tified his indignation again&s;t &s;in, but not again&s;t his Son: What was laid upon Chri&s;t, was done away; but the Act of &s;in was not done away, though the guilt of it was.</P>
<P N="10">10. That Faith and Repentance are contained in the Moral Law, and were written in man's Nature: Which is judged a mi&s;take. For what was writ in man's heart, did re&s;pect only the Moral Law, or Covenant of Works; where there is no mention of the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, or any admittance of Repentance for &s;in.</P>
<P N="11">11. That the Go&s;pel doth not promi&s;e life to Penitent &s;inners, but the Impenitent, becau&s;e the Penitent have life already. Which is judged an Opinion contrary to the whole Tenor of the Go&s;pel. It of|fers life to the Impenitent, but doth not promi&s;e it.</P>
<P N="12"><PB N="12" REF="7">12. That the Go&s;pel is nothing el&s;e but a Promi&s;e. Which is judged a great mi&s;take, unle&s;s taken in a very &s;trict &s;en&s;e. For we find many Precepts and Threatnings in it, according to which Chri&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"> in executing his Kingly Office in his Church. And there<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="4 letters"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters">+tainly a mi&s;take, that for &s;ins again&s;t the Go&s;pel men <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"> to the Law for Puni&s;hment, and &s;hall not be judged by the Go&s;pel at all.</P>
<P N="13">13. That a Chri&s;tian ought not to make <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"> inward Grace or Qualifications to examine his State by: Which is judged a grea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> mi&s;take. Doth not the Apo&s;tle <HI>Paul</HI> judge of the <HI>The&s;&s;alonians</HI> Election by their Faith, <HI>receiving the word with much a&s;&s;urance,</HI> 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 1.5. And the Apo&s;tle <HI>John,</HI> by love, <HI>by love to the brethren,</HI> 1 John 3.14. As a Man's bad &s;tate may be judged of by evil habits and qualifications, &s;o may not his good &s;tate be judged of by good habits and qualifications? E&s;pecially when made evident in an holy Conver&s;ation. Doth not our Saviour him&s;elf direct us to judge of the Tree by the Fruits? <HI>Mat.</HI> 7.20. And the Apo&s;tle, of the good &s;tate of the <HI>Philippians</HI> by par|taking of his Grace? <HI>Phil.</HI> 1.7.</P>
<P N="14">14. That Ju&s;tifying Faith is a full per&s;ua&s;ion of heart that we are Ju&s;tified: Which is another great mi&s;take. For the Scripture &s;ets it forth by a coming to Chri&s;t, receiving him, and tru&s;ting in him that we may be Ju&s;tified, <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.16.3.24.</P>
<P N="15">15. To give Obedience on the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">count of any Law-Sanction, is legal Obedience, whether new or old Law: Which is a mi&s;take, and doth exclude all Obedience.</P>
<P N="16">16. That there is a work of Sanctification wrought in the Soul before Ju&s;tification, in a &s;inners fir&s;t Calling; the Apo&s;tle &s;aying, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8.30. <HI>Whom he called, them he ju&s;tified;</HI> which is judged an error. For <HI>calling</HI> taken in a &s;trict &s;ence, is either the outward Call of the Go&s;pel, or the fir&s;t an&s;wer of the Soul of a &s;inner to this Call, in a willingne&s;s to leave his former <HI>&s;in,</HI> and to come to Chri&s;t as King, Prie&s;t, and Prophet, that he may be Ju&s;tified and Sanctified by union with him. Some other Differences I might mention, but the&s;e are the Principal.</P>
<P>Thus for the &s;ake of tho&s;e that have not time to read long Di&s;|cour&s;es, and cannot comprehend nice di&s;tinctions and controver&s;ies in Religion, I have publi&s;h'd this plain Sheet: Which I wi&s;h may be a Winding-&s;heet to our late Differences, and an In&s;trument of Truth and Peace; and of maintaining that Brotherly Union which hath been long de&s;ired, and much endeavoured, and at la&s;t happily effected, and in the pre&s;ence of God and Angels Atte&s;ted and Solemnized. <HI>Amen.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
<PB REF="7">
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
