<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2014-12-01</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, PROBLEMs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, ABBRs, LETTERs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B43850">
<STC T="W">R1878_VARIANT</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc" PRE="ocn">767615930</BIBNO>
<VID>212643</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<P>Ju&s;tification Ju&s;tified: OR THE GREAT DOCTRINE OF Ju&s;tification, Stated according to the HOLY SCRIPTURES, And the Judgment of PROTESTANT DIVINES.</P>
<P>By which &s;everal Fundamental Truths, al|ways owned by the Church of <HI>England,</HI> &s;ince the Reformation, are Explain'd Confirm'd, and Vindicated from the Errors of Mr. <HI>William Sherlock.</HI></P>
<P>Al&s;o a Di&s;cour&s;e in An&s;wer to him concerning ACQUAINTANCE WITH THE PERSON of CHRIST.</P>
<P>By <HI>SAM&V;EL ROLLS.</HI></P>
<P><HI>London,</HI> Printed for the Author, and are to be Sold by <HI>Ben. Billing&s;ley</HI> at the Printing-Pre&s;s in <HI>Corn-hill.</HI> 1674.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="theses">
<PB REF="3">
<PB N="1" REF="3">
<HEAD><HI>THESES</HI> Of Ju&s;tification.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>I.</HEAD>
<P>_THE word <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> is taken ei|ther <HI>Actively,</HI> for the Act of God who ju&s;tifieth (or the Act of God in ju&s;tifying) or <HI>Pa&s;&s;ively,</HI> for the priviledge (or as it is a priviledge) of &s;uch who are Ju&s;tified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>II.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Active,</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI> Ju&s;tification, or <HI>Ju|&s;tification</HI> Actively, and Pa&s;&s;ively taken, are not two things, or two di&s;tinct <HI>&s;pecies,</HI> or kinds of Ju&s;tification, but one, and the &s;ame, diver&s;ly con&s;idered, or under di&s;tinct re&s;pects, and ha|bitudes. As the love wherewith I love another man, and the love wherewith he is belov'd of me, are one and the &s;ame, but may be con&s;ide|dered either as in me, as the <HI>Subject</HI> of that love, or as terminated upon him as the <HI>Object.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="2" REF="4">
<HEAD>III.</HEAD>
<P>Though <HI>Active</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI> Ju&s;tification do admit of a di&s;tinct con&s;ideration, yet they can never be really &s;eparated, or apart, or one without the other. For God can never be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie, but when &s;ome body is Ju&s;tified by him, for every Action mu&s;t have an Object, and every Agent, a Patient. Therefore that ju&s;ti|fication from Eternity which &s;ome &s;peak of, is only God's Decree to ju&s;tifie &s;uch and &s;uch in time, <HI>viz.</HI> when they &s;hould come to believe in Chri&s;t, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.8. <HI>And the Scripture fore-&s;ee|ing that God would ju&s;tifie the Gentiles through Faith.</HI></P>
<P>Yet notwith&s;tanding Ju&s;tification Active and Pa&s;&s;ive are the &s;ame thing (only con&s;idered the fir&s;t as coming from God, and the latter as received or applyed by the Believer) neither can they be &s;eparated, yet this di&s;tinction hath it's u&s;e. For when we &s;ay Faith is an In&s;tru|ment of our <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> it is not as Ju&s;tification is <HI>Actively</HI> con&s;idered; for how can any Action of Man be an In&s;trument to God's Action? But as we are Pa&s;&s;ively ju&s;tified we are <HI>ju&s;tified by believing;</HI> it's not our faith that doth produce our Ju&s;tification properly; Therefore when it is &s;aid, that only <HI>Faith ju&s;tifieth,</HI> it is to be re|&s;olved Pa&s;&s;ively. By Faith only we are ju&s;tifi|ed.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>IV.</HEAD>
<P>The proper definition of Ju&s;tification is &s;uch
<PB N="3" REF="4"> as doth take in both that which we call <HI>Active,</HI> and that which we call <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive:</HI> I &s;ay, both the <HI>Active,</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive,</HI> Ju&s;tification (as they are called) are involved, or included, in the u&s;ual definition of Ju&s;tification, which &s;hews that they are really the &s;ame thing, though there be &s;ome notional difference betwixt them.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>V.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> (to give you the definition of it) is a gracious Act, or Sentence of God, where|by every true Believer is acquitted, di&s;charged, and ab&s;olved, of, and from his &s;ins, and is accounted, declared, and pronunced ju&s;t, and righteous only for the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Obe|dience of Chri&s;t imputed to him, and received by Faith alone. <HI>Vide Ame&s;. p.</HI> 115. Sect. 6. <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.22.24.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>VI.</HEAD>
<P>The fore-&s;aid Definition cannot be much, (if at all) ami&s;s, for that it taketh in all, or almo&s;t all the cau&s;es of Ju&s;tification, both <HI>Actively,</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;&s;ively</HI> con&s;idered.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>VII.</HEAD>
<P>For fir&s;t, it a&s;&s;igneth the <HI>Efficient</HI> cau&s;e of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> namely, God. For he it is who ju&s;tifieth, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.5. I have therefore calld it an Act of God. Moreover, to &s;hew what man|ner of Act, in, or of God the ju&s;tifying of a &s;inner is, I call it a <HI>Sentence</HI> of God, the Su|preme Judge, thereby intimating it is a <HI>forin|&s;ick,</HI>
<PB N="4" REF="5"> or <HI>Court-Act,</HI> an Act of Law, or Judicature (as when a Judge acquitteth a Man that hath &s;atisfied the Law by him&s;elf, or Proxy, and di&s;|chargeth him by Proclamation, &amp;c.) not a <HI>Phy|&s;ical</HI> Act, as when a Phy&s;itian by proper Reme|dies maketh a &s;ick man well, nor yet a <HI>moral</HI> Act, as when a Father by good Coun&s;el, and Ex|ample is In&s;trumental to make a bad Son to be|come good. For the Act of a Judge when he acquitteth an accu&s;ed Man is of a di&s;tinct Na|ture from both of the&s;e. To <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> is no where either in the Old, or New Te&s;tament, taken in any other than a <HI>forin&s;ick</HI> &s;en&s;e, <HI>Deut.</HI> 25.1. 1 <HI>King.</HI> 8.32. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 6.23. <HI>Job.</HI> 9.20. <HI>Prov.</HI> 17.15. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 50.8. <HI>Mat.</HI> 12.37. <HI>Rom.</HI> 2.13. Compared with 12, and 3, 16. &amp; 8.32, 33. So <HI>Rom.</HI> 6.7. it &s;ignifies to be delivered <HI>a paena,</HI> as one that is acquitted at Law. So the <HI>Temple</HI> was ju&s;tified, when freed from the Infamy which it was laid under by rea&s;on of the Image of <HI>Ju|piter Olympius</HI> &s;et up there by <HI>Antiochus,</HI> Dan. 8.14. See al&s;o <HI>Job</HI> 9. <HI>v.</HI> 23.20. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 143.2. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 53.11. <HI>Luke</HI> 8.14. <HI>Acts</HI> 13.39. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4.4.6.11. <HI>Titus</HI> 3.7. Al&s;o <HI>Dan.</HI> 12.3. when Men are &s;aid to <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> it may be under&s;tood in this &s;en&s;e of men as <HI>In&s;trumental.</HI> Al&s;o that in <HI>Rev.</HI> 22.11. <GAP DESC="foreign">, may be thus under|&s;tood, Let him that is ju&s;tified continue to apply the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t to him&s;elf by Faith, in order to his being more and more Actually ju&s;tified from his new &s;ins, &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>VIII.</HEAD>
<P>The fore-&s;aid Definition containeth the <HI>Cau|&s;a
<PB N="5" REF="5"> Proegoumena</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> or that whereby God was inwardly (or from within) moved, and excited to ju&s;tifie Believers in &s;uch a way and manner as hath been expre&s;&s;ed, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Free Grace,</HI> Mercy, and good will of God to|wards them. Therefore I have called it a gra|cious Act of God, or an Act of God's free-Grace. But by the way ob&s;erve, that the Ju|&s;tifying of a Sinner it's being an Act of <HI>Free-Grace</HI> do's not hinder but it may be an Act of <HI>Ju&s;tice</HI> too, as it is, all things con&s;idered, particularly con&s;idering the <HI>Satisfaction</HI> given by Chri&s;t. If we re&s;pect the Notation or Ori|ginal of the word <HI>ju&s;tifie,</HI> it &s;hould &s;ignifie to <HI>make ju&s;t,</HI> as <HI>Sanctifie to make Holy.</HI> But if we regard the common u&s;e of it, it no more &s;o im|ports than as <HI>Sanctifie</HI> u&s;ed of God imports <HI>to make holy</HI> or <HI>magnifie</HI> in common u&s;e of &s;peech <HI>to make great.</HI> And it is the ordinary u&s;e of words not their <HI>Original</HI> without it, that mu&s;t carry it, and determine what they do import, and how they are to be under&s;tood. Excel|lent Mr. <HI>Gataker</HI> in his Treati&s;e of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> p. 8. &s;aith, of <HI>Dan.</HI> 12.3. <HI>Rev.</HI> 22.11. <HI>The&s;e I conceive are the only two places in Scripture where the term of ju&s;tifying or tho&s;e an&s;wering it are thus u&s;ed, viz.</HI> To make a man inherently, or habi|tually ju&s;t by a good quality infu&s;ed, or wrought into him. And yet even tho&s;e two places may ad|mit of the &s;ame Con&s;truction of the word <HI>Ju&s;tifie,</HI> as hath been given of all the re&s;t, <HI>vid. The&s;.</HI> 7.</P>
<P>That the Free Grace of God was that which from within did move him to ju&s;tifie a &s;inner is
<PB N="6" REF="6"> clearly held forth, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.24. <HI>Being ju&s;tified freely by his Grace.</HI> And <HI>Eph.</HI> 2.8. <HI>For by Grace are ye &s;aved through Faith.</HI> And <HI>Titus</HI> 3.7.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>IX.</HEAD>
<P>Ju&s;tification is rightly called an Act of God's <HI>Free Grace,</HI> and Mercy (or a gracious Act of God) (though there be full Satisfaction in the ca&s;e) upon &s;everal accounts. As namely, 1. Becau&s;e God accepteth of the obedience of one for another, of Chri&s;t for us, which he might have cho&s;en whether he would have done, for he might have in&s;i&s;ted upon Satisfaction from the Per&s;on offending. God might have &s;aid, that <HI>The very Soul which hath &s;inned it &s;hall dye.</HI> Doubt|le&s;s the Superiors of <HI>Zaleucus</HI> (had he had any) might have cho&s;en whether they would have ac|cepted of one of his Eyes, in&s;tead of one of his Sons, who had forfeited both. 2. God in &s;trict|ne&s;s of Ju&s;tice might have required the <HI>idem,</HI> the &s;elf-&s;ame &s;atisfaction which the Law required, or <HI>penalty</HI> which the Law threatned, <HI>viz.</HI> the eternal de&s;truction of Sinners: but he has been plea&s;ed to accept of the <HI>tantundem,</HI> or <HI>tanta|mount,</HI> from Chri&s;t, which is as if a Man were bound to pay me 1000 <HI>l.</HI> in Lawful money of <HI>England,</HI> and I &s;hould accept of a <HI>Jewel,</HI> one, or more, to that value, in&s;tead thereof, which every body knows I was not bound to do, or might refu&s;e. But 3. It was yet a far greater Act of Grace than either of the former, for God to provide, and procure a Surety, and a Satisfaction, at his own Co&s;t, and Charges (as
<PB N="7" REF="6"> <HI>Zaleucus</HI> redeemed one of his Son's forfeited Eyes with one of his own.) For God not only to find out a <HI>ran&s;om,</HI> and Chri&s;t to give him&s;elf to be that, and the Holy Gho&s;t, who was E&s;&s;entially one with the Father and Son, to con&s;ent there|unto (for this was done by joynt con&s;ent of all the three Per&s;ons, who &s;aid in effect, Let us re|deem Man, as let us make Man) was an Act of infinite Grace, and Mercy. 4. For God to pitch upon Man as an object of ju&s;tifying Love, and to Elect him thereunto from Eternity, whil&s;t the fallen Angels were pa&s;&s;ed by, was an Act of meer Free Grace.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="10" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>X.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Final</HI> cau&s;es of our <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> or of God's ju&s;tifying us, were as follow, <HI>viz.</HI> the &s;atisfying of the Love, and Grace of God in &s;aving of Believers, for it is a Satisfaction to Love to do good to tho&s;e that are beloved of us. So 'tis &s;aid of Chri&s;t, that <HI>he &s;hall &s;ee of the travel of his Soul and &s;hall be &s;atisfied,</HI> and of God, <HI>that Mercy plea&s;eth him, and therein doth he de|light.</HI> I &s;ay, the giving content and &s;atisfaction to Divine Love, in, and by the Salvation of Sin|ners; as al&s;o to magnifie, and glorifie the Rich|es of God's Grace, and Mercy, thereby, are the two great ends, or <HI>Final Cau&s;es</HI> of Ju|&s;tification, or of God's ju&s;tifying us (which may after a &s;ort be reduced to the <HI>Proegumenal</HI> cau&s;e, as being cau&s;es inwardly moving God thereunto.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="11" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="8" REF="7">
<HEAD>XI.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Final Cau&s;es</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tification, Pa&s;&s;ively</HI> ta|ken, or of our being ju&s;tified, are (be&s;ides tho&s;e fore-mentioned) that we &s;hould be to the prai&s;e of the glory of God's grace, in ju&s;ti|fying us, by glorifying him by a holy conver|&s;ation, <HI>that being delivered out of the hands of our Enemies, we &s;hould &s;erve God in Righteou&s;ne&s;s and Holyne&s;s all our dayes,</HI> Luke 1.74, 75. <HI>Who gave him&s;elf for us that he might redeem us from all Iniquity, and might purifie to him&s;elf a peculiar People zealous of good works,</HI> Titus 2.14. This la&s;t is the only cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification that hath not been expre&s;t in the definition thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="12" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XII.</HEAD>
<P>The definition of Ju&s;tification which we have given, containeth al&s;o the <HI>Material Cau&s;e</HI> there|of, <HI>viz.</HI> the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedience of Chri&s;t: which may otherwi&s;e be called the <HI>me|ritorious cau&s;e,</HI> or the <HI>Procatarctical,</HI> or external moving cau&s;e thereof. For when a <HI>material cau&s;e</HI> is a&s;&s;igned of things that are immaterial, or &s;piritual, the word <HI>matter,</HI> or material, mu&s;t needs be taken in a <HI>moral,</HI> or <HI>&s;piritual</HI> &s;en&s;e, and not in a &s;trict &s;en&s;e, for <HI>matter</HI> properly &s;o called.</P>
<P>So that there is no incongruity in terming the <HI>meritorious</HI> cau&s;e the <HI>material</HI> cau&s;e of our Ju&s;ti|fication, or the <HI>Procatarctical,</HI> or procuring cau&s;e thereof, or <HI>vice ver&s;a.</HI> The material cau&s;e of a thing (&s;ay Logicians) is, <HI>ex qua res e&s;t,</HI> or that out of which, or of which, or by which
<PB N="9" REF="7"> any thing is. Now, the Obedience of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, is that out of which our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God doth &s;pring, or re&s;ult, or by, and for which, we are ju&s;tified, or, which was the only thing from without <HI>(ab extra)</HI> primarily moving God to ju&s;tifie us.</P>
<P>But according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> our &s;incere obedi|ence to the Go&s;pel is the matter of our Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s before God, or that by which we are ju&s;tified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="13" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XIII.</HEAD>
<P>Many &s;everal Per&s;ons, and things are &s;aid to <HI>ju&s;tifie,</HI> in different wayes, and re&s;pects, <HI>ex gr.</HI> 1. God ju&s;tifies as a <HI>Judge</HI> by his definitive Sen|tence, and &s;o Chri&s;t who is the Judge of the World, will ju&s;tifie all the Elect in that great day of di&s;tinction. 2. Chri&s;t ju&s;tifies more ways than one, <HI>viz.</HI> 1. By his <HI>Blood,</HI> as the price of our ju&s;tification, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.9.18, 19. <HI>Acts</HI> 13.39. 2. Chri&s;t ju&s;tifieth as an <HI>Advocate,</HI> 1 <HI>John</HI> 2.1, 2. alledging his own Obedience in our &s;tead for our ju&s;tification. 3. The <HI>Law</HI> is &s;aid to ju&s;tifie, becau&s;e it is the <HI>Rule</HI> by which the Judge proceeds in ju&s;tification, <HI>John</HI> 7.51. 4. <HI>Witne&s;&s;es</HI> are &s;aid to ju&s;tifie, when their evidence helps to clear the party accu&s;ed. In that &s;en&s;e Con&s;ci|ence is &s;aid to excu&s;e, or ju&s;tifie, 1 <HI>John</HI> 3.20, 21. 5. What&s;oever is pleaded as a &s;ufficient ground, or motive, for which a Man may be cleared from the fault objected again&s;t him is &s;aid to <HI>ju&s;tifie.</HI> So <HI>works</HI> ju&s;tifie, <HI>Jam.</HI> 2.22.24. And <HI>words,</HI> Mat. 12.37. as <HI>evidences</HI> that are
<PB N="10" REF="8"> produced to manife&s;t innocency, or integrity. 6. That which is a means to make a man par|taker of Chri&s;ts Righteou&s;ne&s;s is al&s;o &s;aid to <HI>ju|&s;tifie;</HI> &s;o <HI>Faith</HI> ju&s;tifies, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But when the que|&s;tion is put whereby, or by what a &s;inner is ju&s;tified in the &s;ight of God? it is u&s;ually in|tended of the <HI>formal cau&s;e</HI> of our <HI>Ju&s;tification;</HI> as if it had been put in the&s;e words, How comes it to pa&s;s that Believers are righteous in Gods account, as if they had (which they have not) a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s formally inherent in them&s;elves? or whence is it that Believers are by God di&s;charg'd from Hell, and accepted Righteous to eternal life, as if they were <HI>formal|ly</HI> Righteous by a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own? To which the An&s;wer is, It is by means of the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to them, and by means of that imputation, made as bene|ficial to them, as if it were formally inherent in them. Now the Definition given doth al&s;o con|tain the <HI>formal cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, <HI>viz.</HI> the imputation of Chri&s;ts Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedi|ence to us. For as a man is a man by being indu|ed with a rea&s;onable &s;oul; (or that is the <HI>form,</HI> or <HI>formalis ratio</HI> of a man) &s;o a Believer is ju&s;ti|fied by vertue of having the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to him, or being inve&s;ted with that Righteou&s;ne&s;s. But now according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> the acceptation of our &s;incere Obedience to the Go&s;pel is the <HI>formal cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tificati|on, or that by vertue whereof we become Ju&s;ti|fied.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="14" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="11" REF="8">
<HEAD>XIV.</HEAD>
<P>When we call the Imputation of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedience, the <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification; we do not take the word <HI>Form,</HI> or <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;e &s;trictly, and Phy&s;ically, as they do who thus define it, <HI>viz. Forma e&s;t interna cau&s;a per quam res e&s;t id quod e&s;t.</HI> For the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is not internal, nor inherent, in ju&s;tified per&s;ons; but external, foraign, and imputed; (though as to Ju&s;tification it &s;elf, it is intrin&s;ical, and &s;o is the imputing of it) but our meaning is this, that the manner of Gods ju&s;tifying a &s;in|ner, is by imputing to him the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Je&s;us Chri&s;t. A man doth not become ju&s;tified, or is not con&s;tituted ju&s;t by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t inhering in him, or dwelling in him, as the &s;oul doth in the body; but the Righteou&s;s+ne&s;s of Chri&s;t doth <HI>Ingredi Ju&s;tificationem,</HI> though not <HI>Ju&s;tificatum: i. e.</HI> entereth into the definition of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> though not into the Per&s;on Ju&s;tified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="15" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>When we &s;ay that Cod imputeth Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s to us, our meaning is nothing el&s;e but this; that he graciou&s;ly accepts for us, and in our behalf the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, as if we had in our own per&s;ons, &s;atisfied his Law. Bi&s;hop</HI> Davenant <HI>&s;aith,</HI> p. <HI>359.</HI> de Ju&s;titia Actu|ali, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Imputare alicui idem e&s;t in hac que&s;tione, atque inter ea quae &s;unt ip&s;ius, &amp; ad cum pertinent, illud connumerare, &amp; recen&s;ere.</P>
<PB N="12" REF="9">
<P><HI>Al&s;o B.</HI> Davenant, p. <HI>313.</HI> Quando formalem cau&s;am quaerimus Justitiae no&s;trae, id quaerimus prop|ter quod peccator in gratiam Dei recipitur, per quod immediate Deo gratus, &amp; ad vitam aeternam ac|ceptus stat, cujus beneficio damnatoriam legis &s;en|tentiam evadere, denique quo niti po&s;&s;it ac debeat ad Coele&s;tis judicis &s;avorem &amp; approbationem con|&s;equenaam.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="16" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XVI.</HEAD>
<P>The word <HI>Forme,</HI> or <HI>Formes,</HI> is u&s;ually ap|plyed not only to <HI>&s;ub&s;tantial</HI> Formes, which do give <HI>e&s;&s;e &s;impliciter,</HI> but al&s;o to <HI>accidental</HI> Forms, which do give <HI>e&s;&s;e tale:</HI> &s;o we &s;ay <HI>learning</HI> is the <HI>form</HI> by which a man is <HI>learned,</HI> and <HI>heat</HI> the form by which the fire is <HI>hot.</HI> So here, the <HI>form</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> is that by which a ju&s;tified man is not only reputed, and denominated &s;uch be|fore God, but is &s;o made, and con&s;tituted. Now becau&s;e by a pa&s;&s;ive denomination a man is &s;aid to be ju&s;tified; it is not nece&s;&s;ary that this deno|mination be taken from an inherent form, or &s;hould &s;uppo&s;e an inherent form. <HI>Ex gr.</HI> when we &s;ay that a man is beloved, honored, con|demned, or acquitted, all the&s;e things may be &s;aid of him in whom there is no inherent form, which may found, or be the foundation of the&s;e denominations. <HI>Va&s;quez</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Potest aliquid dici ju&s;tum extrin&s;ica &amp; aliena ju&s;titia.</HI></P>
<P><HI>N. B.</HI> But yet the name <HI>Ju&s;t,</HI> is not in Scrip|ture &s;o u&s;ually taken from an extrin&s;ick form, as is the name <HI>Ju&s;tified;</HI> for men are called Righ|teous, or holy in Scripture, from an inherent
<PB N="13" REF="9"> Righteou&s;ne&s;s, begun in them, but <HI>ju&s;tified</HI> only from the mo&s;t perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to them.</P>
<P>If therefore the name of a ju&s;tified per&s;on, and the benefit of Ju&s;tification, be not had by any form inherent in us, but by a re&s;pect had to &s;omething that is extrin&s;ical, it is manife&s;t that we are ju&s;tified by way of <HI>Imputation,</HI> and that that extrin&s;ick Righteou&s;ne&s;s, though it be not a Phy&s;ical form within us; yet doth &s;upply the room of &s;uch a thing, and in that &s;en&s;e is rightly called the <HI>formal cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification. <HI>Vide Davenant,</HI> p. 346. <HI>Per formalem cau&s;am Justifi|cationis nihil aliud intelligimus quam illud per quod &s;tamus in con&s;pectu Dei, a damnatione libera|ti, innocentes, gratificati, &amp; ad vitam aeternam acceptati,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="17" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XVII.</HEAD>
<P>That the Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, B. <HI>Davenant</HI> &s;heweth by the following Arguments, <HI>p.</HI> 362.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="18" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XVIII.</HEAD>
<P>The benefit of Chri&s;t's imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s doth not con&s;i&s;t in this, that thereby we are in|dowed with an inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s which may abide the &s;trict judgment of God; but that apprehending Chri&s;t by Faith, with re&s;pect to his Merits, we may be ab&s;olved from the con|demning power of the Law, and accepted to life eternal. <HI>Ergo,</HI> For this he quotes <HI>Joh.</HI> 3.16. and
<PB N="14" REF="10"> 18. &amp; <HI>Joh.</HI> 5.24. <HI>He that believeth on him that &s;ent me &s;hall not come into Judgment (or Condem|nation,</HI> &amp;c. Here, &s;aith he, I query what is the Judgment which they who believe on Chri&s;t &s;hall not come into, or are exempted from for Chri&s;t's &s;ake? Doubtle&s;s, &s;aith he, it is that &s;trict Judgment of God, when a Man is exa|mined according to the Rule of the <HI>Law,</HI> and is pronounced Righteous, or unrighteous, ac|cording as he is found exactly to an&s;wer, or not to an&s;wer thereunto, and is accordingly rewar|ded, or puni&s;hed. Therefore the Ju&s;tification, and Salvation of Believers, depends upon the&s;e, that by, and for the merits of Chri&s;t, they &s;hall be &s;o dealt with, as if they had a perfect Legal Righteou&s;ne&s;s in them&s;elves, p. 362, 365.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="19" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XIX.</HEAD>
<P>The di&s;obedience of <HI>Adam</HI> is &s;o imputed to his Po&s;terity that with re&s;pect to that they &s;tand guilty before God, and condemn'd to eternal puni&s;hment: Therefore the Obedience of Chri&s;t is &s;o imputed to his My&s;tical Members, that with re&s;pect to that, they &s;tand <HI>ju&s;tified</HI> before God, and accepted to Eternal Life. The Con&s;equence he proves from <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">9. <HI>Bel|larmin</HI> him&s;elf, <HI>De Ami&s;&s;. Gratiae, Lib.</HI> 5.17. &s;aith, <HI>the Di&s;obedience wilfully committed by</HI> Adam <HI>made his Po&s;terity guilty of Death, and hateful to God, and that that very &s;in of his was communica|ted to us by imputation. For it was imputed</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>to all that are born of</HI> Adam (<HI>or that &s;prang from</HI> Adam) <HI>becau&s;e we all being in the loins
<PB N="15" REF="10"> of</HI> Adam <HI>did &s;in in him, and by him when he &s;in|ned.</HI> See B. <HI>Davenant,</HI> p. 363. 364.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="20" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XX.</HEAD>
<P><HI>God with re&s;pect to the Obedience of Chri&s;t, even to the death of the Cro&s;s, hath freed us from the puni&s;hment due to the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ors of the</HI> Law, <HI>by imputing to us that Satisfaction of another as if it had been ours.</HI> Ergo; Bellarmin <HI>him&s;elf,</HI> De Ju&s;tit Lib. <HI>2.</HI> Cap. <HI>10. &s;aith,</HI> Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be our Righteou&s;ne&s;s becau&s;e he &s;atisfied his Father for us, and doth &s;o communicate that &s;a|tisfaction to us, when he ju&s;tifieth us, that it may be called our &s;atisfaction, and righteou&s;ne&s;s. It would not be ab&s;urd <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> if one &s;hould &s;ay that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s and merits of Chri&s;t are imputed to us for that they are given and applyed to us as if we had &s;atisfied God our &s;elves. B. Dave|nant, p. 364. How much more Orthodox is <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf in this la&s;t pa&s;&s;age (if not in the former al&s;o) than Mr. <HI>Sh.?</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="21" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXI.</HEAD>
<P>Scripture acknowledgeth the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t to be ours who believe, <HI>viz.</HI> in, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.30. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. &amp; <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.9. Now, ours it cannot be otherwi&s;e than by <HI>Imputation.</HI> Now the making of that perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s ours, wherefore is it but to &s;upply the ab&s;ence of that perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s which ought to be in us, but is not? Therefore the Imputed Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, doth in Ju&s;tification &s;upply the place of a <HI>Formal Cau&s;e. B. Davenant,</HI> p. 366.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="22" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="16" REF="11">
<HEAD>XXII.</HEAD>
<P>Again, B. <HI>Davenant</HI> u&s;eth this Argument. They who being cloathed with Chri&s;t, and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s are accepted to eternal Life, in them this imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s (as to the benefit of Ju&s;tification,) is in the Nature of a formal Cau&s;e. But all Believers are &s;o cloath|ed with Chri&s;t, and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>Gal.</HI> 6.26, 27 <HI>Eph.</HI> 1.6. <HI>Who hath made us accepted to him&s;elf in his beloved.</HI> Therefore our imper|fect Righteou&s;ne&s;s cannot render us accepted with God to Eternal Life, but it behoveth us to appear before him cloathed with the Garment of our Elder Brother, as <HI>Jacob</HI> did when he &s;ought the Ble&s;&s;ing. Which Similitude Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> derideth, yet <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf &s;aith, <HI>Sano modo &s;imilitudinem indumenti Chri&s;ti accommodari po&s;&s;e ju&s;titiae imputatae.</HI> B. <HI>Davenant</HI> adds, that we being cloathed with the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t by God's donation, and the application of Faith, it doth no le&s;s conduce to our Ju&s;ti|fication than it would do if it were <HI>formally</HI> in|herent, and in that &s;en&s;e we may call it the <HI>for|mal Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="23" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Again, the Bi&s;hop afore&s;aid argueth thus, He who was made a <HI>Surety</HI> for us, and took upon him the payment of our whole Debt, his O|bedience is imputed to us, and being imputed availeth as much as if it were inherent in us. But &s;o was Chri&s;t, <HI>Heb.</HI> 7.22. Now to be as
<PB N="17" REF="11"> advantagious, and available to us, as if it were inherent, is (&s;aith he) <HI>&s;upplere vicem cau&s;ae formalis.</HI> Hence we are &s;aid to be compleat in Chri&s;t. Dr. <HI>Hammond,</HI> in his Catechi&s;m, p. 489. puts this Que&s;tion, <HI>How was the pardon of &s;in purcha&s;ed?</HI> His An&s;wer is, <HI>By the &s;atisfaction wrought by him in his &s;ufferings taking upon him to be our Surety, and to &s;uffer in our &s;tead, that as many as are renewed by his Grace may be relea&s;ed by his &s;ufferings,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="24" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Another Argument of Bp. <HI>D.</HI> is this.</P>
<P>The Scriptures which do affirm that Faith is imputed to us for Righteou&s;ne&s;s do plainly &s;hew that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is imputed to Believers; for tho&s;e Texts mu&s;t needs be meant of Faith as it apprehendeth it's object, and ap|plyeth Chri&s;t and his &s;aving Righteou&s;ne&s;s to believers. For nothing is more u&s;ual than to at|tribute that to the cau&s;e applying which proper|ly and immediately belongs to the thing apply|ed; whereas <HI>Bellarmin</HI> calleth Imputed Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>Imaginatio Ju&s;titiae, cui veritas non re|&s;pondet</HI> (or, with Mr. <HI>Sh. an imaginary Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s;</HI>) Bp. <HI>D.</HI> replyeth, <HI>When God reputes us Righteous by Faith, the Truth an&s;wering to this e&s;ti|mation is not the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t formally inherent in us, but the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t re|ally participated, and given to us by Divine appoint|ment: God does not think us to be inherently ju&s;t, but for that imputation he e&s;teems us freed from the damnation of Sin, and accepted to Eternal Life.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="25" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="18" REF="12">
<HEAD>XXV.</HEAD>
<P>The fore-&s;aid Excellent Bi&s;hop argueth fur|ther thus; either the Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of our <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> or it only interveneth to obtain for us &s;ome other <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification. But not the latter, &s;aith he, <HI>Ergo</HI> the former.</P>
<P>He goes on to &s;hew how our fir&s;t <GAP DESC="foreign">, or entrance into the favour of Go<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, is by the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, apprehended by Faith, <HI>Rom</HI> 8.5. <HI>Being ju&s;tified by Faith we have Peace with God through our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> v. 2. <HI>By whom al&s;o we have acce&s;s by Faith into this grace.</HI> Then that our <HI>&s;tanding,</HI> or abiding, and continuing in that favour of God, is not by own Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s he proveth from the following words, <HI>wherein we &s;tand,</HI> viz. by the &s;ame Faith, and by the &s;ame Chri&s;t. Yea, further (&s;aith he) our acceptation to Glory is not from inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but from our Mediator and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, for it followeth; <HI>And rejoyce</HI> (viz. by Faith) <HI>in hope of the glory of God:</HI> i. e. by the &s;ame Faith we expect glory, by the &s;ame Chri&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="26" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Another Argument which <HI>B. Davenant</HI> u&s;eth, is this; Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s is nothing el&s;e but the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t applyed, and given to us, to produce &s;ome Spiritual effect. For when God with re&s;pect unto Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s vouch&s;afeth to deal with us as if
<PB N="19" REF="12"> it were our own (inherently) then he is &s;aid to impute it to us. But Righteou&s;ne&s;s &s;o ap|plyed and given to us, though it be not in us after the manner of a Phy&s;ical form, yet hath the efficacy of a <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> by Divine Ordi|nation and Acceptation. One and the &s;ame Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t con&s;idered in its &s;elf, and its own worth is the <HI>Meritorious cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, but con&s;idered as <HI>imputed,</HI> given, and applyed as their own to all Believers, &s;up|lyes the place of a <HI>Formal Cau&s;e.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="27" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXVII.</HEAD>
<P>The la&s;t Argument of the Excellent Bi&s;hop afore-&s;aid proving the <HI>Imputation</HI> of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s to be the <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, is as followeth.</P>
<P>If there be but one <GAP DESC="foreign"> or Righteou&s;ne&s;s that can avail to Ju&s;tification of Life, and that be the Obedience of Chri&s;t alone, then certain it is that Ju&s;tification doth belong to none but tho&s;e that are partakers of that Righteou&s;ne&s;s. But this is in plain words A&s;&s;erted by the Apo|&s;tle, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.18. <HI>For as by the offence of one Judg|ment came upon all men to condemnation: even &s;o by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of one the free gift came upon all men to Ju&s;tification of life.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>per unam justitiam exactam.</HI> Therefore the Ju&s;tifica|tion of life doth not redound from any quality inherent in us, but this compleat Righteou&s;ne&s;s of our Mediator, given, and imputed to us. Our inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s hath not (&s;aith he) <GAP DESC="foreign">, that is, (according to him) a compleat, and
<PB N="20" REF="13"> ab&s;olute perfection of Righteou&s;ne&s;s; therefore it cannot produce in us ju&s;tification of life, which is a mo&s;t perfect effect of a mo&s;t perfect cau&s;e: Therefore the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is to us in&s;tead of a <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> con&s;tituting our <HI>Ju&s;tification.</HI> In <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">8. where 'tis &s;aid, <HI>By the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of one,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, the true gift came upon all to the Ju&s;tification of life <GAP DESC="foreign">, by the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> is meant not <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> the effect, called <GAP DESC="foreign">; but the one only Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">reby we are ju&s;tified. And it &s;eems mor<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> proper to tran&s;late it <HI>So by one Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>per unam</HI> rather than <HI>per unius ju&s;titiam;</HI> For the Apo&s;tle does not &s;ay <GAP DESC="foreign"> (as in the next, <GAP DESC="foreign">) with an arti|cle, and the Adjective put after the Sub&s;tantive. Moreover, to tran&s;late it by <HI>one</HI> Right<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ou&s;ne&s;s, rather than by the <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s of one</HI> doth bet|ter accord and an&s;wer to <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.18. <HI>As by one offence</HI> (and &s;o it is in our Mar|gent) moreover the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> there &s;eems to &s;ignifie more than <HI>Ju&s;titia,</HI> viz. <HI>Ju&s;tificamen,</HI> or <HI>Ju&s;tificamentem</HI> (if we may make &s;uch words) or as the <HI>French</HI> tran&s;late it, <HI>Ju&s;tice Ju&s;tifi|cante.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="28" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>We have put in the word, <HI>only,</HI> into the De|finition of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> that thereby we might exclude all fal&s;ely pretended <HI>Material,</HI> and <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;es of our Ju&s;tification, by &s;aying we are accounted Righteous, <HI>only,</HI> for the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s,
<PB N="21" REF="13"> and Obedience of Chri&s;t, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> to &s;hew, that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the only <HI>Matter,</HI> and the <HI>Imputation</HI> thereof the only <HI>Forme</HI> of our Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="29" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXIX.</HEAD>
<P>To the Arguments which have been already brought, I would a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d, If <HI>Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> be not the <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, ei|ther we may be ju&s;tified without any Righteou&s;|ne&s;s at all, or we mu&s;t be ju&s;tified by <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> as the <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;e of our Ju&s;ti|fication; But neither can we be ju&s;tified without any real Righteou&s;ne&s;s on the one hand, nor yet by vertue of an <HI>Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> on the o|ther hand: <HI>Ergo,</HI> we mu&s;t be ju&s;tified by Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s Imputed.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="30" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXX.</HEAD>
<P>Common &s;en&s;e will tell us, that for a man to be, or to be made Righteous, (which is all one with <HI>Ju&s;tified,</HI> for &s;o are all that are Ju&s;tified) without any Righteou&s;ne&s;s of his own inherent, or imputed, is again&s;t &s;en&s;e, and rea&s;on, as much as to &s;ay that a man can be truly rich, and yet neither have any e&s;tate of his own, nor the u&s;e of any other mans; or be very wi&s;e, and yet neither have any head-piece of his own, nor yet the advice and coun&s;el of any other wi&s;er than him&s;elf. The judgment of God is accor|ding to truth. If God did not make a Believer perfectly Righteous, as to guilt, and condem|nation, by vertue of Chri&s;t's Obedience imputed
<PB N="22" REF="14"> to him, he could not account him &s;o, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Philo|&s;ophers &s;ay <HI>Deus ip&s;e non potest &s;upplere defectum cau&s;ae formalis. ex gr.</HI> God cannot make a man without a rea&s;onable &s;oul, or a wi&s;e man with|out wi&s;dome, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> For &s;o to do doth <HI>implicare.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="31" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXI.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Inherent</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s cannot be the <HI>formael cau&s;e</HI> of our <HI>Ju&s;tification:</HI> Therefore <HI>Imputed</HI> mu&s;t, &s;ith we cannot be ju&s;tified without a Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, and there are but the&s;e two &s;orts: For all Righteou&s;ne&s;s is either <HI>Inherent,</HI> or <HI>Im|puted.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="32" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXII.</HEAD>
<P>To prove that we cannot be ju&s;tified by Inhe|rent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or that, that cannot be the Formal cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification Bp. <HI>D.</HI> brings &s;even following Arguments contained in &s;everal Paragraphs, or Sections, one in each <HI>&amp;c.</HI> p. 346.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="33" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>If we are ju&s;tified by Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, as the Formal cau&s;e, than either by Habitual, or Actual, not by Habitual (according to the Papi&s;ts) For many of them do &s;ay that it is not <HI>de fide,</HI> but a meer probable thing that there is any &s;uch thing as a <HI>habit,</HI> or habits of Grace in|infu&s;ed into Believers. And as for Actual Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, the <HI>Coun&s;el of TRENT,</HI> denieth that any man is <HI>Justified</HI> thereby, <HI>Bellarmin</HI> de <HI>Ju&s;tit.</HI> lib. 2. cap. 15. Neither can Actual Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s be counted <HI>Inherent,</HI> properly, becau&s;e
<PB N="23" REF="14"> it con&s;i&s;ts not in permanent qualities, but in tran&s;ient acts, which are &s;aid to <HI>flow</HI> from the &s;oul, not to <HI>inhere</HI> in it, for they abide no where.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="34" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>If we are formally ju&s;tified by Inherent Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, then it mu&s;t be by that Inherent per|fect Righteou&s;ne&s;s which is accompanied with Actual Righteou&s;ne&s;s that is perfect al&s;o: but there is no &s;uch Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s in this life; and if there were, and he that had it &s;hould not perfectly live, and act according to it, he would be &s;o far from being ju&s;tifi'd thereby, that it would aggravate his Condemnation. <HI>That our Ju&s;tification mu&s;t be by a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and no otherwi&s;e is evident, becau&s;e</HI> the Scripture &s;aith, <HI>cur&s;ed is he that cyntinueth not in all to do them,</HI> Gal 3.10. <HI>Al&s;o for</HI> that the Apo&s;tle ha|ving &s;aid, <HI>By the works of the Law is no fle&s;h ju&s;ti|fied in Gods &s;ight, which he confirms in</HI> the remain|der of that, <HI>and in the</HI> next whole Chapter, <HI>viz. Rom.</HI> 4. al&s;o in <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. <HI>The Arguments which he</HI> brings to prove it are &s;uch as the&s;e, <HI>viz. Becau&s;e we have all &s;inned, and come &s;hort of the glory of God Becau&s;e we are ju&s;tified</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, which implies a deficiency of Merit. Al&s;o becau&s;e they are &s;aid to be <HI>Ble&s;&s;ed who&s;e &s;ins are covered, which implies,</HI> that the works of Ju&s;tified Per&s;ons are mixt with &s;in, and therefore cannot ju&s;tifie them Al&s;o, If Ju&s;tification were by works, Chri&s;t had died in vain, and Faith were vain we were yet under the Cur&s;e, <HI>&amp;c. All which pa&s;&s;ages do &s;hew that an imperfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s cannot justifie us,</HI> (for
<PB N="24" REF="15"> el&s;e they are not conclu&s;ive) and a perfect in|herent Righteou&s;ne&s;s we neither have, nor can have in this Life.</P>
<P>Whereas the Papi&s;ts &s;ay, that the works by St. <HI>Paul</HI> excluded from Ju&s;tification, are only the works of the <HI>&V;nregenerate:</HI> that is manife&s;tly fal&s;e; for in the places quoted, he excludeth from Ju&s;tification the Works of <HI>Abraham</HI> when Cir|cumci&s;ed, Regenerate, and a true Believer, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. So <HI>David</HI> acknowledgeth that the works of the Regenerate could not &s;tand before the &s;trict Judgment of God, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 143.2. &s;ee <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.15, 16.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="35" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification ought to have &s;uch efficacy, as after &s;in committed, to compen&s;ate, or &s;atisfie for the injury done to the Divine Maje&s;ty: But by a Created quality (&s;uch as <HI>Inherent</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s is) God cannot be &s;atisfied for the injury done to him. The of|fence given, and injury done to God by every wilful (or mortal) &s;in is infinite, as <HI>T. Aquinas part</HI> 3. <HI>qu. art.</HI> 2. &s;aith, <HI>Peccatum contra Deum Commi&s;&s;um quandem infinitatam habet, infinitate Divinae Maje&s;tatis.</HI> That it is &s;o is apparent by Gods threatning infinite puni&s;hment for every &s;uch &s;in, and by the common confe&s;&s;ion of the Schoolmen, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Now 'tis impo&s;&s;ible that by a quality of but a finite Virtue and Dignity, an offence of infinite Indignity &s;hould be blotted out, or compen&s;ated and &s;atisfied for. Bp. <HI>D.</HI> p. 350.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="36" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="25" REF="15">
<HEAD>XXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>If Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s be the Formal cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification; then it expelleth the contrary Forme, <HI>viz.</HI> Inherent Sin, at its fir&s;t coming, and at the fir&s;t informing of its &s;ubject. This Propo&s;ition is not only granted by the Papi&s;ts, (<HI>Va&s;quez</HI> and others) but laid as a great Foun|dation. But Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s cannot do that. Witne&s;s <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 64.6. <HI>We are all as an unclean thing, and our Righteou&s;ne&s;s as filthy raggs,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Job</HI> 9.30, 31. <HI>Dan.</HI> 9.7. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 9.15. All the&s;e were indowed with with Inherent Grace, yet they all own them&s;elves to be &s;potted with &s;in.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="37" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>He that is formally ju&s;tified by Inherent Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, from the time he he hath attained that quality is acceptable to God, and worthy of eternal life by vertue of that quality, without the &s;upervening Grace of God, and Imputation of the Merits of Chri&s;t. For according to the Papi&s;ts, the Formal cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, from the nature of the thing, doth ab&s;olutely make us acceptable to God, and worthy of Heaven. But certain it is, that we do &s;tand accepted with God, and to eternal happine&s;s, not by the effi|cacy, dignity, and vertue of this infu&s;ed quality, but by the Merit of the Mediator. For if it be enquired, how we come to be received as the Children of God, the Scripture an&s;wereth, by, and for Chri&s;t: not by, and for the Sanctity that is be&s;towed upon us. <HI>Gal.</HI> 4.4. <HI>God &s;ent his Son
<PB N="26" REF="16"> that he might Redeem tho&s;e that are under the Law, that we might receive the Adoption of Sons. And becau&s;e ye are Sons he hath &s;ent the &s;pirit of his Son into your hearts.</HI> He do's not &s;ay Ye are received for Sons, becau&s;e the Spirit hath impre&s;t Inhe|rent Holine&s;s upon you; but <HI>e contra.</HI> So that <HI>Inherent Holine&s;s</HI> is not the cau&s;e of Son&s;hip, but the Con&s;equent. Again, If it be enquired why we are accepted with God to eternal life; the Scripture an&s;wereth, not by our <HI>Inherent</HI> Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, but by the favour of God in Chri&s;t our Mediator <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.9. <HI>Being ju&s;tified by his bloud, we &s;hall be delivered from wrath by him.</HI> Al&s;o, <HI>Rom.</HI> 6.32. <HI>The Gift of God is Eternal Life by Je&s;us Chri&s;t our Lord,</HI> (not by Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but by Chri&s;t, Bp. <HI>D.</HI> p. 352, 353.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="38" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Chri&s;t re&s;igneth to no Creature the proper Works of a <HI>Mediator:</HI> Therefore he doth not confer upon <HI>Inherent</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s, that that &s;hould take away our &s;ins, &s;hould reconcile us to God, &s;hould render us accepted to eternal life, and con&s;equently he hath not made that to be the <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="39" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>The Formal cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification ought to be &s;uch, as to which a Believer may &s;afely, and boldly commit him&s;elf in trouble of Con&s;cience, and in the Agony of Death. But none of the Pa|pi&s;ts have dared to tru&s;t to their own Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, when under &s;erious Temptations, when
<PB N="27" REF="16"> Con&s;cience was &s;truck with a true &s;en&s;e of &s;in, and of the Wrath of God, and &s;natcht, as it were, before the Tribunal of God. See B. <HI>Downam</HI> p. 202, 203. By which it appeareth that the Pa|pi&s;ts them&s;elves, when under the expectations of death, or trouble of Con&s;cience, are more Orthodox, than Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> now is, in the point of Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="40" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XL.</HEAD>
<P>He is not ju&s;tified by his own Inherent Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s who &s;tands ju&s;tified by that that he re|ceiveth from God daily the pardon of his unrigh|teou&s;ne&s;s. But we do all &s;in daily, and daily ask the forgivene&s;s of &s;in: Therefore we acknow|ledge that we do not &s;tand ju&s;tified, or worthy of Heaven, by a quality of Righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>Inhe|rent</HI> in us; but that by the Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, and favor of God, life eternal is given to us, who are mo&s;t unworthy, for Chri&s;ts &s;ake.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="41" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLI.</HEAD>
<P>If the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t be the <HI>Matter,</HI> or <HI>Material</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, then the <HI>Imputation</HI> thereof is the <HI>Form,</HI> or <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;e thereof. But the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Matter</HI> of our Ju&s;tification. By the <HI>Mat|ter</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, I mean that Righteou&s;|ne&s;s by which we are ju&s;tified; I &s;ay if it be &s;o, then <HI>Imputation,</HI> or the <HI>Imputing</HI> of that Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s mu&s;t be the <HI>Forme:</HI> For it is the way, and manner in which we are ju&s;tified, or where|by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t comes to be as u&s;eful to us, for matter of Ju&s;tification; as if it
<PB N="28" REF="17"> an internal, inherently formal Righteou&s;ne&s;s, which were in &s;trictne&s;s of &s;peaking, that form whereby we were made ju&s;t, or Righteous. Now that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Material Cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, I prove by the en&s;uing Arguments</P>
<P N="1">1. The Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are ju&s;ti|fied is God's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, not ours, <HI>Rom.</HI> 1.17. <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.21. The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which is out of us in him is God's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 1.2. that which is inherent in us is ours: therefore we are ju&s;tified by the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, which is out of us in him, and not by that which is inherent in our &s;elves. Now in <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.3. There is &s;uch an oppo&s;ition made betwixt God's Righteou&s;ne&s;s and ours, in the point of Ju&s;tification; that who&s;oever &s;eek to be ju&s;tified by their own Righteou&s;ne&s;s, can|not be ju&s;tified by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God. Bp. <HI>D.</HI> p. 127, 128.</P>
<P N="2">2. That is the <HI>matter</HI> of our Ju&s;tification be|fore God, by which we being &s;inners in our &s;elves do &s;tand righteous before God, which we being &s;inners may oppo&s;e to the Judgment of God, why he &s;hould not condemn us, which we may plead as a full &s;atisfaction to God for us: &s;uch is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t. For being &s;inners in our &s;elves, yet believing in Chri&s;t, we are in him accepted, and con&s;tituted Righteous, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.19.</P>
<P N="3">3. By that Righteou&s;ne&s;s of man which only is <HI>perfect</HI> we are ju&s;tified, and not by that which is <HI>imperfect.</HI> The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, which
<PB N="29" REF="17"> is out of us in him, is the only Righteou&s;ne&s;s of man which is <HI>perfect,</HI> and all our inherent Righ|terou&s;ne&s;s in this life is <HI>imperfect. Ergo.</HI> The Pro|po&s;ition needeth no proof; for that Ju&s;tice which is not perfect cannot &s;tand in judgment before God, and is &s;o far from ju&s;tifying, that it &s;elf is &s;inful, every imperfection, and defect, being <GAP DESC="foreign">, a tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of the Law, and con&s;e|quently a &s;in. <HI>Augu&s;tin</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Peccatum e&s;t cum charitas minor e&s;t quam debet.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. By that Righteou&s;ne&s;s alone, and by no other we are ju&s;tified, by which the Law is fully &s;ati<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">fied, and not by any Righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent in us, or performed by us. Therefore we are ju|&s;tified by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t alone, and not by any Righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>inherent</HI> in us, or per|formed by us. Three things are here to be ac|knowledged. Fir&s;t, That who&s;oever is ju&s;tified, is made ju&s;t by &s;ome Righteou&s;ne&s;s; for to think a man &s;hould be ju&s;tified without ju&s;tice, is as ab|&s;urd as to think a man is cloathed without ap|parel.</P>
<P>Secondly, That all true Righteou&s;ne&s;s is con|formity to the Law of God, which is that per|fect Rule of Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</P>
<P>Thirdly, That there can be no Ju&s;tification without the Law be &s;atisfied, either by our &s;elves, or by another for us, <HI>Mat.</HI> 5.17. <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.31. Now by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t the Law is fully &s;atisfied; but by any other Righteou&s;|nee&s;s inherent in us, or performed by us, the Law neither is, nor can be fully &s;atisfied.</P>
<P N="5">5. By what Righteou&s;ne&s;s we are <HI>ab&s;olved,
<PB N="30" REF="18"> redeemed, Reconciled;</HI> and for which we &s;hall be <HI>&s;aved,</HI> by it we are ju&s;tified. But by the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t alone, we are <HI>ab&s;olved</HI> from our &s;ins, <HI>redeemed</HI> from our iniquities, <HI>reconci|led</HI> to God, and &s;hall be <HI>&s;aved. Ergo,</HI> The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>matter</HI> of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, or the only Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s by which we are ju&s;tified. To prove the <HI>Major,</HI> read <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.5, 6, 7, 8. where <HI>Ju&s;tifica|tion</HI> and <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion, or Ab&s;olution</HI> are &s;poken of promi&s;cuou&s;ly.</P>
<P>Again the benefit of Redemption is explained by <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion</HI> of &s;in, <HI>Eph.</HI> 1.7. <HI>Col.</HI> 1.14. <HI>Titus</HI> 2.14. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 133.8.</P>
<P>Again, Being reconciled to God, and being ju&s;tified are u&s;ed promi&s;cuou&s;ly, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.9, 10. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.14.</P>
<P>Again, Salvation, and Ju&s;tification, are put one for the other; for that which is the <HI>Matter</HI> of Ju&s;tification, is the <HI>merit</HI> of Salvation: for by what we are ju&s;tified, by that we are intituled to Salvation; and by what we receceive remi&s;&s;i|on of &s;ins, by that al&s;o we receive our Inheri|tance. Ju&s;tification may be compared to the <HI>In|&s;titution</HI> of a Mini&s;ter to a Benefice, which giveth <HI>Jus ad rem</HI> Glorification to <HI>Induction,</HI> which gi|veth <HI>Jus in re,</HI> or po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God by which we are ju&s;tified is not pre&s;cribed in the Law to Ju&s;ti|fication, but without the Law is revealed in the Go&s;pel, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.21. Therefore not inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but that is the matter of our Ju&s;tification: for the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God is
<PB N="31" REF="18"> not pre&s;cribed in the Law to ju&s;tiefication, but <HI>Inherent</HI> Righteov&s;ne&s;s is, this being the great difference betwixt the Law, and the Go&s;pel, that the Law to Ju&s;tification requireth perfect Obedi|ence to be performed in our own per&s;ons: The Go&s;pel propoundeth the Obedience of Chri&s;t, which he performed for us to be accepted in their behalf who believe in him. Wherefore (&s;aith Bp. <HI>D.</HI> p. 200. alluding to <HI>Gal.</HI> 1.8, 9.) <HI>Let him be h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ld accur&s;ed, though he were an Apo|&s;tle, though an Angel from Heaven, who &s;hall teach Justification by the Legal Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and not by the Evangelical.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. The matter of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before Cod, as it is not <HI>only</HI> our Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, &s;o neither is it that in part: For we are not ju&s;ti|fied before God, both by Faith and by Works, by Gods Righteou&s;ne&s;s and our own, by that Righteou&s;ne&s;s which is out of Chri&s;t in us, and that which is inherent in our &s;elves: For the Scripture maketh &s;uch an oppo&s;ition betwixt the&s;e two, as that they cannot &s;tand together, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3 28. <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.4, 5.9. 3, 31, 32. 11.5, 6. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.9. <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.16.3.11. <HI>Eph.</HI> 2.8, 9. <HI>Ergo.</HI> The only matter of our Ju&s;tification is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedience of Chri&s;t, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.9, 19.</P>
<P N="8">8. An Imputative, not an Inherent righteou&s;|ne&s;s is the matter of our Ju&s;tification, and there|fore the righteou&s;de&s;s of Chri&s;t is it. For proof of that matter, &s;ee <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.19. where it is called the <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s of one, whereas if it were a Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s from him in us, it would be the Ju&s;tice of &s;o many as are ju&s;tified,</HI> as the <HI>Councel of Trent</HI> &s;peak|eth,
<PB N="32" REF="19"> <HI>Ju&s;titiam in nobis recipientes unusqui&s;que &s;uam.</HI></P>
<P N="9">9. That Ju&s;tification which the Scripture teacheth taketh away all manner of boa&s;ting, <HI>Rom,</HI> 3.27. <HI>Eph.</HI> 2.9. But the owning of Chri&s;t his righteou&s;ne&s;s for the only matter of our Ju&s;ti|fication, only taketh away boa&s;ting. Therefore that is, and ought to be &s;o owned. They that make as if our &s;incere Obedience were the mat|ter of our Ju&s;tification, do &s;peak as if the <HI>Cove|nant of Grace,</HI> and the other <HI>of Works,</HI> did differ only <HI>gradu not Specie</HI> and both did yield matter of boa&s;ting, only the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> the le&s;s of the two.</P>
<P N="10">10. The Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby <HI>Abraham, David,</HI> and <HI>Paul,</HI> were ju&s;tified, was the righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t: Therefore that is the only matter of our righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, or the only righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we can be ju&s;tified, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.3, 4, 5, 23, 24. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 143.2. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 71.16. 1 <HI>Cor</HI> 4.4. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.8, 9. To the&s;e we might add <HI>Job, E&s;ay,</HI> and <HI>Daniel, Job</HI> 9.2, 3.15.20.10.15.42.6. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 6.1, 5. <HI>Dan.</HI> 6.7, 18.</P>
<P N="11">11. What righteou&s;ne&s;s God accepteth on our behalf by that we are ju&s;tified: the righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which he performed for us in his fle&s;h, God accepteth on our behalf. <HI>Ergo:</HI> By that we are Ju&s;tified, or <HI>that is</HI> the matter of our Ju&s;tification. <HI>This very Argument</HI> Bellarmin <HI>u&s;eth again&s;t</HI> O&s;iander, <HI>De Ju&s;tif.</HI> lib. 2. cap. 5. <HI>Otherwi&s;e</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>Why did the Son of God take our fle&s;h upon him, why became he obedient unto death?</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P N="12">12. Only a righteou&s;ne&s;s of infinite value, can
<PB N="33" REF="19"> be a &s;atisfaction for &s;in (&s;o <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf &s;aith in the &s;ame place) Such is the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t only in regard of the dignity of his Per&s;on, &amp;c. <HI>Ergo.</HI> The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t only can be the matter of our Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s before God.</P>
<P N="13">13. The Scripture &s;peaks of our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s being in Chri&s;t, and of our being Righte|ous in him, or of Chri&s;t being our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s. <HI>Ergo. I&s;a.</HI> 45.24, 25. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.8, 9. <HI>Jer.</HI> 23.6. <HI>Jer.</HI> 33.16. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.30. The&s;e Texts Bp. <HI>Downam</HI> hath for imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, which Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI> rejects as nothing to that purpo&s;e. See Bp. <HI>Downam,</HI> p. 224. <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf confe&s;&s;eth, <HI>that Chri&s;t is called our Righteou&s;ne&s;s, becau&s;e he &s;atisfied his Father for us, which his Satisfaction</HI> he doth &s;o give and communicate <HI>to us when he doth ju&s;tifie us that it may be called our Satisfaction and our Righteou&s;ne&s;s. This Confe&s;&s;ion di&s;&s;olveth</HI> the very frame of his whole Doctrine of Ju&s;tification&punc; whereunto he hath taught that nothing concur|reth but Deletion of &s;in, and Infu&s;ion of Righteou&s;ne&s;s, which they &s;ay expelleth &s;in, &amp;c. As for Imputation of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, he, and his followers deride and &s;corn it. <HI>But</HI> here <HI>he confe&s;&s;eth, that in Ju&s;tification the Satisfaction of Chri&s;t is imputed to us and accepted of God in our behalf, as if we our &s;elves had &s;atisfied God,</HI> and <HI>that for that cau&s;e he is truly called our Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> How much more <HI>Orthodox is</HI> Bellarmin <HI>here than Air.</HI> She<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">lock?</P>
<P N="14">14. We are ju&s;tified by the Blood of Chri&s;t,
<PB N="34" REF="20"> <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.19. Therefore the Obedience of Chri&s;t, even to Death, is the matter of our Ju&s;tifica|tion.</P>
<P N="15">15. By the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t our &s;ins are <HI>covered as by a Garment, Ergo.</HI> That is the matter of our Ju&s;tification, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 32.1. For he is ju&s;tified who&s;e &s;ins are covered. See Bp. <HI>Downam,</HI> p. 226. &s;aith he, <HI>Bellarmin confe&s;&s;eth that the &s;imilitude,</HI> and the Example of <HI>Jacob</HI> may be accommodated to imputed Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, which Similitude Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;coffs at, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>N. B. Bellarmin</HI> would per&s;wade the world that we are &s;o ab&s;urd, as to teach that we are formally made ju&s;t by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of ano|ther; but (&s;aith Bp. <HI>Downam</HI>) we are well content that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are Sanctified, or formally made Righteous &s;hould not be <HI>Imputative,</HI> &s;o that they will confe&s;s that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t his whole Satisfact|ion, whereby we are ju&s;tified before God is im|puted to us, <HI>which they mu&s;t confe&s;s, or el&s;e they cannot be &s;aved,</HI> p. 227. Thus far he, &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="42" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLII.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas it may be enquired whether the <HI>Active,</HI> or <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI> Obedience of Chri&s;t, or both together, be the <HI>matter</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, and the Imputation thereof the <HI>Form:</HI> I An&s;wer, that the <HI>Active,</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI> Obedience of Chri&s;t, are both in a &s;en&s;e, and to a degree, imputed to Believers, though not in &s;o large a &s;en&s;e, as &s;ome have &s;aid, <HI>viz.</HI> as if Believers were reck|oned
<PB N="35" REF="20"> by Chri&s;t their Surety to have done what|&s;oever Chri&s;t him&s;elf did, <HI>viz.</HI> to have fulfilled all Righteou&s;ne&s;s, neither to have committed any thing which they ought not to have done, nor to have omitted any thing which they ought to have done: Or, as if Believers in Chri&s;t might have been &s;aid to have done what&s;oever he did in the Fle&s;h, or Chri&s;t to have done every thing that he did in their &s;tead, room, and be|half, and as it were for them.</P>
<P>For what&s;oever Je&s;us Chri&s;t was bound, as Man, by the Law of Creation, to do for him|&s;elf, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> to love God with all his heart, &amp;c. he could not be &s;aid to have done for others (&s;o as he is &s;aid to have &s;uffered for us) or Believers to have done, in, and by him: For as Chri&s;t could not have made atonement for our &s;ins if he had any &s;in of his own, <HI>Heb.</HI> 7.27. <HI>Such a High Prie&s;t became us who needed not daily as tho&s;e High-Prie&s;ts to Offer up &s;acrifice fir&s;t for his own &s;in, and then for the People's,</HI> &amp;c. So what Duty and ob&s;ervance Chri&s;t had to pay for him&s;elf, he could not be &s;aid to have pre&s;ented to God upon our account, or we to have fulfilled the&s;e things in him, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> That we in Chri&s;t did love God, tru&s;t in God, delight to do the Will of God, or that fora&s;much as he did it we may be &s;aid to have done it al&s;o. That I &s;ay is not true. Were that true, that Chri&s;t had done every thing that the Law of God requires that Believers &s;hould do, or &s;hould ever have done; and that upon their account, that they in, and by him might have been reckoned to have
<PB N="36" REF="21"> kept the whole Law of God perfectly, and God to have accepted of his Active Obedience, in|&s;tead of theirs, two things would follow, <HI>viz</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. Then there were no need of the <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI> Obedience or &s;ufferings of Chri&s;t on our behalf, &s;ith believers might plead not guilty to the whole Law of God, upon the account of having com|pleatly an&s;wered to every tittle thereof, by Chri&s;t their Surety, who was appointed of God to Officiate in their &s;tead.</P>
<P N="2">2. Neither then would it be needful for us to keep the Law of God, to our power in our own Per&s;ons &s;ith it had been kept, and ob&s;erved for us by way of proxy, allowed of God for that purpo&s;e. To be &s;ure it would be unju&s;t for God to puni&s;h us for not ob&s;erving his Law our &s;elves, &s;o long as it was punctually ob&s;erved by Chri&s;t, whom him&s;elf (according to that Opi|nion) did admit, and allow of, to keep, and ob&s;erve it upon our account. He who hath his place excellently well Officiated and &s;upplyed by an able Proxy, allowed, and admitted to Officiate for him, is no more to be blam'd, or kept from his reward, than if he had &s;erv'd it in his own Per&s;on. But both the&s;e are great in|conveniencies and ab&s;urdities, <HI>viz.</HI> either to &s;ay that we are not bound, upon pain of damnati|on, unto obeying the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t, and keeping the Laws of God in our own Per&s;on, (which is the thing called Holine&s;s, without which no Man &s;hall &s;ee God:) Or el&s;e to &s;ay that Chri&s;t dyed in vain, or that the <HI>Pa&s;&s;ive</HI>
<PB N="37" REF="21"> obedience of our Saviour was needle&s;s, and &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|perfluous, as it would have been, if Chri&s;t hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> active obedience had been &s;o reckoned, and im|puted to us, that we &s;hould be accounted of God to have done what&s;oever he did, <HI>i e.</HI> to have f<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">l|fill'd all righteou&s;ne&s;s actually, and actively, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="43" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Yet neverthele&s;s Je&s;us Chri&s;t his conformity to the whole Law of God, or being made un|der the Law, con&s;ider it as a part of his <HI>Humili|ation,</HI> and Exinanition, was certainly one part, and degree of the <HI>Satisfaction,</HI> which he made to the Ju&s;tice of God for Believers. For though it behoved Chri&s;t when he became man, and dwelt among&s;t men, to have been conformable to the Law of his Creation, it doth not follow that by that his conformity to the Law he did no way &s;atisfie for us. For if any man being free, and <HI>&s;ui juris,</HI> do oblige him&s;elf not only to die, on the behalf of another, but to &s;erve a hard Ap|prenti&s;hip fir&s;t, may he not be &s;aid to make &s;a|tisfaction in part, as well by the hard &s;ervice which he undergoes, as by dying for him at the expiration of &s;uch a time of &s;ervitude? For though he were bound upon pain of pre&s;ent death, to &s;uch acts of &s;ervitude, or &s;lavery, af|ter that he had taken that condition upon him, yet fora&s;much as he was not bound to have ta|ken upon him the condition of a &s;lave, or &s;er|vant, but that it was his free will, and plea&s;ure, &s;o to do, in order to &s;atisfying the debt, or of|fence
<PB N="38" REF="22"> of another per&s;on: I &s;ay, in that regard, his &s;o doing could not be &s;aid to be the paying of one debt with another. A <HI>Surety</HI> when he has ta|ken upon him that relation is bound to pay the whole debt, if the Principal debtor faileth; do's it therefore follow, that becau&s;e it belongs to him, in that ca&s;e, as he is a Surety, to pay the debt, that therefore his payment is not &s;ati&s;|factory, or that it is but the paying of one debt with another? <HI>viz.</HI> the debt of his friend, with the debt of his <HI>&s;ureti&s;hip,</HI> or of his relation as a Surety? Fora&s;much as he was voluntarily a Surety, in order to freeing, or &s;atisfying &s;uch a debt (which he needed not to have been) his paiment is good, for another, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="44" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLIV.</HEAD>
<P>Chri&s;t did &s;ome things which did not belong to him to do meerly as he was a <HI>man,</HI> nor yet as he was of &s;uch a nation, <HI>viz.</HI> a <HI>Jew,</HI> but did belong only to &s;inful men, as &s;uch, to do, <HI>viz.</HI> he &s;uffered him&s;elf to be <HI>Circumci&s;ed,</HI> and <HI>Obla|tions</HI> to be offered for him, <HI>Luke</HI> 2.21, 24. he was conformable to &s;everal other Ceremonial Laws, <HI>John</HI> 7.2, 10. <HI>Mat.</HI> 26.17. He was bap|tized, and he &s;eems to have eaten the Lord's Supper with his Di&s;ciples. And he calls the&s;e works the fulfilling of Righteou&s;ne&s;s. Now the&s;e things were not ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary to con&s;ti|tute the Sanctity, Ju&s;tice, and purity of Chri&s;t, or by the Law of his Creation. To tho&s;e things therefore Chri&s;t &s;eems to have been bound meer|ly by a peculiar compact with his Father, partly
<PB N="39" REF="22"> in order to his greater <HI>Humiliation,</HI> and partly in order to the better promoting of our Salvati|on. Moreover, tho&s;e ob&s;ervances, though they were not ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary to the holyne&s;s of Chri&s;t, or of any man, antecedently to the com|mand of God injoyning, and impo&s;ing them, yet con&s;equently upon that they were, as was the po|&s;itive Law of ab&s;taining from the <HI>Tree of the know|ledg of good and and evil.</HI> And though tho&s;e out|ward ob&s;ervances, &s;eparated from inward Sancti|ty, are but the bark or &s;hell of Religion, which God makes nothing of, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 1.12, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 66.3. yet as performed by him, who was God, and con&s;e|quently a great branch, and &s;ign of humiliation, and &s;ubjection, they cannot but be of great me|rit, and conduce much to promote that &s;atisfact|ion which he undertoook for believers, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Yet fora&s;much as Chri&s;tians now a days are not bound to &s;ome of the&s;e ob&s;ervances, <HI>ex gr.</HI> to Circumci&s;ion, to Sacrifices, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and as for o|ther of them, they are bound to ob&s;erve them in their own per&s;ons, as namely <HI>Bapti&s;m,</HI> and the <HI>Lords Supper,</HI> &amp;c. that kind of Obedience cannot be &s;aid to have been, or to be imputed to believ|ers, in any &s;uch &s;trict &s;en&s;e, as if Chri&s;t had per|formed it in their place, and &s;teed: yet it mu&s;t be &s;aid, that that part of Chri&s;ts obedience was accepted of God as a part of that <GAP DESC="foreign">, or price of Redemption, which was due for our &s;ins, and &s;o far forth, or in that loo&s;er &s;en&s;e, imputed.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="45" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="40" REF="23">
<HEAD>XLV.</HEAD>
<P>Chri&s;t's &s;ubmitting him&s;elf to a mean conditi|on, as <HI>taking upon him the form of a &s;ervant, and m<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">king him&s;elf of no reputation,</HI> were not E&s;&s;enti|al to the purity of his nature, or nece&s;&s;ary in or|der to his own Salvation (who being God could not mi&s;carry) but were a part of God's Cur&s;e due for &s;in, and nece&s;&s;ary to promote the Salvation of Believers. Therefore the&s;e things were a part of Chri&s;ts <HI>Satisfaction,</HI> which is after a &s;ort im|puted to us for righteou&s;ne&s;s; but not in &s;uch manner as if Chri&s;t had taken the&s;e things upon him in our place, and &s;teed, for neither are we thereby made free from that kind of life, <HI>viz.</HI> from &s;ervitude, and meane&s;s; nor are we bound to govern our own lives according to that pat|tern, and as many are tied to any &s;uch thing, are tied thereto, in their own per&s;on, I &s;ay to under|go it (&s;ay it be the condition of meer &s;ervants) in their own per&s;ons, and not by Chri&s;t their <HI>Surety.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="46" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLVI.</HEAD>
<P>It may be of great u&s;e to under&s;tand aright, &amp; to bear in mind what is the true notion of <HI>Imputa|tion,</HI> or what the word <HI>Imputed</HI> meaneth. Imputa|tion (therefore) is the Acceptation of (<HI>Numb</HI> 18.26, 30.) one thing for another. He is righteous, or ju&s;t by <HI>Imputation,</HI> who being in him&s;elf guilty of a fault, yet is accounted righteous, or <HI>guilt|le&s;s,</HI> for the &s;ake of &s;omething el&s;e which is ad|mitted, or accepted, in the place, or <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">eed of that
<PB N="41" REF="23"> ju&s;tice, or righteou&s;ne&s;s, which ought to have been inherent in him&s;elf. The thing &s;o accepted is called <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> And it is &s;o called becau&s;e it is a righteous thing, to give, and take &s;atisfaction, or compen&s;ation, for &s;in committed, <HI>Him God hath held forth for a propitiation that God might be ju&s;t, &amp;c.</HI> If this ju&s;tice, or righteou&s;ne&s;s be full and adequate to the fault committed, it removeth the de&s;ert of puni&s;hment from the guilty, and extingui&s;heth all obligation therun|to. The Ju&s;tification of a per&s;on not inherently ju&s;t, but guilty, is when the fault of which the party is accu&s;ed is acknowledged; but &s;ome|thing el&s;e is tendered, or pleaded for it, by which he may be vindicated from the merit of condemnation. Nor can any other way be found out whereby a guilty per&s;on may be ju&s;tified, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> when the de&s;ert of condemnation is re|moved, the fault it &s;elf is after a &s;ort extingui&s;h|ed, as if it had never been committed, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Vide <HI>Brad&s;haw, de Ju&s;tif.</HI> cap. 5.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="47" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLVII.</HEAD>
<P>After all that has been &s;aid touching the righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, its being the <HI>Material cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, and the Imputation thereof, the <HI>Form</HI> or <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification; I mu&s;t needs own it for a truth, that Believers are in Scripture frequently denominated ju&s;t, or righteous per&s;ons, from that righteou&s;ne&s;s, or holine&s;s which is inherent in them: yea, it cannot be denied but by vertue thereof they are formally ju&s;t, and righteous, though but with an
<PB N="42" REF="24"> imperfect righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>&amp;c. Luke</HI> 1.6. 'Tis &s;aid of <HI>Zachary,</HI> and <HI>Elizabeth, They were both righ|teous before God, walking in all the command|ments of God blamele&s;sly,</HI> I&s;a. 38.3. <HI>Remember, O Lord,</HI> &s;aid <HI>Hezekiah,</HI> &amp;c. So we read of righte|ous <HI>Abel,</HI> Mat. 23.35. <HI>and that the righteous &s;hall go into life eternal.</HI> 1 Joh. 3.7. <HI>He that doth righ|teou&s;ne&s;s is righteous.</HI> So it is &s;aid of <HI>Job,</HI> ch. 1.1. that <HI>he was an upright,</HI> i. e. <HI>a right, or righteous man, one that feared God, and e&s;chewed evil.</HI> Nei|ther is this at all to the prejudice of the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification, only by, and for the righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to us. For it is one thing to be righteous with an inherent, habitual, im|perfect righteou&s;ne&s;s, which may &s;erve for &s;ome other good u&s;es, and purpo&s;es; as namely, to glorifie God, and adorn the Go&s;pel, to do &s;ome good therewith to our &s;elves, and others; and another thing to be righteous with a compleat, perfect righteou&s;ne&s;s, whereby we are free'd from the Cur&s;e, or Condemning power of the Law, and have right and title given us to eternal life; fora&s;much as all our &s;ins, as well of <HI>Omi&s;&s;i|on,</HI> as <HI>Commi&s;&s;ion,</HI> are &s;atisfied for by Chri&s;t: and the believer thereupon is left no more liable to puni&s;hment either of <HI>Sen&s;e,</HI> or <HI>Lo&s;s,</HI> that is, ei|ther to Hell, or to the mi&s;&s;ing of Heaven; than if he had in his own per&s;on made God a plenary amends for all the injury which he had done him. From inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s, a man is reckoned by God, as righteous only to &s;uch a degree, (as we call School-boys <HI>Scholars,</HI> becau&s;e they have &s;ome little learning, but not enough
<PB N="43" REF="24"> to fit them for the Univer&s;ity, or whereby to claim a degree there.) So holy men from that imperfect righteou&s;ne&s;s which they have by Gods gracious conde&s;cention, are termed ju&s;t, or righteous, but not with a righteou&s;ne&s;s which renders them altogether guiltle&s;s, and faultle&s;s in the &s;ight of God, as doth that righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby they are ju&s;tified. Therefore from their inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s, though good men are de|nominated <HI>ju&s;t,</HI> yet they are not from thence or|dinarily denominated <HI>justified,</HI> nor at all but in a le&s;s &s;trict, and proper &s;en&s;e.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="48" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLVIII.</HEAD>
<P>As for the danger of the Doctrine of Ju&s;tifica|tion by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to Believers in point of debauching the lives of men, they are wor&s;e &s;car'd than hurt, who dream of any &s;uch thing: For fir&s;t, They who preach that Doctrine, do con&s;tantly teach, that whom&s;oever God ju&s;tifieth, he &s;anctifies at the &s;ame time, and that that faith which is the in|&s;trument of their ju&s;tification, is always &s;uch as doth purifie their hearts, produce good works, work by love, and that which doth not is a dead faith, and con&s;equently, that <HI>no unrighteous per|&s;on</HI> (becau&s;e every &s;uch per&s;on is void of true &s;aith) <HI>&s;hall inherit the Kingdome of God.</HI> They tell the people that they &s;hall as certainly be damned if they live and die without holyne&s;s, and good works, as if men were to be &s;aved by a righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent in them&s;elves. Again, They tell them, that men <HI>who by patient continu|ance
<PB N="44" REF="25"> in well doing, do &s;eek life and glory,</HI> &s;hall a<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> certainly be &s;aved, as if their &s;o doing were trul<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> meritorious; yea a valuable price, or purcha&s;e, o<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> &s;alvation; or as if they might claim, and chal|lenge heaven for &s;o doing, though when all i<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> done, they mu&s;t confe&s;s them&s;elves to hav<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> been unprofitable &s;ervants, and that eternal lif<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> is the <HI>free gift of God through Je&s;us Christ our Lord.</HI> Who then can &s;ay more, in effect, eithe<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> to deter men from the commi&s;&s;ion of &s;in by the danger of hell fire it &s;elf, or to encourage me<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> to the practice of true Religion: mean time pre|&s;erving the honor of the free grace of God in Je|&s;us Chri&s;t? In this behalf the oppo&s;ers of <HI>Impu|ted Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> deal as di&s;ingeniou&s;ly, and flan|derou&s;ly, with tho&s;e of the other per&s;wa&s;ion, as the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> do again&s;t the <HI>Prote&s;tants,</HI> in all who&s;e accu&s;ations of that nature, as to the generality of Orthodox Prote&s;tants, there is not one word of truth. For neither do they who contend ear|ne&s;tly for Ju&s;tification only by Chri&s;ts righteou&s;|ne&s;s imputed to us, &s;et at naught holine&s;s, as a needle&s;s thing, and that without which men may be &s;aved by Chri&s;t: neither can any &s;uch infe|rence be with any colour of rea&s;on, drawn from their opinion, as touching the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t being the only <HI>Material,</HI> and the <HI>Imputa|tion</HI> of that Righteou&s;ne&s;s, the only <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification.</P>
<P>Is it not enough that they do all own inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Holine&s;s, to be <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qu<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> non</HI> of Ju&s;tification, and Salvation? As he that hath a great &s;um of money owing him (admit
<PB N="45" REF="25"> a thou&s;and pounds) cannot receive it unle&s;s he will give him that is to pay it an <HI>Acquittance,</HI> no more than if it were not due to him, though his owing of the money is the only cau&s;e why he is content to pay it, not becau&s;e he to whom he &s;hould pay it, will give him a Note to &s;hew for &s;o much received, for had he not owed it he would have cared for no &s;uch Note, nor have payed &s;uch a &s;um, to have received a Million of &s;uch Notes as tho&s;e, &amp;c.</P>
<P>What Creditor do's not hold him&s;elf as much concerned to give an Acquittance, when deman|ded, in order to receiving a great &s;um of mony, that is due to him, becau&s;e without &s;o doing he cannot receive it, as if he had no other right to it, or it were not due to him upon any other account?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="49" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XLIX.</HEAD>
<P>Before I come to treat of the <HI>In&s;trumental Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, which is <HI>Faith</HI> alone, it may be nece&s;&s;ary to a&s;&s;ign the rea&s;on, or cau&s;es why I have placed Ju&s;tification not in the <HI>Remi&s;|&s;ion of &s;ins,</HI> as &s;ome do; but in God's <HI>account|ing, e&s;teeming,</HI> and <HI>pronouncing</HI> a Believing &s;in|ner righteous to Eternal Life; I &s;ay, There are &s;ufficient rea&s;ons to be given why Ju&s;tification &s;hould be placed <HI>not in Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;in,</HI> but in <HI>accounting,</HI> and <HI>declaring,</HI> the ju&s;tified Per&s;on righteous.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="50" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="46" REF="26">
<HEAD>L.</HEAD>
<P>To pardon an Offence is, in &s;trictne&s;s of &s;peaking, nothing el&s;e but to remit the puni&s;h|ment of it, or not to puni&s;h it; as when a Ma|lefactor worthy of Death, or Bani&s;hment, and Sentenced thereunto, hath that Sentence rever|&s;ed, or taken off, but is not intituled to any re|ward, or priviledge. But to ju&s;tifie a &s;inner is not only to take off the Sentence of damnation that did lye again&s;t him (as the Scripture &s;aith, <HI>He that believeth not is condemned already,</HI>) but by accounting and making him &s;avingly righteous to give him right, and title to Eternal Life. Now, to reward (e&s;pecially with &s;o great a re|ward as Heaven, or to intitle a Man thereunto) is much more than not to puni&s;h him with Hell, and Eternal Death.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="51" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LI.</HEAD>
<P>Yet I &s;hall not lay very much &s;tre&s;s upon that fir&s;t Argument, becau&s;e it may be &s;aid that the puni&s;hment due to &s;inners con&s;i&s;ts not only in the mi&s;eries, and torments of Hell, but al&s;o in the lo&s;s of Heaven; &s;o that if the whole pu|ni&s;hment be taken away, (or which is all one, the &s;inner fully pardoned) he is by mean<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> thereof re&s;tored to a right and Title to Eternal Life. As if a Father who has declared that he will not only beat his Son, for &s;ome great Of|fence, but al&s;o di&s;inherit him, &s;hall pardon him, to all intents, and purpo&s;es; his &s;o do|ing mu&s;t extend not only to the not beating of
<PB N="47" REF="26"> him, but al&s;o unto the owning, and accepting of him for his Heir, or re-in&s;tating him into his In|heritance.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="52" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LII.</HEAD>
<P>Therefore in Order to proving that Ju&s;tifica|tion doth not con&s;i&s;t in <HI>remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins,</HI> I &s;hall ra|ther tru&s;t to the&s;e (and &s;ome following) Argu|ments. Fir&s;t, If where&s;oever in the Scripture we find the word <HI>Ju&s;tifie</HI> in&s;tead thereof we &s;hould put <HI>Pardon,</HI> where <HI>Ju&s;tification, Par|doning,</HI> where <HI>Ju&s;tified, Pardoned;</HI> the notion, or con&s;truction thence ari&s;ing will be found &s;en&s;|le&s;s, and ab&s;urd, then to <HI>Ju&s;tifie</HI> in the Language of Scripture (which mu&s;t be adhered to, and mu&s;t decide this controver&s;ie) is one thing, and to <HI>Pardon</HI> is another, <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> one thing, and <HI>Pardon of &s;in</HI> another. But &s;o it is, witne&s;s the&s;e In&s;tances, be&s;ides many more which might be alledged, <HI>Deut.</HI> 25.1. <HI>They &s;hall pardon</HI> (in|&s;tead of ju&s;tifie) <HI>the guiltle&s;s, and condemn the wicked.</HI> P&s;al. 51.4. <HI>That thou may&s;t be pardoned when thou judge&s;t,</HI> Mat. 11.19. <HI>Wi&s;dom is pardon|ed of her Children,</HI> 1 Tim. 4.16. <HI>Pardoned in the Spirit.</HI></P>
<P>If a Man Examine all the places in <HI>Mo&s;es and the Prophets,</HI> where the term of <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> is u&s;ed, he &s;hall find none where <HI>pardon</HI> of &s;in is thereby &s;ignified. <HI>Vide Gataker,</HI> p. 13.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="53" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LIII.</HEAD>
<P>A Man may be <HI>Pardoned,</HI> and yet not <HI>Ju&s;ti|fied;</HI> o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Ju&s;tified,</HI> among&s;t Men, and not
<PB N="48" REF="27"> <HI>Pardoned, Ergo. ju&s;tification,</HI> and <HI>pardon</HI> are two di&s;tinct things. For it is an undoubted Axiom, <HI>Quae &s;ubjecto differunt inter &s;e differunt. Tho&s;e things that differ in &s;ubject,</HI> that is, the one where|of may be found in &s;ome Subject where the other is not, are di&s;tinct, and divers one from another. Now, <HI>remi&s;&s;ion</HI> may be where <HI>ju&s;tifi|cation</HI> is not; and <HI>ju&s;tification</HI> may be where <HI>re|mi&s;&s;ion</HI> is not. If a Man have wronged me, I may forgive him, as <HI>David</HI> did <HI>Shimei,</HI> and yet not <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> him in his dealings. And when a Man is fal&s;ly accu&s;ed of wrong done to another, then he may be ju&s;tified and yet nothing <HI>remit|ted,</HI> becau&s;e no wrong at all done. So we are &s;aid to <HI>ju&s;tifie God,</HI> P&s;al. 51.4.</P>
<P>Though in regard of a man's State, God ne|ver remits &s;in where he do's not <HI>ju&s;tifie;</HI> yet in regard of &s;ome particular <HI>acts,</HI> he remits &s;in &s;ometimes where he ju&s;tifies not, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 78.37, 38. <HI>Though their hearts were not upright with him, yet even of his compa&s;&s;ion he forgave their iniquity, and de&s;troyed them not.</HI> So far forth remitted it as not in&s;tantly to de&s;troy them for it. And &s;ometimes God <HI>ju&s;tifies</HI> when he <HI>remits</HI> not, as he did in approving <HI>Phineas</HI> his Act, as a ju&s;t and righteous Act, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 106.30, 31. And as he is &s;aid to ju&s;tifie the Prophet <HI>E&s;ay,</HI> in the di&s;charge of his Mini&s;try, <HI>E&s;ay</HI> 50.8. If a Man that hath wronged another do obtain his <HI>Pardon</HI> without giving him real Satisfaction, in ca&s;e he be que|&s;tioned for it another time, he may plead his <HI>Pardon,</HI> but not &s;tand upon his <HI>ju&s;tification.</HI> But if he has given him full Satisfaction by him&s;elf,
<PB N="49" REF="27"> or Surety, he may &s;tand upon his Ju&s;tification, and plead not guilty, becau&s;e he can plead <HI>&s;a|tisfaction</HI> made, and accepted. And this lat|ter, not the former, is the very ca&s;e betwixt God, and Man in the ju&s;tifying of a &s;inner: Sa|tisfaction is the main ground of the Ju&s;tification of him, not made by him, but by Chri&s;t for him. To this point <HI>Bellarmin, de ju&s;tif.</HI> l. 1. c. 2. Speaks as well as any Prote&s;tant, and far beyond the <HI>Socinian, vide</HI> Gataker, p. 14, 15, 16.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="54" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LIV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> is the cau&s;e of <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion</HI> of &s;ins, and <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion</HI> of &s;ins is the proper effect of <HI>Ju|&s;tification;</HI> therefore tho&s;e two things mu&s;t needs be different, and di&s;tinct. To pardon an Of|fender is not to puni&s;h him, or to exempt him from all manner of puni&s;hment due to him for &s;uch an Offence (whether it be puni&s;hment of &s;en&s;e, or of lo&s;s) And the rea&s;on why God doth forbear to puni&s;h a &s;inner, is, becau&s;e he looks upon him as a guiltle&s;s Per&s;on, for as much as he hath &s;atisfied for his Offences, by his Surety Je&s;us Chri&s;t. <HI>Guilt</HI> is our Obligati|on to puni&s;hment, but when full Satisfaction is rendered, and accepted, there remains no more Obligation to puni&s;hment. And therefore it is that God doth look upon a Believer as guiltle&s;s, with reference to eternal puni&s;hments (which are by Chri&s;t &s;atisfied for) and thereupon for|beareth for ever to inflict any &s;uch puni&s;hment upon, or denounce it again&s;t him. Whence it ap|peareth that <HI>Pardon</HI> of &s;in is the effect of Ju&s;ti|fication,
<PB N="50" REF="28"> and con&s;equently, is after it, <HI>ordine na|turae,</HI> though not <HI>temporis,</HI> and &s;o cannot be the &s;ame thing.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="55" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LV.</HEAD>
<P>To pardon an Offender may be an Act of meer <HI>Favour,</HI> and <HI>Mercy,</HI> and doth mo&s;t pro|perly &s;ignifie the forgivene&s;s, which is without Satisfaction. But for God to ju&s;tifie a Believ|ing Sinner is an Act of <HI>Ju&s;tice.</HI> God's Ju&s;tice doth as well appear in acquitting us for Chri&s;t, as in exacting a payment for us from Chri&s;t, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 53.7. Ju&s;tice in Civil Courts con&s;i&s;ts as well in acquitting the Guiltle&s;s, as in condemning the Guilty, <HI>Deut.</HI> 25.1. The Ju&s;tification of a &s;inner is tran&s;acted not by a meer Sovereign, and ab&s;olute Power alone, but in a Legal way; whence it is the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, that <HI>the Law is not thereby infringed, but e&s;tabli&s;hed,</HI> Rom. 3.31. For Chri&s;t in the Scripture is termed not only <GAP DESC="foreign">, a <HI>Mediator,</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.6. or one that by per&s;wa&s;ion, and intere&s;t indeavours to compo&s;e the difference between them, but he is &s;aid to be al&s;o <GAP DESC="foreign"> a Surety, <HI>viz.</HI> as God's Surety to Man for the performance of his pro|mi&s;es which are <HI>all in Chri&s;t, yea and Amen,</HI> 2 Cor. 1.20. <HI>So Man's Surety to God for the di&s;|charge of the debt of all</HI> tho&s;e that have intere&s;t in him, and making &s;atisfaction to God by doing, and induring what&s;oever was nece&s;&s;ary for that purpo&s;e, <HI>E&s;ay</HI> 53.6. <HI>We all had &s;trayed, and the Lord had cau&s;ed the iniquity of us all to remain on him.</HI> It was <HI>exacted</HI> (as <HI>Junius</HI> rightly ren|ders
<PB REF="28"> it) and he <HI>an&s;wered,</HI> that is, engag'd him|&s;elf for the Di&s;charge of it, as <HI>Cappel</HI> well ren|ders the word, yea, he did really an&s;wer it, as we &s;ay of a party, or <HI>Surety</HI> that hath made payment, that <HI>he hath an&s;wered the Debt; vide</HI> Gataker, p. 27, 28.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="56" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LVI.</HEAD>
<P>That God is &s;aid to pardon, or forgive tho&s;e whom he ju&s;tifieth, though he has received &s;atis|faction for their Offences, is made a proper kind of &s;peaking, and a true notion, for that he exempts them from puni&s;hment, as they do who pardon others, and not only &s;o, but ex|erteth as much of Grace, and Mercy, towards the ju&s;tified Per&s;on in the manner of doing it, as if he had remitted his Offences without any &s;a|tisfaction given, or demanded. Hence, &s;aith <HI>Bernard, vide Gataker,</HI> p. 23, 24. <HI>Thou art &s;a|ved by nothing, but not &s;aved with nothing, for no|thing</HI> laid down by thee, but <HI>not without a price pay'd by Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="57" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LVII.</HEAD>
<P>The ju&s;tifying of a Sinner is not meerly the accepting of him as &s;avingly ju&s;t, and Righte|ous, but the making of him &s;o, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.18. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. <HI>It is not</HI> (as one calls it) <HI>the remit|ting of the penalty of the Law, and &s;o di&s;charging a guilty Per&s;on, as if he were innocent, and righ|teous, not according to Law and Ju&s;tice, but out of a Sovereign and ab&s;olute Power. A Man who be|fore was not ju&s;t cannot truly be ju&s;tified unle&s;s he
<PB N="52" REF="29"> fir&s;t be made, or con&s;tituted ju&s;t,</HI> Gataker 33. The word <HI>Ju&s;tifie</HI> doth not &s;ignifie in common u&s;e to <HI>make ju&s;t,</HI> yet a Man that hath done wrong that he may be ju&s;tified, mu&s;t be fir&s;t made ju&s;t, not inherently ju&s;t, for though he were &s;o, yet that would not be &s;ufficient to clear him from the guilt of his former unju&s;t Act (as of theft, &amp;c.) but he mu&s;t be &s;o made ju&s;t, <HI>i. e.</HI> guiltle&s;s, and blamele&s;s, as that he may an&s;wer the rigor of Law and Ju&s;tice, e're he can truly be ju&s;tified, and this cannot be done but by a plenary &s;atisfaction for the wrong done and the Offence formerly committed, exhibited, and accepted.</P>
<P>Now, that which is exhibited by doing, or &s;uffering, or both, in way of Satisfaction, and &s;o accepted, being &s;uch as makes a plenary &s;atisfaction for an Offence formerly committed, becau&s;e it utterly extingui&s;heth, and aboli&s;heth the wrong, &s;o taketh it away as if it had never been, it ju&s;tly procures a guiltle&s;ne&s;s, and blame|le&s;ne&s;s, to the Delinquent, in who&s;e behalf it is performed, and makes him therefore to be re|puted in the eye of the Law, and Ju&s;tice, as therefore now no delinquent, but as guiltle&s;s, faultle&s;s, and ju&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="58" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Gataker,</HI> p. 34. &s;aith, that not the <HI>Sa|tisfaction</HI> it's &s;elf, but the <HI>Guiltle&s;sne&s;s</HI> thereby procured is that which is &s;o often in Scripture termed, <HI>Ju&s;tice</HI> or <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> called the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of God, <HI>Rom.</HI> 1.17. &amp; 3.21, 22. &amp;
<PB N="53" REF="29" MS="y"> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. becau&s;e prepared propounded and appointed us by God (for God as the party wronged, and Chri&s;t as the party &s;atisfying for this wrong, are in this Argument di&s;tingui&s;hed, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.24, 25. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.19.21.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="59" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LIX.</HEAD>
<P>The Ju&s;tification &s;poken of in the Scripture is &s;uch a Ju&s;tification as wherein there is a &s;pe|cial manife&s;tation of God's <HI>Ju&s;tice,</HI> Rom. 3.26. whereas in &s;uch ca&s;e, which in plain terms is no other than meer pardon, there may be an am|ple declaration of <HI>Mercy,</HI> but no &s;uch demon|&s;tration of <HI>Ju&s;tice</HI> at all.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="60" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LX.</HEAD>
<P>They are mi&s;taken who &s;ay that the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> when applyed to <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> doth &s;ig|nifie <HI>moderation, equity, grace,</HI> and <HI>mercy,</HI> in <HI>par|don</HI> of &s;in; and that the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> imports only a <HI>merciful, charitable</HI> per&s;on, &amp;c. <HI>Vide</HI> Gattaker, <HI>p.</HI> 24.</P>
<P>That the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>Righteous</HI> is u&s;ed in the New Te&s;tament with an eye to Retributive Ju&s;tice con&s;i&s;ting in acquitting the guiltle&s;s, and doing Ju&s;tice upon the guilty, may appear from the en&s;uing Texts, <HI>viz. John.</HI> 7.24. <HI>John</HI> 5.30. <HI>Rev.</HI> 15.3. <HI>Rev.</HI> 16.5, 7. <HI>Rev.</HI> 19.11. 1 <HI>John</HI> 2.29. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4.8. Let <HI>Grotius</HI> and <HI>Hammond</HI> con&s;ult their own Expo&s;itions on the&s;e Texts one of which doth Expre&s;ly &s;o Interpret, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4.8. though there not &s;o nece&s;&s;arily, becau&s;e the allu&s;ion is there to the Judges, or
<PB N="54" REF="30"> Triers at the Olympick Games: Again, <HI>Rom.</HI> 1.32. and <HI>Rom.</HI> 2.5. where 'tis apparent that <HI>Punitive Ju&s;tice</HI> is meant al&s;o, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.4, 5. ex|pounded by the next words, <HI>Is God unrighteous in taking vengeance? Rom.</HI> 9.28, 14. 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 1.6. <HI>Gattaker</HI> 24, 25, 26, 27.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="61" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXI.</HEAD>
<P>Though as <HI>Ju&s;tifying</HI> is &s;ometimes taken for approving, or vindicating an innocent per&s;on that is wrongfully accu&s;ed, or approving a ju&s;t action, as that of <HI>Phineas;</HI> I &s;ay, though as the word is taken in that &s;en&s;e, God is &s;aid to ju&s;ti|fie when he do's not pardon; yet &s;o as the word <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> is taken when God is &s;aid to <HI>ju&s;tifie the ungodly,</HI> Rom. 4.5. (which is the u&s;ual accep|tation of it, and that which we here enquire af|ter) God doth never <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> but he doth al&s;o <HI>pardon.</HI> Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins is a nece&s;&s;ary con&s;e|quent of efficacious Ju&s;tification, grounded up|on &s;atisfaction tendered, and accepted, made, and admitted. When &s;atisfaction for an injury is made and accepted, and the party that did it in reguard thereof ju&s;tified, that is, thereby there|of di&s;charged, Rea&s;on and equity requires that the offence be <HI>remitted,</HI> that is, that the party wronged cea&s;e now to be offended with him whom he was ju&s;tly offended with before. <HI>Vide Gattaker</HI> 23.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="62" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXII.</HEAD>
<P>Becau&s;e when God doth ju&s;tifie a &s;inner, he doth always pardon his &s;ins (as hath been &s;aid)
<PB N="55" REF="30"> and Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, or exemption from puni&s;h|ment, or rever&s;ing the &s;entence of condemnati|on, are immediate effects, and con&s;equents of Ju&s;tification: therefore it is that &s;ome excellent Divines have put <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion</HI> of &s;ins into their de|&s;cripti<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> though certain it is, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y do differ as the <HI>cau&s;e,</HI> and the <HI>effect.</HI> For God doth therefore remit &s;in, or take off the the penalty due for &s;in, becau&s;e he ju&s;tifies the &s;inner, and do's own, and acknowledg him to be guiltl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;s; that is, ju&s;tly liable to no &s;uch pe|nalty, fora&s;much as the ju&s;tice of God is by Chri&s;t &s;atisfied for him, ina&s;much as he is a true believer. God doth not ju&s;tifie men, becau&s;e he has pardoned them (as a Prince might do a man-&s;layer whom by his Prerogative he has par|doned) but becau&s;e he <HI>Justifieth</HI> them, or ac|knowledges them ju&s;t and righteous upon ac|count of the &s;atisfaction which he has received from Chri&s;t on their behalf, therefore he par|doneth them, or exempteth them from puni&s;h|ment, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="63" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Ju&s;tification &s;eemeth to wa&s;h a &s;inner cleaner, than bare <HI>pardon</HI> would have done; fora&s;much as <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> taketh away not only the <HI>penalty</HI> that was incurr'd by &s;in, but the very <HI>de&s;ert</HI> of that penalty, which <HI>bare pardon</HI> &s;eemeth not to do. He who hath made full &s;atisfaction for an offence, after that is done, is not worthy, or do's not de&s;erve to &s;uffer for it, becau&s;e the crime is thereby extingui&s;hed, and annihilated, but
<PB N="56" REF="31"> he who has received only a free pardon (as for murther, or the like) though that is &s;ufficient to &s;ave his life, yet it cannot take away his <HI>de|merit,</HI> or <HI>de&s;ert</HI> to die, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Indeed every ju&s;ti|fied per&s;on before &s;atisfaction accepted, and taking place in him, <HI>i. e.</HI> before he did believe, did de&s;erve to die eternally, till after the &s;ati&s;|faction of Chri&s;t applyed by faith, he can no longer be &s;aid to be under the guilt, or ju&s;t <HI>de|merit</HI> of damnation, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Whereas <HI>Ame&s;ius</HI> &s;aith in his <HI>Chap. de Ju&s;tif.</HI> That <HI>Justification doth not &s;o take away the guilt, as that it takes away the de|&s;ert of puni&s;hment from the &s;in; which (the &s;in it &s;elf remaining) can in no &s;o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t be taken way, but it &s;o takes away the guilt, that it takes away the deadly effects of it.</HI> I &s;ay, tho&s;e words of his are fairly con&s;i&s;tent with what I have &s;aid: For though a <HI>de&s;ert</HI> of puni&s;hment be always in&s;epa|rable from the nature of &s;in it &s;elf, yet he that was a <HI>&s;inner,</HI> may cea&s;e, &s;o much as to de&s;erve puni&s;hment, I &s;ay, a demerit of puni&s;hment is &s;eparable from a <HI>&s;inner,</HI> or one that was &s;o, but not from <HI>&s;in,</HI> or from one in whom the &s;in it &s;elf is remaining; (as <HI>Ame&s;ius</HI> &s;peaketh) but from one, in whom it is taken away, by the ap|plication of the blood of Chri&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="64" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas &s;ome great Divines have put into their Definition, that Ju&s;tification is an act of God wherein he accepteth us <HI>as</HI> righteous in his &s;ight; which words may &s;eem to imply that Be|lievers are not really righteous in the &s;ight of
<PB N="57" REF="31"> God, but meerly accepted as &s;uch, or <HI>as if</HI> they were &s;uch (as he that pays but half a crown in the pound, may have, by the clemency of his Creditor s, a full di&s;charge given him <HI>as if</HI> he had pay'd all) I conceive their meaning may be this; that Believers are, as to all the benefits and advantages of righteou&s;ne&s;s, or of being righteous, &s;o accepted with God upon account of that righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;ts, which is theirs by <HI>Imputation</HI> only, as if they had had a real <HI>in|herent</HI> righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own, whereby they had been <HI>formally</HI> righteous in the &s;tricte&s;t &s;en&s;e; as a man is wi&s;e by his wi&s;dome, and &s;trong by his &s;trength. They may put an <HI>as,</HI> (or a <HI>tanquam</HI> to it) becau&s;e we do not hold that the righteou&s;ne&s;s, or obedience of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Form</HI> of Ju&s;tification in that <HI>Formal &s;en&s;e</HI> as the rational Soul is the form of a man; but only that it do's <HI>&s;upplero vicem, &amp; locum cau&s;ae forma|lis,</HI> that is, doth &s;tand a Believer in as good &s;tead, for matter of &s;ecurity from hell, and intitling him to heaven, as a compleat perfect righte|ou&s;ne&s;s inherent in him&s;elf could do. Even as the payment made by a <HI>Surety</HI> do's to all intents as much &s;ecure the <HI>principal</HI> debtor, as if he him|&s;elf had done it; yet can he not in a &s;trict &s;en&s;e be &s;aid to be &s;o good a payma&s;ter as if he had made payment him&s;elf.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="65" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXV.</HEAD>
<P>How God when he ju&s;tifieth can be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie us from all our &s;ins at once, or to pardon to us all our &s;ins, as well tho&s;e that are to come,
<PB N="58" REF="32"> as tho&s;e that are pa&s;t, is a thing me-thinks as difficult to explain, as any one thing belong|ing to the great Doctrine of Ju&s;tification.</P>
<P><HI>Ame&s;ius</HI> in his <HI>Chap. de Justif.</HI> &s;ect. 24. &s;aith this, <HI>Sins pa&s;t are remitted by a formal application, but &s;ins to come only virtually: Sins past are remit|ed in them&s;elves, &s;in<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to come in the &s;ubject or per|&s;on &s;inning,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="66" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXVI.</HEAD>
<P>'Tis hard to find a &s;imilitude that may &s;uffici|ently illu&s;trate that dark&s;ome &s;aying of the Re|verend <HI>Ame&s;ius;</HI> yet I think &s;ome light may be given thereunto by &s;uch a &s;imilitude, or &s;imili|tudes as follow.</P>
<P>Admit an Annuity of four&s;core pounds a year &s;ettled upon any per&s;on for the time of his life, to be paid by quarterly portions, 20 <HI>l.</HI> every quarter, upon condition that he &s;hall come to &s;uch a one to receive it, as oft as it becomes due, and &s;hall give him an Acquittance, wherein he &s;hall greatly acknowledg his thankful accept|ance of the Doner's bounty. In this ca&s;e, I &s;ay, there is four&s;core pound a year &s;ettled upon the fore&s;aid party all at once, <HI>virtually,</HI> for by one deed he is made capable of challenging it in &s;uch equal proportions as oft as it &s;hall become due, making good the forementioned provi&s;o's, <HI>viz.</HI> that he come him&s;elf in per&s;on for it, to the party that is appointed to pay it, and do give him a thankful Acquittance, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Till the provi&s;o's upon which the actual payment of each Sum of Money be complyed with, he can|not
<PB N="59" REF="32"> actually receive it, but yet it was all <HI>virtu|ally</HI> ve&s;ted in him from the very fir&s;t, and he from the fir&s;t time he was in&s;tated in the Annui|ty, put into a capacity to receive it, from time, to time, as it &s;hould grow due. Or po&s;&s;ibly the thing may be better explained by &s;ome &s;uch &s;i|militude as this.</P>
<P>A rich Father &s;ending his Son to travel beyond the Seas, de&s;ires a great Merchant of that coun|try, in which his Son is to re&s;ide, to defray all his expences, and to pay off all the bills which &s;hall be brought in upon his account, provided he &s;hall from time, to time bring the bills of his charges, and expences to him, and reque&s;t him to &s;ee them fully di&s;charged; and in ca&s;e any of his bills appear to have been inflam'd by great prodigality, and extravagan|cy he &s;hall confe&s;s, and bewail his fault, and promi&s;e amendment; and having &s;o done, then, and not till then, the Merchant afore&s;aid, is, and &s;hall be reque&s;ted to make full payment to all his Creditors, and to &s;ee all, and every of his debts di&s;charged. The Son who&s;e ca&s;e this is may be &s;aid to have all his debts <HI>virtually</HI> pay'd, from the time that his Father took order with &s;uch a Merchant for the payment of them, who undertook to &s;ee it done, becau&s;e by this means, he can command his debts at any time, doing in order thereunto only &s;ome certain things which are in his power to do: yet the debts of this Son cannot be &s;aid to be <HI>actually</HI> pay'd, be|cau&s;e many of them are not yet contracted, as to others of them, he has not yet carried in his bill
<PB N="60" REF="33"> to the Merchant that undertook to pay what&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters">+ever he &s;hould owe, or he hath not as yet co<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters">+fe&s;&s;ed, and bewailed his fault, as to &s;ome deb<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> contracted by great Profu&s;ene&s;s, which was t<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> precede the payment of them, and therefor<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> the <HI>actual</HI> payment of them is yet &s;u&s;pended notwith&s;tanding it is in his power to procur<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> the actual payment of them, at no long war<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters">+ing, by doing &s;uch previous things as are in h<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> power to do, and therefore may all his debts b<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> &s;aid to be <HI>virtually</HI> paid, but not <HI>actually.</HI></P>
<P>The accommodation of that &s;imilitude t<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> the purpo&s;e in hand is very ea&s;ie. Or, &s;uppo&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> a Prince has a Favourite, &s;o great in his favou<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> that he hath re&s;olved that he &s;hall never be pu<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> to Death for any offence that he can pardon t<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> him, and yet the &s;aid Favourite falls time, af|ter time, into &s;uch mi&s;demeanors, for which h<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> cannot but be arraigned by Law, and &s;entence<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> to Death according to the common cour&s;e o<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Ju&s;tice; yet fora&s;much as the Supreme Magi+&s;trate has given him a&s;&s;urance that he &s;hall no<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> dye for any offence that he can pardon, an<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> con&s;equently upon humble application for<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> particular pardon, &s;o oft as he is condemne<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> afre&s;h, he is &s;ure to obtain it; this man may b<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> &s;aid to be pardoned <HI>virtually,</HI> though not <HI>actu|ally,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="67" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXVII.</HEAD>
<P>An Elect, Believing, and therefore ju&s;tified Sinner, may be &s;aid to have all his &s;ins pardo|ned <HI>virtually,</HI> and in the <HI>Subject,</HI> or Per&s;on &s;in|ning,
<PB N="61" REF="33"> though not in them&s;elves (as <HI>Ame&s;ius</HI> &s;peaketh) becau&s;e God hath re&s;olved, yea, &s;o ordered, and fore-laid the matter that &s;uch a one &s;hall not be finally lo&s;t, and undone, con|demn'd, and damn'd: but that the &s;atisfaction of Chri&s;t &s;hall, from time, to time be &s;o effectu|ally applyed by him, for, and in order unto ta|king away the guilt, or condemning power of &s;in, that eventually it &s;hall never be his ruin.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="68" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Though all the &s;ins of &s;uch a one may be &s;aid to be pardoned in <HI>Subjecto,</HI> or in, and as to the Per&s;on &s;inning, meaning thereby fora&s;much as 'tis certain he &s;hall not be damned for his &s;ins, he hath a pardon <HI>tantamount.</HI> Yet may &s;ome of his &s;ins be &s;aid not to be <HI>actually</HI> pardoned, &s;ee|ing it is a real truth, that to &s;uppo&s;e a Believer might live or dye without renewed Faith, and Repentance, after the commi&s;&s;ion of &s;ome great, and deliberate &s;in, were to &s;uppo&s;e he might be damn'd. For &s;uch &s;ins do deprive even Believ|ers, and ju&s;tified Per&s;ons them&s;elves, though not of <HI>jus ad rem,</HI> as to matter of Salvation, yet of <HI>jus in re.</HI> In which &s;en&s;e the&s;e words of St. <HI>John</HI> are to be under&s;tood, <HI>viz. No murtherer hath eternal Life abiding in him,</HI> i. e. hath an immediate, actual fitne&s;s, and capacity for Heaven, at the pre&s;ent, as tho&s;e that were un|clean, or in a Journey had not for partaking of the Lord's Pa&s;&s;eover, though they had a habitu|al right to it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="69" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="62" REF="34">
<HEAD>LXIX.</HEAD>
<P>That Man cannot be &s;aid to be Actually an<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> compleatly pardoned, who has any block o<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> bar in his way to Heaven for the pre&s;ent, or wh<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> cannot enter into Life, or be &s;aved under hi<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> pre&s;ent circum&s;tances, which may be the ca&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> of a true Believer, and ju&s;tified Per&s;on<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> (witne&s;s <HI>David,</HI> &amp;c.) therefore every ju&s;tif<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters">+ed Per&s;on is not compleatly and actually pardo+ned, all his &s;ins, at all times, but &s;ome may ye<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> be after a &s;ort, charged upon him: yet &s;ith a<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Elect Believer &s;hall certainly have all tho&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> blocks taken out of his way, fir&s;t, or la&s;t, o<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> before he dyes, all his &s;ins may be &s;aid to be virtually pardoned, and in equivalency. A<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> that man might virtually, and in effect, be &s;ai<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> to be &s;ecured from dying by the means of<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> <HI>Pleurifie,</HI> who hath a Phy&s;itian alwayes at hand, perfectly able (if there be any &s;uch) and a<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> willing to Cure him of it, becau&s;e in that ca&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> his Life would be &s;ecured from that Di&s;ea&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> <HI>virtually,</HI> yet could he not be &s;aid to be <HI>actually</HI> delivered from that Di&s;ea&s;e, or the danger o<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> it, in ca&s;e he were apt ever, and anon to fall in|to it, to &s;uch a degree, that if great means, and remedies were not u&s;ed it would be &s;ure to be his death, &amp;c. So would the greater, and deli|berate &s;ins of ju&s;tified Per&s;ons, certainly be the death of their Souls if Je&s;us Chri&s;t their great Phy&s;itian, did not from time to time, by re|newing Faith in them, whereby to take hold of the Satisfaction and expiation which he by his
<PB N="63" REF="34"> blood has made in &s;uch ca&s;es, relieve them a|gain&s;t the &s;ame, which &s;heweth that though they be <HI>virtually</HI> pardoned, as to all their &s;ins, yet not compleatly, actually, and to all intents, and purpo&s;es: for as Divines &s;ay, there can be no &s;uch pardon obtained for any great, and wil|ful &s;in, without particular renewing of Faith, and Repentance. In that &s;en&s;e it is that they do own the&s;e kind of &s;ins to be <HI>mortal,</HI> and not to have a pardon of cour&s;e, as le&s;&s;er &s;ins have upon a general Repentance, which there&s;core they call <HI>venial.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="70" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXX.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Reverend Mr.</HI> Durham <HI>in his Book on the</HI> Re|velation, <HI>p. 259. puts the Que&s;tion in the&s;e words (for I chu&s;e to give you his own)</HI> How can a man at the fir&s;t exerci&s;ing of Faith be &s;aid to be ju|&s;tified or pardoned of all his &s;ins, &s;eeing his &s;ins af|ter Ju&s;tification are not pardoned till they be com|mitted, and Repented of?</P>
<P><HI>His An&s;wer thereunto is in the&s;e words.</HI></P>
<P>Both are true <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> for future &s;ins are not actually pardoned till they be committed, and repent|ed of, yet is the man a ju&s;tified per&s;on, and in a ju|&s;tified e&s;tate, having a ground laid in his Ju&s;tifica|tion for obtaining the pardon of tho&s;e &s;ins that fol|low, &s;o that they &s;hall not overturn his former Ab&s;o|lution, for Gods Covenant hath both fully in it, yet in due way to be applyed. And it is <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> as if a company of Rebels were &s;ubdued, and by Treaty they are pardoned, changed from the &s;tate of Ene|mies, to be natural Subjects, and priviledged with
<PB N="64" REF="35"> their priviledges, &s;o that if they fall in after faults (as Subjects may fall in) yet are they never again counted Enemies, nor is their first Freedom Can|cel'd, but they are dealt with as native Subjects fal|ling into &s;uch offences, and have priviledges that Strangers have not, nor can plead in the &s;ame faults; one of which priviledges may be &s;uppo&s;ed to be, that they &s;hall not be rigidly fallen upon, although their guilt de&s;erve death, but that they &s;hall have means u&s;ed to reclaim them, (and the&s;e &s;uch as cannot but be effectual) and that upon recovery they &s;hall be pardoned tho&s;e faults, and be pre&s;erved from the de|&s;erved puni&s;hments, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> It is &s;o by the Treaty of Grace, and Ju&s;tification; the believing Sinner is tra<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ted from the &s;tate of an Enemy, to the condi|tion of a Friend, this is unalterable, he cannot af|terwards but be a Friend; yet becau&s;e a Friend may be ingrateful, and may fail to his Benefactor, therefore in this Treaty it is provided, that there &s;hall be a way to forgivene&s;s by vertue of the Cove|nant, yet &s;o as there &s;hall be a new exerci&s;e of Re|pentance and Faith, for the commending of the way of grace: And &s;o a &s;inning Believer is a &s;inner, but not in the &s;tate of &s;in, nor is an Enemy as he was before Ju&s;tificati<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n, even as a faulty Subject is guil|ty, yet is no Enemy, nor Rebel, nor can be puni&s;h|ed by death when he becomes penitent, although he de&s;erveth it, becau&s;e the Law of Grace is &s;uch to the Subjects of that Kingdom, that the pleading of that former Treaty, and betaking them&s;elves to the terms hereof, is ever to be accepted as a righteou&s;ne&s;s for them in reference to any particular &s;in following Ju&s;tification, as well as what proceeded. And this no
<PB N="65" REF="35"> Stranger to God can plead, who hath no &s;uch ground for his recovery from &s;in, or that God will give him Repentance for it, much le&s;s that he will certainly pardon him. Yea it differeth from a Penitents ca&s;e at fir&s;t conver&s;ion, becau&s;e a Covenanter may expect pardon by vertue of that &s;ame Covenant in which he is ingaged, and to which he hath already right, and he hath <HI>Jus ad rem:</HI> Another cannot do &s;o, but mu&s;t con&s;ider the Covenant as afore&s;aid only, and &s;o expect pardon, not becau&s;e God is <HI>actually</HI> ingaged to give it to him, as in the others ca&s;e, but becau&s;e God doth offer to accept of him on tho&s;e terms, and then to pardon him. <HI>Thus far Mr.</HI> Durham, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="71" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXI.</HEAD>
<P>Be&s;ides the <HI>principal efficient cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tifica|tion, which is God, the inwardly moving or Proegumenal <HI>cau&s;e</HI> which is <HI>Free Grace,</HI> the <HI>Pro|catarctick cau&s;e</HI> which was Je&s;us Chri&s;t, the <HI>Ma|terial cau&s;e</HI> which was the Obedience of Chri&s;t, the <HI>Formal cau&s;e, viz.</HI> the <HI>Imputation</HI> of Chri&s;ts Obedience, and the <HI>Final cau&s;e,</HI> all which have been &s;poken of already, and proved to be &s;uch: there is another cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, which might have been brought in under the efficient (for thereunto it belongs as <HI>efficiens minus princi|palis) viz.</HI> the <HI>In&s;trumental cau&s;e</HI> which is very nece&s;&s;ary to be di&s;cour&s;ed of by all tho&s;e who treat of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> fora&s;much as there are &s;ome con&s;iderable controver&s;ies which do de|pend upon it. Now the <HI>In&s;trumental cau&s;e</HI> or <HI>con|dition</HI> of Ju&s;tification (for you may call it either
<PB N="66" REF="36"> in different re&s;pects) is <HI>Faith:</HI> I call Faith the <HI>In&s;trument</HI> of Ju&s;tification, not that it is &s;o im|mediately (for that might &s;eem to a&s;cribe unto man &s;ome kind of efficiency in point of ju&s;tify|ing him&s;elf) but <HI>mediately,</HI> fora&s;much as it is the hand whereby, or wherewith, a Believer receiveth the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, by the imputation of which Righteou&s;ne&s;s he is ju&s;tifi|ed. So that as properly as the cau&s;e of a cau&s;e may be &s;aid to be the cau&s;e of that cau&s;e its <HI>effect,</HI> (as the Grandfather of the Granchild) may <HI>Faith</HI> be &s;aid to be the <HI>In&s;trument</HI> of Ju&s;ti|fication, it being the in&s;trument of applying, or receiving that Righteou&s;ne&s;s, by which Belie|vers are ju&s;tified.</P>
<P>They mu&s;t needs own <HI>Faith</HI> to be <HI>Instrument|al</HI> in, and towards Ju&s;tification, who affirm it to be the <HI>condition</HI> thereof: For doubtle&s;s to per|form the condition of any promi&s;e made by a faithful per&s;on, mu&s;t needs be <HI>in&s;trumental</HI> for, and towards the performance and enjoyment of the promi&s;e it &s;elf, &s;ith a faithful promi&s;er when the condition of the promi&s;e which he hath made is performed, cannot but perform his pro|mi&s;e, if it be in his power. Yea fora&s;much as <HI>Faith</HI> is the one onely condition upon which the promi&s;e of <HI>Justification</HI> is &s;u&s;pended, <HI>Faith,</HI> in &s;trictne&s;s of &s;peaking, is the only (to be &s;ure the mo&s;t principal) in&s;trument of <HI>Ju&s;tification:</HI> For what is, or can be &s;o in&s;trumental to obtain the benefit of a good man's promi&s;e, as to ful|fil the condition upon which he &s;u&s;pended it, when that's done, all is done, for that is all in all.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="72" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="67" REF="36">
<HEAD>LXXII.</HEAD>
<P>Though there be other more remote, and le&s;s principal In&s;truments of Ju&s;tification, yet the mo&s;t immediate, and mo&s;t principal, and the only <HI>Internal In&s;trument</HI> thereof is <HI>Faith</HI> alone.</P>
<P>The Word of God, whereby as an in&s;tru|ment, Faith is ingendered: for Faith cometh by hearing, the Mini&s;ters of God who di&s;pen&s;e that word, and the holy Sacraments which are a kind of vi&s;ible Go&s;pel, and <HI>Seals of the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of God which is by Faith,</HI> are remote in&s;tru|ments in the hand of God whereby to bring a|bout the Ju&s;tification of a &s;inner, <HI>Dan.</HI> 22.3: But the mo&s;t principal, and immediate in&s;tru|mental cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, is <HI>Faith:</HI> For that doth <HI>immediate attingere effectum.</HI> Hence &s;uch pa&s;&s;ages as the&s;e, <HI>Being Ju&s;tified by Faith. By him all that belive are Ju&s;tified.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="73" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXIII.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Mr.</HI> Gattaker <HI>p. 70. &s;aith that</HI> Though to the full enjoyment of life eternal in Heaven are requi|red many conditions in the Covenant of the Go&s;pel, as <HI>Faith, Repentance, Charity, Humility, Ho|line&s;s, Mortification, Self-denyal, Obedience, Patience,</HI> and <HI>Per&s;everance</HI> in good works; yet unto Ju&s;tification is required only <HI>Faith.</HI> For ex|cepting that one place of St. <HI>James,</HI> which a&s;&s;ign<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Ju&s;tification to works, ye &s;hall find the Ju&s;tification of a &s;inner a&s;&s;igned to <HI>Faith</HI> con&s;tantly, in places al|mo&s;t innumerable, and never attributed either to the Love, or Fear of God, or to <HI>Charity,</HI> or <HI>Patience,</HI>
<PB N="68" REF="37"> but to <HI>Faith</HI> in Chri&s;t's bloud, <HI>Romans 3.25.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="74" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXIV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Mr.</HI> Perkins <HI>in his</HI> Catholick Reformed, Con+trover&s;. <HI>4.</HI> cap. <HI>1. &s;aith,</HI> Faith is the alone and only In&s;trument wrought of God in the heart of a man, whereby he laieth hold on Chri&s;t, applying hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s to him&s;elf, which neither Hope, nor Chari|ty, nor any other Grace can do.</P>
<P><HI>And Learned Bp.</HI> Abbot <HI>&s;aith, (writing in defence of</HI> Perkins) <HI>that</HI> Faith though not nega|tively con&s;idered excluding other Graces, yet priva|tively ab&s;tracted from the con&s;ideration of them is &s;aid to ju&s;tifie. The wounded <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> were cured by meer &s;eeing, or looking at the Brazen Serpent without working, <HI>John 3.14. There believing in Chri&s;t is compared unto the beholding of the Brazen Serpent.</HI></P>
<P>Chemnitius, <HI>in his</HI> Examen Concil Trident. de fide Justif. <HI>giving rea&s;ons why the Prote&s;tants u&s;e the word</HI> Sola <HI>of Faith in Ju&s;tification, mak|eth one to be</HI> ut o&s;tendatur organum &s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> medium applicationis. <HI>For not by works, but Faith alone is the Promi&s;e received.</HI></P>
<P>Burges, Prop. <HI>1. &s;aith,</HI> They who are for Works and Faith, joyning the&s;e in our Ju&s;tification, ought to leave out the word <HI>Sola</HI> or only, in Praying, and Preaching.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="75" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXV.</HEAD>
<P>If &s;om<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> had rather call <HI>Faith</HI> the <HI>Condition</HI> than the <HI>In&s;trumental cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, pro|vided that by <HI>Faith,</HI> and by <HI>Condition,</HI> they un|der&s;tand
<PB N="69" REF="37"> what they ought to do, and will own Faith to be the only Condition of <HI>Justification,</HI> I &s;ee no cau&s;e to be offended at them.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="76" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>It may be &s;afely &s;aid that we are ju&s;tified by Faith, as it is a Condition, provided, the Con|ditionality of it be limited to the <HI>Receptive</HI> office of Faith, and Gods de&s;ignment thereunto. <HI>B. Prop.</HI> 4. My meaning is, that <HI>Faith</HI> may be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie as it is a Condition, provided you al|low it to be the condition of Ju&s;tification, not as it is an excellent Grace, Quality, or Work; but as it has a peculiar property for the receiv|ing of Chri&s;t, and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, even as <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ating</HI> nouri&s;heth us (or is as I may &s;ay the con|dition of our being nouri&s;hed) not meerly as it is an <HI>action,</HI> for then walking, or &s;peaking, might do the &s;ame thing; but as it is that action by which nouri&s;hment is received into our bodies. It &s;eemeth indifferent whether we call <HI>Faith</HI> the <HI>Condition,</HI> or the <HI>In&s;trumental cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, and either is done upon the fol|lowing accounts.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="77" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>Faith is calllled the Condition of the Cove|nant, becau&s;e it is upon that Condition that Ju|&s;tification is offered unto us therein, and upon this Condition God becomes our God, and Chri&s;t our Righteou&s;ne&s;s. And it is al&s;o called the In&s;trumental cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification, be|cau&s;e it acteth by receiving Chri&s;t, as he is held
<PB N="70" REF="38"> forth in the Word: If that, <HI>viz.</HI> the Go&s;pel be ju&s;tly called the <HI>External In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e which doth <HI>offer</HI> Chri&s;t for our Righteou&s;ne&s;s, then may <HI>Faith</HI> well be called the <HI>Internal In&s;tru|mental</HI> cau&s;e, becau&s;e it doth <HI>receive</HI> him for the &s;ame end, and becau&s;e by this <HI>receiving</HI> he be|cometh our Righteou&s;ne&s;s, upon which our ju|&s;tification is founded, <HI>Durham,</HI> 234.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="78" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>When we &s;ay that <HI>Faith</HI> is the only <HI>Internal</HI> In&s;trument (for there are &s;everal external ones) of our <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> and that it is the condition thereof; our meaning is, that no other work, or grace, is &s;o concern'd in, and with our <HI>Ju|&s;tification,</HI> as <HI>Faith</HI> is, or that ju&s;tifying of a &s;in|ner is not &s;u&s;pended upon any other than the one onely condition of believing, though ju&s;tifying Faith, be not alone, yet Faith alone ju&s;tifieth, in the quality of of a condition, and is the only <HI>Internal In&s;trument</HI> of Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="79" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXIX.</HEAD>
<P><HI>To be yet more plain</HI> (if we can be &s;o) <HI>God doth</HI> not impute the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of his Son to a &s;in|ner, and thereupon make, and account him Righ|teous to Eternal Life, or one that by his Surety hath &s;atisfied his Law and Ju&s;tice, with re&s;pect had to his <HI>Love, Humility,</HI> Repentance, and other Graces (which do accompany &s;aving Faith) though upon the account of them al&s;o they are by God accounted formally, and inhe|rently, but imperfectly Righteous) but only with regard to his <HI>Faith</HI> con&s;idered in a <HI>priva|tive
<PB N="71" REF="38"> ab&s;tractivene&s;s,</HI> or ab&s;tractive from all other graces, fora&s;much as the promi&s;e of Ju&s;tifica|tion is made to the Grace of <HI>Faith,</HI> and to that alone, or to a Believer only as &s;uch.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="80" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXX.</HEAD>
<P>It is no contradiction to exclude other graces from a <HI>conditionality</HI> as to the act of Ju&s;tification, and yet to affirm them requi&s;ite nece&s;&s;arily in the Subject <HI>ju&s;tified,</HI> &amp;c. This Prote&s;tant Di|vines do a thou&s;and times over illu&s;trate by di|vers &s;imilitudes. Becau&s;e Repentance is requi|red as well as Faith mu&s;t their Office, and work be confounded? Certainly it is not <HI>Repentance,</HI> but <HI>Faith</HI> that receiveth the Pardon.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="81" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXI.</HEAD>
<P>The di&s;tinction of Faith Ju&s;tifying, <HI>quae viva,</HI> but not <HI>qua viva,</HI> which is lively, and working, but not as it is lively, and working, is very good, and &s;ound; that is, Though only that Faith which is accompanied with Love to God and Man, godly &s;orrow for &s;in and other graces do ju&s;tifie (becau&s;e that is the only living and true Faith) yet this living Faith in the bu&s;ine&s;s of ju&s;tifying, or as it ju&s;tifieth In&s;trumentally, is not concurr'd with by any other grace, but is by it &s;elf alone.</P>
<P>As the Sun which giveth Light, giveth heat al&s;o, but it doth not give heat as it is <HI>Corpus lu|mino&s;um,</HI> but as it is <HI>Corpus calidum.</HI> The heat of the Sun doth not enlighten, nor the light of the Sun heat, and warm. A King that goeth to his Parliament to &s;ign Bills, and compleat
<PB N="72" REF="39"> Acts of Parliament, &s;eldom goeth without a con&s;iderable Guard, and Retinue, but when all comes to all, 'tis he that &s;igns all the Bills, and the re&s;t of his Company have nothing to do in that affair. So Faith hath a large Retinue of Graces, u&s;eful for many other good purpo&s;es, but &s;uch as do not meddle or make more or le&s;s in that great bu&s;ine&s;s of Ju&s;tification, but leave all that affair (as God hath left it) to Faith alone, &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="82" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXII.</HEAD>
<P><HI>We may ob&s;erve, &s;aith Mr.</HI> Gataker <HI>p.</HI> 79. <HI>that God's pardon is often a&s;cribed to Repentance</HI> as well as to Faith, (<HI>Acts</HI> 2.38. <HI>Mark</HI> 1.4. <HI>&amp; alibi po&s;&s;im</HI>) both being conditions of our recon|ciliation to God, <HI>but Ju&s;tification is only attribu|ted to Faith, but never to Repentance. The Rea|&s;on</HI> (&s;aith he, is evident) becau&s;e &s;orrow for &s;in though &s;erious and effectual in the conver&s;ion of a &s;inner to God, brings not an equivalent &s;atisfaction to the Ju&s;tice of God, but Faith brings with it the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, and tenders the obedience of Chri&s;t our Surety as our own unto God for Ju&s;tification, B. <HI>Prop.</HI> 1.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="83" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Though Prote&s;tant writers in this controver|&s;ie did chiefly militate again&s;t the <HI>merit,</HI> and <HI>cau|&s;ality</HI> of works in Ju&s;tification, then a&s;&s;erted by the Papi&s;ts; yet it is plain that they did there|by exclude their <HI>Conditionality</HI> al&s;o as to the
<PB N="73" REF="39"> act of Ju&s;tification, &amp;c. <HI>We cannot, &s;aith</HI> Gat|taker, 68. <HI>be too zealous in this becau&s;e the conceit of Ju&s;tification by Works is a &s;lippe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y opinion, and we &s;ee by Experience how ea&s;ily, though almo&s;t in|&s;en&s;ibly, the Papi&s;ts &s;tid and fell by ri&s;ing in their own proud Imagination from Ju&s;tification by Works</HI> into the pre&s;umption of <HI>merit,</HI> by good works. But the Apo&s;tle oppo&s;eth the former, and by con&s;equence <HI>a Minori ad majus,</HI> excludes the latter.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="84" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Neither is this Ju&s;tification by <HI>Faith</HI> alone, excluding the <HI>Conditionality</HI> of Works to be ap|plyed to our Ju&s;tification, at fir&s;t, only, but as continued: &s;o that fir&s;t, and la&s;t, we are ju&s;ti|fied by Faith alone, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.11. <HI>The ju&s;t &s;hall live by Faith,</HI> which belongs to the whole cour&s;e of their Lives re&s;pectively to Ju&s;tification. And when the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5. <HI>Being ju&s;tified by Faith we have peace with God;</HI> would it not be irrational to limit it only to our Ju&s;tifica|tion at fir&s;t? Is not <HI>the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God revealed from Faith to Faith, not from Faith to Works?</HI> Rom. 1.17.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="85" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXV.</HEAD>
<P>That Faith is concerned in the bu&s;ine&s;s of Ju|&s;tification only, as a condition, or In&s;trument, &s;o far, and no farther, is evident, becau&s;e though the Scripture doth often &s;peak of our be|ing ju&s;tified <GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp; <GAP DESC="foreign">, yet never <GAP DESC="foreign"> by Faith, yet never for Faith.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="86" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="74" REF="40">
<HEAD>LXXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>If it be enquired what that Faith is which is the condition or In&s;trument of Ju&s;tification; I &s;hall an&s;wer no more at pre&s;ent but this, <HI>viz.</HI> Faith is that Grace whereby Je&s;us Chri&s;t is &s;o received to all intents and purpo&s;es as he is of|fered to &s;inners in the Go&s;pel.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="87" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>The fore-&s;aid de&s;cription of Faith furni&s;h|eth us with one Argument for Faith's being the only <HI>Condition,</HI> or <HI>In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tifi|cation, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> It is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, Obe|dience, or Satisfaction of Chri&s;t imputed, or put to our account which ju&s;tifieth. That Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s is freely offered to &s;inners in the Go&s;|pel to be made theirs upon &s;uch terms. Being &s;o offered, there is nothing more requi&s;ite to make it ours but our &s;o accepting of it. Now, Faith is that our acceptance of it &s;o as it is offered, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>When &s;o accepted the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t becomes ours, and when it is once actu|ally &s;o, then are we actually ju&s;tified without any more ado, and other Graces are &s;ervicable to us for other purpo&s;es, but not to ju&s;tifie us. For <HI>fru&s;tra fit per plura,</HI> and when any thing is heartily off<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">red, there needs nothing but accep|ting it upon the terms &s;pecified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="88" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="75" REF="40">
<HEAD>LXXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>When Faith is &s;poken of in the Scripture as the <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or <HI>Condition</HI> of Ju&s;tification (call it whether you will) thereby is meant the <HI>Habit, Grace,</HI> or <HI>Act</HI> of Faith, &s;uch as was expre&s;&s;ed, not the <HI>object, viz. The Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t, or Covenant of Grace,</HI> as &s;ome would carry it, becau&s;e the word Faith is &s;ometimes &s;o taken, <HI>Er. gr. Gal.</HI> 3.23. <HI>Before Faith came.</HI> For be&s;ides that words are to be taken in the mo&s;t u&s;ual and famous &s;en&s;e, unle&s;s there be particu|lar, and &s;pecial rea&s;on to the contrary (which cannot be &s;hewed in tho&s;e places where Faith is &s;poken of as the <HI>In&s;trument</HI> or <HI>Condition</HI> of Ju|&s;tification; I &s;ay, be&s;ides that, it will be found that if you put the word <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> in&s;tead of the word <HI>Faith</HI> where Faith is &s;poken of as the In&s;trument of Ju&s;tification; there will ari&s;e a very inconvenient &s;en&s;e.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="89" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>LXXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>The mo&s;t u&s;ual and general &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">gni<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ication of the word <HI>Faith,</HI> is as it is <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">ken for the <HI>Grace</HI> of <HI>Faith,</HI> or the Actings t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ereof, and there is no inconvenient &s;en&s;e ari&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">th from ta|king it &s;o when Faith is &s;poken of as the In|&s;trument of our Ju&s;tification, <HI>Ergo.</HI> It ought to be &s;o taken. Po&s;&s;ibly in fifty places of the New Te&s;tament Faith is taken for the Grace of Faith, and in very few in any other &s;en&s;e. To be &s;ure it is &s;o taken in <HI>Heb.</HI> 11. where Faith is &s;o much &s;poken of and defined, <HI>v.</HI> 1. <HI>Faith is
<PB N="76" REF="41"> the &s;ub&s;tance of things hoped for,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>v.</HI> 4. <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Faith</HI> Abel <HI>offered to God,</HI> &amp;c. Faith in that on Chapter is about &s;ixteen or &s;eventeen times ta|ken for the Grace or Faith, and not for th<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t. Neither would any incon|venient con&s;truction ari&s;e if we take it as mean<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> of the grace of Faith when we are &s;aid to be ju&s;tified by Faith <HI>In&s;trumentally, Ex. gr.</HI> Rom<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> 3.25. <HI>To be a propitiation through Faith in hi<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Blood.</HI> Now, though the blood of Chri&s;t be the Seal of the New Covenant, yet certainly the Apo&s;tle intended not here to &s;peak of that, but of the meanes, on our part, whereby we are made partakers of Chri&s;t's Redemption, and propitiation, <HI>Gal.</HI> 7.3. So <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.1. when the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>being ju&s;tified by Faith, we hav<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"> Peace with God;</HI> why &s;hould not <HI>Faith</HI> be taken for the Grace of <HI>Faith</HI> correlative to it's object Je&s;us Chri&s;t? So <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.16. <HI>Even we have believed in Je&s;us Chri&s;t, that we might be ju&s;tified by the Faith of Chri&s;t,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>i. e.</HI> by the grace of Faith, or by believing in Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="90" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XC.</HEAD>
<P>Should we take <HI>Faith</HI> for the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Co|venant of Grace,</HI> in the places la&s;t mentioned, as a more unu&s;ual, &s;o a more inconvenient, le&s;s congruous, and le&s;s probable &s;en&s;e would ari&s;e from thence, if not untrue, and ab&s;urd. <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> when the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>Being ju&s;tified by Faith,</HI> Rom. 5.1. We &s;hould read being ju&s;tified by the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> again&s;t that might be objected that the Go&s;pel ju&s;tifieth no
<PB N="77" REF="41"> Man, unle&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> it be applyed by <HI>Faith,</HI> men may hear the Go&s;pel, and yet never be ju&s;tified, but they cannot believe the Go&s;pel, with a true and lively Faith, and not be ju&s;tified. So tho&s;e words, <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.16. <HI>Knowing that a man is ju&s;tified by the Faith of Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> ought not to be under&s;tood of the <HI>Object</HI> of Faith, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> but of the Grace of Faith, for could he have been ju&s;tified by the Go&s;pel only (or as the only In&s;trument of his ju&s;tifica|tion) what need he have added, <HI>even we have believed in Je&s;us Chri&s;t, that we might be ju&s;tified,</HI> &amp;c. So 'tis mo&s;t certain that Je&s;us Chri&s;t is not actually a propitiation for our &s;ins, meerly through the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> unle&s;s the Grace of Faith doth intervene actually to entere&s;s us in his Sacrifice, and Satisfaction, and therefore it is inconvenient by <HI>Faith in his Blood,</HI> to under&s;tand the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace</HI> &s;ealed with his Blood, &amp;c.</P>
<P>There are two other Texts in <HI>Rom.</HI> 3. which would be very incommodiou&s;ly applyed to the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> where <HI>Faith</HI> is mentioned as the In&s;tru|ment, or Condition of Ju&s;tification, <HI>v.</HI> 22. <HI>Even the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God which is by Faith of</HI> Je&s;us Chri&s;t <HI>unto all, and upon all them that believe.</HI> Do not the latter words &s;hew that the <HI>Grace of Faith,</HI> not the <HI>objectum quod</HI> of Faith, which is the <HI>Go&s;|pel,</HI> is there to be under&s;tood by <HI>Faith?</HI> To be &s;ure in that latter clau&s;e Faith is &s;poken of as an In&s;trument, yea, as a condition of Ju&s;tification. Now, the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> though it is in <HI>external, re|mote</HI> In&s;trument of ju&s;tifying a &s;inner, as it is
<PB N="78" REF="42"> the In&s;trument of <HI>Faith,</HI> or means of <HI>believing,</HI> yet Faith is the more immediate In&s;trument of the two, and a condition al&s;o, which the <HI>Go&s;pe<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="right margin cropped or obscured" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1+ letters"></HI> cannot be &s;aid to be. Al&s;o from <HI>v.</HI> 26. we ar|gue, that by <HI>Faith</HI> in the 25 ver&s;e, not the <HI>Go&s;|pel,</HI> but the <HI>Grace of Faith</HI> is meant, becau&s;e the words are, that he <HI>might be ju&s;t and the ju&s;tifier of him which believeth in Je&s;us.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="91" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCI.</HEAD>
<P>Faith is &s;uch an In&s;trument of Ju&s;tification as upon which Ju&s;tification doth always in&s;ue: For who&s;oever truly believeth in Je&s;us Chri&s;t, is, and &s;hall be ju&s;tified, but &s;o is not the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or the <HI>Covenant of Grace:</HI> For the Go&s;pel has been, and may be preached to thou&s;ands, who never did, nor ever will come to believe, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Now is it not more proper to attribute an effect to the immediate, and effectual cau&s;e, than to a cau&s;e that is more remote, and often ineffectual? and con&s;equently our Ju&s;tification, to the Grace of Faith, than to the object of <HI>Faith,</HI> viz. <HI>the Gospel?</HI> 'Tis har&s;h to &s;ay that we are ju&s;tified by that (as namely by the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI>) which we may have, and enjoy, and never be ju&s;tified, and much ea&s;ier to conceive how we may be &s;aid to be ju&s;tified by that, (as namely by <HI>Faith</HI>) upon the having (and u&s;ing) of which, we cannot but be ju&s;tified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="92" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCII.</HEAD>
<P>When we are &s;aid to be Ju&s;tified by Faith, as <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.1. the Faith there &s;poken of, is not
<PB N="79" REF="42"> to be taken <HI>Metonymically, viz.</HI> the <HI>cau&s;e</HI> put for the <HI>effect,</HI> and Faith which is the root of good works, put for good works, which are the fruit of &s;aving Faith.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="93" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCIII.</HEAD>
<P>Neither is Faith there taken <HI>Synecdochically</HI> as a part for the whole, or as one Virtue for all her in&s;eperable companions, for which a Be|liever is accepted of a gracious God. Faith is not there taken as a complexive word, that in|cludes <HI>Love,</HI> and <HI>Fear,</HI> and holy <HI>Obedience,</HI> and in Conjunction with all the&s;e doth produce Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="94" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCIV.</HEAD>
<P>Thus &s;ome by giving the name of <HI>Faith</HI> to all &s;orts of <HI>Graces,</HI> yea and of <HI>good works,</HI> do hook, and hedge in the Popi&s;h Doctrine of Ju&s;tificati|on by works, under the wing of &s;omething <HI>called Faith</HI> (as the <HI>Quakers</HI> do under the name of <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> telling us fir&s;t, that Chri&s;t is the Light within them, and &s;econdly, that to follow the Light within them, whereby they mean nothing el&s;e but doing of good works, in conformity to natural Light, will bring us to Heaven.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="95" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCV.</HEAD>
<P>Tho&s;e that cannot brook <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> by <HI>Faith</HI> alone, as the only <HI>Internal In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e, but would concern the whole of Go&s;pel Obe|dience in the bu&s;ine&s;s of Ju&s;tification, go this way to work, <HI>viz.</HI> they tell us, that God hath a
<PB N="80" REF="43"> <HI>double Court,</HI> one may be compared to our <HI>Kings Bench</HI> (a &s;trict Tribunal of Ju&s;tice) wherein the Offender is tryed according to Law: So when God proceeds again&s;t a &s;inner accordiag to the <HI>Covenant of works</HI> by the Law, there is no hope of Ju&s;tification by works, becau&s;e all have &s;inned, and the Law is to all a Mini&s;try of Con|demnation, and an in&s;trument of death: For there is no mention of Repentance, or room for Reconciliation, in the fir&s;t covenant of the Law. But God hath &s;et up another Court, as it were of <HI>Chancery,</HI> where <GAP DESC="foreign">, or a temperament of equity is admitted, where God by a new Cove|nant of Mercy moderateth the &s;trictne&s;s of the the Law, and requires not exact, but &s;incere O|bedience. And though St. <HI>Paul</HI> deny Ju&s;tifica|tion to the works of the Law, yet he contradicts not St. <HI>James,</HI> who &s;aith a man is ju&s;tified by good works in Gods <HI>Court of Equity</HI> under the Go&s;pel. And they ob&s;erve, that though the Sts. do decline God's Judgment, where exact Ju&s;t|ice keeps the Court, yet the Sts. often plead their own Righteou&s;ne&s;s before a Merciful God, who accepts their &s;incere endeavours, and acts of Obedience. <HI>The Socinians plea&s;e them&s;elves with this di&s;tinction who deny Ch i&s;ts Satisfaction,</HI> and con&s;equently acknowledg no u&s;e of Faith in his bloud; for apprehending, or applying of Chri&s;ts Righteou&s;ne&s;s for our Ju&s;tification, <HI>and teach that a man is Ju&s;tified</HI> by his operative Faith, and &s;incere Obedience, which God by the New Covenant of Grace, accepts unto righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, though it be not exactly conformable
<PB N="81" REF="43"> to the Rule of the Law. Others al&s;o who ac|knowledg the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t purcha&s;|ed by his propitiatory Sacrifice, yet imbrace this di&s;tinction, and do think that Go&s;pel obedience concurs with Faith unto our Ju&s;tification; be|cau&s;e God accepts even the defective &s;ervices of his Children. And they imagin that St. <HI>Paul,</HI> and St. <HI>Peter</HI> may be accorded by taking <HI>Faith</HI> in a Figurative &s;en&s;e, when the former &s;peaks of <HI>Ju|&s;tification</HI> by Faith, <HI>&amp;c. Gattaker</HI> 66, 67.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="96" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCVI.</HEAD>
<P>The grounds they go upon for taking Faith for all Graces, yea for all good works, for the &s;um total of all Go&s;pel-obedience, are very in|&s;ufficient; as namely this for one: Becau&s;e the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifies both <HI>Incredulity,</HI> and <HI>di&s;|obedience,</HI> and <GAP DESC="foreign"> is oppo&s;ed to <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>John</HI> 3.36. Therefore Faith (they &s;uppo&s;e) imports not only <HI>Belief,</HI> but al&s;o <HI>Obedience.</HI></P>
<P>The &s;trength of that Argument is meer weak|ne&s;s. For, 1. Though a word have two &s;everal &s;ignifications it do's not follow that it is always to be taken in both, or that tho&s;e two come all to one. 2. It follows not becau&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ig|nifieth either <HI>unbelief,</HI> or <HI>di&s;obedience,</HI> or <HI>both;</HI> that therefore the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> from which it comes, &s;ignifieth the two contrary things, be|ing without the privative particle, for though it doth &s;ignifie to <HI>obey,</HI> yet no where to <HI>believe.</HI> 3. The word <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifieth <HI>pertinaciam non credendi etiam vi&s;is, &amp; auditis idoneis documen|tis, q. d. Imper&s;ua&s;ibilitatem Ae&s;tius ad,</HI> Rom.
<PB N="82" REF="44"> 11.30. <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifies more than <GAP DESC="foreign">, viz. <HI>Qui non tantum non credit &s;ed recta monentibus re|&s;i&s;tit.</HI> Therefore it will not follow that the word which is of a contrary &s;ignification, doth &s;ignifie <HI>Faith,</HI> and nothing el&s;e, but rather it &s;hould &s;ignifie an <HI>ea&s;ine&s;s of Believing,</HI> or of be|ing per&s;waded, to own the Truths of the Go&s;|pel, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 4. Neither is there any word as is directly contrary to <GAP DESC="foreign"> &amp; <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>viz.</HI> any &s;uch word as <GAP DESC="foreign">, whereby Faith, or a Be|liever may be &s;ignified, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Therefore from the notation of the&s;e words, no Argument can be drawn that to believe, and to yield &s;incere Obedience to the whole Go&s;pel are all one, or the &s;ame thing.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="97" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>XCVII.</HEAD>
<P>They who contend for Faith being a Com|plexive word, &s;ignifying all &s;orts of Graces, and the &s;um total of Go&s;pel Obedience, and of all good works, do pretend that to the be&s;t of their under&s;tanding. St. <HI>Paul</HI> and St. <HI>James</HI> can|not be otherwi&s;e reconciled, and for that rea|&s;on, they are induced to take <HI>Faith</HI> in &s;o large a &s;en&s;e, as that it may include works, &amp;c. Now, that Rea&s;on will ea&s;ily fall to the ground if we can prove that St. <HI>Paul</HI> and St. <HI>James</HI> may be fairly accorded without it, as al&s;o that they two ought not to be &s;o reconciled.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="98" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="83" REF="44">
<HEAD>XCVIII.</HEAD>
<P>The pa&s;&s;ages in which St. <HI>Paul</HI> and St. <HI>James</HI> &s;eem to &s;ome to differ, <HI>toto Coelo</HI> are the&s;e. St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.28. <HI>We conclude that a man is ju&s;tified by Faith without the deeds of the Law,</HI> and <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.2, 3. <HI>For if</HI> Abraham <HI>were ju&s;ti|fied by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not be|fore God. For what &s;aith the Scripture,</HI> Abra|ham <HI>believed God, and it was counted to him for Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> v. 4. <HI>Now, to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of Grace, but of Debt,</HI> v. 5. <HI>But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that ju&s;tifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> v. 6 <HI>Even as</HI> David <HI>al&s;o de|&s;cribeth the ble&s;&s;edne&s;s of the man to whom God im|puteth Righteou&s;ne&s;s without works.</HI> Thus far St. <HI>Paul.</HI></P>
<P>Then comes St. <HI>James,</HI> and &s;aith, <HI>Jam.</HI> 2.20.24. <HI>But wilt thou know, O vain Man, that Faith without works is dead? Was not</HI> Abraham <HI>our Father ju&s;tified by works when he had offered</HI> I&s;aac <HI>his Son upon the Altar? See&s;t thou how Faith wrought with his Works, and by Works was his Faith made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled, which &s;aith,</HI> Abraham <HI>believed God, and it was imputed to him for Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and he was called the Friend of God,</HI> v. 25. <HI>Ye &s;ee then, how that by Works, a Man is ju&s;tified, and not by Faith on|ly.</HI> 25. <HI>Likewi&s;e al&s;o was not</HI> Rahab <HI>the Harlot ju&s;tifi d by Works when &s;he had received the Me&s;&s;en|gers, and had &s;ent them another way? For as the Body without the Spirit is dead, &s;o Faith without works is dead al&s;o.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="99" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="84" REF="45">
<HEAD>XCIX.</HEAD>
<P>We &s;hall find there is no need to confound <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Works</HI> together, in order to reconci|ling the&s;e two Apo&s;tles. For though in words they &s;eem to contradict each other, yet in very deed they do not, yea, cannot, becau&s;e they do not &s;peak <HI>ad idem,</HI> or <HI>circa idem,</HI> but of dif|ferent <HI>manners.</HI> For St. <HI>Paul</HI> di&s;cour&s;eth how our <HI>Per&s;ons</HI> are ju&s;tified before God, but St. <HI>James,</HI> how our <HI>Faith</HI> mu&s;t be ju&s;tified before Men. Now, our <HI>Per&s;ons</HI> are ju&s;tified by <HI>Faith,</HI> but our <HI>Faith</HI> by good <HI>works.</HI> They who &s;ay the&s;e two things, do not thwart one another, more, or le&s;s. <HI>Zanchy</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Fides ju&s;tificat hominem, opera ju&s;tificant fidem.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="100" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>C.</HEAD>
<P>St. <HI>James</HI> his bu&s;ine&s;s is to prove that a bare Profe&s;&s;ion, or boa&s;ting of Faith, not accompa|nied with good works, can ju&s;tifie no man, nor a&s;&s;ure the World that his Faith is &s;uch as will ju&s;tifie him before God. This I make appear from <HI>Jam.</HI> 2.14. <HI>What doth it profit my Brethren, if a Man &s;ay he hath Faith, and hath not Works?</HI> 2. Becau&s;e he compareth it with a vain O&s;ten|tation of <HI>Charity,</HI> v. 15, 16, 17. <HI>If a Brother or Si&s;ter be naked and de&s;titute of daily food, And one of you &s;ay unto them, depart in peace, notwith|&s;tanding you give them not tho&s;e things which are needful to the Body, what doth it profit? Even &s;o Faith, if it have no Works, is dead being alone.</HI> 3. Becau&s;e he compareth it with the Faith that
<PB N="85" REF="45"> Devils have, which being without Works is dead, <HI>v.</HI> 19. <HI>The Devils al&s;o believe, and tremble,</HI> v. 20. <HI>But wilt thou know, O vain Man, that Faith without Works is dead.</HI> 3. But that Faith accompanied with good works doth ju&s;tifie both before God, and Men, he proveth by the Ex|ample of <HI>Abraham</HI> when he offered his Son, <HI>Gen.</HI> 22.12. who neverthele&s;s was long before that time ju&s;tified by Faith in the &s;ight of God. <HI>Gen.</HI> 15.6. Therefore the&s;e words are not to be under&s;tood of his Ju&s;tification to Eternal Life. Moreover, God &s;aith to <HI>Abraham,</HI> Gen. 22.12. <HI>Now I know that thou feare&s;t God.</HI> For by Faith, and good Works, both Internal, and External, we approve our &s;elves, both to God, and Men. Then as for the following in&s;tance of <HI>Rahab,</HI> doubtle&s;s &s;he is &s;aid to have been ju&s;ti|fied by Works, in the &s;ame way and manner that <HI>Abraham</HI> was, to &s;hew, that not only the Jews which &s;prung from <HI>Abraham,</HI> but the truly believing Gentiles al&s;o, were ju&s;tified after the &s;ame manner that he was.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="101" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CI.</HEAD>
<P>It is as true that the Reconciling of St. <HI>Paul,</HI> and St. <HI>James</HI> ought not to be attempted by making <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>good works</HI> one, and the &s;ame thing; as that it is po&s;&s;ible to reconcile them otherwi&s;e: I &s;ay, it is mo&s;t certain that we ought not to attempt the Reconciling of tho&s;e two Apo&s;tles, by &s;aying that we are ju&s;tified both by <HI>Faith,</HI> and by good <HI>Works,</HI> or that <HI>Faith</HI> is the &s;ame with all <HI>Go&s;pel Obedience,</HI> be|cau&s;e
<PB N="86" REF="46"> there is a very great &s;trem, and torrent of Scripture running to the contrary, and ex|pre&s;ly excluding good works from having any hand in our Ju&s;tification. Read at large <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.20. <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.6. <HI>Eph.</HI> 2 8, 9. <HI>Titus</HI> 3.5. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.19. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.9. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.30. <HI>Jer.</HI> 23.6. <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.24, 25. <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.18, 19. <HI>Gal.</HI> 2.16. <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.5. <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.28.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="102" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CII.</HEAD>
<P>No Man is, or can be ju&s;tified either by works done before Regeneration, nor by works done by him after Regeneration, neither by the works of the <HI>Ceremonial Law,</HI> nor by the works of the <HI>Mo|ral Law,</HI> nor by <HI>Evangelical Obedience</HI> (as &s;uch) nor by <HI>Faith,</HI> or the <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere,</HI> as it is a work: I &s;ay, by none of all the&s;e, nor yet by all the&s;e together, can any Man be ju&s;tified in the &s;ight of God; no, not &s;o much as <HI>In&s;trumentally,</HI> much le&s;s by the&s;e as the <HI>Material,</HI> or <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of his Ju&s;tification, or as the matter of his Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, &amp;c. Becau&s;e the Scripture excludes all &s;orts of <HI>works,</HI> con&s;idered as &s;uch, from our having any hand in the Ju&s;ti|fication of a &s;inner, and puts that upon <HI>Faith</HI> alone, and upon that but as an <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or hand whereby we receive that Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which alone <HI>doth,</HI> and which only <HI>can</HI> ju|&s;tifie us.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="103" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="87" REF="46">
<HEAD>CIII.</HEAD>
<P>That the works of the <HI>Ceremonial Law</HI> do not, or cannot concur to the ju&s;tifying of a &s;in|ner, need not to be proved among&s;t Chri&s;tians now adayes, &s;ith that Law is well known to have been long &s;ince not only <HI>dead,</HI> but <HI>deadly. If ye now be circumci&s;ed Christ &s;hall profit you no|thing.</HI> Whether tends the Epi&s;tle to the <HI>Gala|tians,</HI> but to encounter with tho&s;e as would make a medley of <HI>Judai&s;m,</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;tiani&s;m,</HI> and urged a nece&s;&s;ity of the <HI>Ceremonial Law</HI> upon the Gentile Converts? Again&s;t tho&s;e he proves that neither <HI>Jews,</HI> nor <HI>Gentiles,</HI> are ju|&s;tified by the Covenant made in <HI>Horeb,</HI> but by <HI>Faith</HI> in Chri&s;t, according to the Covenant made with <HI>Abraham</HI> 430 years before the Law, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.8, 17. And therefore now to &s;eek Righteou&s;|ne&s;s by the works of the Law is to fall from the grace of Chri&s;t. <HI>Gattak.</HI> 74.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="104" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CIV.</HEAD>
<P>Neither can Men be ju&s;tified by works of what &s;ort, or <HI>Law,</HI> &s;oever done in an <HI>unregene|rate e&s;tate.</HI> The rea&s;on is plain, becau&s;e &s;uch works cannot plea&s;e God. <HI>They that are in the fle&s;h cannot plea&s;e God. Without faith it is impo&s;&s;i|ble to plea&s;e God.</HI> Moreover, the Papi&s;ts them|&s;elves do grant that men are not ju&s;tified by works done before, but only after their <HI>Regene|ration.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="105" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="88" REF="47">
<HEAD>CV.</HEAD>
<P>No man is or can be ju&s;tified by the works of the <HI>Moral Law,</HI> or by works done in ob&s;ervance of the ten Commandments. For St. <HI>Paul</HI> in the Epi&s;tle to the <HI>Romans</HI> deals with tho&s;e who in|&s;i&s;ted more upon their obedience to the <HI>Moral Law,</HI> (though they did not exclude the ob&s;er|vance of the <HI>Ceremonial</HI>) and they would fain e&s;tabli&s;h a righteou&s;ne&s;s upon their own works performed out of obedience to Gods Com|mands, <HI>Rom.</HI> 9.31, 32. &amp; 10.3.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="106" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CVI.</HEAD>
<P>That when <HI>Paul</HI> excludeth <HI>Works</HI> from any hand in our Ju&s;tification, he intendeth as well tho&s;e of the <HI>Moral,</HI> as the <HI>Ceremonial</HI> Law: I prove thus, yea that he argueth principally a|gain&s;t works done in conformity to the <HI>Moral</HI> Law, that they have no power to ju&s;tifie us. For 1. He treateth of the Law by which &s;inners &s;hall be judged, which is the <HI>Moral</HI> Law, <HI>Rom.</HI> 2.12. 2 Of the Law that was written in the hearts of the Heathen, yea of all men, <HI>v.</HI> 14. and that the <HI>Ceremonial</HI> Law never was, but the <HI>Mo|ral.</HI> 3. Of that Law which forbad Adultery, and Sacriledge, and by the breaking of which, the <HI>Jews</HI> di&s;honored God&punc; (who were &s;trict in ob&s;erving the <HI>Ceremonial</HI> Law) and was not that the <HI>Moral</HI> Law? <HI>v.</HI> 22, 23. 4. Of the Law by which is the knowledg of &s;in, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.20. now do's not that <HI>Moral Law</HI> make the greate&s;t di&s;covery of &s;in? was it not by the <HI>Mo|ral
<PB N="89" REF="47"> Law</HI> that <HI>Paul</HI> knew Concupi&s;cence to be &s;in, which otherwi&s;e he had not known? now the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> denies Ju&s;tification to be by the works of that Law which di&s;coverth &s;in. 5. <HI>He denies Ju|&s;tification by the works of the Law, which he went about not to aboli&s;h, but to e&s;tabli&s;h,</HI> Rom. 3.31. <HI>That mu&s;t needs be the</HI> Moral Law, for the <HI>Cere|monial Law</HI> he labored to aboli&s;h, and to e&s;tab|li&s;h only the <HI>Moral.</HI> 6. <HI>He treats of that Law</HI> which hath &s;aid, <HI>Thou &s;halt not Covet,</HI> Rom. 7.7. and is not that the purport of the tenth Com|mandment? 7. <HI>Of that Law which cur&s;eth eve|ry one that continueth not in all that is written there|in to do it,</HI> Gal. 3.10. <HI>and that was the Moral Law, witne&s;s</HI> Deut. 27.26. For there (whence the&s;e words <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. are quoted) <HI>Cur&s;ed be he that con|firmeth not all the words of this Law to do them,</HI> doth bring up the arrear of the Cur&s;es from Mount <HI>Ebal,</HI> beginning <HI>v.</HI> 15. <HI>Cur&s;ed be he that maketh any graven Image,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>If the Law there|fore</HI> there mentioned be &s;poken of as a <HI>Covenant of Works</HI> to them that are under the Law, it mu&s;t needs be meant of the <HI>Moral Law,</HI> for the <HI>Ce|remonial Law</HI> was never any part of the <HI>Covenant of Works</HI> made with <HI>Adam</HI> in Paradi&s;e; for it was not then extant, yea it was a kind of <HI>Typical Go&s;pel.</HI> 8. Of that Law which is ful|filled in this, <HI>Thou &s;halt love thy Neighbour as thy &s;elf,</HI> Rom. 13.8, 9. By all the&s;e pa&s;&s;ages it ap|peareth, that it is the <HI>Moral Law</HI> of which St. <HI>Paul</HI> chiefly treateth, denying that it is po&s;&s;ible for any man to be ju&s;tified by the works thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="107" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="90" REF="48">
<HEAD>CVII.</HEAD>
<P>Yea no man can be ju&s;tified by <HI>Evangelical Works,</HI> or by &s;incere obedience to the Go&s;pel. I do not well know how to di&s;tingui&s;h betwixt o|bedience to the <HI>Moral Law,</HI> and <HI>obedience to the Go&s;pel,</HI> &s;ith the <HI>Moral Law,</HI> or ten Command|ments, are the Rule of a Go&s;pel Conver&s;ation. And indeed the <HI>Moral Law</HI> was publi&s;hed from <HI>Mount Sinai,</HI> and written in Tables of Stone, &s;ome hundreds of yea s after the publication of the Go&s;pel; and as it could <HI>not di&s;anul the Go&s;pel,</HI> &s;o was it added as a clearer, and more legibly written Rule, to tho&s;e that were under the Go&s;pel, when the characters of the <HI>Innate Law</HI> were &s;carce to be read. Moreover, If <HI>the grace of God which bringeth Salvation</HI> (whereby is meant the Go&s;pel) <HI>teacheth us to live Righteou&s;ly, &s;oberly and Godly in this world,</HI> do not the ten Commandments teach the &s;ame?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="108" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CVIII.</HEAD>
<P>But whereas <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Repentance</HI> are com|monly called by the name of <HI>Go&s;pel-duties</HI> (as <HI>&V;nbelief,</HI> and <HI>Impenitency</HI> by the name of <HI>Sins a|gain&s;t the Go&s;pel</HI>) for this rea&s;on it may be, <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e the <HI>Moral Law</HI> whil&s;t it was in the na|ture, and quality of a meer <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> as to <HI>Adam</HI> in Paradi&s;e, commanded no &s;uch thing as that which we call <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Repent|ance,</HI> and by the <HI>New Covenant</HI> only the&s;e two great Duties are di&s;covered, and impo&s;ed, I &s;ay admitting &s;ome di&s;tinction betwixt the <HI>Moral
<PB N="91" REF="48"> Law,</HI> and the <HI>Law of the Go&s;pel,</HI> upon the ac|count afore&s;aid, no man is, or can be ju&s;tified by obedience to the Go&s;pel, or by <HI>Evangelical Works</HI> in that acceptation, that is, by his <HI>Repen|tance,</HI> nor yet by his <HI>Faith,</HI> or <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere,</HI> as it is a <HI>Work,</HI> but meerly as it is an <HI>In&s;trument</HI> whereby we receive Chri&s;t, and his Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="109" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CIX.</HEAD>
<P>We are not, nor cannot be ju&s;tified by <HI>Evan|gelical Works, Evangelically</HI> performed, <HI>viz.</HI> from a principal of true Grace, and Spiritual life (and not meerly of nature, and free will) there|fore not by any works what&s;oever, much le&s;s by tho&s;e <HI>Evangelical</HI> works which are &s;o only for the <HI>matter</HI> of them, as external Repentance, or &s;orrow for &s;in, that is &s;hort of <HI>Godly &s;orrow ne|ver more to be repented of,</HI> or <HI>Common Faith,</HI> &s;hort of the Faith of Gods Elect. Was not <HI>Abrahams</HI> Obedience in following God's call out of his Country in Circumci&s;ing him&s;elf, &amp; his Family, and in offering his only Son <HI>I&s;aac,</HI> an evident fruit of his <HI>Faith?</HI> (as we are told, <HI>Heb.</HI> 11. By Faith <HI>Abraham</HI> did &s;o, &amp; &s;o) therefore they mu&s;t needs be <HI>Evangelical</HI> works, <HI>Evangelically</HI> per|formed, or good works, both for <HI>matter,</HI> and <HI>manner.</HI> And yet St. <HI>Paul</HI> teacheth (for all this) that <HI>Abraham</HI> was &s;o ju&s;tified by <HI>Faith,</HI> that his Obedience had no influence upon his Ju&s;tifica|tion, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.2. <HI>If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory, but not before God,</HI> which is an Elliptick &s;peech amounting to thus much. But
<PB N="92" REF="49"> <HI>Abraham</HI> hath not whereof to glory before God, <HI>v.</HI> 3. <HI>For what &s;aith the Scripture?</HI> Abraham <HI>believed God, and it was imputed to him for Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> &amp;c. See al&s;o <HI>v.</HI> 4, &amp; 5. See al&s;o <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.6, 7, 8, 9. If the&s;e Heroick Acts of Obedi|ence came not into account for ab&s;olving <HI>Abra|ham</HI> from the guilt of &s;in, but his Faith on him <HI>that ju&s;tifieth the ungodly, was imputed to him for Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> and indeed long before the Sa|crificing of his Son, then the works of Go&s;pel Obedience ought not to he crowded with Faith into the means of our Ju&s;tification. <HI>Gattak.</HI> 76. Who knows not that <HI>David</HI> was a R<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">generate Man, a Man after God's own heart, which <HI>ful|filled all his will,</HI> Acts 13.22? And yet <HI>David</HI> him&s;elf did not expect the ble&s;&s;edne&s;s of Ju&s;ti|fication (or Salvation) upon account of his own works, or Go&s;pel Obedience, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.6. <HI>Even as</HI> David <HI>de&s;cribeth the Ble&s;&s;edne&s;s of the man unto whom God imputeth Righteou&s;ne&s;s without works.</HI> v. 7. <HI>Saying, Ble&s;&s;ed are they who&s;e Iniqui|ties are forgiven,</HI> &amp;c. Plainly intimating that God is reconciled to the World of true Believ|ers, not imputing their tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions to them, becau&s;e he imputes unto them the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, which needs not our <HI>works</HI> to a&s;|&s;i&s;t it, but requires our <HI>Faith</HI> to receive it.</P>
<P>Read further what <HI>David</HI> &s;aith, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 143.2. and what St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4.4.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="110" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="93" REF="49">
<HEAD>CX.</HEAD>
<P>That &s;incere Obedience to the Go&s;pel, and Good works; the Companions and effects of Faith, are not intended by the word <HI>Faith,</HI> and involved therein, when we are &s;aid to be ju&s;ti|fied by <HI>Faith,</HI> as an <HI>In&s;trument</HI> (or In&s;trumen|tally) is evident, becau&s;e then the Apo&s;tle's conclu&s;ion would run thus, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.27, 28. <HI>Boa&s;ting is excluded not by the Law of Works, but by the Law of Faith.</HI> Whereby we mean Obe|dience, and good Works. <HI>Therefore we conclude that a Man is ju&s;tified by Faith,</HI> that is, by <HI>Obe|dience,</HI> and <HI>Good Works, without the works of the Law.</HI> Can we imagine that the Apo&s;tle who ex|cludes not only obedience to the <HI>Moral</HI> Law (of which he &s;peaks principally, as hath been pro|ved at large) but al&s;o the Obedience of <HI>Abra|ham</HI> (which was an <HI>Evangelical</HI> &s;elf-denial) from the power, or ground of Ju&s;tification, and oppo&s;es the way of <HI>Faith</HI> to the way of <HI>Works</HI> in order to <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> did mean by <HI>Faith, good Works,</HI> and intended that we &s;hould expound Faith by Obedience? Who &s;ees not a violence offered to the Apo&s;tle's words, when they are thus di&s;torted from their genuine &s;ignification to a Figurative &s;en&s;e? And who &s;ees not that &s;uch a way of Arguing appears to be very ab&s;urd and &s;elf-contradicting?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="111" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="94" REF="50">
<HEAD>CXI.</HEAD>
<P>To &s;ay that Works are excluded from Ju&s;ti|fication not as Works, or pieces of Go&s;pel O|bedience, but as &s;uppo&s;ed by &s;ome to be <HI>merito|rious,</HI> is a poor eva&s;ion that has no truth in it. Becau&s;e <HI>Faith</HI> is affirm'd to be a cau&s;e of Ju&s;ti|fication, or to concur to Ju&s;tification, in that &s;en&s;e that <HI>Works</HI> are denied &s;o to do; but <HI>Faith</HI> is not affirmed to be the <HI>meritorious cau&s;e</HI> of Ju|&s;tification. Therefore Works are not in that &s;en&s;e denied to be the cau&s;e of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> when they are oppo&s;ed to Faith. <HI>Works</HI> are plainly de|nyed to be the cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification in that &s;en&s;e that <HI>Faith</HI> is a&s;&s;erted &s;o to be. <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.28. <HI>There|fore we conclude a man is ju&s;tified by Faith with|out the deeds of the Law.</HI> But a man is not there &s;aid, or intended, to be ju&s;tified by Faith as a <HI>meritorious cau&s;e.</HI> Therefore <HI>works</HI> are not there excluded from Ju&s;tification, as pretended to be <HI>meritorious</HI> cau&s;es thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="112" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXII.</HEAD>
<P>To be ju&s;tified by <HI>Works,</HI> and by <HI>Merits,</HI> &s;eem in the Apo&s;tle's &s;en&s;e to be one, and the &s;ame thing. Therefore if we are not ju&s;tified by <HI>me|rits,</HI> neither are we ju&s;tified by <HI>works.</HI> The Apo|&s;tle &s;eems plainly to a&s;&s;ert that if our Ju&s;tificati|on were by <HI>works,</HI> we might plead <HI>merit,</HI> that it <HI>would not be of grace but of debt,</HI> Rom. 4.4. <HI>To him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of grace, but of debt.</HI> Therefore they that deny <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> by <HI>merit,</HI> ought to deny Ju&s;tifica|tion by <HI>works</HI> al&s;o. For one, according to St.
<PB N="95" REF="50"> <HI>Paul,</HI> would nece&s;&s;arily follow upon the other.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="113" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXIII.</HEAD>
<P>To &s;ay that good works, if they were own|ed as one cau&s;e of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> could not pre|tend to any thing of <HI>merit,</HI> or meritoriou&s;ne&s;s, becau&s;e they cannot be performed but by grace, and &s;trength received from God, who mu&s;t <HI>work all our works in us, and for us,</HI> is to &s;ay nothing to the purpo&s;e. For if that were true, <HI>Adam</HI> could not have <HI>merited</HI> at God's hand had he &s;tood in the &s;tate of <HI>Innocency,</HI> becau&s;e it was God <HI>made man righteous,</HI> even the fir&s;t Man, and who in|dued him with that habitual Grace, and a&s;&s;i&s;ted him with that Divine concour&s;e, which was &s;uf|ficient to have continued him in that holy, and happy e&s;tate in which he was created, and to have advanced him to a better (as is generally held.) But do not the generality of our Divines grant that <HI>Adam</HI> by well u&s;ing, or improving that &s;tock of Grace which he had received from God, might have <HI>merited</HI> at God's hands, if not in the &s;tricte&s;t &s;en&s;e, yet in a &s;en&s;e &s;uffici|ently &s;afe, proper, and allowable?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="114" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXIV.</HEAD>
<P>If God would have rewarded&punc; <HI>Adam not of Grace, but of Debt,</HI> in ca&s;e he had per&s;i&s;ted in his innocency, then <HI>Adam,</HI> according to St. <HI>Paul,</HI> might have been &s;aid to have <HI>merited</HI> his reward, in as much as he &s;hould have had it upon the ac|count not of <HI>believing,</HI> but of <HI>working, Rom.</HI> 4.4. For &s;aid he, <HI>To him that worketh is the reward not
<PB N="96" REF="51"> reckoned of grace but of debt.</HI> Now to be reward|ed as of debt, and not of grace, is to be reward|ed upon the account of <HI>Merit;</HI> or of what God is plea&s;ed to own for &s;uch.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="115" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXV.</HEAD>
<P>When the Apo&s;tle excludeth <HI>Works</HI> from Ju|&s;tifying us, &s;o as <HI>Faith</HI> doth, or being the <HI>In|&s;trument,</HI> or <HI>Condition</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, he would no where be under&s;tood thereby to in|tend &s;uch works as are <HI>perfect</HI> and <HI>faultle&s;s.</HI> For 1. He &s;hould then exclude tho&s;e works which are no where to be found, and therefore need not to be excluded: which &s;eems to have been as needle&s;s, as a Que&s;tion which &s;ome are &s;aid to have put, who di&s;puted upon this problem, whether it were lawful for us to work Miracles? or whether they might lawfully work Miracles? who might have forborn to have queri'd about the lawfulne&s;s of u&s;ing &s;uch a power, till they had fir&s;t had &s;uch a power to u&s;e. And 2. If it be &s;aid that &s;uch works are to be found in the conceit and imagination of &s;ome men, I an&s;wer, it do's not appear that St. <HI>Paul</HI> was contending with that &s;ort of men, or doth in all his <HI>Epi&s;tle to the Romans</HI> take notice of men of that opinion in his time. 3. Whereas there were in his time, many pretenders to Ju&s;tification by <HI>Works,</HI> it &s;eemeth mo&s;t probable, that they were &s;uch who doubted not but God would take their good works as he found them, and for them gra|ciou&s;ly accept, and ju&s;tifie them, as being the be&s;t works they were able to do, though they
<PB N="97" REF="51"> knew they were attended with &s;ome &s;ailings, and imperfections. Tho &s;ome have found it too ea&s;ie to them to think that God will ju&s;tifie them for their &s;incere, though imperfect obedience; yet it &s;eems a very hard matter for any con&s;iderate man (or per&s;on worth confuting) to think that nothing of weakne&s;s, and imperfection doth cleave to his good works. St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith of the <HI>Gentiles,</HI> Rom. 1. that their <HI>Con&s;ciences did ac|cu&s;e them</HI> (for &s;ome things) as well as excu&s;e them in others. 5. When the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> &s;aith <HI>what the Law cannot do in that it is weak through the fle&s;h,</HI> &amp;c. though he glanceth at the imper|fection of our works, yet he &s;eems to bring it in as a thing that was <HI>known,</HI> or needed not to be proved, that our fle&s;h was weak, that is, we in this corrupt &s;tate could not do works that are perfectly good, and to give that which he took <HI>pro conce&s;&s;o,</HI> as the rea&s;on why the Law could not ju&s;tifie us, <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e we cannot keep it perfectly, and it can ju&s;tifie none but them that can. 6. The Apo&s;tle in that text &s;eems to take two things for granted, or &s;uch as would ea&s;ily be owned, <HI>viz.</HI> 1. That the <HI>Law</HI> (or <HI>Covenant</HI> of works) could not ju&s;tifie one that could not keep it perfectly. 2. That man in his fle&s;hly, or fallen &s;tate, or &s;ince his fall, could not do that. And by tho&s;e two confe&s;&s;ed <HI>Mediums,</HI> or Propo|&s;itions, he proves this conclu&s;ion, <HI>viz.</HI> That the Law could not ju&s;tifie fallen man. 7. But nei|ther from this text, or any other, doth it appear that St. <HI>Paul</HI> was troubled with a &s;ort of men who dream'd of their own works, being every
<PB N="98" REF="52"> way <HI>perfect,</HI> and did make it his bu&s;ine&s;s to op|po&s;e them, but only &s;uch who dream'd of being &s;aved by their own good works, which they thought God would mercifully accept, and ju|&s;tifie them for, though they might need grains, or more than grains of allowance.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="116" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Neither are we ju&s;tified by <HI>Faith</HI> it &s;elf, &s;ingly, and &s;olely con&s;idured, or by the act of believ|ing (or <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere</HI>) as it is a good work, grace, or quality, but meerly as it is that <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> whereby we receive Chri&s;ts Righteou&s;ne&s;s, by which we are ju&s;tified, or whereby we are united to Chri&s;t, and &s;o become partakers of all his benefits. This is evident, 1. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle oppo&s;eth <HI>Working,</HI> and <HI>Believing,</HI> each to other, or rather, <HI>Believing</HI> to <HI>Working,</HI> in the matter of Ju&s;tification, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.5. <HI>But to him that workeih not, but believeth on him that ju|&s;tifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> In this ca&s;e we may &s;ay, <HI>Fides quae opus e&s;t ju&s;tificat, non qua opus e&s;t.</HI> That Faith which is a good work ju&s;tifieth, but not as it is a good work, (as they &s;ay, <HI>quae viva,</HI> not <HI>qua viva.</HI>) It is by Chri&s;t and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s alone, as ours <HI>Imputatively,</HI> that we are ju&s;tified, as by the <HI>matter,</HI> and <HI>form</HI> of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and therefore Faith is but the <HI>In&s;trument of Applicati|on,</HI> as laying on is to a Plai&s;ter. 'Tis the Plai&s;ter that cureth, the laying on is but the applying of it, or the bringing of the &s;ore and the remedy together. If the Que&s;tion be put, <HI>Who</HI> &s;hall be
<PB N="99" REF="52"> Ju&s;tified? I an&s;wer, <HI>Believers.</HI> But if it be put thus, <HI>Why</HI> is a Beliver Ju&s;tified? or whence re|&s;ults the Ju&s;tification of a Believer? or by what is he ju&s;tified? I an&s;wer, By the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t applyed to him by <HI>Faith, Act.</HI> 13. <HI>By him</HI> (&s;peaking of Chri&s;t) <HI>all that believe are ju|&s;tified.</HI> And <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 53.11. <HI>By the knowledg of him &s;hall my righteous Servant</HI> (that is Chri&s;t) <HI>ju&s;ti|fie many.</HI> It is Chri&s;t that &s;hall <HI>ju&s;tifie</HI> (and by the Faith or <HI>knowledg of him&s;elf</HI> as only the in&s;trumental cau&s;e) becau&s;e of the words fol|lowing, <HI>for he &s;hall bear their Iniquities.</HI> It is by <HI>bearing their iniquities, i. e.</HI> by &s;uffering, and &s;a|tisfying for their iniquities, (for &s;o Chri&s;t is &s;aid to have <HI>borne our &s;ins in his body upon the the Cro&s;s when he died for</HI> them) that Chri&s;t &s;hall ju&s;tifie them who have knowledg of him, or who be|lieve in him. So then it is not their <HI>Believing,</HI> ac|cepted in the place of a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s, for, and by which Chri&s;t Ju&s;tifieth them, but by <HI>bearing their iniquities,</HI> by his own obedience to the death of the Cro&s;s, on their behalf. It is not a poor mans acceptance of a great rich Match that doth enrich him, I &s;ay, the act of accepting, is not the the thing that doth it, or is the matter of his E&s;tate, but the rich Match which is offered to him, and accepted by him.</P>
<P>There are Miracles in Scripture a&s;cribed to <HI>Faith,</HI> to which Faith could no otherwi&s;e con|cur, than as an <HI>In&s;trument</HI> engaging the power of God to work &s;uch Miracles, or as a <HI>Condition</HI> to which the working of Miracles was promi&s;ed, <HI>Mat.</HI> 16.17. <HI>The&s;e &s;igns &s;hall follow tham that
<PB N="100" REF="53"> believe in my name, they &s;hall ca&s;t out Devils &s;peak with new tongues.</HI> v. 18. <HI>They &s;hall take up Ser|pents, and if they drink any deadly thing it &s;hall not hurt then. They &s;hall lay hands on the &s;ick, and they &s;hall recover.</HI> We read <HI>Heb.</HI> 11.33. of tho&s;e <HI>who through Faith &s;topped the mouths of Lions, quenched th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> violence of Fire.</HI> v. 35. <HI>Received their Dead rai&s;ed to life again,</HI> &amp;. Faith it &s;elf could not do the&s;e things, unle&s;s it were omnipotent; therefore it could be but the <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or Con|dition, by, or upon which the power of God was ingaged to do them, which may &s;erve to illu&s;trate what we have in hand. Look how Faith concurr'd to the curing of that Cripple &s;poken of, <HI>Acts</HI> 3.16. <HI>His name, through Faith in his name, hath made this man &s;trong.</HI> In like manner doth it concur to the <HI>ju&s;tifying</HI> of a &s;in|ner, <HI>viz.</HI> as a meer applying In&s;trument, or Condition; by means of which, and with re|&s;pect to which, the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t be|comes imputed to us, for our Ju&s;tification. It was the Name, or Power of Chri&s;t, which cured that Cripplle; &s;o 'tis Chri&s;t, and hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s which ju&s;tifieth a &s;inner, but then it is through <HI>Faith,</HI> as the <HI>In&s;trument</HI> receiving, and applying the &s;ame.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="117" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXVII.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Faith</HI> is a Grace by it &s;elf, di&s;tinct from <HI>fear</HI> of God, <HI>Love, &s;elf denyal,</HI> &amp;c. and as &s;uch, it acteth when it is <HI>in&s;trumental</HI> in <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> or doth concur thereto, either as an <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or a <HI>Condition</HI> (call it either). When the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI>
<PB N="101" REF="53"> defineth <HI>Faith, Acb.</HI> 11. 1. &s;aying, <HI>Faith is the &s;ub&s;tance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not &s;een,</HI> he gives that de&s;cription of that one grace, and not of all the re&s;t. <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Charity</HI> are not the &s;ame grace; for the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> &s;aith, <HI>now abideth Faith, Hope, and Charity, the&s;e three, but the greate&s;t of the&s;e is Charity.</HI> If they be not di&s;tinct, how are they called three? or how could <HI>Charity</HI> be &s;aid to be the <HI>greate&s;t,</HI> if <HI>Faith, Hope,</HI> and <HI>Charity</HI> be all one? Is the &s;ame thing greater than it &s;elf at the &s;ame time? Morever, <HI>Faith</HI> &s;hall hereafter be done away, that is &s;wal|lowed up in <HI>Vi&s;ion,</HI> but <HI>Charity never faileth,</HI> as the Apo&s;tle &s;peaketh, <HI>v.</HI> 8. Now that which fail|eth, and that which &s;hall never fail, cannot be the &s;ame. Moreover, <HI>Faith</HI> is &s;aid <HI>to work by love,</HI> which implies, that they are two di&s;tinct things. Al&s;o, <HI>Faith</HI> is &s;aid to be <HI>made perfect by love, i. e.</HI> demon&s;trated to be perfect, which &s;heweth it is not the &s;ame thing. I might add <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Re|pentance</HI> are not the &s;ame, witne&s;s that expre&s;&s;i|on, <HI>Repentance toward God, and Faith in our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> Faith is cau&s;al to &s;everal other Gra|ces. They differ as <HI>cau&s;es,</HI> and <HI>effects,</HI> therefore they cannot be the &s;ame thing, <HI>ex gr. Faith</HI> is the cau&s;e of Chri&s;tian Patience. <HI>He that believes maketh aot ha&s;te,</HI> 2 Cor. 4.16. <HI>For which cau&s;e we faint not,</HI> there was their <HI>Patience.</HI> Now that <HI>Faith</HI> was the cau&s;e of it may be proved by <HI>v.</HI> 18. <HI>While we look not at the things which are &s;een, but at the things which are not &s;een.</HI> Now to be the evidence of things not &s;een, or to look at and to reallize un&s;een things, is the nature, and work
<PB N="102" REF="54"> of <HI>Faith. Faith</HI> is &s;poken of but as one fruit of the Spirit among&s;t many, <HI>Gal.</HI> 5.22. where St. <HI>Paul</HI> enumerates <HI>Love, Long &s;uffering, Gentlene&s;s, Goodne&s;s, Meekne&s;s, Temperance,</HI> &amp;c. were the&s;e one, and the &s;ame, &s;urely they would not be pre&s;ented to us under &s;o many &s;everal names, and denominations, <HI>&amp;c. Faith</HI> is not the name of a Chri&s;tians whole <HI>Panoply,</HI> or &s;piritual Armor, but of one piece thereof. That indeed is called the <HI>Shield,</HI> Eph. 6.16. but <HI>Truth the Girdle. Righteou&s;ne&s;s the Bre&s;tplate,</HI> and <HI>the Helmet, the hope of Salvation.</HI> In 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 1.4, are the&s;e words, <HI>We glory for your Patience and Faith.</HI> and <HI>v.</HI> 3. <HI>Your Faith groweth, and your Charity abound|eth.</HI> and in 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.5. <HI>The end of the Command is Love, ovt of a pure heart and Faith,</HI> where <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Love</HI> are &s;poken of as two things, <HI>Faith</HI> as the <HI>cau&s;e,</HI> and <HI>Love</HI> as the <HI>effect, Love</HI> out of <HI>Eaith,</HI> &amp;c. For fear of tiring you, I &s;hall quote but one text more, to this purpo&s;e, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.11. <HI>Follow after Righteou&s;ne&s;s, Godline&s;s, Faith, Love, Pacience, Meekne&s;s.</HI> Would the Apo&s;tle have given &s;o many names to one and the &s;ame thing? or do's it not enough appear by their being &s;o con&s;tantly &s;poken of in Scripture as di|&s;tinct, that they are not the &s;ame? That <HI>Ju&s;tify|ing Faith</HI> involves all other Graces, and is the name of all Graces in one, cannot at all be prov'd by the Apo&s;tle <HI>James</HI> his di&s;cour&s;e of Ju&s;tificati|on by works: For St. <HI>James</HI> doth not mention any prrticular <HI>Grace,</HI> but <HI>Works</HI> in general, as externally, and vi&s;ibly practi&s;ed. Had he &s;aid <HI>Abraham was justified not only</HI> by Faith, but al&s;o
<PB N="103" REF="54"> by <HI>Love, &s;elf denial, Obedience,</HI> &amp;c. there had been &s;ome colour for &s;uch an A&s;&s;ertion. But now there is none.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="118" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Seeing <HI>Faith</HI> is almo&s;t every where el&s;e in Scripture taken for a Grace by it's &s;elf, di&s;tinct from the re&s;t, and other Graces &s;poken of as di&s;tinct one from another, it can at no hand be proved, that where <HI>Faith</HI> is mentioned with reference to <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> or we &s;aid to be Ju&s;tified by, or through Faith, by <HI>Faith</HI> is meant all &s;orts of Grace, or the whole Chain of Gra|ces, whereas indeed <HI>Faith</HI> is but one link of that Chain.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="119" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXIX.</HEAD>
<P>If <HI>Faith</HI> it's being the only In&s;trumental cau&s;e, or the only condition of Ju&s;tification can|not be evaded, by &s;aying that by Faith is meant the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or by <HI>Faith</HI> is meant <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>good works</HI> together; or by <HI>Faith</HI> is meant not one &s;ingle Grace, but all comprized under that Name: Nor yet by &s;aying that when works are excluded from <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> we mu&s;t alwayes under&s;tand it of works either as <HI>meritorious,</HI> or as <HI>Perfect,</HI> or as <HI>works before Regeneration,</HI> or as works of the <HI>Ceremonial</HI> Law only, or as works of the <HI>Law,</HI> not <HI>of the Go&s;pel,</HI> or as works <HI>in|&s;incere,</HI> and only materially, and extrin&s;ically good: I &s;ay, If <HI>works,</HI> as <HI>works</HI> be excluded from Ju&s;tification, and none of the other eva|&s;ions will hold water (as hath been &s;hewed)
<PB N="104" REF="55"> then we are not ju&s;tified by our real, inward holi|ne&s;s, or &s;incere Obedience to the Go&s;pel, but by <HI>Faith</HI> alone, as the only <HI>In&s;trument</HI> whereby we receive, and apply to our &s;elves the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of our Saviour, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And if our Obe|dience to the Go&s;pel, though &s;incere, cannot be proved to be &s;o much as the <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or <HI>Con|dition</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, much le&s;s the mat|ter of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, or that which in God's Court <HI>of</HI> Chancery (as they call it) is accepted in&s;tead of a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s for our <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="120" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXX.</HEAD>
<P>As for the Popi&s;h Di&s;tinction of a <HI>fir&s;t</HI> and <HI>&s;e|cond Ju&s;tification;</HI> to the latter of which they &s;ay good works doth concurr. I think there is nothing in it that will &s;atisfie any good Prote|&s;tant, or any rational man of an unprejudiced mind. For by our <HI>fir&s;t Ju&s;tification</HI> they do un|der&s;tand our being made Holy, and Godly of unholy, and ungodly. Now, that Prote&s;tants do call not <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> but <HI>Sanctification.</HI> By our &s;econd <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> they under&s;tand our be|ing made of Holy, more Holy, and of Godly, more Godly. This Prote&s;tants deny to be tru|ly called <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> and do call it our <HI>growth in Grace,</HI> or progre&s;s in <HI>Sanctification,</HI> and doubtle&s;s &s;o it is. But for a Per&s;ons being really ju&s;tified more than once, we have no ground or foot &s;teps in Scripture. Therefore though it be a Truth that a Believer by abounding in good works, doth increa&s;e in Grace, and Holine&s;s
<PB N="105" REF="55"> (for repeated Acts do &s;trengthen their re|&s;pective Habits) yet that by doing good works, they do acquire a <HI>&s;econd Ju&s;tification,</HI> is a mo&s;t ungrounded notion, and mu&s;t &s;uppo&s;e that ei|ther the <HI>fir&s;t ju&s;tification</HI> may be lo&s;t, and a <HI>&s;e|cond</HI> obtained, and if &s;o, why may there not be twenty <HI>ju&s;tifications</HI> as well as two? or el&s;e that a Believer is not virtually ju&s;tified from all his &s;ins at once (which our Divines do general|ly affirm that he is) Now, if there be no <HI>&s;e|cond ju&s;tification,</HI> the concurrence of good works thereunto, is a notion that falls to the ground. For, <HI>non entis nulla e&s;t affectio.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="121" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXI.</HEAD>
<P>The denying of Ju&s;tification to be by our own inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, accepted as if it were perfect, or in&s;tead of the perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, and a&s;&s;erting of Ju&s;tification to be by the only Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Je&s;us Chri&s;t ap|prehended by <HI>Faith</HI> alone, doth greatly tend to keep Sinners humble, and to exclude all boa&s;t|ing (which God aimeth to do) when they &s;hall con&s;ider that that whereby they are ju&s;tifi|ed is not in them&s;elves, this being certain that we are more apt to be proud of what is &s;uppo|&s;ed to be in us, than of what is <HI>imputed</HI> to us. As a Debtor hath le&s;s to boa&s;t of when the pay|ment of his <HI>Surety</HI> is imputed to him for his di&s;|charge, than if by his indu&s;try he had procured &s;omething to pay for him&s;elf, although the &s;tock had been freely be&s;towed on him by the <HI>Surety.</HI> 'Tis evident by the Apo&s;tles words, that that can
<PB N="106" REF="56"> be no true notion of the way of God's ju&s;tify+ing a &s;inner which doth leave any room, or place, or pretence for boa&s;ting, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4.2. <HI>If</HI> Abraham <HI>were ju&s;tified by works, he hath whereof to boa&s;t</HI> (or glory) <HI>q. d.</HI> That is Argument enough to prove that <HI>Abraham</HI> was not Ju&s;tified by works. He adds as a <HI>minor</HI> propo&s;ition or a&s;&s;umption, <HI>But not before God,</HI> meaning, But he had no cau&s;e to glory, or to boa&s;t before God. <HI>Ergo.</HI> He was not ju&s;tified by works.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="122" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXII.</HEAD>
<P>Our Graces and good works, though from henceforth they &s;hould be perfect, and intire, lacking nothing, would not be able to &s;atisfie God for our <HI>Original &s;in,</HI> and our Actual &s;ins that are <HI>pa&s;t,</HI> and to di&s;charge us from the guilt of them, for we cannot pay one debt with ano|ther, and our be&s;t Obedience is a daily debt; much le&s;s then can <HI>imperfect</HI> Obedience to the Go&s;pel, though &s;incere, ju&s;tifie us, or be the matter of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="123" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Our Ju&s;tification is as free to us (though 'twere not &s;o to Chri&s;t) as any Pardon ever was to a Traytor. Now, unto a Pardon freely given there is nothing required but the hearty acceptance of it upon the terms of promi&s;ing to be a Faithful Subject for time to come, or &s;o. Now, though &s;uch a Pardon co&s;t a man nothing, and is abundantly &s;ufficient for his di&s;charge, yet mu&s;t he come and plead this Pardon in open
<PB N="107" REF="56"> Court, he mu&s;t produce it, and in&s;i&s;t upon it, before his Judge, in arre&s;t of Judgment, that the Sentence denounced again&s;t him may not be Executed. A Traytor that is &s;o acquitted, cannot be &s;aid to be acquitted by his willing|ne&s;s to accept of a pardon, or to produce it in Court when obtained (for what Malefactor is not willing to do the&s;e two things?) But by the <HI>Pardon</HI> it's &s;elf it is that a Traytor is di&s;|charged, though he cannot have the benefit of his Pardon, if it be only tendered, unle&s;s it be al&s;o <HI>accepted,</HI> and pleaded by him. Now, to accept, and plead his Pardon, when nothing el&s;e but that is required of him, renders it no le&s;s <HI>free,</HI> than if he mjght have had it without accepting, or at lea&s;twi&s;e, without pleading of it. But were he for his <HI>Pardon,</HI> and in order to the procurement thereof, to be a Servant all the dayes of his Life, that would alter the ca&s;e, and make his <HI>pardon unfree.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Believing,</HI> or <HI>Faith</HI> is the Acceptance of our Pardon upon God's terms, but <HI>ju&s;tification</HI> by works, re&s;embleth the la&s;t in&s;tance, <HI>viz.</HI> of one who mu&s;t work hard all the dayes of his Life, to pay his Debt, or el&s;e be ca&s;t into Pri&s;on, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="124" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>In &s;aying that <HI>Faith</HI> is the <HI>In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e, or <HI>Condition</HI> of Ju&s;tification, we a&s;cribe much more to it than if we had called it only <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non.</HI> For <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non</HI> do's <HI>nihil ponere in e&s;&s;e,</HI> it produceth nothing; no effect doth
<PB N="108" REF="57"> nece&s;&s;arily follow upon it. The poore&s;t begger hath that in him without which no man can be a Prince, <HI>viz.</HI> Humane Nature. For to be a man is a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non,</HI> of being a Prince, yet how far from being a Prince is a poor Beg|ger? Every Virgin that Liv'd in that time when Chri&s;t was look'd for, had a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non,</HI> of being the Mother of Chri&s;t. For none but a Female, and a Virgin, could be that, yet re|&s;pective to the decree of God none but the Virgin <HI>Mary</HI> could be that.</P>
<P>But a Condition is &s;uch a thing, as when it is performed, produceth a real effect, <HI>viz.</HI> inti|tleth to the performance of the promi&s;e, which was &s;u&s;pended upon it. Al&s;o an <HI>In&s;trumental Cau&s;e,</HI> which is &s;uch in Fact, or in <HI>facto e&s;&s;e,</HI> produceth the effect. For no man can be &s;aid to be the In&s;trument of doing &s;uch a thing untill the thing be done. A cau&s;e in <HI>facto e&s;&s;e</HI> &s;uppo|&s;eth it's <HI>effect</HI> to be &s;o. For nothing is actually a cau&s;e that doth not actually effect &s;omething, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Faith is &s;o an <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> and &s;o a <HI>Condi|tion</HI> of Ju&s;tification that when&s;oever a &s;inner be|lieveth he is thereupon ju&s;tified immediately in the &s;ame In&s;tant.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="125" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXV.</HEAD>
<P>There is no danger in owning Holine&s;s, and good works to be <HI>cau&s;ae &s;ine quibus non</HI> of Ju&s;ti|fication, becau&s;e a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non</HI> is as remore a thing as can be thought of, and do's not at all intitle what in that &s;en&s;e is called a <HI>Cau&s;e</HI> to the <HI>effect.</HI> For the Law of God is a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua
<PB N="109" REF="57"> non</HI> of <HI>&s;in.</HI> For had there <HI>been no Law, there had been no tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion.</HI> Yea, God him&s;elf who can as &s;oon cea&s;e to be God, as be the Author of &s;in, yet may be &s;aid to be a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non</HI> of &s;in in e-ference to his making of men, and Angels. For had God Created no intelligent Creatures, there could have been no &s;in; for &s;uch Crea|tures only are capable of &s;inning. But &s;hall we therefore make God the Author of &s;in? God forbid.</P>
<P><HI>Privation</HI> is a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non</HI> of <HI>Generation,</HI> yet Philo&s;ophers deny it to be a cau&s;e truly &s;o called.</P>
<P>One calls <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non, cau&s;am &s;tolidam,</HI> and well he may, for there is little rea&s;on to be given why it &s;hould be called a cau&s;e, &s;ith the Definition of a cau&s;e doth not agree to it, <HI>Cau|&s;a e&s;t cujus vires e&s;t.</HI> A cau&s;e is that by virtue, or means whereof, &s;ome other thing is, or is produced. But nothing is produced by virtue of a <HI>cau&s;a &s;ine qua non.</HI> There may be a hun|dred <HI>cau&s;ae &s;ine quibus non,</HI> that a man may have of his being a <HI>Lord Mayor of</HI> London, if he had not been <HI>ens,</HI> or had a being, he could not have been that, without he had a <HI>vegetative &s;oul,</HI> or without he had had a <HI>&s;en&s;itive &s;oul,</HI> and a <HI>rational &s;oul,</HI> and a <HI>Body</HI> that had not been mon|&s;trous, the right &s;hape of a man, without he had Lived in <HI>Europe,</HI> yea, Lived in <HI>England,</HI> yea, Lived in <HI>London,</HI> yea, had been a Free Man of <HI>Lon|don,</HI> yea, been po&s;&s;e&s;t of a vi&s;ible good E&s;tate, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> (and twenty things more) he could ne|ver have been <HI>Lord Mayor of</HI> London. And yet
<PB N="110" REF="58"> will any man &s;ay that any of the&s;e things were the <HI>cau&s;es</HI> of his being <HI>Lord Mayor?</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="126" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Yet owning Holine&s;s, and every grace to be (as they are) cau&s;es without which there is no Ju|&s;tification, though it doth not advance other Graces to a parity with Faith, or to an equal in|fluence upon the Ju&s;tification of a &s;inner, to that which Faith hath yet is an effectual bar (if right- by con&s;idered) again&s;t <HI>pre&s;uming</HI> to live un|righteou&s;ly, and unholily, upon the account of our being ju&s;tified by a righteou&s;ne&s;s without us. For what is any man the better, or what more encouragement hath he to &s;in, though it be &s;o that we are not ju&s;tified by every &s;ort of Grace, but by <HI>Faith</HI> alone (as the only <HI>In&s;trument</HI> where by we apprehend the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, and the only condition to which the Promi&s;e of Ju&s;tification is made) &s;ith they that &s;ay &s;o, do acknowledge that <HI>Repentance, Love, Self-denyal,</HI> and all other Graces, mu&s;t concur in the <HI>per&s;on Ju&s;tified,</HI> though not to his <HI>Ju&s;tification;</HI> or that we cannot be <HI>ju&s;tified</HI> without the pre&s;ence of tho&s;e, though by the&s;e we are not ju&s;tified, but by <HI>Faith</HI> alone: yea that the per&s;on ju&s;tified cannot be &s;aved without doing of good works, if he hath &s;pace of time for them (which the Thief on the Cro&s;s had not) no more than a Sum of Money that is due, can be received without giving an <HI>Acquittance</HI> for it, when it is demanded, and in&s;i&s;ted on.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="127" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="111" REF="58">
<HEAD>CXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>They give the true&s;t, and be&s;t account of the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification, who &s;o &s;tate it as nei|ther to deprive God of the glory of his free Grace, not to deter man from his duty, in point of &s;incere obedience; &s;o as <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> may not be confounded with <HI>Sanctification</HI> (as by the Pa|pi&s;ts it is, as if it were the &s;ame thing) as con|&s;i&s;ting in righteou&s;ne&s;s not imputed, but infu&s;ed, nor yet <HI>Sanctificaiion</HI> be excluded, and render|ed needle&s;s by the Doctrine of <HI>Justification</HI> as it is &s;tated, but <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> &s;o confined to the u&s;e for which it is de&s;igned of God, that <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent,</HI> or <HI>implanted</HI> may be own|ed as indi&s;pen&s;ably nece&s;&s;ary, though not for the &s;ame with <HI>Imputed,</HI> yet for other great ends and u&s;es, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> By taking care of the latter, we &s;hall arm our &s;elves again&s;t <HI>Antinomians,</HI> and <HI>Liber|tines;</HI> of the former, again&s;t <HI>Papists,</HI> and <HI>Soci|nians,</HI> &amp;c. The account we have given of Ju&s;ti|fication by <HI>Faith</HI> alone, hath to the be&s;t of our knowledg, been &s;o &s;tated, and hath therefore a great character of Truth upon it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="128" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>The a&s;&s;erting of new Terms, Phra&s;es, and Modes of &s;peaking, in &s;o great a Doctrine as that of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> though nothing but &s;ome more accuracy in &s;tating the old Doctrine con|cerning it were intended, has been, and is, of dangerous con&s;equence, e&s;pecially when the old terms, and expre&s;&s;ions, whereby it hath
<PB N="112" REF="59"> been competently under&s;tood formerly, are cri'd down, and exploded. I &s;ay it is of dangerous con&s;equence, becau&s;e men are thereby led to to think, that all that which they have heard concerning <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> formerly, was fal&s;e, though the Inventors of the&s;e new expre&s;&s;ions, they them&s;elves do not think &s;o, or what&s;oever they think, by their new Phra&s;es, they lead the people into Fundamental Errors, being deceiv|ed them&s;elves, and deceiving others, I &s;ay de|ceiving, and being deceived.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="129" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXIX.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Mr.</HI> Durham, <HI>on the</HI> Revelation, <HI>hath a worthy pa&s;&s;age to this purpo&s;e,</HI> p. <HI>236.</HI> We are per&s;wad|ed <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> that the reflecting on many worthy men, the ob&s;curing of the troden path by new Que|&s;tions, and Objections, the confounding of Rea|ders by propo&s;ing, as it were, of a different &s;train of the Covenant from what formerly hath been Preach|ed, the giving an open door to men to propo&s;e new draughts in all things, and that not in expre&s;&s;ions only, but al&s;o in Fundamental things, &s;hall be more prejudicial to edificatiom, than the bringing forth of this &s;hall be u&s;eful: For if by this all the former Doctrines of Ju&s;tification be enervated, where were we all till now? If it &s;tand &s;o that the followers there|of may attain Heaven, what is the u&s;e of this &s;o full a new model, with &s;o much profe&s;&s;ed danger in, and di&s;&s;atisfaction with the former? Will it not be welcom to Papi&s;ts <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> to have Prote|stants &s;peaking in their terms, and homologating them in condemning the former language of the mo&s;t eminent Reformers?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="130" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="113" REF="59">
<HEAD>CXXX.</HEAD>
<P>The opening of Faiths peculiar concurring for the Application of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s in the Covenant of Grace, is a bu&s;ine&s;s of great u&s;e and concernment, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> into which we may receive &s;ome light by con&s;idering how, and in what &s;en&s;e, <HI>Faith</HI> is and may be &s;aid to be a <HI>Condition of the Covenant of Grace,</HI> or of <HI>Ju&s;tifi|cation.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="131" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXI.</HEAD>
<P>Covenants are either &s;uch as meer entering in|to them doth entitle to the benefits comprehend|ed in them, as in the Marriage-Covenant, en|try thereinto intitleth the Wife to the Husband, and all that is his: Sometimes again the Relati|on mu&s;t not only be entered, but al&s;o the terms thereof actually performed, before there be a right to the thing promi&s;ed. Thus if <HI>Jacob</HI> Co|venant with <HI>Laban</HI> to &s;erve him &s;even years, that he may Marry his daughter, at the expira|tion thereof, he enters into the Relation of a Ser|vant pre&s;ently, but his reward becomes not due till the end of his &s;ervice: Or if a Ma&s;ter Cove|nants to make his Servant free at the end of eight years, in ca&s;e he &s;hall do him good and faithful &s;ervice, though he be now his Cove|nant Servant, yet his Fredom, the reward of his Service, will not become due to him till he hath actually &s;erv'd his Ma&s;ter, &s;o many years, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="132" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="114" REF="60">
<HEAD>CXXXII.</HEAD>
<P>As there are two &s;orts of Covenants (as hath been &s;aid) &s;o there are two &s;orts of Condi|tions of a Covenant, or Covenants: For 1. The words <HI>Condition of a Covenant,</HI> are &s;ome|times taken more largely; for all the duties that are required of one in that Relation: And &s;o a Wives dutifulne&s;s to her Husband after Marri|age, may be called Conditions of the <HI>Marriage Covenant.</HI> Sometimes a Condition is taken more &s;trictly, and <HI>Formally;</HI> that is, for &s;uch a thing as makes up the Relation, and entitles one to, and en&s;tates him in the Priviledges Covenanted. So Formal con&s;enting in Marriage is the Condi|tion. And a Sons actual accepting of the a&s;&s;ured Adoption, and engaging him&s;elf to be dutiful, do en&s;tate him in the priviledge of a Son, al|though he hath not actually perform'd all that he is engaged to. And in this re&s;pect the actual performing of &s;uch duties, is rather the duty of one in &s;uch a Relation, than the Condition re|quired to the up-making of it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="133" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>There is difference betwixt the Priviledges, of a Covenant which flow from it; as &s;uch, and to all in &s;uch a Relation, (Thus all Wives, as &s;uch, have intere&s;t in their Husbands) and tho&s;e Priviledges of a Covenant, which are but con|ditionally promi&s;ed even to them that are with|in tho&s;e Relations. So what a Husband promi&s;|eth to give his Wife upon condition of her be|ing
<PB N="115" REF="60"> a Faithful Wife, depends not upon her Re|lation as a Wife, but upon the continuing faith|ful. An Adopted Son cannot plead actual po&s;|&s;e&s;&s;ion of the Inheritance, though he be a Son, till that time come that was appointed by the Father, or till he perform &s;omething call'd for in the right of Adoption, (which is in&s;inuated,) <HI>Gal.</HI> 4.1, 2.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="134" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>What hath been &s;aid may help to &s;hew us in what &s;en&s;e Works may be called the Condition of the Covenant of Grace, and in what &s;en&s;e Faith only. If we take <HI>Condition</HI> largely, and materially for what&s;oerer is required of one in Covenant; &s;o Works may be called the Condi|tion of the Covenant. Even as a Wife or Son, their performing Conjugal, or Filial Duties to a Husband, or Father, may he called Condi|tions of Marriage, and Adoption: Yet if we con&s;ider the Condition of the Covenant of grace &s;trictly and <HI>formally,</HI> for that which doth actual|ly intere&s;s one in, or entitle him to Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and maketh him a &s;on, that is Faith properly taken as it doth unite with Chri&s;t <HI>Joh.</HI> 1.12. becau&s;e it is impo&s;&s;ible to conceive one to believe in Chri&s;t but he mu&s;t be conceiv|ed to have title to him, as a Wife to her Hu&s;|band, or a Son to his Father. And &s;o he cannot be conceived to be a true Believer but he mu&s;t be ju&s;tified; becau&s;e to have intere&s;t in Chri&s;t, and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, cannot be &s;eparated from Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="135" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="116" REF="61">
<HEAD>CXXXV.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Covenant of Grace</HI> is not like the Cove|nant betwixt a Husbandman and his Labourer, for his hire, which pre&s;uppo&s;eth working, and &s;o the performance of it mu&s;t go before the Ser|vant, or Labourer can plead any thing upon the Agreement: But it is like a Marriage Covenant, or <HI>free Adoption,</HI> which doth indeed infer duties to follow in the re&s;pect afore&s;aid, and doth im|ply an ingagement to perform them, but doth not pre&s;uppo&s;e the actual performance thereof before any right can be pleaded by &s;uch Relati|ons, but only con&s;enting and ingaging to the &s;ame. The <HI>Covenant of Works</HI> is in Scripture compared to that Covenant which is betwixt a Ma&s;ter and his hired Labourer; hence the re|ward is called <HI>Debt,</HI> or <HI>Hire;</HI> becau&s;e the per|forming of the Conditions, of Holine&s;s, and O|bedience was nece&s;&s;arily pre&s;uppo&s;ed unto ha|ving right to the great priviledges of that Cove|nant. For though <HI>Adam</HI> was in covenant with God at fir&s;t, yet could he not claim life by ver|tue thereof, till he had continued in obedience to the commands, and actually performed the &s;ame, as Servants mu&s;t do before they can plead for their hire. Again, The <HI>Covenant of Grace</HI> is compared to <HI>Free Adoption,</HI> and to <HI>Marriage</HI> be|twixt Man, and Wife, not becau&s;e the <HI>Cove|nant of Grace</HI> requires not Holine&s;s, or Works, but becau&s;e it doth not require them actually to precede a per&s;ons title to all the priviledges Co|venanted, and doth freely entitle him to the
<PB N="117" REF="61"> &s;ame upon his entery therein, as a Wife is enti|tled to what is her Husbands upon her Marriage with him, although afterwards &s;he be to per|form the Duties of the Relation, rather as du|ties called for by it, than as <HI>Conditions</HI> of it, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="136" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>The difference betwixt the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> and <HI>Covenant of Grace</HI> lieth not in this, that the one requireth Works <HI>perfectly holy,</HI> as the Con|dition thereof, and the other Evangelical works, not <HI>perf<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ctly holy:</HI> becau&s;e &s;o there were not the &s;ame Law for ordering holine&s;s to us which they had, nor the &s;ame ab&s;olute pattern of Holine&s;s for our Copy, <HI>viz.</HI> God's Holine&s;s calling us to <HI>be holy as he is holy;</HI> nor were defects in reference to our perfect Holine&s;s, &s;inful under the <HI>Cove|nant of Grace,</HI> if perfection were not required therein; all which are fal&s;e, be&s;ide that &s;o it were &s;till of <HI>works.</HI> But the difference lieth in this, that our <HI>working</HI> is not to be the ground of our inheritance, nor actually to precede our Righteou&s;ne&s;s, (as in the Covenant of works was nece&s;&s;ary) but <HI>believing,</HI> and <HI>con&s;enting</HI> only.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="137" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>The difference betwixt the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> and the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> may be conceived thus: Suppo&s;e a Debter Sued for his own Debt &s;hould either plead no Debt, or that he had paid it, or would pay it; this is the <HI>Covenant of Works.</HI> Again, the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> is as a
<PB N="118" REF="62"> Debtor, acknowledging Debts, but being un|able to pay, pleadeth only the Surety's pay|ment, and expecteth to be ab&s;olved on that ac|count; and not as if by a Surety's intervening he had had all the Debt forgiven him, to &s;o much, or had a new bargain given him, for a penny yearly, or a Pepper-corn in the place of a thou&s;and Talents; and in a word, &s;o much down, and that for Gold, Oare of Gold &s;hould be accepted. For if &s;o, It would be the &s;ame kind of Condition, and &s;o the &s;ame Covenant in kind. For, <HI>Majus &amp; minus non variant &s;pe|ciem.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="138" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas the Go&s;pel requireth <HI>perfect Obedi|ence</HI> (as hath been proved) as truly as the <HI>Co|venant of Works</HI> did, were that <HI>perfect Obedience,</HI> the Condition of it, without which the benefits thereof cannot be enjoyed, there would be no difference at all betwixt the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> and the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> fora&s;much as both did require <HI>works,</HI> yea and <HI>perfect works</HI> as the con|dition thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="139" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>It may be farther evidenced, that not &s;incere, though imperfect Obedience, is the Condition of the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> and of our Ju&s;tification, but <HI>Faith,</HI> becau&s;e when the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> oppo&s;eth the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Law and Go&s;pel, he op|po&s;eth <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">t as it were 1000 Talents to a penny, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> of works to another; but the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s
<PB N="119" REF="62"> of Chri&s;t, or to be found in him to all kind of Works what&s;oever, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.9. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.12. <HI>And to have the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, and the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Christ, and the Righteou&s;ne&s;s by Faith,</HI> are ever one and the &s;ame things, and are &s;till oppo&s;ed to <HI>Works.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="140" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXL.</HEAD>
<P>Moreover, the Sinners charge is not this, that he wants his penny, or pepper-corn, but that he hath broken the Law, his Righteou&s;ne&s;s therefore mu&s;t be &s;uch as doth meet that charge, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8.34. And &s;o it mu&s;t be &s;uch a Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s as may be equivalent, at lea&s;t to his own fulfilling the Law, or his having &s;atisfied the penalty thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="141" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLI.</HEAD>
<P>When we &s;ay <HI>Faith</HI> is the <HI>Condition</HI> of the New Covenant, and of our <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> (which is one great priviledge thereof) we mean, that our having right to God's promi&s;es &s;upplyeth that room which <HI>Conditions</HI> do in men's mutual bargains; wherein when one promi&s;eth &s;ome|thing on &s;uch a Condition, the performance of that Condition doth turn the conditional pro|mi&s;e into an ab&s;olute right to him that hath per|formed it. And &s;o <HI>Faith</HI> is the Condition upon which the Title to that great promi&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> God's being our God doth depend. <HI>Faith</HI> hath obtain|ed that Name in re&s;pect of the place which God hath put it into in his Covenant, and &s;o it flows from his extrin&s;ick Ordination, <HI>Durham,</HI> 240.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="142" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="120" REF="63">
<HEAD>CXLII.</HEAD>
<P>But when <HI>Faith</HI> is called the In&s;trumental cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification the intrin&s;ick manner of it's Acting is re&s;pected. For though it be from the Spirit, with other Graces, and they be not &s;eparated, yet hath it a peculiar aptitude to <HI>look to Chri&s;t, receive him, apprehend,</HI> and <HI>eat</HI> him, take hold, and re&s;t on him, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> That is, expect Salvation from him, for &s;o the Jews were &s;aid to <HI>re&s;t</HI> in the Law who expected <HI>Ju|&s;tification</HI> by it, <HI>Rom.</HI> 2.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="143" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLIII.</HEAD>
<P>It is a Truth greatly to be ob&s;erved, that for attaining of <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> by Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, <HI>Faith</HI> doth peculiarly concur in the ap|prehending thereof, and working thereon, other|wi&s;e than other Graces can be &s;aid to do, <HI>Dur|ham</HI> 240.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="144" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLIV.</HEAD>
<P>The fore-going Propo&s;ition will not &s;eem &s;trange if we con&s;ider, That to be Ju&s;tified by Chri&s;t, and by Faith, or by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, and by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, are &s;till one in Scripture, even then where that concurrence which is allowed to Faith is deny'd to all other things, which &s;heweth, that Faith concurreth peculiarly, and that it ju&s;tifieth by obtaining Ju&s;tification through Chri&s;t. 2. As Faith of Miracles did concur for the obtaining of a particular benefit, &s;o doth &s;aving Faith for
<PB N="121" REF="63"> attaining of Ju&s;tification. But Faith of Mira|cles did concur In&s;trumentally for health; for 'tis &s;aid, &s;ome had Faith to be healed. <HI>i. e.</HI> to receive virtue from Chri&s;t to heal them, which others had not. And accordingly the effects are attributed both to their <HI>Faith,</HI> and to Chri&s;t's power. Therefore it may be &s;o here, <HI>viz.</HI> Ju|&s;tification may flow from Faith, as the <HI>In&s;tru|mental Cau&s;e,</HI> and from Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s as the <HI>Meritorious.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="145" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLV.</HEAD>
<P>Works are not the <HI>In&s;trument,</HI> or <HI>Condition</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, whether works before Conver&s;ion, for they were not acceptable, nor works after Conver&s;ion, for they are after <HI>Ju|&s;tification;</HI> and &s;o can be no cau&s;e thereof.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="146" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLVI.</HEAD>
<P>If any &s;hall object and &s;ay, that neither Faith before we are Sanctified can Ju&s;tifie us In&s;tru|mentally, nor Faith after we are Sanctified (for the rea&s;ons alleaged again&s;t Works) I an&s;wer, It is neither Faith before, nor after our being Sanctified, or Converted, that is the In&s;tru|ment of our Ju&s;tification, but that <HI>Faith</HI> which enters into us into a ju&s;tified e&s;tate, and it can|not be conceived either <HI>before,</HI> or <HI>after,</HI> being an in&s;tantaneous Act, as &s;olemn con&s;enting in Marriage is not before, nor after, as it con&s;ti|tuteth Marriage, but in&s;tantly.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="147" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="122" REF="64">
<HEAD>CXLVII.</HEAD>
<P>Some to make way for Works being a Con|dition of Ju&s;tification as well as Faith, do &s;ay that Ju&s;tification is not an in&s;tantaneous, but a continued Act: but in the &s;en&s;e they do affirm it is fal&s;e. For it cannot be &s;aid that Believ|ers do continue in being <HI>admitted into</HI> a ju&s;tified E&s;tate, or that by a continued Act the Lord is &s;till admitting them, as it inferreth <HI>non-admi&s;&s;i|on,</HI> or an imperfect admi&s;&s;ion, which is the &s;en&s;e in which they affirm it: but all that can truly be &s;aid is, that God continueth to <HI>Ju&s;tifie,</HI> or that the Act of their admi&s;&s;ion into that E&s;tate is a continuing Act. As a Man is married but once, to one Woman, but though his con|&s;ent to Marry be given at once, and the &s;ame in&s;tant they are Man and Wife; yet that an In&s;tantareous Act of his in declaring his con&s;ent to Marry, abideth for ever, as long as they two &s;hall Live.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="148" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLVIII.</HEAD>
<P>That Ju&s;tification is no continued Act, I prove thus. 1. A Sinner upon his Believing is in&s;tantly ju&s;tified and freed from the cur&s;e, and in&s;tated into Friend&s;hip with God, <HI>Ergo.</HI> Ju&s;ti|fication is no continued Act. 2. Our being ad|mitted into the Covenant of Grace as to a right to the &s;aving Ble&s;&s;ings promi&s;ed therein is no continued, but an in&s;tantaneous Act. <HI>Ergo.</HI> Ju|&s;tification is &s;o. For they who are &s;o in Cove|nant are Ju&s;tified, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 3. A Believer is not
<PB N="123" REF="64"> partly under the Cur&s;e, and partly under Grace; partly &s;aved, and partly damn'd; partly ab|&s;olv'd, and partly condemn'd; therefore being certainly under Grace, and ab&s;olution in part, (for el&s;e he could not be &s;aid to be ju&s;tified at all) he mu&s;t be altogether &s;o. 4. A Believer, for that he is &s;uch, or as, and as &s;oon as he is &s;uch, hath a Righteou&s;ne&s;s that can abide the Trial in Ju&s;tice. Therefore Ju&s;tification can|not be a continued Act. For if the Ju&s;tifi|cation of a Sinner were but a perfecting, it could not be &s;aid that he had an Actual, perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s (as that of Chri&s;t imputed to him is) but only that it were a perfecting.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="149" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXLIX.</HEAD>
<P>To &s;ay that Works are a Condition of the Covenant, or of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> were to confound the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> and the <HI>Covenant of Works.</HI> Now, the Apo&s;tle doth directly oppo&s;e the&s;e. <HI>The Righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law &s;aith on this wi&s;e, The man that doth the&s;e things &s;hall live in them.</HI> And the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith is holden forth as oppo&s;ite to that, and &s;o cannot be &s;aid to con&s;i&s;t in doing of works, <HI>Rom.</HI> 10.5, 6. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.12. The <HI>Covenant of works</HI> is &s;o called, in re&s;pect of the formality of the Condition thereof, <HI>viz. Doing,</HI> that is, the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s which we our &s;elves do, <HI>Titus</HI> 3.5. <HI>Not by works of Righteou&s;ne&s;s which we have done,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="150" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="124" REF="65">
<HEAD>CL.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Faith</HI> is oppo&s;ed to works as the <HI>Condition of the Covenant,</HI> or of <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> not as con&s;i|dered in it's &s;elf, but with Re&s;pect to it's object Chri&s;t. Works inherent in us, and performed by us are call'd for in the <HI>Covenant of works,</HI> as the Righteou&s;ne&s;s thereof, and as the only ground upon which we can expect to be ju&s;ti|fied by it. Again, by the Covenant of Grace Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s without us received by Faith is only admitted as a Right and ground of Ju&s;tification. 'Tis evident that Faith is &s;o to be under&s;tood, <HI>Rom.</HI> 10.5, 6. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.10, 11, 12. For the Righteou&s;ne&s;s &s;poken of, <HI>Rom.</HI> 10.3, 4. (which is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, and is oppo&s;ed to our Righteou&s;ne&s;s) is <HI>Chri&s;t the end of the Law for Righteou&s;ne&s;s to all that be|lieve.</HI> So it is al&s;o, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. And it is ob&s;erva|ble that in both the&s;e Chapters the difference of the Condition of the Covenant of Works, and of Grace is in&s;i&s;ted, on to plead the nece&s;&s;ity of a Righteou&s;ne&s;s without us in oppo&s;ition to our own: and &s;o Faith mu&s;t be the Condition of the Covenant of Grace as it acteth, or re&s;teth on that.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="151" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLI.</HEAD>
<P>We cannot a&s;&s;ent to the di&s;tinction which &s;ome give, <HI>viz.</HI> That Chri&s;t is our <HI>Legal Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> that is, that by him we have &s;atisfied the Covenant of Works, he having pay'd in our Name; but <HI>Faith and Obedience</HI> are our
<PB N="125" REF="65"> <HI>Evangelick Righteou&s;ne&s;s;</HI> that is, as he hath procur'd a new grant of Life upon the&s;e ea&s;ie terms, in the Covenant of Grace, and &s;o as by performing thereof we may come to have right to what he hath purcha&s;ed in &s;atisfying the fir&s;t Covenant.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="152" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLII.</HEAD>
<P>I &s;ay, we cannot a&s;&s;ent to the fore-&s;aid di|&s;tinction. 1. Becau&s;e it doth make two Righ|teou&s;ne&s;&s;es in Ju&s;tification, and one of them to be the means for attaining the other, whereas the Go&s;pel Righteou&s;ne&s;s is but one in it's &s;elf, by Faith apprehended and made ours. Chri&s;t is our <HI>Legal Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> as the Law's charge is &s;atisfied by him: and he is our <HI>Evangelick Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> as the mean of an&s;wering the Law is propo&s;ed to us in the Go&s;pel, and for us, upon the condition of Faith, accepted by the &s;ame, without which Chri&s;t had never been our <HI>Legal Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> But if we con&s;ider the <HI>Law righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> &s;trictly, as it requireth <HI>Satisfaction</HI> from the very Party, &s;o Chri&s;t is not our Legal Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but our Evangelick Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, &s;eeing no other way but by the Go&s;pel we have acce&s;s to him.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="153" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLIII.</HEAD>
<P>To &s;uch as do affirm that Chri&s;t hath procu|red Faith (in that large &s;en&s;e as involving Go&s;|pel Obedience) to be accepted as our Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, I would an&s;wer, 1. That were not to make Chri&s;t our immediate Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but
<PB N="126" REF="66"> only to procure that &s;uch works &s;hould be ac|cepted, and the former Covenant mitigated, but not in its Nature changed. 2. That over|turneth the <HI>Imputation</HI> of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s as our immediate Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and &s;o puts upon being found not in Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, but in our own, contrary to <HI>Paul, Phil.</HI> 3.9.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="154" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLIV.</HEAD>
<P>Concerning <HI>Faith,</HI> it is mode&s;tly, and &s;afely expre&s;&s;ed, that <HI>Faith,</HI> at mo&s;t, is but the con|dition on which Chri&s;t becomes our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s; and &s;o <HI>Faith</HI> it &s;elf properly cannot be our Righteou&s;ne&s;s. When <HI>Faith</HI> is called the condition of the Covenant, or our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, it doth not imply that it is properly impu|ted, but it &s;hews to whom, and upon what terms Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s is imputed, or how a Sinner may have acce&s;s to be ju&s;tified by it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="155" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLV.</HEAD>
<P>Faith when it is called a condition of the co|venant ought alwayes to be taken &s;trictly, as it receiveth Chri&s;t, and by that manner of Act|ing is differenced from all other Graces, and Works.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="156" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLVI.</HEAD>
<P>Faith &s;trictly taken cannot be rightly con|ceiv'd but as looking to Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, the object thereof, even as we cannot conceive a con&s;ent which con&s;tituteth a Marriage, with|out
<PB N="127" REF="66"> re&s;pect to the party con&s;ented to: or as we cannot conceive looking to the brazen Serpent, as the condition, or mean, by which health was gotten, but with re&s;pect to the object thereof, the Serpent, and the ground preceding, <HI>viz.</HI> God's appointment; without which, a look &s;imply con&s;idered was of no &s;uch virtue.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="157" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLVII.</HEAD>
<P>To them that &s;hall &s;ay, If Faith properly ta|ken be the condition of the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> and hath in that &s;ucceeded in the room that works had in the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> it there|fore mu&s;t be our <HI>Evangelical</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s; as <HI>Works</HI> were our <HI>Legal</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s. I an&s;wer; That Faith is never to be taken with|out implying the Object, Chri&s;t, or without re&s;pect to it's proper aptitude for receiving him. And &s;o <HI>Believe and thou &s;halt be &s;aved,</HI> implyeth &s;till this. Receive Chri&s;t and re&s;t on his Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, or &s;ubmit to Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and accept of him for that end, that he may be Righteou&s;ne&s;s to thee, and thou &s;halt be &s;aved. Our Evangelick Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are ab&s;olved is in Chri&s;t, not in our &s;elves, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.21. as the &s;in for which he was &s;entenced was in us, not in him.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="158" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLVIII.</HEAD>
<P>The di&s;proving of Ju&s;tification to be a con|tinued Act, plainly proveth Faith and Works joyned together not to be the Condition thereof. For if &s;o, no man could be ju&s;tified till the clo&s;e
<PB N="128" REF="67"> of his life, or till he had per&s;evered in Faith and Holine&s;s to the end of his days. Now if Ju&s;tifi|cation be an <HI>In&s;tamaneous</HI> act (like that of a Judge giving &s;entence of Ab&s;olution) then good works cannot precede our Ju&s;tification, and con|&s;equently not be the In&s;truments of it. True it is, God continueth to pronounce Believers Ju&s;ti|fied to their dying day, and the Imputation of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s unto them never cea&s;eth as to the virtue of it; but it cannot be &s;aid that God doth continue to change Believers from a &s;tate of Enmity to a &s;tate of Friend&s;hip, which is the true notion of Ju&s;tification.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="159" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLIX.</HEAD>
<P>The way of Ju&s;tification more clearly expre&s;|&s;ed under the Go&s;pel by the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions, <HI>Be|lieve in the Lord Je&s;us and you &s;hall be &s;aved,</HI> may be &s;omewhat illu&s;trated by comparing it with the Typpical expre&s;&s;ions under the Law. Now the expre&s;&s;ions of the Old Te&s;tament run thus: <HI>When a man &s;inneth he &s;hall bring an Offering,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and he &s;hall put his hand upon the head of the Burnt offering, and it &s;hall be accepted for him, to make Atonement for him,</HI> &amp;c. In tho&s;e words God did propo&s;e &s;omething as a Righteou&s;ne&s;s for a &s;inner, which was to be accepted for him; yet none will &s;ay that it was the external Sacri|fice it &s;elf that was to be accepted for &s;uch, nor that it was the Faith of the Offerer alone, that was &s;o accepted: For then there needed no Sa|crifice, but it behoved to be the thing Typefied by that Sacrifice, <HI>viz.</HI> the Sacrifice of Chri&s;t
<PB N="129" REF="67"> look'd to by the Faith of the Offerer, that was &s;o accepted. Yet the external Sacrifices in the Old Te&s;tament, are as expre&s;sly &s;aid to be accepted for a &s;inners Ju&s;tification, or an A|tonement for him, as Faith is &s;aid to be count|ed for Righteou&s;ne&s;s in the New. And as it can|not be &s;aid that by vertue of Chri&s;t's Satisfacti|on, and the Covenant with him, it was procur|ed that &s;uch Performances, and Sacrifices, &s;hould be accepted of them&s;elves as the per&s;on's immediate Evangelical Righteou&s;ne&s;s: (though their Ceremonial Law was their Go&s;pel) So it cannot be &s;aid that there is any &s;uch bargain concerning Faith in the New Te&s;tament, but that Chri&s;t apprehended by Faith is the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s both in the Old, and New Te&s;tament, which is the thing that we intend, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="160" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLVI.</HEAD>
<P>A right under&s;tanding of the <HI>matter</HI> of our Ju|&s;tification, or of what is the <HI>matter</HI> of our Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s before God, will help us to under|&s;tand both the <HI>Formal,</HI> and <HI>In&s;trumental cau&s;e</HI> therereof. The Matter, or Material Cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification, <HI>is that which an&s;wereth to this Que|&s;tion, What is the very thing which cau&s;eth a man to &s;tand righteous before God, and to be accepted to Life everla&s;ting? We hold that the Satisfaction made by Chri&s;t in his Death, and Obedience to the Law, is imputed to us, and becomes our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s.</HI> Perkins, <HI>p.</HI> 58. If then Chri&s;t's Satisfact|ion or Obedience, be the <HI>matter</HI> of our Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s before God, it will thence follow, that the
<PB N="130" REF="68"> <HI>Formal Cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification mu&s;t needs be the Imputation of that Righteou&s;ne&s;s: for by means thereof it is that we are ju&s;tifi'd from guilt, and accepted to life as effectually as if we were <HI>formaly ju&s;t,</HI> by a perfect Righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent in us: that imputation with reference to the fruits, and effects thereof, is as it were a <HI>formal inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s: i. e.</HI> as beneficial to us as if it were &s;uch. Hence al&s;o may the <HI>In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification be gathered, and found out; <HI>viz. Faith.</HI> Becau&s;e that is the true In|&s;trument of Ju&s;tification, by means of which, or by, and upon which, the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t becomes imputed to us, and that is <HI>Faith</HI> alone. Faith is all in all for matter of receiving the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t; for that Grace which receiveth Chri&s;t, is that Grace which we call <HI>Faith:</HI> And when the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is once received, the &s;inner is Ju&s;tified, there is no more go's to the ju&s;tifying of him. As there go'es no more to the &s;ealing, or &s;tamping of Wax, than its receiving the Impre&s;&s;ion of the Seal that is put upon it, when that is done it is Sealed.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="161" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXI.</HEAD>
<P>Nothing can ju&s;tifie us In&s;trumentally, but what can in&s;trumentally procure the acquitting of us from our &s;ins, or the application of &s;uch a Righteou&s;ne&s;s to us as whereby we may be ac|quitted from all our &s;ins. <HI>Works,</HI> as <HI>Works,</HI> can|not do that, but <HI>Faith</HI> can: Therefore not Works, but Faith are the In&s;trument of our Ju|&s;tification. This is the great Argument which
<PB N="131" REF="68"> St. <HI>Paul</HI> in&s;i&s;ts upon in his three fir&s;t Chapters to the <HI>Romans</HI> to make way for the Conclu&s;ion which he draws up, <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.20. <HI>viz.</HI> that we are ju&s;tified by Faith, and not by the Deeds of the Law; <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e all are &s;inners, both <HI>Jews,</HI> and <HI>Gentiles,</HI> and it is not their after-obedience to the Law of God that can &s;atisfie for their for|mer &s;in, and di&s;obedience: neither can any thing ju&s;tifie us that cannot acquit us from our by-pa&s;t &s;ins, or &s;atisfie for them, only Chri&s;t's Obedi|ence, and not ours, can do that, and that Obe|dience of our Saviour is apprehended by Faith alone; I &s;ay the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is re|ceived only by <HI>Faith,</HI> and not by <HI>Works:</HI> be|cau&s;e Works, or Go&s;pel obedience, are not the Condition of our Ju&s;tification, as not preceding, but following it: neither is it by them, but by Faith, that Chri&s;t and his Righteou&s;ne&s;s are re|ceived; fora&s;much as what&s;oever it is that re|ceives, or accepteth of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, as offered in the Go&s;pel, that is called <HI>Faith,</HI> and intended by the word <HI>Faith,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="162" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXII.</HEAD>
<P>If men mi&s;take them&s;elves in the great point of Ju&s;tification, they may not, yea cannot ju&s;t|ly extenuate their fault by charging St. <HI>Paul's</HI> Di&s;cour&s;es, and Arguments about it, with great <HI>ob&s;curity,</HI> and that the &s;trength, and force of them, is at le&s;twi&s;e very much concealed, and la|tent: Witne&s;s what that great man, Mr. <HI>Gattaker</HI> &s;aith, (quoting al&s;o a greater man than him&s;elf, <HI>viz. Jo. Pi&ccedil;us, Count. of Mirandula.</HI>) His words
<PB N="132" REF="69"> are the&s;e: <HI>Nor do I conceive this (Epi&s;tle to the</HI> Romans) <HI>to have gained precedency</HI> (he means as being placed fir&s;t) <HI>&s;o much in regard of the preheminence of the place to which it was written, being at that time the head City of the</HI> Roman <HI>Em|pire, but principally rather in regard of the eminency, and excellency, yea deep profoundity of the My&s;te|ries of the Go&s;pel, more fully, and largly therein de|livered, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n in any other of them, I may boldly &s;ay, what if I &s;hould &s;ay in all the rest of them were they all put together? Add we may hereunto, that the points herein di&s;cour&s;ed, and debated, are pur&s;ued, and pro&s;ecuted with that nervo&s;ity of Argument, and vivacity of Spirit, and the limbs and joints of the whole di&s;cour&s;e &s;o aptly knit together, and artificially riveted into one another, that that Noble</HI> Italian <HI>Earl, &s;o much renowned for his variety of Learn|ing, &s;harpne&s;s of In&s;ight, and &s;oundne&s;s of Judg|ment, that he was deemed the Miracle of the Age he lived in, is reported to have &s;aid; That all the Hu|mane Writings of Learned Men, and great Scho|lars, that ever he had &s;een, or read, &s;eemed to him in compari&s;on of this one our Apo&s;tle's Ma&s;ter piece (as he e&s;teem'd it)</HI> Tanquam &s;copae di&s;&s;olutae <HI>(as it is in the Proverb) but as Be&s;omes without hands.</HI> Gattaker 2.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="163" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXIII.</HEAD>
<P>If what has been &s;aid and proved touching the great Doctrine of Ju&s;tification as I have &s;ta|ted it be true, there are many Errors in Mr. <HI>Sherlock's</HI> Book, relating to that excellent Doct|rine: and if &s;uch be the true cau&s;es of Ju&s;tifica|tion
<PB N="133" REF="69"> as I have a&s;&s;igned, the cau&s;es a&s;&s;igned by Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI> are not the true. I pre&s;ume he did not fore&s;ee the many ill Con&s;equences which would follow upon his denying <HI>Imputed-Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> and myriads of ab&s;urdities, that would in&s;ue thereupon; but the Error it &s;elf is never|thele&s;s chargeable, as followeth.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="164" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas I have a&s;&s;erted, and prov'd, that God is the Principal <HI>efficient</HI> of Ju&s;tification, or that it is God who ju&s;tifieth; Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> Tenet (I do not &s;ay he him&s;elf thinketh &s;o) &s;aith, that He who is ju&s;tified, ju&s;tifieth him&s;elf. He ju&s;tifieth us, who&s;e <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> ju&s;tifieth us: but according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> our own Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or &s;incere Obedience to the Go&s;pel ju&s;tifieth us, <HI>Ergo,</HI> we ju&s;tifie our &s;elves. Wherefore is God &s;aid to ju&s;tifie &s;inners, but becau&s;e he provides and im|putes a Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby they are ju&s;ti|fied? If then the Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are ju&s;tified be of our own providing, and pro|curing, as it is, if obedience to the Go&s;pel be that Righteou&s;ne&s;s, then do we ju&s;tifie our &s;elves. As <HI>Adam</HI> in ca&s;e he had &s;tood might and would have been &s;aid to have pre&s;erv'd him&s;elf in a happy condition, though God gave him at the fir&s;t the grace and power whereby to do it. So though that power whereby we are enabled to obey the Go&s;pel do come from God, yet may we be &s;aid (as well as he in the other place) by the improvement thereof to ju&s;tifie our &s;elves, or to do that whereby we are ju&s;tified.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="165" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="134" REF="70">
<HEAD>CLXV.</HEAD>
<P>Yea, in ca&s;e we were ju&s;tified by our obedi|ence to the Go&s;pel, in oppo&s;ition to any imput|ed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, then do we not only ju&s;tifie our &s;elves, but ju&s;tifie our &s;elves upon higher terms, and in a more noble way than others &s;ay that God him&s;elf doth ju&s;tifie &s;inners; <HI>viz.</HI> by way of <HI>Inherency,</HI> or of <HI>Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> which is more honorable to us, and denominates us (&s;trictly &s;peaking) more ju&s;t, than that Righteou&s;ne&s;s for which we mu&s;t be beholden to another.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="166" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Sherlock's</HI> Tenet, or his denying of Im|puted Righteou&s;ne&s;s, overthroweth, in the next place, the <HI>Proegoumenal,</HI> or inward moving cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, <HI>viz.</HI> the free Love, Mercy, Grace, and good will of God, which we &s;ay did from within &s;tir him up thereunto. But if Believers have a Righteou&s;ne&s;s Inherent in them&s;elves that is able to ju&s;tifie them, and God too in ac|cepting it as &s;uch, (as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;aith, we are ju&s;tified by our &s;incere obedience to the Go&s;pel) then not meer free Grace, <GAP DESC="foreign">, and good will, but the Ju&s;tice, and Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God's na|ture, who did fore&s;ee that we would in due time obey the Go&s;pel, did move him from Eternity to <HI>decree,</HI> and in time to <HI>effect</HI> our Ju&s;ti|fication: For look what did move God to ac|compli&s;h our Ju&s;tification in time, did move him to decree it from Eternity.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="167" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="135" REF="70">
<HEAD>CLXVII.</HEAD>
<P>Moreover, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> Tenet overthroweth the true <HI>Procatarctick</HI> or external moving cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification, or denieth it &s;o to be. Now that cau&s;e &s;ay we is Chri&s;t; but Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> or ra|ther his Tenet, &s;aith, that fore&s;een good Works, or Obedience to the Go&s;pel was that cau&s;e. For look by what we are Ju&s;tified principally, by that it is that God was externally (or from without) moved to ju&s;tifie us. But according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> we are Ju&s;tified by our own Inherent Holine&s;s principally; <HI>viz.</HI> as by the matter, and form of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God: <HI>Er|gr.</HI> The contrary to this &s;ee in a former The&s;is.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="168" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Again, Mr. <HI>Sherlock's</HI> Tenet overthroweth, and denieth that <HI>In&s;trumental Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tifica|tion, which we have a&s;&s;igned, and proved, <HI>viz. Faith,</HI> and Faith alone. For if we are Ju&s;tified by a Righteou&s;ne&s;s of our own, we need not Faith to lay hold upon that Righteou&s;ne&s;s: &s;ure|ly we are not ju&s;tified by believing in our &s;elves, or in our own Righteou&s;ne&s;s. If we are Ju&s;tified by <HI>Go&s;pel Obedience</HI> principally, there needs no Faith to Ju&s;tifie us <HI>In&s;trumentally:</HI> But if we &s;ay by Go&s;pel Obedience only In&s;trumentally, then he advanceth every Grace, and all &s;orts of good Works to as great an intere&s;t in the Ju&s;tifying of a Sinner, as Faith it &s;elf hath, which hath been di&s;proved.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="169" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="136" REF="71">
<HEAD>CLXIX.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Sherlock's</HI> Tenet a&s;&s;igneth that for the <HI>matter</HI> or <HI>material cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, which I have clearly proved is not, <HI>viz.</HI> our own Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedience to the Go&s;pel. If a Righteou&s;ne&s;s that is <HI>Imputed</HI> be not the matter of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, as he &s;aith it is not, then our Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s mu&s;t: for we mu&s;t be ju&s;tified by &s;ome Righteou&s;ne&s;s or other; and every Righteou&s;ne&s;s mu&s;t con&s;i&s;t of &s;omething, and that whereof it con&s;i&s;ts is cal|led the matter, or material cau&s;e of it: <HI>i. e.</HI> Go&s;pel obedience is the very thing which cau&s;|eth a man to &s;tand righteous before God, and to be accepted to life everla&s;ting. Now that it is not &s;o (be&s;ides what hath been &s;aid already to the contrary) I prove thus; <HI>viz.</HI> To ju&s;tifie a &s;inner, is to declare him guiltle&s;s, and faultle&s;s, as being really &s;o, for that by his Surety he hath &s;atisfied for all his Tre&s;pa&s;&s;es. But God cannot declare a &s;inner guiltle&s;s, and faultle&s;s, and one who has &s;atisfied the Law, by, and upon the account of his own Inherent, and Imperfect O|bedience: For then &s;hould the Judgment of God not be according to Truth. Again, Where|as Ju&s;tification doth involve Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins as a nece&s;&s;ary effect from that cau&s;e (for to re|mit &s;in is not to puni&s;h it eternally, and God cannot puni&s;h their &s;ins, whom he hath declared to have &s;atisfied his Ju&s;tice by Chri&s;t, &s;o as to ex|empt them from eternal puni&s;hment) only that Righteou&s;ne&s;s can be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie us,
<PB N="137" REF="71"> which is &s;ufficient to procure the Remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins, or we can be ju&s;tified only by that Righteou&s;ne&s;s, by, or by means whereof our &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ns are pardoned: but our &s;ins are not pardon|ed by, or for our Inherent, but Chri&s;t's Impu|ted Righteou&s;ne&s;s. <HI>Ergo.</HI> I might add one Ar|gument more. We ar<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> ju&s;tified by the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of <HI>but one, Rom.</HI> 5. But inherent Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, or Go&s;pel-Obedience is the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of <HI>many,</HI> yea, of every one who be|lieveth; I mean their own Righteou&s;ne&s;s: <HI>Sub|jective Ergo,</HI> we are not ju&s;tified thereby.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="170" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXX.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s Opinion de&s;troyeth the <HI>For|mal Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, which if the Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, or Satisfaction of Chri&s;t, be the <HI>ma|terial</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification (as hath been pro|ved) can be nothing el&s;e but the <HI>Imputation</HI> of that Righteou&s;ne&s;s. For as a man is <HI>formally</HI> wi&s;e by the wi&s;dom that is inherent in him, &s;o are all Believers as graciou&s;ly treated by God in reference unto being accepted to eternal Life, upon account of the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t <HI>imputed</HI> to them, as if they were <HI>formally,</HI> and <HI>inherently</HI> Righteous. To &s;peak &s;trictly, no man hath any <HI>Formal</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s in this Life, that is perfect, for what is <HI>formal</HI> is in|herent, but the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is as beneficial to Believers to &s;ave them from Hell, and bring them to Heaven, as if it were <HI>for|mally</HI> in them, and therefore it is called the <HI>For|mal Cau&s;e</HI> of their Ju&s;tification, as &s;upplying
<PB N="138" REF="72"> the room of &s;uch a cau&s;e. If by the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t alone, I am ju&s;tified, and if the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is, and can be made, as it were, <HI>formally</HI> mine (or as good for my purpo&s;e) by the <HI>Imputing</HI> of it, then the Im|putation of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s is the <HI>Formal</HI> cau&s;e of my Ju&s;tification; which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> de|nies, and needs he mu&s;t, &s;ith he denies that there is any &s;uch thing as <HI>Imputation of Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> &amp;c. But that there is hath been pro|ved at large.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="171" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXI.</HEAD>
<P>Yea, one of the chief <HI>Final Cau&s;es</HI> of God's Ju&s;tifying a Sinner, will fall to the ground if we are Ju&s;tified (as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;aith we are) by our own inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s, or Go&s;pel-Obedience; namely, the glorifying of the Riches, and <HI>Freene&s;s</HI> of the <HI>Grace</HI> of God in the Ju&s;tification and Salvation of Sinners.</P>
<P>Becau&s;e to be ju&s;tified by Works, and by <HI>Grace</HI> are incon&s;i&s;tent according to that Text, <HI>Rom.</HI> 11.6. <HI>If by Grace, then 'tis no more of works; otherwi&s;e Grace is no more Grace.</HI> But if it be of works, then <HI>it is no more works; other|wi&s;e work is no more work.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="172" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXII.</HEAD>
<P>That Opinion which overthroweth all, and every the cau&s;es of Ju&s;tification commonly a&s;|&s;igned by the whole &s;tream of Orthodox Di|vines (as Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s Opinion denying Im|puted Righteou&s;ne&s;s hath been proved to do)
<PB N="139" REF="72"> mu&s;t needs have a very &s;u&s;picious and dange|rous a&s;pect, and look like a thing to be hated, <HI>Cane &amp; Angue pejus.</HI> (as they &s;ay.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="173" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>If by what has been &s;aid to weaken Mr. <HI>Sher|lock</HI>'s Opinion again&s;t <HI>Imputed</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and to &s;trengthen our own for it, it appeareth (as I hope it plainly doth) that there is &s;uch a thing as <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> (that hated name, that great Eye-&s;ore of &s;ome Men) then two Corollaries will follow thereupon, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="174" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>I &s;ay, it will follow in the fir&s;t place, that <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> and <HI>Sanctification</HI> are two di&s;tinct things; or that Sinners are not ju&s;tified by a Righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>infu&s;ed,</HI> or <HI>implanted.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="175" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXV.</HEAD>
<P>Secondly, That it is Time and Labour mi&s;|&s;pent to go about to invalidate, and enervate all tho&s;e places of Scripture which are common|ly brought to prove the Doctrine of Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath done. For if there be &s;uch a thing, &s;urely the places which he would otherwi&s;e interpret, are as fair for it as any.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="176" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="140" REF="73">
<HEAD>CLXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Yet it doth not follow, that becau&s;e good works, Holine&s;s, or Go&s;pel-Obedience, are neither the <HI>Efficient, In&s;trumental, Material,</HI> or <HI>Formal</HI> Cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification, that there|fore they are not more, or le&s;s concerned with, and about the compleat Formal and Actual ju|&s;tifying of a &s;inner, or application of his ju&s;ti|fication to him, o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> it with them. Certainly other Graces, and Holy Habits be&s;ides <HI>Faith</HI> are concerned as <HI>cau&s;ae &s;ine quibus non</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tificati|on.</HI> For no man can be ju&s;tified that do's not love God, and fear God, and Obey God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> becau&s;e the Ju&s;tifying Faith is alwayes accom|panied with the&s;e things (as Life in the Body is with Breath, and inward motion of the heart and blood, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> though Faith be the only Grace which receiveth that Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t by which we are ju&s;tified.) Moreover, in order unto being <HI>formally and Actually pardo|ned,</HI> tho&s;e great &s;ins which we omit after Conver&s;ion, it is nece&s;&s;ary for us to <HI>Repent,</HI> and to <HI>forgive</HI> others, their Tre&s;pa&s;&s;es again&s;t us, to make &s;atisfaction to men for injuries done to them, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> The&s;e are Conditions upon which Actual, Formal, compleat Pardon are &s;u&s;pended; yea, and to which it is promi&s;ed. Moreover, what&s;oever may be pleaded as a &s;ufficient ground and motive, upon which a man may be cleared from his &s;ins, may be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie him (&s;o works <HI>ju&s;tifie, Jam.</HI> 2.22. and <HI>words, Mat.</HI> 12.37.) as evidences that are produced to
<PB N="141" REF="73"> manife&s;t Innocency, <HI>Gattak.</HI> 80. Mini&s;ters in a remote &s;en&s;e may be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie, <HI>Dan.</HI> 12.3. <HI>viz.</HI> As in&s;truments to bring others to Faith, and &s;o to Ju&s;tification.</P>
<P>But when we &s;ay that we are not ju&s;tified by good works, or Go&s;pel-Obedience, we mean, as if they were &s;o, and in &s;uch &s;en&s;e our Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s under the <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> as per|fect per&s;onal Obedience &s;hould have been un|der the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> and as if upon their account, and for their &s;akes, it were that we are delivered from Hell, and accepted to Eter|nal Life, which I &s;ay is only for Chri&s;t's &s;ake, and upon his account, who hath purcha&s;ed Eter|nal life for us, which as to us is a meer gift.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="177" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>Admit of the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by <HI>Works</HI> as much as by <HI>Faith,</HI> or as being the &s;ame thing with <HI>Faith,</HI> and the Doctrine of Ju|&s;tification by <HI>Merit</HI> cannot be excluded, but will fir&s;t &s;teal in in&s;en&s;ibly, and afterwards come to be owned. For if we are not ju&s;tified by <HI>Grace</HI> then by <HI>Merit;</HI> and if by Works, then not by <HI>Grace, Ergo.</HI> If by works, then by me|rit, or of <HI>Debt,</HI> which is all one, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4. <HI>To him that worketh is the reward of Debt;</HI> and <HI>Rom.</HI> 11.8. <HI>If it be of Works, 'tis no more of Grace.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="178" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="142" REF="74">
<HEAD>CLXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>They do very ill Service to the Church of God in <HI>England,</HI> who at &s;uch a time when the Papi&s;ts are conceived to be wre&s;tling a fall with us for all (and therefore &s;hould have le&s;s grant|ed them than before, and no more than is ju&s;t, and fit) do give to them more than ever was given them by Prote&s;tants, <HI>viz.</HI> the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by <HI>Works,</HI> and in effect by <HI>Me|rits,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="179" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>The Per&s;ons with whom Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> Symboli|lizeth in denying Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and pleading for Ju&s;tification by our &s;incere, though imperfect, Obedience to the Go&s;pel, are two bad &s;orts of Men, as mo&s;t are, <HI>viz. Socinians,</HI> and <HI>Papi&s;ts.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="180" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXX.</HEAD>
<P>It were ea&s;ie to reckon up &s;everal other things wherein Mr. <HI>Sh. Socinianizeth,</HI> or con|&s;enteth with the <HI>Socinians</HI> as &s;uch, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> 1. <HI>In Deo non e&s;&s;e E&s;&s;entialem Ju&s;titiam punientem ne|ce&s;&s;ario peccata.</HI> Peltius, p. 12. 2. <HI>Nos non pecca&s;&s;e in Adamo.</HI> Pel. p. 45. 3. <HI>Homines non ita corruptos aut impotentes e&s;&s;e ad bonum vi lap&s;us Adae.</HI> Pelt. 48. 4. <HI>Po&s;&s;e aliquos ita a peccatis actualibus ab&s;tinere ut opera legis perfecte prae&s;tent</HI> Pelt. p. 77. 5. <HI>Patres V. Te&s;tam. non e&s;&s;e ju&s;ti|ficatos &amp; &s;ervatos per eandem viam qua nos nimi|rum per fidem in Chri&s;tum, aut per Chri&s;tum,</HI> &amp;c.
<PB N="143" REF="74"> <HI>P. p.</HI> 114. 6. <HI>Deus potuit &s;atisfieri alio modo quam per Chri&s;ti Obedientiam.</HI> Pelt. p. 141. I &s;ay, it were ea&s;ie to reckon up &s;everal things of great moment, as to which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> con&s;ent|eth with <HI>Socinians,</HI> but that which is to our pre|&s;ent purpo&s;e is that he Symbolizeth with that dangerous &s;ort of men in &s;everal points rela|ting to <HI>Ju&s;tification. Ex. gr.</HI> 1. They hold that Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s is not ours, or is not imputed to us for our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God: <HI>P.</HI> 148. 2. That <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere,</HI> or Faith it's &s;elf (as a Grace or Work) is imputed to us for Righteou&s;ne&s;s. <HI>P.</HI> p. 151. 3. That Obedience to the Commands is our Ju&s;tificati|on, or that we are Ju&s;tified by works. <HI>P.</HI> p. 156.</P>
<P><HI>N. B.</HI> I do not &s;ay that Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath vented the Second, Third, and Fourth <HI>Socinian</HI> errors above mentioned, (in Latine) in words at length, but the pa&s;&s;ages of a Sermon of his, quoted in my <HI>Prodromus</HI> bring him under vehe|ment &s;u&s;pition of all tho&s;e three.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="181" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXI.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> by denying the Imputation of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, doth (though it may be he &s;ees it not) in effect deny the <HI>Satisfacti|on of Chri&s;t,</HI> and in &s;o doing &s;trike hands with the dangerous <HI>Socinians,</HI> in one of their mo&s;t dangerous, and Characteri&s;tical Tenets, and ca&s;t in his Lot among&s;t them. For how can any man be the better for the payment, or Satisfaction which is made by another, unle&s;s it be reckoned
<PB N="144" REF="75"> to him, or put to his account, or done, and accepted on his behalf? Which is all one with being <HI>Imputed.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="182" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXII.</HEAD>
<P>The Second &s;ort of men with whom Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> Symbolizeth in his Notions about Ju&s;tification, are our good Friends the <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> with whom Prote&s;tants formerly had wont to have the greate&s;t and mo&s;t frequent conte&s;ts, and no greater about any point than the Doctrine of <HI>Ju&s;tification.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="183" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas the Papi&s;ts &s;ay, that Ju&s;tification is not by <HI>Imputation,</HI> but by <HI>Infu&s;ion</HI> of Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;aith both.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="184" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>That we are not Ju&s;tified by imputed Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s; yea, that there is no &s;uch thing, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath &s;aid over, and over again as plainly as words can expre&s;s it. Witne&s;s p. 234. where he &s;aith, that <HI>Chri&s;t Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> was not <HI>an imaginary, imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> intimating that <HI>Imputed</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s is meerly <HI>Imaginary;</HI> and in p. 242. Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;aith, <HI>that Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s doth plainly contradict the Doctrine of our Saviour, and if the Apo&s;tles had taught any &s;uch thing as that, it would very much have weakned their Credit with me, for this had been to Preach another Go&s;pel than our Saviour did.</HI> And in p. 273. he &s;aith, <HI>The Truth is the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s
<PB N="145" REF="75"> of the Law, and of works in the New Te|&s;tament &s;ignifies only an external Righteou&s;ne&s;s, which cannot plea&s;e God; and that internal Holi|ne&s;s, which they call the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, is that very Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith which the Go&s;pel commands, and which God approves, and rewards, and this Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s is no where to be found, as I know of, but in their own fancies.</HI> Sh: <HI>p.</HI> 273. Moreover, he laboureth to enervate, by giving a different &s;en&s;e thereof, all tho&s;e texts both in the Old, and New Te&s;tament, which are commonly brought to prove Imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>ex gr. Jer.</HI> 23.6. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 45.24. <HI>Phil.</HI> 5.8, 9. <HI>Rom.</HI> 10.4. p. 271. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.20. p. 272. and in <HI>p.</HI> 276. he &s;aith, <HI>Thus you &s;ee that there is no foundation in Scripture for all this talk of a Per&s;onal Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t inherent in him, and imputed to us.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="185" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXV.</HEAD>
<P>Whereas Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> laieth great &s;tre&s;s upon this Argument, <HI>viz.</HI> that, <HI>In all the Hi&s;tories of the Go&s;pel which give us an account of our Saviour's Sermons, and Parables, whereby he in&s;tructed the People in all nece&s;&s;ary Truths, he makes no mention at all of the Imputation of his Righteou&s;ne&s;s to them, but exacts from them a Righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own if they would find mercy with God.</HI> Sh. <HI>p.</HI> 239. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> I &s;ay, whereas he laieth &s;o much &s;tre&s;s upon that Argument, that he intimateth, that <HI>if the Apo|&s;tles, or if an Angel from Heaven had preached, and publi&s;hed Ju&s;tification by Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, he would &s;carce have believed it.</HI> p. 242. (an un|toward
<PB N="146" REF="76"> expre&s;&s;ion, &s;ith there is nothing in it con|trary to any part of our Saviour's Doctrine.) for|a&s;much as he meets not with it in any of Chri&s;t's Sermons.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="186" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>The &s;trength of that Argument, <HI>viz.</HI> that be|cau&s;e the expre&s;&s;ion of <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> or <HI>Imputation of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> do's not oc|cur, in &s;o many words, in all, or any of our Sa|viour's Sermons, or Parables, that there is no truth or reality in it, or that there is no &s;uch thing: I &s;ay the &s;trength thereof is but weak|ne&s;s, (though it &s;eem to be the fir&s;t-born of Mr. <HI>Sherlock's</HI> &s;trength, as to this matter.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="187" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>That the &s;trength of &s;uch an Argument as that is but weakne&s;s, I affirm, Fir&s;t upon this ground, Becau&s;e there might be &s;ufficient rea&s;on for our Saviour to omit the Preaching of &s;ome great, and con&s;iderable Truths, as namely becau&s;e they were known, and believed before. As &s;ome things that are plain in the light of Nature, the Scripture &s;aith little of, and the New Te&s;tament &s;aith little or nothing, of tho&s;e things which were plainly revealed before in the Old. Now that the Ju&s;tification of a &s;inner &s;hould be by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, Suffering, and Satisfaction of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> was plainly revealed in the Old Te&s;tament, <HI>ex gr.</HI> I&s;a. 53.11. <HI>By his knowledg &s;hall my Righteous Servant ju&s;tifie many, for he &s;hall bear their iniquities.</HI> And <HI>v.</HI> 5. <HI>He was
<PB N="147" REF="76"> wounded for our Tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions, the cha&s;ti&s;ements of our peace were upon him, and by his &s;tripes we are healed.</HI> v. 6. <HI>All we like &s;heep have gone a&s;tray, and God hath laid on him the iniquity of us all,</HI> &amp;c. Dan. 12.24. <HI>Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people to fini&s;h the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions, and to make an end of &s;ins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everla&s;ting Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> &amp;c. The whole <HI>Ceremonial</HI> Law, or the greate&s;t part of it (which was a kind of vi&s;ible Go&s;pel) did con|tinually preach this Truth, <HI>viz.</HI> that the deliver|ing of us from puni&s;hment, and accepting of us to life, and favor with God, was to be upon the account of another, the inocent &s;uffering for the nocent, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> What el&s;e was meant by all the bloudy Sacrifices offered for the &s;ins of the people, in which God accepted the life of a harmle&s;s &s;potle&s;s Lamb, as a ran&s;om for the life of a &s;potted, guilty &s;inner? all the&s;e things typi|fying, and pointing out, that <HI>without bloud there could be no Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins.</HI> Dan. 9.26. <HI>The Me&s;&s;ias &s;hall be cut off, but not for him&s;elf.</HI> If then there were a &s;ufficient Light &s;hining in the Old Te&s;tament, in <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> and the Prophets, to di&s;|cover that the Ju&s;tification of a Sinner, or his being pardoned and accepted with God; was, and always &s;hould be by means of another: and particularly by the &s;ufferings of another; and that a harmle&s;s, un&s;potted per&s;on; and that the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> was ne that &s;hould &s;uffer for our &s;ins, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 53.8. <HI>He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the Tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of my people was he &s;tricken.</HI> v. 10. <HI>When thou &s;halt make his &s;oul an
<PB N="148" REF="77"> offering for &s;in, he &s;hall &s;ee his &s;eed,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and the plea&s;ure of the Lord</HI> (which is the Salvation of Souls) <HI>&s;hall pro&s;per in his hands.</HI> v. 12, <HI>He bare the &s;ins of many, and made interce&s;&s;ion for tran&s;|gre&s;&s;ors,</HI> &amp;c. What expre&s;&s;ions can be plainer than the&s;e? The&s;e things con&s;idered, our Savi|our needed not to in&s;i&s;t much upon Ju&s;tification, and Salvation by the righteou&s;ne&s;s and &s;ufferings of the Me&s;&s;ias, &s;ith &s;o much had been &s;aid of that by the Prophets of the Old Te&s;tament. And if it be &s;aid that the Di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t, neverthele&s;s were very ignorant of the intended death of Chri&s;t, witne&s;s <HI>Peter,</HI> who &s;aid, <HI>Ma|&s;ter, the&s;e things &s;hall not happen to thee,</HI> when Chri&s;t foretold his death, yet our Saviour might not think fit to enlarge much, and often upon that &s;ubject, le&s;t his Di&s;ciples &s;hould not be able to bear the thoughts of it, like an indulgent ten|der Wife, that cannot bear to hear much &s;aid of her Husbands dying, before her &s;elf. See <HI>John</HI> 16.12.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="188" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>If from a total &s;ilence concerning Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s in all the four Go&s;pels we could not have gathered any &s;uch thing (becau&s;e there might be good rea&s;on for &s;aying nothing of it) much le&s;s can we &s;afely conclude there is no &s;uch thing meerly from its not being mention|ed there in &s;o many words, as long as we find other expre&s;&s;ions, and pa&s;&s;ages in the&s;e texts; <HI>viz.</HI> in the Hi&s;tories, Sermons, and Parables of Chri&s;t, which are <HI>Tantamount,</HI> or which do ne|ce&s;&s;arily
<PB N="149" REF="77"> imply our being Ju&s;tified by the righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, or Obedience, by the Death and Suf|ferings of another. Do's not our Saviour &s;ay, <HI>John</HI> 6.5. <HI>If any man eat of this bread he &s;hall live for ever, and the bread which I &s;hall give is my fle&s;h, which I will give for the life of the whole world.</HI> Did not the Voice from Heaven &s;ay, <HI>This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well plea&s;ed?</HI> in|timating that we are made accepted to God by Chri&s;t, and upon his account. Do's not Chri&s;t &s;ay, <HI>This is my bloud of the New Te&s;tament which is &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins?</HI> intimating that the pardon of our &s;ins, upon which a title to eternal life nece&s;&s;arily in&s;ueth, (for what then can hinder us?) is upon the account of the bloud of Chri&s;t, &s;hed for us, which is the thing that we chiefly mean by that righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which is imputed to Believers; <HI>viz.</HI> his <HI>Obedience to the death of the Cro&s;s,</HI> &amp;c. (which was an act of righteou&s;ne&s;s in Chri&s;t for that he had promi&s;ed it, and his &s;o doing was in pur&s;u|ance, and performance of his Promi&s;e, <HI>&amp;c.) I come to do thy will, O God, as it is written of me in the volume of thy book.</HI> It was indeed both the effect of righteou&s;ne&s;s in Chri&s;t, and it is the cau&s;e of righteou&s;ne&s;s in Believers: for upon that account are they accepted of God righ|teous to eternal life, and therefore may well be call'd the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t. According as &s;ome excellent Divines expound that text, <HI>John</HI> 16.10. <HI>He</HI> (&s;peaking of the Spirit,) <HI>&s;hall con|vince the world of righteou&s;ne&s;s, becau&s;e I go to the Father, and you &s;ee me no more,</HI> It makes greatly
<PB N="150" REF="78"> for <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> For &s;ay they, the meaning of the&s;e words is this, The world &s;hall be convinced that Je&s;us Chri&s;t hath &s;atisfied the Ju&s;tice of God to the utmo&s;t, for that he &s;hould maintain his &s;tanding in Heaven, and they &s;hould &s;ee him upon earth no more: whereas, if he had left any part of the debt unpaid, or had not fulfilled all righteou&s;ne&s;s, he &s;hould have been &s;ent back again to the earth whence he came, whereas contrary to that the Scripture &s;aith, that as <HI>Chri&s;t died for our &s;ins, viz.</HI> to pay our debt, <HI>&s;o he ro&s;e again for our Ju&s;tification; viz.</HI> to manife&s;t he was fully acquitted from all that was imputed to him, and &s;hould <HI>appear the &s;econd time without &s;in,</HI> &amp;c. Were the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> that had been &s;tung with fiery Serpents, cured by a meer act of vi&s;ion, or looking &s;imply con&s;ider|ed, or were they not cured principally by the virtue that was in the Brazen Serpent? It was the Brazen Serpent that cured them, and not they them&s;elves? Now Chri&s;t &s;aith plainly, <HI>Joh.</HI> 3.16. <HI>As Mo&s;es lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderne&s;s, even &s;o mu&s;t the Son of man be lifted up:</HI> (viz. upon the Cro&s;s) <HI>That who&s;oever be|lieveth in him &s;hould not peri&s;h, but have eternal life.</HI> It was by Chri&s;t Crucified that Believers were to have eternal life: and if &s;o, then the Obedience of Chri&s;t to the death of the Cro&s;s, was, and is imputed to Believers; el&s;e how come they to have &s;uch benefit thereby? If it were not reckoned that Chri&s;t &s;uffered in their &s;tead, to &s;atisfie for their &s;ins, or as their <HI>Surety,</HI> who&s;e payment was, and is accepted of God
<PB N="151" REF="78"> for them, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> What mean tho&s;e words of Chri&s;t, <HI>John</HI> 10.15. <HI>I lay down my life for the &s;heep?</HI> if the laying down his life be not imputed, or reckoned to his &s;heep, or accepted on their be|half as a Propitiatio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> for their &s;ins? Do we not read in <HI>Luke</HI> 2.68, 74. of God's redeeming his people by Chri&s;t, and <HI>rai&s;ing up a horn of Sal|vation for them in the hou&s;e of David; As he &s;pake by the mouth of his Prophets, which have been &s;ince the world began: That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies, might &s;erve him without fear.</HI> Now could all this be done without &s;atisfying Divine Ju&s;tice for &s;ins, &s;ince God did in&s;i&s;t upon having &s;atisfacti|on; for <HI>without bloud there is no remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins:</HI> and the High prie&s;t was in&s;pir'd when he &s;aid, <HI>It was nece&s;&s;ary that one &s;hould die for the people.</HI> Do we not read, <HI>John</HI> 1.29. the&s;e words applyed to Chri&s;t, <HI>Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh a|way the &s;ins of the world.</HI> How did he do that but by being &s;lain for the &s;ins of the world? Now if his death, and &s;laughter, be not <HI>imputed,</HI> or reckoned to us, we &s;hall be never the better for it. So al&s;o, <HI>John</HI> 3.16. <HI>God &s;o loved the world that he gave his only Son, that who&s;oever believeth on him might have eternal life.</HI> So then Chri&s;t as given, <HI>viz.</HI> to be crucified, and delivered up to death for us, is the principal cau&s;e of our e&s;ca|ping Hell, or attaining eternal life; to both which Ju&s;tification entitleth us. Now how &s;hould our title to deliverance from Hell, and to the enjoyment of eternal life, re&s;ult from thence, if Chri&s;t dying upon the Cro&s;s were not
<PB N="152" REF="79"> imputed, or reckoned by God &s;o us, as if we had made &s;atisfaction to his ju&s;tice, &s;ince Chri&s;t our Surety hath done it to the full? To conclude with tho&s;e Sacramental words of our Saviour, <HI>This is my body which was broken for you.</HI> If the breaking of Chri&s;t's body be not imputed, or reckoned to us as a &s;atisfaction made for us, or in our behalf, and &s;o accepted of the Father, I &s;ee not how his body was broken for us, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Sith then all the forementioned places (and it is like &s;everal others in the Go&s;pels) do hold forth the &s;um, and &s;ub&s;tance of what we intend by <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> though not a&s;&s;ert it Syl|labically, or in &s;o many words, it can be no ju&s;t exception again&s;t that Doctrine its being a truth.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="189" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CLXXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>Another thing in which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;ymbolizeth with <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> is, in that he averreth Ju&s;tification to be by <HI>Inherent,</HI> or by our own internal Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, as they do, thereby confounding <HI>Ju&s;ti|fication,</HI> and <HI>Sanctification,</HI> and turning the <HI>Co|venant of Grace</HI> into a <HI>Covenant of Works;</HI> or ma|king the&s;e two Covenants (which are &s;pecifi|cally di&s;tinct,) to differ only <HI>&s;ecundum magis &amp; minus.</HI> For according to him, we are ju&s;tified by our obedience to the Go&s;pel; and what is that but the effect of Grace infu&s;ed, or the act|ing, and putting forth of inherent Grace, or if you plea&s;e, our own improvement of that Ta|lent of Grace which God hath be&s;towed upon us, and con&s;equently, as I &s;aid before, we may
<PB N="153" REF="79"> be &s;aid to ju&s;tifie our &s;elves, upon as good rea&s;on as it is &s;aid, <HI>He that hath this hope in him purifieth him&s;elf,</HI> &amp;c. 1 <HI>John</HI> 3.3. or as it is &s;aid, <HI>Seeing ye have purified your &s;elves in obeying the Truth,</HI> 1 Pet. 1.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="190" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXC.</HEAD>
<P>Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;o as he &s;tateth the Doctrine of Ju&s;ti|fication, a&s;&s;erteth that which doth infer <HI>Merit.</HI> I &s;ay, he contendeth for that from whence the abhorred Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by our own <HI>Merits</HI> may be inferred; and would certainly follow to be true, if that which he &s;aith were true. For he &s;ticks not to own Ju&s;tification to be by our own Evangelical Works; or that we are ju&s;tified by our &s;incere obedience to the Laws of Chri&s;t <HI>Now to him that worketh is the reward imputed of debt,</HI> &s;aith the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Rom.</HI> 4. Now to be rewarded of <HI>Debt,</HI> and that debt for our Work, is all one as to be rewarded of, or upon <HI>Merit.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="191" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCI.</HEAD>
<P>Again, the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> do &s;ay, that the Formal Cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification is Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s; that is, that by our obedience to the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t we are made, or do become formally ju&s;t, in the &s;ight of God, and righteous to eternal life. Now Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> &s;aith no le&s;s in &s;ub&s;tance, if not in words. Now whether it be more &s;afe to &s;ay (as all &s;ound Prote&s;tants have done) that the imputation of our Saviour's Obedience, and Satisfaction, and Righteou&s;ne&s;s to Believers
<PB N="154" REF="80"> is that which ju&s;tifieth them, that is, freeth them from guilt, and wrath; and entitleth them Righteous to Eternal Life, as effectually as if they were formally ju&s;t by a perfect inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own; I &s;ay, whether it be &s;afer to &s;ay &s;o, or to &s;ay (as Papi&s;ts do) that the only Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we can be &s;aid to be Righteous before God, and whereby we are freed from Hell, and accepted to Eter|nal Life, is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of <HI>Grace,</HI> and <HI>Holine&s;s</HI> implanted in us, and of good works, the Fruits and Effects thereof, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Let all Pro|te&s;tants, and impartial Chri&s;tians judge. How dangerous it is to &s;ay, as <HI>Bellarmin</HI> doth on <HI>Rom.</HI> 3.24. <HI>Ju&s;tificamur per gratiam,</HI> i. e. <HI>per ju&s;ti|tiam ab illo donatam &amp; infu&s;am haec e&s;t cau&s;a for|malis Ju&s;tificationis no&s;trae.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="192" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCII.</HEAD>
<P>It were ea&s;ie to charge Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s Book with &s;everal other things, wherein it harmoni|eth with our Popi&s;h Adver&s;aries in the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification: as namely, in denying Faith to be the <HI>In&s;trumental Cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, &amp;c. but <HI>I</HI> take no plea&s;ure in making the very wor&s;t of what can be made of his expre&s;&s;ions, and &s;hall therefore &s;ay no more of that.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="193" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCIII.</HEAD>
<P>Me-thinks it &s;hould put Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> to the blu&s;h, and make him &s;mite upon his Brea&s;t, if after all that hath been &s;aid, <HI>I</HI> &s;hould prove that the great Rabbies of the Popi&s;h Church, have now,
<PB N="155" REF="80"> and then written much more Orthodoxly, and Prote&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="4 letters"> like, touching Ju&s;tification than he him&s;elf hath done. <HI>Bellarmin, De Ju&s;tif.</HI> l. 1. Cap. 2. &s;aith thus. <HI>T<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters"> is bri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">fly to be here ob|&s;erved, that Chri&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> the meritorious cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, as if the Father in favour to his &s;on did forgive us our &s;ins; as Kings a&s;&s;oil guilty Per&s;ons out of favour to, and at the &s;uit of Friends, but becau&s;e he hath pay'd an exact price of ran&s;om, and thereby in rigour of Ju&s;tice made &s;atisfaction for the wickedne&s;s of us all. What could any Pro|te&s;tant writer &s;ay in this point more? &s;aith Mr.</HI> Gattaker, p. 15.</P>
<P><HI>Hear</HI> Bellarmin <HI>again, Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>De Ju&s;tif. cap.</HI> 10. <HI>Dicitur inquit Chri&s;tus Ju&s;titia no&s;tra quoni|am &s;atisfecit Patri pro nobis, &amp; eam &s;atisfactionem ita nobis donat, &amp; communicat, quum nos ju&s;tifi|cat, ut no&s;tra &s;atisfactio, &amp; ju&s;titia dici po&s;&s;it. Nam et&s;i per ju&s;titiam nobis inherentem vere ju&s;ti nominemur, &amp; &s;imus, tamen non per eam &s;atisfaci|mus Deo pro culpis no&s;tris, &amp; paena aeterna,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Non e&s;&s;et ab&s;urdum &s;i quis diceret nobis imputari Chri&s;ti Ju&s;titiam &amp; merita, cum nobis donentur &amp; applicentur ac &s;i nos ip&s;i Deo &s;atisfeci&s;&s;emus,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>Gabriel Va&s;quez, <HI>Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>in</HI> 1. 2. <HI>Di&s;put.</HI> 222. <HI>cap.</HI> 1. &s;aith thus. <HI>Verba i&s;ta Concilii Tridentini Quanquam nemo po&s;&s;it e&s;&s;e ju&s;tus, ni&s;i cui merita Pa&s;&s;ionis Domini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti communican|tur, dicit idem &s;ignificare ac &s;i diceret ni&s;i cui meri|ta pa&s;&s;ionis Domini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti imputantur. Di&s;put. vero</HI> 203. <HI>affirmat recte dici po&s;&s;e merita Chri&s;ti nobis imputari quum agitur de cau&s;a meri|toria ju&s;tificationis, quoniam imputari nobis Chri&s;ti
<PB N="156" REF="81"> merita idem e&s;t, quod merita illa nobis applicari, &amp; communicari.</HI> Upon which Expre&s;&s;ions put to|gether, <HI>Le Blanc</HI> doth thus animadvert in his Di&s;cour&s;e, <HI>De ju&s;titia Chri&s;ti fidelibus imputata. &V;nde patet Scholae Romanae Theologo immerito car|pere no&s;tram de Imputatione ju&s;titiae Chri&s;ti Doct|rinam quandoquidem nihil hac in portere vera &s;en|timus quod vis veritatis ip&s;os non cogat agno&s;cere.</HI> The&s;. 36. That is, <HI>The Romi&s;h Divines do un|ju&s;tly carp at our Doctrine concerning the Imputa|tion of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, &s;ith there is nothing that we think in this matter, which the force of Truth doth not compel them to acknowledge.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="194" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCIV.</HEAD>
<P>Not to give Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> the odium of quoting <HI>all,</HI> or the greate&s;t part, of tho&s;e pa&s;&s;ages which do occur in Popi&s;h Writers, concerning the <HI>Im|putation</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t's</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and other matters relating to Ju&s;tification, in which di|vers of them have been more Orthodox than him&s;elf; I do in the next place aver, that the <HI>Homilies</HI> of the Church of <HI>England</HI> are as plain and po&s;itive for our Ju&s;tification by the Imputa|tion of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s, as Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI> is, or can be again&s;t it, and do in &s;ome other matters referring to Ju&s;tification, manife&s;tly contradict him, or he them.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="195" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>In the Homilie, or Sermon</HI> of Salvation, <HI>we find &s;uch pa&s;&s;ages as follow.</HI> Becau&s;e all men be &s;inners, and Offenders again&s;t God, therefore can
<PB N="157" REF="81"> no man by his own Acts Works, and Deeds (&s;eem they never &s;o good) be ju&s;tified, and made righte|ous before God: but every man of nece&s;&s;ity is con|&s;trained to &s;eek for another righteou&s;ne&s;s, or ju&s;ti|fication to be received at God's own hands, <HI>&amp;c. Again,</HI> God &s;ent his only &s;on into the World to ful|fil the Law for us, and by &s;hedding his most precious Blood to make a &s;acrifice and &s;atisfaction, <HI>or (as it may be called)</HI> amends to his Father for our &s;ins, <HI>&amp;c. Again,</HI> The Grace of God doth not &s;hut out the ju&s;tice of God in our ju&s;tification, but only &s;hutteth out the ju&s;tice of man, that is, the ju&s;tice of our Works, <HI>&amp;c. Again,</HI> Faith doth not &s;hut out Repentance, Hope, Love, and the fear of God to be joyned with Faith in every man that is ju&s;tified, but it &s;hutteth them out from the effect of ju&s;tifying. <HI>Yet more plainly in the &s;ame Homily.</HI> So that Chri&s;t is now the righteou&s;ne&s;s of them that do truly believe in him. He for them paid the ran&s;om by his death. He for them fulfilled the Law in his Life. So that now in him, and by him every true Chri&s;tian may be celled a fulfiller of the Law: for|a&s;much as that which their infirmity lacketh, Chri&s;ts ju&s;tice hath &s;upplyed. <HI>Again, in the &s;econd</HI> Ho|mily of Salvation, <HI>we meet with &s;uch pa&s;&s;ages as follow.</HI> Con&s;ider diligently the&s;e words without works, by Faith only, freely we receive remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins; what can be &s;poken more plainly, than to &s;ay, That freely, without works, by Faith only, we obtain remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins? This Doctrine (viz. <HI>That Faith only ju&s;tifieth, as the margent &s;hew|eth</HI>) advanceth the true Glory of Chri&s;t, and beat|eth down the vain glory of man: This who&s;oever
<PB N="158" REF="82"> denieth is not to be accounted for a Chri&s;tian man, nor for a &s;etter forth of Chri&s;t's Glory, but for an Adver&s;ary to Chri&s;t, and his Go&s;pel, and for a &s;etter forth of mans vain-glory. <HI>Let Mr.</HI> Sherlock <HI>weigh tho&s;e words well. Again,</HI> Man cannot make him&s;elf righteous by his own works, neither in part, nor in the whole, for that were the greate&s;t arrogancy, and pre&s;umption of man, that Anti-Chri&s;t could &s;et up again&s;t God, to affirm that a man might by his own works take away and purge his own &s;ins, and &s;o ju&s;tifie him&s;elf. <HI>Again,</HI> The true under&s;tanding of this Doctrine; we be ju&s;tified freely by Faith without works, or that we be ju&s;ti|fied by Faith in Chri&s;t only, is not that this our own act to believe in Chri&s;t doth ju&s;tifie us, for that were to count our &s;elves to be ju&s;tified by &s;ome act, or vir|tue that is in our &s;elves, <HI>&amp;c. Towards the end of that Homily are the&s;e words,</HI> So that our Faith in Chri&s;t (as it were) &s;aith unto us thus; It is not I that take away your &s;ins, but it is Chri&s;t only I &s;end you to for that purpo&s;e, for&s;aking there|in all your good virtues, words, thoughts, and works, and only putting your tru&s;t in Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Again, in the third Homily of Salvation, are the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions.</HI> Neverthele&s;s becau&s;e Faith doth directly &s;end us to Chri&s;t for remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins, and that by Faith given us of God we embrace the promi&s;e of God's Mercy, and of the remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins (which thing none other of our virtues, or works properly doth) therefore Scripture u&s;eth to &s;ay, that Faith without works doth ju&s;tifie.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="196" TYPE="thesis">
<PB N="159" REF="82">
<HEAD>CXCVI.</HEAD>
<P>He that runs may read the fore &s;aid pa&s;&s;ages quoted out of the three Homilies <HI>of Salvation</HI> to be directly oppo&s;ite to &s;everal notions deli|vered by Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> in his Book, in reference to the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification. For 1. Where|as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> confoundeth ju&s;tifying <HI>Faith</HI> and all other Graces, <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel-Obedience, Faith</HI> and <HI>&s;incere good works,</HI> and maketh as if they were one, and the &s;ame thing (witne&s;s what he &s;aith in p. 273. of his Book) the Ho|milies fore-quoted do manife&s;tly di&s;tingui&s;h be|twixt <HI>Faith</HI> and other Graces, but more plain|ly betwixt Faith and good works. Witne&s;s that pa&s;&s;age, <HI>Faith doth not &s;hut out Hope, Love, Repentance, and the fear of God to be joyned with Faith in every man that is ju&s;tified, but it &s;huts them out from the Office of ju&s;tifying.</HI> Now, if Faith, and all the&s;e Graces were one, and the &s;ame Faith &s;hould &s;hut out it &s;elf from the Office of ju&s;tifying, according to them. Divers pa&s;&s;a|ges fore-quoted do &s;hew that the Homilies do frequently oppo&s;e <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>works, Ex. gr.</HI> this for one. <HI>Con&s;ider diligently the&s;e words without works by Faith only freely we receive remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins: what can be &s;poken more plainly, than to &s;ay, that freely, without works, by Faith only we obtain remi&s;&s;ion of our &s;ins?</HI> 2. Whereas Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> intere&s;&s;eth all Evangelick Obedience, internal Holine&s;s, and &s;incere good works, in ju&s;tificati|on, as truly, and as much, as <HI>Faith</HI> it &s;elf (as he mu&s;t needs do who makes them the &s;ame with
<PB N="160" REF="83"> Faith, or to be Faith it &s;elf) divers pa&s;&s;ages alledged out of the Homilies in the fore-going The&s;is do expre&s;ly deny and contradict that a&s;|&s;ertion of his; witne&s;s that terrible pa&s;&s;age which I would wi&s;h Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> to think of, name|ly, That <HI>Faith only</HI> (that is, without works concurring as to that, for that the Margent &s;hew|eth to be the thing treated of) <HI>ju&s;tifieth ad|vanceth the true glory of Chri&s;t, and beateth down the vain-glory of man: This who&s;oever denieth is not to be accounted for a Chri&s;tian man, nor for a &s;etter forth of Chri&s;t's glory; but for an adver&s;ary to Chri&s;t and his Go&s;pel, and for a &s;etter forth of man's vain-glory.</HI> 3. Whereas Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> makes as if Faith it &s;elf, the very <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere,</HI> the habit, or act of believing (what&s;oever he under&s;tands thereby) were the matter of our Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, or our very Evangelical Righteou&s;ne&s;s be|fore God, the Homily is plain again&s;t him in the&s;e words. <HI>The true under&s;tanding of this Do|ctrine we be ju&s;tified freely by Faith without Works, is not that this our act to believe in Chri&s;t doth ju&s;ti|fie us, for that were to count our &s;elves to be ju&s;tified by &s;ome act, or virtue in our &s;elves.</HI> 4. Whereas Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> utterly denyeth, and derideth <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> witne&s;s the pa&s;&s;ages which I have quoted out of his Book in <HI>The&s;is</HI> 179. to which I &s;hall add one or two more, <HI>viz.</HI> that in <HI>p.</HI> 276. of Mr. <HI>Sh</HI>'s. book, where he concludes thus. <HI>Thus you &s;ee that there is no foundation in Scripture for all this talk of per&s;onal Rigteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t in|herent in him, and imputed to us</HI> Al&s;o, <HI>Sh.</HI> p. 273. <HI>Thus you &s;ee how the Apo&s;tle oppo&s;eth the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s
<PB N="161" REF="83"> of the Law to the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, not as an inherent, and per&s;onal to an Imputed Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s; but as an external, and Ritual, to an inherent, real, and &s;ub&s;tantial Righteou&s;ne&s;s This is</HI> (&s;aith <HI>Mr.</HI> Sh.) <HI>the</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Founda|tion of all other mi&s;takes in this matter, that by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, and the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Works, mo&s;t men under&s;tand an inherent holine&s;s, the conformity of our hearts, and lives to all moral Precepts, and Rules of good life; and then conclude that if this righteou&s;ne&s;s will not plea&s;e God, nothing but an imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s can, though I &s;hould have rather concluded that nothing can: but the truth is, the righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, and of Works in the New Te&s;tament &s;ignifies only an external righteou&s;ne&s;s, which cannot plea&s;e God; and that internal holine&s;s which they call the righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, is that very righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith which the Go&s;pel commands, and which God approves, and rewards, and this imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s is no where to be found, that I know of, but in their own fancies.</HI> If this long Paragraph be not quite contrary to what the <HI>Homily</HI> declareth, I am much deceived. The words of the <HI>Homily</HI> are the&s;e. <HI>Man cannot make him&s;elf righteous by his own works, neither in part, nor in the whole; for that were the greate&s;t Arrogancy, and Pre&s;umption of man, that Anti|chri&s;t could &s;et up again&s;t God, to affirm that a man might by his own works take away his own &s;ins, and &s;o ju&s;tifie him&s;elf.</HI> But &s;aith Mr. <HI>Sh. If internal holine&s;s will not plea&s;e God</HI> (that is, be accepted by him as that righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby a &s;inner is ju&s;tified in his &s;ight, for of that he was &s;peaking)
<PB N="162" REF="84"> <HI>I &s;hould have concluded that nothing can.</HI> Who can reconcile that pa&s;&s;age of hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> in the Homily, which followeth. <HI>Becau&s;e all men be <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">in|ners, and offenders against God, therefore can no man by his own acts, words, and deeds, be justified, and made righteous before God; but every man is con&s;trained to &s;eek for another righteou&s;ne&s;s or ju&s;ti|fication to be received at God's own hand,</HI> &amp;c. And again, <HI>God &s;ent his only Son into the world to fulfil the Law for us, and by &s;hedding his most precious blood to make a &s;acrifice and &s;atisfaction, and (as it may be called) amends to his Father for our &s;ins,</HI> &amp;c. Which pa&s;&s;age in the Homily plainly tells us another way how God comes to be plea&s;ed with &s;inners, &s;o far forth as to ju&s;tifie them: then upon their inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s, or inter|nal holine&s;s (which yet is very nece&s;&s;ary for o|ther purpo&s;es) <HI>viz.</HI> upon the account of Chri&s;t his atonement, and &s;atisfaction, which being not theirs &s;ubjectively, and <HI>inherently</HI> if it be not <HI>imputed</HI> to them, they can have no benefit by it. The Homily &s;aith expre&s;sly, that <HI>every man is con&s;trained to &s;eek another righteou&s;ne&s;s (viz.</HI> than that of his own works and deeds) <HI>to be received at God's own hand.</HI> The Homily tells you that our very <HI>Faith,</HI> or <HI>believing</HI> is far from ju&s;tifying us, or being the matter of our righteou&s;ne&s;s be|fore God, witne&s;s the&s;e words. <HI>So that our Faith in Chri&s;t (as it were) &s;aith to us thus. It is not I that can take away your &s;ins, but it is Chri&s;t only; I &s;end you to him for that purpo&s;e, for&s;aking therein all your good virtue, thoughts, words, and works, and only putting your tru&s;t in Chri&s;t,</HI> &amp;c. Again, The
<PB N="163" REF="84"> third <HI>Homily of Salvation</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Faith doth direct|ly &s;end us to Chri&s;t for remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, and that by Faith we imbrace the promi&s;e of God's mercy (which thing no other of our virtues, or works properly doth) therefore &s;cripture u&s;eth to &s;ay, that Faith without works doth justifie.</HI> which pa&s;&s;age, fora&s;much as it excludeth other graces, and works, be&s;ides <HI>Faith,</HI> from the ju&s;tifying of a &s;inner upon this account; that they do not, like <HI>Faith,</HI> properly imbrace the promi&s;e of God's mercy, and re|mi&s;&s;ion of &s;in, plainly implieth, and intimateth, that Faith doth ju&s;tifie only <HI>correlatively</HI> to its ob|ject Chri&s;t, and his righteou&s;ne&s;s, which can be made ours no otherwi&s;e than by <HI>imputation,</HI> or gracious accepting of us as if we were perfectly righteous with an inherent formal righteou&s;ne&s;s of our own, &s;ith it is not ours internally. There|fore there is &s;uch a thing as <HI>imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> and that Faith that lays hold upon it is a grace by it &s;elf, di&s;tinct from other graces, and other good works, and is the only in&s;trument on mans part, whereby he is ju&s;tified. All this I &s;ay is true if the <HI>Homilies</HI> of the <HI>Church of England</HI> may be credited. And now methinks I hear tho&s;e men who find the <HI>Articles,</HI> and the <HI>Homilies of the Church of England</HI> to &s;tand &s;o much in their light, crying out concerning tho&s;e that pen'd them, <HI>&V;tinam ne&s;cii&s;&s;ent literas</HI> (as one concerning him|&s;elf) would to God they had been illiterate men, that had never learnd to write: and (pre|tending that the Doctrine of <HI>imputed righteou&s;|ne&s;s,</HI> will de&s;troy all good <HI>Ethiks</HI>) making bold to abu&s;e the <HI>Homilies,</HI> and that text toge|ther,
<PB N="164" REF="85"> <GAP DESC="foreign">, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15.33.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="197" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCVII.</HEAD>
<P>The <HI>Church of England</HI> is not &s;ingular in the Do|ctrine declared in their <HI>Homilies</HI> (the Comment of their Articles) <HI>viz.</HI> that <HI>we are ja&s;tified by the Imputation of the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t apprehend|ed by Faith:</HI> for it were ea&s;ie to produce a cloud of Witne&s;&s;es con&s;enting with them in this matter, and plainly affirming the &s;ame thing in their Writings, <HI>viz. Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Brentius, Chytraeus, Hemingius, Zuinglius, Occo|lampadius, Grynaeus, Bullinger, Calvin, Gualter, Danaeus, Zanchy, Beza, Peter Martyr, Mu&s;culus, Pareus, &V;r&s;inus, Marlorat, Junius, To&s;&s;anus, Sy|brandus, Bucanus, Pezelius, Aretius, Chamier,</HI> to omit the eminent Divines of our own Nation, &s;uch as <HI>Whittaker, Perkins, Pemble,</HI> &amp;c. who have written to the like purpo&s;e. But oh how va&s;tly doth one Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> outweigh all the&s;e? <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="198" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCVIII.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Whereas in my</HI> Prodromus <HI>I undertook to produce nine eminent Bi&s;hops, (eight of them of the</HI> Church of England) <HI>all &s;etting their faces again&s;t that notion of Ju&s;tification which Mr.</HI> Sherlock <HI>hath delivered to us,</HI> viz. <HI>that we are not ju&s;tified by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t</HI> imput|ed <HI>to us, but by our own &s;incere obedience to the Go&s;pel (which, &s;aith he, is called the righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of Faith) having already produced two of the nine,</HI> viz. <HI>Bp.</HI> Davenant, <HI>and Bp.</HI>
<PB N="165" REF="85"> Dounam, <HI>in variety of in&s;tances; there remains but &s;even, the fir&s;t whereof I &s;hall now in&s;tance in is Bp.</HI> Hall, <HI>whom I find as oppo&s;ite to Mr.</HI> Sherlock <HI>in this matter, as a man can be. His words are as follow.</HI> The Evangelical Ju&s;tice (<HI>&s;aith Bp.</HI> Hall) is not without the intervention of a Saviour; to which claim is laid in two kinds: ei|ther as imputative, or as inherent. The inherent wrought in us, the imputed wrought for us. It is the main care of our lives, and deaths, what &s;hall give us peace, and acceptation before the dreadful Tribunal of God: What but righteou&s;ne&s;s? What righteou&s;ne&s;s, or who&s;e? Ours, or Chri&s;t's? Ours in the inherent graces wrought in us, in the holy works wrought by us; or Chri&s;t's in his mo&s;t perfect obedi|ence, and meritorious &s;atisfaction wrought for us, and applyed to us? The Tridentine faction is for the former (<HI>and &s;o we may &s;ay is Mr.</HI> Sh.) we for the latter. God is as direct on our &s;ide as his word can make him; every where blazening the defects of our our own righteou&s;ne&s;s, the imperfections of our be&s;t graces, the deadly nature of our lea&s;t &s;ins, the radical &s;infulne&s;s rf our habitual concupi&s;cence, the pollution of our be&s;t works: every where extolling the perfect obedience of our Redeemer, the gracious ap|pplication of that obedience, the &s;weet comfort of that application, the a&s;&s;urance and unfailablene&s;s of that comfort; and la&s;tly, our happy re&s;t in that a&s;&s;ur|ance. We were to us if we were not more ju&s;t in that, than &s;anctified in our &s;elves. We are &s;anctified in part, according to the weakne&s;s of our receit, we are ju&s;tified throughly according to the perfectne&s;s of thy acceptation. Were we throughly &s;anctified here, we
<PB N="166" REF="86"> &s;hould be more than men, were we not throughly ju|&s;tified we &s;hould be no more than &s;inners before thee, while we &s;tand before thee as &s;inners we can have no peace. Let others tru&s;t in the Chariots and Hor|&s;es of their own &s;trength, we will remember the Lord our God. The work of thy Ju&s;tice (or righ|teou&s;ne&s;s) &s;hall be our Peace. <HI>Thus far that Ex|cellent and acute Bi&s;hop.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="199" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CXCIX.</HEAD>
<P>The Learned Bi&s;hop <HI>Prideaux,</HI> &s;ometimes profe&s;&s;or of Divinity at <HI>Oxford,</HI> in his Book called <HI>Fa&s;ciculus Controver&s;iarum</HI> (over and above what may be met with in his other works) giveth ample te&s;timony to the Doct|rine of Believers their being ju&s;tified by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed to them, and received by Faith alone. That only Faith on man's part doth ju&s;tifie, he proves by this Ar|gument, for one, <HI>p.</HI> 266. <HI>Per quod &s;olummodo imputatur nobis Chri&s;ti Ju&s;titia,</HI> &amp;c. That by which alone, or by which only, the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is imputed to us which &s;atisfieth God's Law, and for man's lap&s;e, by that only on our part we are ju&s;tified. But <HI>we are ju&s;tified</HI> only <HI>by his grace through the redemption which is Chri&s;t Je&s;us, whom God hath &s;et forth to be a pro|pitiation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> Rom. 3.24. Whence Chri&s;t <HI>is made to us Wi&s;dom, Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and Redemp|tion,</HI> 1 Cor. 1.30. In that Argument he plainly declares his Judgment for our being ju&s;tified by the <HI>Imputation of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> for by
<PB N="167" REF="86"> that he proves we are ju&s;tified by <HI>Faith</HI> alone on our part, for that alone receiveth, or layeth hold on that Righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby God ju&s;ti|fieth a Sinner, or whereby, <HI>ex parte Dei,</HI> or with re&s;pect unto God, a Sinner is ju&s;tified. Yea, one of his Arguments to prove that we are j<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tified by Faith alone, is this, <HI>viz. That Doctrine</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>which di&s;tingui&s;heth &s;aving Ch<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i&s;tianity from Judai&s;m, Turci&s;m, and Hea|theni&s;m&punc; is to be received by all Chri&s;tians: But &s;uch is thi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Doctrine</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>of Ju&s;tification by Faith alone, becau&s;e Chri&s;t is the end of the Law for Righteou&s;ne&s;s to every one that believeth,</HI> Rom. 10.4. But if the Doctrine of <HI>Imputed Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s</HI> be over-thrown, the Doctrine of Ju&s;ti|fication by Faith alone, (as on Man's part) falls to the ground, as Bp. <HI>Prideaux</HI> intimates, for he builds this upon that, and con&s;equently ac|cording to that Learned Prelate, the great thing whic<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;hould di&s;tingui&s;h us from <HI>Jews, Turks,</HI> and <HI>Heathens,</HI> is taken away; which a&s;&s;ertion of his is a kind of calling them (by craft, as they &s;ay) either <HI>Jews, Turks,</HI> or <HI>Heathens,</HI> who deny the Doctrine of Chri&s;t's <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> for in &s;o doing they mu&s;t needs deny the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by Faith alone, <HI>(ex parte hominis)</HI> for it is the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which Faith layeth hold upon, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Al&s;o in p. 298. having &s;tarted this Objection. If the Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t appre|hended by Faith be that which alone doth ju&s;ti|fie us, then &s;hould we be as Righteous as Chri&s;t him&s;elf; his An&s;wer to it is this, <HI>Juxta verita|tem
<PB N="168" REF="87"> rei aeque &s;umus ju&s;ti &s;ed non aequaliter, nec eo|dem modo, cum i&s;le ju&s;tus &s;ic &s;ubjective, nos impu|tative, ille de proprio nos illius la<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">gitate.</HI> It fol|lows not (&s;aith he) that we are Righteous equally with Chri&s;t him&s;elf, becau&s;e he is righ|teous <HI>&s;ubjectively</HI> (or in him&s;elf) we but <HI>Im|putatively</HI> (or by the acc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">unting of his righ|teou&s;ne&s;s to us) and accepting his Righteou&s;|ne&s;s for us, and on our behalf.) No more need to be &s;aid to prove that that Learned Bi&s;hop (who&s;e Authority certainly may go as far as Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s) was a hearty a&s;&s;erto<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of the now de&s;pi&s;ed Doctrine of <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;|ne&s;s.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="200" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CC.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Edwinus London</HI> (as he writes him&s;elf) that is <HI>Edwin Sand<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, then Bi&s;hop of London,</HI> in an Epi&s;tle of his before <HI>Luther's Commentary on the Galatians</HI> (which I know not whether I &s;hould not call his &s;olemn Licen&s;e for that Book) writes thus.</P>
<P><HI>This Book being brought to me to peru&s;e, and to con&s;ider of, I thought it my part not only to allow of it to the Print, but al&s;o to commend it to the Read|er, as a Treati&s;e mo&s;t comfortable to all afflicted Con&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">iences exerci&s;es in the School of Chri&s;t This Author felt what he &s;pake, and had experience of what he wrought, &amp;c. Sathan is the Enemy; The Vict<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters"> is only by Faith in Chri&s;t. This mo&s;t ne|ce&s;&s;ary Doctrine the Author hath most &s;ub&s;tantially cleared in this his Commentary. Which being writ|ten in Latine certain godly learned men have tran|&s;lated
<PB N="169" REF="87"> into our Language to the great benefit of all &s;uch, as with humbled hearts will read the &s;ame.</HI></P>
<P>If this mo&s;t Reverend Bi&s;hop had not been a hearty Friend to the Doctrine of <HI>Imputed Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> he would never have given &s;o high a Commendation of <HI>Luther</HI>'s work upon the Epi|&s;tle to the <HI>Galatians,</HI> which doubtle&s;s is full of that kind of Doctrine; yea, &s;urely, had he been of Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s mind, he would have been &s;o far from Licen&s;ing that Book him&s;elf, with re&s;pect, and Honour, that by his good will, no body el&s;e &s;hould have Licen&s;ed it, but rather have told the World that it was <HI>idle talk, and meer tittle tattle.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="201" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCI.</HEAD>
<P><HI>The Excellent Bi&s;hop of</HI> Norwich, <HI>that now is, in his Explication of the</HI> 110th. P&s;alm, <HI>p. 440. having in the fore-going page &s;poken of Chri&s;t his &s;uffering for us,</HI> as our Head, and Surety <HI>(for &s;o he &s;peaks) &s;aith,</HI> The fruit which redounds to us hereby is the Expiation of our &s;ins, by the imputing of his Righteou&s;ne&s;s unto us. This is my Blood of the New Te&s;tament, which was &s;hed for many for the remi&s;&s;ion of &s;in, <HI>Mat. 26.28.</HI> And in whom we have redemption through his Blood, the forgivene&s;s of &s;ins, <HI>Eph. 1.7.</HI> The manner whereby the &s;atisfaction of Chri&s;t becomes profitable to us unto the remi&s;&s;ion of &s;in, and Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s is by Imputation, <HI>Rom. 4.3.5.8.5.19.</HI> Now, all the World is guilty before God, <GAP DESC="foreign">, it lyeth in mi&s;chief, and therefore must be ju&s;tified by a forreign Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and that equal
<PB N="170" REF="88"> to the Ju&s;tice offended, which is the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God unto us graciou&s;ly imputed. As there is a Per&s;onal and individual unity whereby a man is one, in, and by him&s;elf: So there is a common unity whereby a man is one with another. And this is the ground of righteou&s;ne&s;s imputed. &V;nitas enim prae|&s;tantis e&s;t fundamentum proprietatis ad officium prae|&s;titum, <HI>i. e.</HI> Onenes with the performer is the foun|dation of our pro&s;priety to the good Office performed. So then betwixt Chri&s;t and us there mu&s;t be an &V;ni|ty, or el&s;e there can be no Imputation. It is &s;aid, that Faith is Imputed for righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>Rom. 4.5.</HI> not the <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>credere,</HI> or the Act of Believing as it is a work proceeding from us by grace, but becau&s;e it is the bond of &V;nion betwixt us, and Chri&s;t, and by that means makes way to the Imputation of Chri&s;ts righteou&s;ne&s;s to us. 'Tis generally con&s;ented to by them that have read his Works that Dr. <HI>Reynolds, now Bi&s;hop of</HI> Norwich, <HI>u&s;eth to write</HI> &s;en&s;e, <HI>and nothing but what is good</HI> &s;en&s;e, <HI>and yet I find all the pa&s;&s;ages fore-mentioned in that book of his, which I mentioned before, nor do I know how much time it would take up to tran|&s;cribe all that that Excellent Per&s;on has &s;aid concerning</HI> Imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>in his &s;everal mo&s;t worthy Writings. The&s;e that I have quo|ted are enough to &s;hew that he, and Mr.</HI> Sh. <HI>are not of a judgment about that grand affair.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="202" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCII.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> Andrews, <HI>who is univer&s;ally owned to have been an excellent Scholar, and an able Divine, in his Sermon of</HI> Ju&s;tification <HI>(towards
<PB N="171" REF="88"> the end of his Book of Sermons) writes thus.</HI> In the Scripture <HI>(&s;aith he)</HI> there is a double righ|teou&s;ne&s;s &s;et down both in the Old, and in the New Te&s;tament, in the Old Te&s;tament, and in the very fir&s;t place that righteou&s;ne&s;s is mentioned in the Bi|ble, <HI>en. 18. 10.</HI> Abraham <HI>believed, and it was counted to him for righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> And again in the very next line it is mentioned, Abraham <HI>will teach his hou&s;e to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> A righteou&s;|ne&s;s done. In the New likewi&s;e, the former, in one chapter (even the fourth to the <HI>Romans</HI>) no few|er than eleven times <HI>Reputatum e&s;t illi ad Ju&s;titi|am.</HI> A reputed righteou&s;ne&s;s. The latter in <HI>St. John 1.3, 7. He that doth righteou&s;ne&s;s is righ|teous.</HI> A righteou&s;ne&s;s done. The one is a quality of the party, the other an act of the Judge declaring, or pronouncing righteous. The one ours by influence, or infu&s;ion, the other by accompt, or imputation: when Chri&s;t is called Jehovah, our righteou&s;ne&s;s, that great Bi&s;hop expoundeth it of righteou&s;ne&s;s im|puted: For (&s;aith he <HI>p. 76.</HI>) The tenour of the Scripture touching our Ju&s;tification all along runs in judicial terms. When we &s;hall once be brought and arraigned before the righteous judge &s;itting upon the throne (<HI>which he &s;peaks alluding to</HI> Prov. <HI>20.8.</HI>) we &s;hall there &s;ee that righteou&s;ne&s;s in that &s;en&s;e <HI>(whereby he meaneth inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s)</HI> will not abide the trial. Bring them hither then <HI>(meaning to God's Tribunal)</HI> and ask them here of this name, and never a Saint, nor Father, no not the Schoolmen them&s;elves, but will &s;hew how to un|der&s;tand it aright. In their Commentaries it may be in their Que&s;tions, and Debates they will hold hard
<PB N="172" REF="89"> the other: but remove them hither, they for&s;ake it pre&s;ently, and take the name in the right &s;en&s;e. Ju&s;t and perfect <HI>Job</HI> &s;tanding here. Though I be ju&s;t (&s;aith he) I will not hold up my head <HI>(i. e.)</HI> will never plead it, or &s;tand upon, but put up a &s;upplica|tion to be relieved by Jehovah, <HI>Ju&s;titia no&s;tra. Da|vid</HI> dareth not stand here, but de&s;ireth God not to enter into judgment with him, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But if we mu&s;t come (<HI>viz.</HI> to the judgment of God, as thither we mu&s;t come all) then he will never account his own righteou&s;ne&s;s, but make mention of this name, <HI>Jeho|vah ju&s;titia no&s;tra. Daniel,</HI> that man &s;o greatly be|loved, after he &s;aw the Antient of days &s;et down on his Throne, and the book open before him there: Not in our righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>Dan. 9.18.</HI> Yet was that righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>a Jehovah,</HI> (from the Lord) but here it would not &s;erve, he mu&s;t wait for the Me&s;&s;i|as, and the everla&s;ting righteou&s;ne&s;s which he bring|eth with him. <HI>E&s;ay,</HI> at the Vi&s;ion of God &s;itting up|on his Throne, crieth out. Woe is me, I am a man of polluted lips: Woe is me, for I have held my peace. There he &s;eeth that the very &s;ins of omi&s;&s;ion, and the uery &s;ins of his lips would be enough to condemn him, though he had never in act committed any. <HI>St. Paul</HI> &s;aith, Though I know nothing by my &s;elf, and &s;o had Ju&s;tification <HI>a Domino,</HI> I am not therefore ju&s;tified: It is another righteou&s;ne&s;s, and not that, mu&s;t acquit him. Yea, the very Schoolmen them&s;elves (&s;aith he) take them from their Que&s;tions, Quod|libets, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> let them be in the Soliloquies, Meditati|ons, or Devotions, and &s;pecially in directing how to deal with men in their la&s;t agony, when the Judge &s;tands before the door, then take <HI>An&s;elm,</HI> take <HI>Bo|neventure,</HI>
<PB N="173" REF="89"> take <HI>Ger&s;on,</HI> you would not wi&s;h to find <HI>Jehovah our Rightehu&s;ne&s;s</HI> better, or more preg|nantly acknowledged, than in them you &s;hall find it. And indeed, &s;aith he, &s;o far as concerneth &s;atisfacti|on for &s;in, and our e&s;caping from eternal death, the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> taketh this name aright, and now they find no &s;uch ab&s;urdity in it, that Christ his rightheou&s;ne&s;s, and merit, are imputed to us: but in the po&s;itive Ju&s;tice, or that part thereof which is me|ritorious for reward, there fall they into a phan&s;ie that a righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent in them&s;elves, without the righteou&s;ne&s;s that is in Chri&s;t, will &s;erve them. The rea&s;on, &s;aith <HI>Bellarmin,</HI> why in &s;atisfaction for &s;in we need Cri&s;t's righteou&s;ne&s;s to be accounted ours is becau&s;e the offence is infinite. We rea&s;on <HI>a pari.</HI> There mu&s;t al&s;o be a an infinite merit, becau&s;e the re|ward is no le&s;s infinite. Is there not as much required to purcha&s;e for us the Crown of Glory, as to redeem us from the torments of Hell? <HI>Bellarmin,</HI> after his long Di&s;putation, taking upon him to an&s;wer a ca&s;e of Con&s;cience, whether a man might repo&s;e any tru&s;t in that which he had &s;o long argued for, &s;aith at la&s;t, that <HI>Propter incertitudinem propriae Ju&s;titiae, &amp; periculum inanis gloriae, tuti&s;&s;imum e&s;t fiduciam totam in &s;ola Dei mi&s;ericordia reponere.</HI> That is, Con&s;idering the uncertainty of man's righteou&s;|ne&s;s, and the dangerou&s;ne&s;s of vain-glory, it is mo&s;t &s;afe to repo&s;e all our confidence in the mercy of God alone. <HI>Thus far Bp.</HI> Andrews, <HI>be&s;ides &s;everal o|ther pa&s;&s;ages which might be gathered out of his Sermon of</HI> Ju&s;tification, <HI>on</HI> Jer. <HI>23.6. which he tran&s;lates thus;</HI> This is the name whereby they &s;hall call him, The Lord our Righteou&s;ne&s;s. <HI>Plainly de|claring
<PB N="174" REF="90"> his &s;tedfa&s;t Judgment to have been for the Doctrine of</HI> Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>and for the in&s;ufficiency of any</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s Inherent, <HI>as for the purpo&s;e of</HI> Ju&s;tification. <HI>How much were it to be wi&s;ht that Mr.</HI> Sh. <HI>were but as Orthodox in that point, and that he had taken in his fir&s;t &s;ea&s;oning from &s;uch &s;ound Authors as was that renowned</HI> Bi&s;hop, <HI>rather than from</HI> Socinus, <HI>or any of his Complices.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="203" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCIII.</HEAD>
<P>The late Reverend Bi&s;hop of <HI>Glouce&s;ter</HI> in his <HI>Expo&s;ition of the Catechi&s;m of the Church of</HI> Eng|land, p. 71. hath the&s;e words. <HI>But yet full &s;a|tisfaction he may plead</HI> (&s;peaking of a Believer) <HI>The Obedience of the Son of God both Active and Pa&s;&s;ive;</HI> Active, <HI>in keeping and fulfilling every tittle of the Law; and</HI> Pa&s;&s;ive, <HI>in &s;uffering the wrath of God due for the breach of the Law: Out of which Obedience ari&s;eth that actual ju&s;tice in Chri&s;t, that being imputed to us, in re&s;pect of that Relation in which we &s;tand unto Chri&s;t (he and all his Elect being taken for one Body) God doth re|lea&s;e, acquit, and di&s;charge the guilty &s;inner.</HI> And p. 73. <HI>God imputing to all penitent, and believing &s;inners the Obedience of his own Son, and his righ|teou&s;ne&s;s accounts them ju&s;t in his &s;ight.</HI> No man that reads tho&s;e pa&s;&s;ages can doubt that Learned Prelate (for &s;o his works &s;peak him) to have been po&s;itive and peremptory for the Imputa|tion of Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s to Believers, and their Ju&s;tification thereby, which he lays down as a Catechi&s;tical, Fundamental Truth, for
<PB N="175" REF="90"> writing an Expo&s;ition upon the Church Cate|chi&s;m, his whole bu&s;ine&s;s lyes with &s;uch Truths as tho&s;e; Therefore in his Epi&s;tle Dedicatory to the pre&s;ent Arch-Bi&s;hop of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> he <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> the&s;e words. <HI>I though it my Duty to invoke your Lord&s;hips Patronage, and that you would be my <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">kler, as you haven been hitherto, again&s;t any <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">ould dare to oppo&s;e the&s;e &s;olid, and funda|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">tal <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">raths, which none will be &s;o impudent to contradict but branded Hereticks, and hot-brain'd Ph<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">naticks</HI> I &s;uppo&s;e Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> do's not take him&s;elf to be either of tho&s;e two; but you &s;ee what that Learned Prelate &s;aith of all them who contradict the Truths a&s;&s;erted in his Expo&s;ition of the Catechi&s;m, which he calls <HI>fundamental,</HI> (and <HI>I</HI> am &s;ure Ju&s;tification is one of the great|e&s;t points that can be handled in any Catechi&s;m; therefore the Truths that concern that mu&s;t be great <HI>Fundamentals) I</HI> &s;ay, you &s;ee what he &s;aith of &s;uch Per&s;ons, in <HI>The&s;i</HI> and it is no hard thing to reduce it <HI>ad Hypothe&s;is.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="204" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCIV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Bi&s;hop Abbot,</HI> in his Defence of Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> his book, called <HI>The Reformed Catholick,</HI> again&s;t Dr. <HI>Bi&s;hop,</HI> doth highly a&s;&s;ert and vindicate the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;|ne&s;s <HI>Imputed,</HI> witne&s;s the following pa&s;&s;ages. 1. In p. 381. <HI>That our Ju&s;tification and Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s before God &s;tandeth not in any inward vir|tues, or graces poured into our Souls, but in the Imputation of Chri&s;t's Obedience, and Righteou&s;|ne&s;s made ours by Faith &s;hall be proved unto him,
<PB N="176" REF="91"> God willing, by better Arguments than he &s;hall be able to di&s;prove.</HI> 2. In p. 382. he &s;aith,</P>
<P>It is truly &s;aid by Mr. <HI>Perkins,</HI> that <HI>the Church of</HI> Rome <HI>in teaching ju&s;tification by Works doth raze the very Foundation of Chri&s;tian Faith, and maketh Chri&s;t but a counterfeit and fal&s;e Chri&s;t; becau&s;e, as &s;aith the Apo&s;tle, If Righteou&s;ne&s;s be by the Law, then Chri&s;t dyed in vain,</HI> Gal. 2.21. <HI>Therefore peremptorily he denounceth, Ye are abo|li&s;hed from Chri&s;t, ye are fallen from Grace who|&s;oever are ju&s;tified by the Law,</HI> Gal. 5.4. 3. In p. 384. <HI>In whom</HI> (&s;peaking of Chri&s;t) <HI>and not in our &s;elves, we are made the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God; that is, ju&s;t in the &s;ight of God, in that his Obedience, and Righteou&s;ne&s;s performed and wrought in our Name, and for our behoof, is im|puted unto us, by Faith in his Blood.</HI> 4 In p. 388. <HI>Bp.</HI> Abbot <HI>vindicates Mr.</HI> Perkins his fir&s;t rea&s;on for imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>viz. That which mu&s;t be our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God must &s;atisfie the Ju&s;tice of the Law, which &s;aith, Do the&s;e things and thou &s;halt live. But there is nothing that can &s;atisfie that ju&s;tice of the Law but the Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and Obedience of Chri&s;t. Ergo.</HI> 5. In p. 400. he vindicates Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> his &s;e|cond rea&s;on for imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>viz.</HI> That, <HI>As Chri&s;t was made &s;in for us, &s;o we are made the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God in him.</HI> 2 Cor. 5.21. <HI>But Chri&s;t was made &s;in by the Imputation of our &s;ins, he being mo&s;t Holy: Therefore a &s;inner is made Righteous in that Chri&s;ts Righteou&s;ne&s;s is Imputed to him.</HI> 6. In p. 404. the excellent <HI>Bp.</HI> afore-&s;aid vindicates Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> his third
<PB N="177" REF="91"> Rea&s;on for imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, <HI>viz.</HI> from <HI>Rom.</HI> 5. <HI>As by one mans di&s;obedience,</HI> &amp;c. whence he argues thus. <HI>As by the di&s;obedience of</HI> Adam <HI>men were made &s;inners, &s;o by the Obedience of Chri&s;t they are made righteous: But men are made Sinners by Imputation of</HI> Adam's <HI>&s;in unto them,</HI> Ergo. <HI>By Imputation of Chri&s;t's Ju&s;tice we are made righteous.</HI> 7. In p. 413. he vindicateth Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> his fourth and la&s;t Rea&s;on for im|puted Righteou&s;ne&s;s, taken from the con&s;ent of the Ancient Church, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 8. In p. 422. <HI>Bp. Abbot</HI> takes upon him to defend the An&s;wers which Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> gave to all and every the Objections which the Papi&s;ts bring again&s;t <HI>Impu|ted</HI> righteou&s;ne&s;s, and the Arguments for Ju&s;ti|fication by a Righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>Inherent.</HI> Thus you &s;ee that Mr. <HI>Perkins</HI> him&s;elf was not a greater a&s;&s;erter of the imputation of Chri&s;t's Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s to believers, and their Ju&s;tification there|by, than was the Learned and Excellent <HI>Bi&s;hop Abbot,</HI> who&s;e Judgment, and Authority will weigh in the balance, again&s;t twenty &s;uch young Gentlemen, with their &s;hels upon their heads, as he that hath taken upon him to oppo&s;e and deride it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="205" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Bp. Morton,</HI> in his book called, <HI>The Prote|&s;tants Appeal,</HI> p. 69. plainly declareth him&s;elf for <HI>Imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> by his quoting for the confirmation of it the following pa&s;&s;age out of <HI>venerable Bede. Nothing can be more for our Ju|&s;tification by the</HI> imputed <HI>merits of our head Chri&s;t
<PB N="178" REF="92"> than that his Heavenly axiome, &s;aying, the condem|nation of Chri&s;t is our ju&s;tification. Nothing more oppo&s;ite unto the</HI> Romi&s;h <HI>ju&s;tifying by Inherent per|fection than</HI> (&s;peaking of the regenerate) <HI>to &s;ay, no man &s;hall be &s;aved by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Works, but by the only righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith.</HI> Now, that by Faith there he would have us to under&s;tand the Object of Faith, <HI>viz.</HI> the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t which Faith takes hold of, and relatively to which Faith is &s;aid to ju&s;tifie, may be gathered from a &s;imilitude which he u&s;eth, in p. 630. <HI>Yet under&s;tand, good Reader</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>that of as a ring of Gold wherein there is inclo&s;ed a precious Stone of &s;ome &s;ingular virtue to cure thy Di&s;ea&s;e, thou u&s;e&s;t to &s;ay that the ring doth cure thy grief, yet not of it's own virtue, although it be of Gold, but by the power of the precious stone, which it contains; &s;o &s;ay we, that Faith justifieth, but not by any merit, or worthine&s;s in it &s;elf, although it be the gift of God, and a virtue Theological, but by the power and vi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tue of Chri&s;t his precious merit of redemption, the object which it cla&s;peth, and apprehendeth.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="206" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCVI.</HEAD>
<P><HI>The incomparable Primate of</HI> Armagh, <HI>Bp.</HI> &V;&s;her, <HI>in his</HI> Body of Divinity, <HI>p. 193. and in &s;everal other parts thereof, declareth him&s;elf abundantly for the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification by Chri&s;t's Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> Imputed.</P>
<P>Ju&s;tification, <HI>&s;aith he,</HI> is the Sentence of God, whereby he of his Grace for the righteou&s;ne&s;s of his Son, by him imputed to us, and through Faith ap|prehended by us, doth free us from &s;in and Death,
<PB N="793" REF="92"> and account us righteous unto Life. For hereby we both have a deliverance from the Guilt, and puni&s;h|ment of all our &s;ins, and being accounted righteous in the &s;ight of God by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of our Sa|viour Chri&s;t imputed to us, are re&s;tored to a better Righteou&s;ne&s;s than ever we had in <HI>Adam. p. 194.</HI> Thus God imputing the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t to a &s;inner doth not account his &s;ins to him, but intere&s;ts him in a &s;tate of as full, and perfect freedom, and acceptance, as if he had never &s;inned, or had him|&s;elf fully &s;atisfied. The matter of Ju&s;tification, or that righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby a &s;inner &s;tands ju&s;ti|fied in God's &s;ight, is not any righteou&s;ne&s;s inhe|rent in his own Per&s;on, and performed by him, but a perfect righteou&s;ne&s;s inherent in Chri&s;t, and per|formed for him. The Form, or being Cau&s;e of our ju&s;tification, and that which makes the Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t &s;o really ours that it doth ju&s;tifie us is the gracious Imputation of God the Father ac|counting his Son's righteou&s;ne&s;s unto the &s;inner, and by that allowing, making it his to all effects, as if he him&s;elf had performed it. <HI>Thus far Bp.</HI> &V;&s;her. <HI>Then he puts the Que&s;tion.</HI> But how can Chri&s;t's righteou&s;ne&s;s be accounted ours? Is it not as ab&s;urd to &s;ay that we are ju&s;tified by Chri&s;t's righteou&s;ne&s;s, as that a man &s;hould be wi&s;e with the wi&s;dom of ano|ther? <HI>&amp;c.</HI> An&s;wereth it thus; no doubtle&s;s, be|cau&s;e this righteou&s;ne&s;s is in Chri&s;t, not as in a per|&s;on &s;evered from us, but as in the Head of the Church, the &s;econd <HI>Adam,</HI> from whom therefore it is communicated to all, who being united as Mem|bers to him do lay claim thereunto, and apply it unto them&s;elves, <HI>Rom. 5.19. Rom. 10.4.</HI> For if
<PB N="180" REF="93"> the &s;in of <HI>Adam</HI> were of force to condemn us all, be|cau&s;e we were in his Loins, he being the head of our common Nature; why then &s;hould it &s;eem &s;trange that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of our Saviour Chri&s;t, both God, and Man, &s;hould be available to ju&s;ti|fie tho&s;e that are intere&s;&s;ed in him e&s;pecially con&s;ide|ring we have a more &s;trict conjunction in the Spirit with him, than ever we had in Nature with <HI>Adam?</HI> And though it be not fit to mea&s;ure Heavenly things by the Yard of rea&s;on, yet it is not unrea&s;onable that a man owing a thou&s;and pound<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, and not being able to pay it, his Creditor may be &s;atisfied by one of his Friends. <HI>In p. 196. that Excellent Pre|late hath this pa&s;&s;age</HI> So that Faith ju&s;tifieth only relatively, in re&s;pect of the Object which it <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">a&s;t|neth on; to wit, the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, by which we are justified: Faith being only the In|&s;trument to convey &s;o great a benefit unto the Soul, as the hand of the Beggar receives the Almes.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="207" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCVII.</HEAD>
<P>The oppo&s;ers of Chri&s;t's <HI>Imputed righteou&s;|ne&s;s,</HI> and of Ju&s;tification by Faith alone, on Man's part, are found Fighters not only again&s;t the Writings of the Generality of the mo&s;t emi|nent Divines of the Reformed Churches (as I have in&s;tanced in above thirty) but al&s;o again&s;t many Renowned Bi&s;hops of the Church of <HI>Eng|land,</HI> who&s;e Names and &s;ayings have been men|tioned; and not again&s;t them only, but al&s;o a|gain&s;t the <HI>Homilies,</HI> as hath been made appear by &s;everal pa&s;&s;ages alledged from thence, which are point blank again&s;t them; yea, over
<PB N="181" REF="93"> and above all that, they will appear to fight again&s;t the <HI>eleventh Article of the Church of</HI> Eng|land, &s;tiled; <HI>Of the justification of man.</HI> For that <HI>Article</HI> runs thus; <HI>We are accounted righte|ous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Je&s;us Chri&s;t, by Faith, and not for our own Works, or de&s;ervings. Wherefore that we are ju&s;ti|fied by Faith only is mo&s;t whol&s;om Doctrine, and full of comfort.</HI> Tho&s;e are the very words of the Article. By the <HI>merits</HI> of Chri&s;t doubtle&s;s are meant his Active, and Pa&s;&s;ive Obedience, or what he did and &s;uffered for Believers, in or|der to meriting and purcha&s;ing Eternal Life for them, which Obedience of our Saviour we call his <HI>righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> Now, &s;aith the Article, we are accounted Righteous before God (that is, we are ju&s;tified <HI>only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Je&s;us Christ.</HI> But, &s;aith Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> (and as many as are of his mind) we are ac|counted Righteous before God for our &s;incere Obedience to the Go&s;pel, or for our internal Holine&s;s. For, &s;aith he, <HI>p.</HI> 273. having &s;poken ju&s;t before <HI>of Internal Holine&s;s, and the confor|mity of our hearts and Lives to all moral Precepts. If this righteou&s;ne&s;s will not plea&s;e God, I &s;hould have concluded that nothing can.</HI> He goes on, and &s;aith, <HI>That Internal Holine&s;s, which they call the righteou&s;ne&s;s of the Law, is that very righte|ou&s;ne&s;s of Faith which the Go&s;pel commands, and which God approves and rewards; and this Impu|ted righteou&s;ne&s;s is no where to be found but in their own fancies.</HI> From tho&s;e words of his I Argue thus again&s;t him. A man is counted Righteous
<PB N="182" REF="94"> before God (or ju&s;tified, which is the &s;ame thing) for that which is his Righteou&s;ne&s;s, e&s;pe|cially his only Righteou&s;ne&s;s in the &s;ight of God. But according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> our only E|vangelical Righteou&s;ne&s;s in the &s;ight of God is our internal Holine&s;s, and conformity of our hearts and lives to all moral Principles, and Rules of a good life. <HI>Ergo.</HI> By our internal Holine&s;s we are counted righteous (&s;avingly) or ju&s;tified in the &s;ight of God. Imputed Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s being no where to be found that Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> knows of, but in mens own fancies, men mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be ju&s;tified by inherent Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> or without any righteou&s;ne&s;s at all. The latter cannot be, that a man &s;hould be righteous without any righte|ou&s;ne&s;s; therefore he is &s;o in the &s;ight of God, and to &s;alvation (for that we are &s;peaking of) by, and for his inherent holine&s;s, or Go&s;pel obedi|ence. And if &s;o, Then Believers are not account|ed righteous before God, only for the merit of Je&s;us Chri&s;t (as the Article &s;aith) yea &s;o far from that, that they are not counted righteous before God, &s;o much as partly, or in part, for the merit of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e their only righteou&s;|ne&s;s (according to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI>) is their internal holine&s;s, and conformity to moral Precepts. Again, If we are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, as the Article &s;aith, then we are &s;o accounted by, and for, an <HI>imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s;</HI> yea by, and for an <HI>imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> only. For there are but two ways whereby any righteou&s;ne&s;s can be
<PB N="183" REF="94"> ours: <HI>viz.</HI> either by <HI>Inherency,</HI> or by <HI>Imputation.</HI> But the merits of Je&s;us Chri&s;t are not <HI>inherent</HI> in us; therefore if they be our righteou&s;ne&s;s in the &s;ight of God, they mu&s;t be <HI>imputed</HI> to us. No|thing can be more plain than that, if we are ju|&s;tified by the righteou&s;ne&s;s of another, <HI>viz.</HI> of Chri&s;t, we are ju&s;tified by a righteou&s;ne&s;s <HI>impu|ted,</HI> and not <HI>inherent;</HI> and con&s;equently that there is &s;uch a thing as <HI>imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> el&s;e|where than in the fancies of men. Sure I am, The merits of Chri&s;t can avail us nothing, unle&s;s they be imputed, or reckoned to us; or unle&s;s God, upon the account thereof (and not of our own internal holine&s;s) do deal with us, as if we in, and of our &s;elves had been worthy of eternal life, Chri&s;t's meriting had &s;ignified nothing to us, unle&s;s he had merited for us, or with an in|tention that his merits &s;hould be put to our ac|count; as Chri&s;t's giving up him&s;elf to death, had been of no u&s;e to us, unle&s;s he had loved us, and given him&s;elf for us. If Chri&s;t's merit be not imputed to us, for the accepting of us righte|ous before God, we have no advantage by it any more than a man can have had by a plai&s;ter that was never applyed. Now they that &s;ay we are ju&s;tified only for the merit of Chri&s;t (or for the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed, which hath been prov'd to come all to one,) as &s;aith the <HI>Article</HI> of our Church, do va&s;tly differ from Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> that &s;aith we are not ju&s;tified, no not partly, by <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s;</HI> yea indeed, that there is no &s;uch thing. If his eva&s;ion &s;hould be that Chri&s;t hath merited that our &s;incere obe|dience,
<PB N="184" REF="95"> and God's acceptance thereof, in&s;tead of that which is compleat and perfect, &s;hould be the <HI>matter,</HI> and <HI>form</HI> of our ju&s;tification, or righteou&s;ne&s;s before God (which is like the Pa|pi&s;ts notion, <HI>viz.</HI> that works dyed in the blood of Chri&s;t do ju&s;tifie) I &s;ay, &s;uch a notion as that is very un&s;ound and un&s;afe. For that were to make as if Chri&s;t did give away the glory of Ju&s;tification, and Salvation to another, <HI>viz.</HI> to our <HI>Go&s;pel obedience;</HI> and died not to &s;ave us him&s;elf, but make us Saviours to our &s;elves: or had &s;aid to <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Good Works,</HI> as <HI>Joab</HI> did to <HI>David,</HI> 2 Sam. 12.27. <HI>I have fought again&s;t Rab|bab, and have taken the City of Waters. Now there|fore encamp thou again&s;t the City and take it, le&s;t I take the City, and it be called after my name.</HI> i. e. he had as good as done the work, but he would have <HI>David</HI> have the honor of it. To &s;ay that Chri&s;t merited that we might merit; (or be counted worthy of eternal life upon account of our own inherent righteou&s;ne&s;s, which is all one) is to &s;ay that Chri&s;t who merited that we &s;hould be &s;aved by his <HI>Grace,</HI> merited that we &s;hould be &s;aved by our own works, which is a contradicti|on to rea&s;on, and a turning the Covenant of Grace into a Covenant of Works. To &s;ay that Chri&s;t hath merited that our &s;incere, though im|perfect obedience to the Go&s;pel &s;hould be the righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are counted &s;avingly righteous before God; is, 1. To attribute the Pardon of our &s;ins to our own good works, (for by what we are ju&s;tified, by that we are par|doned; or by that righteou&s;ne&s;s our &s;ins are co|vered)
<PB N="185" REF="95"> now that cannot be, for our le&s;s than due obedience cannot &s;atisfie God for our di&s;obedi|ence. Or, 2. It were to make as if the imput|ing, or imputation of Chri&s;t's righteou&s;ne&s;s to Believers, would not have been &s;ufficient for their Ju&s;tification, unle&s;s that imputed Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s were caked out for that purpo&s;e by our good works, as our good works had not been &s;ufficient if they had not been taked out with the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t. Now who dares to think that for God to have reckoned what Chri&s;t had done and &s;uffered, as Mediator, to have been done and &s;uffered for us, and in our behalf, had not been &s;ufficient to have freed us from hell, and entitled us to eternal life? And if that alone be &s;ufficient, why &s;hould we think that God hath added <HI>Go&s;pel Obedience</HI> as a Part|ner with Chri&s;t in the ju&s;tification of a &s;inner; or that we are ju&s;tified partly by Chri&s;t's pa&s;&s;ive, and partly by our own active obedience? They that &s;hall venture between tho&s;e two &s;tools will fall to the ground. Far be it from us to think that Chri&s;t hath died to make a Saviour of any thing, or of any body but him&s;elf. If God need do no more than reckon to us the &s;atisfaction made to his Law, and Ju&s;tice, by Chri&s;t our <HI>Surety,</HI> as if we had made it our &s;elves, in order to his making us happy (with con&s;i&s;tence to all his Attributes) why &s;hould we think that God doth call in the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of <HI>Inherent Righteou&s;|ne&s;s,</HI> for, and towards the ju&s;tifying of a &s;inner? <HI>Fru&s;tra fit per plura.</HI> He that &s;aith, <HI>If there had been a Law that could have given Righteou&s;ne&s;s,
<PB N="186" REF="96"> verily Righteou&s;ne&s;s &s;hould have been by that Law.</HI> Would he not &s;ay that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t imputed being alone &s;ufficient for the Ju|&s;tification of a &s;inner, verily he &s;hall be ju&s;tified by that righteou&s;ne&s;s alone. <HI>Internal</HI> Righteou&s;|ne&s;s is good for many other excellent purpo&s;es, though not to be the matter of our Ju&s;tifying righteou&s;ne&s;s before God; as Gold and Silver are good for many things, though not to eat. Upon the whole matter I find Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> (and as many more as are of his mind) highly peccant again&s;t the 11th <HI>Article</HI> of our Church, as to the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition the ein contained; <HI>viz.</HI> that <HI>only for the merit of our Lord, and Saviour Chri&s;t, we are accepted righteous before God.</HI> Concerning which Mr. <HI>Rogers (the then Arch Bi&s;hops Chap|lain,</HI> and explainer of the Articles by Allow|ance) addeth, <HI>And this is the Faith, and Con|fe&s;&s;ion of all the Churches Reformed</HI> The 2d Pro|po&s;ition contained in the 11th Article, according to Mr. <HI>Rogers</HI> his divi&s;ion of it, is this, <HI>Only by Faith are we accounted righteous before God.</HI> This branch of the Article &s;eems to hold forth how, and by what means we become intere&s;&s;ed in the merit of Chri&s;t, for which alone we are count|ed righteous before God, <HI>viz</HI> by <HI>Faith.</HI> But Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> contradicteth that fir&s;t A&s;&s;ertion two ways: 1. By &s;aying in effect that we are ju&s;tified as truly, and as much, by <HI>Repentance, Love,</HI> and e|very other Grace, as by <HI>Faith.</HI> For he makes <HI>Faith</HI> to be the Sum, and Sub&s;tance of all Graces, as if every grace were <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Faith</HI> were all graces in one. 2. By &s;aying that we are
<PB N="187" REF="96"> ju&s;tified or accounted righteous before God not only by <HI>Faith,</HI> but al&s;o by <HI>Good Works,</HI> which he calls <HI>Faith,</HI> or the <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith,</HI> witne&s;s, <HI>Sh.</HI> p. 273. where he &s;aith, <HI>That in|ternal Holine&s;s,</HI> which they call the Righteou&s;|ne&s;s of the Law, is that very righteou&s;ne&s;s of <HI>Faith</HI> which the Go&s;pel commands. Now that Internal Holine&s;s, <HI>he calls a conformity of heart and life to the Moral Precepts,</HI> which making to be the &s;ame thing with <HI>Faith,</HI> he &s;trongly confounds <HI>Faith</HI> and <HI>Good Works,</HI> and makes them both one. In &s;o doing he contradicteth the third Propo&s;ition contained in the Article which I am &s;peaking of; <HI>viz.</HI> that <HI>we are count|ed righteous before God not for our own works, or de&s;ervings.</HI> In which words there is a manife&s;t oppo&s;ition made betwixt <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Good Works,</HI> which Mr. <HI>Sh</HI> would have us take for one and the &s;ame thing. He makes as if <HI>Faith,</HI> and <HI>Good Works</HI> are all one, and &s;o brings in Works into Ju&s;tification; whereas the Article not only di|&s;tingui&s;heth, but oppo&s;eth them, and &s;o ex|cludes <HI>Works</HI> from Ju&s;tification. He that with reference to what hath been objected, can re|concile Mr. <HI>Sh</HI>'s. Tenets of Ju&s;tification to the 11th <HI>Article</HI> of our Church, <HI>erit mihi Magnus Apollo.</HI> Now that the World may be &s;ure that I have not mi&s;taken the &s;en&s;e and meaning of the Church in this their 11th <HI>Article,</HI> I appeal to the <HI>Homilies</HI> before cited; and who knows not that the Homilies are the mo&s;t genuine, and au|thentick Comment upon the Articles? (as the Prophets of the Old Te&s;tament were upon the
<PB N="188" REF="97"> five Books of <HI>Mo&s;es.</HI>) and doubtle&s;s as the <HI>Homilies</HI> have &s;tated the Doctrine of Ju&s;tificati|on; &s;o the Article intended it. And therefore who&s;oever contradicts the <HI>Homilies</HI> in the point of Ju&s;tification (as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> has done abundant|ly) mu&s;t contradict the <HI>Articles</HI> al&s;o. After all this, I can hardly forbear to put forth &s;uch a Que|gion to Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> as <HI>Dalilah</HI> did to <HI>Samp&s;on, Now tell me, I pray thee, wherewith thou mighte&s;t be bound?</HI> Judg. 15.10. If neither the general cur|rent of Orthodox, and Famous Divines of the Reformed Churches; nor the unanimous con|&s;ent of many renowned Bi&s;hops of the Church of <HI>England;</HI> nor the <HI>Homilies;</HI> nor the <HI>Arti|cles</HI> of our Church; nor all together, can hold you; <HI>tell me, I pray thee, wherewith thou may&s;t be bound, and wherein thy great &s;trength lieth.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="208" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Con&s;idering how great, and manifold an inter|e&s;t the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, which can be ours only by <HI>Imputation,</HI> has been proved to have in the bu&s;ine&s;s of ju&s;tifying a &s;inner before God, their <HI>error, &s;in,</HI> and <HI>pre&s;umption</HI> mu&s;t needs be great, who &s;et them&s;elves to oppo&s;e that righ|teou&s;ne&s;s, and the imputation of it. For it hath been proved that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, is the <HI>material cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tification, or the <HI>matter</HI> of our Righteou&s;ne&s;s before God; or that Righteou&s;ne&s;s by which, and with which, and upon the account of which believers are ju&s;tified in God's &s;ight. Al&s;o, that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Meritorious cau&s;e</HI> of our Ju&s;tificati|on, or that Righteou&s;ne&s;s for which, or for the
<PB N="189" REF="97"> &s;ake of which, and by the merit and de&s;ert of which, Believers have their &s;ins pardoned, and are accepted righteous to eternal life. It hath al&s;o been proved that the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is the <HI>Formal cau&s;e</HI> of Ju&s;tification, if con|&s;idered as <HI>imputed,</HI> or that the <HI>imputation</HI> of Chri&s;t his Righteou&s;ne&s;s is &s;o; not that Believ|ers are <HI>formally</HI> righteous with the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, as a wi&s;e man is formally wi&s;e by his inherent wi&s;dome; but for that they are as effect|ually &s;aved from Hell, and accepted to eternal life upon account of what Chri&s;t hath done, and &s;uffered for them, (which I call his Righteou&s;|ne&s;s) as if they had a perfect compleat Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s inherent in them&s;elves (whereby they were formally righteous to the &s;tricte&s;t &s;en&s;e) with which to appear before God. I have al&s;o proved the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t to be the great <HI>Object</HI> of that Faith which has been &s;aid to be the <HI>In&s;trumental</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification, and that Faith is &s;aid to ju&s;tifie us only <HI>correlatively</HI> unto Chri&s;t Crucified, Chri&s;t fulfilling all righ|teou&s;ne&s;s for us, who&s;e righteou&s;ne&s;s is appre|hended, accepted, and applyed by Faith alone. That the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t is al&s;o the <HI>Pro|catarctical</HI> cau&s;e of our Ju&s;tification, or the great cau&s;e which doth move God, <HI>ab extra</HI> (or from without him&s;elf) in oppo&s;ition to the <HI>proegume|nal,</HI> or inwardly moving cau&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> the Love, and good Will of God) to ju&s;tifie &s;inners; For thereunto is God moved by what Je&s;us Chri&s;t hath done, and &s;uffered for them. <HI>Forgiving one another (&s;aith the Apo&s;tle) even as God for
<PB N="190" REF="98"> Chri&s;t's &s;ake hath forgiven you,</HI> Eph. 4.32. La&s;t|ly, From what hath been &s;aid may al&s;o be ga|thered that the exalting, or magnifying of the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, or that the Infi|nite &s;ufficiency, worth, and dignity of the Sa|crifice and Satisfaction of Chri&s;t, and that the infinite Love and Mercy of God in providing &s;uch a Sacrifice, and &s;uch a righteou&s;ne&s;s for &s;in|ners, might be made known to the World. I &s;ay, that is one of the great <HI>Ends,</HI> or <HI>Final cau&s;es</HI> of God's ju&s;tifying a believing Sinner. Wit|ne&s;s <HI>Eph.</HI> 2.7. <HI>That in the Ages to come he might &s;hew the exceeding riches of his Grace, in his kind|ne&s;s towards us through Christ Je&s;us.</HI></P>
<P>The righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t being thus upon the matter all in all, in the bu&s;ine&s;s of <HI>Ju&s;tifi|cation,</HI> not only the <HI>material,</HI> but the <HI>formal,</HI> the <HI>Procatarctical,</HI> the <HI>meritorious,</HI> the <HI>Final</HI> cau&s;e of Ju&s;tification (under &s;everal notions and con|&s;iderations) it will follow that they who deny <HI>Imputed</HI> righteou&s;ne&s;s, and con&s;equently the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, which is thereby in|tended, do lay the Ax of their Error, to the very root of the Doctrine of <HI>Ju&s;tification</HI> (al|mo&s;t the greate&s;t Doctrine in all Chri&s;tianity) and do threaten to cut it down, both Root and Branch. For take away the <HI>Material, Formal, Meritorious, Procatarctical, Final,</HI> and <HI>In&s;tru|mental</HI> cau&s;es of Ju&s;tification (for if the <HI>object</HI> of Faith, <HI>viz.</HI> the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t be taken away, the <HI>Act</HI> mu&s;t needs cea&s;e; and &s;o <HI>Faith,</HI> the <HI>In&s;trument</HI> of Ju&s;tification, mu&s;t fall to the ground.) I &s;ay, take away all the&s;e cau&s;es
<PB N="191" REF="98"> of <HI>Ju&s;tification,</HI> and what will remain? Scarce &s;o much as were the remains of <HI>Jezebel, whom when they went to bury,</HI> 2 King. 9.35. <HI>they &s;ound no more of her than the skul and the feet, and the palms of her hands, &s;o that</HI> (as it was Prophe|&s;ied by <HI>Elijah) they &s;hall not &s;ay this is</HI> Jezebel; that is, they &s;hould not know her to be the &s;ame; or to allude to what is &s;aid of <HI>Dagon,</HI> in 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 5.4. <HI>And the Head of</HI> Dagon, <HI>and both the palms of his Hands were cut off upon the Thre&s;hold, only the stump of</HI> Dagon <HI>was left to him.</HI> So the op|po&s;ers of Chri&s;t's imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s do leave &s;carce &s;o much as a &s;tump of the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification.</P>
<P>And as it was &s;aid of <HI>Dagon,</HI> that he was fal|len upon his Face to the ground, &s;o the Adver|&s;aries of <HI>Imputed</HI> righteou&s;ne&s;s have laid the Doctrine of Ju&s;tification flat upon its face, (as it were) &s;o that according to them we cannot know it to be what it is, or &s;ay, <HI>This is ju&s;tifi|cation.</HI> The righteou&s;ne&s;s whereby we are <HI>ju|&s;tified,</HI> and wherewith we are <HI>&s;anctified</HI> are &s;o confounded, and made one and the &s;ame, the <HI>Covenant of Works,</HI> and the <HI>Covenant of Grace</HI> made &s;o like each other, as to differ but in de|gree; one exacting a perfect, the other accep|ting an imperfect, &s;incere Obedience for our &s;a|ving righteou&s;ne&s;s before God, <HI>Prote&s;tant,</HI> and <HI>Popi&s;h</HI> Doctrine &s;o blended, or rather <HI>Prote&s;tan|ti&s;m</HI> (or what is &s;o called) &s;o conform'd to <HI>Po+pery,</HI> &s;o many of the main cau&s;es of <HI>Ju&s;t fication</HI> de&s;troy'd at once; Ju&s;tification &s;o dwindled a|way to almo&s;t nothing to what had wont to be
<PB N="192" REF="99"> made of it, that we are in no &s;mall danger of becoming more corrupt than the Papi&s;ts them|&s;elves in the great Doctrine of Ju&s;tification: If the Enemies of Chri&s;t's imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s &s;hall proceed at &s;uch a rate as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> has be|gun.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="209" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCIX.</HEAD>
<P>One good way to be e&s;tabli&s;hed in the Doct|rine of Chri&s;t's imputed righteou&s;ne&s;s, and pre|&s;erved from the damnable errors afore&s;aid (for &s;o I mu&s;t call them) is to take heed how we deny the <HI>Imputation,</HI> or at lea&s;twi&s;e the <HI>Infect|ion</HI> and <HI>Inherency</HI> of <HI>Original &s;in.</HI> Be e&s;tabli&s;h|ed in the belief of imputed &s;in, and you will never &s;tagger at the Doctrine of <HI>Imputed righ|teou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> For who ever did deny the latter who did not fir&s;t doubt the former? Now, the In|fection or pollution of our Natures by Original Sin, me thinks is evident from this Argument, and Con&s;ideration among&s;t others. If we were not born in &s;in, and Conceived in Iniquity, we &s;hould have an indifferency to good or evil, no more propen&s;ion to evil than to good, we &s;hould be as ductile, and pliable to what is good, as to what is evil, con&s;equently, as we had more incentives from without, more inducements, more advantages, more helps and conduce|ments to one than to the other, we &s;hould clo&s;e with that, whether good, or evil. As a man that walks abroad for his plea&s;ure, being per|fectly indifferent which way he walks, Ea&s;t, or We&s;t; let a Friend come and de&s;ire him to go
<PB N="193" REF="99"> with him Ea&s;tward or We&s;tward, that way that he de&s;ires him to go with him he will go, be|cau&s;e before he was perfectly indifferent which way he went. He was like a pair of Scales han|ging in <HI>aequilibrio,</HI> in an equipoi&s;e, if but a grain or two be ca&s;t into either of them pre&s;ently that Scale is turned; I &s;ay, the Scale is pre&s;ently turned on that &s;ide, becau&s;e before they were ju&s;t even. So would it be with Men were they like to two even Scales, as to good and evil, nei|ther of which did in the lea&s;t preponderate (as they would Naturally be if their were no pollu|tion by Original Sin) the lea&s;t grain, or mo|ment of rea&s;on, and of inducement ca&s;t in on either &s;ide would cau&s;e the Scale to turn on that &s;ide, had they ever &s;o little more of Example, Coun&s;el, Encouragement, Intere&s;t, or other Inducement to be, and to do good, than to be, and to do evil; they would certainly be, and do that which were good. But woful Experience tells us that it often proves quite otherwi&s;e. For how many Children have we &s;een and known, who&s;e Parents from their very Child-hood have taken all po&s;&s;ible care to ingage them in, and for the wayes of God, &s;etting excellent Example before them, and &s;uffering them to &s;ee no other, giving them the be&s;t Coun&s;el they could, &s;hew|ing them what was good, and what was not; the ugline&s;s and danger of &s;in, the beauty and profitablene&s;s of Holine&s;s, threatning and ter|rifying them in ca&s;e they did ami&s;s; yea, cor|recting of them now, and then, incouraging them by large promi&s;es if they did well, and by
<PB N="194" REF="100"> frequent great rewards as oft as they found them well doing, giving them the be&s;t books to read, the be&s;t Company to keep, watching over them continually; and yet after all this, tho&s;e Chil|dren, or &s;ome of them, have betaken them&s;elvs to ill cour&s;es, and run into all exce&s;s of riot, though Parents have done all that ever they could to keep down the Weeds of Sin, and to &s;ow and cheri&s;h the Seeds of Virtue and good|ne&s;s in them from time to time. If &s;uch Chil|dren had not been Naturally propen&s;e to evil, and aver&s;e to good, or propen&s;e to evil, and not to good, upon all tho&s;e helps and advantages un|to being good, they certainly have prov'd &s;o: It was therefore doubtle&s;s the Corruption of their Natures (otherwi&s;e caller <HI>Original</HI> &s;in) which made them break all tho&s;e bonds, and ca&s;t all tho&s;e Cords from them, which would otherwi&s;e have held them to the performance of their Duty, and unto keeping Con&s;ciences void of offence towards God and Men. Never tell me that any man hath as much mind to do one thing as another, when a hundred times &s;o much per&s;wa&s;ion cannot prevail upon him to do the one, as will prevail upon him to do the o|ther. When Scales are even, a few grains ad|ded to either of them, will cau&s;e that &s;ide to turn, and to weigh down: but where it is &s;o that many <HI>Ounces,</HI> and <HI>Pounds</HI> will not cau&s;e one of the Scales to out-weigh the other, 'tis mo&s;t certain they are not even, but one Scale doth much preponderate the other. Where ground is plain and level, the way backward
<PB N="795" REF="100"> and forward are both alike ea&s;ie, but when it is hard to go, and ea&s;ie to come back, is a &s;ign the ground is Hilly and uneven. Finding therefore that the doing of good is to men Naturally dif|ficult and unea&s;ie like going up a &s;teep Hill, and that to do evil is ea&s;ie to men, like coming down the Hill; 'tis manife&s;t that the Nature of man is not indifferent to good and evil, but aver&s;e to good, and propen&s;e to evil. When Men pre|&s;ume to deny a thing &s;o evident in the &s;ight of Experience, as is the pollution of our Natures by Original &s;in, becau&s;e they cannot &s;atisfie them&s;elves touching the way and manner how it it is conveyed (as if men &s;hould deny that the River <HI>Nilus</HI> ever had any &s;treams, or that there was ever &s;uch a River, becau&s;e they could ne|ver find out it's Head) no wonder if they make bold al&s;o to deny what they never &s;aw, and felt (as they love done the other) <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Imputed</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Je&s;us Chri&s;t. On the other hand, who&s;oever is duly &s;en&s;ible of the great pollution of his <HI>Nature,</HI> as well as of his <HI>Life,</HI> and of Original depravation as well as of de|filement by actual &s;ins, will cry out for the Robe of Chri&s;t's Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s to cover his manifold defects and deformities, and never dare to tru&s;t to &s;uch filthy rags as he finds his own Righteou&s;ne&s;s to be.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="210" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCX.</HEAD>
<P>There is &s;o great a connection betwixt the Doctrine of Chri&s;t's <HI>Satisfaction,</HI> and that of <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> and &s;o great a depend|ance
<PB N="196" REF="101"> of the latter upon the former, that who|&s;oever is hearty and &s;tedfa&s;t in the belief of Chri&s;t's <HI>Satisfaction,</HI> or having made attonement and expiation for the &s;ins of Believers by his blood, mu&s;t either not under&s;tand <HI>Con&s;equences,</HI> or he hearty al&s;o in the belief of the Mediato|ry <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;s</HI> of Chri&s;t it's being <HI>Imputed</HI> to Believers, and their being ju&s;tified before God upon that account, God looking upon them as having &s;atisfied his Ju&s;tice though not in their own Per&s;ons, yet in, and by Chri&s;t their <HI>Sure|ty,</HI> and therefore pronouncing them di&s;charged from guilt and righteous to Eternal Life. If Chri&s;t's Satisfaction be accepted of God for be|lievers, and they accepted with God upon ac|count thereof, then is his Satisfaction, or Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s <HI>Imputed</HI> to them, for that is the mean|ing of <HI>Imputed,</HI> as I have el&s;e-where explained. But if Chri&s;t's Satisfaction be not accepted of God for believers, or they accepted with God for it, then they are never the better for it, they have no real benefit and advantage by it. If a man pay a thou&s;and pounds to another man's Creditor, to whom he owes as much as that comes to, but never tells him, that he pays that mony on behalf of that other man, or would have him look'd upon to be now out of Debt, and to have given Satisfaction by his hand, I &s;ay, if &s;uch a thing he not expre&s;&s;ed, he to who&s;e Creditor that thou&s;and pounds was paid, &s;hall be never the better for it. Let to man take the boldne&s;s to deny <HI>Imputed</HI> Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, or the Imputation of Chri&s;t's Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s
<PB N="197" REF="101"> to Believers, till he hath fir&s;t acquired the impudence to deny the &s;atisfaction of Chri&s;t al&s;o. For he that denies the former, do's by <HI>con&s;equence</HI> (that is, in a mask and vizard) de|ny the latter al&s;o, which vi&s;ibly, and with open face he is a&s;hamed, or afraid to do.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="211" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCXI.</HEAD>
<P>The apprehen&s;ion of approaching Death o|pens almo&s;t every man's eyes that profe&s;&s;eth him&s;elf a Chri&s;tian, to &s;ee the nece&s;&s;ity of an <HI>Im|puted Righteou&s;ne&s;s,</HI> even theirs who were ready to deride it whil&s;t they lookt upon the evil day as far off. Bp. <HI>Dounam,</HI> in his book of <HI>Ju&s;tifica|tion,</HI> p. 2003. tells us, <HI>Many who have lived Pa|pi&s;ts, have in this mo&s;t weighty point died Reformed Catholicks. And to this purpo&s;e</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>there is extant among&s;t them in divers Books, a Form of vi&s;iting the &s;ick, wherein both the Pa&s;tor is direct|ed what to &s;ay, and the &s;ick per&s;on what to an&s;wer. The Pa&s;tor therefore having demanded the&s;e Que&s;ti|ons. Brother, Do&s;t thou rejoyce that thou &s;halt die in the Faith? Dost thou confe&s;s that thou ha&s;t not liv'd &s;o well as thou oughte&s;t? Doth it repent thee? Ha&s;t thou a will to repent if thou had&s;t &s;pace of life? Do&s;t thou believe that our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t died for thee? Do&s;t thou believe that thou can&s;t not be &s;aved but by his death? And having received af|firmative an&s;wers to every Que&s;tion, he inforceth this Exhortation, that while his &s;oul remaineth in him, he &s;hould place his whole affiance in the death of Chri&s;t, and in no other thing: and that if God will judge him, if he &s;hall &s;ay unto him, Thou art a
<PB N="198" REF="102"> &s;inner, that thou ha&s;t de&s;erved damnation, that he is angry with thee, he &s;hould &s;ay; O Lord, I inter|po&s;e the death of thy Son between me and thy judg|ment, between my &s;ins and thee, between me and my bad de&s;erts, between me and thine anger.</HI> So <HI>Quae|&s;tiones authore An&s;elmo morientibus proponi &s;olitae per univer&s;um Chri&s;tianum orbem.</HI> Bp. <HI>&V;&s;her,</HI> de Succe&s;&s;. <HI>p.</HI> 194. <HI>&amp; Re&s;pen&s;io ad Je&s;uitam,</HI> p. 513. <HI>Chemnitius his Examin,</HI> part. 1. p. 243. <HI>Card. Ho&s;ij Confe&s;&s;. Petricovien&s;.</HI> c. 74. fol. 143. &amp;c. In the Edition Printed at <HI>Venice,</HI> there are the&s;e two Que&s;tions. <HI>Do&s;t thou believe that thou &s;halt come to glory, not by thy own merits, but by the virtue, and merit of Chri&s;t's pa&s;&s;ion?</HI> And a little after, <HI>Do&s;t thou believe that our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t died for our Salvation, and that no man can be &s;aved by his own merits, or by any other means but by the merit of his pa&s;&s;ion? unto both which an Affirmative An|&s;wer was made. Sic ordo baptizandi cum modo vi&s;i|tandi, Impre&s;&s;. Venete. Anno</HI> 1575. <HI>fol.</HI> 34. See <HI>Perkins</HI> his <HI>Reformed Catholick</HI> p. 276. Surely the truth of that Doctrine is much to be que&s;ti|oned, in which Papi&s;ts them&s;elves, though they in&s;truct people the greate&s;t part of their <HI>life time,</HI> yet dare not but teach them otherwi&s;e when they come to die.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="212" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCXII.</HEAD>
<P>Many have decry'd Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s, and profe&s;&s;ed to expect Salvation, or Ju&s;tificati|on, only by that righteou&s;ne&s;s which in <HI>Inherent</HI> in them&s;elves, who yet have really and in good earne&s;t had no <HI>Inherent</HI> Righteou&s;ne&s;s to pre|tend
<PB N="199" REF="102"> to. In this number were the Phari&s;es of old, who &s;eemed to think them&s;elves whole and not to &s;tand to need of Chri&s;t for their Phy&s;itian, and yet God knows they were far from being &s;o. For whil&s;t they pai'd tithe of Mint, and Anni&s;e, and Cummin, they omitted the weigh|tier matters of the Law; Judgment, Mercy, and Faith: Whereupon Chri&s;t cryed out, <HI>Woe unto you Scribes, and Phari&s;ees Hypocrites,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Mat.</HI> 23.23. &amp; <HI>Luke</HI> 20.47. Chri&s;t &s;peaks thus of them: <HI>Which devour Widdows hou&s;es, and for a preten&s;e make long Prayers.</HI> The Scribes, and Pha|ri&s;ees were great contemners of Chri&s;t's Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, and pretendedly confident of their own, <HI>God I thank thee</HI> (&s;aid the Phari&s;ee) <HI>that I am not as other men are, or as this Publican: I fa&s;t twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I po&s;&s;e&s;s.</HI> They boa&s;ted much of their own Righteou&s;ne&s;s; they were they <HI>who ju&s;tified them&s;elves before men,</HI> but in the mean time, bring &s;uch as they were, they could not chu&s;e but know that they had in|deed, and in truth no Righteou&s;ne&s;s to boa&s;t of.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="213" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCXIII.</HEAD>
<P>'Tis vehemently to be &s;u&s;pected that &s;ome men have made &s;o much the higher pretences unto being ju&s;tified by their own Righteou&s;ne&s;s becau&s;e they knew they had no Righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own whereby to be Ju&s;tified; &s;o that their &s;o doing was but a meer cloak, colour, and covert for their unrighteou&s;ne&s;s: as who &s;hould &s;ay, No man will &s;u&s;pect us to be unrighteous, or ungodly (though we know our &s;elves &s;o to
<PB N="200" REF="103"> be) &s;o long as we bear the world in hand that we have &s;uch confidence of our own Righteou&s;|ne&s;s, that we expect, and de&s;ire no other Righ|teou&s;ne&s;s to Ju&s;tifie us, that we need not fly for refuge (as others do) to that which they call <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> As they who have no beauty, think them&s;elves mo&s;t concern'd to <HI>paint,</HI> thereby to conceal, and cover their de|formities; &s;o they are mo&s;t prone to pretend to a Righteou&s;ne&s;s of their own, who have not the &s;hadow of &s;uch a Righteou&s;ne&s;s to pretend to. A worthy Divine was heard to &s;ay, in his time, That <HI>he would not for a thou&s;and pounds have been ignorant of the Lives and Conver&s;ations of men who&s;e manner it was to cry down the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t Imputed, and to cry up their own Inherent Righteou&s;ne&s;s. For</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>I might po&s;&s;ibly have been drawn into the &s;ame Error with them, if I had found their lives exactly good, but what I have known by them, or &s;everal of them, has perfectly de|livered me, &s;aith he, from that temptation.</HI> He thought he had found the emptie&s;t barrels in that re&s;pect, to give the greate&s;t &s;ound. It &s;eems to be a maxime among&s;t &s;ome men, that The le&s;s they are what is good and excellent in truth and in reality, the more they ought to &s;eem or to appear to be &s;o.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="214" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCXIV.</HEAD>
<P>There is hardly any one thing repre&s;ented in, and by the word of God, more dangerous and fatal, or de&s;tructive to the &s;ouls of men and wo|men, than to tru&s;t, or to have tru&s;ted to their
<PB N="201" REF="103"> own righteou&s;ne&s;s, and not to the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, which put to a believers account is call'd <HI>Imputed Righteou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> I wi&s;h that a few texts to that purpo&s;e might be well weighed by Mr. <HI>Sherlock,</HI> and others, <HI>viz. Rom.</HI> 9.33. <HI>Rom.</HI> 10.3. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.10. <HI>Gal.</HI> 5.2, 4. <HI>Rom.</HI> 11.6. <HI>But I&s;rael, which followed after the Law of righteou&s;|ne&s;s, hath not attained to the Law of righteou&s;ne&s;s. Wherefore? Becau&s;e they &s;ought it not by Faith, but as it were by the works of the Law; for they &s;tumb|led at that &s;tumbling &s;tone,</HI> (viz. <HI>at Chri&s;t, and at the way of Ju&s;tification, and Salvation by him.) For</HI> (Rom. 10.3.) <HI>They being ignorant of God's righ|teou&s;ne&s;s; and going about to e&s;tabli&s;h their own righteou&s;ne&s;s, have not &s;ubmitted them&s;elves to the righteou&s;ne&s;s of God.</HI> v. 4. <HI>For Chri&s;t is the end of the Law for righteou&s;ne&s;s to every one that believ|eth.</HI> See al&s;o <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.10. <HI>For as many as are of the works of the Law (i. e.</HI> as expect to be ju&s;tified by the works of the Law) <HI>are under the Cur&s;e. Cur&s;ed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the Law to do them.</HI> Now it is the Moral Law that is here &s;poken of, and of which he &s;aith, <HI>v.</HI> 11. <HI>But that no man is ju&s;tified by the Law in the &s;ight of God is evident, for the Ju&s;t &s;hall live by Faith.</HI> See al&s;o <HI>Gal.</HI> 5.4. <HI>Chri&s;t is become of none effect to you, who&s;oever of you are ju&s;tified by the law, ye are fallen from grace.</HI> That he cannot be ju&s;tified by the grace of God, who expects to be ju&s;tified by his own works (&amp; if not by grace then not at all) &s;eems evident as from the forementioned Texts, &s;o likewi&s;e from <HI>Rom.</HI> 11.6. <HI>And if by Grace, then it is no
<PB N="202" REF="104"> more of Works: otherwi&s;e Grace is no more Grace: But if it be of Works, then it is no more Grace: Otherwi&s;e Work is no more Work.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="215" TYPE="thesis">
<HEAD>CCXV.</HEAD>
<P>The danger of going about to e&s;tabli&s;h our own Righteou&s;ne&s;s in point of Ju&s;tification being re|pre&s;ented &s;o very great, tho&s;e Doctrines are vehemently to be &s;u&s;pected which look that way, as leading towards an Error: to which, what <HI>Solomon</HI> &s;aith of a Harlot, may be allu|&s;ively applyed, <HI>Proverbs</HI> 7.27. <HI>Her Hou&s;e is the way to Hell, going down to the Chambers of Death.</HI> As al&s;o what is &s;aid <HI>Proverbs</HI> 9.18. <HI>He knoweth not that the dead are there, and that her Gue&s;ts are in the depth of Hell.</HI> I &s;ay, con&s;idering that, of this Error, as of the Strang Woman; it may be &s;o &s;aid, the &s;afe&s;t way will be to take that coun&s;el concerning it, that <HI>Solomon</HI> gives concerning the <HI>path of the Wicked,</HI> and <HI>the way of Evil Men,</HI> Prov. 4.14, 15. <HI>Enter not into it, avoid it, pa&s;s not by it, turn from it, and pa&s;s away.</HI></P>
<P>Whil&s;t we are all &s;ubject to Error (as we &s;hall be in this life) it will be our wi&s;dome, if we mu&s;t Err at all, to be &s;ure to Err on the &s;afe&s;t &s;ide, where we &s;hall not en|danger being burned our &s;elves, for razing the Foundation; but only having our work burned, for building Hay, and Stubble up|on it. Now certainly it is better to a&s;cribe too much to the Grace of God, and to the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t, than too little; and
<PB N="203" REF="104"> to attributte too little to our own Works, and Righteou&s;ne&s;s, than too much. But I hope I have done neither.</P>
<P>'Tis &s;afer venturing to Err with <HI>Puritans,</HI> &s;uch of them as have been great A&s;&s;ertors of Ju&s;tification by the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;t <HI>Imputed,</HI> than to Err with <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> who u&s;e to oppo&s;e it in their Health, though ma|ny of them have owned it upon their Death|beds.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="discourse">
<PB N="205" REF="105" MS="y">
<HEAD><HI>OF ACQUAINTANCE WITH THE PERSON of CHRIST:</HI> That there is &s;uch a Thing, and that it is most de&s;ireable.</HEAD>
<P>_THat we &s;hould not, or need not ac|quaint our &s;elves with the <HI>Law,</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t, as well as with his <HI>Per&s;on;</HI> or that we ought to ac|quaint our &s;elves with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, over, and above what is revealed concerning it in his Go&s;pel, are two A&s;&s;ertions that, to the be&s;t of my knowledg, did never drop from the Mouth, or Pen, of any man that I have heard, or read: But that we ought to be acquainted not only with the <HI>Law,</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t, but al&s;o with his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> is a great, and manife&s;t Truth, which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> do's not only &s;eem to doubt of, but laughs to &s;corn; at lea&s;twi&s;e (which comes all to one) derides tho&s;e <HI>(ad nau&s;eam u&s;que)</HI> who make any preten&s;ions thereunto.</P>
<PB N="204" REF="105">
<P><HI>To know Chri&s;t</HI> (&s;aith Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> p. 37.) <HI>is to un|der&s;tand the Declaration which he hath made of God's Will to the World; that is, the Go&s;pel which he Preached.</HI></P>
<P>This he Writes <HI>Exclu&s;ively,</HI> as if that were the only knowledge of Chri&s;t which any man ought to &s;eek after, and what&s;oever more than that any man pretended to were but meer fancy and delu&s;ion. In p. 32. he &s;aith, <HI>God was &s;een in Chri&s;t. He that hath &s;een me hath &s;een my Fa|ther, that is, in plain words, the will of God was plainly declar'd to the World by Chri&s;t.</HI> In p. 37. Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath the&s;e words. <HI>After this plain ac|count wherein the knowledge of Chri&s;t con&s;i&s;ts</HI> (on which he had &s;pent about twelve pages) <HI>the &s;um of which is that to know Christ is to un|der&s;tand his Go&s;pel, which contains all tho&s;e Reve|lations which he made of God's Will.</HI> Now, if that be the &s;um total of all the knowledge of Chri&s;t, <HI>viz. To under&s;tand all the Revelations which he hath made of God's Will,</HI> then to know his <HI>Per&s;on</HI> is no part of that acquaintance with Chri&s;t which we ought to pre&s;s after. If Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> had &s;aid that the &s;um of our knowledge of Chri&s;t is to know his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> and that, after a long Di&s;cour&s;e of <HI>Acquaintance with Chri&s;t,</HI> and wherein it did con&s;i&s;t, you would, and ju&s;t|ly might have charged him with rejecting Ac|quaintance with the <HI>Laws,</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t. But you have never found (nor I believe ever &s;hall) Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> &s;o gro&s;s, and erroneous as that would amount to. In p. 38. he &s;aith, that tho&s;e words, <HI>Col.</HI> 2.3. <HI>In him dwell all the trea&s;ures of
<PB N="206" REF="106"> Wi&s;dom and knowledge, are meant of the Doctrines and Revelations of Chri&s;t.</HI> But why ought we not rather to under&s;tand them of his <HI>Per&s;on?</HI> When it is &s;aid, <HI>Col.</HI> 2.9. <HI>In him,</HI> that is, in Chri&s;t, <HI>dwelleth all the fulne&s;s of the God-head bo|dily;</HI> and to like purpo&s;e, <HI>Col.</HI> 1.19. Ought we not to apply it to his <HI>Per&s;on?</HI> When it is &s;aid, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 68.18. <HI>Thou ha&s;t received gifts for men that the Lord might dwell among&s;t them;</HI> is it not to be under&s;tood of his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> not of his <HI>Doctrines and Revelations?</HI> Why then may not, <HI>Col.</HI> 2.3. be al&s;o meant of the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, e&s;pecially con&s;idering tho&s;e two Texts, <HI>viz.</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.24. <HI>Chri&s;t the Power of God, and the Wi&s;dom of God,</HI> and v. 24. <HI>Of him are ye in Chri&s;t Je&s;us, who of God is made to us Wi&s;dom,</HI> &amp;c. both which Texts mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be intended of the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t. He di&s;covereth his incon&s;i&s;t|ency with him&s;elf in drawing a whole <HI>Scheme of Divinity,</HI> &s;uch as him&s;elf approveth, and after that &s;aying; p. 86. l. <HI>ult. All this we learn from our Acquaintance with Chri&s;t his Per&s;on.</HI> If there be no &s;uch thing how comes he to draw a <HI>Scheme</HI> of Divinity after his own heart from thence? (of which he tells us again, p. 96.) But afterwards he in&s;inuates that Acquaintance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t is a kind of <HI>materia prima,</HI> capable of all Forms, or a No&s;e of wax, that may be turned every way, or a Foundation on which we may build what we plea&s;e, as well Error, as Truth; Truth, as Error, whereas I had thought the old Rule had been true, <HI>viz. Po&s;ito uno ab&s;urdo &s;equuntur Mille,</HI> or that no|thing
<PB N="207" REF="106"> but ab&s;urdities can well be founded upon ab&s;urdities, but he it &s;hould &s;eem can bring <HI>a clean thing out of an unclean,</HI> and cau&s;e Truth to be born of Error, his own &s;uppo&s;edly Orthodox <HI>Scheme of Divinity</HI> to be founded upon the noti|on of <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Christ;</HI> for he &s;aith, p. 97. <HI>I must advi&s;e them to quit this way, as the which will &s;erve others as well as them|&s;elves.</HI> It is the Doctrine of Acquaintance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t that he would have men quit, but that he is greatly to blame for giving men that advice, I &s;hall forthwith prove, <HI>viz.</HI> by the following Arguments.</P>
<P N="1">1. If Je&s;us Chri&s;t be a <HI>Per&s;on</HI> then we ought to be acquainted with his <HI>Per&s;on</HI> (for we ought to acquaint our &s;elves with what Chri&s;t is, &s;o far as po&s;&s;ibly we can.) But Je&s;us Chri&s;t is a <HI>Per&s;on.</HI> If Chri&s;t be not a Per&s;on there cannot be three Per&s;ons in the God-head, for they that own a Trinity in Unity, do all own Chri&s;t to be one (and the &s;econd) <HI>Per&s;on</HI> in the God-head, and if he were not one there were but two.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Chri&s;t is the expre&s;s Image of his Fathers Per&s;on,</HI> Heb. 1.3.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Name Chri&s;t is but &s;eldome in all the Bible put for the <HI>Church,</HI> and it is but &s;eldome put for the <HI>Law and Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t,</HI> and though you are plea&s;ed to &s;ay, p. 4. <HI>That Chri&s;t is Ori|ginally the Name of an Office, which the Jews call the</HI> Me&s;&s;ias, <HI>or one anointed by God:</HI> Yet 'tis mo&s;t certain that it is not in any one in&s;tance of Scrip|ture the name of an <HI>Office.</HI> Now, there being but one more &s;ignification of the word Chri&s;t,
<PB N="208" REF="107"> according to you, in all the Bible, <HI>viz. A Per|&s;on inve&s;ted with an Office,</HI> p. 8. That mu&s;t needs be the u&s;ual, and general &s;ignification of the word <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI> Now, an <HI>Office</HI> is one thing, and an <HI>Officer</HI> is another thing, if <HI>ab&s;tracts,</HI> and <HI>con|crets,</HI> be not the &s;ame thing, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> if it be one thing to be <HI>wi&s;e,</HI> and another thing to be <HI>wi&s;dom</HI> it &s;elf, or to be <HI>good,</HI> and to be <HI>goodne&s;s</HI> it &s;elf. If then the name <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> doth &s;ignifie a <HI>Per&s;on inve&s;ted with an Office,</HI> then it &s;ignifies a <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> and &s;omething more, <HI>viz.</HI> one in <HI>Office;</HI> Yea, that being the mo&s;t u&s;ual, and general &s;ig|nification of the name Chri&s;t, where &s;omething in the context doth not point out another &s;ig|nification of it, it ought alwayes to be taken in that &s;en&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> for <HI>a Per&s;on in Office,</HI> or anoin|ted to Office, one, or more, according to that known Axiom, <HI>viz. Analogum per &s;e po&s;itum &s;u|mitur pro famo&s;iori analogato,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P N="2">2. We ought to be acquainted with Chri&s;t <HI>Him&s;elf.</HI> Therefore with his <HI>Per&s;on</HI> For the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t is (as you in your Book affirm more than once) Chri&s;t him&s;elf (as your own Per&s;on is your &s;elf.) Is it not of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t that St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaketh, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.10. when he &s;aith, <HI>that I may know him, and the power of his Re&s;urrection,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with Chri&s;t Crucified; for, &s;aith the Apo&s;tle, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 2.2. <HI>I determined to know nothing among&s;t you &s;ave Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and him Crucified,</HI> &amp;c. Now &s;urely it was the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, not his <HI>Law</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> that was Crucified.</P>
<P N="4"><PB N="209" REF="107" MS="y">4. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with Chri&s;t as he is God, or to know him to be &s;uch, and as he is &s;uch. But Chri&s;t as God is a <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> and was before ever he did a&s;&s;ume the humane Nature. If we know not Chri&s;t to be God, how can we under&s;tand that Text, <HI>Acts</HI> 20.28. <HI>The Church of God, which he hath purcha&s;ed with his own Blood?</HI> El&s;e how can we &s;ay to Chri&s;t, as <HI>Thomas</HI> did, <HI>John</HI> 20.28. <HI>My Lord, and my God?</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to know Chri&s;t as <HI>Man,</HI> or the Man <HI>Chri&s;t Je&s;us.</HI> Now Chri&s;t as <HI>Man</HI> is a Per&s;on, for his Humane Nature is taken in|to onene&s;s of &s;ub&s;i&s;tence, or of Per&s;onality with the Divine Nature, which is called the <HI>Hypo&s;tatical &V;nion.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with the <HI>Nature</HI> and <HI>Attributes</HI> of Je&s;us Chri&s;t. Now it is impo&s;&s;ible for us to know the Attributes of Chri&s;t his Divine Nature, unle&s;s we know his <HI>Per&s;on;</HI> for his Attributes are <HI>him&s;elf,</HI> as the Scripture &s;aith. <HI>God is Love,</HI> and him&s;elf, and his <HI>Per&s;on</HI> (according to your &s;elf) are all one. Though I cannot demon&s;trate that <HI>Decreta Dei &s;unt Deus ip&s;e</HI> (as &s;ome have &s;aid) nor an|&s;wer their Objections again&s;t it, who &s;ay, that <HI>God</HI> is <HI>Eus nece&s;&s;arium,</HI> a Being which cannot but be, but his <HI>decrees</HI> are <HI>Voluntary</HI> Acts, and &s;ome of them at lea&s;t might not have been, <HI>Ex. gr.</HI> God might not have decreed that Chri&s;t &s;hould dye for Sinners (for he was under no nece&s;&s;ity to make &s;uch a decree) yet &s;ure I am the <HI>Attributes</HI> of God, and con&s;equently
<PB N="210" REF="108"> of God the Son, are God him&s;elf. God is Ho|line&s;s it &s;elf, and Holine&s;s in the ab&s;tract is God; and &s;o God is power it &s;elf, and Power it &s;elf, or Infinite Power is God him&s;elf. If then we mu&s;t be acquainted with the Attributes of Chri&s;t we mu&s;t be acquainted with him&s;elf, and him&s;elf, and his Per&s;on are all one, as you your &s;elf have acknowledged once, and a|gain.</P>
<P N="6">6. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with Chri&s;t as he is repre&s;ented to us in the Scrip|tures. But there Chri&s;t is repre&s;ented to us as a <HI>Per&s;on.</HI> He &s;peaks to his Spou&s;e the Church as &s;uch throughout the <HI>Canticles,</HI> and &s;he &s;peaks to him as &s;uch, <HI>Cant.</HI> 1.2. <HI>Let him ki&s;s me,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>for thy Love is better than Wine,</HI> &amp;c. And v. 4. <HI>The King hath brought me into his Chamber</HI> (mean|ing Chri&s;t.) To mention all tho&s;e places where Chri&s;t is &s;poken of as a <HI>Per&s;on</HI> were to tran|&s;cribe a great part of the Bible. And for all that mu&s;t we not pretend to, or &s;eek after any ac|quaintance with his <HI>Per&s;on?</HI> Mu&s;t we &s;hut our eyes again&s;t a great part of what is &s;poken con|cerning Chri&s;t in the Holy Scriptures?</P>
<P N="7">7. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with Chri&s;t as he is repre&s;ented to us in the <HI>Articles of our Creed;</HI> But there he is repre&s;ented to us as a <HI>Per&s;on.</HI> Witne&s;s the&s;e pa&s;&s;ages, <HI>And in Je&s;us Chri&s;t our Lord, who was Conceived by the Holy Gho&s;t, born of the Virgin</HI> Mary, <HI>&s;uffered un|der</HI> Pontius Pilate, <HI>was Crucified, dead and Bu|ried, de&s;cended into Hell, ro&s;e again the third day, a&s;cended up to Heaven, &s;itteth at the right hand of
<PB N="211" REF="108"> God, from thence he &s;hall come to judge the Quick and the Dead.</HI> Now, the fore-mentioned Ex|pre&s;&s;ions are applicable only to his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> not to his <HI>Law</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> and therefore we ought to be acquainted with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, if we ought to know, and believe the one half (for thereabouts they are) of the <HI>Articles</HI> of our <HI>Creed.</HI></P>
<P N="8">8. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to be acquainted with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of God the Father, and therefore al&s;o with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of God the Son. For there is the &s;ame Rea&s;on for both. What but the <HI>Per|&s;on</HI> of God the Father, and of the two other Per&s;ons of the Ble&s;&s;ed Trinity is meant, <HI>Job</HI> 22.21. where 'tis &s;aid, <HI>Acquaint thy &s;elf with him, and be at peace?</HI> By <HI>Him</HI> cannot be meant the <HI>Law,</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of God, witne&s;s <HI>v.</HI> 22. <HI>Re|ceive, I pray thee, the Law from his mouth:</HI> what, the Law from the mouth of his Law? What &s;en&s;e were that? and <HI>v.</HI> 23. <HI>If thou return to the Almighty thou &s;halt be built up,</HI> &amp;c. It was the Almighty then, by which is meant God him&s;elf, with whom he was coun&s;elled, <HI>v.</HI> 21. to ac|quaint him&s;elf, for of the &s;ame Per&s;on he &s;peaks in the&s;e three ver&s;es, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="9">9. <HI>Arg.</HI> We ought to have, and to hold <HI>Com|munion,</HI> and <HI>Fellow&s;hip,</HI> with Chri&s;t him&s;elf, or with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Dhri&s;t,: <HI>Ergo,</HI> we ought to be acquainted with his Per&s;on. <HI>Fellow&s;hip,</HI> and <HI>Acquaintance</HI> cannot ea&s;ily be &s;eparated. Ac|quaintance, if it doth not precede Society, and Fellow&s;hip betwixt man, and man, it do's al|ways accompany it, or follow upon it. For how
<PB N="212" REF="109"> can we otherwi&s;e chu&s;e than be acquainted with the Per&s;ons of tho&s;e with whom we have inti|mately conver&s;ed time after time? I mu&s;t needs know &s;uch a one, &s;ay we, having conver&s;ed with him &s;o often as I have done, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Now Fel|low&s;hip, and Communion with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, or with Chri&s;t him&s;elf we all ought to &s;eek after; for we cannot walk in the light, but we mu&s;t have it, 1 <HI>John</HI> 1.7. and walk in the light, <HI>viz.</HI> of Grace, and Holine&s;s we ought, and mu&s;t: and of &s;uch St. <HI>John</HI> &s;aith <HI>v.</HI> 3. <HI>And truly our fellow&s;hip is with the Father, and the Son Christ Je&s;us.</HI> What with his <HI>Law</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> only? as by reading, and hearing, and under|&s;tanding of it? All that wicked men may do, and have. Therefore with <HI>him&s;elf</HI> doubtle&s;s, or with his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> in, and by means of his Ordi|nances. Read <HI>P&s;al</HI> 63.1. <HI>O God, thou art my God, early will I &s;tock thee, my &s;oul thir&s;teth after thee.</HI> v. 2. <HI>To &s;ee thy power and thy glory &s;o as I have &s;een thee in thy Sanctuary.</HI> So that God him|&s;elf is to be &s;ought, yea to be &s;een and enjoyed in his Ordinances. Read al&s;o <HI>Exod.</HI> 25.22. <HI>And there will I meet with thee, and commune with thee from above the Mercy-&s;eat, from between the Che|rubims which are upon the Ark of the Te&s;timony of all things which I give thee in commandment,</HI> &amp;c. See al&s;o <HI>Exodus</HI> 20.24. <HI>In all places where I re|cord my name I will come unto thee, and I will ble&s;s thee,</HI> &amp;c. May we not infer that Communion which Believers have, and ought to have with Chri&s;t him&s;elf in Ordinances, from <HI>Rev.</HI> 1.13.? <HI>And in the mid&s;t of the &s;even Candle&s;ticks one like
<PB N="213" REF="109"> to the Son of Man,</HI> &amp;c. To name but one text more for this purpo&s;e, in <HI>Mat.</HI> 18.20. &s;aith our Saviour, <HI>Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the mid&s;t of them.</HI> From all the&s;e places I gather that <HI>Communion</HI> with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t may be had, and is promi&s;ed upon certain conditions; and from thence I in|fer, That Acquaintance with the per&s;on of our Saviour (which is an in&s;eparable concomitant or con&s;equent of &s;uch communion) may be had al&s;o, and ought to be &s;ought after, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Surely I need &s;ay no more (nay have &s;aid more than I did need) to convince any man that he has done very &s;infully in di&s;owning, and deriding &s;o real, and &s;acred a thing, as is <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t,</HI> though under pretence of zeal for his Law and Go&s;pel. Now whereas I find the&s;e two words, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Law</HI> &amp; <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of our Saviour often put together in Mr. <HI>Sh</HI>'s. book, as if the latter did &s;ignifie more than the former, give me leave to ob&s;erve by the way, that one of them might be &s;pared: for they are one and the &s;ame in &s;en&s;e, and &s;ignifica|tion, for that the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t is his <HI>Law,</HI> and the <HI>Law</HI> of Chri&s;t is his <HI>Go&s;pel:</HI> For the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t is not all made up of <HI>Promi&s;es,</HI> but partly of <HI>Precepts.</HI> Was it not the &s;um and &s;ub|&s;tance of the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> which <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Silus</HI> an&s;wered to the Jailor, <HI>Acts</HI> 16.30. who asked them, <HI>Sirs, what mu&s;t I do to be &s;aved?</HI> v. 31. <HI>Believe in the Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and thou &s;halt be &s;aved.</HI> The <HI>Covenant of Grace,</HI> as well as other Covenants, is <HI>Promi&s;&s;um &s;ub condi|tione,</HI>
<PB N="214" REF="110"> it con&s;i&s;ts as well of a <HI>Law</HI> enjoyning a <HI>Duty,</HI> as of a <HI>Promi&s;e</HI> encouraging thereunto. Neither is the Law of Chri&s;t without the Pro|mi&s;e, nor the Promi&s;e of Chri&s;t without his Law, but they go both hand in hand together. Therefore we read of tho&s;e <HI>who obey not</HI> (as well as who believe not) <HI>the Go&s;pel of Christ:</HI> now a Law is the object of di&s;obedience, <HI>where no Law is there can be no Tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion:</HI> as where there is no promi&s;e there can be no Diffidence or unbe|lief, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> I have &s;aid enough, I think, to prove that the <HI>Law,</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of our Saviour are <GAP DESC="foreign"> or Synonymous expre&s;&s;ions: but ha|ving been guilty of <HI>Sub&s;traction</HI> in other pa&s;&s;ages of his book (even to &s;uch a degree as to &s;ub|&s;tract, or deny Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t) who knows whether to make amends for that, he has not here run upon <HI>Multiplication</HI> more than he needed to have done, like the Pa|pi&s;ts, who pre&s;uming to take away one of the ten Commandments, <HI>&s;plit</HI> another &s;ingle Com|mandment into two, tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;till they may make up the &s;ame number. Bu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> if I do not overlook great|er faults than <HI>Tantokgies</HI> in the Book that I am dealing with, I think I &s;hall never have done with it. My next work &s;hall be to prove that <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t</HI> (which our unhappy Antagoni&s;t has &s;o often let fly again&s;t) is not only a real, and attainable thing, but al&s;o greatly <HI>de&s;ireable,</HI> yea, and highly <HI>advantagious,</HI> and upon what grounds it is &s;o.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> Acquaintence with the per&s;on of our Saviour is to be de&s;ired in order to enkindling,
<PB N="215" REF="110"> and encrea&s;ing Love and Affection in us towards him. <HI>Ignoti nulla Cupido.</HI> We may love Chri&s;t though we never &s;aw him, but we cannot love him if we never knew him. <HI>Thy name is as Oynt|ment poured forth,</HI> Cant. 1.3. <HI>therefore do the Vir|gins love thee;</HI> implying, that if the name of Chri&s;t had been as ointment clo&s;e &s;hut up in a Box, and not di&s;covering it &s;elf, either by &s;ight, or &s;avour, they could not have loved him. When Ointments &s;end forth their &s;avour, we know what they are. Now &s;aith the Text, <HI>Be|cau&s;e of the &s;avour of thy good Oin<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ment therefore do they love thee,</HI> Cant. 1.3. As they &s;ay <HI>There is nothing in the under&s;tanding that was not fir&s;t in the &s;en&s;es:</HI> it is as true, <HI>There is nothing in the affecti|ons, that was not fir&s;t in the under&s;tanding.</HI> If then we ought to love the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ea&s;on of Chri&s;t, for certain we ought to acquaint our &s;elves with his Per&s;on, and not with his Go&s;pel only, or ra|ther with that part of his Go&s;pel only, which makes no mention of his Per&s;on. Who dares to &s;ay that the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t ought not to be <HI>de|lighted</HI> in, yea that it is nor a great duty to de|light our &s;elves in the <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> and Per&s;onal excel|lencies of our Saviour? If &s;o I am &s;ure we ought to be acquainted therewithal; for to delight in that whereof we are perfectly ignorant, is utterly impo&s;&s;ible.</P>
<P>Delighting, and rejoycing are neer akin: they &s;eem to differ but in degree. Now that it is a duty to rejoyce in Chri&s;t Je&s;us may be gathered from &s;undry texts, <HI>viz. Phil.</HI> 3.1, 3. and <HI>Phil.</HI> 4.4. <HI>Rejoyce in the Lord always, and again I &s;ay re|joyce:
<PB N="216" REF="111"> viz.</HI> in the Lord Chri&s;t; for that <HI>he</HI> is meant may, be collected from the next ver&s;e, <HI>viz. The Lord is at hand.</HI> But how can we re|joyce in one we know not, or with whom we have no acquaintance? <HI>In whom believing</HI> (&s;aith the Scripture) <HI>we rejoyce:</HI> intimating that we could not rejoyce in Chri&s;t unle&s;s we knew him. For, &s;aith the Apo&s;tle, <HI>How &s;hall they believe on him of whom they have not heard?</HI> Who&s;e doubt is it whether it be our duty and excellency to &s;et a high <HI>price,</HI> and <HI>value</HI> upon Chri&s;t? Is it not &s;aid that <HI>to them that believ<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Chri&s;t is precious?</HI> Yea, is it not as di&s;tingui&s;hing a Character of a true Believer as can be given, that he is one that va|lueth Je&s;us Chri&s;t above all the world, even then when he has fair opportunities to enjoy a|bundance of the World, and great probability that he may long continue &s;o to do? Is not the <HI>Merchant man</HI> &s;poken of <HI>Mat.</HI> 13.45. <HI>Who when he had found one Pearl of great price, went and &s;old all that he had, and bought it,</HI> an emblem of every true Chri&s;tian &s;etting forth the high e|&s;teem, and value for Chri&s;t, which every &s;uch per&s;on hath? If &s;o, It mu&s;t needs be a great pri|viledge to be endowed with power from on high to prefer Je&s;us Chri&s;t above our greate&s;t joys, and enjoyments in this world. Now that we can never do unle&s;s we be acquainted with him. We can value no man till we know him, and his worth. To one that knows the worth of a barly corn, but not of a Jewel; a Jewel may &s;eem le&s;s worth than a barly-corn. The Daughters of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> hearing the Church &s;ay that <HI>&s;he was &s;ick
<PB N="217" REF="111"> of Love,</HI> to Chri&s;t, made an&s;wer, <HI>What is thy Beloved more than another Beloved?</HI> But the Spou&s;e that was acquainted with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, replyed; <HI>My Beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among&s;t ten thou&s;and,</HI> and &s;o continu|eth to commend him to the end of that Chapter. Whence did that prizing and admiring of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t re&s;ult but from her having that Acquaintance with him which others had not? (who were ready through their Ignorance to &s;ay, <HI>He hath no Form, nor Comline&s;s, there is no Beauty that we &s;hould de&s;ire him.</HI>) Chri&s;t <HI>to the Jews</HI> that knew him not was a <HI>&s;tumbling block, and to the Gentiles fooli&s;hne&s;s, but unto them which were called,</HI> (viz. to the &s;aving knowledge of him&s;elf) <HI>Chri&s;t the Power of God and the Wi&s;dom of God.</HI></P>
<P>A Fourth Priviledge re&s;ulting from our Ac|quaintance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t is, that thereby we &s;hall be induced, and I had almo&s;t &s;aid inforced to tru&s;t him; For they that know Chri&s;t as they ought to know him cannot chu&s;e but tru&s;t him. As there are &s;ome Truths which the mind of a man cannot chu&s;e but a&s;&s;ent to, at the fir&s;t hearing, which do <HI>Cogere A&s;&s;en&s;um,</HI> &s;o there are, &s;ome &s;uch indi&s;putable objects of Love, and Tru&s;t, that they who know them to be what they are cannot but Love, and tru&s;t them. Such a one is Chri&s;t. <HI>They that know thy Name will tru&s;t in thee.</HI> Now, not the Word and Promi&s;es, but the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t is the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> Object of our tru&s;t, and the <HI>rea&s;on</HI> of our tru&s;t: for what is the rea&s;on that we tru&s;t any mans word, but be|cau&s;e
<PB N="218" REF="112"> we know him&s;elf to be hone&s;t, and able to make it good? Who regards the Promi&s;e of a meer Stranger, not knowing who is, or as they &s;ay, whence he comes, and whether he will? <HI>Paul</HI> therefore tru&s;ted Chri&s;t with the invalua|ble Jewel of his Soul, becau&s;e he was well ac|quainted with him, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.12. For, &s;aith he, <HI>I know whom I have believed, and am per&s;wa|ded that he is able to keep that which I have commit|ted to him again&s;t that day.</HI> Who would lo&s;e the benefit of being able chearfully to commit his Soul into the hands of Chri&s;t, for all Eternity, to excu&s;e the Labour, and pains of being ac|quainted with him? Or what wi&s;e man would intru&s;t any matter of great concernment in the hands of one whom he has no knowledge?</P>
<P>To pa&s;s on to a <HI>Fifth.</HI> Is it no Priviledge that by how much more we know the Per&s;on, and Per&s;onal Excellencies of Chri&s;t, by &s;o much more &s;hall we know how to <HI>plea&s;e,</HI> and <HI>imitate</HI> him? We cannot but plea&s;e Chri&s;t when we imitate, and conform to him. Now, the know|ledge of Chri&s;t is a <HI>conforming,</HI> or rather <HI>trans|forming</HI> knowledge, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3.18. <HI>We all with open face, as in a Gla&s;s beholding the Glory of God, are changed into the &s;ame Image.</HI> If we &s;ee Chri&s;t as he is, we cannot but be like him, 1 <HI>John</HI> 3.2. A full Vi&s;ion of Chri&s;t will fully a&s;&s;imulate us to him, and &s;o will a more imperfect Vi&s;ion, or knowledge of him, in a degree. The more we know the temper, and di&s;po&s;ition of any Friend, the better we know how to &s;uit and ac|commodate our &s;elves to him, and how to give
<PB N="219" REF="112"> him content. 'Tis both our Duty and Excellen|cy to conform to the will and Pattern of our Sa|viour, <HI>to walk as he walked; and to be in the world as he was in the World,</HI> 1 <HI>John</HI> 4.17. and that we can never do, unle&s;s we know who he was, and how he behav'd him&s;elf when he was in this World. He that would <HI>learn of Chri&s;t</HI> (as he bids us) <HI>to be meek and Lowly,</HI> mu&s;t fir&s;t be ac|quainted with Chri&s;t as &s;uch, or know a&s;&s;uredly that he was &s;o.</P>
<P>Sixthly, By acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, or with Chri&s;t him&s;elf (which you have told us comes all to one) we may come to know the <HI>Image of Chri&s;t,</HI> where, and in whom|&s;oever we &s;hall &s;ee it, and thereby be induced to love, and honour both it, and them. St. <HI>John</HI> did find it a great advantage to him&s;elf and o|thers, that they did know and love the <HI>Image</HI> of Chri&s;t where they &s;aw it. For, &s;aith he, 1 <HI>John</HI> 3.14. <HI>We know that we have pa&s;&s;ed from Death to Life, becau&s;e we love the Brethren,</HI> meaning, &s;uch in whom the Image, and likene&s;s of Chri&s;t did appear. Who can Love and value a <HI>Copy</HI> for it's likene&s;s to the <HI>Original,</HI> unle&s;s he be ac|quainted with the Original to which it is like? If one man imitate another as exactly as he can, in Preaching, or otherwi&s;e, who can love him for &s;o doing, unle&s;s he know, and prize the Per&s;on whom he imitates?</P>
<P>Seventhly, Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI> him&s;elf &s;eems to account it a great Duty, and Priviledge, to be acquainted with the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t. Now, who knows not that it is impo&s;&s;ible to be ac|quainted
<PB N="220" REF="113"> with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, and the cir|cum&s;tances of his <HI>Per&s;on, viz. Life, Death, Re|&s;urrection,</HI> &amp;c. and not to be acquainted with a great part of his <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> &s;ith a great part of the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> is taken up in de&s;cribing to us who Chri&s;t was, what he did, and &s;uffered; and for what ends, and purpo&s;es he did and &s;uffered &s;uch things?</P>
<P>Eighthly, Yea, more than &s;o, Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t doth not only imply, and involve acquaintance with a great part of his <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> but hath al&s;o a great tendency and influence both to <HI>awe,</HI> and <HI>allure</HI> us to the Obe|dience thereof. The knowledge of Chri&s;t as the Judge of Q<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ick, and Dead, who will one day <HI>come in flames of Fire to take Vengeance on them who obey not his Go&s;pel,</HI> may awe us into O|bedience, as the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.11. <HI>Knowing therefore the terrour of the Lord, we per|&s;wade men.</HI> He had &s;aid in the ver&s;e immediate|ly fore going, <HI>For we mu&s;t all appear before the Judgment-&s;eat of Chri&s;t,</HI> &amp;c And &s;ith <HI>Mercy</HI> and <HI>Maje&s;ty</HI> do both meet in Chri&s;t, and greet each other, &s;urely there is much in that knowledge of his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> as well to <HI>invite,</HI> and allure, as to <HI>awe,</HI> and affright us into the Obedience of his <HI>Go&s;pel.</HI> El&s;e what meaneth that obte&s;tation of the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Rom.</HI> 12.1. <HI>I be&s;eech you there|fore, B<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ethren, by the Mercies of God that ye pre|&s;ent your Bodies a Living Sacrifice, Holy, accep|table to God,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>Ninthly, Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t according to what is revealed concerning
<PB N="221" REF="113"> it in his Go&s;pel (and no man that Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> writes again&s;t preten<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s to any other) will Antidote us again&s;t tho&s;e gro&s;s Errors, and Here&s;ies which many have run into, as in reference to the Per|&s;on of our Saviour, as <HI>Simon Magus, Corinthus, Marcion, Samo&s;atenus, Arius, Ne&s;torius,</HI> and &s;uch like; whereof &s;ome denyed his <HI>Divinity,</HI> others his <HI>Humanity;</HI> &s;ome the <HI>Purity</HI> of his Conception, others the truth of it: &s;ome con|founded the two Natures, denying their di&s;tin|ction, others denying their <HI>&V;nion,</HI> divided the Per&s;on, of one making two. Some &s;aid he hath the <HI>Body,</HI> but not the <HI>Soul</HI> of Man; others, that he took an <HI>Ethereal,</HI> or Spiritual, not a true Body, and &s;uch like. They are &s;econded at this day by <HI>Antitrinitarians, Famili&s;ts, Socinians,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>An effectual Antidote again&s;t <HI>Quakeri&s;m</HI> is, I think, as nece&s;&s;ary at this day as &s;uch an one again&s;t the <HI>Plague</HI> would have been &s;ome years &s;ince: and certainly a due Acquaintance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, and &s;tedfa&s;t belief of what the Scripture &s;aith concerning the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of our Saviour, is as Sovereign an Antidote again&s;t the Pe&s;tilent Doctrines of the <HI>Quakers</HI> as can be made u&s;e of. For who can be a <HI>Quaker</HI> (truly &s;o called) who doth really believe what the Scripture hath revealed to us, as touching the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t? As namely, that Je&s;us Chri&s;t is not a meer <HI>Quality, Accident, or Principle,</HI> or nothing el&s;e but <HI>the Light</HI> which is <HI>within</HI> every man, but a <HI>real Per&s;on,</HI> true God, and true Man, and that the Go&s;pel is a real <HI>Hi&s;tory,</HI> and
<PB N="222" REF="114"> true matter of Fact in the Letter of it, as well as a profound <HI>My&s;tery,</HI> with reference to the wi&s;e contrivance, and Excellent de&s;igns, and u&s;es thereof? The <HI>Quakers</HI> (like the <HI>Fameli&s;ts</HI> of old) turn the whole <HI>Hi&s;tory</HI> of the Go&s;pel, &s;o far as concerns the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t into an <HI>Allegory,</HI> and by endeavouring to make nothing but a meer <HI>Figure</HI> of it, do make it a meer <HI>Cypher.</HI> Before I go any further I mu&s;t take leave to tell Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> that the cour&s;e he takes is the High|way to <HI>Quakeri&s;m.</HI> For if men &s;hall be derided for making mention of the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, and where&s;oever the name of Chri&s;t is found we &s;hall generally be directed to under&s;tand thereby either the <HI>Church,</HI> or certain <HI>Laws and Rules,</HI> or above and before all, a certain Office (one, or more) how &s;oon may the &s;ubtiler &s;ort of Quakers tell us that there is but a &s;tep betwixt us and them, they can ea&s;ily give us the Right hand of fellow&s;hip? They &s;ay that the <HI>Light</HI> of Nature, or Light within us (which is a great Law, or Sy&s;tem of Laws) that is Chri&s;t. They &s;ay that <HI>Con&s;cience</HI> (that great <HI>Office,</HI> and Court of Judicature &s;et up in every mans brea&s;t) that is <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and we (if of Mr. <HI>Sherlock</HI>'s mind) do &s;ay that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> is primarily, and Ori|ginally the name of an Office. They &s;ay that Chri&s;t and we are all one, for every man is one and the &s;ame with the Light that is in him (for that Light is &s;omething of our &s;elves: and we &s;ay that Chri&s;t for the mo&s;t part &s;ignifies either the Church, whereof our &s;elves are a part, or certain Laws and Rules of Life, and &s;uch is the
<PB N="223" REF="114"> Light within us, or is the name of an Office, and has not the Light within us &s;everal Offices, as namely to accu&s;e, or excu&s;e; to condemn, or acquit, and comfort us, as the matter &s;hall re|quire, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Thus whil&s;t every thing almo&s;t that is &s;aid of Chri&s;t him&s;elf, we do interpret to belong to his <HI>Law</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> and do generally read the lat|ter in&s;tead of the former (as if it were &s;o in our Bibles) we &s;hall be apt to forget that there is any &s;uch <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> as Chri&s;t, and what that per|&s;on has done and &s;uffered for us, and be in a great preparedne&s;s to comply with the <HI>Quakers,</HI> who retain in effect nothing but the name of Chri&s;t, by which name they baptize, and in|tend nothing but the <HI>Light within them,</HI> or the <HI>Law</HI> of Nature. Could the gro&s;&s;er &s;ort of <HI>Qua|kers</HI> but extirpate the Hi&s;tory and Doctrine of the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, and bury them in perfect oblivion: I doubt not but they would think the greate&s;t part of their work were done, and then the Light of Nature might ea&s;ily be &s;et upon the Throne of Chri&s;t, and be generally accepted for the only Light that men &s;hould turn to.</P>
<P>Tenthly, <HI>Fellow&s;hip and Conver&s;e</HI> with Je&s;us Chri&s;t is doubtle&s;s a great priviledge, for &s;o St. <HI>John</HI> &s;peaks of it, 1 <HI>John</HI> 1.3. and there is no que|&s;tion to be made but that Communion and Fel|low&s;hip with Chri&s;t is, and may be much facili|tated, and farthered, by our Acquaintance with his Per&s;on. We &s;carce know how to conver&s;e with tho&s;e to whom we are yet but &s;trangers; we hardly know what is fit and proper for us to
<PB N="224" REF="115"> &s;ay to them, or how to take and con&s;true &s;uch things as they &s;peak to us; whether they &s;peak as they think, or only to trye us, or whether they take in good part what we &s;ay to them. But when we di&s;cour&s;e tho&s;e per&s;ons with whom we are intimately acquainted, we have as it were a Key to all they &s;ay; we ea&s;ily under|&s;tand their meaning if they &s;ay but a little, and can apply our &s;elves to them with freedom and confidence. They who are well acquainted with dumb per&s;ons, can under&s;tand their very <HI>&s;igns,</HI> and motions, better it may be, than the articu|lar words, and expre&s;&s;ions of tho&s;e whom they never &s;aw before.</P>
<P>Again, Acquaintance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t is as it were a door, an inlet to all &s;orts of Graces, as namely, <HI>Faith, Love, Humility, Re|pentance, Self-denyal, Patience,</HI> and what not? Faith in Chri&s;t is called <HI>Knowledge,</HI> I&s;a. 53.11. <HI>By the knowledge of him &s;hall he ju&s;tifie many,</HI> and &s;o el&s;ewhere, probably becau&s;e it is introduced by, and founded in the knowledge of Chri&s;t. Of <HI>Love,</HI> and <HI>delight</HI> in Chri&s;t, &s;pringing from thence I &s;pake before. To prove it will teach us <HI>Humility,</HI> I might alledge what <HI>Job</HI> &s;aith to God <HI>Now mine eyes have &s;een thee, therefore do I abhor my &s;elf in</HI> du&s;t and a&s;hes: al&s;o tho&s;e words of Chri&s;t, <HI>Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly.</HI> If the knowledg of Chri&s;t doth not promote <HI>Re|pentance,</HI> why is it &s;aid, <HI>They &s;hall &s;ee him whom they have pierced, and mourn over him?</HI> To know Chri&s;t to have been <HI>oppre&s;&s;ed and afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth, as a &s;heep before the &s;hearers
<PB N="225" REF="115"> is dumb,</HI> &amp;c. I&s;a. 58.7. <HI>Who when he was revi|led, reviled not again, when he &s;uffered he threat|ned not,</HI> 1 Pet. 2.23. Is it not a great In&s;tance and le&s;&s;on of <HI>Patience?</HI> when the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>Phil.</HI> 2.5 6. <HI>Let this mind be in you which was al&s;o in Chri&s;t Je&s;us, who being in the form of God, made him&s;elf of no Reputation, and took upon him th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> form of a Servant, and became obedient, even to the Death of the Cro&s;s;</HI> do's he not &s;et before us the highe&s;t Example of <HI>Self-denyal</HI> that ever was? The like might be &s;aid of all other graces how they may be learnt by a due Acquaintance with Chri&s;t. Take one or two Texts for all, 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 1.2. <HI>Grace and Peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God, and of our Lord Je|&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> What more full Expre&s;&s;ion than that of our Saviour, <HI>John</HI> 17.3. <HI>This is Life Eternal, that they might know thee and Je&s;us Chri&s;t, whom thou ha&s;t &s;ent.</HI> Intimating that a right know|ledge of God, and Chri&s;t, is <HI>&s;eminally, virtu|ally,</HI> and <HI>radically,</HI> all Grace, and all that is ne|ce&s;&s;ary in order to Glory, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Now, do all the&s;e great benefits and privi|ledges re&s;ult from a right knowledge of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, and dare any man be &s;o bold (I had almo&s;t &s;aid &s;o de&s;perate) as to laugh it to &s;corn? But Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> tells us, p. 57. of a very bad &s;cheme of Divinity (as he counts it) drawn from the Doctrine of Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, of which in his jearing Language he &s;aith, <HI>The&s;e are tho&s;e great Go&s;pel My&s;teries, and Soul &s;aving Truths which are learnt from an Acquaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on, which his
<PB N="226" REF="116"> Go&s;pel is &s;ilent in.</HI> But how incon&s;i&s;tent is he with him&s;elf? For he has no &s;ooner ended that <HI>mock &s;cheme,</HI> which he puts upon tho&s;e whom he writes again&s;t, but he forthwith gives you another of his own, as &s;ound (to his thinking) as &s;ound can be, which he &s;aith, <HI>is much more plainly deducible from an Acquaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on,</HI> p. 81. How can that Doctrine be in it's &s;elf de&s;picable, fal&s;e, and dangerous, from whence a whole Sy&s;tem, or Scheme of <HI>good Divinity</HI> may be drawn? St. <HI>James</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Jam.</HI> 3.12. <HI>One Fountain cannot &s;end forth &s;alt waters and fre&s;h.</HI> But Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> has brought fir&s;t Salt Waters, as he counts them, and then fre&s;h, and both out of the &s;ame Fountain, <HI>viz. Ac|quaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t.</HI> They had wont to &s;ay, <HI>Can any good come out of</HI> Nazareth? But with much more rea&s;on it may be &s;aid, Can a fan&s;iful imaginary Doctrine, &s;uch as he often intimates that of Acquaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on to be, yield &s;o many great Truths, as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> undertakes to infer from thence? for he &s;aith, p. 87. <HI>All this we learn from an Ac|quaintance with Christ's Per&s;on (as the&s;e men call it)</HI> and then he adds (judge you how humbly) <HI>And it were ea&s;ie now to draw the whole Plot and de&s;ign of Chri&s;tianity, to &s;earch into the deep coun|&s;els of God, and to di&s;cover tho&s;e Principles and Motives he was Acted by, and the Infinite Wi&s;|dom of the contrivance and the true methods of a &s;inners recovery by Chri&s;t, and what that Homage and Wor&s;hip is which we owe our Saviour.</HI></P>
<P>Now, if it be &s;o, that all the&s;e great, and ex|cellent
<PB N="227" REF="116"> Truths Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath learnt, and could di&s;cover from <HI>Acquaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on,</HI> adding <HI>(as they call it)</HI> never I think was a Doctrine &s;o confe&s;&s;edly pregnant, and able in|&s;trumentally to lead a man into all truth, <HI>even in|to the deep coun&s;els of God, and the Infinite wi&s;dom of his contrivances</HI> (as he phra&s;eth it) &s;o kickt, and &s;purn'd at, &s;o &s;corn'd and derided, as <HI>Ac|quaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on</HI> has been by one that tells us he has learnt, and could di&s;cover &s;o much from it. Admit &s;ome men &s;hould, or had drawn <HI>a bad Scheme of Theology,</HI> from a great, and whol&s;om truth (as foul &s;tomacks corrupt the be&s;t of nouri&s;hments, and the very grace of God it's &s;elf is by &s;ome turned into wanton|nne&s;s) was it Lawful for Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> to expo&s;e that great Truth, to &s;corn, and contempt, be|cau&s;e others had &s;o perverted it? (as &s;ome are &s;aid to wre&s;t &s;ome pa&s;&s;ages in St. <HI>Paul</HI>'s Epi&s;tles, to their own de&s;truction.) By the &s;ame rea&s;on might he not go about to raze the only Founda|tion, our Lord <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> becau&s;e &s;ome even upon that have <HI>built Hay and Stubble.</HI> Had not Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> prevented me by giving <HI>a Scheme of Divinity,</HI> of his own approving, deducible, as he tells us, from Acquaintance with Chri&s;t's Per&s;on, I could ea&s;ily have given him another, &s;uch as I think he would not have offered to de|ny, the Truth, and goodne&s;s, either of the whole, or of any part thereof. I would have premi&s;ed but two or three things, <HI>viz.</HI> 1. That Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> by that <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t,</HI> for pretending to which he derides tho&s;e
<PB N="228" REF="117"> whom he writes again&s;t, under&s;tands acquain|tance with the <HI>Circum&s;tances,</HI> and <HI>adjuncts</HI> of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t; as namely, with his <HI>Life, Death, Re&s;urrection, A&s;cen&s;ion, Interce&s;&s;ion,</HI> as well as with him&s;elf immediately, for that ap|peareth, not only from p. 139, and 140. (where he expo&s;eth men for being &s;o much tran&s;por|ted &s;ometimes with the thoughts of <HI>Chri&s;t Cru|cified</HI>) other whiles with the apprehen&s;ion of his Love to them, but more e&s;pecially from that <HI>Scheme of Divinity</HI> which him&s;elf deduceth from Acquaintance with Chri&s;ts Per&s;on; beginning p. 81. and reaching to p. 87. where he fir&s;t treats of Chri&s;t his <HI>Incarnation,</HI> or coming into the World in the Nature of Man. Then he treats of the <HI>good works,</HI> and kind <HI>Miracles</HI> which he wrought in the World. <HI>Then he mentions the World being made by Chri&s;t.</HI> Afterwards he <HI>&s;peaks of the Innocence, and Holine&s;s of his Life, of his Excellent Example.</HI> By and by, <HI>he men|tions Chri&s;t his dying as a &s;acrifice for &s;in.</HI> Then he &s;peaks of Chri&s;t his <HI>Re&s;urrection from the dead,</HI> and <HI>his A&s;cen&s;ion to Heaven,</HI> p. 86. <HI>Of his Exaltation to the right hand of God, and of his Interce&s;&s;ion.</HI> All the&s;e things he refers to our <HI>Acquaintance with Chri&s;t</HI>'s <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> adding <HI>(as the&s;e men call it)</HI> nay, it is ea&s;ie to &s;hew that he doth al&s;o thereunto refer <HI>Acquaintance with the Divine,</HI> as well <HI>as Humane Nature of Chri&s;t, and with the &s;everal Excellencies, and perfections of both his Natures united in one Per&s;on.</HI> For v. 82. &s;aith he, <HI>when we con&s;ider this Mediator was no le&s;s than the Eternal &s;on of God, by whom the
<PB N="229" REF="117"> Worlds were made;</HI> (which words he brings into his di&s;cour&s;e of Chri&s;ts <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> &amp;c.) Now if to be acquainted with Chri&s;ts <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> be to be ac|quainted with his <HI>Incarnation, Life,</HI> good <HI>Works, Death Re&s;urrection, A&s;cen&s;ion,</HI> and <HI>Interce&s;&s;ion,</HI> yea with his <HI>Divine Nature,</HI> and the &s;everal <HI>Excel|lencies</HI> and <HI>Perfections</HI> thereof, I dare be bold to &s;ay it were a very ea&s;ie thing, from all of the&s;e put together, to deduce all the <HI>Articles of our Creed,</HI> the <HI>Doctrine of a Deity,</HI> and of <HI>a Trinity in &V;nity,</HI> of the <HI>Divine Attributes,</HI> of <HI>Creation, Providence,</HI> and of all the <HI>great</HI> things which are revealed concerning Chri&s;t, as he was <HI>Man,</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> and of the <HI>Communion of Saints</HI> (for knowing Chri&s;t to be Head of the Church, I mu&s;t know there is a <HI>Church</HI> that hath Commu|nion among&s;t the &s;everal Members of it, as members of the Natural Body have each with other) Moreover, the Doctrine of <HI>Forgivene&s;s of &s;ins,</HI> of the <HI>Re&s;urrection of the Dead,</HI> and <HI>of the Life Everla&s;ting:</HI> Yea, a man cannot have &s;o much knowledge of the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, but he mu&s;t needs know the &s;ub&s;tance of <HI>the Ten Commandments,</HI> and that he ought to conform thereunto; for he that knows how Chri&s;t walk|ed, knows that Chri&s;tians ought to walk as they have had him for an example, who loved God with all his heart, and his Neigh|bours (if men may &s;o be called) as him|&s;elf.</P>
<P>Now if <HI>Acquaintance with Chri&s;t his Per&s;on,</HI> according to that De&s;cription which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> him&s;elf doth make of it, do take in &s;o great a
<PB N="230" REF="118"> part of the mo&s;t indi&s;putable Divinity that we have; <HI>viz.</HI> the &s;um of the <HI>Creed,</HI> and <HI>Decalogue,</HI> who can but wonder at the extreme folly, and wickedne&s;s of any man, that &s;hould pre&s;ume to write one line in contempt thereof? Had there been a generation of men who had pre|tended to have known the <HI>bodily per&s;onage of Chri&s;t,</HI> his <HI>Stature, Complexion, Features,</HI> &amp;c. or to have had &s;uch a vi&s;ion of Chri&s;t as <HI>Stephen, Acts</HI> 7.55. <HI>Who looking up to Heaven, &s;aw Je&s;us &s;itting at the right hand of God,</HI> or to have con|ver&s;ed with the per&s;on of Chri&s;t face, to face (as &s;ome have pretended to have done with Angels) to have expo&s;ed &s;uch wild Enthu&s;ia&s;ts as tho&s;e, for their vain pretences, had been but to have &s;erv'd them in their kind, and &s;uch a rod as you have made might have &s;uited well enough with the backs of &s;uch fools: But to fall foul upon men for pretending, at lea&s;twi&s;e to de&s;ire, and to pre&s;s after tho&s;e things which every good Chri&s;tian ought to de&s;ire, and pre&s;s after, and cannot do otherwi&s;e; <HI>viz.</HI> to <HI>know Je&s;us</HI> Chri&s;t <HI>him&s;elf,</HI> and him <HI>Crucified,</HI> and ri&s;ing again from the dead, yea to <HI>know the power of his death, and of his Re&s;urrection,</HI> as St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.9. was &s;o daring an attempt, and &s;o malicious an enterprize, as I have &s;eldom heard the like. Had the men you write again&s;t pre&s;s'd their hearers, and readers to a meer <HI>&s;peculative</HI> knowledg of Chri&s;t, only to fill their heads with <HI>notions</HI> con|cerning the nature, and excellencies of Chri&s;t, you might have blam'd them for that: But 'tis an <HI>experimental</HI> knowledg of Chri&s;t, which you
<PB N="231" REF="118"> your &s;elf do confe&s;s, the&s;e men pretend, and pre&s;s to, <HI>p.</HI> 139. for there you &s;ay, <HI>So the&s;e men talk al&s;o of an Experimental knowledge of Chri&s;t, the meaning of which is that this Acquain|tance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, warms and heats their fancies, &s;ometimes they find great breakings of heart, &amp;c.</HI> The men you write again&s;t do pre&s;s men &s;o to know Chri&s;t, as to know him, is &s;aid, <HI>to be Life Eternal.</HI> They would be under|&s;tood as Divines &s;ay the Scriptures &s;hould be, when they u&s;e words of knowledge, <HI>verba no|titiae connotant affectum,</HI> viz. to co-&s;ignifie &s;uit|able affections: They mind men of &s;uch Texts as tho&s;e, 1 Joh. 2.3. <HI>Hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his Commandments:</HI> And v. 4. <HI>He that &s;aith I know him, and keepeth not his Commandments, is a lyar.</HI> And 1 Joh. 3.6. <HI>Who|&s;oever &s;inneth hath not &s;een him, neither known him.</HI> Now to abu&s;e Reverend Mini&s;ters for pre&s;&s;ing men to a practical, experimental, affe|ctionate knowledge of the <HI>Incarnation, Life, Death, Re&s;urrection, A&s;cen&s;ion,</HI> and <HI>Interce&s;&s;ion</HI> of Chri&s;t, and of his great <HI>Per&s;onal Excellencies,</HI> both <HI>Divine</HI> and <HI>Humane,</HI> was a thing &s;o bor|dering upon <HI>Bla&s;phemy,</HI> that hardly any thing can come nearer to it. There are two Errours more that I &s;hould be glad to convince Mr. <HI>Sher|lock</HI> of e're I conclude this Chapter; one is, that it was not <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t</HI> that he &s;hould have expos'd more or le&s;s, (for that is a Sacred and mo&s;t nece&s;&s;ary thing) but he &s;hould have reproved the profe&s;&s;ed <HI>re|jecters,</HI> and <HI>refu&s;ers</HI> of acquaintance with the
<PB N="232" REF="119"> <HI>Laws</HI> and <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> of Chri&s;t: He &s;hould have &s;aid, Here come they who &s;ay unto Chri&s;t, <HI>This man &s;hall not Reign over us. Come, let us break his Bonds, and ca&s;t his Cords from us.</HI> Here come they who &s;ay unto God, <HI>Depart from us, we do not de&s;ire the knowledge of thy ways.</HI> You &s;hould have remembred, that <HI>Chri&s;t will come in flames of fire to take vengeance on them that know not God;</HI> and therefore &s;hould have found fault with them <HI>that obey not the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t,</HI> not with them who &s;tir up them&s;elves and o|thers to know Chri&s;t, yea his <HI>Per&s;on;</HI> for of that <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks, when he &s;aith, <HI>that I may know him, and the Power of his Death,</HI> &amp;c. You have plainly &s;et the Saddle upon the wrong Hor&s;e, and mu&s;t take more heed another time. La&s;tly, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath built all his long Di&s;cour&s;e about <HI>Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t,</HI> up|on a fal&s;e and &s;andy Foundation, <HI>viz.</HI> a meer Dream of his own; as if Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> did go a|bout to &s;et up a <HI>Religion of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t</HI> in oppo&s;ition to the <HI>Religion of his Law and Go|&s;pel;</HI> which I dare &s;ay never entered into his heart to do, nor can any &s;uch thing, with any colour of rea&s;on, be gathered from tho&s;e two pa&s;&s;ages, viz. <HI>Sh. p.</HI> 38, and 39. from whence Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> commenceth two long Suits again&s;t Dr. <HI>Owen,</HI> giving him in the fir&s;t place this I|ronical Salute, <HI>I &s;hall not envy the Author the glory of this Di&s;covery, and therefore &s;hall hone&s;t|ly confe&s;s where I had it,</HI> viz. <HI>in a Book entitu|led Communion with God,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Written by</HI> John Owen, D. D. <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="233" REF="119">
<P>Now they that &s;hall impartially read tho&s;e two pa&s;&s;ages quoted out of <HI>J. O.</HI> his Book of <HI>Communion with God,</HI> upon which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> char|geth him with &s;etting up a <HI>Religion of Chri&s;ts Per&s;on,</HI> in oppo&s;ition to the <HI>Religion of his Do|ctrine,</HI> may ea&s;ily &s;ee, that the <HI>Promi&s;es</HI> which Mr <HI>Sh.</HI> produceth, will by no means bear the <HI>Conclu&s;ion</HI> which he draws from thence, or prove Dr. <HI>O.</HI> guilty of any &s;uch Errour as he chargeth him with; but as the Proverb &s;aith, <HI>There is a great deal of Cry, and but a little Wooll.</HI> The fir&s;t pa&s;&s;age in Dr. <HI>J. O's.</HI> Book, of which he makes &s;o much u&s;e, is this: <HI>Chri&s;t is not only the Wi&s;|dome of God, but made Wi&s;dom to us, not only by teaching us wi&s;dome, as he is the great Prophet of the Church, but al&s;o becau&s;e by the knowing of him we become acquainted with the wi&s;dome of God, which is our wi&s;dome.</HI> Thus far Dr. <HI>O.</HI> p. 87. Now what hurt in all this? At this great offence is ta|ken by Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> but I &s;ee none given. That <HI>Chri&s;t is the wi&s;dome of God,</HI> and not only &s;o, but <HI>made to us of God wi&s;dome,</HI> is the very expre&s;&s;ion of the Holy Gho&s;t in Scripture, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.30. That Chri&s;t teacheth us Wi&s;dom, as he is the great Prophet of the Church, is no Chri&s;tians doubt. Therefore the only words that have rai&s;ed all this clamour are the&s;e: <HI>but al&s;o becau&s;e by the knowing of him we become acquainted with the Wi&s;dome of God.</HI> Here Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> takes it for grant|ed that by <HI>him</HI> is meant the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t, though the word Per&s;on is not once u&s;ed in all this condemned pa&s;&s;age: and though Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> him&s;elf when he finds the word <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> doth ge|nerally
<PB N="234" REF="120"> con&s;true it to mean the <HI>Laws and Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t,</HI> not his <HI>Per&s;on.</HI> Suppo&s;e we then that the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t was there intended by Dr. <HI>J. O.</HI> What fal&s;e Divinity, or what bad &s;en&s;e is there, in &s;aying, that by knowing the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, we become acquainted with the Wi&s;|dome of God? I am bold to &s;ay that Acquaint|ance with the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t is one way to become acquainted with the Wi&s;dome of God: and Dr. <HI>O.</HI> &s;aith no more: for he &s;aith, <HI>Chri&s;t is made Wi&s;dome to us, not only by teaching us Wi&s;|dome, as he is the great Prophet, but al&s;o becau&s;e by that knowing of him, we become to be acquainted with the Wi&s;dome of God.</HI> Here Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> may note that Dr. <HI>O.</HI> owneth that <HI>Chri&s;t is made Wi&s;|dome to us by teaching us Wi&s;dome,</HI> that is, (as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> him&s;elf expounds it) <HI>by the Doctrines he Preached, and tho&s;e Revelations he hath made of God's will.</HI> How then doth Dr. <HI>O.</HI> exclude the Religion of Chri&s;t's <HI>Law and Go&s;pel?</HI> or &s;et Acquaintance with his <HI>Per&s;on,</HI> in oppo&s;ition to Acquaintance with his Go&s;pel? when you &s;ee he takes in both, in that &s;ingle pa&s;&s;age which you fir&s;t quarrel with? Is this fair play, Sir? would you be &s;o &s;erv'd your &s;elf? At that rate a man may find fault with the mo&s;t &s;ound, and judicious book that ever was written, yea with a book (if there were any &s;uch) written by an holy Angel, and &s;ent down from Heaven. But whereas you &s;tumble at tho&s;e words, <HI>viz.</HI> that <HI>by the knowing of Chri&s;t his Per&s;on, we become ac|quainted with the Wi&s;dome of God;</HI> to me they &s;eem to be of ea&s;ie, and &s;afe interpretation. For
<PB N="235" REF="120"> fir&s;t, I am per&s;waded that Chri&s;t executeth the Office of a <HI>Prophet,</HI> in revealing to us, not only by his <HI>Word,</HI> but al&s;o by his <HI>Spirit,</HI> the will of God for our Salvation. Now you &s;eem to be of opinion that Chri&s;t revealeth his will to us only by his Word (For if by his <HI>Spirit</HI> al&s;o, doubt|le&s;s Acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t by procuring us a greater effu&s;ion of his &s;pirit might increa&s;e our &s;piritual wi&s;dome.) I know ano|ther Gentleman of your opinion (if that be it) he, and his followers, <HI>viz. Socinus Solut. &s;crup. Re&s;pon&s;.</HI> 6. <HI>Sacrae Scripturae ita apertae, atque ex|peditae &s;unt, ut nemo eas qui non intelligat plane &s;tu|pidus non videatur.</HI> Al&s;o <HI>Simon Epi&s;copius, Di&s;p.</HI> 46. <HI>priv. coral.</HI> 1. <HI>An ulla operatione Spiritus &s;ancti &s;ine ullo alio medio opus &s;it, in voluntate, aut intellectu, aut in Scripturis promittatur, ad hoc ut quis credat, verbo externo propo&s;ito? Nos Negati|vam tuebimur.</HI> In plain <HI>Engli&s;h,</HI> the Tenet of the <HI>Socinians</HI> you know is, that God, and his will, may ea&s;ily be known by meer reading of the Scripture, without any illumination from the Holy Gho&s;t. You &s;eem to be of the &s;ame mind, for that you reproach Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> for mention|ing any other way whereby we may come ac|quainted with the Wi&s;dome of God than by the Revelations which he hath made of his will in the Scripture. If that be true, why doth Chri&s;t &s;ay, <HI>John</HI> 14.26. <HI>The Holy Gho&s;t whom the Father will &s;end in my name &s;hall teach you all things.</HI> We ex|pect not that the Spirit of God &s;hould reveal tho&s;e things to us, which are no where revealed in the Scriptures: but that he &s;hould make us know
<PB N="236" REF="121"> tho&s;e things more for our good, that he &s;hould help us to under&s;tand what otherwi&s;e we &s;hould not: therefore <HI>David</HI> &s;aith, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 119.18. <HI>Open thou mine eyes that I may &s;ee wonderous things out of thy Law. John</HI> 16.13. <HI>When the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all Truth: for he &s;hall not &s;peak of him&s;elf (viz.</HI> any new Truths that Chri&s;t had not him&s;elf delivered) <HI>but what&s;oever he &s;hall hear, that &s;hall he &s;peak.</HI> v. 14. <HI>He &s;hall re|ceive of mine, and &s;hall &s;hew it to you.</HI> And as the Spirit of God explaineth, &s;o likewi&s;e he apply|eth Truths to our hearts, <HI>which we</HI> our &s;elves could not apply. <HI>He witne&s;&s;eth with our Spirits that we are the Children of God, and cryeth in us, Abbah Father, and maketh us to know the things that are freely given us of God.</HI></P>
<P>But to come yet more clo&s;e, why &s;hould Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> make &s;o &s;trange of this, that <HI>by knowing of the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t we &s;hould become more acquain|ted with the Wi&s;dom of God?</HI> Is not <HI>Col.</HI> 2.3. pertinently quoted by Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> to confirm it, <HI>viz. For in him dwell all the Trea&s;ures of wi&s;dom and knowledge?</HI> Let Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> di&s;prove if he can, that tho&s;e words do mo&s;t directly refer to the <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t. I have el&s;ewhere &s;hewed great probability for it. Now, to be acquainted with him in whom are all the Trea&s;ures of wi&s;|dom, is &s;ure one good way to be wi&s;e. E&s;pe|cially con&s;idering that it is his Office as Prophet of the Church to teach us, and <HI>his Lips are to pre&s;erve knowledge,</HI> and he is appointed of God to be to us wi&s;dom, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But moreover the ve|ry <HI>Per&s;on</HI> of Chri&s;t is a mo&s;t excellent Gla&s;s, in
<PB N="237" REF="121"> which to behold the wi&s;dom, and all other the Attributes of God the Father, &s;ith Chri&s;t is <HI>the expre&s;s Image of his Father's Per&s;on, and the brightne&s;s of his glory.</HI> Did not Chri&s;t &s;ay to <HI>Philip,</HI> John 14.9. <HI>He that hath &s;een me hath &s;een the Father, and how &s;aye&s;t thou then, &s;hew us the Father?</HI> That Text is al&s;o greatly to our pur|po&s;e, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4.6. <HI>God hath &s;hined in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the Face of Je&s;us Christ.</HI> Let Mr <HI>Sh.</HI> deny then if he can, that knowing of Chri&s;t, is the way to more acquaintance with the Wi&s;dom of God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>The other pa&s;&s;age in Dr. <HI>Owen's</HI> Book, <HI>Of Communion,</HI> p. 92. is this, <HI>Tho&s;e properties of God (his pardoning Mercy,</HI> &amp;c.) <HI>Chri&s;t hath re|vealed in his Doctrine in that revelation which he had made of God and his Will, but the Life of this knowledge lies in Acquaintance with his Per&s;on, wherein the expre&s;s Image, and beams of this glo|ry of his Father doth &s;hine forth.</HI> That is, that the&s;e things, <HI>are clearly, eminently, and &s;avingly to be di&s;cover'd in Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> I &s;ay, this is that other pa&s;&s;age of Dr. <HI>Owen's,</HI> upon which Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> builds his Accu&s;ation, that Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> re|jecteth the <HI>Religion of Chri&s;t his Law and Go&s;pel,</HI> and betaketh him&s;elf only to the <HI>Religion of Chri&s;t's Per&s;on,</HI> and to <HI>Acquaintance with his Per|&s;on.</HI> But how injuriou&s;ly, he that runs may read; for Dr. <HI>Owen</HI>'s words are, that <HI>The Pro|perties</HI> (or Attributes) <HI>of God Chri&s;t hath re|vealed in his Doctrine, in that Revelation which he hath made of God and his Will</HI> (that is, in the
<PB N="238" REF="122"> Holy Scriptures) How then doth Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> reject Acpuaintance with the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t? Indeed he &s;aith, that <HI>the Life of this knowledge lyes in Acquaintance with his Per&s;on, or that they are eminently, clearly, and &s;avingly to be di&s;cover|ed in Je&s;us Christ.</HI> What Acquaintance with Chri&s;t is in Dr. <HI>Owen</HI>'s Divinity, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> tells us, p. 38. <HI>viz. a knowledge what Chri&s;t is, hath done, and &s;uffered for us;</HI> moreover, <HI>an Expe|rimental knowledge of the&s;e things</HI> it is that Mr. Sh. &s;aith, Dr. <HI>Owen,</HI> and &s;uch as he, pretend unto, p. 139. Now as Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> hath explained him, I think Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> hath &s;aid very well, for what will it profit any man to have the <HI>Letter</HI> of the Scripture at his fingers ends, all by heart, as they &s;ay, yea, a competent knowledge of the &s;en&s;e and meaning thereof, if he have not that which St. <HI>Paul</HI> did profe&s;s him&s;elf to thir&s;t after, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. <HI>v.</HI> 10. viz. <HI>that he might know Christ, and the power of his Re&s;urrection, and the Fellow&s;hip of his &s;ufferings, being made confor|mable to his death.</HI> Surely the Life of know|ledge is &s;o to know Chri&s;t as to believe in him, to love, delight, tru&s;t in, obey, and &s;tudy to plea&s;e him, above all others, to know the power of his Death, and Re&s;urrection, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and that is the knowledge Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> &s;peaketh of, and who dare, in expre&s;s terms, contradict that a&s;&s;ertion? Upon the whole matter I find Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> had as little rea&s;on to quarrel Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> for what he hath written touching this matter as tho&s;e two Brothers, of whom <HI>Camerarius</HI> &s;peak|eth in his <HI>Horae &s;ubci&s;iva,</HI> had to quarrel, and
<PB N="239" REF="122"> kill one another, which was but this. Walking out together in a brave Star light night, one of them, who was a <HI>Gra&s;ier,</HI> wi&s;ht that all the Firmament were one Rich Meadow, and his: the other being a <HI>Butcher,</HI> wi&s;ht that all the Stars in the Sky were &s;o many large Oxen. The Gra&s;ier replyed, what would you do with your Oxen? Said the Butcher, I would put them in|to your Meadow; but you &s;hould not Brother, &s;aid the Gra&s;ier; yea, Brother, but I would, &s;aid the Butcher; and &s;o they quarrelled (&s;aith my Author) till they kill'd one another. I &s;ay, Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> in reference to what Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> hath &s;aid about our acquaintance with the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t, had no more cau&s;e to quarrel him, than the Gra&s;ier had his Brother the Butcher, for &s;aying if all the Stars were Oxen he would put them in his Meadow (if all the Sky were that) and the other him for &s;aying he &s;hould not. I wi&s;h Mr. <HI>Sh.</HI> to con&s;ider, that as the <HI>Fall</HI> of Man came in at fir&s;t by means of affecting un|due knowledge, <HI>viz. to be like God, knowing good and Evil.</HI> So Man's Recovery is appoint|ed to be by means of that knowledge which is proper for him, according to that of our Saviour, <HI>John</HI> 17.3. <HI>This is Life Eternal, to know thee, and Je&s;us Chri&s;t, whom thou ha&s;t &s;ent.</HI> Let him therefore take heed how he derides that kind of knowledge which alone is &s;aving.</P>
<P>Let him al&s;o remember, that at that great day every body that can make the lea&s;t pretence thereunto, will lay claim to Acquaintance with Je&s;us Chri&s;t (which he hath &s;o much expo&s;ed)
<PB N="240" REF="123"> and that it had been better for any man never to have been born, than when he &s;hall knock at Heaven Gate, to be an&s;wered, For what Ac|quaintance knock you here? <HI>Depart, I know you not.</HI> In that day the <HI>Acquaintances of Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> will appear to be the only happy per|&s;ons: and I dare &s;ay him&s;elf will wi&s;h, if he continue to de&s;pi&s;e them (as &s;uch) that he had rather ca&s;t in his lot among&s;t them. God grant that I may be ignorant of all things el&s;e, rather than of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and him Crucified: For St. <HI>Paul determined to know</HI> (that is to make known) nothing el&s;e but that among&s;t the <HI>Corinthians,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 2.2. I &s;hall conclude this Chapter with tho&s;e words of the great Apo&s;tle, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3.8. <HI>Yea doubtle&s;s, and I count all things but lo&s;s for the ex|cellencies of the knowledg of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, my Lord: for whom I have &s;uffered the lo&s;s of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<HEAD>ERRATA.</HEAD>
<P>Reader, For the Rea&s;on rendered at the end of my <HI>Prodromus,</HI> I &s;hall leave it to thy &s;elf candidly to correct the Typographical Errours, advertizing thee but of two: <HI>viz.</HI> In <HI>p. 205. l. 12.</HI> for <HI>manifold,</HI> read <HI>manife&s;t.</HI> and in <HI>p. 209. l. 12.</HI> be &s;ure in &s;tead of <HI>Man,</HI> to read <HI>God-man.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
