This book made available by the Internet Archive.

To the Learned, zealous, Faithfull Minifhrs of Jefus Chrift, Mr. Richard

PV**/, Matter ct Pembroke-Hall in Cambridge^ Mr, 'intheny Bttrgts, Pallor of Sutton-Coldfie I d\n way-wictfhirt, Members of ihc Reverend Alfcmbiy of Divines, my very

much valued !-iicndsand Brethren

in the wot k and Patience

oftheGofpel.

Moft'DearBrethrtH,

Never well under-flood iheir meaning, who crave Patronage to their Writings from the meere great ones of the times. If they need or defirc a borrowed honour, methinks A 2 they

The Efiftle Dedicatorj.

they quite miftake their way, land go for water to the top of | Teneriffe, wh ich they flaould | feek v in the valleys or ftill | Sowing Springs.To give them jour Writings to ioftro& i them 3 is agreeable co our Of-! fice and duty: but to fubmit jthera to their cenfures, or ; crave the proteftion of their i Greatnefie$ 5 and prefix: their names as the Signatures of | Worth, as if Truth did ever j i the more dwell withia, where I this gilded fign is hang'd without : this feemeth to nie, to be as needlefle, as abfufr'd. The felf-idolizing fin of Pride is fo naturall to all m$n s cfpeci-ally when furthered by dignities and worldly pomp, that they are apt enough without % tempter, to take themfelves

for

The Epiftle Dedicatory.

for the fummumgehus in every Predicament as well as their ownc. A little help wil mount them above their Teachers, and a little more above Ordinances ; but the top of the ambition is to be above God ; that on them as the AlfbatW may depend, and to them as the Omega z\\ may afcribe. I think it a more needfull work (not for our honour, but their j ownfafety)tomakeihem un-i derftand, that Princes and Parliaments are Schollers in that Schoole where Chrift is theMafter,an$ we his Uihers: and that (atkaft) in refpeft of our Nuncupative 5 Dcchra-j tive power^e are their Rulers (in fpiricuals, whom they arc! bound toob;y, ^^•13.7.1*7-! and that a!! Minifters arc feiJ A 3 ih

The Epifite DedtcAtory.

(hops or Ovcrfeers in the language of the holy Ghoft, Aft. 20.28. *W/.i.i.&c.andnot the fervants or pleafers of mzn>Gal. 11.10.

They leave as the bare name of their Teachers, fo that we will teach them nothing but what they have taught us fir ft, and leave out the hard fayings wh ich they cannot beare. For my part, though I have found as much refpe& from fuch as matt) yet have I kno*n very few of the moft Religious great ones, but if I would deal but half as plainly as my com-miflion and patterns doe require, I (hould quickly turne their refpe& into iadignition. If the old round dealing Prophets and Apoftlcs were among us, I doubt feme pious \ Gen-

The EpiftU 'Dedicatory.

Gentlemen would cake them for fawcy, proud, pragmatical fellowes 5 and would think their tongues ( though not their revenues)did need a reformation. All this is no bleroirti to Magiftracie, the Ordinance of God, but to humane qature,that for the mod part can as ill beare a high e-ftate, as a mans brains can endure to ftand on the pinade ofa fteeple. Nor is this to blame any due honor to fuch, but to excufe my felfe, that I employ not my breath to fill any empty bladder. For you who are lo;v, and full, I ftp* pole the acknowledgement of your worth is leflc dangerous. As I am more beholden to Reafon and Religion, then to Greatneflc/o doe 1 feel them

com- \

command my efteem and af-fe&ions mod powerfully. Your names therefore have I chofen to prefix to this paper, i. As acknowledging you indeed fie cenfors of my Do&rines having alwayes valued the judgement of Ari-ftotle in Philofophy before A-lexanders^ and thinking your approbation more confidera-ble then al the Lords or Commanders in the Land. If you approve, I fhallbe the more confirmed ( and fo will my people for whom 1 write it, who know and hdfognw you.)

I If you difallow, (for I cannot

(conceit that there is nothing tobedifaiiowed) I (hill fat i

jpe<9:,and fearch againe.

j 2.1 defire alfo hereby to;

acquaint the world with the j

reverend

Tke Spifiie 'Bedicatory.

reverend efteem I have of you, and to (hew the contemners of j the Miniftry fome examples ! for their confutation : That they irho think that Enghnd hath not as learned, holy, ex-j perimentall, judicious, hum-1 Me, heart-piering Preachers, as any other Nation whatfoe-ver,may look upon you and confeffe their errour : That for all the diffentioas that have fo wafted borh Church and State, it may appcare in you, wee had lome that were I lovers of peace * and if all had been fo minded, our wounds had bin heald.That our ignorant yonglings that ru(h upon the Miniftry ( who may fee j thetnfelves in that glaffe, i I Hw&.fO may confider their ! diftancefrom fuchasyou,and

be I

Thetyifi e Dedicatory,

be humbled. That thofe who wonder at the fpreading of errors in our people,may fee in youj we had fome that taught them better 5 And Alexander did unjuftly hang Epheftions Phyficion becaufe hee dyed. And that out Authors or defenders of Itroboms worfhip, whofe fingers itch to be doing with the Prophets that gainfay them, may ice what manner of men they have todeale with, whofe worth is fufficient to difgrace the proudeftperfecutqnrs,and make their names hatefuil to all generations : To whom I commend Six waiter Ravleighs tme obfervation (Hift. of the world par.iJ,4.c.$.§.6.) [If Anti-pater upon his conqqeft had carried all other a&ions never

fo

TheEpifil DtdicAWy.

fo mildly, yet fot killing De-\ rnoftbenes^ all that read his clo->] qucnt Orations, doe condemn him for a bloody Tyrant to this day: Such grace and reputation doe the learned Arts finde in all civill Nation*, that the evill done to a man famous inoneofthem, is abletoble-miib any a&ion how good fo-cver otherwife it be or honorably carrycd.] Tofuchends as thefe have I here prefixed your names; and not to in-terefle you in the difhonour of the imperfe&ions of this (lender Tra&ate. \\ Farewell, Reverend Bre-tben, and go on to be exemplary in all fpirituallexcellencies: And that the Lord of the Haiveft would fend forth

more

The EfiftU Dedicatory.

more facb, and lengthen and (bcceed your laboors to his ChHrcb, is ebe hearty prayer of

Tour unworthy feBow-

fervant,

1649- Ri. Baxter.

To the Reader.

Heflow progreft of knowledge, and the {mall addition that each age doth make to the foregoing^botb in common Sciences and Divinity, dotbfeema wonder to many. Among many others, tbefefoure are no fmatl impediments to this deferable increase.

I. Every ignorant\ empty

kraine ( wbuh usually hath me

bigbefi efleem ofitjeife)hA:h the

a liberty

To the Reader.

liberty of the Prejje , whereby (through the common itch that pride exciteth in men, to feeme (ornehodyin the wofid) the number of bookes is grown fo great, that they begin with many to grow contemptible i and a man may beftow a great many yeares to find out the Authors weaknejjfe^ and that his books have nothing in them but common ; and Jo many mufi be tojjedover before we find out thofe few that Are cleareand folid^ that much of our livef 4rt\ fpentin the difcovery: And yet he is thought to fcape well that onely lofeth his time and labour and gets no more hurt by them.) Some think the truth Ml not thrive among tk . till every mam have leave to fott> both in Prejje and Pulpit *H$ pteafe • God forbid that » we fixould ever feet ha t % day I

;&MhcR**<Jcr.

| day I If ten mens Joyces be loud-] i er thenotHy then would thenoyfe \ ofErr our drown the voyce of Truth; Ignorance is ufually c!a-! mwous and load, but Truth is\ modeft, though zealow:Ove Or j tbodox faithjull Teacher, would\ fcarcebefeen or fade room for^ the. crowd of feduccts: For the godly ^compared with tht ungodly^, tm not neer fo few as the men of. deer understanding, in com-parifon of the ignorant : And ihiy are woft forward to fpeake, thatb$omAea$.

2. Others then are of much like under standing and ends m the former^ who yet tafythe contrary veanes to obtain? thofe -end*. They bpow nofuch way to \ be the onely men, as magtfertally tohlcnctallconttadiBors: If it were one ly for apparent and\ 1 « * eighty \

To the Reader.

mighty truths r> I fhuld com., mend their ztak: But, the mi fa chiefe is ± that, the) will he Creed.maker sthemfelvi^or put their Commentaries into the Text 9 or fa conjoyne them^ as. the Rhempi that the Text may notwd*\ in the day-light alone; And fa the Creed of mmy* wfio have a quicke and eafie faith is fuelled as big almoji \xs. Aqui-x&sSummes± 4/one of the'Fri mitive CMartyn were aliv among us , and frofegedbut what wxs in his ancient Creed % hee would fear ce be taken by maty f or * Christian. I am not all fa narrow in my Creed \ as Doll or Taylor urgetb: but I have obfarved more *f this, fart of men contemne his Arguments y then are able to anfwer themi The fa men therftfalves believe

£ V fol

-' - —~ ; :— —i r -; *■ '

TochcReader.

nuck( fiJe hqrjnna ) that I they liriow but little * And yet they would haveno body know more then they , or no body fpeake that filth not as they. 1 T$e) would have nothing (aid but w) at is fa Id tlrealy ; and tJi&it is better ( ii print) fa? ?*jibing, jhey think it a re, preach to change our opinions % or hoNthem with referves: Pu-dethrcopprobrU nobis,&c. . But O that tbefe men could tell us how. to remsdy it I To cry down that ignorance which dweU let^m m*. is more to the credit of Knowledge then of me. But the fe men are like many fuperfi* clall Scholia/*, who when they have /pent many yeans in the yniverjitics , have ho way to prove themselves proficients, but

to ex toll Learningjtndcn down a 3 the

To

mm:

the unlkmed, tbdtfrtkey'm,

caft the fufpitionfrpni thel

Je/ves upon others : Eyenfo do^

theft in crying dmn enows. /

I know this fmall TraB mil net

, rellifb mil with thzfe mens pal-

lats • neither & h ambitious of

i their favour, or yet fo quarrel.

\fome as puyopfy to ^VMe

I them ; though feme words nixy

; zrot £*y#J tfj£<tf to their conceit* #

' M f abkorre the prcjfB of l^

; !ian ro <aty?™y. rfc? Chrj^t^

\Faith, fygiving all Setts a 11

\berty of contending ; fo a-w J

\loath thut any fucb , mo after

Ifhouldbe produced by nature who

j fhouN be a profejjedenemy, to. the

! advancement of Reafon.'\ or

Jboutd prefume to boundtftai fed

of Knowledge which Gad hath

'promifedfha'lcover the eafttfi

and to fay, hither to jpd h thou

To the Reader.

*«. and no further: For my part, IrnuftfaM Butgerfdicius in prsfat. ad fecundamcdit.Lo-uic jWipw wrrlStt w'«p<"> Vis enttti humana? mentis ira circumfcripta eft , uc omnia nonvideatomni tempore; & quxantcaprobavit, poftac-curatius examen itcium ltn-pVobet.tejiciatoue. Hocadca reipfa compeTio tepws tn audits meditationibuiqae me-W tit qux olim mihi vifa font Certimmi & qmfi ex tripode bronunciata , ea roehonbus rationibus mows deprehen-dam, admodum efle a ventate Men*. A*dfure Divinity hath

m »reat depths as vhtlofopby^ efveciaBy where it it interwoven with it. And to them that wiH certifie me in my miflakes, Imuji fay as Ariftotlefofc* tffl*W> \

To the Reader.

he preferred him the me&nes of his cure ( refcrente ^liano, lib.?, devar, Hift.) Ne,in-quit, me cures vchic bubul-' cum, velut foflarem,fed prius caufam ediflere, ficenitn fi-cili pcrfuafionc me morige-rum reddideris. Crudelilft* ma cnim eft (inqmc Rkfche!) \Sc infaniflima tyrannis, cam jqais alios; uc a fedi&is attar* ganr,cogcre vulr, nulla di&> rumevidentiaallarl ! 5, But the grestejh enemy to knowledge of aS y is mensftudy-ing onety names and words 5 in fiead of'things . Both in Sciences find Divinity this hath de~ bafed mens underfiandings. Men get all the termes of Art* and theologicdl definitions^ /.< ilinRions\ Axiomes , &c. *t K tfmr fingers end- but to fiu*ly

the

ToihtR?vder.

the wKureoftbe things them.

felilef^hey are. utterly carehfje.

V?heir having Ijitb rnoretn

'their mmon ,' ih * n m th ,t :r redon andjudgement: Iherg you'may f»de perhaps a large

j Mnkxfkure , or a- Farrago N-.tionumfccun.darum, fed,

fcrV fine primis. Tbtj b*ye\ !ear*e4{a4P'*-r,ots)t»fpt*ktbe

fame mrds which their Turns Ud Authors have put mo tieirmoutb-es ilftputUemM of their &eaten.road,and they are ' ataftand: ibeft mtnmqmtb \ indufay makegoodLinguip oY Ht^riam^jtAn^kH

muffer an Army mtbout their Soles :■ gut for Philosophy and ■Divinity, they have Utile, more then tie' Careers bo'fe nht.n be hltta Library on his back': AS

— rtm-rS ;

in Dialog, demufcdcv^^o Do6tomrt dusd TikXtafle*, Alii cniai eruditi (tint cjaafi raemorid tenus dolfti \ alii veritatam penfitatores. Du6 itaque ad authoritateni pctun-mr, Lir & artis perkUS fiV, & exeorum nutflero perieVq^os depoficum eft fcientice -tfibti-nal. What I would fay te thefe men^ they may read (if they will m<& tbi hhour) in Ritf-chell's Preface to his late Contemplationcs "Mctaphy.

Anif([which is the kitting effeFt of'this venome ) ihefe preachers ufiullf teach their fsopk a Chripanity' fuitabh \to their own* Tbeohgie, which conjifetb in repeating ceria<>tie x words } andformes , a nd ufmg certain ceremonious anions, 'ant

then

To the Reader.

then they are a* good Christians they themfetves are Di« vines.

4, And yet were there no \mifcarriage t* our fludm 5 ; Knowledge could not make that happy progreffe which feme ex-feB : For it is not inftudies as \ it ii fn HmufaBureSy that one \ man may begin where another] left ; but every man must fetch ! it from the very principles him. J felfe ; Neither can we take the words ofthofe that have jludied it before m 5 for that is neither a founds nor fatisfaBory know, iedge : whence it comes to pajje, (faith Ppmble Vind. Grat.p. 168.) that while wee are bujie ia examining our forefathers i&uentions^ and posterity im placed in trying our examina-ttons } neither we nor they have x

™* h '

To rthcftcttfer.

much time to adde any thing for the increase of Learned Knowledge : whence you may guejje at one ca&je , why many Sciences y for fame thoufands *f yeares have kept one pitchy and not grown* above that dwarfifh feature that they had in thefr infant invention ; and alf* what the reafon is that many that read mop , prove not the deepetl Schollersyfor no great*? impediment to exaft Learning then, to make ufe of other mens understandings , and negleft o#r owne*

1 [peak not this , as if I had overcome thefe impediments, any more tbe» others • tut becaufe I have perhaps more keeie hin~ dred by them , and fo take my felfe bound to wame thee of the pit that 1 havefalnein* 4n4

with

- - ■ -

To the Reader.

with all to let thee know , that if godly men themfelves while they lye in thtfe fnares r fbaltop-ptfeany truthin this Tra8> it is no winder > but a thing to be ex* ptSfed,

Togivethee tfoHiftory ofthf contption and nativity of tbefe A phonfmes,** i the reafon why I trouble ihe world with more Boo Lies, which 1 blame in others\ underfland, that this is but a* Appendix to another Treatife going to the PreJJe on a mate excellent Subjetl : Al\o, that ha* ving occafion therein to touch upon, Match. 25.55/ I was deftredto explain* in what, fence* it is i that Cbrift giveth the reafon of hisfentence in judgement from mem works : /« anfwer hereto (andtpcleare (ome other incident'doubts of the lil^e n*\

ture

To. tht Reader.

ture) I wrote thefe Pofitions or *ipborifme$ s \ which when feme- \ had got, they complained of e& ! | /cure brevity^ and defired fome j \fuUer explication < which when ! / had done , that which before \ wat but mo or three leaves, an nexedus an Appendix to the\ fore mentioned Treatife , did \ [well to this bignefle, that I was \ faint to let it gee alone. Could I have got Copies enow for my ; owne friends^ whom I ambmind to injlruB , other men had not betne like to b&Vdbeen trouUed with it • If thm pleife , rforas mayst let it pajj'e without tkim^ obfervx\ion : If otherwife, it is fo (mill, that it will tah a? but little of thy time to read it, nor adds mu?tr t6 the commn bur* den; Somt few paffage there are which I am not fo clean and

conn

To rbt Reader,

confident in my felfe ; J$ the nature of the Death threamld itithefirfl CdWntoti The.ne-cefiitftftht-funttaall p<?rjS«c mance or execution' of all threat-rings • the inter eft tf CbriHs ABive Obedience te thofe Lam tfbSch did bind* man in inno-cency^ in thtwork of fatisfo-ttton , as conjoined with bis Fajfitit Oieiience to make up the fame frke. But as thefe art 'but fetp^fo lamr.ot utterly Vi a hfftvtonceming them , 4u4 feme to difcerne a flro&g pro-babi lity ofirhat I have i»ritttn> therein,

A For you^ my-Friends ,, tvhom Ohri W hath committed t$ my Teaching and O verfight y as to an unworthy Vjher. under him in- hh Schook \ axcLsteward m hisBoufe^and ofkis Myfxeries^ . JpuL

«-u

TochcRwd*.

1 .fttblijb this for-your fdJvt and ufe; i.{ '

that points controverted *r4 : i& r )\ ter written thtin f reached^ andi read than beard • efpecJally^ where the greateft part of tie \ Auditory is unc^pable of u**t derflpnding them.

2. Tet is tkisD-o&rine offo) great concernment y andfo nser ! the FQundati^ that 4>f\dltyf controverfies agitated i#> $k#[ Church y there s few that,doe better defer ve pur ftudy, and few, lhaX l&P.fa loath yourftiould be ignorant of It is myjxttf* ding.joy\ thatGfid hath kept-you w, ihis.difirafted age, fron doting about que Hons that en*\ gender frife y and hatK : ^ive^} i you. to xlealx fe» the mojlfusfej \ mentally undoubted^andptaUi-\

'call

——

To the Reader.

call Truths, and to {f end your time inpraTice, and peace^apd promoting th$ falyation cf the ignorant about you^ when others | are taken up in cenfuriug their brethren ^renting the Churchy \ oppoflag the truth,or wrangling | altoutleff'^r things which are \ quite above thsir understandings* Hold on ibis wiy ; and if you have not in it mort Com mnnion with Cbrift , more: growth in Grace y and oh your heath beds a more comfortable review of your lives , and at l^l a [better reckoning made thereof, then the other % then j I have deceived you . Vet , .;> I wzuld have you negleB no truth , fo especially what time >i7* can [pare for controverfie 5 l*t it*biefdy be [pent upon thefe that are fo weighty. Be afhameet _ that

To the Reader.

that men fhould heart you difpu» ting about Circumft ant tails of Difcipline ,. Bapttfme , Sup-per 3 &c % before you know bov to bee justified before GO D y Or underftand the DoBrine of the Covenants , Redemption^ Faith, Obedience &c.

3. The Bookes that are mitten? ofjujlifcation are many, and fome great y which 1" fyiew you had not time to read • and if)oh did, perhaps would lofe much of your labour , as I have done : Therefore I defired to fet the mofl neceJJ'ary part before you in a narrower compare. I never intended the full handling of the DoHriae of justification • thefe Aphorifmes being but for the Anfwering of a particular Question

#om '"' containing as much at \ tke iMtttf Yolitmes. '• Jtf'/ow* »£»*«"/ have omilteil the proofe 'of mi ARertions, partly became the^eeynedfU-Kt^rtobethe

[toxins i farth for brevity ,\ and partlrbecauje it if for your ■fa to Womlatn (.jeij at-\uk to chare *hat you. doubt \jF. < A MM\ Ihope, doeun-, mmaf&l to take upon;

\yMnnot)et reach to ; fee in,

^someivtdence^iflejUed.

Uird'andrnore necejjary than

fh%jpimgi^ -*«**»y

TotkeRfcd^

knomng\ .that X^muft fhonly put off this Tabernacle] andffi fallen from you y [ thought good to ufe this 'endeavour , that you msj bee able after my departure , to t have tbefe things in % your runclerstandings and remembrance ( 2 P^\ r. 14, 1 J..-) And while' [ am in this jleli , I (ball not

ceafe to x^dm^iiM «. **i pray on your behalfe , that you may beware Itf yee alfo faing led amy with the errot^r if the' wiclgcf, fall from yo.ur r: Q?ne (ledftftnsjfe • but miy grov in Grace r - and in the Knowledge of our LORD and S A "K l-

or/^vlESUS CHRIST:

Nor (hi J l I difirt any grex!-

er Honour or .Advancement

on this Etrth, than with A-

»... * btlitte,

TotheRcidcr.

bilitU^ Sincerities and Sue-

cejje D to be

AServancofChrift,

in tfee work of your

\ t y Salvation,

Ri. Baxter.

Ktdirminfter. Novemh.i 7 .

1

(l

t-

APHORISMES

OF

IUSTIFICATION,

With their Explication Annexed.

Wherein alfo is opened the Nature of the Cove-

na»ts,Satisfa6lion,Righteouf-ncfle, Faith, Works, &c.

Thefis I.

O d hathfirfl a Will of pur* pofe 5 whereby he determi-mh of Events: what fball he y tnd what fball not be 7 de fa-£o: Secondly, And a Legifla-ive y or Preceptive trill, for the \overnment of the Rational! B Creature •

7 he Nature of the

Creature: whereby he determi-netbwhatfhallfo, andwhat (ball not le, de jure, or in pint of duty ; and in order thereto, conclu* deth of Rewards and Funify-ments.

Explication.

T^HisDiftinaion of the Will of A God into his Will of Purpofc, and his Will of Precept \ is very commonly ufed by Divines, and ex• plained by feme, efpteially, Do&orj Trvtfe frequently, and Doctor Ed j ward Reignolds , in his Sermons onj the Humiliation dayes, onHof. 14. Yet 1$ not the exceeding ncceffity and ufcfulnefTe of it difeerned by many j nor is it improved accordingly by any that I have read.- Itisncan of kin to the common diftin&ion o£Voluntas fgni>& BcnepUcit*, but not the fame: The Tearm [jig**] being more comprehend ve, yet (in

mt

Covenants opened*,

my judgement) leffe proper and convenient then this [ Legiflative VSf ill, or voluntas Tnecepti i) As the o\Avzife(hzw$,Pf*cipit ac prohibit t permnityconffility implet. Two of i thefe A6ts, to wit, Permiflion and Operation, fall under the Will of Purpoie ,as they are the effe&sand revelarion of it; but not under the Legiflative Will: And indeed the Schoolmen by their Voluntasfigni % do intend no other Will, but the fame which they call BentfUciti t whofeObjeft is event, as it is uncertainly feprefented to us by thofc five fignes: And beeaufe they are fuch uncertain Agnes (the contrary to what they feem to import, being frequently certain;) therefore they tell us that this isbutmetapho-rieally cailed the Will of God ,v;z,. by a fpeech borrowed from the manner of men, whofignirle their Will by fuch kinde of Action*; fee Acjuin, futA,ia:i*.Que/l.\9. Art.\\,\i. And Schibler, Metaph. of this. But that which 1 call the Legifla. B 2 live

The nature of the

tive or Preceptive will, hath another object , viz,, not event but duty ; and is Metonymically rather then Metaphorically called Gcds Will, it being the effect and revelation of his reall unfeigned Will. For God doth not feeme to Will that this or that (hall be our daty, and fo fpeake after, the manner of men (according to the fcnfe of their Voluntas ftgni) but hcc willcth it unfeignedly.

Neither is this DiftinSion the fame with that which difFerepceth Gods revealed Will from his fecret. For his revealed Will containeth alio part of the Will of his purpofe, and all the will of precept : The meere proprieties, and alio the pro-mifesand threatnings.fo farasthey point out future event, are the Revealed part of the Will of Gods purpole. Ttlevus himfclfe in his conference with Ow™ (eemes to approve of this Diiincuon ; where he diftingui(beth of Gods Will according toits Obje&,zri&. vet quod.

Covenant! opened*

ipfe vult facere t vel quod a nobis vult^eri : If in this laii branch he fpe:.kenct de officio an J of this preceptive will , rather then de events and of the will of purpofe, then he canmeane it onely ofa conditional! w'illofpurpofe.

As we ufe to diftinguifh betwUc the legall will of the Kingpubliqiy manifeftingour c'ury in the Laws, j and his perfbnail private will ; fo f murt we do here.

The necefluyof this diftincYion is fo exceeding great, that but little of the doflrinall part of Scripture can be weN underftood without it. The verity of it is alfo unqueftion-able: for none but the grolely ignorant will deny 5 that Evenc and Duty, Purpofe and Law, are truly diftinft, or that both thefe laft are called in Scripture and common cuRome of fpeech _ The Will of God.

And therefore it is a fenceleiTc

Objection , that wee hereby make

two wills in God,". and thole con*

B 3 tndiftory.

The Nature of the

fradi&ory s For firft, we only make them tw© diftin& A<5h of one and the fame will : whereof that of purpofe is lefle revealed , and doth Icfle concern us, yet is moil properly called his will, as being fuch as in man we call the EHrite A& of it : but that of precept is all revealed and doth more concerne us; yet as it is in his Law it nenely Metony-mcally called his Will as being only the difcovery of his \ 7 Vil\ i properly fo called.

And ily Contradiction there is none;for they are not de eodsm; they have to do with feverall Ob ■ jeds ; To Will that it (hall be Abrahams duty pro hoc tempore to facriflee his fon ; and yet that de event* it (hall not be executed, are far from eontradi3ory. To Will that it (hall be the Jews duty , not tokillChriit, and yet that eventually chey fhall kill him , is no con-tradition. To will that it fnall.be 'Pharaohs duty to. let Ifrael go; and yet that in poynt of event hee

(hall

Covenants opened.

(hall not let them go, is no contradiction. Indeed, if God had willed, that he ("hall let them go, and he fhall not eventually, or that it fhall be his duty, and it fhail not; either of thefe had been a contradiction undoubted.

But I havelargely explained,and more fully improved this Diftio-dion under the Difpute about Uni-verfall Redemption, and therefore fhall fay no more ofit now.

Thcfis IT. F/V/?, Prsdeftination, EltBi-on, Reprobation, or Pretention. Secondly^ the Covenant betvixt the Father and the Son. Thirdly the ab[olute Pr&mifes of Regeneration andyerfeverance.FoHrtb-1% the fulfilling of thofe Promises by differencing Grace, are all in the feries under the will of God$purpofe m

The Nature of -the

Explication.

IJ «of very great ufe rounder-ftand which of tbefe Wills every one of Gods particular words or works do fall under,

i. That Predeftination, Eleai. on, and Reprobation, are under this Will of Purpofeonly, is undoubted. 2< Divines ufe to mention a Co. venanting between the Father and the Son about the work of Rederop -tion : It is called a Covenant but improperly/peaking afcer the manner of mem Properly it is but the Decree of God concerning Chrifts Incarnation, his work, and hisfuf-fermgs, and the fuceeiTc of thefe, and what (Sod will further do thereupon. This therefore falls under this Genius, and fo doth theFathers giving the Ele& to Chrjit, which*is but part of this,

3s Thofe promifes of taking the hard heart out of ui t and giving hearts of flefli, one heart, a new heart, and of putting his fear in us, that

Covenants opened*

that wee fliall not depart frem him a &c. sre generally taken to be Abfclure prcmiies ( for here is no Condition exprtiled or intimated) madetoa!ltheEkc"t and only them, as not yet regenerate; and To not to any cither named or qualified pcr-fons. Thefe are not there To re fulfilled upon condition of our Faith, or made ours by beleev : ng, as other prcmifes are: For Faith is part of the thing promifed, and the perfbns are unregeneratf, and confequently unbclec vers when thefe prcmifes are fulflllfd to them. Therefore thefe | Ab/b'ute promifes are but meere gradous prcdiclicns what God will do fcr his Elc&, the comfort whereof can be received by no rran till the benefit be received, and they be to him fulfilled : Therefore as all meer predi(5tions,fo alfo thefe promifes do fall under the Will of Purp?ie, and not of Precept.

4. So alfo doth the fulfilling 'of

thefeto particular peifcns: theaclu-

allchufing or calling of fome while

I o The Nat fire of t be

others are paft by: The bedewing of that faith which is the condition of the Covenant : The giving of perfeverance : And all the pafiages of fpeciall, erfe&uall, differencing Grace. The knowledge of this is of great ufe in expediting the Armini-an Controversiesas you (hall perceive after : Some parts of Scripture do in feverall refpe&s belong to both thefe Wills; fuch are fome promifes and threatningsconditional!, which as they are predictions of what {hall come to pafle, do belong to the wiH Purpofe, but as they are purpofely delivered and annexed to the com -mands and prohibitions for incite ment to Duty, and rerlraint from Sin, (which was indeed the great end of God in them) lo they belong to the Wi'l of Precept: For the pro mife of Reward, and the threatning o£Punifhment, are reall parts of the Law or Covenant, fo of Hiltory All this is only a preparative tathe opening more fully the nature o "the Legillative. WilUnd what tails under

it : For the Will of Purpoie, aid wRat is undent, ♦ have no intention any further to handle*

Theils HI,

Fir ft,The mil of God concerning duty is exprejfed wbolj tn bis written Lam. Secondly, ivbub Laws are promulgate ande^a^li-fhed by way of Covenant , wherein the Lord engageth himfelfe to reward thofe that perjorme its conditions^ andtbieateneththt fe. nalty to the violaters thereof.

Explication*.

l;XTOt but that much of Gods xN Will is alfo contained in the Law of Nature; or may by the meere uleof Reafon be learned from Creatures, and Providence*: But yet this

i&>

is nothing againft the Scriptures fuffieicney and perfection: For t5e-fides all the fuperadded PofitiveSj the Scripture alfoeomajnes all that which we call the Law of Nature; and it is there to be found more legible and difcernable than in the beft of our obfeurc, deceit!ulh corrupted hearts.

a. All perfect compulfive Laws have their penalty annexed, (orelfe they are butmeerly directive) but notufually any reward propounded to tbeobeyers: Iris fufficient that the Subject know his Soveraignes pleafure, which he is bound to ob-ferve without ary reward. Meere Laws are enacted by Soveraignty? Meere Covenants are entred by equalls, or perfbns dif-engaged to each other in refpeft of the contents of the Covenants, and therefore they require mutualleonfent.Thefe therefore made by God, are of a mixt ratu e; neither meere Laws, nor meere Covenants, but both. He hath enacted his Laws as our So- veraigne

veraigne Lord, without waiting for the Creatures confenr, and will pu-ni& the breakers, whether they confenu>rno: But as it isa Covenant^ there muft be a rettipulation from the Creature 5 and God will not performe his conditions there expreffed, wiihout the Covenanters eonfent, engagement, and performance of theirs.

Yet is it called frequently in Scripture [a Covenant,! as it is offered by God, before it be accepted and entered into by the Creature : beeaufe the condefcention is only on Gods part • ai:d in reafon there fhouid be no queftion of the Crea -tures confent, k being fo wholly and only to his advantage. Gen. 9. 11,17. Sxoh 34.28'. % Dcut. 30«I. 2 Kings 23,2..&c. ^There arc fome generall obfeure Threatnings annexed to the prohibitions in the La^y of Nature j that is,Nature may difcernc that God willpunifh the breakers of his Law, but how, or with what degree of punifhment

puniflhment it cannot difcern : Alfo it may collect that God will be favourable and gratious to the Obedient : but it neither knows truly the conditions , nor the nature or greatneffe of the Reward,nor Gods engagement thereto. Therefore as it is in Nature ^ it is ameer Law* and noc properly a Covenant. Yea to *Adam in his perfection, the forme of the Covenant was known byfuperadded Revelation, and not written naturally in his heart*

Whether the threatning and pu • nifhment do belong to it only as it is a Law , or alfo as it is a Covenant , is of no great moment; feeing it is really mixtof both. It is called in Scripture alfo, the curfc of the Covenant : 2) cut. 29.20* 21.

Thefts. 4.

Thefirft Covenant m&de with

Adam/'

Adam did promt'fe life upon condition of perfeB obedience, and threaten death upon the leap difobedience*

Explication.

THe promife of li'e is not ex-preffed, but plainly implycd in the threading of death. That this We promifed was oncly the continuance of that ttate that Adam was then in in Paradice,u the judgment of raoit Divines ; But what death it was that is there threatened , is a Queltion of very great dilrlcu ty, and fome moment. The iam^ dam» nation chat followcth the breach of the New Covenant, it could not be: no moretfeen the life then en. joyed is the i^me with chat which the New Covenant promifeth. And I cannot yet aflent to their judgement, who think it wasoneiy that dea.h which confuicth in a meerlfe- paranon

pa ration of ibule and bodyjoralfo in the annihilation of both, sstdams feparaced foule muft have enjoyed happinefle, or endured mifery ; For that our foulcs when feparated are in one of theie conditions, and not annihilated orinfenfible , I have proved by twenty Arguments from Scripture in another booke. As Adamshfe in Paradife was,no doubt incomparably beyond ours in happi-ceffe ; ib the death threatened in that Covenant was a more terrible death then our temporall death.For though his lcfTeby a terr.pora'l deach would have bin greater then ours now; yec hee would not have bin a Subject capable ofprivation, if annihilated ; nor however capable of the fenfe of his Iofle. A great lofle troubleth a dead man no more then the fmalleft. Therefore as the joy of Paradife would have bin aperpe-tualljoy/o theforrowandpiinit it like would have bin perpetuall, and wee perpetuated capable Subjects, See barlowexercit\nt7HmmelttuJit

wiferut*

miferum ejfc quam non ejfe f I do not thinke that all the deliverance that Chrifts Death procured, was onely from a temporall death or annihilations that thedeaih which hee fuffered was ^equivalent to no more.

The/Is 5;

This Covenant being foon by man violatedjhe threatning mufl bee /unfilled andfo the penalty fuffered.

Explication*

\7T7Hether there were any V V flat neceffity of mans differing after the fall, is doubted by many,and denyed by Socmus.Whem ther this neceffity arifeth from Gods naturall Jurtiee, or his Ordinate, viz. his Decree, and the verity of

the

the threatning , is aifo with many of our own Divines a great difpute: whether God might have pardoned finne, if he had not faid, the fmntr flail die, may be doubted of(though I believe the affirmative, yet I judge it a frivolous prefumptuous quefti-on. But the word ofhis threatning being once paft, me thinks, it mould bee paft queftion that hee cannot abfolutely pardon , without the apparent violation ofhis Truth, or Wifdome. Some think that it proceeded! from his Wifdome rather then his Juftice.that man muft fuf* fer: ((zzyixlJo.Cjoodwm of juftif. part&.pag.^ ) but why mould we feparate what God hath eonjoyned? However, whether Wifdome , or juftiee, or Truth (or rather all thefe) were the ground of it, yet certaine jit is, that a ncceffity there was that | the penalty mould be inflicted :or (elfe the Son of God mould not have made fatisfa&ion, nor finners bear fomuch themfelves.

Thefts 6.

Ihdls 6.

This penalty the Render htm felfe could not hear without his everlafitptg undoing;

Explication*

THat is, not the fall penalty: forparcofitheedidbeare, and theEanh for hij lake : and f as I think) all mankind doth beare pare of it to this day. Buethefullpe-nalty would have bin a greater and everiaftingfufreiing.

Thcfis 7.

(:) Tefus Chi It at ihe will of his Father y (2) and upon his own ivillidykingferfeBl) fur.

xtfad

nifioedforfhisWorke^ (4) with & Divine powerfajandperfonaU Righteoufnefje* (6) firflundertook* 5(7) &nd afterward dif. charged this debt h ( 8 ) byfuf fering what the Law didthrea* ten j and the offender himfelfe wm unable to beare.

Explication

(r)nPHe Love of God to the -L World was the firft womb where the worke of Redemption was conceived, loh. 3.16. ( as it is taken conjunct with his own glory.) The Etcrnall Wifdome and Love found out and refolvcd on this way of recovery, when ic never entered into the thoughts of man to contrive or defire it.

(2) The Will of the Farher and the Son are one : The Son was a voluntary u idsrtakcr of this task :

it

it was cot impofed upon him by :onftraint : when he is faid to come to do his Fathers Will ( Heh.xo. 7,9* ) it doth alfo include his own Will. And where he is laid to do it in obedience to the Father, as Jit isfpoken of a voluntary obedience, fo is it fpoken of the execution of our Redemption 3 and in regard to the humane nature efpeeially ; and not of the undertaking by the divine Nature alone. Not only the eon fen t of Chrift did make it lawfull that he (hould be punifhed being innocent , but alfo that fpeciall power which as he was God he had over his own life.more then any creature hath:^. io. 18. I havepower : (\^ffUv) faith Chrift, to lay down . my Life.

(3).Nomeerecreature was qualify ed for this worke : even the Angels that are righteous do but their duty ,and therefore cannot fu« pererrogateor merit for us.Nciihcr were they ab.'e to bcare and overcome the penalty.

WIr

^^ The Nature of the

(4). It mull therefore be God tharmuftfatisfyGod; bothforthe' perfe&ion of the Obedience , for dignifying of the duty and" fuffeu ing, for to be capable ©f meriting, for the bearing of thecurfe,andfor the overcommingof it, and doing the reft ofthe workes of the Medi-atofftvip, which were to be done, after the Refurreclion. Yet meere God it muft not be f bur manalfo. or elfe it would have been forgive* nefle without fatisfacYion, feeing God cannot be fa d to make fatis-fadlion to himfelfe. Many other reafon* arc frequently given by Divines to prove the neeeflity of Chrills Incarnation, e/^#.20, 28.

/&£.*. 1,2, 3.

(%.) Had not Chrift been perfectly righteous himfelfe he had not been capabfeof fatisfy ing for others: Yet is knot neceflary that he mud be inallrefpe^sa fu 1 filler of Righ« teoufneflc before he begin the work offatisfa&ion,or that his rightebuf-neffe and fatisfa&i'on be fodiftinft,

as

as that the fame may not be both righteoufneffe andfatisfa&ory.

Though many great Divines do fo diftinguifh between luftiiUm perfix<e,&IuftitUm meriti 3 2S that the former is only a preparatory to the latter ; yet I cannot fee any realbn but the fame obedience of Chrift to the whole Law may be both perfonall and meritorious, (of I i the righteoufneffe of the Divine nature, or the babituall righteoufnefTe of the humane natural do not nowdifpute.) Therefore I do not mean that all Chrifts perfonall righ. tcoufneffe was only preparatory to his fatisfaclion and merit, when I fpeakofhis being furniflied with a perfonall RighteoufnefTe, though I eonfetTe I was long of that judgement. See more after at pag.45.

( 6, ) The undertaking of the Sob of God tofatisfie,wascrfe&u-all before his a&uall farisfying: As a man that makes a purchafe, may take poffefsion and enjoy the thing purcnafed upon the metre bargaine

made

124 The 2fjtureofthe

made, or earnes paid, before he have fully paid the fum. To this purpofe rnoftunderftand that in Rev, 13.8. whofe names were not written in the boo^ of life, of the lambe flaine From the foundation of the World: But I doubt noc but Weemfe his inrjvpretation is the plaine truth ; I thSTthe words [ from the founda-j tion of the World ] have reference J to the writing of thefc names in the book of Life, and not to the flaying Of the Lambe, as being thus to be read, whofe names were not written in the boo 1 of life of the flaw Lambe, from the foundation of the Werld. It hath the fame fence with Rev.iy.

18. which doth expound this in leaving out the mention of the flaying of the lambe.

(7). I know mans guilt andob-ligation to fuffer, is but Metapho* rieally called his debt. Therefore when we would fearch into the nature of thefe things exactly, wee muft rather conceive o' God as the Lawgiver and Governour of the

World,

World, then as a eredicor, left the Metaphor (hould miflead ut« Yet beeaufe it is a common and a Scripture phrafe , and conveniently ex-prcfleth our Obligation to beare thepcnalty of the violated Law, I ufc it in that fenfe.

Bnt here we are caft nponmany and weighty and very difficult Queftions. Whether Chrift did diicharge this debt byway of folu-tion or by way of fatisfa&ion ?

2, whether in his fuffering and our efcape the threatniog of the Law was executed or difpenfed with?

3, And if difpenfed with , how it can Rand with the truth and jufticc of God? j\. And whether finners may the-oce be encouraged to con -ceive feme hope of a relaxation of the threatnings in the Gofpell ? 5. And whether the faithfullmay not ieare left God may relaxe a promife as well as a threatning ? c. Andlaiily whether if the Law

C be

berelaxable , God might not have relealedhis Son from the fufFering, rather then have put him tologreat torment, and fo nave freely par-doned the oftendoors ? I (hail briefly anfwertoallthefe.

i Quefl. Meere and proper fofu-tionor payment is, when the very fame thing is paid which was in the obligation , o r furfered which was threatened. Tnrs payment the creditor cannot refufe; nor theRu?cr refu r e this (ufTering , nor to acquit the perfon that hath To payed or fuffererf.

Satisfaction is the paying of fomewhat that was not directly in the Obligation s but is given to fa* ti fye the creditor in Head of the debt, which payment the Creditor may chule to accept; antfifheedo not cenfent to accept it, though it were paid, yet thedebtourfhouid not be acqui t. So alio in regard of iuffcring,

Here we take paym-nr and farrj-faction in the iitid ;egall fence,

Covenants opened* tj

and not in the large fence wherein they are confounded. Andnow the Qneftionis \ whether Ghrifts fuf-fenng were the payment of the very debt, or of fcmewhatelfe in its ftead? The rcfolvingof this depends upon the revolving of two other qud&ons both great and diftrcuk.

t. What it was which the Law did threaten 2. what it was that Chrift didfuffer?

11 Various are the jmteemtnts of Divines about the former ,• and exceed ng difficult it is to determine, becaufe it hath pleated the Holy Ghotito fpeake of it (o Sparingly: and who can here underlined any morethemiswrrnen? 1. Whether 9>£ds9ns\cxx\z and bedy mould irr»-mcdiatly have binannihiJated,or destroyed fo as to become in,enfible?

2. Or whether his foufe fhould have bib immediatlyiepmcedfrom his body as.oursaneatdeath, and fo be the only lurfcrerof thepaine?

3. Or if fo, whether there fhould have bin any Refurre&ion of the C 2 body

body after any certaine (pace of time, that fo it might fuffer as well as the foule ? 4. Or whether foule and body without reparation flionld hare gone downe quick together into Hell I Or into any plaeeor ftate of torment fhort of Hell ? 5. Or whether both (hould have lived a curfed life on Earth through ever-lafting, in exclufion from Paradife, reparation from Gods favour and gratious prefence,lofle 01 his image, &c ? 6. Or whether hee (hould have lived fuch a miferable life for a feafon, and then be annihilated, or deftroyed ? 7 • And if (b, whether hismiferyon Earth (hould have bin more then men doe now endure ? And the more importance are theie Queftions of, becaufe of fomc other that depend upon them. As 1. what dearh it was that Chrift redeemed us from? 2. And what death it is that perifhing in'ants die, or that cur guilt in the firtt tranf-greilion doth procure ? For it being afmnc againft the fir It Covenant

only,

•&

Covenantt opened. *9 1

onefy, will be puniflhed with no o-thcr death then that which is threat-ned in that Covenant.

Much is faid againft each of thefe expofitions of that dill threatning.

i. Againtt the firftl have faid fomewhat before; And that in i Thef. i. :o- feernj to be much a-giinft it : Jefnt that delivered us from the w/atb to come : This wrath was either the execution of the threatning of the Covenant of works, or of the Covenant of grace: not thelatter,for Chrift faveth none whodeferveit, from that: therefore it mui* needs be the wrath of thefirft Covenanted confequenc-ly that Covenant did threaten a future wrath to all tinners, which,if the world or ^idam himfeife had been deftroyed, or annihilated immediately upon his fall, we had not been capable of.

2. Againtt the fecond fence, ic feemech. unlikely that the foule mould furTer alone, and the body lie quietly in the dull, becaufe the bo-_____ C 3 dy

The Nature of the

dy did 6nne as wcU as the foulr, and the fenles. were the fouies> inti-cers 2nd betrayers.

2. Againft the third there is no intimation of a Refi>rre&ion in the Scrip urea* p3rt of the penalty of the Covenant of works or as a preparative to it. That %Adam fhould have ri/en againe to be condemned

; or executed ifCbrift had not come,

| no Scripture fpeakes j but rather

] on the contrary , R^furreclion is afcrbedto Chriftalote, i for. 1.5. 12. 21, 22.

4. Againft the fourth it feemeth

(evident by the executim, that the reparation of fcule and body was, at kali i part of the death that was threatned j or elfe how comes it to be inflated ? And the Apoftle faith plainly, that in zAd*m alldye,.v/'*.

j thisnatmalldeath,! Cor.i 5.22. y» Againft the fift the fame Ar-

1 gument will favc<

6. Concerning chefixth and (e-

. venth they lye ©pen to the fame objection as the (econd.

! h

It i$ hard to conclude peremptorily in fo obfeure a cafe. If wee knew certainly what lite was the reward of that Covenant, we might the better underftand what death was the penalty. Calvin and many more Interpreters think that if A-dam had not fallen, he mould after a feafon have been tranflated into Heaven without dea.h, as Enoch and Elias. But I know no Scripture that tells us lb much. Whe. therin ParadifeterreHiiall or ede-fliall. I certainly know not; but that lAdam mould have lived in happi-nefte,and not have dyed, is certain ; feeing therefore that Scripture tells us on the one hand, that death is the wages of finne; andon the o» therfaand, that Iefus delivered us from the wrath to come ; the a, 6, and 7. Expofitions doc as yet feem to me the mo:i fafe. as containing that punimment whereby ho h it e;e Scripture s are fulfilled: Befide that they much correfpond , to the execution , viz.. that man G 4 fhould

fliould live here for a fcafon a dying life, fcparatedfrom God, devoid of his Image, fub;e& to bodily curfes and calamities, dead in Law, and at laft his foule and body be feparatcd; his body turning to duft from from whence it came, and his foule enduring everlafting forrowes, yet nothing fo great as thofe that are threatned in the new Covenant.

The Objedion that lyeth againft this fenie,is eaficr then thofe which are againft the other. For though the body fliould not rife to torment, yet its defoliation is a very great punifhment: And the foule being of a more excellent and durable nature, is likely to have had the greater and more durable fufFering : And though the body had a chiefe hand in the fin, yet the foule had the farre greater guilt, becaufe it (houldhave commanded and governed the body ; as the fault of a man is far greater then the fame in a beaft.

Yet I do not pofkively conclude,

that

thar the body (hould not have rifen againe 5 but I finde no intimation of it revealed in the Scripture ; but that the fentence (hould have been immediately executed to the full, or that any fuch thing is concluded in the words of the threat [In the daj the* eatefi thou [hale Me the death I I doe not thinke; for that would have prevented both the being, the fin, and che furTering of his polterity ; and consequently Chrift did not lave any one in the world from finne or furTering but Adam and Eve, which fecms to me a hard faying (though I know much may be laid for it.)

Thus we tre in part the firtf Qne-ftion refolvcd, what death ir was that the Law did threaten? Now tet us fee, whether this were the fame that Chriftdid lutfer ? And if we take the threatning in its full extent, as it exprefleth not only the penalty, but alb its proper fubje& and hs cireumftanees , then' it is- undenyable that Chriit did not C 5 futfee

fuffer the fame that was threatned For the Law threatned tHe death of the offender,but Chriftwa* not the offender 3 u4dam fhould have fuf-feredfor ever.but fo did not Chrift; ^f^«? did dye ipirltuaily, by being forfaken cf God, in regard of holu neffeas well as in regard of com fort, and fo deprived at leart of the chiefepart of his Image; fo was not Chrirt.

Yet it is difputable whether thc-fe twolaft were directly contained mj the threatning, or not? whether the threatning were not fully executed in Adams death ! And the ecemity ofit were not accidentally even a neceiTary confequem of A-dams difabilicy to overcome ceath and deliver himfelf,.whieh God was not bound to doe. ? And whether the lode of Gods Image were part of the death threatned , or rather theeffcclof our finnconely, exe. euted by our telves , and not by God f Many Divines fay,that God did not take away his Image, but

man

Covc***ts opened. g ?

man tbxull it away ; So Capsll of Temptations, pzg*%.'8zc. Though molt judge otherwife, becaufe the fame power cfmft annihilate that mull create.

] conclude then, that in rega/d of the pre per penalty, Chriftdi'd&fftr a paineandmi-cry ofthe fame Tort, and of equall we'ght with that ihrcatned; but yet becaufe it was not in all refpe&s the Jaroe, it was ratbeF fat is faction then the. pay-; ment ofthe proper debt, being. a payment as Godrnight havecho-; fen to accept.

The 2. Queftionw-as, Whether' the threatnirg was executed, one-iaxed and diipenied with .*

lAnfw* The Anfvver to this is ! plaine in the anfwer to .the former.

In regard ofthe meer weight oc J punifbrnentiCon^deredasaLttxa^tecf I from pcrfon and duration, it .vras | executed and ieiaxed; y^c taking ! the

thethreamingintircly a* it was given out,aiadwemuftfayitwasdif-♦penfed with ; fcr mankinde doth not fuffer all that is there threat-ned.

Yet fome, who think that the death threatned did confift in our prefentmiferies and temporal death onely, doalfo think that thethreat-ning is fully executed upon the tinners, and that Chrili hath onely de-livered usfrcm the accidentall dura* tionof it, but not prevented the execution.

If I could think that the threat-

ning intended no punifoment to

I thefoule further, after it is fepara-

j ted from the body, then I fhouJd

think as they.

The^QoefiioniSjHow it can ftand with the Truth and luftice of Godtodtfpenfewith his Threats? Concerning his Iutfice the quetfion is not difficult, and I (hall fay nothing to .that ; all the queftron is,

ho.w

how to reconcile this difpenfation with Gods truth. Here you rnuft dirtingmfh, 1. Betwixt the letter of the Law and the fenfe. 2. Between the Law andche end of the Law* 3. Between a Threat with exception either exprefled or refer-ved, and that which hath no exception. 4. Between a chreatning which onely expieflfeth the defcrt of the fi r.ne, and what puniflimeat if due, and fo falleth only under the will of precept, and that which alfb intendeth thecertaine prediction of event, and lbfallech under the will of purpofe aifo. And now 1answer:

1. The end of the Law is the Law, and that end being the mani. fcftatjonof Gods Iuitice and hatred of nnne,&c. was fulfilled, and therefore the Law was fulfilled.

2. Moft think that the Threatning had this reierved exception, [Thou fhalt dye, i. e. by thy felfe, or thy furety.J And though it be finfull in man to fpeak with men-tall refeivations when he pretends to

to reveale his mind, yet not in God, because as he is fubject to no Law, iohe is net bound to reveale to us all hismnde, nor doth he indeed pretend any fich thing.

3. So that the fenie of the Law is fuelled.

4. Butthefpeciailanfwer that I give.isihis, When Threat nings are tncerly parts cf tl e Law, and not alio predictions ofevent and diico-yeaes or Gods parpofe thereabouts, then they rmy be djipenfed with without any breach of Truth : For as when God faith, [ Though not eateofchs Tret &c 9 \ ihcmcaniog is cnely [It is thy duty not to eare] and not trui eventually he fhould not cate: So when he iaith [Thou jhjtltdietktdeathi The meaning is, L Death fhall be the due reward of , thy finne, and 10 may be infli.&ed

for k at my pleafure] and not that he fhould certainly fuflfer it in the event. And I judge, that except there be fomc note added whereby it is apoaieBt, that God intended

alfo

alfo the predi&ion of eveEt, no rxifcr Threatnirig 15 to be understood pthcrvvife but as it is a part of the Law, and lb fpeaks of the duc-ne(Ve of pun.fhmenc onely, as the Precept fpeaks of the dueneffe of obeying.

If this be grdtitts his meaning, I aflenc, that Omvesmh* qmbus »<?« adeft irreveeabtlttatis lignum juttl-ligendafunt exfiapte vatura do jure J commtKAniis *d rtluxundum nihil \*9m'mrit4*iZ.i) (b farreas they • are no predictions of even ; other • : wile Gods bare pr di&jcn is a note ! of irrevocability ; And his two J notes, vU. An Oath, and a Pro-, mife, are nflc rhc oneJy fencs of irrevocability: God. Word is as ifureashisOath,andaThreatnino as true « a Promiie, and when £ fett* unoer^/^f^ fnrfkwM as %eJy be fidflled. See Cm,*, ^

urn ejus defenfinm.

The

The Ntttreeftbe

The 4* Queftion is, whether fin *

nersmaynot hence be encouraged

to conceive fome hope of a relaxati.

on of the Threatnings in the New

Covenant ? To this lanfwer:

I i. No ; For God hath fully dif-

covered, that it is his purpofe and

refoiution to execute thofe Threats,

and not to relax or reverfe them; /

that he willcome in Aiming fire to

render vengeance on them that

know not God, and obey not the

Gomel otour Lord Iefus Chntt,&€.

%Tb$f. 1.7X That there is no

mere facrifiiccfor fin,1M. !**•#'

27 . And hath revealed the manner

how they (hail be condemned,

a. If there w*re any hope of thw, yet were it unexpretfable m.dnefle to venter ones everiatlug itate on that,when we fee that God did not remit the penalty of the firft *ve-nant wholly, but would have his jnftice&tisficd.ihoughby the W-I feting of bis Sonne thrift : And

yet that it alio coft the offecdors fa dcare themfelvcs.

The 5. Queflion is, May we not feare left God may difpenfe with hi* Promifes as well as his Threats ? I anfwer :

1. He did not di/penfe with his Threatning , but upon a valuable consideration.

2. No; for though the Promife as well as the Threat doe belong to the Law, and lb difcover what is due, rather then what (hall come topaffe, yet the thing promifed being once our due, cannot be taken from us without ourconfent: and (o $ z\(jrotiHS faith, Expromifsione jut atijuod acqmritur ei cm fatla eft promtjfio; lu'iice bindeth to give all to another that is his due, but not alwayes and abfolutely to in-fl:cl: upon an offender as much pu. nifhmentas he deferveth.

-• Befide, God hath revealed it to be the will of his purpofe alfo to

con-

con r er the things prom tied in the Gofpd upon all Beleevers.

Thetf.andlaftQneflion was, If the Law be relaxabk, whether God tnight not have freely remitted the offence, and have fpared his Son his fatisfa&ory fufferings ? I anfwer.

i. It yet remaines under di fpute whether the Threat fpeak not de \even$H> as tothefinne, though but de jure, as to the finner ? Andthen the Truth of God would forbid a difpenfaticn asto-the finne.

2, Though the Threatning doe not flatly determine of the executi-| on de eventn ; yet it intimates a j flrong probability of it, and feemes I to teil the world,that ordinarily the !Law giver will proceed according jthereco,and gives the iinner flrong grcundsto expect as much. Therefore if God QioulJ relax his Law, much more if he fhould wholly dif-pencewithit byrerni&on,t.he Law 1 weald feern tolofe much ofits authority,

thorhy, and the Law.giver be cfteemcd mutable.

5. Befides, as no good Lawes are lightly to be reverfed To, much I leiTefuch as are Co agreeable to order, and the nature of God, and io folemn.y enacted as this wat.

4. Though GOD did difpenfe with his Law as to ourimpunity,be caufe elfe mankind would have utterly periled, and became he is a-bundam in mercy and compaflion (£%*.$4. 7. P>/.io>.8. &iiz. 4*f. & 14?. 8. Jfirff.-f. Ier. 31. ! 20. Lnk 6i6> Row. 2.4.) yet he i is alfoho'y and jufi, and a hater of /inne; and how wouJd thofe his Attributes have been manifeftcd or glorified, if he had let lb many and great finms g oe wholly unpun fried,

rfip.li. 2. Rom. !.i8.J

5. It wculd have encouraged ™cn to fin and concemne the Law, ifthe very hrti beachand all other ihould be nvcr.'y remitted ; but whet* men fee that God hath punished

died his Son when he was our fare -ty, they may eafily gather that he will not fparethem, it* they continue rebdls.

6. The very end ©f the Law elfe would have been fru ft raced 3 which now is fulfilled by Chrifts fatisfa-&ion : For Proximo [ant idem & twtvndcm.

7. Bdijes the exceeding love of God that is muutelitd in this furfe-ringof his Son, a ad the great engagements that are laid upon the finner.

They that will avoid all the fup-pofed inconveaiencies of this Do* drineof Godsdifpencing with his Threacnin^s ; malt needs affirms, that the offenders do fuffer as much, and trie lam: which was threatned.

(8.) Whether we are juftified onely by Chrifts Paflive Righteouf-netfe, or alio by his AcYive, is a veryj

grea*

great dilute among Divines. p y hjsPaffive Righ teoufnefle is meant notonelyhis death, but the whole courfe of his humiliation, from the Aflumption of the humane nature to hisRefurrcaion; Yea, even his Obediential! Anions fo far as there was any fufferingin them, and as they areconfidered under the no-tion of Suffering, and net of Duty orObedienee. ByhisAdiveRigh. teoufnefle is meant the Righteouf-nefie of his Anions, as they were a perfea obedience to the Law. The chiefepoint of difference and difficulty Jyeih higher, How the Rich, teoufnefle of Chrifl is made ours? Moft of our ordinary Divines fay, thatChriftdidas properly obey m ourroomeandflcad, as he did iuffer in our Head ; and that in Gods I etfecm and in point of Law wee were in Chrifts obeying and fuffe-nng, and !o in him wee did both P«*<% fulfill the Ccmmands of the Law by Obedience, and the threatnings of it by bearing the

Penalty ,• I

* _ 1

penalty ; atkUhus (fay thtyl is Chritfs RighfeOufaefle imputed to us/£//<.hisPafFiveRighteou&es for the pardon of our fitt^and delivering us from the penalty ; his A6tive Rfghteoufnefle for the making of unrighteous, and giving us titleto the kingdom: And iome fay,the habitual! Righteoufnes of his humane nature iniiead of our own habituall Righteoufnefle ; yea fome sddc the righteoufnes of thedivin naturealfb. This opinion (in my judgement) containeth a great many of mistakes.

i. It' uppofeth us to have been in Chrift , at leaft in legal! title, before we did beleeve>or\*ere born; and that notonely in a genera)land conditional! fenfe as all men, but in a ipcctall as the juftified ; indeed we are elected in < hi ill before the foundation £i the world ; but that is a teime of diminution,and theie-fore doth not prove that we were then in him ? Neither Gods Decree or foreknowledge give us any legal! title. 2. It

Covenants opened. An

2. Ic teacheth imputation of Cbritts Righteoufnefleih (o ft rift a fcnfc,a$ will neither ftand with rea-fon.northeDo&rineof Scripture much Icffe with thephrafe of Scripture which mentioneth no imputation of Ghritt or his RighteoufnefTe to us at all; and hath given great advantage to the Papifts a «aicft us in this Doctrine of Juftifica^ don.

iy Itfecmeth toafcribe to God a milhking jixlgeihent,asto effetm us to have been in Chrift when wee v ere not, and to have dene and fuf. feredinhim,what we did not.

4- Itm 3 keth Chrift to have paid the Idem, and not the Tantftndem -

the fame th 2t was due, and not the value; and iotojuftifieus by payment of the proper dcbt,andnotby ftnft fctisfaction. And indeed this lstheverycoeofthemiihke, to think that we have by delegation paidiheproperdcbtof0^ fwr ro the whole Law. or that in ChrirV w^haveperfecllyobeved; whereas __ i.Tt

48 The 2{aturc of the

I. it can neither be faid, that wedid it; 2. And that which Chrift did, was to (atisfie for our non-payment and diibbedience.

«;, So it maketh Chrift to have fulfilled the preceptive part of the Law in our ftead and roome in as ftri&a fenfe, a$hedidinourroom beare the punifhment, which will 'not hold good(though for our fakes he did both J

6. It fuppofeth the Law to require both obedience and fuffering in refped of the lame time and actions, which it doth nor. And whereas they fay, that the Law required fufTtring for what is paft, and Obedience for the future 5 this is to deny that Chrift hath fatisfied for future finnes • The time is neere when thofe future fins will be paft alio; what doth the Law require, then ? Ifwe doe not obey for thei future, then we fin; ifwe fin, the! Law requires nothing but fuffering for cxpiacion* m I

7. This opinion maketh Chrills

fufferingsl

filterings (by coniequence) t© be m vain, both to have been fuffered needlefly by him, and to be neediefc al(o now to us: For if we did perfectly obey the Law in Chrift, (or Chrift for us, according to that ftrift imputation,) then there is no ufe for fuflferin* for difobedience.

8. Itfondlyfuppofetha medium betwixt one that is juft, and one that is guilty; and a difference betwixt one that is juft,and one that is no (inner; one that hath his fin or guilt taken away, and one that hath his unrighteoufnefs taken away. It is true,in bruits and infen(ibles,that are not fubjefts capable of juftice, there is a medium betwixt juft andunjuft, and innocency and juftice are not the fame. There is a negative injuftice which denominateth the fubjeel non-jMjltfmjouz not in\u$ttm) where Righteoufnefs is not due: But where there is the debit urn hafondi, where Righteoufnefs ought to be, and is not, there is no negative unrighteoufnefs, but primitive: As there is C no

I .

J no middle betwixt ftrait and crook-| ed, fo neither between Conformity •to the Law, ( which is Righteouf-| nefs, /and Deviation from ir,f which \ is unuighteoufnefs.)

9. It maketh our Righteoufnefs • to eonfift of two parts, viz* The

putting away of our guik 3 and the Imputation, of Righteoufnefs, /. e. 1 r.'Removing the crookednefs; 2.Ma-king them ftreight.

10. It afcribeth thefe two fup-pofed parts to two diftincl fuppofed caufes:; the one to Chrifts fulfilling the Precept by his acTual Righteoufnefs, the latter to his fulfilling the

i threatening by his paiTive Righte-iQufaefs: As if there muft be one caufeof introducing light, and another of expelling darknefs; or one : caufe to take away the crookednefs of a.line, and another to make it ftreight.

1.1. The like vain diflincTion it iraaketh between delivering from fd€ath,and giving title to life; or freeing tis from the penalty, and giving

us

us .the re ward: For as when all fin of omifllon and commiflion is ab-fent, there is no unrighteoulnefs; fo when all the penalty is taken away, both rfrat ©Ppain, and that of lofs, the party is reftored to his former happinefs. - Indeed there is a greater uiperadded decree of life and glory procured by Chrift more .then .we loft .in Adam : But as that life is not oppofed to the deat-h or penalty of the firft Covenant 3 but to that of the fecond ; fo is it the erTed of Chrifts pafllve, as well as of his active Righ-teoufnefs.

So you fee the miftakes contained in this firft Opinion, .about the Imputation of Chfifrs Righteoufnefs to us.

The rmintainers gf it(be(ide fome < fewable men)arethe vulvar-fortof unftudyed Divines, who having not ability or diligence to fearch deep into fo profound a Con trover fie, do ftdlhold:thae opinion which ismofi common fcnd in credit.

If you would fee wh^t is faida-D 2 gainft

gainft it, read \AxWvtton i T*reiu f PifcJtorM* Bradfbxtvffa Gataker, and Mr '}9: Goodwin.

1 fie other Opinion about our Participation of Chrifts RighteouTnefs is j this, That God the Father doth ac-J cept the fuffef in'gs and merits of his I Son as a full fatisfaclion to his vio- , ! latedLaw,and as a valuable consider- i ationnpon which he will wholy for-1 give and acquit the offendors thern-j (elves, and receive them again into i j hisfavy, and give them the addition ] j of a more excellent happinefs alfo 3 fo j they will but receive his Son upon i the terms expreffed in the Gofpel. ! This Opinion as it is more hmple j j and plain, fo it avoydeth all the fore- i i mentioned inconveniences which d6 j I accompany the former. But yet this I difference is betwixt the maintainers j j of if.Moftofthem think,that Chrifts | j Paffive Righteoufnefs (in the iati- j j tude before expreffed,) is the whole ? I of this Stt&fiftidn made by Chrift, I

which I

Covenants opened. ?3 I

which they therefore call Jnjlitia i Merit • , and that his A3ual Righte-• oufnefs is but Juftitia Perfona, cjua-; lifying him to be a fit Mediator. Of ■ this judgment are many learned and ' godly Divines, of (ingular efteem in the Church of God, (the more to blame fome of the ignorant fort of their adverfarics, who fo reproach themasHercticks: I have oft wondered when I have read fome of them, (asM. fFaiker, &cj to fee how ftrongly they revile, and hoW weakly they difpute.j Sure if thofe two famous men Partus and Pifia-tor, btfide OlevUn y Sctilittm t Ca.r-gint, learned Cape tins, and many cither beyond Sea, be Hereticks, I know not who will (hortly be reputed Orthodox • and if they be not miftaken all antiquity is on their | Cxfatbeftdc Ca(vi*>Vrfine,W&Kio& other modern Divines that writ before this Controverfie was agitated; andfure they are neither unlearned nor ungodly that have in our own Country maintained that opinion; D 3 wit-

54- The Nature of the

witnefs Mr Anthony JVotton , M r Gataker, Mr John Goodwin, and (as I am informed ) that excellent Dif-putantand holy, learned, judicious Divine Mr John. Bait y Vf\th many o~ ther excellent men that I know now living. .

Someothers(thoughfew)do thinii;

that' though Chrifts Hightebufnefs

be not imputed to us in that ftricl:

fenfe as the firft Opinion expreffeth,

but is ours under the fore-explained

-notion of Satisfaction only, yet the

A<fUve Righteoufnefs considered as

fuch is part of this Satisfaction alfo,

as well as his Pallive, and JufHtU

Meriti^ well zsfuftitia ?erfon<z ;

} and though the Law do not require

| both obeying and fuUering,yetChrift

! paying not the Idem, but the>Tan-

| tandem, not the ftricl: debt it felf,

f but a valuable Satisfaction, might

j well put the merit of his works into

J the payment.

i The-chief Divines that I know I ! for

for this Opinion (as it is diftinguiili-ed from the two former J are judicious and holy Mr Bradfb*w$x& Qro-tiut, (if I may call a Lawyer a Divine.)

And for my own pare I think ft is the truth, though I confefs I have | been ten years ot another mind for the fole Pafiive Righteoufnefs, be-eaufe of the weaknefs of thofe grounds which are ufuaily hid to fupport the opinion for the Active and Paflive; till difcerning more clearly the nature of Satisfaction, I perceived, that though the fufYerings ofChrift have the..chief place there-in,yet his obedience as fuch may aifo be meritorious and fatisfaclory. The true grounds and proof whereof .you \ may read in Gr otitis de Satis faff. ] cap. 6. and Bmd/baw of Juftifka-tion in Pre&ce,and cap.\$.

The chief Objections againft it are thefe;

i.Objea. Chrifts Paffive Righteoufnefs being as much as the Law required on our behalf, as fatisf action D 4 for

%6 The Nature of the

for its violation, therefore the Adive ; is needlefs, except to qualifie him to : be a fit Mediator. I anfwer, Thi$ | objection is grounded upon the fore-mentioned Error, That Chrift paid the Idem, an J not the Tantmdem : whereas it being not a proper payment of the debt, but fatisfaclion, therefore even his meritorious works mightfatisfie. Many an offender a-gainft Prince or State hath been pardoned their offence, and efcaped pu-ni(hment,for fome deferving acceptable fervice that they have done, or that fome of their predeceflbrs have done before them. And fo Rom. 5. 10. 'By the obedience of otte 7 many are made right eons,

2. Jtisobjefted, That Chrfft being once fubjed to the Law, could do no more but his duty, which if he had not done, hemuft have fuf-fered for himfetf ; and tliercfore how could his obedience be fatisfa&ory and meritorious for us ? I anfwer, 1* You mult not here in your con- I ceivings abftracl the Humane Na- ture,

ture, which W3S created, from the Divine; but confider them as* com-; pofingoneperfon: 2. Normuft youj look upon the Works of Ghrift, asj receiving their valuation and deno-1 mmation from the Humane Nature j alone or principally. 3. Nor muft; you fepirate m your thoughts the I time of Chrifts fervitude and fub-jeftion, from the time of his freedom before his incarnation and fub-je&ion. And fo take thefe Anfwers. r. Chrift Jefasdid perform feveral works which he was not obliged to perform, as a meer Subject: Such are all the works that are proper to his office of Mediator, his arraming the Humane Nature, his making Laws to his Church, his eftablifhing and fealtng the Covenant, his working Miracles, his=fending his Difci-ples to convert and 1 fave the world, enduing them "with the Spirit, his overcoming Death and 1 rifing a-gain,&e. Whac Law bindeth us to Such works as thefe > And what Law (to fpeak properly,} did brnde D 5 him

■enfcPrXet wer,e- the works In them/elves fQ£xcelient>and agreeable tohis Fathers Will, /which hq was well Acquainted with) that they were trruly , meritorious and fatil-factory.

2, Some."Wpr|is-;he : ferfonTie;d which were our duty indeed, but he was not bound to perform thsm in I regard of himfelf: Such as are all the c$(ervances oftbe Ceremonial Law,' his Circurncijion, Offering, and .foiiis Baptifni.ScC ■L^inn, 2j> GxLq.q. Ifa.^a^ Jok.j.i.ic. Mat.26. 17^18,19,2c. & 3.13,10. TJliefe. were the proper.duties offln-n^^ich he was nor. Thefo two are admitted by MrGataktr,': anSd moil: others. |

3. Even his obedience £0 the Mo* ral Law was not his duty, till he voluntarily undertook. 11;; It being therefore upon 1-his content -and ch'oyce,,andnot due before confent, mult needs .be meritorious. And though when he wason<;e aftrvant he is bound to do the work of a fer-

vant

vane, yet when he Voluntarily himlelf in the fktJof a fcx\ under the Law, not for his own fake, bun for ours, his work k ver the lets meritorious. Siippofe when a SotiMier hath deferyej ; death, his Captain fhould offer him-, I felf to the General to do .the 'duty of the private Souldieri, and to' perform fome rare exploit agaihft the Enemy , though he lofe his life In the Service, and all this to faftfom Soddier: when he hath underta" the ta&k, it becomes due, but yet is never rhe lefs fatisfaclory. As he (faith Bradjhaw) who to fatisfie for another, becomes a (lave to men • ebtirinand by all thofe dels, which the Laws binde a flave unto, make fatisraclion- yea,though they be'fuch a&s,as he,becoming a (lave, is bound apon-pain of death to undergo : fo driftj&c. and the greater was'the bond that he did undergo for the doing of them, the greater was the merit. 7/*. 42.1. & 53.11. Phli. 2.7. Luk. 2.20. If a. 5 3.9, 10. Gal,

The Nature of the

I4.4. 2 Corinth. 5.IL. Htb.7.26. I Pet.2.22 } 2^ <#• 3. ig, ifoh.^. 4. Even feme works that are due may yet befo excellent for matter jand manner, and fo exceeding plea-jfing to him that commands them, ithat they may give him faiisra&ion For former injuries;, and he may think it his part to encourage the Actor with fome reward. So Jona-ffc*#.rdelivering IfracI by that rare exploit did fave him from death: Abntrs bringing in the Kingdom to David woulii have. covered his former ftrvice agajnft him: Many ,of- foabsiauhs were long covered !by his good fervice: Such were the Wtions or David in bringingjn the Ifore-skiris of ' ihsfhiliftinsi .and ot 'his Worthies, in fetching him of the waters of $ethlebtm* \ Sam. 14. 44,45. 2 Sam, 2.3.„ 1 Sam.,v% 2d, 27. 2 Sam. 23.16. It was notonely thefurTeringorhazard in thefe afti-j onsthat was meritorious, but alfo I the excellency, of the actions, them-fclves.

t. The

5. The intereft of the Divine Na* cure, in all the works of Chrift, ma-keth them to be infinitely meritorious, and fo fatbfa&ory.

Tlicfis S.

j(i> VTJBerefore the lather ' VV hath delivered*!} things

\into the-hands of the Son ; and gi-

\ven him all power in heaven and' earthed made him Lord both of the Jead'obd living. J ok 13. 3. Mat.

,28.18. J oh. 5.21, 22,23^27.- Rom. 14.9.-

Explication.

j(i) pp0r v Explication of thfc-there JT are feveral Queftions-'to be debated;

1. Whether the extolling of Chrift Che Mediator, or the reftore-ing and fov^of tteoffcndors, were"

Gods*

Gods more remote end, and principal indention ?

i. Whether this Authority and Dignity of Chrift, be by Original Natural Right? or by Donation? or by Purchafe ?

3. Whether Chrifts LordLhip o-ver all,do imply or prove his redeeming of all ? or of all alike ?

4. Whether God hath delivered things cut cf his own power in any jdnde, by delivering them into the power oh his Son ? or whether it be. only the fubitituting -him to be .Vicegerent to the Father ?

To the firft, I anfwer: That the faving of finners was the end both of the Father and the Son, is plain through the Gofpel: and that the exalting of Chrift to his Dominion was another end, is plain in Rom. 14 9. But which of thefe was the principal eixlj think is an unwarrantable queftion for man to propound: I dare not undertake to aflerc a natural priority or posteriority in any of Gods Decrees, de mefoU ad finem

tiltimnm

fittinwni', mucoids 'to determine which "hath th6n>ft placed wfcrch tfcefecond, PMtZr.91 ■ To the ftcond queftion I anfwcr: 1. The D vine Nature of Chrift be-rr*» one with cite'Godhead of the Father, had an abfolute fov^raignty over all things from their firft being : and fo derivately had the humane nature as Toon as afTumed by*venue. ' of the Hypoftatical Union.

2. But there is further a power ^iven him as Mediator to difpofe of all it his pleafure, t6 make new laws {o the world, and to deal with them according to the tenor of thofe laws: This power ispaitly purcjhafect, aol panry given (bur not g**ti.<) *«ffiat is, Though God might have refufeel tht tendered fatisfa&ion, arid have j made the (inner bear she punifbaient yet he willinglyaccepted the MM of &S4S00 as a fait ranfom, and delivered up all to the Purchafer as'his own: And fo well was he pleafed j" with the work of Redemption, that j he alfo gave a further power to his

Sc

The Nature of the

Son, to judg his Enemies, and fave his people with, a far greater Judgment & Salvation.So that thupow? er may be faid to be Cgiven] Chfift, as it was«he free a<fl of God, without coriftraint: and yet to be [ pur-chafed^ becaufe it was given upon a valuable consideration.

To the third Qucftion, I anfwer. This Authority of Chriit implieth the piuckafingipf. all things under his power or dominion,as-is-explained in the kit: But what redemption or benefit is procured to the party, I fhall(hew you*more, when I come to treat of uniyerfal Redemption by it k\L

To the fourth Queftion, I anfwer. This is more then a fubftituting of drift to be the Fathers Vicegerent. It is alfo a power of prescribing new terms of Life and Death, and judging men according thereto, as is faid before. Yet is nothing properly given out of the Fathers power or poffeflion: but a power to fufpend or difpence with the ftri A Covenant

Cotenants opened. 6$

of Works is given to the Son; and fo God having ported with that advantage which his Juftice had a-gainft the (inning world., and having relaxed chat Law 1 , whereby he might have judged us, is therefore faid to judgno man, but to give all judg- ; ment to the Son. Joh.jM, ij.

i > i

Thcfis p.

(I) T T woe not the intent either of 1 the Father or Son, that by

this fatisfaftion the ofendors Jhould be immediately delivered from the \ whole curfe of the Law, and freed from the evrl which they had J brought upon themfelves, but fome part mufi be executed on foul and body, and the creatures themjelves ; ar.d remain upon them at the plea* fure of Chrift. Rev. I. 18* l Cor. 15.26.

£*-

Explication.

TV He Queftions that are here to I be handled for the Explication of this Pofltion are thefe.

i Sjtesi. Whether the redeemed are immediately upon the price paydj delivered from any of the curfe of the Law ? if riot from all ?: 2 gueft* Whether the fufTerings of the Elect before conversion are in execution of any part of the curfe of the Law ?

3. Whether the fufferings of Be-leevers are from the curfe of the Law ? or only afrli&ions of Love, the curfe being taken off by Chrift?

4. Whether it be not a wrong to she Redeemer, that the people whom he hath ranfomed are not immediately delivered ?

5. Whether it beany wrong to the redeemed themfeives ?

6. How long will it be till all the curie be taken off the Beleevers, and

Re-

CpvmtoU ofcTitd. 6)

Redemption have attained its full effect?

To the firft Queftion I anfwer: In this'cafe the undertaking of fatisfa<flion had the fame immediate efTedupon /4dam,zs the fatisraclion it felf upon us, or for us.- To determine what thefe ate ,* were an excellent work; it being one of the greateft and'nobkft queftions in our controverted Divinity, What a& the immediate effetts of Chrifis De*th I He that can rightly anfwe* this, is a Divine indeed; and by the fceip of this, may expedite moft o-ther controverfies about Redemption and Justification.. In a woro, j The effects of Redemption under-j taken, could not be upon a fub/e& I not yet exfcftent, and fonofubjeel:, | though it might be for them : None j but Adam and Eve were then ex-| iftcnt. Yet as foon as we do exift, I we receive benefit from it. The fufpending of the rigorous execution of the/tprerjce of the--Law,-is the moft obfetvable immediate tfecl: of

Chrifts

Chrtfk death ; which fufpenfion is fomc kinde of deliverance from it. Of the other effects elfewhere.

To the fecond Qutftion. The Elect before converfion do (land iii the fame relation to the Law and Curfe as other men, though they be differenced in Gods Decree, Epb.i.iyii.

To tie third QueHion. I confefs we have here a knotty Queftion* The common judgment is, That Chrifthath taken away the whole curfe (though not the filtering) by bearing it himfelf; and now they are only affections of Love, and not Punifhments. I do not contradict this doctrine through affectation of froguhrity, the Lord knoweth; but through conftraint of Judgment; And that upon thefe grounds following.

i. It is undenyable, thatChrifts taking the curfe upon himfelf did not wholly prevent the execution upon the offendor, in£^3. 7,8*10,15, 1^17^10.

2. It

— ■ ■ ■ ' * ■

2. Ic is evident from the event, feeing we feel part of the curfe fulfilled on us: We eat in labour and fweat; the earth doth bring forth thorns and bryars; women bring forth their children in forrow ; our native pravity is the curfe upon our fouls; we are lick, and weary, and full of fears, and forrows,and flhame, and at laft we dye and turn to duft.

3. The Scripture tells us plainly, that we all dye in Adam, (even that death from which we muft at the Refurreclion be raifed by Chrift,) 1 Qor. 15.21,22. And that death is the wages of fin,#<w.6.23. And that the ficknefs,and weaknefs,and death of the godly is caufed by their fins, 1 Cor. 11.30,31. And if fo, then doubtlefs they are in execution of the threatening of the Law, though not in full rigor.

4. It is manifeft, that our fuflfer-ings are in their own nature evils to us, and the fan&ifyihg of them to us j taketh not away their natural evil, but only produceth by ir, as by an

occaiaon,

, j 70 The Natti-re of the

occafion,a greater good : Doubtkfs j fo far as it is the effect of fin, it is e-j vil, and the effect a! fo. of the Law. j • 5. They are afcribed to Gods %qf[ | gcr, as the moderating of triem is-i afcribed to his love/P/rf/^o.^and a j thoufand places more.

6. They are called punifhments in ! j Scripture, and therefore vye may call I \ themfo, Lev.%6.<\!£-$.Lar&.i.ty I (^4.6,22; li^r^-p. 13. Hofeaq.9. \

. 7. Theverymtuceofaffitdionis tobealovingpuniflirrient, a natural j evil fandtified, and. fo to be mixt of j evil and good, as it proceedeth from I mixt caufes: Therefore to fay that j ! Chrift hath taken away the curfe and | j evil, but not the fuffering, is a contradiction, becaufe fofar as it is a ! fuffering it is to us evil, and the exe-i cution of the curfe.. What reafon \ can be given, why God (hould, not ; do us all that good without our fuf-ferings,whichnowhe doth by them,, if tfiere were not fin, and \yrath, and L&whnriem? Sure he could better

us

us by eafier means.

8. All thole Scriptures and Rea-fons that are brought to the contrary do prove no more but this, That our afflictions-are not the rigorous execution of the threatning of the Law, that they are not wholly or chiefly in wrath; but as the common Love 9/ God to the wicked is mixt with hatred in their fufferings, and the. hatred prevaileth above the love, fo the fufferings of the godly proceed from a mixture of love and anger, and fo have in them a mixture of-good and evil; but the Love overcoming the Anger, therefore the good is greater thai the evil, and fo death hath loft its fling, 1 Or.15. 55,56. There is no unpardoned (in in it, which fhall procure further jndgment,.and fo no hatred, though there be anger.

p. The Scripture faith plainly,That death is one of the enemies that is not yet overcome, but (hall be lafl: conquered,! Cora 5.26. and of our corruption the cafe is plain.

10. rhe

Ji The Nature of the

10. The whole ftream of Scripture maketh Chrift to have now the fole difpofing of us and our furTerings, ;o have prevented the full execution of the curfe, and to manage that which lyeth on us for our advantage and good ; but no where doth it affirm that he fuddenly delivereth us.

To the fourth Queftion: It caj^ be no wrong to Chrift, that we are not perfectly freed from all the curfe and evil as loon as he had fatisfled :

• i. Bfcaufe it was not the Covenant betwixt him and the Father. 2. It

; is not his own will, & volenti no* fit injur U. 5. It is his own doing now to keep us under it, tiU he fee • the fitted time to releafe us. 4. Our ; foflferings are his means and ad van- \ tages to bring us to his Will Man- J kind having forfeited his life, is call: \ into prifon till the time of full execution: Chrift fteppeth in, and buyeth the prifoners,\vith a full pur-\ pofe, that none of them yet (hall j (cape but thofe that take him for

• their Lord. To this purpofe he muft

treat

treat with them, to know whether they will be his fubjects, and yield themfclves to him,and his terms. Is it not then a likelier way to procure their confent, to treat with them in prifon,then to let them out, and then treat ? and to leave fome of the curfe upon them, to force them to yield, that they may know what they mutt expect elfe when the whole ftiall be executed.

To the fifth Queftion: It is no wrong to the (inner to be thus dealt with; 1. Becaufe he is but in the mifery which he brought upon himfelf. 2. No man can lay claim to the Satisfa&ion and Redemption upon the meer payment, till they have a word of promife for it. 3. Their furTerings, ir they will be ruled, ("hall turn to their advantage.

To the fixth Queftion : The lad enemy to be overcome is death, 1 Cor. 15.26. This enemy will be o-vercome perfectly at the Refurrecli-on; then alfo ftiall we be perfectly acquit from the charge of the E Law,

Law,& acciafation of SataruTherfore not till the day of Rcfurredion and Iudgment, will all the ErTe&sof Sin and'Law,and Wrath be perfectly removed. I Cor, 15. 24.

Thcfis 10.

(ij \& An having not only bro" jLV-L ken this firfi Covenant , but iifabled himfelf to perform its Conditions for the future, andfo being out of all hope of attaining Righ-teoufnejs and Life thereby, (2) It I pleafed the Father and the Media-I tor to prefcribe unto him a nety i £*w.y (3^ and tender him a new I Covenant 1 (4) the Conditions ! whereof Jhould be more eafie to the Sinner , and jet more abafng, (5 J and Jhould mere clcerly manifeft, and more highly honour the uncon-ceiveable Love of the Father and Redeemer* *

Expm

Explication.

(i)\ J\ 7HctherMan were on-

V V ly the meritorious

Caufe of this his difability, oralfo

the Efficient, is a great difpute, but

of no great moment; as long as we

are agreed that Man is the only faul-

! ty caufe.Whether he caft awayGods

j image ? or whether God took it

! from him for lift"? whether God

• only could annihilate it>Or whether

l Man may annihilate a^uality,though

not a Subftance > I will not meddle

with, f ut too fure it is, that we

are naturally deprived of it, and fo

difabled to fulfil the Law. If Chrift

therefore ftiould have pardoned all

that was pafi, and renewed the firft

violated Covenant again; and fet

I Man in the fame eftate that he fell

i from,in poynt of guilt, yet would he

have fallen as defperately the next

j temptation: yea though he hadre-

j ftored to him his primative ftrength

t and holinelTe, yet experience hath

E 2 (hew-

j6 'The Nattire of the

(hewed on how flippery and uncertain a ground his happinefs would have flood, and how foon he was likely to play the Prodigal again with his itock.

(2) God the Father and Chrift the Mediator, who have one will, did therefore refolve upon a more fuitable way ofhappines.

(3) This way, as the former, is by both a Law and Covenant. As it is a Law, it is by Chrift preicribed, and flatly enjoyned;and either obedience, or the penalty lhallbe exacted. As it is a Covenant, k is only tender* ed & notenforced.lt is called aCove-nant as it is in Scripture written and offered (as is (aid befc:e;improperiy, becaufeit containeth the matter or' the Covenant, though yet it want the form: Even as a Bond or Obligation before the fcaiing or agreement is called a Bond: Or as a form of prayer as it is written in a book,is caTd a prayer, becaufe it containeth the matter that we fhould pray for: though to fpeak itri&iy,it is no prayer, till it be

fent

fent up to GocMrom a defiring Soul.

(4)Though without Grace we can no more beleeve, then perfectly o-| bey, f as a dead man can no more remove a liraw then a mountain ) yet the conditions of the Gofpel confi-deredin themfelves, or in reference to the ftrength which God will bellow, are far more facile then the old conditions. Mat. 11. 20. 30. ljoh. 5.3. And moreabafing they are to the (inner, in that he hath far leffe to doe in the work of his Salvation. And alfo in that they contain the acknowledgement of his loft eftate, through his own former fdf-destroying folly. .

(5)Such incomprehenfible amazing Love.of God the Farher,& of Chrift, is manifefted in this New Covenant, that the glorifying thereof doth feem to be the main end in this defign. Oh fweet and bleiTed End .' (hould not then the fearching into it be our main ftudy ? and the contemplating of it, and admiring it, be our main employment? Rem. 5. 8. Tit. 3.4. E ; I loh.

-:

1 let :. 18. i£. Irb,

So wocdcr therefore tiaz God »' did noc prtrent die fail of mm, I

make ic an occaiioaal prepatathreco \ tadklaqff anfe

aotf A^r^j.- km* bt [up

this as the emlj pjfibUws] tfLsfr.

The ftnmr fill C9*ti*ncth t§

x*mmsmk\ friiUte^ frf*f*i "ti | tbreJter.So tc*t I I en cftht

jmfiifci *re JHM hrcdekts *f thdt

L*v.dxAxrc tbrt*t9<ddfi.

Explicati

i

AdoDwktedoi: j

many places of Scripture are ufually produced which feem to contradict it. I know alfo that it the judgement of learned and godly men, that the Law, as it a Covenant of works, is quite null and repealed in regard of the Sins of btleevers: yea, many do beleeve, that the Covenant of works is repealed to all the world, and only the Covenant of Grace in force.

Againft both thefe I maintain this Altertion, by the Arguments which you flnde under the following Pofiti-on 13. And I hope, notwithstanding that I extol free Grace as much, and preach the Law as little, in a forbidden fence, as though I held the con trary opinion.

Thefis

12

T

Henfore Wr mtift not plead the i _ the referi of the Law for enir Justification j but mttft refer it to oar Surety , who by the value and

__ ' cffcacjl

efficacy of his once offering and merits doth continually fatisfie.

Explication.

T Shall he re explain to you, in what fence, and how far the Law is in force, and how far not; and then prove it in and under the next head. You muft here diftinguiih betwixt, i. The repealing of the Law, and the relaxing of it. 2. Between a difpenfation abfolute and refpective. 3. Between the alteration of the Law, and the alteration of the Subjects relation to it. 4. Between a Difcharge conditional, with a fuf-penfion of execution, and a Difcharge abfolute. And fo I refolve the queftion thus ;

1. The Law of Works is not abrogate, or repealed, but difpenfed with, or relaxed. A Difpenfation is (as Grotius defineth it,) an act of a Superior, whereby the obligation

of

of a Law in force is taken away, as to certain perfons and things.

2. This Difpenfation therefore is not total or ablohue, but refpeclive. For, i. though it difpence with the rigorous execution^ yet not with every degree of execution. ^.Though the Lawbe difpenced with as it contained the proper fubjecls of the penalty, viz,, the parties offending, and alio the circumftances of duration,^. Yet in regard of the meer puniflm?ent abftractedfrom perfon and circum[tances,it is not difpenced with: for-toChrifl.it was not difpenced with : His fatisfacTion was by paying the full value.

3. Though by this Difpenfatioa our Freedom may be as full as upon a Repeal, yet the Alteration is not made fa the Law, but in our eftate and relation to the Law,

4. So far is the Law difpenced with to all, as to fufpend the rigor-. 011s execution for a time • and a Li-1 Deration or Difcharge conditional procured and granted them. But an

E 5 ab-

abfolute Difcharge is granted to none in this life. For even when we do perform the Condition, yet ftffl. the Difcharge remains conditional, till we have quite finished our performance. For it is not one inftan-taneous .Act of beleeving which ftiall quite difcharge us $ but a continued Faith. No longer are we dif-charged, then we are Bdeevers. And where the condition is not performed, the Law is (HI in force, and fhall be executed upon the offcndor him-• felf.

I fpeak nothing in all this of the J directive ufeof the Moral Law to j Beleevers : Btit how far the Law is yet in force, even as k is a Covenant of Works ; becaufe an utter Repeal of it in this fence is fo commonly, but inconfiderately aiTerted. That it is no further overthrown, no not to Beleevers, then is here explained, I now come to prove.

Thefis

Thefis 13

rF this Were not fo,but that Ckrift had abrogated the fir ft Covenant*, then it wouldfollow , I. That no fin but that of Adam, and final Unbelief, is [0 much as threatened with death, or that death is explicit ely (that is, by any Law) due to it or deferved by it. For, What the Law in force doth not threaten, that is not explicit ely deferved, or due by LaW. .2. It Would follow , That Chrifi dyed not to prevent or remove the wrath and curfefo deferred or due to us for any butAdzmsfin, nor to pardon our fins at all: but only to prevent our defert of Wrath & curfe, and consequently to prevent our need of pardon, 3. // won Id follow* That againfi eternal wrath at the day of Judgment, we mufi not plead the pardon of any fin, but the first, but our own non-defertoftbatwrath, becaufe of the repeal of that LaW be-fore the Jin was committed, All

which

which conferences f&em to me tin-faff er able, -which cannot be aveyded if the Law be repealed*

Explication.

WHcn God the abfolutc Sovereign of the World foall but command, though he exprefly threaten ho punifhment to the dif-obedfent, yet implicitely it may be laid to be due; that is, the offence in irfelfcon(klered,deferveth fome punifhment in the general } for the Law of Nature containeth fome general Threatenings, as well as Precepts, (as I (he wed before ; )' Whether this Duenefs of punifhment, which I call implicite, do a rife from the nature of the offence only, or alfo becaufe of this general threat in the Law of Nature, I will not difpute. But Gc^d dealeth with his Creature by way of legal government 5 andkeepetfvnot their defer-

ved

ved'puniftiment from their know-ledg no more then their ditty ; it being almoft as neceflary to be known for our incitement, as the Precept for our dikdtion. Gods laws are perfect laws, fitted to the attainment of ail their ends: And by thefe laws doth he rule _ the world; and according to them doth, he difpofe of his rewards-and punimments: So that we need not fear that which is not threatened : And in this fence it is that I fay, That what no law hi force doth threaten, that-fin doth not explicitly deferve: Not fo deferve as that we need to fear the fuffering of it. And upon this ground the. three fore-mentioned conferences muft needs follow. For the new Covenant threateneth not Death to any fin but final unbelief, or, at leaft; to no fin without final unbelief: And therefore if the old Covenant be abrogated, then no law threateneth it : And confequently, 1. Our Sin doth not deferve it ( in

the

the fence exprefledj. Nor Chrift prevent the wrath deferved, but only the defert of wrath. 3. And therefore not properly doth he pardon any fuch fin, fas you will fee after when I come to open the nature of pardon). 4. We may plead our non-defer ving of death for our difcharge at judgment. 5. And further, then Chrift in fatisfying did not bear the punifhment due to any fin but Adams firft : For that which is not threatened to us, was not executed on him. This is a clear, but an intolerable confequencc. 6. Scripture plainly teacheth, That all men (even the Elec*t)-are under the Law till they beleeve and enter into the Covenant of the Gofpel. Therefore it is faid 3 Iok 3.18. He that faleeieth not y is condemned already : And the yvrdth oj Cod abi~ dethoubim^vev. 36. And we are fa id to beleeve for Remiflion of fins. Ads i. 38. Marl^i.q. Z/^24.47 ^#.10.43.07-3.79. Which (hew, •that fin is not before remitted, and

con-

confequently the Law not repealed, but fufpended, and left to the dif-pofe of the Redeemer.Eife howcould the Redeemed be by nature the children of wrath ? Eph* 2.3. The cir-cumcifed are debtors to the whole I&w 9 Gdl»£ 3,4. andChrift is become of none effect to them. But they thar are led by the Spirit are not under the law,and againft fuch there is no law. Gal. 5.18,23.The Sctipture hath concluded all under Sin (and fo far under the h\ vv no doubt) that the promife, by faith inJefusChriIt,mightbe given to them that beleeve. GaL 3.22. We are under the Law when Chrift doth redeem us. GaL/\. 5. See alfo lam. 2. 9. id. iTim. 18. 1 Qor. 15. jtf. Gal. 3 19,2021. Therefore our deliverance is conditionally from the curfe of- the Law j viz. if we will' obey the Gofpel. And this deliverance, together with the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law, is it which isfo oft mentioned as a pri-viledge; of beleevers, and an effect ; of the blood of Ghrift: which deli-

, verance

verance from the curfe, is yet more full when we perform the Conditions Qf our freedom: And then we are faid to be dead to the Law. Rom.y.4. And the Obligation to punifhment dead as to us, ver. 6. But not the Law void or dead in it (elf. ,

7. Laftly, All the Scriptures and Arguments^fg.60.61. which prove, That afflictions are puniflhments, do prove aifo, that the Law is not repealed : For jio man can fuflfer for breaking a repealed Law, nor by the threats of a repealed Law; yet I know that this Covenant of Works continueth not to the fame ends and ufes as before, nor is it fo to be preached or ufed. We muft neither take that Covenant as a way to life, as if now we muft get falvation by our fulfilling its condition ; nor muft we look on its curfe as lying on us remedikfly.

Thefis.

Thcfis 14.

(i) "Tp He Tenor of the new Co-

JL venant is this. That Chrifi having madefujficientfatufattion to the Law, Whofoever Will repent and believe in him to the end,Jhallbeju-fiified through that SatisfaEliofrom all that the Law did charge upon them, and be moreover advanced to far greater PrivHedges and Glory then they fell from: But whofoever fulfilleth not thefe conditions , {hall (2) have no more benefit from the blood of Chrifi> then what the] here received and abufed, but must an-fwer the charge of the Law thtm-felves\andfor their negletl of Chrifi mu/i alfo fuffer a far greater cow demnation* Or briefly, Whofoever believeth in Chrifi jh all not perijh, but have everlafiing life y but he that believeth not /hall not fee life y but the Vcrath of God abideth on him. Mark, 16.1 6. John 3.15,16, 17,18,36. & 5. 24. (>6.35,40,47.

&

&!•!%. & 11. 2-5, 16. &12.46. Atls 10.43. Rom.i,*i6*& 4.5. d- 5. 1. Cr ic. 4,io. 1 John 1 ). iQ.Marl^ 1.15.(^-6.12. Z*^ 13.3.5. 0^24. 47.e^EF.r 5.31. #• 11.18. & 20.21. <#•2.38. c^ 3.19. C^ 8.22. # 26.20. Rev,2.$ > i6.Heb 6.1. 2 Pet.3.9.

Explication*

(i)/^Hrifts Satisfaction to the V_/ Law goes before the new Covenant, though not in regard of its payment, (which was in the ful-nefs of timej yet in regard of the undertaking,acceptanceand efficacy^ There could be no treating on new terms, till the old obligation were fatisfied and fufpended.

I account them not worth the con-futing,who tell us,That Ghrift is the only party conditioned with, and that the new Covenant,as tous,hath no conditions; (fo Saltmarjhfaz^) The place they alledg for this afTer-

tion

tionistbat, Jer.^ 1.31,31,33. cited \nHeb. 8.8,9,10. which place contained not the Full Tenor of the whole new Covenant: But either it is called the new Covenant, be-caufe it expreffeth the nature of the benefits ofthe new Covenant as they are offered on Gods part, without mentioning mans conditions, (that being not pertinent to the bnfinefs the Prophet had in hand ; ) or elfe it fpeaketh only of what God will do for his deft in giving them the firft Grace,and enabling them to perform the conditions of the new Covenant, and in that fence may be ailed a new Covenant alfo,as I have (hewed before, /><*£-7.8. Though properly it be a prediction, and belong only to Gods Will of Purpofe, and not tohislegiflative Will.

But thofe men erroneously think, that nothing is a condition.but what is to be performed by our own ftrength. But if they will believe Scripture, the places before alledged will prove, that the new Covenant

hath

hath conditions on our part, as well as the old.

(i) Some benefit from Chrift the condemned did here receive, as the delay of their condemnation , and many more mercies, though they turn them all into greater judgments : But of this more when we treat of general Redemption.

Thcfis ij.

T Bough Chrift hathfu$iiently fatisfied the Law, yet is it not his Will, or the Will ef the Father, that any man Jhould be jufiified or faved thereby, who hath not fome ground in himfelf of perfonal and particular right and claim thereto; nor that any jhould be ju fit Bed by the blood only as [hedor offered, except it be a/Jo received and apply ed; fo that no man by the meer Satisfaction made, is freed from the Law or curfe of the firfl violated Covenant abfelutely, but con iittonally miy* ..

Ex-

Explication*

I Have (hewed before,/?. 57.58. &c. That Chrift intended not to remove all our mifery as foon as he dyed, nor as foon as we believed. I am now to (hew, That he doth not ju-ftifie by the (hedding of his blood immediately, without fomewhat of man intervening, to give him a legal title thereto. All the Scriptures al-ledged fag. 79. prove this: We are therefore faid to be juftified byTaith. Let all the Antinomians flhew but one Scripture which fpeaks of Jufti-fication from eternity. I know God hath decreed to juftifie his people from eternity, and fo he hath to fan-ctifie them too,but both of them are done in time: Juftification being no more an imminent act in God then San&ification, as I ft^ll fhew afterward.

The Blood of Chrift then isfur-ficient mftiogenereyhwt not in cmni genere ; fufficient for its own woik,

but

94 The Nature of the

but not for every work. There are

feveral other neceflaries to juftifie

and fave, quibus pofitu, which being

fuppofed, the Blood of Chrift will

be effectual: Not that it receives

its efficacy from thtfe, nor that thefe

do add any thing at all to its worth

or value ; no more then the Cabinet

to the Jewel, or the applying hand

to the medicine, or the orrendors

acceptation to the pardon of his

Prince; yet without this acceptation

and application this blood will not

be erfe&ualto juftifieus. For (as

Grotius) Cum unufquifque aftui ex

fka voluntate pendenti legem pojfit

imponere,ficut id quod pure debetur

novaripoteftfub condition^ it a eti-

ampojfunt, is qui folvitpro alio, et

& qui rei alterim pro altera folutio-

nemtdmittit^p&cifci, utautftatim

fequatur remijfio, ant indiejn, item

aut pure, aut fub conditions Fuit

j autem et Chrifii fatisfacientk &

\ clei fatisfatlionem admittentis hie

\ animus ac voluntas y hoc denique

\ patlum etf&dusy non ut dent flat im

ipfo perpejfionis Chrifti tempore pa-no* remitteret, fed ut turn dtmum idfieret y cum homo vera inChriftum fide ad deum converfus, fupplex ve-niam precaretur , accedente etiam Chrifti apud deum advoc At lone five interccffione. Nan obftat hie erg$ fatisfaliio quo minus fequip offit re-miffio fatisfaliio enim non jamfu-ftulerat debitum^fed hoc egerat, ut propter ipfum debitum aliquando t oiler etttr. Cjrot. de fat if cap, 6* So that, as Auflin, he that made us without us,will not fave us without us. He never maketh a relative change, where he doth not alfo make a real. Gods Decree gives no man a legal title to the benefit decreed him, feeing purpofe and promife are fo different: A legal title we mull have, before we can be juftified; and there muft be fomewhat in our felves to prove that title,or elfe all men fhoujd have equal right.

Thefis i

s 1

96 The Nature of the

Thcfis 1 6.

T'He obeying of a Law, and performing the conditions of a Covenant, or fatisffwg for difobedi-ence , or non-performance , is our Righteeufnefs, in reference to that Law and Covenant

Explication.

IF we underftand not what Righ-teoufnefs is, we may dispute long enough about Juftification to little purpofe: You mufl: know therefore thatRighteoufnefsis no proper real Being, but a Modus Bntis\ the Modification of a Being. The fubjecfl of it is, i. An Action, 2.0raPerfon; An A&ion is the primary fubjeft, and fo the Difpofition; and the Per-fon fecondary, as being therefore righteous,becaufehis difpofition and anions are fo.

Righteouf-

Righteoufnefs is the conformity of Difpofitions and Actions, and confequently the perfon to the Rule prefcribed.

It is not a being diftinct therefore from the faid Difoofitions and Actions, but their juft and well being.

This Definition is only of the Creatures Righteoufnefs. .

God is the Prlmnm 'fujlutn, and fo the Rule of Righteoufnefs to the Creature,and hath no Rule but him-felf, for the meafuring of his Actions.

Yet his EfTence is too far above us, remote and unknown to be this Rule to the Creature; therefore hath he given us his Laws, which flow from his perfection, and they are the immediate Rule of our Difpofitions and Actions, and fo of our Righteoufnefs.

Here carefully obferve, That this Law hath two parts; 1. The Precept and Prohibition prefcribing and requiring Duty: 2. The Promife and Commination determining of F the i

$8 The Nature of the

the reward of Obedience,and penalty of Difobedience. As the Precept j is the principal part, and the Penalty j annexed but for the Precepts fake ; fothe primary intent of the Law- = giver is the obeying of his Precepts, and our fuf&ring of the Penalty is but a fecondary, for the attaining of I the former.

So is there accordingly a two-fold : Righteoufnefs or fulfilling of this j Law, (which is the thing I would i have obferved:)the primary ,moft ex- ! cellent & mod proper Righteoufnefs , lyethin the conformity of ouracTi- • ons to the precept: The fecondary, -lefs excellent Righteoufnefs) yet fitly | enough fo called ) (fee Pemhle of ftsftificat.pag. 2. ) is, when though we have broke the precepts, yet we have fatisfied for our breach, either by our own furTering, or fome o- i ther way.

The firft hath reference to the Commands when none can accufe 1 us to have broak the Law: The fe-cond hath reference to the Penalty;

when

when thoughwe have broke the law, yet it hath nothing againftus forfo doing, becaufe it is fatisfyed. Thefe two kinds of Rightcoufneffe cannot ftand together in the fame perfon, in regard of the fame Law and Actions ; he that hath one, hath not the other: he that hath the Firft,need not the Second; There muft be a fault, or no fatisfadrion; this fault muft be confefTedj and fo the firftkind of Righteoufneffe difclaimed, before Satisfaction can be pleaded : and Satisfaction muft be pleaded, before a Delinquent can be juftified. This welunderftood T would givea clearer infight into the nature of ourRighte-oufnefs, and Juftifkation,then many have yet attained. The great Quefti-on is, of which fort is our Righte« oufnefs whereby we are juftified ? I anfwer, of the fecond fort, which yet is no derogation from it: for though it be not a Rightoufnefs fo honouring our felves, yet is it as excellent in Chrift, and honorable to him. And thisfirftkindeofRighte-F 2 oufnefs

oufnefs as it is in Chrift, cannot retaining its own form, be made ours. And to that the Papifts arguments will hold good. The Law commanded our own perfonal obedience, and not anothers for us ; We did not fo perfonaily obey, we did not really obey in Chrift : and God doth not 'judge us to do, what we did not; If we had, yet it would not have made-us juft: for one fin will make us un-juft, though we were never fo obedient before and after; Therefore if we had obeyed in Chrift, and yet finned in our (elves, we are breakers of the Law ftill. And fo our Righte-oufnefs cannot beo£ the firffc fort. This Breach therefore muft be fatis-fied for, & confequendy, our Righ-teoufnefs muft be of the fecond fort: feeing both cannot ftand in one perfon as beforefaid. Chrift in-! d^d had both thefe kinds of righte-oufnefs, viz. the righteoufnefs of perfect Obedience; and the righteoufnefs of Satisfaction, for Difobe- , dience .But the former only was his

own I

own perfonal Righteoufnefs., not communicable to anotherunderthat notion, and in that form of [a Righ-tcoufnefs by obeying Q The latter, was his Righteoufnefs, as he Rood in our room, and was by imputation a (inner: and fo is alfo our Righteoufnefs in and through him. Yet the former ( as I have proved Pag. 49. &cj. is ours too, and our Righteoufnefs too ( though many Divines think otherwife:; but how ? Not as retaining its form, in the former fence : but as it is alfo in a further-confederation, apart of the Righteoufnefs by Satisfaction : feeing that Chrifts veryperfonal obediential righ-.teoufnes was: alfo in a further repecl: fatisfadtory. I intreat thee Reader, doe not pafs over this diitincT: representation of Righteoufnefs, as curious, or neediefs; for thou canft not tell how thou art righteous or jufti-fyed without it. Nor do thou through prejudice re/eft it asun-found, till thou have firft well ftudi-ed the Natureof Righteoufnes in ge-F3 nera

102 The Nature of the

neral,and of Chriftian Righteoufnefs in fpecial.

Thcfis 17.

THerefore as there are two Covenants, With their diftintl Conditions: fo is there a twofold Righteoufnefs , and both of them, dbjblutely neceffary to Salvation.

'

Explication.

AS Sin is defined to be av^a a Tranfgreflion of the Law. \Ioh. 3.4. So Righteoufncfs is a Conformity to the Law. Therefore: as there is a twofold Law or Covenant • fomuft there be accordingly a two-fold Righteoufnels; whether' both thefe be to us neceffary is all the doubt. If the firft Covenant be totally repealed, then indeed we need not care for the righteoufnes of

that

that Covenant, inrefpeft of any of our perfonal anions: but only in re-fpea of Aims firlt,and ours in him, But I have proved before that it is not repealed ; other wife the righte-nefs-of Ckift itnputed to us, would be of a very narrow extent; if it "were a Covering only to our fir ft tranfgreffion. I take it for granted therefore, that he muft have a two-fold Righteoufnes anfwerable to the two Covenants, that expeft-cth to be juftifyed. Andtheufual confounding of thefe two diftincT RighteoufnefTes, doth much darken the controverts ^aboujt Juftificati1

en.

Thefis 18.

C\Vr Legal Righto fsfnes t $r righ-/ teuofnefs ofthefirfi Covenany is not perfonal , or confiftethnot tn any qualifications of our own per-fons, or aftions performed by >#4 {For We never fulfilled^ nor $erfon\

E4 «fr-

104 The N*tare of the

ally fatisfied the Law: ) but it is wholly without us in Chrift. And in this fence it is that the Apoftle (and, every Chriftian,) difclaimeth his otyn Righte€Hfnefs y or his own Worlds, as being no true legal Righ-teoufnefs. Phil. 3. 7,8.

Explication*

1 J^vOth Hot the Apoftle fay, L/ that as touching the Righteoufnefs which is in the Law, he was bhmelefs ? Phil, 3. 6. Anf. That is, He fo exaclly obferved the Ceremonial Law, and the external part of the Moral Law, that no man could blame him for the breach of them But this is nothing to fuch a keeping of the whole Covenant, as might render him blamelefs in the fight of God: otherwife he would not have efteemed it fo lightly.

2. There are degrees of Sin. He' that is not yet a (inner in the higheft degree

degree, is he not fo far righteous by a perfonal Righteoufnefs t Chrift, fatisfied only for our fin; fo far. as our Actions are not (inful, fo far they need no pardon nor fatisfaction. And confequently, Chrifts righteoufnefs and our own works, doe concur to the. compofing of our perfect Righteoufnefs. Anf\ Though this Objection doetfvpuzle foine, as if there were no efcaping this Fopifh .fclf-exaling Confequence; yet by the help of the fore-going .grounds-, the vanity ofitmaybe eafily difcon vered. And that thus..

1. An Action is; not righteous,' which is not; conformable to the! Law ; if in force refpects it be conformable, and in fome not, it cannot be culled a conformable or righteous -Action. So that we having no actions, perfectly conformed to the Law, have therefore no one righteous action. 2. If we had; Yet many righteous Actions, if but one were.unrighteous, will not ferve to denominate the. perfon. F5 Righte-

to6 The Nature rfthe

Righteous, according to the Law of Works. And that theic joyned with Chrifts Righteoufnefs, doe not makeup one Righteoufnefs for us, is plain thus; The Righteoufnefs which we have in Chrift, is not or the fame fort with this pretended 1 partial Righteoufnefs: For this pre-tendeth to be a Righteoufnefs ( in part) of the firft kinde mentioned Pag. %6 % 87. viz,, Obediential confuting in conformity to the Precept. NoWjChrHtsRighteoufnefs imputed to us, being.only that of the fecond fort ( vU* By fatisia&ion for hob-; conformity, or for our. difobedi-ence,) cannot therefore poffibie be joyned with our imperfect Obedience, to make up one Righteoufnefi for us. I acknowiedge, that fome aelions of ours, may in (bme re-fpe&s be good, tbough chat refpeel: cannot denominate it fftricliy in the fence of the old Covenant) a good Work. I acknowledge alfo, that fo far it is pleating to God : yet the Action cannot be faid to pleafe him

fmuch

(much lefs the peribn,) but only -that refpe&ive Goodnefs. nAICo that Chrift dyed only tofatisHe for our anions fo far as they were (inful, and' not in thofe refpe&s wherein they; are good and lawful. Yet that thefe good works ( To commonly called ) Can be no part of oar Rigkeoufnefc, I think is fully proved by thefcre--going Argument. Though I much queftion, whether they chat ftand : fottfche imputation of Chriib rnoral Righteoufnefein the rigid reje&fcci fence, (as if in him we had pakltfae primary proper debt of perfeft obe-d fence ) can fo well rid their hands ofthisobje&ion*

Thefis 19.

THe'Righteoftfnefs of the New Covenant , is the only Condition of our inter eft *#, 4*ci enjoyment I of the Right evxfitefs of the I old. Or thus : Thofe only frail [ have fart in Chrifts fatisfattion^ ' md fo in him be legally righteous >

who

108 The Nature of the

Veho dobeleive, and obejthe Gofpel, and fo arein themjelves Evangelically Rigloteous*..

Thcfis 20.

OVr. Ev angelic all* Right eoufnefs U: not without us in Chrifi, as our legal Right eoufnefs is : but con-Jtfteth in our oVen anions of Faith and CjofpeL Obedience. Or thus : Thongh Chriftperformedthe conditions of the LaVv, and fat is fed for our nonperformance • jet it is our felves thas mufi perform the conditions oftheGofpeL

Explication^

*~y" He Contents of thefe twoPo-8 fitions being of fo.neer nature, I fhall explain them here together i though they feem to me, Co plain and clear that they .need notmuch explication

/

Covenants opened, iop

plication, and lefs confirmation: yet becaufe fome Antinomians doe down-right oppofe them, and fome that are no Antinomians have ftart-led at the expreflions, as if they had contained fome felf-exalting horrid doctrine; I fhal fay fomthing hereto. Though for ,my part, I doe fo much wonder that any able Divines (hould deny thera-.yet methinks they Qiould be Articles of our Greed, and a part of Childrens Catechifms, and under-ftood and believed by: every man that is a Chriflian : I m&m the matter of them,.if not the Phrafe; though I think it to be agreeable to -the matter alfo.

That there may be no contention about words, you muft take my phrafe of [Legal and Evangelical -Rigbteoftfnefs'] in the fence before •explained, viza as they take their name from that Covenant whichis their rule, and I know not how any righteoufnefs fhould be called [^Legal or Evangelical] is a fence more fki&&. proper,nor whence the.de-

norruW

I ox The Nature <f the

nomination can be better taken then from the formal reafon of the thing: Yet I know, that the obfervance of the Law of Ceremonies,and tbefeek-ing of life by the works of the Law, are both commonly called Legal Righteoufnefs, but in a very improper fence in comparifon of this. I know alfo, that Chrifts Legal Righ-teoufnefsjimputed to us,is commonly called [_ Evangelical Righteoaf-nefs,] bat that is from a moreaJiene extrirVecal rerpccl; to wit,;beeaijfe the Gofpel declarech and offerech this Righteoufhefs, and becaui'e it is a way to Juftifkation, wfcich only the Gofpel revealeth. I do not quarrel with any ot thefe fanms of fpeech, only explain my cnwwhkh I knew not how to exprefs naoue properly, that I be not mif-under-ftood.The Righteoufnefs of the mw Covenant ihen being, the perform-ance of its conditions, and ltSfomdi-tions being our obeying theGdpel or beleeving, it mult needs be pkin, That on no other tenns do wc partake

Covenants evened. m

take of the Legal Rightcoufnefs of Chrift. To affirm therefore that ©ur Evangelical or new Co v t riant-Righ-teoufnefs#in Chrift, and not in our felves, or performed by Chrift, and not by our felvcsjs fucha monftrous piece of Antinomian dodrrine, that no man who knows the nature and difference of the Covenant, canpof-fibly entertain, and which every Chriftian fhould abhor as unfuffer-able.

For i. It implyeth blafphemya-gainft Chrift,as it" he had fin to repent of,or pardon to accept, and a Lord that redeemed him to receive and fdbmit to ; for thefe are the conditions of the new Covenant. l.It implyetr^thatjewvnd Pagans, and every man (hall be faved.Do not fay that I odioufly wring out thefe confequences; they are as plain as can be expected : For if any be damned, itmuft be either for breaking the firft Covenant or the fecpnd: If the former be charged upon him, he may efcape by pleading the fecond

flllr

112 The Nature of the

fulfilled: If the latter, the fame plea will ferve 3 fo that if Chrift have fulfilled both Covenants for all men, then none can peri Hi. If they fay, that he hath performed the new Covenant conditions only for the elecl:; Then third, this followeth how-foever, That they are righteous, and •juftified before they beleeve, (which what Scripture doth fpeak ?).

4. And that beleeving is needlefs, not only as to our Justification, but to any other ufe: For what need one thing be fo twice done ? If Chrift have fulfilled the new Covenant for us,as well as the old, , what need we do it again ? Shall we come after him to do the work he hath perfected ? Except we would think with the Socinians, and as Siri<> nelm Digbj, That Chrift was but our pattern to follow, and but fet us a copy in obeying according, to rigfit Reafon.

5. That the faved and the damned are alike in themfelves, but the difference is only in Election, and

Chrifts

113 ' Covenants opened*

Chrifts- intention: For the faved have broke the old Covenants well as the damned; and if it be not they, but Chrift, that fulfil their conditions of the new, then the difference is all without them.

6. It confoundeth Law and Gof-peljt bverthroweth all the Lawsand Precepts of Chrift,by removing their end, it contradideth the whole fcopeof the Scripture, which telieth us, That Chrift was made under the Law, (and not under the Gofpel,) fulfilled the Law,(but not theGofpel Covenant)bore the curfe of theLaw, (but not of the Gofpel J and which irapofeth a neceflity of fulfilling the conditions of the Gofpel themfelves upon all that will be juftified and faved. To quote the Scriptures that affert this, would be to transcribe almoft all the doctrinal part of the New Teftament. What unfavory ftuff then is that of Mr SaltmarJh,ofc ] free Grace, pag. 83.84. Who direft-eth thofe that doubt of their Gofpel fincemytofeeit in Chrift, becaufe

Chrift

Chrift hath beleeved perfe&ly, j* e hathforrowed for fin perfectly, *% hath repented perfectly, he hath obeyed perfectly, he hath mortified fin perfectly ,and all is ours,&c. If this be meant of Gofpei-belee-ving, repenting, forrowing, obeying and mortifying, then it is no uncharitable language to fay, It isblaf-phemy in its clear confequence.; as if Chrift had a Saviour tobeleevdn for pardon and life, or fin to repent of^and forrow for,and mortifie: JBtit if he meant it of legal beleeving in God, or repenting, forrowing for, mortifying of fin inns, and not in hirnfelf; then is it no more to the bufinefs he hath in hand, then a Harp to a Harrow, as they fay. It is not legal beleeving, whichis the evidence doubted of, or enquired after; and (ureGhrifts repenting and forrowing for our fin, is no clearing to us, that werepent of our own, nor any acquitting of us for not doing it: And tor his-mortifying fin in us, that isithe doubt, Whether k be done in

the

the doubting foul or not. ? If he mean it of deftroying the guilt of fin mcritorioufly on the Crofs, that is but a ftrange evidence of the death of it in a particular foul: Except he think ( as divers that I met With in Glocefter-Jhire, and VPilt-Jbire,) That Chrift took our natural pravity and corruption together with our fltfli. But I let go this fort of men, as being fitter firft to learn the grounds of Religion in a Cate-chifm, then to manage thofe Dif-putes wherewith they trouble the world.

Thcfis 21.

NOt that we can perform theft Conditions without grace: (for without Chrifl we nan do no-thing : ) But that he enableth us to perform them our felves; and doth not himfelf repent , beleeve y love Christ, obey the Gofycl for tu, as he didfatisfie the Law for hs.

The Nature of the 116

T

Explication.

His prevention of an Objection I add, becaufe fome think it is a felf-afcribing, and derogating from Chrift, to affirm our felves to be but the Actors of thefe duties; though we profefs to do it only by the/trengthof Grace. But that it is Chrift that repenteth and beleev-eth, and not we, is language fome-what ftrange to thofe ears that have been ufed to the language of Scripture or Reafon. Though I know there is a fort of fublime Phtonick, Plotinian Divines, of hte fprung up among us, who think all things be but one; and thofe branches or beams of Gods EfTence, which had their Being in him before their Creation, and fhall at their diflfolution return into God again ; and fo the fouls of men are but fo many parcels of God given out into fo many bodies; or at leaft but beams dreaming from him by a f ancyed Emanation

tion. Thefe men will fay, not only that it is Chrift in ns that doth be-lceve, but the meer Godhead in ef r/ fence confidered. But it fufficeth fober men to beleeve that Chrift dwelleth in us; J. By his graces or fpiritual workings: 2. Byourcon-ftant love to him, and thinking of him : as the perfon or thing that we are ftill affectionately thinking on, is faid to dwell in our minies or hearts (becaufe their idea is ftill there,) or our mindes and hearts to dwell upon them. But in regard of the Divine Etfence, which is every where, as it dwells no otherwifc ( for ought I know or have feen proved) in the Saints,then in the wicked and devils; fo I think (as Sir Kenelm ~Digby thinks of the Soul ; That the Body is more properly faid to be in the Soul, then the Soul in the Body, \ fo we are more properly faid to live, and move & have our Being in God, then God to live, and move, and have his Being in us. I will not digrefs from my intended

118 The Nature of the

ed fubjecT: fo far, as to enter here into a difquifition after the nature or workings of that Grace which doth enable us to perform thefe Conditions. I refer you to Parkers Thefes de Traduclione Peccatorts advit>

Thefis 22.

IN this fore-explained fence it is 0 that men in Scripture arefaid to be perfonallyrighteous : And in this fence it is ^ bat the Faith and duties of Beleevcrs are faid to pleafe God> viz. as they are related to the Cove* nant of Grace, and not as they are meafured by the Covenant of I ; Works.

Explication.

THofe that will not acknowledg that the godly are called righ*-teousin the Scripture, by reafon of

| aperfonal Righteonfnefs, confifting

! in the re&itude of their own difpofi-

: tions and a<£tk>ns, as well as in re^-

gard of their imputed righteoufnefs,

; may be convinced from thefe Scrip-

! tures, if they will beleeve them.

Gen. y. U & 18. 23, 24. Job 17. 9.

Pfoii.$ % 6. & 37.17, a,&c Bed.

9.1,2. Bzekz 18.20, 24. & 33; 12,

15,18. ^^.9.13.^13.43.(^25

37,46. Lukji.6. H^.11.4. 1 Pep.

4.18* 2?^. 2.8. 1 fob* 3.7,12.

ito/. 22.ii* y^Mo.41. Rom^sj.

So their ways are called Righteouf-

nefs. Pfa/.i^.i. (£-23.3. c^ 45.

7, &c.^/^.5.2o. #-21,32. X^ 1.

75. ^#.10.35. Rom.6> 13,16, 18,

I9> 20. 1 Or. 1 j. 34. 1 y<?^. 2. 29.

(£•3.10. £^.4.24i&c.

That men are fometime called righteous, in reference to the Laws and Judgments of men, I acknow-ledg: Alfo in regard of fome of their particular a&ions, which are for the fubftance good: And perhaps fometimes in a comparative fenfe, as they, are compared with the

un-

120 The Nature pf the

ungodly: As a line lefc-crooked fhould be called (height in compa-rifon of one more crooked: But how improper an expreflion chat is, you may eafily perceive. The ordinary phrafeof Scripture hath more truth and aptitude then fo. Therefore it muft needs be that men are called Righteous in reference to the new Covenant only; Which is plain thus: Righteoufnefs is but the denomination of, our adions or perfons, as they relate to fome rule. This rule when it is the Law of man, and our a&ions fuit thereto, we are then righteous before men. When this Rule is Gods Law, it is either that of Works, or that of Grace: In relation to the former, there is none righteous, no not one: for all have finnedj and come fhort of the glory of God. Only in Chrift, who hath obeyed and fatisfied, we are righteous. But if you confider our actions and perfons in relation to the rule of the new Covenant, fo all the Regenerate are perfonaliy righteous,

becaufe

becaufe they all perform the conditions of thisCovenant,and are proper-lyponounced righteous thereby.Nd-ther can it be conceived how the works of Beleevers, fhould either pleafe God, or be called righteouf-nefs, as they relate to that old Rule, which doth pronounce them unrighteous, hateful, and accurfed.

Two forts among us therefore do di(cover intolerable Ignorance in this point, u Thofe that commonly ufe and underftand the words L Righteous, and Righteoufnefs] as they relate to the old Rule: as if the Godly were called righteous (besides their imputed -RighteoufnefsJ only becaufe their Sanclification and good Works havefome imperfect agreement to the Law of Works: As if it were a ftreight line which is in one place ftreight and another crooked; much lefs that which is in every part crooked in fome degree. I have bin forry to hear many learned Teachers fpeak thus; moft they fay to maintain it, is in this fim-

Uu*. 9 P le

I pic objeclion. If we are called holy,

I becaufe; of an imperfect Holinefs: riiert .w hy not< righteous, becaufe of an imperkdvifrghteoufnefs ? Anf.

\ Holinefs ftgnifieth no more but a Dedication to God, either by fepa-ration only > o£ by qaalifying the ftftyecT;fitft,'-Withan aptitude to its Divine imploytmnty and then fepa-rating or devoting it: as in our San-dification. Now a perfon imper-

; fe$ty fo qualified , is yet truly and r&illy fo- qualified ; and therefore

t may truly be called holy fo far. But

' ifrghteoufncfs fignifying-a Conformity to the itale; and a Conformity with'a quatenHiSi bran imperfect ^etflitude, being not a true Cofor-mtty or iteclkude at all ^becaufe the denomination is of the whole AdVion or Perfon, and not ofr a cer-

I t$n part or refpeel:, J therefore imperfect Sighteedfiiefs is not /tfghte 1 -ouftids, but Unrighteoufaefs; ft is a contradiction madjettp. 6>%#.Buf, is our perfonai/ttghteoufne&perfecl as it is meafured by the New itole ?

- , „• A gL

..i.... >' —— ■

—*.

^//|jcstaslj(hftll6pentoyo« by

I could her^ t fce_ap: ur^a ^a.uUtudfe Qf.tohedox W^^rs, that do call ohrpesSanal ;^ghr_eOufnefs by the ^dteof^E^gifiw^l^ ■ figuring

Name. ' <•>

TWfncond fort that* AeW their grofs jgnoranod, g of the nature of R»ighteoufnef$,are the Antinomians, (.(andfert^]o;kr;fii^Hepine3;wh0ra ttey ftvfitojtefk) rWfaii thty doe bujt iaea^a man calk of a i?ightouf-nefs in hifl&felf; or in any thing he can do, 'or-making his own duty either ; iiaf/?i§h$tQuf9ef$j or- condaci-bk thereto \, they ; ftartjer at iuch 'Dpc%ine^-rjnd'ev^r|^afla-tke teeth,; astf we preached flat-Papery, yea as i£wtfcryed.downChrift,and fetup our fclves: : The ignorant-wretches not i undijrftafjcjjng f » ;h§ , difference between fh<^twp|#t*©£ £ighfe-oufnefs; thacof.^e old Covenant, which is all out of us in Chrift ; and that of the New Covenant, which is G 1 all

all out of ChrifNn our (elves: (though wrought by the power of the Spirit of Chrift.)

gtteft. But how then is A hah and Niff eve's humiliation accepted, and fuch other works of thofethat are not in Chrift, feeing they are yet lindertheLawr

Anf. 1. No man is now under the Law as Adam was before the new Covenant was made; that is, not fo under the Law alone, as to have nothing to do with the Gofpel; or fo under the bid Covenant, as to have no benefit by the new.- 2. So that wicked men may now find that tender & merciful dealing fromGod, that even thofe works which are Iefsunjuft and finfol, and draw necr-eftto the cectitude required by the Gofpel, (hall be fo far accepted, as that,for their further encouragement, fome kind of reward or fiitpenfion ] of wrath (ball be annexed to thena, andGoi will countenance in them that which k good, though it be not fo much as may denominate it a | 1 good]'

good work. 3. But yet the bcft of an unregmerate mans works have more mater in them to rjrovokeGod then to pleafe him, and he never ac-cej>teth therrtas Evangelically Righteous f for they thatarim the flefa, and are without faith, cannot poifi-bly fo pleafe God, RomA.S.Heb.11. 6. As their righteoufnefc is but a lefs degree of unrighteoufaefs, and tHerefore^isinoft:imprbpedy called riehtebufncfsj fo rJieitLpleailng God iyfeut a^lower ^degree of difpleafing him, arid therefore but improperly called pleafing him.

1

Thtfis dt,

J

IN. this fence alfo,it is fo far from being an error to affirm, that [faith it felf is our Right coufnefs,~] that k is* truth neceffaryfor every Chriflmn to kjoW ; that is^ Faith is our Evangelical Right eoufnefs* {in the fence before explained*) as Chrifi is our Legal Righteoufnefs. G 3 Ex-

1 16 The Natursofifa

Explication.

v 1

THis AfTertionjToacjdiQuis tolhofe thatundcrflarid not its grounds, is yet facleaafrom iwihatiis/faiid before, that Iiieed sto add- jleuowefir prove it. Jrarii.Jlhave ciriared.be-fore, chat there: jmuft tea perfoeal Right€QufnefS)|)dSd[e& that imputed,. in aiP that aqe juiftifie<j. : cAod that 2. Thef^Iliiii^ofthe r»nditioasjo£ 'each Covenant is: xte Rii»hceaalT nefs t in reference to that Covfenani:« But Faith is the fulfilling of the conditions of the new Covenant, therefore it is outRighfapttfiefsin relation to that (Covenant. I do not here take Taith for anyone fingfc Aft,-hug as I fhalLafter ward explain it. i

Jgue & In what 4er>ee then is] Faith faid to baiaa^Bed to us for Righteoufnefs, if it be our Righte-oufnefs it felf?

An fa. Plainly thus ; Man is become unrighteous by breaking the

Law

Law of Righteoufnefs that was given him ; Chrift fully iatisfieth for this tranfgreflfion, and buycth the prifoners into his own hands, and maketh with them a new Covenant, That whofoever will accept of him, andbeleevein him, who hath thus fatisfied, it (hall be as efre&ual for their Justification, as if they had fulfilled the Law of Works themfelves. A Tenant forfeited! his Leafe to his Landlord, by not paying his rent; i he runs deep in debt to hfm, and is efrfabled to pay him any more rent for the future, whereupon fie ispu^ out of his houfe, knd caft into -pri ("on j tili he pay the debt; his Landlords fon payeth it for him, taketh him cut of prifon, and putteth him in hi$ houfe again, 2s his Tenant, having purchafed houfe and all to himfelf * he maketh him a new Leafe in this Tenor, that paying but a pepper corn yearly to him, he fhallbe acquit both from his debt, and fr6m all o-ther rent for the future, which by-his old Leafe was to be paid; yet doth C4 he

128 The Nature of the

he not cancel the old Leafe,but keep-eth it in his hands to put in fuite a-gainft the Tenant, if he ftiould be fo FooliQi as to deny the payment of the pepper cornJn this cafe the payment of the grain of pepper k imputed to the Tenant, as if he had payed the rent of the old Leafe: Yet this imputation doth not extol the pepper corn, nor vilifie ;he benefit of his Be-neftclor, who redeemed him; Nor canitbefaid, that the purchafedid only ferve to advance the value and efficacy of that grain of pepper, Bat thus; A perfonal rent muft be paid for the teftification of his homage; he was never redeemed to be independent, and his own Landlord and Matter: the old rent he cannot pay ^ his new Landlords clemency is fuch, that he hath refolved this grain (hail ferve the turn.

Do I need to apply this to the pre-fent cafe ? or cannot every man apply it ? Even fo is our Evangelical Righteoufnefs, or Faith, imputed to us for as real Righteoufnefs, asper-

fcd

fed Obtdience.Two things are con-fiderable in this debt of Righteouf-nefs; The value, and the perfonal performance or intereft: The value of C&rifts Satisfaction «• imputed to us, inftead of the value of a perfect Obedience of our own performing, and the value of our Faith isnotfo imputed : But becaufe there imift be fome perfonal performance of honv age, therefore the perfonal perfbrm-ance of Faith fhall be imputed to us for a fufficient perfonal payment, as if w« had paid the full rent, becaufe Ghrift, whom we believe in, hath ! paid it, and he will take this for fatisfa&ory homage; foit is in point of perfonal performance, and not of value thatFaith is imputed.

Thcfis r4>

THis perfhnal Go If el Righteofif-nefs is in its kind a perfett Righteoufvefs ; and fo far we may admit the dottrinc of perfonal Per-I ieUion % G 5 Bx- ,

130 Tht Nttttrc of the

■

Explication.

. ..

\>J fidered, cither in regard of the matter and the ads denominated righteous, orelfe in refped of-the form which gives them that! denomination; Alio our Faculties and Adions are confiderabie, either in regard of their Being, or hi their 'Quality.

~i. The perfedion o£xhe feeing of our Faculties or Ads is nothing to our pre Cent purpofe, as falling under a phyfical coniideration only.

2. In regard of tHerr Quality they: maybe called perfed or impetfM in feveral fences. _.

1. As Perfection is taken for the tranfcendentaLperfedion of Being, fo they are per fed.

2. And as it is taken for the compLat number of all parts, it is perfed.

I,

isyetikft^-fjic tenter or Tartkifdi-ter, that is,il*r-a work that is finifh-edby the Author, fo our holinels is fHUimperfefthere.

4. And ask is taken for accidental perfection, (fo called in Metaphy-ficks, ^whea-it wants nothing which beyond the Efl*ence,;fe;tflfe v ree]i}ifite to the integrity, ornament and welU being of it,; foour holine'fs is here imperfect.

5. As perfection is taken, pro fa-nitate,iot foundnefs, fo our hoknefe ' is imperfect

6. And as it is taken, pro maturi t ate fox ripened,-fo it is imperfect.

7. In refpecl; «if the admixture of contrary .qualities, our holinefs is imperfect.

8. But whether-all thiy imper*. feeTion be privative and (inful, or mecrly negative; and only our mi-fery, whether it be 3 privation, phy-. fical or moral, is a queftion that will be cleared, when I come to (hew the extent of the Commands or Rule.

Bat not anyoPxhefe kinds.of per-

1^2 Tht Nkture of the

fe&ion is that which I mean in the Pofition: Holinefs is a quality,, and may be intended and remitted, in-creafed and decreafed y but it is the relative confideration of thefe qualities of our faculties and a&s, as they are compared with the 'Rule of the new Covenant; andfoit is not the perfection- of our holinefs that we enquire aftet, but of our righteoufnefs ; which righteoufnefs is not a quality as holinefs is, but the modification of our afts as to the Rule, which is not varyed, fccHn&umm*' jis ctmhnu: See SehibL.Aftt/tph. /;'. 2. c. 9. Tit. 7. eArt. 2. Therefore our Divines ufually fay, That our J unification isperfed, though our Sanclification be not; and then I am fur%eur iftghtcoufnefs muft be pcrfetf..

A two-fold'perfecl^on is here im-plyed. 1. A Mecaphyfical Peife&i-on of Being. 2. A Perfection of Sufficiency in order to its end.

1. The being of our Righteoufnefs formally confifting. ia our relative

con-

conformity to the rule, either it rrmft be perfe<5t,or not at all. He that is not perfectly innocent in the very point thathc is accufed,is not innocent truly, but guilty. Sincerity is ufually faid to be our Gofpel Pet feftion: not as it is accepted in flead of perfe&ion* but as it is truly fo; for fincerc Faith is our conformity to the Rule of Perfection, viz,, the new Covenant as it is a Covenant; yet as it is fin-cere Faith, it is only materially our Righreoufnefs and Perfection, but formally as it is relatively our conformity to the faid Rule. j 2. OurRigkeoufnefsisperfc&as in its Being, fo alfo in order to its end. The end is, to be the condition of our j unification, &c. This end it feallperfe&ly attain. The Tenor of new Covenant is not, Believe in the higheft degree,and you {hall be jufti-fied; ButWieve (incerely, and you fliallbejuftified; foshat ourRigh-teoufnefs-, 1. formally confidered, in rcktioato the condition of the new Covenants pcrfeft or none> 2. But

134 The Nature.oj the

confidered materially as it is holinefs, either in reference to the degree it fhould attain, or the degree which it (hall attain, or in reference to the excellent object which it is exerciied about, or in reference to the old Covenant, or the directive, (and in fome fence J the preceptive part of the new Covenant; in all thefe re-fpecls it is imperfect.

I fpeak not all this while of that perfection in Cbrifts Satisfaction, which is alfo onr perfect Rjghteouf-nefs, becaufe few will queftion the perfection of that.

Thefisl}.

YEt isipan. improper fpeech of feme Divines ,7 'hat Chrift fir ft juftificth our perJcftSy and then our duties and altions : And except by Zjffttfjw&y^eji mcanjjis efteeming thtm to be. a fulfilling of the Gofpel Gondii ions\ and Jo juft, it U unfetmd and dangeron /, as xsdi'as. improper.

Explication

1. T T is improper in the belt fence: 1- 1. Becaufe it is contrary to the Sc'riptureufe of theword £ fuftify-i*ig]'"- which is the acquitting of us from the charge of breaking the Law, and -not from the charge of violating the new Covenant. 2. It is v againft the nature of the thing; feeing Juftification (as you fh^ll fee anon) Implyeth Accusation ; but the efteeming of a righteous .action to be as it is, doth not I imply arty aceufation. 3 .This fpeech, joyning Juftification of Perform and Actions together, doth feem to intimate the fame kindeof Juftification of both, and fo doth tend to fe-duce ; the hearers to a dangerous error. 2. Forifitbe underftood in the worft. fence, it will overthrow the Righteoufnefs of Chrift imputed , and the whole fcope of the Gofpel, and will fet up the doctrine j

©fr

13.6 The Nature of the

of Juftification by Works. For if God do juftifie our Works from any legal Accufation, (as he doth our perfons,) then it will follow, Tha: our Works are juft, and consequently we are to be juftified by them. There is no room ror Scrip-ture-juftirkation where our own Works are not firft acknowledged anjuftifiablerbecaufe there is no place for Satisfaction and Juftification thereby from another, where we plead the Juftification ofour own Works in refpeCt of the fame Law. Juftification of Works is a fufficient ground for Juftification by Works v feeing the juftnefsor his difpofitions-and adions is the ground of denominating the perfon juft; and that according to the primary and moft proper kinde of Righteouiaefs; as is exprcfied in the diftin&ien of it, i

TAefis

Thcfis 16.

(1) |W T Either can our performance Jl\ of the conditio s oftheCjofrel in the moft proper andftri^tfence^be [aid to merit the rewardifeeing there is nothing in the value of it, or any benefit that God receivetb by it, which may fo entitle it meritorious^ neither is there any proportion betwixt it and the reward. (2) But in a larger fence y as Promift is an Obligation, and the thing promifed is called Debt; fo the performers of the Condition are called Worthy ', and their performance Merit. Though properly it is all of Grace, and not of Debt, (t ) Rom. 4. 4,16. & 5.15,16,17* H^.14.4. Mat. I0.8. Rom.3.24* & 8.32. 1 Cor.2. 12. Rev.21.6. & 22.18. Rom. iu 6. G4/.5.4. Eph.z.ifoZ* Gen. 32* 10. (2)Mat. 10.11,12,13,37. & 22.8.Z«£.2C35. <£■ 21.36. zThef 1.J.I 1. Rev.^.^&c.

138 The Nattm.fifthe

Explication.

TN the fttifteft fence he isfaid to 1 Merit, who performeth fome-what of chat worth in it felf to another, which bindeth that other in ftrid juftice to requite him. This ivorkmuftnot be doe, and fo the performer not under the abfolute loveraigncy of another; foreWe he k not in a capacity of thus Meriting. It is natural Juftice which here btnd-eth to Reward. All that we can merit at the hands of Gods natural Juftice is but thefe ; tWo things. l. The efcape of panifhment in that refped or confide rat ion wherein our actions are not finful: or the not punning of -us in a greater degree then fin dtferves:: (Though indeed am queitionable wticther weare capable of fuffering more.) a. Oar anions thus deferve the honor of acknowledgment of that good which , is in them; yea, though the evil be more

:

more tfecn the good. As a raercif&l Thief that gives a.poor man half his raooy again, when he hath robbed him, as he deferyeth a lefs degree ©f puni&roent,. fo that good which was j® his aftjon deferveth an afnfwerable afckriDwkdgi^edtand praife, though he dye i or the faA . JSut this is « poor kinde of meriting , 'and liKk to the honor or benefit of the party rfc And is BODreproperly called a Jeffrde/ert of r^iflbnent, ^then a defeat re-ward.

2.Tk fecond kkid of Merit,is tlutt vrtcrebya Governor, for the promoting -of the ends ofGover nmentois obliged to ^ewajfd the Obedience of the Governed: That when Dif-obedience is grown common, the Obedience may be encouraged, and a difference tftede; Among men c-ven Jut)icebindeth to fuch reward; at kaft to afford the obedient the benefit of protection tind freedom, though he do no more then his duty: Buxthat:%!hecaufen6 man hath an

abfolute

:*: TkfXji:**.' ■-'■■:

J dbfotae fo YOtigKT if jmre orcr fas

fcbjecfe, 2S God barb, bo: k ic-

:•: •: :..r 1: ;:.: ::■?: r:e vrer;

Wfc n raped c^ the Liw of

:^5,-rct al the Obligation ^Jcrt

wooW fie span God to levvutf of

'*tv. bdbtr :.-:- ::-: :>:e.'i : f:r-

basing tc poomh as, snd acKEiow-

W g i* g oar obedierxr > wooli be

bat fair ovmw&&XB~ zsbe difccnj-

etb focb i Rewi::

rJ*wdl^c*«mear tl* Wcdfc

working nxwiy'whh robacay

t§eaa aereeiMe'to their

£237, wc ire i^tk.»: Stable fararKs

_<fatx. TbefeJarr tks Obb-giDQD to itu l:z *:cs; the Vsiizoz! of God, is it is in his own brtft known to bimfyf alone, fo is it

iri"?.T. rrrrr. r.jr. :_* i ; r.c! pnoer-^botbe worth of oar Works, ■■ i^ere?; ne t r.; : ~ r •: z rr.v ct-.-adMcrit

fufficiendy explained in the Position : where the Obligation to reward, is Gods ordinate Juftice, and the truth of his Promife; and the worthinefe licth in oar performance of the Conditions on our part. This is improperly called Merit: This kinde of Meriting is no diminution to the grcatnefs or freenefs of the «ft or reward : becaufe it was a free and gracious A& of God to make our performance capable of that title • and to engage himfelf in the forefaid promife to us $ and not for any gain that he expe&ed by us, or that our performance can bring him.

Thcfis 27.

(0 A SJtwaspoJpbleforAdim . ±\_ to have fulfilled the Law offVorly by that power Vohichhe received by nature ;. (2) So is it pof-fiblefor ms to perform the Conations of the neft Qovenant by the (3) Power which we receive from the Grace of Ghrift. Ex-

*4a The Nature af the

i \

no

ens •yy- ,- i xnmozl + . ■

1 (^) !f Tr ; Hat? may be poffible whidi A1: is not future. A tiling is

I ftiflmed poffible wheritfchgrels no* tkiag' in the- nature of thfe t&i&gnjtf Mfi, which may fc hm#errit£^rd^ duclion as to neoeffi^e-'itS non* futurity: Though from extri»fdcstJ Reafonsi the fame non-futurity Wtfy> b6 certain, and in feme refp^^ tte~ dsGkdfM And ali^hings::c6i^re4 : the futurity of it may be tetW&inv poffible 1 ;-and yet the thing ^itffdP be poffible. So it was poffible.<b^ v&Jw*»~to- have- -fteeeK----Andh~fb-

| if you (houkUafes the' Word Q Poffible 1 absolutely, and abftracled frdtti' the connderation of tHe> ftterig&hof the a&or^ even the Gotamaadstsf thetow^te yer^ftf^ fibl6,t64)efelfilka.< But* fttdv fc«fe> of t% word ft fe^im^ropefi: it ba&gvbrdinatiiy fpoken with relation to the ftrength ofthe'Agerttv

(2) But in; the relative fence the Conditions of: the. new Covenant arepoflible to them that have'the afliftance of grace. I intend not here to enter opon an Explication of the nature of thatGracrwhich is neceflfa-ry to this performance; my pur-pofe being chiefly to open thofe things wherein the relative change «r our cftates doth confift, rather then the real. Whethet theri this Grace be Phyfical or Moral ? Whether t here be * Moral Suafion of the Spirit, diftincl: from the Suafion of the Word, and other outward means? Whethen. ihkt* which is commonly called the work of Con-fciencejbealfo fromfubh an internal fuafory work-of the S^iric^ How far. this Grace is refiftible? Orwhei. ther all have fufficient/Grace tc* be*-leeve, either-given, or internally offered? with multitudes of fach queftionss, Iihail here pafs by ; Re* ferring you to thofe many^ Volumes that have already handled them. All that I (hall fay of this fhall be when

H4 The Nature of th*

I come to open the Nature of Faith. See Parlors Thefes before menci-oned.

Thefis 28.

THe Precepts of the Covenants, as meer Precepts, mufi be di-fiinguijhed from tho fame Precepts considered as Conditions, upon performance whereof Vr em* ft lux, cr the for nonperformance.

Thefis 29.

AS all Precepts are deliz r npen Covenant-terms, or as belonging to one of the Covenants^ and net independently ; So have the fame Precepts various ends ami ufes, ace or ding to the tenor and ends of the diftinci Covenants to which thej do belong.

Ex plica-

■

Explication*

THereforeitispnething to ask, .whether the. .Covenant of Work's be. abol ifneel ? anil anotrier-thing, whether the Moral Law be aboliilied ?- Yet that no orie Precept of eitherMoral or Ceremonial Law was delivered without reference to one of the Covenants, is very evident. For if the breach", or] that Command be a fin,and to be punched, then either according to the rigorous threatening of the old Cove-mnt, or according t;othe,way and fuftice of the ne'w. For ihe Law, as it was delivered by Mofes, maybe reduced, in feveral fefpech to ,each of thefe Covenants, and cannot con-ftitute.-a third Covenant, whply di-ftinct frqm both thefe; and therefore tamerojioth more fitly call ic a fubfervient- Covenant, then a third Covenant. For either God intended in that Covenant to prc-H ceed

I ceed with finners in ftricl rigor of 1 , Juftice, for every fin; and then it is { ' reducible to the firft Cbvenant: Or elfe to pardon fin upon certain conditions, and to difpence with the rigor of that firft! Covenant: And then it rpnft pply fatisfiuftion for thofefins; and fo be reducible to the fecond Covenant: (For I cannot yet digeft the Doctrine of Ground and Vojfiui) concerning fatif-fa&ion by facrifice for temporal puniQiment, without uabordrnati-on to the fatisfadtion by Chrift:) Or if it feem in feveral phrafes to favor of the language of the feveral Covenants, ( a,s indeed it doth ; ) that is became they are yet both in force; and in feveral refpeds it is reducible to both. So that wnen we demand, whether the Moral Law dq1 yet binde, the queftion i$ ambiguous, from the ambiguity of j the term £ Binde]. For it it one thing to ask, whether it bindc upon j the old Covenant terms? another, whtthcr upon new Covenant terms? I 4md|

and a third, whether as a meer Precept ? Here a queftion or two muft be anfwered.

i Qgeft. How could the Precepts delivered by Mofes (when the ,old Covenant was violated, and the new eftablifhed) belong to that old Covenant >

2 &neft. In what fence doth the Decalogue belong to the new Covenant ?

3 Qneft. Whether the Precepts of the Gofpel do belong to the Decalogue ?

4 <2f* e fi» Whether the Precepts of the Gofpel belong alfo to the old Covenant?

But all thefe will be cleared under the following Petitions, where they fhallbe diftindly anfwered.

THefis 30;

THcre is no fin prohibitedI in the Golf (I which is not a bre.Acb.cj: feme Precept in the Pecdogue ; H 2 and

148 . The Nature of the

and which is not threatened by ihe Covenant of Works , as offending again (t p and fo falling tinder the I Juftice thereof. For the threatening I of that Covenant extendeth to all j fin that then was, or after (hottld \ be forbidden. God ftillrefcrved the \ prerogative, of adding to his Lotos, j without alteringtheCovenant terms; j elfe every new Precept would imply \ a ne\X> Covenant: And fo there ■ fhould be a 'multitude of Cove- j nants*

Explication.

1. "Though the Decalogue doth not mention each particular duty in the Gofpei, yet doth it command obedience to all that are or (hall befatfsned % -and expreiTeth thegenus oi every particular duty. And though it were not a duty from the general precept, till it was fpe-cifled in the Gofpel, yet when

it once is a duty, the. neglect ©f it is a (in againft the Decalogue. For inftance ; The Law faith. Thou (halt take the Lord for thy God j and confequently beleeve all that he faith to be true ; and obey him in all that he (hall particularly command you: The Gofpel' revealeth what it is that is to be be-leeved, and faith, This is the Vvork^ ofGody that je beleeve in him Vvhom the Father hath ftnt , ^.6.28, 29. The. affirmative part of the fe-cond Commandment is, Thou fhak worfhip God according to his own inftitution: The Gofpel fpecifieth fome of this inftituted Worihip; •w-s.Sacraments^&c. So that the neglect of Sacraments is a breach of the fecond Commandment: And Unbelief is a breach of the firft. This may help you to anfwer that qae-ftion, Whether the Law with-out the Gofpel be a futficient Rule of Life? Anfw. As the Lords Prayer is a futficient Rule of Prayer : It is fufficienj: in H 3 its

I > o The Nature of the

its own kinde, or to its own pur-pofes: It is a fufficient general Rule tor duty; but it doth not enumerate all the particular inftituted fpe-cies. Yet here, the Gofpel revealing thefe kiftitutions, is not only the new Covenant it felf; but the doctrine of Chrift, which is an adjunct: of that Covenant alfo. 2.That every fin againft the precepts of theGofpel &decalogue,are alfofins againft the Covenant of Works, and condemned by it, will appear thus. i. -The threatening of that Covenant is againft all (in, as well as one, (though none but eating the forbidden fruit be named : ) But thefe are fins; and therefore threatened by that Covenant. The major appears by the recital afterwards; Curfed is he that doth not all things written. 2. I have proved before, that the old Covenant is not repealed, but oneiy relaxed to Beleevers upon Chrifts fatisfaction: And then it muft needs be in force againft every fin. 3. The penalty in that Covenant

nant is (till executed againft fuch fins. So that every fin againft the GofpelJs a breach of the Conditions of the Law of Works: Bu* e-very fin againft that Law, is not a breach of the Condition^^ the Gofpel. And it hinders TO tfiis? That the Moral law byMofes, and the Gofpel by Chrift, were delivered fince the Covenant with Adam. For though that Covenant did not fpecifk ^each duty. and fin ; yet it doth condemn ths fin when it i$ fo { Specified. But the. great Objection is this: How can Unbelief be a breach of the Covenant of Works, when the very duty of beleevmg for-pardon is inconfiftenJt with the Tenor of that Covenant, which knoweth no pardon > Anf. 1. Pardon of fin is not fo contradictory to the troth of that Covenant, but that they may confift upon fatisfadti-onmade. Though it is true, that the Covenant it fejf doth give no hopes of it; yet it doth not make it impoflible. 2. Unbelief, in rc-H 4 fpecl

152 The Nature of the

fpc& of pardon and recovery., is a Sin •againft the €ovenant cf Works, not forfnditer^^ but eminent er. 5. Not al r o as it is the negleft of a duty, with fuch and Juchjfcs and ufes, but as it is the ne^e^of duty in .the general con-fidered; and'loasit is a fin in general, and not as it is a fin confining in fuch or fuch an ad or omifli-on. The form of the fin lieth. in its pravity or deviation, from .the Rule: So far Unbefcef is. .condemned by the Law: Thefubftrate act is but the matter, (improperly fo called.;

The review of the comparifon before layd down will.explain this to you: A Prince btftoweth a Lordihip upon a Slave, and maketh him a Leafe of it, the tenor where ot is t That he (hall perform exact obedience to all that is commanded I him ;• and when he fa?ls of this., he I (hall forfeit his Leafe : The Tenant difobeyeth, and maketh th« forfeiture; The Son of this Prince in-

terpofeth

terpofeth, and buyeth the Lordfhip, and fatisfieth for all the damage that came by the Tenants difobedience: Whereupon the Land and Tenant and Leafe are all delivered up to him, and he becomes Landlord. He findeth the Tenant ( upon his forfeiture ) difpoflfefTed of the choyceft rooms of the houfe, and chief benefits of the Land, and confined to a ruinous corner; and was to have been deprived of all, had not he thus interpofed. Whereupon he maketh him a new Leafe in this Tenor, That if in acknowledgment of the favor of his Redemption, he will but pay a pepper corn, he (hall be refto-red to his former pofleflion, and much more.

In this cafe now the non-payment of the pepper corn, is a breach of both Leafes: Of the old, becaufe though he had forfeit- I ed histitle to the benefits of it,( yet he could not difanul the duty of it, which was obedience during H5 his

154 The Nature of the

his life .* efpecially when the penalty was not fully executed on him, but he was permitted ftill to enjoy {ome of the benefits. So that as it is an acl: of difobedience in general, his non-payment is a further forfeiture of his old Leafe: But as it is the non-payment of a pepper corn required of him in ftead of his former Rent, foit is a breach of his new Leafe only. Even fo is Unbelief a violation of both Covenants.

Thcfis 31.

THe G'off el doth eUMifh y and not repeal the Moral Law> and fo is perfetl obedience commanded^ t and every fin forbidden, novp^ as ex-attlj 04 under the [Covenant of Wor\s : But this is but an adjuntt of the new Covenant, and not a proper fart of it: Neither is it on the fame terms^or to the fame ends y as in. thefrfl Covenant*.

Ex-

Explication.

THat the Moral law is yet in force, I will not ftand to prove, becaufe fo many have written of it already. See Mr Anthony Surgefes Lectures: But to what ends, and in what fence the Gofpei continueth that Law, and commandeth perfect obedience thereto, is a Queftion not very eafie.

1. Whether Chrift did firft repeal that Law, and then re-eftabltfh it to other ends I So fome think.

2. Or whether he hath at all made the Moral Law to be the preceptive part of the new Covenant ? And fo whether the new Covenant do at all command us perfect obedience? or onlyfincere?

3. Or whether ?the Moral Law be continued only as the precepts of the , old Covenant, and fo ufed by the I new Covenant,mesrly for a directive Rule?

To

To the hrft I anfwer; i. That it is not repealed at all I have proved already, even concerning the Cove-nan; of Works it feif; and others e-nough have proved at large of the Moral Law. cu Yet that Chrift ufeth it to other ends, and for the advantage ofhis Kingdom, I grant.

To the other iecond Queilion, I anfwer • i. That the Moral Law, as it is the preceptive part of the Covenant cf Works, is-but defatted o-ver into the hands or Chrift, a

!' continued in the fence before ex-ed, fetms plain to me. :. That the iame Ifenl Law therefore fo continue to command even believers, and that the perfect obeying ci it is therefore their civ and the not obeying their fin, Lead threatened m -Covenant.

5. That JcfusChnfi hart rnaj. ime Moral Law.for

Dels, whereby ~:1. That Ufhcqeas car UDCt

Covenants opened. \^n

obedience to Chriff, is part of the condition of the new Covenant; that we may know what his Will is, i which we mull endeavor to obey, | and what Rule our actions mufl be \ fincerely fitted to, and guided by, he hath therefore kfc us this Moral Law as part of this dfredion, having added a more particular enumeration of fome duties in his Gofpel. That as when the old Covenant faid,Thou {halt obey perfeel ly; the Moral Law did partly tell them, wherein they fhould obey: So when the new Covenant -faith, Thou (Lalt obey fin-cerely; the Moral Law doth perfect ly tell us, wherein, or what we muft endeavor to do.

4. But that the Moral Law,without refpedt to either Covenant, fhould command us perfeel obedience ; - or- that Chrift,as the Mediator of the new Covenant, fhould command us not only fincere, but alfo perfect obedience to the Moral Law, and fo hath made it a proper part of his Gofpel, not only as a- Dkedtory

and*

158 The Nature of the

and Inftrudion, buc alfo as a Command : I am not yet convinced, (though I will not contend with any that think otfoerwife,) my Reafon is, becaufe I know not to what end Chrift fhould command us that obedience which he never doth enable any man in thisiife to perform. If it were to convince us of our difabiiity and fin, that is the work of the Law, and the continuing of it upon the old terms, as is before explained, is fufficient to that.

ButljudgthisQ^eftion to be of greater difficulty then moment.

Thefis 31.

IF there be Any farticular fins a* gainfi the new Covenant , Which are not alfo againfi the old ; or ifl any fins be confiderable in any of their reffietts , as againft theCjoffel §nly y then Chrifis death Was not to fat is fieforanyfuchfinsfo confidered: For where no death is threatened,

there ,

there none is explicit ely due , nor Jbould be executed; and where it is not fo due to the [inner, nor fbould have been executed on him, there it could not be required of Christ, nor executed on him: But the Go/pel threat eneth not death to any fin, but final unbelief and rebellion , (and for that Chrift never dyed, as I (hall Jbew anon,) therefore Chrift dyed not for any fin as againft the Gofpel, norfujfered that Which is no Where threatened.

Explication.

A Sin may be faid to be againft the Gofpel, 1. As Chrift and his Gofpel are the objed of it y 2.0r j as it breaketh the conditions of the Gofpel: In the latter fence only I here take it. To prove the point in hand, there needs no more then the Argument mentioned: For to all that unbelief, and other fins of the

godLy

godly,which are forgiven, the Gof-pel doth no where threaten death; J and thertfoie Chrift could not bear ! ir 3 as to fatisile the Gofpel-threaten-; ing. Though I confefs I have been long in this point of another judgment, while I coniidcred not the Tenor of the Covenants diftin&Iy 5 fome further proof you fhall have in the next conclurion. Read Heb. 9.15.

Thclls

33

AS the Active Obedience of Chrift ivas not the Right eouf-nefs of the fecond Covenant i or the performing of its Conditions^ but of the fir ft , pr&perly called a. Legal Rightesufnefs ; jo a/fa his Pa (five Obedience and Merit was only to I fatisfu for the violation of the Covenant of Works, but not at all for the violation of the Covenant of Cjrace ; for that there is no fat if-faWionmade, and there rcmaineth nofatrifice. Ex-

Covenants opened* \6l

Explication.

THat Chrift'dkl not fulfil the conditions of thenew Covenant for us 3 1 have proved already : That he hath not fatisfied for its violation, I think to the confederate will need no proof: If you think otherwife, coniider, i. Chrift is faid to be made under the Law, and to have born the curfe ofthe Law, and to have freed us from the curfe of it, but no where is thisaffirmed of him in refpecT of theGofpel. i. There be terms by him propounded, upon which men muft partake of the benefits of his Satisfaction; but thefe terms are only.che conditions of the new Covenant, therefore he never fatisfied for the non-performance of thofe conditions. 3. Ifhedid.upohwhat conditions is that SatisfacTion enjoyed by us ? 4.But the Queftion is out of doubt,btcdufe that every man that performech not the GofpeL conditions,

ons, doth bear the puniftiment him-felfjin eternal fire, and therefore Chrift did not bear it; So that as it was not fo grievous a death which was threatened in the firft Covenant, as that is which is threatened in the fecond; fo it was not fo grievous a kind of death which Chrift did bear, as that is which final unbelievers fhal bear, (except as the accumulation of (ins of fo many might increafe it; ) Therefore when we fay, That Chrift fuffered in his Soul the pains of hell, or that which is equal; wemuftnot wan, the pains which is threatened m the Gofpel, and the damned unbelievers muft endure- but only of that death which the Law of Works did threaten. Wo therefore to the rebellious unbelieving world, that muft bear this fecond death them-felves : For of how much foever puniftiment (hall they be thought worthy, who tread underfoot the blood of the Covenant? Hekio.*?.

Thefis.

Thefis 54.

THe Covenant of Grace is not properly faid to be violated^ or its conditions broken^ exceft they be finally broken: For the vitiation confifteth in non-performance of the conditions y and if they are performed at lafiy they are truly performed\ and ifperfermedythen the Qovenant is not Jo violated,as that the offender Jhottld fall under the threatening thereof

Expli

icatton*

J Deny not but the new Covenant may be faid to be neglecled, and finned againft, and the Command of Chrift broken by our long (landing out in unbelief, though we come home at laft. But the Covenant conditions are not broken, when ever the precept of the Gofpel is tranf-

greffed,

164 The Nat ftre of the

grefTed, or the Covenant neglected, except it be final. The Condition is, Whoever btlieveth (hall befaved, not limiting it to a particular fea-fon. Though both the precept of Chriit, and common Reafon re-quireth that we be fpeedy in the performance, becaufe we have no pro-mife that the day of Grace (ball continue, and becaufe our neglect will incrcafe our difability, and our frequent refitting will grieve the Spirit : So that the new Covenant doth not threaten death to every particular ad: of difobedience or unbelief, ner to any but what is finail, though the precept require that we believe immediately, and every degree ot unbelief be forbidden. "

Thcfis 35,

YEt the fins of Beleevers a-gkinjk the Gofpci Precepts have

have need of pardon, and are proper-ly [aid to ie pardoned, in reference to their deferved punifiment 5 1. 'Both becaufe the puni[hment y -which naturally an A implicit ely is due to them, is not fo much as threatened in this gentle Covenant, audfo becomes not explicit ely due, or in point of Law. 2. But fpe-cially becaufe the old Covenant condemning all fin, is yet unrepealed, "which rvould be executed on us, even for our fins againfi CjRACE , did not the efficacy of CHRISTS Satisfaction daylj ■interpofc, Which makes tu therefore have continual need of that Satif-faelion. ■■

Explication.

THis is layd down to prevent the

Objection which might arife

from the fore-going Do&rine: For

many are ready to ask, If Chrifl

dyed

dyed not for fin as it is againft the Gofpel-Covenanc, then how are fuch (ins pardoned to Bdeevers? I anfwer, in the fore-exprefled way : For certainly the Gofpel cannot be (aid to remit the punifhment which it never threatened, (further then as it is only implicitery due;) And that which it doth ^threaten it doth never remit. '.

Thefis 36.

c7 He far cloning of fin ii a gracious aft ofGody difcharging the Offender by the GoSfeUpromife , or grant from the Obligation,, to pu-nijhment, upon confederation of the fatisfaftio® made by Chrifl , accepted by the fimer , and pleaded with God*

Ex-

Covenants opened. \6j

Explication^

T'He true definition of Pardon, and A of Juftification, doth much conduce to tKe underftending of this whole myfterious Dodrnne, The former.I have here Iayd down as neer as can. I (hall briefly explain the whole Definition.

i. I call it an £AQ of God, 2 for fo the Scripture ordinarily doth. Mat % 6.l2.i4)i5. Adar.u.2$ y 26, Z04.23.34. Efh.\. 32. Some may objecl; IF all things be delivered into the hands of Chrifi the Redeemer, and all Judgment committed to the Son, as is (hewed before, then the Son (hould forgive rather then the Father > I anfwer, 1. So the Son-is fakj to forgive alfo, Mkr. 2.7, 10. L*%. 5. 24* 2.1 (hewed you before^That the Father giveth not away any power from himfelf by giving it to the Son; but onely

doth manage it in another ^y n pon

other terms. 5. 'As the Mediator is a middle perfon, interpoling between God and the world for their reconciliation, fo the Acceptance, Pardon, and Kingdom of the Mediator,-, is, as it were, a Mean or ftep towards the Pardon, Acceptance, «an$ Kingdom of God. Firil Chrift doth cieanfe men by-his Spirit and Blood, and thcnoffereth them blamelefsand undefiled, without rpotor, wrinkle toQod,. who fo aqcep^ them at his hands, and even the-Kingdom ^alfo will he deliver up : to thq- Father, Ephef. ^27. Col. .1.22,28. $ude 24. 1 Cor. 15.24. Therefore the Sons, pardoning, and accepting being firft in orJer A of-Nature,ancl fo but-a mean to Gods "pardoning and accepting, where the wholerwork iscompleatly

ferfefted, ; ( when the finner is fully t roughthome by Chrift,p G©d> 'from f whprn ne'firft. - fell,}- L thf actof. pardoning is therefore ;mo£ ufuaUy | and fitly ifcribed to the Father,(that j icing .the ultimate perfecting par-donjand.we are foid Co .ask it of him throu gh Chr ift . d 2. J[_

2. I call this Pardon [a graciow Aft ; j For if it were not in fome fbrt gratuitous, or free, ic were no Pardon. Let chofe think of this, who fay, We have perfectly obeyed the Law in Chrift, and are therefore righteous. If the proper debt -either of obedience or fuffering be payd, either by our felves, or by another , then there is no place left for Pardon : For when the Debt is payd, we owe nothing (except obedience de novo • ) and therefore can have nothing forgiven us* For the Creditor cannot retufe the proper D:bt, nor deny an Acquittance upon receit thereof. Bat Chrift having payd the Tantundem and not the Idem, the Value and not the ftrict. Debt, this fatisfadion the Father might have cfeofen to accept, or to have discharged us upon Chriits Offerings: which yet becaufe he freely doth, therefore is his gracious Ad properly called Pardon.

The ignorant Antinomians think,

it cannot be a Free Ad of Grace, if

I there

I - '

i there be any Condition on our part i for enjoying it. As if in the fore- ; ' mentioned comparifon, pag. 153. the Tenants redemption were the lefsfree,becaufe his new Leafe requires the Rent of a pepper corn in token of homage i As if when a pardon is procured for a condemned Malefaclor, upon condition that he fhall not rejed it when it is offered him, bat (hall take him that procured it for his Lord, that this were therefore no free pardon! Indeed if we payd but a mite in part of the dcbtitfdf, fo far our pardon were the lefsfree. But I will not further trouble the Reader with thefe fence-lefs conceits, the confutation whereof is fo eafie and obvious. ■

5. I call this Act [> Dijcharging} i as being the proper term in Law to I exprets it by.We were before charged by the Law: we are by this A& difcharged* 4. I call it a difcharge of [jhe

-j&f[endtr]i For an offender is r-he only capable object or recipient of it. There can be no pardon where there isn© offender. " 5f k j

l s\ jl.T call it a difcharging \_from the Obligation to Ftimjhment. ] For, 1. Yob muft look at this whole procefs as legal, and not as referring chiefly to Gods fecrec judgment or thoughts. Therefore when it is called a freeing man from the wrath of God, you mult underftand it onely of the wraththtcatened in the Covenant, and fo from [[the Obligation to Punifhment]. Ygu muft not conceive of the change in God, but in the finners relation, and confequent-ly in the fence and fentence of the Law, as to him. 2. The common word by which this terminus a qno % or rather the evil which this pardon doth direclly free m& from, is expreff-cd, is Guilt. But becaufe the word Guilt h varioufiy ufed, fometimes referring onely to the FacT, fometimes to the defert of Punifhmenr, andlbmetimetothe duenefsof Pu-I 2 nifliment

j

I nifriment, or the Laws obliging the OfTcndor to bear it; I have therefore here taken it in this laft expreflion, | becaufe I think that Guilt is caken a-I way only in this laft fence, as I fhafl \ farther open anon. Therefore many j define Guilt only in this laft fence, : RcAta* ej} Obligatio ad Pctnam.This ! Obligation though expreffed only in the Covenant, yet arifeth alfo from theFadt : For if the Covenant had not been broken, it had not obliged to fufeiing; but (till to duty only.

6. I call it a DifcHarging \_bj the

Gofpel-promife or grant: J (It is

I called a Promife in reference to the

■ benefit as future, but more properly

a Grant in reference to the benefit

I as prefent or part; either in the eon-

; ferringj or already conferred. ) This

I do for thefe Reafong. i. To clear

, the nature of this Ad. 2. To divert

i your thoughts from Gods fecret '

judgment, where moll fuppofe this

A<ft performed ; and to turn them

right, and free God from the I

impu- j

imputation of change.

A great qucftion it is, Whether Remifiion and Juftification be immanent or tranfient Acls of God ? Themiftakeof this one point was it that led thofe two moft excellent, famous, Divines, Dr Twifft and Mr Piwble to that error and pillar of Antinomianifm, wi. Juftification from Eternity. For ( faith Dr Tmfft often) All Acls immanent in God, are from Eternity : but Juftification and Remiflion of fin are immanent Acls: therefore, &c. by [immanent in God] they mult needs mean Negatively, not Pofi-tively. For Acls have not the refpeel of an Adjunct to its fubjeel, but of an efted to its caufe. Now whether all fuch immanent Acls are any mpre eternal then tranfient Acls, is much queftioned: As for God to know that the world doth now ex-ift; That fuch a man is fandified, or juft, dec Gods fore-knowledg is not a knowing that fuch a thing is, which is not; but that fuch a thing I 2 will

Ttx Ndtftrfaf ihe

\ch is not. Yet doth

this make no change in God ; no !

:hm the Sun is changed by tbi |

:r cf Creatures which it ebd*

enlighten and warm • or the Gafs

by the variety c* feces which it re-

i prefents : or the eve by the variety

■ ' £ 1 U L '\-/ J lit

V 5

tfca: every varfacioo of the object thareal change in the eye, ot that the behoving of ten diftrocl: colours at one view, dotkciake ten diftinclaxftscf the fight, or alterations on it: Much lefs do the objects of Gods kncfieledg make fucbalte-nitrons. ^ Bat grant that all C

t Acls are Ererna!;(whkh I

is cult? beyond our underfiatv

:: moftDivines wvi

deny the Minor; and tell you ; that

Remifli i : :rhcation sre •

- Acls; Which is trap J Boc a Trut." er had the happi-tofeeor hear well cleared by For to prove it a tranhenr ■: us no more, but " doth j

I doth tranfire inf*b]ettum extranc-i urn, by making a moral change on J our Relation, though not a real up-! on our perfons,asSandification doth. I But this is only to affirm and not to prove; and that in general only; not telling us what A& it is that maketh this change. Relations are not capable of being the Patients or Subjeds of any Aft: feeing they are but meer Entia Rationu y and no real Beings. Neither are they the immediate producl or effed of any Ad: but in order of Nature are confequential to the direcT effect. The proper cffcft of the Ad is-to lay the Foundation from whence the Relation doth arife. And the fame Acl which layeth the Foundation doth caufe the Relation, wkh-' out the intervention of any other. Suppofe but the fitbjetttwty fenda-mcntum&tcrmivwy and the Relation will unavoydably follow, by a meer refultancy. The direct tffcft- therefore of Gods Adivc Juftification muft be a real effect, I 4 though]

176 The Nature of the

though not upon the (inner, yet upon fomething elfe for him; and thence will his PafTive J unification follow. Now what tranfknt Aft this is ? and what its immediate real Effect? who hath unfolded? I dare no-t be too confident in fo dark a point: but it fcemeth to me 5 that this juftifying tranfient Ac\ is the enacting or promulgation of the new Covenant, wherein Juftrficati-on is conferred upon every Beleeyer. Here, 1. The pa/Ting and enading this Grant is a tranfient Act 2. So may the continuance of it ( as I think. J 3. This Law or Grant hath a moral improper Action, whereby it may be faid-to pardon or juftifie ; which properly is but virtual juftifying. 4. By this Gran: God doth, 1. Give us the Righte-oafnefsof Chrift, to be ours w we beleeve: 2. And difabieth the Law to oblige us to punifhmenr, or to condemn us: ;. Which real Foundation being thus hyd,our Relations off Juftified and Pardoned in

tide

tide of Law] do neceiTarily re-i

fult. • . !

Ob'ptt. Bar this Aft or God, m granting Pardon -to Beleevers, was; performed long ago: Butourjufti-i iication is not till we bekeve? ; ! Attfw. Thougfuhetffeftsof Caufeij I as Phyiicai do follow them immedi-\ ately, yet as Moral they do not fo; I but & what diftance the Agent pkmfes fepneti.rses. A man makes his! Ton a Deed of Gift of certain Lands,' to be his at fuch an age, or upon the performance of fome eminentj Action. Here the Deed of gift is the ' fathers inftrumenc by which he giveth thtfe Lands: The paffing this ! Deed is the proper Aft and time or Donation: Yet the fon hath no potfefllon titt the time prefixed, or till the "Condition be performed; At which time, the conditional Grant becoming abfoluce, and giving him right toprcfent poffeflion, it is not unfitly faid, that his father doth even then beftow the Lands; though by no new intervening aft at I 5 **!

17 8 The Nature tfxke

all, but only the continuation of the former Deed of gift in force. So here; The conditional grant of Pardon and Juftification doth thro ab-folutdy pardon and juftifie us, when we perform the Condition. Hence is the phrafe in Scripture of being [_Ju£lififd by the Law ]: which doth not only fignifie £ by the Law as the Rule to which men did fit their a&ions]j but alfo {"by the Law, as not condemning, but jufti-fying the perfon whofe actions arc fo fitted ]: In which fence the Law did juftihe Chrift: or elfe the Law (hould not juftifie as a Law or Covenant , but only as a Dire&ion: which properly is not Justifying, but only a means to difcover that we are Justifiable. As the Word of Gkift ftiali judg men at the laft day, fok.n.2%. So doth it virtually now. And if it judg, then doth it condemn and juftifle. So Rom.i.11* fam.2.12* We fliall be judged by the Law of Liberty. Gal 5.3,4, 2 3. In xhe fame fence, as the Law is faid

to

] to convince and curfe ( lam. 2. 9. J Gal. 3.13./ it may be faid that the Gofpei or new Law doth acquit, jufttfie and Weft. Rom. 8. 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life in Chrifi fefwyhath made m? free from th* Law of Sin and Death. As the Law worketh Wrath, and where is no Law, there is no Tranfgreflion, (Rom.<\.if>) And as fin is not imputed where there is no h\v, (Rom. 5.13.) and the ftrength of fin is the law, (1 Cor. 15.56*) So the new Kw is the ftrcngch of Righteoufnefs, and worketh Deliverance from Wrath; and were there no fuch new Covenant, there would be no Righ-teoufnefs inherent or imputed : ^7.51.

So that I conclude. That this tranflent Aft of Cod, pardoning and juftifying (conttittttive) is his Grant in the new Covenant ; by which, as a Moral Inftrument, our Juftification and Pardon are in time/ produced, even when we beleeve: the Obligation of the law being then

/

18p Tfo>N*tur*,oftlx

by it made voyd to us.

And this is the prefent appre hcnfionl have of the nature of Re million and J unification: Si quid .ncvifti rttiins, &c. ( yet I {hall have occafion afterwards to tell ycu, That all this is but Remhsi-on and Juflification in Law and Tide, which muft be diitinguifb-ed from that which is in Judgment or Sentence; the former being Virtual in refped to the Acluali-t ty d the later.)

2. The fecond kinde of Gods A&s, which may be called Juftify ing, is indeed Immanent; <vU. His knowing the (inner to be pardoned and juflt in Law; his Willing and Approving hereof as True and Good: Thefeare Aels in Heaven, yea in God himfelf ; but the former fort are on earth alfo. I would not have thofe Acts of God fepa-rated which he doth conjoyn; as he ever doth thefe laft with the former: But I verily think that it. is especially the former tranfient legal

"Arts

Ads which the Scripture ufmlry means^ when it {peaks of Pardoning and ( constitutive ) Jufti-fy-ing: and not thefe- Immanent Acls : though thefe muft be looked on as concurrent witk the former. Yet molt Divines that I meet with, feem to look at Pardon and Justification as being, done in heaven only, and confuting, only in thefe later Immanent A&s: And yet they deny Juftifka-tion to be an Imminent A<ft too: But how they wiil ever rrantfefld that thefe celeftial Acb of God, (vU. his Willing i\\t Sinners Pardon, and to forgiving him in his own breft • or his accepting him as juftj are Tranfient Acls, I am yet unable to underftand. And If they be Immanent Afts,. mbft will grant that they are from E-ternity: and then fair falj the An* tinomians. Indeed if God have a Bat in Heaven befoce his Angels , where thefe things axe., for the prefent tranfa&ed>

as

18a The Nature tf the

as Tome think; and that we are faid to be juftified only at the bar now \ then J confefs that is a tranfient Ad indeed. But of that more here* after. ^l

» __ _____ __

7. I add in the definition. That all this is done [7a confide rat ion of the Satisfaction , I. made by fkrift, 2. Accepted^ 3. and pleaded with GW/) The fatisfaction made is the proper meritorious and impulfive caufe: 2. So the Satisfaction as pleaded by Chrift the interceflbr, is alfoanimpuKive caufe. 3. The Satisfactions Acceptance by the Sinner (that is Faith, J and the pleading of it with Cod by the (inner (that if praying for pardon,) are but the Conditions, or Cattfdfine quo non.

But all thefe will be fulfier opened afterwards.

Thefis

Thcfis 17.

JVftificath* is either 1 . in Title andthe Sence of the LaW> ; 2. Or i* Sentence of Judgment. The firJl may be called Conftitutive ; The fecond Declarative : The fir(I Virtual, thifecond AttttaL

Explication.

I Will not ftand to mention all thofe other Biftinftions of Jufti-fication which are common in o-thers, and not fo neceffary or pertinent to my purpofed (cope. You may fiade them in Mr TZradfiarr, Mr John Goodwin , and Alsledtn* ! Djft melons and Definitions;&c.

The difference between Juftifica-tion in Tkle of Law, and in Sentence of judgment, is apparent at the firft view: Therefore I need not explain it. It is common, when a

man

1

I #4 The Nature of the

! man hath a good caufe, and the Law: on his tide, to fay, The Law jiilMill'li j him, or he is juit in Law, or he is I acquit by the Law; aod yet he is : more fultyand compleatly acquit by | the fentence of the Judg afterward; j In the former fence we are now jite I itirled by fai:h, as focn as ever we I bclrtve: In the latter fence we are. juftified at the iaft Judgraent. Jis6\ tide off Declarative] is too narrow j I for this laft: For the fentence of ju-j dicial abfoiution doth more then I barely to declare us juftificd. I aA ' the former Q Virtual] not as it is in it felf conficicred, but as it ftanderh in relation to the latter.

All thofe Scriptures, .which fpeak of Jufbbcation as done in this life, I underftand of Juftification in Title of Law : SoP^cm^i.Be'mgjuftified by faith, Uv have peace with God. Rom.q.i. Mom.5.9. Being now jufii-fed bykii.bload, &c. lames 2. 21,

But Juftification in Judgment, as it is. the compleating -Aft, ib 1% k

mb£

moll fitly called Justification; and I think the word in Scripture hath moft commonly reference to the Judgment day ; and that Justification in Title is called Quftification] moft efpecialiy, because of its relation to the Juftification at Judgment \ becaufe as men are now in point of Law, fo ftiall they moft certainly be Sentenced in Judgment.

Therefore is it fpoken of many times as a future thing, and not yet ctone: Rom.^o.Mat. 12.37. Rom. 2.12.. Both thefe may be called Qu-itification by Faith J for by Faith we are juftified, both in Law Title, and at judgment.

Thelis38.

-

IVftification, in Title of Law y is a gracious AEl ofGod y bjf the Pro-mife or Grant of the new Covenant, acquitting the Offendor from the Accufation and Condemnation- of

the

the c :.<nt,fipey> co^idtr.itum

of the Sm m Tftade ij Cbrift,

And accented by thefinoer.

Expli

icatton*

H Ere you may fee :. That par-n cf fin,and this Jiubficariao in Law, are not pnnctuaily and pre-ctfejyalione: 2. And yet'theinference is very fmaii The chrrfdifitr-; encelyethm this, That xteTtrm> I *«/af#*of Remifiion, ijtheobii-f g^non to pen-foment; but the 7*r- J minus of Juftirlcation, ( or the evil \ that it formally and directiy doth ' fee as from,) is the Laws Accufari-on and Condcrnnacion:Xc w chowglf the difference between chefe two be very narrow, and rather re^edive then real, yet a plain difference there w • For thc'jgh k be one an I kn* nation of the Law, by

which men are both obliged to pi-nrfhmcnt/accufed as guilty, and con-

den

deemed for that guiic, yet thefeare ndtaUone, though it is alfo true, that they ail ftand or fall together.

That pardon is moft properly the removing of the Obligation, and that Juftification is. the removing of the Accufation and Condemnation in the Law, will be evident to thofe that have read what Divines have written at large concerning the fig-nification of the words, efpecially fuch that have skill in Law, which is a great advantage in this doctrine of Juftification : Therefore as Mr Wot-ten, and Mr Goodwin do a little mi-ftake in making pardon of fin to be the formal caufe of Juftification, (though they are far neerer the mark then their oppofers.) So Mr Brad-Jfcawdotba little too much ftraiten the form of it, making it to lye only in Apology or Plea. It confifteth in both thele Ads; 1. Apology,in op-pofition to Accufation ; thus Chrift our Advocate doth principally jufti-fie us: 3. In Sentence, (virtualor actual,) and fo it is oppofed both to

Accu-

Accufation and Condemnation ; fo Chrift the Mediator as Judg, and the Father as one with him, and as the fupream Judg, doth ju&ifie : But this latter is the chief Aft. The reft of the Definition is furHciently opened under the foregoing Definition of Pardon.and will be more after.

Thefis

19-

JVftification in Sentence ef Judgment is \a gracious Ab~i of God by Chrift, according totheGofpel, by Sentence at his publique Bar, acquitting the finner from the Accufation and Condemnation of the LaVe,pleaded againfi him by Satan^ | upon confederation of the Satisfaction made by Chrift, accepted by the finner , and pleaded for him.

Ex-

Explication.

TT Here is alfo a two-fold Pardon, I as well as a two-fold Juft ifica-tion: One in Law, the other in Sentence of Judgment. So ABs 3. i& Repent > that your fins may be blotted out , When the time of refreflnng comes, &c. But pardon of fin is ufually mentioned in refpeft to this life prefent, as being beftowed here; becaufe a man may more fitly be faid to be fully quit from the Obligation to punifoment, commonly called the guilt in this life, then from the Accu-fation of that guilt which will be managed againtt him by Satan hereafter, or- from the Condemnation, which he muft thenmoft efpccially be delivered from.

The difference betwixt this Jufti-fication and the former,may eafily be difcerned by the Definition without any further Explication.

Thefis

i^o The Nature of the

VVi

Thcfis 40,

*rb ; Hen Scripture jpeaketh of Jufiification by Faith, it is to be underfiood primarily and di-retlly ofJuBificaticn in Law title, and at the bar of Cjods publique Judgment ; and butfecondarily and consequentially of fufttfcation at the bar of Cjods fecret judgment, or at the bar of Confcknce, or of the

World.

-

Explication.

1. ^T^Hac Juftification by Faith is JL inforodei, and not in fore cwfcientU primarily; fee Dr Dorp-name's Appendix to Corenant of Grace againft Mr Pemble. Confci-ence is but an inferior, petty, imprd-per Judg: The work muft be cranf-acted chiefly at a higher Tribunal. View all the Scriptures that mention

Jufti-

€wena*ts.ope*id. 191

Juftification by Faith, and you fliali findc by the Text and Context that they relate to the bar of God, but not one diredly to the bar of Ccn-fcience.lt is one thing to be juftiried, and another thingtohaveit niani-fefted to our Confcienccs that we arefo. 2. That it is not directly at the r of the World, all will acknow-kdg.

3.That it is not directly at the bar of Gods fecret Judgment,in his own breft, may appear thus: 1. That it is not a bar at which God dealeth with finnersjfor Juitification or Condemnation in any known or vifible way; No Scripture intimateth it. 2. We could not then judg of our Juftification. a^They are immanent Ads ; but Juftification is a tranflent Ad: Therefore Dr Dor*name in the place before mentioned hath proved a-gimfclAxPcmble, that Juftification is not from Eternity. And (as I judg by his following Trad of Juftification) WPemhle himfelf came afterwards

191 The Nature of the

wards to a founder Judgment in the nature of J unification. 4. God dealeth with man in an open way of Law, and upon Covenant cerms,and fo will try him at a publique Judgment according to the Tenor of his Covenants. The fecretsof his breft are too high for us. By the word W*llhe judg us: That muft juftifie or condemn us. Therefore when you hear talk of the Bar of God,yoa muft not underftand it of the immanent Acts of Gods Knowledg or Will,but of his Bar of publique Judgment, and in the fence of the Word. Some think that Juftification by Faith is properly and directly none of all thefe yet, but that it is a publique Ad: of God in heaven before his Angels. I think this opinion bet-j ter then any of the three former 1 which would have it at the Bar of Godsfecret Judgment, or of Con-feience>or of the World; and I know no very ill confequence that follow-ethit; But that God doth condemn or juftifie at any fuch Bar, I find

no

Covenants opened. lp£

no Scripture fully to fatisfie or per fwade me. Thofe places,/?***. 2.13. Htb.9.14* Luke 12.8,9. & 15.10. which arealiedged to thatpurpofe, fcem not to conclude a.iy fuch thing, as that to be the Bar where Fatch doth moft properly juftifie: Yet I acknowledg that in a more remote fence, we may be faid to be juftified by Faith at ail the four other Bars, vi/en Gods Immanent Judgment, and before the Angels, and before Coafcience, and the World: For God and Angels do judg according to Truth, and take thoie to be juft, who are k> in Law and in deed : and fo do our Confciences, and Men when they judg rightly; and when they do not, we cannot well be faid to bejuftified at their Bar. Therefore I think they miflake, who would have Works, rather then Faich, to juftifie m at the Bar of the World, as I &aH'Qvewafcerward,whenIcorae to open the conditions of Juftifica-tioo.

K lh&

Thefis 41.

I nTHaV faying of our Divines \ JL [That f unification is perfecl-\ edatfirft, ana admits of no degrees^ \ musl be understood thus, That each ' of thofe Alls Which we call fortification, are in-their ownkjnd perfeCl I at once -fand that our Righteoufitefs is perfect, and admits not of degrees. But yet as the former A els, called justification, do not fully, and in all refpefts , procure our freedom , fo they may be faid u be imperfect , and but degrees toward our full and perfe it Justification at the Uftjudgment.

-

Thefis 42.

THere are many fuch fttrps toward our final and full fuftifi-cation; As 1. Gods eternahLowe' and Decree of justifying us.^Chrifts undertaking forSatisfying and jufti-

_ , 1

fying. 3» Hti atlual fatisfyingb'\ faying the price. 4. His own fujhfi -cationy as the publique Perfon^at his Reftbrreclion. 5. That change Which is made in our Relation upon $ur Regeneration, or receiving the vital feed of Grace, where, among others ; that is contained, which is called the habit of Faith ; this infants are capable of 6* The change of our Relation upon our actual Faith. 7. The pacifying our own hearts by the evidence of Faith % anda(jurance there-upon, andwitnefsofConfcience 9 and Teftimony, and Seal of the Spirit* 8. The Angels judging us righteous, and rejojcing therein, p. Our fxfti-fication before Men. 10. And our final luftifcyLtimat the great Judgment. '

But it is only the fixth and tenth of thefe which is diretlly and properly the lufiijication by Faith^ as is before expr eft.

K 1 Thefis

Thcfis

43

THe fufiification which we have J in Chrtfis own Jufttfieation is \ but conditional as to the particular offenders j andnone can lay claim to j itytill he have performed the conditions ; nor {hall any be perfenally ! juflified till then: Even the eletl \ remain perjonally nn)uft and nnjn- j ftified, for all their conditional ftt r slification in Chrift, till they do be-ieeve.

T His needs not Explication, and for Confirmation there is e-noughfaid under the 15, x8, ip,ao, Pofitions before.

Thcfis 44.

M En that are but thus conditionally pardoned andjujlified, may be unpardoned and Hnjuftified

again

Covenants opened. i$j

again for their non-ptrfornianee of the conditions,and all the debt fo forgiven be required at their hands • and all tins without any change in (jod,orinhis Laws. SeeBiWofthe Covenant, fag. 240.

■

THfs is all piain; only for fo much of it as feems to intimate an univerfal conditional Juftification, and consequently univerfal Redemption, I mtrcat the Reader to fufpend j his Judgment, till I come to the point of Univerfal Redemption, where I (hall fully and purpofely explain my meaning.

And for that which intimates in the following PoGtion, the falling a-way of the justified, undcrftand,that I fpeak only upon fuppofition, and of a poflibiiity in-the thing, and of the Tenor of the Gofpel: But in regard of Gods Will of Purpofe,which determined! eventually , whether they (hall fall quite away or not, I do beleeye, that the juftified by K 3 Fakh

I ?8 . The Nature of the

Faith never do, or fhali fall a-way.

Thefis 45,

YEajn cafe the juflifitd by Faith Jhould ceafe beleeving , the Scripture Would pronounce them unjufi again, and yet without any change in God, or Scripture y but only in tbtmf elves* Bec&nfe their fu~ ftification dpth- continue conditional as long as they live here\ the Scrip* ture doth juftifie no man by name, but all beleevers as fuch $» therefore if they Jhould ceafe to be beleevers 9 they would ceafe to bejuftified.

1

Thefis 46.

Vfiifi'cation imply eth Aecufation > either Virtual or Attual.

Ex-

Explication,

AS there i$ ajuftifjcation in Law or in Sentence, fo is there the AccufationoftheLaWj, as it (lands in force, which may be called a virtual Accnfation, in reference to that at Judgment,, wftcj} wiH-be A&ual from Satans .'pteaiiing ti)e violated Law againft us, Mr Bradjbfw doth fully (hew you the reafon of thi$ Po-fitipn.

• •

Thefis 47.

I""* He sew Covenant accufethno J_ w/w, as deferring its penalty y but eniythofe that perform not its conditiwt ; that />, the finally unbelieving and impenitent rebels a-gainft Chrifi , and their rightful Lord* .

K 4 Ex~

aoo The Nature of the

Explication.

THat the Gofpd doth not con-condemn men,or threaten them with damnaaion for any fins but unbelief, I dare not fpeak or think. But chat the Gofptl threateneth no man with damnation but unbeieevers, is out of aflcjueftion: And confequem-ly the proper fin threatened in the new Covenant as fuch, is unbelief; the reft are but left and fetled on the (inner by this.

Thefis 48.

WHtre the Gofpd'Covenant doth thut accafe, or where any one is truly thus charged^ there & no Jufiificationfor that perfat.

Ex.

: _i

Explicatbrii

I Mean/ not where anyman iaae-cufcd of a temporary negled, or delay of performing thefe conditions: For the Gofpelthreatened not death to fuchj if at laft they do perform them-: But where there is a final nonperformance which is the proper vi-1 oiation, there is no hope ofj uitifica-tion. See for this the 32^33,34,35 Pofitions.

■Thefii&49."

ITheingthe Laws Accnfativnand Condemnation only ,& not the (]o-fpels y which we are ittflifted againfi ; therefore the Right eoufnefs which mnsl be pleaded for our luslif cation direUly mns~l be a legal Righteouf-nefs y Which is only Ckrifts*Satisfa-ttion*

_ K 5 Thefis

so* Thi Nature of

Thcfis 50.

OVr Faith therefore cannot be the leaf fart- of that Righte-oufttefs fo to Ire f leaded, it being not the Right eoufnefs of that Covenant iff hie h doth accufe us ;fa that though vre are jufiified by Faith y yet is it \ not any of the Righteoufnefs to be \ pleaded againft the accnfer%

Thcfis 51.

YBt if Satan , or any other 9 Should faljly accufe us of not performing the conditions of the new Covenant y and fo having no part in Chriftf Satis.fatlion t here we tnuft be jufiified only by our Faith> or per- 1 fonul (Jofpel-Righteoufnefs, and not by any thing that Chrifi hath done . orjufftred : For in all falfe accufe tions we mufl defend our imecency, *and plead Jiot guilty^

Fx-

l ExpHcdtion.

BUt becaufe there i$ no danger tc usfrotnfalfeaccu(ation before the all-knowing Gody. therefore Scripture fakh nothing of any fuch Juftification , Yet at the bar of men it is frequently ufeml, where falfe accusations may be heard j and therefore David, Ioh> efrvdo plead their Innocency again ft their accufers. Al-fo at the bar of our own erroneous Gonfcienccs this kind of Juftification is frequently ufeful; for xhere Satan hath more hope that his falfe accufa-tions may take place, then at the Bar of God; Wherefore he more ufuaily accufethChriftians-to themfelves of being gracelefs, and unbeleevers,and 1 impenitent, and of having no part in Chrift, then of breaking the Law by their fins; And in fuch cafes, when the accufation is falfe, we have no way to anfwer it, but by pleading not guilty, and calling back the accufation

■204 The Nature of

fation as a lying (lander, and producing our. Faith and Gofpel- Obedience, or what ever grace we are ac-cufed to want: And fo it is that our own graces and duties maybe properly our comfort: It will be but a fencelefs flaift in fuch an accufation to (hew Chrifts Legal Righteonfnefs inftead of> our own Evangelical Righteoufnefs. To tell Satan, that Ghrifthath fulfilled the Law for us, when he is accufing us of not fulfilling the Gofpel; filly women are madebeleeve by AntinomianTeach-| crsy that this isa folid way of comforting :«But Satan is a better Logi-: tian then to take quid pro quojind to be baffled with fuch arguing. And asfilly, and more falfe a flnift it "wilt be, to tell him, that Chrift hath be-keved, repented and. fulfilled the Gofpel; Conditions for us, as I have (hewed before. The bed is,. thefe Teacherscdo but fpoyl the comforts' of beleevcTS^ and not their fafety; for in the cafe in hand, we fuppofe the accufation to be falfe; But yer

by

by fuch grounds they may very ea-fily overthrow the May alfo ot un-beleevers, while they teach them how to comfort themfdves without Faiths or toiook at all out of them-felves in Chrift, and fo to filence the accufetion of both Covenants, by producing only the Righteoufnefe of one.

Thefis 52.

WE tuuft net plead for our luslifcation, thatChrifi bath made us free from the very fa ft; nor, fecund, from thefinfulnejs of ike. fail- nor,third, from its.dkfert tf punifbment • If Chrift.had done any of thu for #/, he mufi verify Contradictories. But W* mu\t flead, that the penalty it not due to our perfons nettyithjtanding thefaU,and its. finfulmfs and demerit , becaufe Chrift hash fat H tied for aU.thu*

JEx-

a©6 The Nature of

Explication.

SO Mr Anthony Bnrgefs in his . book of Juftif. pag.19. affirmeth as much, though fome take it fat hai^ nous dodrine. i.That the fad (hould be done, and not done, is a con tradition. 2. So is it, That the fad: fhould be finful,and not finful. 3 .Or that it fhould defer ve death, and not defcrve it: Or that it fhould be a fin againft that threatening Law, and yet not deferve the penalty threatened. Befides, if any of thefc three could have been taken off, what need Chrift- have dyed ? But that which Remiffion and Juftification freeth us from, is the duenefs of pu-niflhment to our perfons, notwithstanding the duenefs of it to the fin;, becaufe what is due to the fin, is in-Aided on the perfdn of another already ,even Chrift. So that you fee in what fence Chrift taketh away fin 8c guilt, which you muftobferve, left

mm

you run into the Antinomian conceit, That God feeth not fin in his juftifi-cd ones. When we fay therefore that God looketh on our fins as if they had never been committed,ihe meaning is, that,in regard to punifhmenr,-they (hall have no more power to condemn us, then if they had never been committed.

The; IS 5};-

THe offending of Go&, and the j defert and procuring offunifh-ment, are not ffyo diflintt effetls of fin, as fome make them; nor ts the removal of the curfe and punijb-men$ y and the obtaining of Gods favour, two diftiittt parts of our Iufti-ficMion*-

Sxplicatiom

T His is plain, becaufe Gods dif-pleafure againft our perfons (fcrhis drflike of the fin is never taken off) is a chief part of our punishment, and therefore not to be diftin-gui&ed from it, but as. the Species from its Cjenw* And fo when all the punifhment is removed, then Cods difpleafure, or the lofs of his favour, muft jieeds- be removed; Therefore that J unification in this differs from Remiffion of fin, I cannot yet think, (as that godly and learned Servant ©f Chriftj whom I honor and reverence, Mr Bnrgefs of Ittftificar* pag.25?. doth,) That Juftification,bc(jcie$'the pardon of fin, doth connote a Itate that the fubje& is put into, viz.. a ftate of favour jbeing reconciled with God. Becaufe even Remiffion it felf doth connote that ftate of favour; For if the lofs of Gods favour be part of che puni&menr, and all the

punifli-

punifhmcnt be remitted, then the favour which we loft muft needs be thereby reftored. Indeed there is a two* fold Favour of God, 1. That which we loft in the fell; 2. More {uper-adde* by Chrift, befides the I former reftored : Of thefe m the following Pofition.

Thtfis" 53.

REmijfo»,l»fifc«tio» and Re-conctttation do but report the offender into thefame flute of free-demand favour that he fell from r But Adoption and Marriage-Vnim with Chrift do 1 advance, bin* far higher.

Explication.

THe three for merare all concent rant confequentsof one andthev 'fame Ad of God by his GofpehThe

free-

freedom from obligation topunifh-ment is called Reraifsion: the freedom from Accufation and Condemnation is called Juftificatiort» and the freedom from enmity and dif-; pleafure is called Reconciliation, ; which arc all at once, and doallde-| note but our Reftauration to our former ftate. Adoption and Marriage-Union do add the reft.

Some may blame me for putting Union among the relative Graces, and not rather among thofe that make a real phy fical change upon us, as. Sanftificatioa and Glorification. But I do herein /according t© my judgment, whereof to give the full reafons here would be too large a digreffion. I know that Cafpar Strefe, and divers others, do place it in ah unconceiveable, unexprefTable medium between thefe two, which yet mud be called a Real Union, more then a Relative, though not Phyfical: I will not now ftand on this. I acknowledg a Real Foundation of a Relative Union, and a Real

al Communion following thereupon: But am very fearful of coming fo near, as to make Chrift and finners-one real Perfon, (as the late elevated Sea among us do,)left blafphemout-ly I ffiould deifie man, and debate Chrift to be actually a finner. Ana if we are not one real Perfon with Chrift, then one what? Itfufficeth me to know as abovelaid, and that we arcone. with Chrift inasiftrifta bond of relation as the wife with the husband, and far drifter; and that we are his body myftical, but not natural. That we (hall be one with him, as he is one with the Father, is true: But that [af\ doth not extend thcfimilitudetoall refpeas, but to a truth in foroe.

Thcfis 55,

BEforc it be committed it is n§ fw y and Where there is nofinjhe penalty is not due; and where it is not due, it cannot properly be forgiven;

giveny therefore fin is not forgiven before it be committed^ though the grounds of certain Remiffion be laid

before.

Explication.

FOr proof of this I refer you to Maftcr Burgefs of Jufiificatr. LeB. 28.

Thcfis 5<£j

BY what hath beenfaid r 'it is dp-parent, That Ittfiification in Title may be afcribed to feveral Cattfes. 1. The principal efficient Caufe is God. 2. The Infiru-mental is the Promife or Grant of of the neW Covenant. 3. The Pro-catarclickjCattfe, (fofar as God may beJaid to be moved by any thing out ofhimfelf, /peaking after the manner ofmen,) is four-fold* I. *And chiefly

chiefly the Satisfaction of Chrifi. 2. The Intercefiion of Chrifi, and [application of tht finner. 3. The neceffity of the fwner. 4. The opportunity and advantage for the glo~ rifying his lufiice ani Mercy. The firft of thtfe is the Meritorious Caufe ; the fecond the moral per-/wading Caufe ; the third is the Ob-jeftive, and the fourth is the Occafi-on. 2. Material Caufe properly it hath none : If you will improperly call Chrifls SAtisfailion the remote matter, I contend not. 3 T'he formal Caufe is.the acquitting of the /inner from Accufation and Condemnation of the Law, or the di/abling the Law to accufe or condemn him. 4r The final foufe is -the Glory of God, and of the Mediator, and the deliverance of the finner* 5* The CauGifine quanon, is both Chrifis Satisfaction , and the Faith of the justified.

Ex-

■

—

Explication*

Hike* will be expe&ed, that I anfwer to thefe C^ueftions. i. Why I call the Gofpel the Inirru-mencal'Cauie? iAYwIcallChrifts Satisfaction the meritorious Caaie, I and the Caufafi*cq*Ano* < 9.Why I make not Chritts Righteoufoefe the material Canfe? -. V.ylmake not the Imputation of it the formal Can I make not Faith

the InfmimentalCaiife? 6. I make it only the C**f* ! lKe *!**

To the firft QpeiHon: AsaLeatc or Deed of Gift is properly a mans Infrrnmrnt , in conrt)ing the thing leafed or given; and as the Kings Pardon under his Hand and Seal is h* proper Instrument of pardoning and jultifying the Kialeficr-or, fo s the new Covenant Gods Iriftrument in this cafe,or,as it were, hisMcu:h,by which he ?:cr.:^c;zn

a'beleever juftified.

Tothefecond.Qujeftion: Chrifls Satisfa&ion liath feveral ways/pf caufing our Juftifieation. 1. Tliat it is the Meritorious Caufe, I know few but Socinians that will deny, 2. That it is befldes properly a CaujA [inequation, cantiot.be denyed by any that confider, that it removeth thofe great Impediments that hindered our Justification. And what if a manftiould fay,that becaufe impul-(ive and procatarclical Caufes have properly no place with God, that therefore the greateft pare of the work ©f Chrifts Satisfaction is to be the CAtifa fine qua non principalis f But becaufe my afsigning no more to Chrifts Satisfaction but" merit, and this improper caufality, doth feem to fome to be very injurious thereto; I defirethem fo long to lay by their prejudice and pafcion while they corifictet of this one thing, That we are not in this ( bufinefs conGderiflg which caufe hath the preeminence, in regard of phyfical production, but

which

which in moral tefpect deferveth the higheft condemnation. Inpoincof Morality the 'greateft praifc is fd-dom doc to the greateft natural ftrength, or to the ftrongcft natural cauCation. InPhyficks the:efficient hath the greateft part of the glory; but in Morals the Meritorious Caufe hath a (ingular (hare: AsDiogeaes faid, Outre me kgh Uudas qui dig-. nnsfum ut accipUm f pi us entm eft mervijfe qtiam dedljfe benefycium* The like may be faid of fome Caufes fine qua non : That they defervc far greater praifc in moral refped, then fome that have a proper caufality do. It is agreed, that rcmovens impedi-mtntum e\uk talis, is Caufa fine yak uon: And doth not the greateft part of a Phyfitians skill lye there ? That which taketh away the offending humor, and denfeth out the corruption, and removeth all hinderan-ces, fhall have the greateft {hare in theglory of the cure, of any artificial caufe. Suppofe a man be condemned by Law fotTreafon, onepayeth

one

one thoufand pound for bis Pardon, and thereby procured it under the broad Sealc; hereby he fufpendeth, and afterward difableth the Law, as to the offender ; This man is the efficient of thofe happy erfed's, from which the justification of the Tray-tor will follow : Butastohisjufti-fication it felf, he is but the Caufa removens impediment*, taking a-way the force of the Law, and the offence of Majefty, and Whatsoever els did hinder the juftification of the offendor. And yet I think he defer-veth more thanks then either the Laywerthat juftifieth him by Plea, or the Judge that juftifies him by Sentence. So here; If you had rather, you may call it a neceilary Antecedent. Or, if any man think fitter to call thefe Caufes by another name, I much care not, fo we agree con* ceming the nature of the thing. To the third queftion.ChriftsRigh-teoufnefs cannot be the materiall :aufe, of an A# which hath no mat-cer.If any will call Chrifts Righteouf-m L ndi|

nefs, t&e matter of our Righteoaf-nefs, though yet they fpeak improperly , yet farre neerer the truth, thentoiiattifthe Matter of our Ju ftification. 9 isqoiq

To the fourth Queft, That Impu-tion is not she Form, is undenyabie, The Form gives the name s efpecial-ly to Anions, that have no #»Uf©r, Imputation and Juftification dettotc diftind Ads : And how then can Imputing b*e the Forme of Juflifying. Though I mention not Imputation in the Definition, nor among the Caufes here, yet it is implyed in the mention of Satisfaction, which mull be made ours, or elfe we cannot be Juftifyedby it. Though therefore, the Scripture do not fpeak of impu>-ting Chrifts Righteoufnefle or Satif-fa&ion to us ; yet if by Imputing, they mean no more but, QBeftowing it on us, fo that we (hall have the Juftice, and other benefits of it, as truely as if we had fatisfied our felves,] in this fenfe I acknowledge Imputation of Chrifts fatisfaftory Righte -i

Rightpqfuefe But I bdeeve that .(his Imputing, doth in, order of nature, go before Juftifying; And that the Righteoufnefs fp Imputed,is the proper ground whence we are denominated Legally righteous, and confequenrly why the Law cannot condemn us. It is a vaine thing to quarrell about the Logkall names of the Caufes of Juftihcation, if we agree in the matter. .

To the fifth Queftion. Perhaps I (hall be blamed, as Angular from all men, in denying Faith to the Inftru-ment of our Juttification: But affectation of fingularity leades mc not to it. ,1. If Faith bean Inftrument, it is the Inftmment of Qod or man : Motor man : For man.'is not the principall efficient; he doth not ju-ffifidhimfdf. a. Notof God: For 1. It is not God that believeth; though itstrue^he is the firft Caufe of all A&ions. 2. Man is the Ctufa fecunda, between God and the Action: and fo ftill man (hould be (aid to juftifiehimfelfe. 3* For (as

_ L 2 Aqui-

_

220 The Nature of

Aqmnm)l\\tK0c\onoH\\Q princi-paU Caufe 'and of,the Ibftrurnent is one Action : and who dare; fa/, that Faith % fo Gods Inftromenc? 4. Thelnfttudnentmuft have ihflu* to the producing of the effecl: of tfii Principall caufe by a proper Caufalt-tie. And who dare fay, that Faith hath fuch an influx into our Juftifi-cation >

ObyeH, But fome would evade thus : It is ( fay they J a Paflive In-ftrument, not an Active.

To which I Anfwer. 1. Even Paflive Internments are fald to help the Action of the principall Agent, (Keckgrm. Logick^ pag. 1 f. 1.) He that faith,Faith doth fo,in my judgement, gives too much to it. 2. It is paft my capacity to conceive of a Paflive Morall Inftrument. 3. How can the Acl: of Believing ( which hath no other being, but to bean Ad) be poflibly a Paflive Inftrument ? Doth this Ad efled by fuf-fering ? Or cap wife men have a grotter conceit of this. 4. I be-..^^-Jieve

mf$ with $chibi<r r . that Acre is no (Sell-thing at*Il as a; pajTiv.e Inftrument. The f xamples that lome produce (as Burger/dim his Cultor 1 &q)^iM) belong to Aftive Inftrument. And the Examples than o-thersbring, (isfackermdns Jurus InftrHmentum fekricsifienis, menfa &fcarnr.itm accuh\tiu y terra am-btiUtimu) are^aluftruments; ex-ceptyoa twillcall every Patient or Orjjed, the Inftrument of the A-gent ': The InftruDpWyY an-Effici-cntCaufe. Alitfficiencie is bya&i-on ; and that which doth not Ac!:, doth not effect. Indeed, as fome extend the ufe of the word internment, ym may ealUlmoft^ny thing an In-driiment,' which if any way eondu-clbie to the produ&ion of the Ef-fe&under the chief Caufe ; Andfo you'may call Faith an Inftrument.

'guefl. But thoughTaith be not the Inftrument of Juftification ; may it not be called the Inftrument of receiving Chrift who J uftifieth us ?

AnCw* I do not io much ftick at L 3 this

this fpeech as atthe former: yet is it no proper 6r fit expreflion neither. For i. The A&of Faith, (which is it that juftifleth) is our Aftuali receiving of Chrift, and therefore cannot be the Inftrumentof Receiving. To fay, our Receiving is the'Infim-ment of our Receiving, is a hitfd faying. 2. And the fe^d or habite of Faith cannot fitly be called in Infeti-ment.For, i.Thefanftified fcurfty It fclf cannot be the fouls Inftrnment • it being the foul it (elf, and nor any thing really diftincTfrom the f6uT: ( nor really diftinft from each other, as Scotus, D'Orbellus Scaliger^&c. Dr. fackson, Mr. Pemble y think: and Mr. Ball queftions.) 2. The holineffe of the Faculties is not their Inftrumentu ' For, 1. It is nothing butthemfeivesrectified: and not a Being fo diftinft as may be called their Initrument. 2. Who ever called Habits,or Difpofitions, the fouls Inftruments ? The aptitude of a Caufe to produce its effe<5t,cannpt be called the Inftrment of it : you may

as

as well call a mans Life his Instrument of Acting, or the (harpnerte of a knife, the knives Instrument; as to call our holinefsjor habituall faitb,the Inftrument or receiving Chrift.

To the (krh and laft QtieiUon. 11 Anfw. Faith is plainly, and unde-' niably the condition of our Jollification. The whole Tenour of the Gof-peli (hews (hat. And a Condition i$\ but a GuHfafine qnk nw\ ; or * int- \ *#*»*, or a neceiTary Antecedent. Hereby the way take notice, that-the fame men that blime the. advancing of Faith fo high, as to be our i true Cofpel Rightioufnefk. Pejit, ! 17.20. and to be imputed m a pro-; per fence, Poftt.i$. do yet, whdfo' it comes to the triall,afcribe far more to Faith, tlien thofe they blame -.making itGods Inftrument in juftifying, j 1. And fo to have part of the ho-' nour of Gods own AcT ; 2. And, that from a realon intrinfecall to faith it fclf j 3. And from a Reafon that well make other Graces to be. Inftrumems as well as Faith. For L 4 Love

Love doth truly receive Chrift alfo. 4. And worft of all, from a Reafon that will make man to be the Caufa proxinta of his own Jufttficatiqn. For man is the Cdufa proximo, of believing and receiving Chrift \ and therefore not God but man is faid tb beleeve. And yet thefe very men do fend a Hue and Crie after the Th crtdere y for robbing Chrift of th* glory of Juftification, when we make it but a poorc improper Cm-fa, fine qua mn. ( And yet I fay as before, that in Morality, yea, and in Naturality, fame Caufa fine qua

In9n y do deferve much of the honour^ but that Faitlv doth not fo, I have fliewedinthe 23. Pofition.J Some think that Faith may be fome fmall bw Impulfive Caufe ; but I will not give it fo much: though if it be made a Procatarc'tick Objective Qufe, I (hall not contend.

Thefis

Thefis 57.

fTis the tA& of Faith Vehich ju-ftifieth men at age, and not tbe> habit: jet not as it u a good work^, \ or as it hath in it /elfany excellency in it above other Graces : But I. *}» the ne ere ft fence idirettly and properly as it is, [The fulfilling of the Condition of the New Covenant :"} 2. In the remote and more improper fence > as it is [The receiving of Cbrift and his Jatisfaffory Righteoufneffe^

Explication*

1. TTHat the habit of Faith doth _L not directly and properly /uftifie, appeares from the tenour of the Covenantuvhich is not £He that is difpofed to beleeve (hall befavedj Bat £ he that believeth. ]

2. That Faith doth, not properly L 5 juftifie

juftifie through any excellency that it hath above other Graces, or any more ufefull property, may appeare thus: i. 1 hen the praife would be due to Faith. 2. Then Love would contend for a (hare, if not a priority. 3. Then Faith would jufti-fie, though it had not been made the Condition of the Covenant.

Let thofe therefore take heed, that make Faith to juftifie, meerdy be-caufe it apprehendcth Chrift; which is its naturall, cfTential propercy.

3. That it is Faith in a proper fence that it is faid to juftifie, and not Chrifts Righteoufnefle onely which it receiveth,may appeare thus. 1. From the necefsity of a two-fold righteoufnefs which I have before proved, in reference to the two-fold Covenant. 2. From the plaineand conftant Ph afe of Scripture, which faith, He that beleeveth fhall be ;ur ftified: and that we are juftified by. faith: and that faith is imputed for . r igh te-

righteoufoejSV. It had been as eafie ft>r the Holy Choft co have faid,that Chrift onely is imputed, or his righ-teoufne0e ondy, or Chrilt onely ju-fftjfierh, &c. it he had Co meant. He 15 the moil excufable in an error, that I is lead into it by the conftant, ex- J preffe phrafe of Scripture. 3. From the nature of the thing : For the i^fecl is afcribed to the feverall ~C*ufes (though not alike ; and in feme fort to the Conditions. Efpe-cialiy, me-thinks they that would have Faith to be the Inftrumenc of. Justification, fhould not deny that we are properly juftified by Faith as by an Inflrument: For it is as proper a fpeech to fay [our hands or our. teeth feed us,] as to fay, Qour meet feedeth us.]

nohc} •■■:*. ' "

4. That Faith doth molt directly and properly juftifie £ as its the fulfilling el the Condition of the New Covenant ] appea-1 reth thus. 1. The New Covenant * ondy doth put the (lamp of Gods

Autho-

Authority upon it % in making k the Condition. A two-told ftamp is necedary to make i recurrent medi-sm cf our Jufti£cark>n. i. Cob> mar.d. 2, Promife. Jkcaufe Qod hathjiei the r commanded any o&er meanes, 3. Nor promrfed Juinfica-tion to any other, therefore it is,that this is the orely condition; an, ooiy<ruK Juilmeth.When I read this to be the tcnour of the New Cove* cant [Whofoever belie veth GiaJlbe Juftirled: ] doth it not tell me d&h> ly why Faith Juftmeth ? eveo became it pleakd the Lawgiver and Covenant-maker co put Fa :h into the Covenant, as its condition. 2. .ve elfe to fbew at Gods ba:r for our Juilification, bu: N.w Covenant ? The Authority and Legality of it muftbeare us out. It i^ upon point of Law that we are condemned ; and it muft be by Law, I that we muft be Jufttfied. There-, fere we were condemned, becauk the Law which we break did threaten death to our fm : If ftf

committed the fame A&, and not unckra-Law that had threatned it with death, we might not haye dyed. So therefore are we Juftified, becaufethe New law doth promife Justification to our faith. H we had performed the fame Ac! under the firft Covenant, it would not have Juftified. As the formall Reafon, why fin condemneth is, becaufe the Law hath concluded it in its threat-ning : fo the formall Reafon why Faith juftifieth, is, becaufethe New Law or Covenant, hath concluded it 10 its Promife. And as where there : is no LaW> there is no Tranfgrefiion nor Condemnation : becaufe fin is formally a tranfgrefsion ot the Law, and Condemnation is but the execution of its Threatning : fo where there is no fulfilling the new Law, there is no Righteoufncflfe nor Justification : becaufe RighteoufnefTe is formally a conformity to the Law of RighteoufnefTe, and Justification is but the performing of part of its Promife.

5. That

230 Thi$txturb*f\

.grn

5. That Faith's receiving Chrill and his righteoufneflfe, is the remote orfecondary, and not theformail Reafon, why it doth Juitifie, appea-reth thviS. 1. I would ask any dif--{enter this Qucftion. Suppofe that ChriiY had done all that he did for ftnners, and they had btlieved in him thereupon, without any Covenant promifing Jufti flea t ion to this faith : Wouid this faith have juftified them ? By what Law r» Or whence will they plead their Juftiflcation at the barr of God ? Well: but fup-pofe that Chrift having done what he did for us, that he fhould in framing the New Covenant have put in any other Condition ; and fatd | £whofoever loveth God iTiall by by vertue of my fatisia&ion be Ju-1 ftifled.] Would not this love have* Juftified ? No doubt of it. I conclude' then thus : The receiving of Chrift, is as the filver of this coine: the Go-fpel-promife is as the Kings ftamp which maketh it currant for juftif)— ing.

ing. If God had feen meet to have ftamped any thing elfe, it would have patted currently. Yet take this. Ffrkh is, even to our own apprehen-tion,the moft apt & fuitable conditr-on that God could hive chofen: (for as far as we can reach to know;) There cannot be a more Rationall and apt condition of delivering a re* deemed Malefactor from Torment, then that he thankfully accept the pardon, and favour of redemption, and hereafter take his Redeemer for his Lord.

So that if you aske me [what is the formail Reafon, why Faith Jufti-fieth ? ]

I Anfwer. Becaufe Chrift hath made it the:condition of the New Covenant, and promifed Juftificati-on upon ehat Condition.

Bat/2.l£you aske me further,Why did Chrift chufe this rather then any thing elfe for the Condition >

I Anfwer. 1. To aske a Reafon

of Chrifts choice and commands is

• not alway wife or iafe. 2. But here

the

a ji The Nature of

the rcafon is fo apparent, that a pa-fleriore, we may lafely adventure to fay : That this is the moft felf-deny-ing, and drift advancing work: Nothing could be more proportionable to our poverty, who have nothing to buy with, then thus freely to receive : Nothing could be more reafonable, then to acknowledge him who hath redeemed us, and to! take him for our Redeemer and Lord : many more fuch Reafons might be given. In a word, then Faith Juitificth primarily and properly, as it is the Condition of the New Covenant, ( that is the for-mallreafon.) And fecondarily, remotely, as it is the receiving of Chrift and his righteoufnefle : (that is the aptitude of it to this ufe to which it hath pleafed God to deftinate it.)

Ifland the more on this, becaufe it is the foundation of that which followeth.

Thefis 58.

THegronnAof this is ; becaufe Chrifts Bsghteoufne$e doth net Jufiifie usfr^erty andformerlyJe-caufe we Beleeve or receive it ; but beewfcitis ours in Law, by Divine Donatio*, or Imputation.

Hfc is plain in it felf, and in that which is faid before.

,

Thefis 59.

IVfiificatpon is not a moment am-ohs 40 9 -begunand ended imme~. diately upon our Believing : tut 4 continued A&\ which though it be in its kind compleate from thefirtt, yn is it fiill in doing, till the finally fufiification at the Judgment day.

Ex-

, : .

134 TbtNatttre.of

Explication*

T

T His is evident From the nntare of the Ad: it being as I fhe w-ed before, an Ad of God by his Gofpel : Now I. God ftill con-tinueth that Gofpel-Covenant in force. 2. That Covenant ftiU con-tinueth Juftifying Believers. 3. God himfelf doth confimie toefteeTft them accordingly, and to Will their Abfo-liKKHV-1. This flieweth you therefore with what limitation to receive the Atferfion of our Divines , that RemifSon and Justification are, fi-mnl& feme I, performed, 2. And that the Juftirled and pardoned may pray for the continuance of their pardon and Juftihcation. 3. That Chrifts fatifadion and our Faith are of continual afe,and not to be laid by, when we are once Juftified, as if the work were done. See Dr. A>»v-*amc of ffislific. of this point.

Thcfis

Thfcfis 60.

TPHip bare Att of bclecving is

I not the onely Condition of the

New Covenant \ but ft tier all other

duties' aifo are farts of-that Condi*

ribn. ■

Explication.

■

rDefirenomoreofthofe that deny this, but that Scripture may be Judge t and that they will put by no one Text to that end produced, till they can give fome : otWer commodious, and not forced Interpretation. 1. Then that pardon of fin and falvation are pfdmifed upon condition of Repenting, as weH as Be-leeving,' is undenyably arterted from thefe Scriptures. Prov. 1. 23. & 28. 13. Man i. 15. C7-6; 12. L#kj 13 .3, 5. AB.2^%. & 3. 19. & 8.23.^17.30. or 26". 20. (^5.31

%l6 The Nature of

& it. 18. Luk± 24, 47. H<?£. 6. 1. ; 2 /Vf. 3. p. .E*,^ 18. 27, 28. & 133.12. Hofe. 14.2. foci2. 14,15. Zk#/-.4.3o. e£* 30.1c.

2, That praying for Pardcp* a|d forgiving others, are Conditions |)f Pardon, is plain, 1 King. 8.30, 39. Aint.6.1 2,14,15. (^ 18.35. v^ar 11. 25,2d. Luke 6. 37. d*n.4. lfob.i& fam.5A5.fe. 14.13,14 1^.5.15^^.8*22.

3 .ThatLove 3 & finccre Obedience, and Works of Love, are alfopartrof the Condition, appeareth in thefe Scriptures, Luk* 7. 47* ( though I know in Pinks Interpretation of thatj Aiifaft 44. Lukf 6.27. 35, Ioh. 15.12.17. 1 Cor. 2.9,/tow. 8. 2%.Ephef<6.2^. I Cor* 16. 22* lam. I*-.|2» & 2. 5; Iob.iq. 21. Tm-'* 8.17. ,21. M. 1 6. 27^ -Mtf. 10.37. Z/^ 13.24. Pkit.2.i2.Rom.2. j.io. I Corinth, 9. 24. 2 77?#. 2. 5.12. I 77w. 6.18.19. ikt/.22.-l4.X*ib 11.28. yT/<«*. 25.41,42. Jam. 2. 21,22,23,24,25.

thef.

Thtfis 6u

rHerefore though the nonperformance of anj one ofthefe be threatned^ith'Certain death ; jet there muft be a Concurrence of them alt'; to make *tp the Conditions which have the fromife of life*

Explication.

THerefore we ofcner read, death threatned to thofe that Repent not, then Life promifed to them that Repent: And when you do read of r life promifed to any one of thefe, you muft underftand it caterispari-bvu^ or in fenfu compofito, as it flands conjunct with the reft,and not as it is divided. Though I think that in regard of their exiftence, they never are divided (for where

God

a *S ThtMdtnre of

God givethone, hegivethallj yet in cafe they were {eparatcd, the Go-fpel would not (b own them as -its intire Conditions.

,

Thefts 6i.

| X/"jE*- Faith may bt ca&ed the 1 finely Caudition ofthe new Go-

. venant; I. Becaufe it is the princ'p-pal Condition, and the other bat the lefs principal: And fo as a tffioTe Country hath oft its name from the chief City ; fo may the Conditions of this Covenant from Faith : i. Becaufe all the reft are, reducible to it; either being prejttfpofed y as Tteceffary Antecedents or means. • or containedin.it a* its parts, proper*

I ties, or modifications; or elfe im+ plied as its immediate produ3 y or

I necejfary fuServient means or con*

\ftquents* . k . '

Ex-

■Ot-

Explication. 1

SybferYient Anions are in common fpeech fikntly implyed in the principal. If the befieged be bound by Articles to furrender a Town to the beftegers at fuch a time; it need not be exprcffed in the Articles, that they (hall withdraw their Guards, and ceafe re-fiftance,aDd open the gates,and yeeld up this houfe, or that ftreet, &c. All this i&miplyed clearly in the Article of furrender.

If a redeemed gaily-flave be freed, upon. condition that he take him for his Redeemer and Mafter that did deliver him; it need not be ex-preffed, that he &all leave the gal-lies, and his company, and employment there, and go with him that bought him, and do what he bids him do: All this is plainly implyed in the forefaid words, of his Conditions.

So

*4° The Nature of

So here, the great condition of Beleeving doth include or imply all the reft.

I confefs it is a work of fome worth and difficulty, to (hew how each other part of the Condition is reducible to Beleeving; and in what refpeft they ftand towards it. I dare not determine too peremptorily here, but I think they ftand thus, i. Hearing the Word, confideration, conviction, godly forrow, repentance from dead works, are implyed as neceffary means and antecedents. 2. Knovviedg of Chrift and Aflent to the Truth of the Gofpel, are at laft integral parts of flat neceflity, if not eflfential parts of Faith. 3. Subjection, Acceptance, Confent, cordial covenanting, felf-resigning, are the very proper effential, formal AcT:s of Faith.

4. Efteeming Chrift abovff all, in Judgment, preferring him before all in the Will, loving him above all; I fay this preferring of Chrift above all in Judgment, Will, and Affection, is

fin my Judgment ) the very Differentia fijlci maxinie propria qttt de e.a ejfentialiter pr/dicatur, & fie pars ejus ejfeyttialfs; the very eflen-tial property of true Faith differencing it from all falfe Faith, and fo an eflential part of it. I know this is like to feem flrange; but Iftiall give my reafons of it anon.

5. Sincerity and per fever a nee arc the necefTary Modifications of Faith: and not any thing really diftincT: from its Being.

6. Affiance and ilncere obedience, and works of Love,are the neceffary immediate, infeparable products of Faith ; as heat and light are of fire; or rather as Reafoning is the product, of Reafon: or yet rather as actions moil properly conjugall, are the effects $f Conjugall contract. And as Faith is in ibme fort more excellent tben- Affiance and Obedience, as the caufeis better then the effed ; fo in fo.mc fort they maybe more excellent then Faith ; as the effect may be preferred before its

M Caufe:

Caufe ; the Ad: before the habit; as being that which is the end of the habit, for whofe fake it is ; and to which it tendeth as to its perfection.

7. The praying for forgiveneffe, the forgiving of others, the pleading of Chrifts fatisfaclion, are both parts of this obedience, and necefla-ry confequents of Faith, and Acls fubfervient to it for the attaining of its Ends.

8. The denying and humbling of theflefli, theferious, painfull, con-ftant ufe of Gods Ordinances, Hearing, Praying, Meditating, &c. are both parts of the forefaid obedience, and alio the neceffary meanes of continuing and exerctfing our Faith.

9. Strength of Grace; Aflfurance of Pardon and Salvation. Perfvvafi-of Gods favour ; filled peace of Confcience ; Joy in this Afllirance and Peace ; the underftanding or

| Truths not fundamental!, or neceffary in practice ; All thefe are no properties of the Condition of the Covenant ;

venant ; but feparable adjuncts of Faith ; tending to the Well-being of it; but neither tending to, nor ne-ceffary, proof es cf the Being of it ; which aBtl l vet fhould have,but may poftibly Wint.

I (hall give you Tome reafons of feverall of thefe Aflfctdons, when I > have firft made way by the Definition of Faith.

So then, as when you invite a man to your Houfe, it is not necef-fary that you bid him come in at the doore, or bring his head, or his tegs, or armes, or his clothes with him; (though thefe are neceffary) becaufeall thefe are neceffariiy im-plyed : even fo when we are faid to be juftiried by Faith onely ; or when it is promifed, that he that be-leeveth dial! be faved, all thofe fore-mentioned duties, are implyed or included.

M i Thefis

Thefis 6^.

AS it is Gods excellent method in giving the Moral Law,

frfl to require the acknowledgment of his Joveraign authority, and to bring men to take him only for their God, (which is therefore called the firjr and great Commandment,) and then to preferibe the particular fub-fequent duties L- fo is it.the excellent method of Chrisl in the Gpfpel, firft to eftablijh With men his Office and Authority, and require an acknowledgment of them, and confent and fubjetlion to them ; and then to prefcribc to them their particular duties infubordinaticn.

Thefis 64.

FAith therefore is the fummary andchiefofthe conditions of the Cjofpel, and not formally and fir icily the Whole : But *$ Love is the fuf~ fM»g I

filling of the LaW y fo Faith Is the fulfilling of the neW Law ; or as taking the Lord for our only God, is the fitm of the Decalogue, implying or inferring all the rest, andfo is the great Commandment • fo taking Chrisl for our only Redeemer ana Lord t is the fnmof the conditions of the new Covenant, includingfmpl]-ing or inferring all other farts of its conditions , and fo is the great Cam-wand of the G off el.

■ ■ "U

Explication.

THe Obfervation in the 6% Pofi-tion, is commended to you by Mr white of Dorchefter in his Directions for reading Scripture ? f\307. The full fubjecrion to the Audio* rity commanding, doth imply and infer fubje&ion to the particular Commands: therefore God doth ftill make this the fum of the conditions of the Law, that theytake him M .3 only

only for their God,or that they have no other Gods but him: And when he contractedi his Covenant into an Epitome* it runs thus, / will he thj Gtd, and thou Jbalt be my people. Exod.io.y. & 23.13. Bent, 7.4. & 8.i£. & 13.2,3,0^. fof % 24. 2,id. &c. Jtidg. 2.12,17,15?. (£-10.13. I JViw.8.8. 2 Kings 5.17. & 17.7. fer.22.9. & 7.23.§• \\.\*& 30.22. £*^. 36.28. £>****. 26.16,17,^. And as Gods promife of taking us for his people, doth imply his oc-ftowing upon us all the privfledges and bleflings of his people, and Co is the fum of all the conditions of the Covenant on his part. Even fo our taking the Lord for our God, and Chrift for our Redeemer and Lord, doth imply our fincere obedience to him; and is the fumme of the Conditions on our part. And fo as Idolatry is that violation of the Law of Nature,whkh doth eminenter, cpn-taine all the reft in it ; So is Unbe-liefe in refpefl: of the Law of Grace. And as the formall Nature of Idolatry.

try lyeth in difclayming God, from being God, or from being our God, or from being our alone God : E-ven fo the formail nature of Unbe-liefe lyeth in difcaiming Chrift, either from being a Redeemer and Lord, or from being Our Redeemer and Lord, or from being Our onely I Redeemer and Lord. This being; well confidered^ill direcT you truly and punctually, where to find the very formail being and nature oF Faith? Notinbeleeving the pardon * of fin, or the favour of God, or onr j falvation; nor in Affiance or recumbency, (though that be a rnoft immediate product of it,) Nor in AC-forance, ("as Divines were wont to teach So, yearesagoc.) Nor in O* bedience, or following of Chrift as a f guide to Heaven, or as a Gaptaioe,; or mcerc Patterne and Law-giver-fas the wretched Socinians teach.)-But in the three Acts above mentioned.. 1. Taking Chrift for a Redee-j mer and Lord ; which is by Aflent.? 2* Taking him for our Redeemer, : M 4 Saviour,

Saviour and Lord ; which is by confers. 3. Taking him for our ondy Redeemcr,Saviour and Lord; which is the Morall fincericy of the former: And the eflential differencing property of it: Not whereby Faith is differenced from Love or joy, &c. But whereby that faith in Chrift, which istheGofpd condition, \s differenced from all other Faith :n Chrift. So that as Corpus & Anim?., & Rationale, doe fpeake the whole ef-fence of man: Even fa this Affent, Confent, and Preference of Chrift before all othersj do fpeak the whole Edence of Faith.

For the common opinion, that juftifying Faith, as juftifying, doth confift in any one (ingle A&, is a wretched miftake, as I (hall ftiew you further anon.

Thef.

Faith opened, %fy?

Thc^s 65.

SCrlptnre doth not take, the wor4 [_Faith~^ as ftritlly as-a Thilo^. fophtr Veoptld doe^ for any oneftngH Ad of the foul ; nor jet for various Acls of one ontty Faculty^ But for a compleat entire Motim of the whole Softie, to Chrifi its 1 Objecl.

TheGs 66.

NFither is Chrifi, in resell of. any one part or worl^ of his Office alone, the Objetl of Juftify-ing Faith, as fuch : Tint Christ in his entire office confidered, is this Object: viz. as he is Redeemer^Lord and Saviour*

Ms Ticfol

A$o The Nature of

The/is 67',

MVch It fear cany Prcmlfesor benefits of Chris! y the. proper Objettofjufiifj/ing Faith, as mmy JQiviMS do mijtakingly conceive <

■ b 2,

Theils 6%.

' ^[OrisCbrifttftrfoncfxfidered

LX as fuch^orfont /</f fa 9 y. jell of this Faith : But i^ s fcrjon ; ofChrift asc'oatbed wtth Us Office [and Authority is this Ofyfa

explication]

rPut all thefc together, as ayming at one fcope: and I (hall now explain them diftinftly.

(To the 6?.) Firft, T hat Faith isnot taken for any one (ingle Aft, I

prove

prove thus. i. If it were but one fingle Aft (I mean Specifically, not numerically)then it could not(accor-ding to the common opinion of 1-hi--■hfopkers) be the-Aft of the whole Soul; Bur Faith muft be the Acl of the whole Soule ; or eife part of the Soulc? would receive Chrift, and part would not ; and part of it would entertain him, and part not. Some think the foul is as the body,j which hath a hand to receive things-. in the name, and for the ufe of the ! whole. But it is not fo, Chrift is not 1 onely taken into the hand : But asl the blood and fpirits, which are re--ceived into every living part. (Though I intend not the compari-. fan fhould reach to the manner of receiving.) Neither is the foul foi divHible into parts, as the body is; and therefore hath not feverall parts for feverall offices. 2. The moft of our accurate ftudious Divines of late, doe take Faith to be feated in both faculties, Undemanding and Will: Butiffo 5 according to the

common I

common Philofophie, it cannot be any one tingle Aft.

Neither Secondly, is it in various Ads of one fingle faculty : For, I, It will (in my judgement) never be proved, that the foul hath faculties which are really diftincl from it felf, or from each other. Thefe Faculties are but the foul it ft If, able to doe thus and thus from its naturall being. Vide Scallger Exercit. I oj. Sett. 3. Underftanding and Willing are its immediate Acts : And perhaps thofe very Ads, are more diversified or diftincl: in tkir objects, then in themftlves. The fouls apprehension of an objecT as true, we call Underftanding ; in regard of its MctaphificailTru^Iv it is a (impie apprehension ; as we receive this Truth upon the word of another, it is Ment and Beliefe; as this Objecl isconfideredas Good, ourmotion toward ir, is called Willing ; if abftnt, Dtliring, Hoping ; if prefers, Comphcency, Joying \ when .we Will a thing as Good, any thing

ftrong-

ftrongly t and apprehend its Good-neflfe any thing cleerely, this we call Love,&c. But whether all thefe be really diftind kinds of A&s of the Soal,is verify doubtfull: Much more, whether they proceed from diftind Faculties. As I am not of my Lord Brooki* minde concerning the Uni ty of all things : So neither would 1 unneceffarily admit of anydivifi-011 : especially in fo fpirituall and perfect a piece as the Soul ; knowing how much of Perfection lyeth in Unity ; and remembring the Vy-tkigorean curfe of the Num ber Two, becaufe itwas the firft that durft depart from Unity: & fruttrtfit per pinra Crc* 2. But if it were proved that the Souls Faculties are really diftinft ; yet both thefe Faculties are capable of receiving Chrift ; and Chrifl is an fib-jecl fuited to both : ani then what doubt- is it whether Faith be in both ?

i. For the WilLno man will que-ftionit, that it is capable cf receiving

\ ving Chrift $ and Chrift a (uttabfc Object for it.

2. And for the Underftandingj it doth as much incline to Truth, as | the Witt to Goodne%; and as true-ly receive its Object under the notion of True, as the Will dotfi receive its Object as Good. If you would fee it proved fully, That Af-fent is an Eflential! part of /ultrfying Faith, read Dr. Boixmmedi fu&i-cation, on that SubjecY: and his Af-pendix to the Cave Hani v of Grace , \ in Anfvver to Mr. l>tmble : Where j I though his Argument will not reach their intended fcope, to prove that AfTenc is tiieonely proper A&of j'u-ftirying Faith, yet they do conclude, that it is a reail part. And he well conruteth his oppofer, though he do not well confirm that his own opi-niortr

3. Confider further, that Chrift doth not treat of Faith, ** fmfn Pbjfito fed moraJi & 'Politico, not as a Naturall Philofopher, but as a law-#va to his Church, Now in

Poii-

Politicks, we doe not take the names of A&ions in fo narrow and ftrift a afenfc, as in Tbyfak* and Logicke. If a Town doe agree to take or receive fucha man for their Mayor;'! or a Kingdom* take or receive fuch i a one as their King ; The words [Take, or JUctivc J here doe not note sny one (ingle Adt of foule or body alone; but a compound, as it were, of .Adions ; which yet do all cake their name from the Principal!, which is [Confc*t.~],

To the 66* That.Chrift as a Saviour onely, or in refpecY of his Prieftly Omce onely, is not the Ob-jecl of justifying Faith ; but that Faith do;h as really and immediatry I Receive him as King y and in fo doing, ] uftifie : this I prove thus. 1

1. ThcGofpel doth not revcale Chtifts Offices as fcparated.- But as they are revealed, fo tbey imift be believed.

2, Neither dothitOflferChrift

g*

in his Prieftly Office onely, as ft pa-rated from his Kingly : though it may fometime prtfle our Acceptance of him in one refpect, and fometime in another: But as he is offered, fomuft he be received.

$; Scripture no where tyethju-ftiflcation to the receipt of him as out Prieft onely, therefore we muft not doe fo.

4. How commonly doth Scrip* ture joyn his Offices together, calling him ufually, Our Lord and Saviour J ejus C fori ft f

5. If we receive him not as King, we receive him not as an entire Saviour : For he iaveth us, not onely by dying for us, but alfo by reducing us really into communion withGod, and guiding us by his Laws, and protecting and perfecting us by his Government , and lubduing our enemies.

6. His Kingly Office is a true part of his entire Office of Mediator-' (hip: Now the fincerity of Ads in. Morall refpeds, lyeth in their true

fuitable-

fuitablenefs to the nature of their Obje&s : As God is not truer/ loved, except he be loved entirely: fo neither is Chrift truely received, if you receive him not entirely. It is a lame, partial! Faith, and no true Faith, that taketh Chrift onely in the potion oPa deliverer from guilt and punifhment, witfeout any accepting of him, as our Lord and Governoitr. Though I beleeve that the hope of being pardoned and faved is the flrft thing that moveth men to receive Chrift, yet do they, being fo moved, receive him as their Lord alfo, or elfe they doe not receive him (incerely. 7. The exalting of his Kingly Office, is as principal! an end of his dying, and of his becomming Me-diatour, as is the faving of us, and the exalting of his Prieftly Office. See the feccnd TfaL and &W.14.9. To this end he both dyed, rofe and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead, and the living. And therefore the receiving of him as Prieft alone, is not like to be the

Con*

Condition of our Juftiftcation. So that if Chrift put both into the Condition, wemuftnot feparatewhat he hath joynecL But the main ground of their Error,wh© think otherwife, is this : They think Acceptance of the mercy offered, doth make it ours immediately in a naturall way, as the accepting of a thing from men; And fo as if he that accepted pardon, fliould have it, and he that accepted fanftitie ftiould have it 3 &c But Chrift (as I have (hewed ) eftabli-fheth his Offices and Authority, before ihe beftow his mercies ; and though Accepting be the proper condition, yet doth it not confcrre the title to us, as it is an accepting primarily, but as it is the Covenants Condition: If we ftiould take pof-feflion when we have no tide m Law, God would quickly challenge us for our bold ufurpation, and dtaie with us, as with him that intruded without the Wedding garment: There is more adoe then come ify and fie down, and take what \ve

have

have a mind to: God hath put all his Sons Offices into the Condition, to be received and fubmitted to : either all or none, muft be accepted: And if All be in the Condition, then the receiving of all muft needs Juftihe upon the grounds that I have laid down before*

To the 67. That the promifes or benefits arc not the immediate proper objed of Juftifying Faith, is evident from the grounds already layd down: As alfo from the con-ftant language of the Gofpel, which maketh Faith to lie in receiving, be-leeving in him, and in his name, &c. ftill making Chrift himfelf the immediate objed. Therefore if Mr Cotton fay as the Lord Brool^ repre-fents him, That Faith can be nothing but a laying hold of that promife which God hath made; (in his Traft.ofTrnth and, Vnh fag. 15 2.) it is a foul error in fo weighty a point; as is alfo his other, of Faith

ipftify-

joftifying and faving only declara-tively. Indeed that firft lefs principal Ad: of Faith, which we all Aflfent, hath the truth of the Gofptl revda-la'tion for its neereft and moft immediate object • but ^1 think, by the leave of thofe who contradict) not its onely nor chief objed : The truth of the proposition is but a means to the apprehending of the truth of the thing propofed; nor the truth of the hiftoryj but a giafs to (Wr us the truth of the Ads which it relateth. So that > even the Underftanding it felf doth apprehend the perfon and offices of Chrift in their Metaphifical Verity, by means of its apprehenfion of the Logical and Moral verity of the Relation: and though the truth of the Word be the neereft object of Af~ fern, yet the truth of Chrifts perfon, nature and offices is the more principal; Or if about thefe, it may not have the name of Affent, yet (hall it have the fame nature ftill.

SsA

To the 62. I think none will contradict it, and therefore there need nothing be faid.

Thefis 69.

IVftifjing Faith is-the hearty accepting of Chrifl for our only Lori and Saviour*

Explication.

IN this brief definition, you have nothing but what is effential to it.

t. The genus I need notmention; when it is the A<5t of Faith which I define, you know the genus al* ready. ' ^

2. The Underftandings apprehen-fion of Chrift as a true Redeemer and Saviour, which in feveral re-fpecls is called Knowledg or Belief,

'■ I » ■!■■■■ ——MM^^——

_ . -

262 The Nature of

I do imply this, and not exprefs it; becaufe though I take it for a real part of Faith, yet not the moft principal and formal part. And as we ufe to imply Corpus ,and not exprefs it when we define man to be Animal rationale ; becaufe the form, or principal eflential partgiveth the name: So here (though I know Affent is not properly a material caufej yet being the lefs principal Ad, it giveth not the denomination.

3. That drift, as Lord and Saviour is the proper objed, I have proved before. His Prophetical Office whereby he is the Teacher of his Church, I imply in both thefe, becaufe it may in feveral refpeds be reduced to thefc: For he teachcth by his Laws and Commandments, and his fpirits teaching and governing are fcarce diflinguifhable, and he faveth by teaching. Alfo his Office of Huf-band,and Head,are in thefc implycd;

Faith ofenedi 26}

theyfigntfying more the future benefits and priviledgcs 'or* a beleever, which he (ball receive from Chrift beleeved in, then the primary offices which he is to ackoowledg in be-leeving.

4. The proper formal act of jufti-fying Faith, which is moft principal-lyerfential toit or all other ts[accepting : 3 If I traft needs place it in one oniy,it fhould be this.

My Reafons are, 1. Becaufethe Scripture maketh unbelief, and not receiving Chrift, all one, John i.u. and beleeving and receding Chrlft, all one, f ohn 1.12. So it proclaims this as the great work of the Gofptl, toTake,Eat 3 Drink,&c.

2.The Gofpel is the Offer of Chrift ("and his benefits to them that firft ' accept himfelf; ) Therefore Puithmuft be the accepting of the thing offred. Both thefe are plain in. Rtv. 21.17. Whofoever W*7/, let him take of the trattr of life freely : There is the

free

free offer, apon condition of coming and taking,or accepting.

3. The Will is the commanding faculty of the foul,therefore its ad is the principal ad, and that is accepting.

4. Chriftis prefenced to us in the Gofpel as a Suitor, befeeching us by hisSpirit and Embaffadors,and wooing us to himfelf, and the enjoying of him, which this driveth at, is called our Marriage to him, and we his Spoufe, aad he our Husband: Now you know that whichtyeth the knot of Marriage is Acceptance or Con-fent.

5. Yea the very nature of a Cove-nant,requireth this. Confent makcth it a compleate Covenant. Therefore I (aid before pag. 219. That Acceptance, Confent, He art-Covenanting, and Se/f-rejigning , are the proper effentiall Acts of this Faith. For all thefe are the Wills ads to this their fobjed, which arc of flat neceflity to the very tying of the Covenant or Marriage knot. Rm*

Faith opened. %C%

io. 10. With the he art man belee-veth unto Right eonfnejfe.

.

And- her6 let me minde you of one ufefuH obfervation more.

The Covenanting on our part, is , a principall part of the Conditions or the Covenant. Though this may feem ftrange, that a Covenanting and performing Conditions, fliould be almoft all one. But that is the free nature of the Grace of the Covenant. As if you marry a poore woman that hath nothing, you will give her yourfelf, and all yon have, mcerly upon Condition that (he will Cpnfent to have you : And that Confent is all the Condition on her part, for obtaining prefect poffeffi-on (I fayj Acceptance, Confent , Covenanting , m&Self-refigningi which are in a manner all one thing:,) Butbecaufe the end of marriage is the faithfuH performance of Marriage duties, though rneer Confent were the onely Condition of her firft __ N pof-

poffeflion* and the, contiauaflce . her Confer* is the chi$f Condition of continuing her pofleffion ; yet the performance ofthofe Marriage duties, and not goingin to others, is part of the Condition alfo of that continuance ; So it is in the prefent cafe of Juftificatiorv

5, Letmeherealfo tell you, that ItakelovetoChrift as our Saviour and Lord, to be etlentiall to this Acceptance : and fo fome degree of Love to be part of Juftifying Fakh, and not properly a fruit of it, as it is commonly taken. My reafbns are,

i» The Wills ferious apprehenfion of a thing Good, which we xall an earneft Willing it, and Accepting k^ is (in my judgement) the fame thing as Love, in an other name. Love is nothing but fuch an earned Willing, choofmgand Accepting it as it is Good. It is generally acknowledged, that

the

the Affections are but the Motions or Afts of the Will. And if Love be anA&of the fame Will, and have the fame Objeft with Confent, E-leclion, Acceptance, &c Why ftioulditnot then be the fame Aft? Ondy Acceptance confidereth its Objed as offered ; Ele&ion confi-dereth it, as propounded with fome other competitor ; Confent confi-derethit,as we are perfwaded and invited to it : But allthefe areex-trinfecall confiderations : They all confider their Objed as Good, and fo dorh Love.

You may object, i. Then De-fire and Hope may be effentiall to Faith ?

I Anfw. That Love which they imply in them is : but defire and hope, as fuch, do properly confider thdr object as abfent, which this Juftifying Faith doth not»

2. Objeft. Scripture oft Diftin-gHifheth Faith and Love.

Anfw. i. Sometime Faith is taken for Hiftoricall faith, or Faith of N 2 Mira-

„-™_—___

Z62 The Nature of

Miracles, and thai it may be diftin-guiflied. z. Sometime true Faith is taken in the ftri&eft fence, and (ometime Iarglier, as I fhall fliew anon. 3. Butefpecially; fodoldi-ftinguifti of Love, as it is confidered by it felf, and as it is an effentiall part of this Acceptance. Love, re-fpecleth its ObjccT: meerly as Good, in itfelf and to the Lover. But Con-fent and Acceptance have fcverail other refpefts,-as is exprefied: And yet there may be Love in all fuch Acceptance ; though not properly Acceptance in all Love.

Objett. 3. Then Love Juftirleth as well as Faith.

I Anfw. When it is thus confidered in Faiths Acceptance, it is not calledby the name of Love, but io-feth its name, as a letter River that felletti into a greater ; therefore it is not faid that Love Juftifieth; but Faith that worketh (even in its effentiall work of Accepting; by Love.

Objett. But Love is the greater

Grace,

Grace, and (hall out-live Faith, and Faith ftould rather then be fwal-lowed up in Love.

Anfw. Love considering its ob« je&onely as-Geod, fhall continue | for ever, becaufe the Coodnefs of its object (ball fo continue : But Acceptance, Content, &c. have o-thcr additional! considerations in their Objects which will vanifli. But which is the chiefeft Grace in it felf, is not the queftion, but which I is the chiefeft in the prefent work.. I Now feeing Confent, Acceptance,; &c. are the chief as to Juftification,« that Love which is eflentially if* them may well lofe its name here: feeing in the bufineffe of Juftifying it is considered but as an effentiali. part of the main duty.

My next Reafon is, becaufe Chrift doth propound it intheGofpel, as of the fame neceflkie, with the fame promifes annexed to it, foh* 1 6* 27. For the Father himfelfloveth yotf, becaufe jee have lovedme^ andbG-teeved r &c< J oh. 14* 21. He that JV 3 loveth

hvethme, fhall be loved of my Fa~ and I mil love him, and foew mj felftobim. jam.i. 12. £2.5. The Crown and Kingdom is prepared for them that love him, 1 Cor. 16*22* If any man love not the Lord Jefm Chrift, let him be Anathema Ma-ranatha , Ephef. 6. 24. In a word, Faith is a comprehenfwe duty, containing divers Adrs, whereof this feemeth to me to be part: Neither can I yet conceive, how there can beacordiall Acceptance of Chrift, as our only Saviour, and Love not be an etfentiali part of that Acceptances But if a finer wit can apprehend the difference better; yet (as I faid) Faith being confidered herein Moral! and Pbliticke refpe&s, and not in ksftri&naturaH quiddity, rnay ef-fentially be an Affe&ienate Acceptance, for all that.

If any think fitter to make a wider difference between the nature of faith and Love to Chrift, I will not contend^ for the matter is not great: thai both are neceffary to Juftific*-

Jmtk'tfmti. *7*

tion, is tafcdefcotil&fhtc they are concurrent M apprehending Chrift: And that Love it a part of the Condition of the Covenant; is *16> 4Jtv (feubted^ fcpd thhteforeJwHl haw feme hand in the bufinefs of Jiiffifi-cation, aslftiali farther clear.

6. I pucin the word O f #3 in ' the Definition 5 becaufef atis faiibe- > J fontyjrake *he prefming of t Chrift before all others, and taffin^ him for* oerObelyLord and Saviour, to be, the effcntiali difference of true Faith-! There is a tWofoidiVenty ror Since- \ my in our duties recpifrte. 1. Ttie 1 verity of their, natorail Being, which 1 is catted their MetaphyficaU Truth. 2. The verity or fincetity of thconas Duties or-Graces, which is fihrir Mbrall Sincerity fcThisla&confifteth inthfcaiiefairingtfshe A& to its Gbjed. For example, one man-pretendeth to love his \vife,and do*; 1 nof..:< There is lieirii^'HattiraJlnof Mbrall Troths'Atiothft dotiv love ' N 4 he*

her,but not half fo well as other women : There is the Metaphyficall Truth, but not the Morall A third loyeth her as 2 wife above others: Tfeefe is both Metaphyficall Truth and Morall.

So it is in oar Love to God : To Love him as the chief Good, is to Love him as he is : And he that lo-veth him "never fo much, and yet kridth anything: effe, as siachor mote ; though his Love have a Me-ta^hyfieaH Truth of Being, yet k hath no Morall fincerity at all j So that the Preferring God before all, or taking him for our Onefy God, is the very point of Sincerity of Love. Why^j'uftfoit is about oar Faith : The taking him unfeignedly for our onely Lord and Saviour, is the very point of the.fincerity of our Faith in Chrift* As Adultery is thd moft proper violation of the Marriage Covenant, except a<fVualL renouncing and deferring : So the taking of any other e Lord or Saviour befoesChriftjOr conjunct tfith hirtrj

*J

is the mod apparent violation of the bond of our Covenant., and moft contradi&ory to the nature and Ef-fence of J unifying Faith ; except onely the Actual! recounckig. Chriit, and the Covenant it felf, by full A-poftacy; which is an unpardonable fin, Hebr. 6. 4, 5, 6. & 10, 3<5. Yet in-fubordinationto Chrift, wernay have other Lords and Saviours, but not in-competition and co-ordination.' Some of his> Government he [ exercifeth by Minifters^- and fome j by Magiftrates under him ( for I j cannot con'fent to them that fay, the Magift ate is onely the Officer of God as Creator, and not of Chrift the Mediator ; becaufe all things are delivered into his hands/ and he is made head over all.) Some-alfo of his Caving works, heperformeth by inftrurnents and means: And what they fo perform under him, may be acknowledged without any decoga-cionfromhiraatalL •

N 5' Bar

. , ...,.,... I

But perhaps fome may think that the Scripture Phrafe feemeth rather to intimate, that Faith is an Aflent, and not fuch an Acceptance and Confem,as is before mentioned; be-caufe it eft times rcqairerh but this, To believe that Jefus is the Chrilt, the Sonne of God .; he that fhould come into the world, &c. ro To-which I Anfwer, i. This proveth onely, that this Knowledg or Aflfent is pmof faith ; but not that it is the whole. 2. Itistheufe of Scripture to drive at that duty which is molt unknown, negle&ed, or refitted ; and to fpeak little of o-thers, where there was then lcffe need to fpeak, though perhaps thel duty be in it felf more weighty : Therefore Chritt and the Apoftlcs did Ipend moft of their pains to per-fwade the Jewes to this A(Tent:That the Meffias £bould come, be their deliverer, they ail knew ; Even the poor Woman of Samaria could tell that, foL^ij. And fo ready were

they

they to Receive him, if they had known hmi; that it was the gcneraiiTexpeAa'tida and define of the "pedpfce, MaI.^\ % But to sperfwade therfl that Jefus was the Chrift, here lay the difficulty. Therefore (asDtf. times Med*tl*c4p. 3. §♦ 20.) thoagh fometime Affent to the Truth Concerning God and. Chrift, J ok 1.50. be taken for true j Faith ; yet the fpeciall Election or Apprehenfion (for that he meanes by FidticU §. 1 \, ) is itill inclu- ■ ded ; and thote> words doe but determine and apply that FidttcU to Chrift, which is prefuppofed to be already towaffd theMefluh.

And let me conclude this with' one more pra&icaliy ufefol obferva-i tion; From this definition of faith, | now men may lee what to enquire 1 after in the fearching of their eftaces. As Faith, being the GofpelrOonditi-on, is the main thing to be looked for; So hereyou fee what that faitK is. The ignorance of this deceiveth!

and

and troubled) multitudes*} Some think itlieth.in MUrauceuSorne^ in a quieting their/heartb m r.cpn&3 jcjence on Qirift; S'pmc'think, as !Mr SAltmfirJh ,: That it is nothing •elfe but a perfwafion more.or lefs oft Gods love: And then .when poor j troubled fouls do feel neither aflu-rance, confidence^ nor perfwafion of that love, they conclude that they have no Faith. And how will thefe miftaken Teachers help them to comfort ? Why, as Mr Salt* arjh doth: fometime to tell them,■Chrill: hath beleeved for them; and fometime to cell them plainly, that he can but commend them to tieLord,who is the author and finifher of Faith: and fometime to tell them, that they fhould not qneftion their faith, any I more then Chrift himfclfi Thus their ftrft way of comfort is to tell them,, they do ill to qneftion their faith: If that would ferve,. all the world might have comfort, and there needs no more; If that will not do, then Chnft hath beleeved.

for . • ■ —"

^;i

nitfropneL a 7 7

fbi them - Yet if that will' fejrve y there is as much comfort for one as* another. Bat what if they fay ft ill, Icannot beleeve, ("that is, as you ex-; pound Belief-.; why, then he con-rcfleth plainly, he is at a lofs; he an drive on the work of comforting no further; he can do no more but pny for them. p*g. 31. Is ic not a wonder that 1 his lamentable Com-, fbrter fhould be fo valued by the troubled fpirits ? T was many years my felf under perplexing doubts*. If I had heard fuch comforting words 3* rhefe, they would foonet have driven me to defpair then to comfort. Hcthat hath not fo much wit asco : difcern fo grofs fallacies, may as foon be comforted by a falfe and impertinent argument, as by a found one. £>ne. But how would you<om-fort fuch a-one, that faith he cannot belt eve ? Anj. Why, I would firft make him know, That the very ef- 1 fential form of faith lieth in- the \ Wills acceptance of an offered <2hrift: Then would I know of

,., -hi ■«

27» Tht Nature of

him, whether he be witling thus to baveChrift bottt for lord and Saviour, or not ? If he fay* He 13 willing: I (hall anfwer, That then he dothbeJeevc; and then he is/ufti-fied: For his Willingnefs is his very Confent or Acceptance; and that Gonfcnt is true Faith: Chrift ex-pe&eth no more to make up the match. If the march bnak, it rauft be either btcaufe Chrift is unwilling, or becaufe he is unwilling: net Chrift j for he is the Suitor,, and In-treaccr,andOrIerer : Not himfelf; for he confeffeth that he is willing. If he fay , I am not willing: I ftouldask; Why then do you look after it, or regard it } Do men enquire after that, and lament the want of it, which they are not willing to have ? either temptation or mel-lancholly maketh you not know your own minde; or elfe you do but diflemble in pretending trouble and fad complaints. If you be indeed unwilling, I have no comfort for you,tiliyouare willing; but muft

turn

Pdhk+ptfud, rj$

turn to pcrfwafions to make yott wiling* If they yet reply; I am not throughly willing: I (hould anfwer, The Condition of the Covenant is not the Perfe&ion j bat the fincerity of Faith or Confent; I which way goes the prevailing bent orchoyce of your Wifl I If Chrift I were before you, would you ac-! cept him, or rejecl: him ? If you would heartily accept htm for your only Lord and Saviour, I dare fay, you are a true Bdeever.

Thus you fee the comfortable ufe of right underftanding, what jufti-fying faith is; and the great danger and inconvenience that followeth the common miftakes in this point.

Thcfis 70,

FAith in the large ft fence, as it comprthendeth all the Conditio* <sf the new C$venant y may be thus definei ; It M y when a [inner by the fVord and Spirit of Chrift being

through*

■2-8o The Nature 'of

thrsughlyronvinted of the Rights oufnefs- of the LaVr, the truth of its threatening the evil of his own fin y and the-great nefs of his mifery here-upohyO&d ^ithall of the Nature and Offices y Sufficiency and Excellency of fefus Chrift, the Satisfaction he hath made , his vptllingnefs to fave x and his free, offer to all that mil accept him for their Lordand Savior * deth- hereupon believe the truth of this (jofpel, and accept of Chrifi a* his only Lord and Saviour^ to bring thtmao God their chief eft good, and to prefent them pardoned and jufi beferehim y und l to 'bcftoVe upon them [a more glorious inheritance^ and do accordingly reft on him as ^keir Saviour, aniftncerely (though imper-fetlly) obey him as their Lord^ forgiving othersJovin^ his people ^bearing what J ujftr in gs are impojedy diligently u ft %g. his means and Ordinances r and cortfeffing and bewailing their fins againsl him, and praying for pardon ; and all this fwcerely, dnltothe end.

Ex-

Explication.

"T~ His is the Condition of the new 1 Covenant at large, That all this is fometime called Faith, as taking its name from the primary, princi-pal,vitalpart, is plain hence.

i. In that Faith is oft called £the obeying of the CbfpeQ btit the Gospel commandeth all this, Rom.ic. 16. iPet.i.n. d-4.1.7. iThef.t* 8v GaJ.3. i. & 5.7, Heb. 5.9.

2. The fulfilling©^ the Conditions of the new Covenant is oft cak led by the name of Faith, & fo oppo-fed"to the fulfilling the Conditions of the old CovenantjCalled Works; But thefe forementioned are parts of the Condition of the new Covenanted: therefore implyed or included^in Faith,&f £3*1 2,23,25 .Not that Faith i$ properly taken for its fruits,or confounded with them, but (as I told I you before) it is named in the-ftead of the whole Condition,. all the. reft

be-

*8i The Natureof

being implyed as reducible to it, in fome of the refjpe&s mentioned under the 6i Pofition.

It may be here demanded, i .Why I do mafc affiance or recombency an immediate product of Faith, when it is commonly taken to be the very justifying Act >

I anfwer: i. I have proved already, that Confent or Acceptance is the principal Aft, anAAffiance doth neceffarfly follow ttafcnjttfjfeartl^ mofi of my Reafons,.tha^Affitncc is a following AcT*, aad not the principal, they are the fame with thok of QzQwtame againft Mr "PmUe.t and in hisTreatife of Juftiftc*ck% whither therefor I refer you for Sar tisfa&ion,

a gjttjt. Why do I make fincerfc ty andperfeverance to be fo nearrkiri to Faith, as to be; in feme fence, the fame,and not rather diftmft Graces?

Anfi*. It is apparent, that they are no real diftincl things, but the Modi of Faith, i. Sincerity is the verity of it, which is. convertible

with

Faith opened* a $5

with its Being, as it is Metaphyfical Verity, and with its Vcrtuous or Gracious Being, as it is Moral or Theological Sincerity. 2. Perfcve-rancc or Duration of a Being, is nothing really diflincl: from tie Being i t fd( 1 Suarez thinks, not fo touch as a Modus %

Thefis y\.

(i)TpH* fincere Performanct of JL the fummary, great Command Htf the Law £To have the Lord only for our God^ndfo to iove 9 obey, believe and truft him above all ] isftill naturally imply ed in tha Conditions eft hi Gofltel, as of abf*~ lute indifyenfible necejfity 9 fa) and in order if nature, and of excellency before Faith it/elf: (3) 'But it is not commanded in the fence, and upon the terms , as under the firfi £o~ nant.

Ex*

1

Explication]

{v) T^ His Command need not J. be expreffed in the Go-fpel Conditions, it is fa naturally x\z-cetfary, and implied in all : As the ultimate End need not be expreffed in directions and precepts fo as the meanes, becaufeit is ftill fuppofed ; & confultatio eft tantum de me-diis.

(i) Love to God, and taking hinaforour God and chiefeGood, is both in excellency and order of nature, before Faith in Chrift the Mediator • 1. Becaufe the End is thus before the meanes in excellency and intention : But God is the ultimate End 5 and Chrift as Mediator is but the mesfnes, foh.iq. 6. Cftrift is the way by which men muft come to the Father.2 J*he Son as God-man or.Mediator, is leffe then the Father; and therefore the duties that refpeft him. as their Gbjed, muft needs be

the

thelefle excellent duties, Joh.T4.13.

The glory of the Son, is but a means

for the glory of the Father, Joh.14.

28. My Father is greater then I\

therefore the Love of the Father is

greater then the Love to the Son,

&c So alfo in point of neceffity it

hath the naturall precedency: as the

End hath before the meanes: for the

denying of the End, doth immedi-

.. ately cafhiere and evacuate all means,

\ as iuch. He that maketh not God

his chief Good, can never defire or

Accept of Chrift, as the way and

I meanes to recover that chief Good.

; The Apoftle therefore knew more

I reafon, then meerely for its perpe-

| tuity , why the chiefeft Grace is

I Love, 1 Cor. 12. 13. Though yet

J the work of J unification is laid

\ chiefely upon faith*

( 3 J That this Love of God, Is ] not commanded in the fence, and on \ the teraies as under the Law, is evident. Fof, 1. The voldCovenant would have condemned us, for the very imperfeftion of the due degree

of

x%6 The Nature of

of Love : ButtheGofpel accepteth of Sincerity, which lyeth in loving God above aU ; or as the chiefe Good. 2* The old Covenant would have deftreyed us, for one omifliofr of a due A&of Love ; But the Covenant of Grace accepteth of it, if a man that never knew God all his life time, doecomeinatlaft.

Yet the fincere performance of k is as necefiary now as then*

Thehs 72.

AS the Accepting of Qhrifl for Lord) ( which is the hearts fub)eUion) is as Effential a part of fuftifying Faith, as the Accepting of him for our Saviour : Sa con-fequently, fincere obedience , tyhich is the efeU. of the former^) hath as rmsch to doe in juftifjwg us before GW, as AffaHce r (rrhich is the fruit of the later.) •

Bxflica^

rKnow this will hardly down with many. But I know nothing canbefaidagainftit, but by denying the Antecedent, viz. That Faith as it Accepteth Chrift for Lord and King doth. Juftifie. But that I have proved before. If it be one Faith, and have the Objed: entirely propounded as one y and be one entire principal! part of the Covenants Condition ; then fare it cannot be divided in the work of Juftifying. This may be eafily apprehended, if men will but underftand thefe three things. 1. That Faith is noPhyrl-cail or naturaU proper Receiving of Chrlit at all : But meerly a morall {Receiving^ though performed by a Phyficall Ad of [_Accefting Q For thy Will doth not naturally touch and take in the perfon of Chrift; That is an impofiible thing, whatfo-ever the Tranfubftantiation men

___ m »y

may fay : ( Though the Eflence of the Godhead is every where. ) 2. That this Accepting which is a Morall Receiving doth not, nor pqf-fibly can, makeChrift burs immediately and properly, as it is a Receiving; But mediately and improperly onely : The for mall cauTe of our intereft, being Gods Donation by the Gofpel Covenant. 3. That this Covenant maketh a whole entire Faith its Condition : A Receiving of whole Chrift with the - whole foul : It \$ y as Amefiw^ ABlo tonus hominis : And if the Covenant doe make Chrift as King, the objecl: of that Faith which is its Condition, as well as Chrift,as a Deliverer or Ptieft ; Then may it be as fit-a Medium for our j uftification, as the other.

That Obedience is as neere a fruit of Faith, as Affiance, is evident; if you take it for the Obedience of the Soul, in Afts that are no more remote from the fecart then Affiance is '. And fe is the Obedience of out

Attions

A&ions external in its formal re-fpecl: (as Obedience; : though not in its material, becaufe the imperate A&s ate not all fo neer the fountain as the Elicite. I take it here for granted, that Dr Bownames arguments in the place fore-cited, have proved Affiance to be but a fruit of the principal juftifying Acl of Faith.

Thcfis 7J.

F Rom what hath been faid, it ap-peareth in what fence Faith only jufiifieth 1 and in what fence Works aljo jufiifie : viz. I. Faith onh juftificth as it impheth and in-cludttb ait other parts of tie condition cf the neV? Covenant ; and is fo put in oppofition to the Works of the Law, or the pcrfonal Right eon fnefs of the old Covenant. 2. Faith orij jufiifieth as the great principal ma. fltr dmj cfthe Gospel, or chief part of its Condition, to which all the refi arefome way reducible. 3. Faith O only

%£po 'The Nature of

onely doth not juftifie in apportion to ' the PVorkj ofthe'Gosfsl ; hit thofe Work* do alfojvflifie, as the fee on-dary, lefs principal parts of therotr-dition of the Covenant*

Thefis 74.

-QO that they both jv-ftifie in the C5 fame ki n 4 e °f caufatity^ viz. as Caufe fine quite non, or mediate and. improper Caufes; or as Dr Twiffe) Caufe difpoiitivse: but with this diference : Faith as the principal part ; Obedience as the lefs principal. The like may be fai-d of Love 1 Which at leafi is a feeon-dary part of the Condition : and of others in the firhe*fkation.

Explication.

Know this is the do&rine that will have the loudeft out-cries

raifed

Werks efkned* a? I

raifed againfl: it-: and will make fome cay out, Herefie, ^operj, So-cinianifm ! and what not ? For my own part the Searcher of hearts knowcth, that not Angularity, af-fecTation of novelty, nor any good will to Popery, provoketh me to entertain it; But that I. have earneftly fought the Lords direction upon my knees, before I durft adventure on it: And that I refilled the.light of this Conclufion as long as I was able. But a man cannot force his own underftanding, if the evidence of truth force it not; though he may force his pen, or tongue, to fi-lence or diffembling.

That which I (hall do further, is, to give you fome proofs of what I. fay, and to aniwer fome Objections. ] Though, if the foregoing grounds j do ftand, there needs no more proof j j of thefe aflertions.

i. If Faith juftifie as it is the ful- \

\ filling of the Condition of the new j

i Covenant, and Obedience be alfo \

j part of that Condition, then obidi- j

• ■ I . I* I LI , . . . L . -

encemuft juftifie in the fame way, as Faith: But both parts of the Antecedent are before proved.

The other proofs follow in the enfuing Petitions, and their Explications and Confirmations.

Thcfis 7j.

THe plain exprejfions of Saint James fhould terrifie us from an interpretation contraHUory to the Text ; and except apparent violence he fifed, with his Chap. 2. 2l.24,25jCrc. it cannot be doubted } bat that a wan, isjuftified by JVorkj, and not by Faith only.

Thefis 76.

N Either is there the Ieasl appearance of a contradiction bef&ixt this and Paul's dotlrine, Rom. 3.28. If men did not through prejudice, negligence, or wilfnlnejs

over-

overlookjhis ; That in that and all other the like places , the Afoftl* doth profeffedly exclude the Workj of the Law only from juftificaiiony but never at all the Works of the Gosjelas tbejare.the Condition of theneVe Covnast,

— *

Explication

M T

IN opening this I (hall thus proceed: i. I will (hew the clear-nefs of that in fames fat the point in queftion. 3. Tfcat Pa*I is to be underftood in the fence exprefled. 3. How this dirTereth from the Pa-pifts Expofition of thefe places; and fro;n their do&rine of Juftification by Works. 4. And how from the Socinian doftrine.

w J

1. The ordinary Expeficions of St. fames are thefe two: 1. Tiiat he fpeaks of ) uflifkatioa before Oj ^ men,

men, and not before God. 2. That he fpeaks of Works, as juftifying our Faith, and not as juftifying oar per-fons: or ^as Mr. ^TtmbUs phrafe is) the Apoftle when he faith Works juftifie,muft be undeftood by a Me-tonimj, that a working Faith jnftiri-eth. That the former Expofition is falfe may appeare thus.

1. The Worlds Judication freeth us but from the Worlds Ac-cufation, to which it is oppofed: And therefore it is but either a Juftifying from the Accufation of hfr mane Lawes; Or elfe a particular Juftification of us, in refpecl: of fome particular fa<fte ; or elfe an ufurped Judgement and Juftification: For they are not conftituted our J udges by God : And therefore we may fay with 'Paul, It ua fmall thing with me to be judge 1 oj : you , or of mans Judgement : And fo a (mall thing to be Juftified by men from the Ac-cufations of the Law of God.

But the Juftification in fames, is of greater moment: as appeares in

the

** r

Works, opened. 295-

the Text. For, .1. Ic- isfuchasfal-Yation dependech on; v<J$J4* j 2. It is men as followeth oncly a It* j ving Faith i but the world may as j well Juftifieuswkn we halre no ; Faith at ail.

1 therefor* affirms, x. The! World is no lawfull Judge cf our Rigrrteoufitefe before God, or in reference to rite Law of Cod* i. Nei-tboc aw tJjfcy.coiD|KKnt or capabk

f 1 Bnyn c«itak»>t»» .frnwria of oui

j Righteoulhefs or unrighteoufneflfe.

I 3.' If they could j yet Works are So

j certain medium, or evideoccAVhere-

! by -the ..world can know ur to be

Righteous : For there Is no outward'

work which an Hypocrite may not

perform: and inward works they

, cannot difcern « nor yet the princi-

ijples from which, not the ends to

i;whkh our work* proceed and are

'intended. There is as much need of

a divine heart-fearching -knowledge,

to. difceru the fincerity of Works, as

j of Faith it felf. Stf that if it be not

Tht r Natxre of

certain, that the Text fpeaks of Ju-ftificatton before God, I fcarce know what to be certain of.

Once more: i. Was Abraham juftified before men lor a fecret Action ? 2. Or for fuch an Adion as the killing of his onely Son would have been ? 3. Was not he the juftifier here, who was the imputer of Righteoufnefs ? But God was the impntcr of Righteoufaefc, v*rf.z$. therefore God was the Juftifier. So I leave that interpretation to fleep.

2. That it is the Perfon and not his Faith onely, which is here faid to be juftified by Works, is as plain in the Text almoft as can be fpoken, Verf. 21. Abraham (not his faith) is faid faid. to be juftified by Works. Verf. 24. By Works [a man] is juftified : If by [a man] were meant, \jt mans Faith] then it would run thus fenccleffely : By Works a mans Faith is juftified, and not by Faith onely, fo'Ferf. 25*

3. For Mr. Fembhs interpretation, That by [Works J is meant \a Working Faith."3 ■

I Anfwer ? I dare not teach the holy Ghoft to fpeak ; nor force the Scripture; nor raife an exposition fo far from the plain importance of the words, without apparent necefliry: But here is not the leaft necdfitie : There being not the leaft inconveni-ence,that 1 know of,in affirming Justification by Works,in the fore-explained fence. Men fektem are bold with Scripture,in forcing it;But they are firft bol J with Conference in forcing it.If it were but fome onePhrafe diflbnant from the ordinary language of Scripture, I (houldnot doubt but-it muft be reduced to ;the reft. But when it is the very fcope of a Chap-ter,in plain and frequent expreflions, j no whit diflbnant from any other Scripture; I think he that may ft> wreftit, as to make it unfay what it faith, may as well make him a Creed of his own, let the Scripture fay what k will to the contrary: O 5 what j

what is this but with the Papifts to make the Scripture a Nofe of Wax. ? If Saint James {peak it To oft over and over ; that Juftification is by works, and not by Faith onely, I will fee more caufe before I deny it; or fay, he meanes a Working Faith,

If he fo underftand \_a Working FaitH] as that it juftifcth principally as Faith,and lefle principally as Wor-: king, then I fhculd not differ from him,only I ftiould think the Scripture ! | Phrafe is more fafe and more proper^; ! But he underftandeth it according to : that common alTertion & expofition, that Fides folum juftifaat, non ah-tcm fides fola : Faith alone juftifieth, but not that faith which is alone.The queftion therfore is,Whether Works do concur with Faith (as part of.the Condition) in the very bufinttfe of J unifying ? or whether, they are onely Concomitants to that Faith which efTecTreth the bufinefs without their afliftance ? The ground of the miftakclyeth here : They fir ft afcribe too much to Faith i and then becaufe

that

*;

that niminm which they give to' Faith, is not found agreeable to W6rks,therefore they conclude, that we are not juftifiect by works at ail. They think that Faith is an 'Infiru-i mentall efficient caufe of Justification ( which that properly it is not, I have proved before :) when if they underftood that it juftifleth but 2.$ a Cattfa fine qua non, or condition, they would eafily yeeld, that Works do fo too. I will not fay thetfore that Works do effectually produce our Juft'ificatiori $ For faith doth not fo: Nor that they juftifie astqiiall parts of the condition : For faith is the principall. But that they juftifie as the fecondary iefle-pf incipall part of the Condition, fnot onely proving our 1 aich to be found, but them-felves being in the Obligation as wel as Faith, *id juftifying in the fame kind of caufaHty or procurement as Faithjthpughnot in equality with it J I prove thus : 1. When it is faid that we are ffuftified bj fP'pr^sj the word [^D im^yeth more then

an Idle concomitancy: If they only ftood by,whileFaithdoth all,it could not be faid, that we are Juftified by Works.

2. When the Apoftle faith [Bj Works, and not Bj Faith one If} he plainly makes them concomitant in procurement, or in that kind of cau-fahty which they have : Efpecially, feeing he faith not, as he is commonly interpreted, [not By Faith which is alone^} but [not, by Faith^n/y^},

3. Therefore he fairh,that [Faith is dead being alone ,] Becaute it is dead as to the ufe and puipofe of Ju-ftifying : for in k ftir it hath a life according to ks quality ftilL This appeares from his comparifon in the former verfe, i <5. that this is the deathhefpeaksof. And fo Works make Faith alive, as to the attakv ment of its end of Juftification.

4. The Analyfis which "Fifcator and Pemblegive, contradi&eth not this Affertioa. If in ftead of [a Working Faith"} they will but keep

the

I. ' I ,*, U. . M I II ■ II . . II—.—

the Apoftles own words, I (hall a-gree to moft of their Analyfis. (Though conclufious drawn from, the Analyfis are often weak, it is fo j eafie for every man to feigne an A-I nalyfis fuited to his ends, ) onefy' the explication of the 22. verf. they! f€em to fatle in. For when the Apo- ( file faith,that Faith did, evvizyu to// j %ty@-avn, work in and with his works, it clearly aimeth atTuch a working in, and with, as maketh them conjunct in the work ofjuftify-ing .• And when he faith that f Faith was made perfeEl by Works ,' J it iS not (as they and others inrerpreOon-lyamanifefting to be perfect. But as the habit is perfected in its Ads, becaufc they are the end to which it tendethjAnd as Marriage is perfected per congrefytm & froereaticnem: or anyGovenant when its conditions are 1 performed. Faith alone is not the en- .1 tire perfect Condition of the New \ Covenant: but Faith with Repentance and fincereObedience,is; A condemned Gally-flave being Redeemed,

1

$02r The Nature of

ed, is to have bis deliverance upon' condition than he take his Redeemer for his Mafter: This'doth fo directly imply, that he mull: obey him,that his conditions are not perfectly fulfilled, except he do obey him as his Mafter: And fo taking him for his Redeemer and Mafter, and obeying him as -his Mafter, do in the fame kind procure his continued freedom. Indeed his meer promife and confent doth procure his firft deliverance,but not the continuance of it. So I ac-knowledg, that the very firft point of Justification is by Faith alone, without either the concomitancy or co-operation of Works; for they canuot be performed in an inftant: But the continuance and accomplishment of Juftihcarion is not without thejoynt procurement of obedience. Asa woman is made a mans wife, and inflated in all that he hath, upon meet acceptance, confent, and. corf-traces * becaufe conjugal ad ions, aF-fcdions;the forfaking of others, &c. are iroplyed in the Covenant, and

ex-

expreflfed as neceffary for the future; therefore if there be no conjugal actions, afFe<fhons,or fidelity follow, the Covenant is not performed, nor (hall the woman enjoy the benefits expected. It is To here, efpecially feeing Chrift may di£eftate the viola-ters of his Covenant at pleafure.

This (heweth us how to aufwer the Objections of fome : r. Say they, Abrahams With was perfect long before. Anf. Not as it is a fulfilling of the Covenants Condition, which alfo requireth its acting by Obedience.

2. Abraham (fay they J was jufti-fied long before Ifaac was offered, therefore that could be but a mant-feftingofit. Anfw. Juftification is a continued Act. God is ftill juftn fying, and the Gofpel ft ill justifying. Abrahams Justification was not ended before. J

3. Mr Pemble thinks, that* as-a I man cannot be faid [to live by Kea-| fon J though he may be faid [[to live j by a reafonable ioul,3 anc * as a plant

liveth

304" The 'Nature iff

livethnot^er augment ationem, & Jt per animam attttricem: So we may be faid to be justified by #»j working Faith, but not by Works. I Anfw. Both Speeches are pre* per. And his Simile doth not fquare or fuit with the Cafe in hand : For Juftifying is an extrinfecaU cenfe-quentj or product of Faith, and no proper t Med at all : Much leffe an effect flowing from its own formal effence,as the life of a man doth from a Reafonable fouk, and the life of a Plant from a Vegetative. I hope it may be faid properly enough, that a Servant doth his w r ork, and pleafeth his Mailer, by Reafon, as well as by a reafonable foul : And that a Plant dothpleafe the Gardiner by augmentation, as well as per anlmam auttriccm. So that a man pleafeth God, and is juftifiedby fincere Obedience , as well as by a> working Faith.

$. How this difTereth from the PapiteDodrineJriecdnot ctli any

Schc-

Scholarwho hath read their writing?* 1. They take Juftifying for Sanctifying : fa doe not I. 2. They quite overthrow and deny themoft reall difference betwixt the Old Covenant and the New : and make them in a manner all one : But I build this Exposition and Doctrine, chiefely upon the cleare differencing and opening of the Covenants. 3. When they fay, We arc Juftify-ed by Works of theGofpef* they mean only, that we are fan&ified by Works that follow Faith, and are bellowed by Grace, they meriting or* inherent jufticc at Gods hands. In a word, there is fcarce any one Doclrin, wherin even their molt learned Schoolmen are more fottifh-ly ignorant then in this of Juftificati-on: fo that when you have read them with profit and delight on fome other fubjeds ; when they come to this, you would pitty them, and admire their ignorance.

They take our Works to be part of our Legall Righteoufnefs: I take •

them <

i them not to be the {maHeft/portion | of it.' Bttf onelya£ar£ofaurE.van-j geiicall Righteoufnefs $ or of the ! Condition upon which Chrifts Righ* \ teotifnefs (hall be ours.

1

5« Bus whsc difference is ttee. betwhtf it indthtlStcmia* Dodrin cf Justification ? ^»/w. In foine ;iu$nsttipuchs/^c*>w«(/^- is but $

thc^wafeitte headofiny -jta that: faith not afcthey* Mr. trottoHis*' Smman, !and Mr. Bradfoaw:, and; ■■Mr*X?Vtftf^van<J Mr. Goodwin 3 ond why not Pifcaton, Rawitt r i&c*. if fame zealous Divines know what Swiwia*ifme> is. But . I had rather ftudy what is Scripture*truth, then, what is Socimamjma : I doe not thinke that Fmftw was .fo Infau* 'fttu$a&xo hcl4 nothing true : That which he held according tro Scripture is not Socintanifme . For my parr, I have read little of their writings; but that little gave ma enougfy and

made

JVorks opened* $07

made me caflr them away with abhorrence. In a word ;. The So-cinians acknowledge not that Chrift had fatisfied the Law for us; and conftqnently is none of our- Le-gallRighceoufnefe: but oneiy hatfr fet us a copy to write after, and- is become our patteme, and that we arejuftiried oy following him as a-Qpeaine and guide to heaven ** And fo alt our proper Rightebttftaeft is in this obedience. MoftsKCurfedDo-cTrine ! So ferre am I from this, that I fay, The Righteoufnefs which we muft plead againft the Lawes accusations, is not one grain of it in our Faith or Works : but all out of. us in Chrifts fatisfaclion. Onely our Faith, Repentance, and fincere Obe-dience, are the Conditions upoai which which we muft partake of the former. And yet fuch Conditions' as Chrift worketh in us freely by his Spirit..

6. Laftly, let us fee whether St.

Faul\

jo8 The Nature of

Paui } ot any other Scripture do contract this. And, for my part,I know not one word in the Bible that hath any ftrong appearance of Contradiction to it. The ufuall places quoted are thefe, Rom. 3.28.^ 4.2. 3.14. 15.16. GaL 2. 16. & 3. 21. 22, Ephef. 2. 8.9. 'Phil. 3. 8. p. In all which, and all other the like places, you fliali eafily perceive, r. That the Apoftles difpute is upon this que-ftion, What is the Righteoufncfs which we muft plead againft the Ac-cufation of the Law ? or by which we are juftified as the proper Righ-teoufneffe of that Law ? And this he well concludeth, is neither Works nor Faith. But the Righteoufnefle which is by Faith; that is, Chrifts Righteoufneffe.

But now St. fames his queftion is, What is the Condition of our Jufti-fication by this Righteonfnefs of Chrift ? Whether Faith onely? or Works alfo ?

2. tpaul doth either in expreffe words, or in the fence and fcope of

his

his fpeech, excise onely the works of the Law,that is,the fulfilling of the Conditions of thetaw our felve&But never the fulfilling of the Gofpel-Conditions that we may have part in Chrift. Indeed, if a man fhonld obey the Commands of the Gofpel, with a Legal intent, that it might be a Righteoufnefle conformi to the Law of Works; this Obedience is not Evangelical, but Lcgall obedience : For the forme giveth the name.

3. Paul doth by the word £ Faith 3 efpecialiy direct your thoughts to Chrift beleeved in; For to be juftified by Chrift ; and to be juftified by receiving Chrift, is with him all one,

4, And when he doth mention Faith as the Condition, he alwaics implyeth obedience to Chrift. Therefore ^BcUeving^ and \j>ht)ing the Gojpel, 3 are put for the .two Summaries of the whole Conditions. The next will cleare this.

Tkfe

I

Thefis 77,

THatVte arejufiified by fine ere obedience to Chrift, as the fe-j c'ondary part of the Condition of our j fftfilfia r ion' 3 is evident alfo from I tfj^/e? following Scriptures. Match. ; 12. '37. Mar. it. 2$. 26. Luk. 6. I 37. Mat6.12.14. 15, ijoh.1.9. A& 8.22. Aft. 3. 19. & 22. 16. I 1 Pet. 4.18. Rom. 6.16. 1 Pet.i. L2. 22.."

Thefis 78.

OVr fuR Juftifkdtion, and our everlafting Salvation have \ the fame Conditions on our part, But fincere Obedience is without nil doubt j .a Condition of our Sal-\ vatidn ; therefore alfo of our fu-\ftifi'cation*

JExpliea-

Explication*

THe Antecedent is manifefr, in that'Scripture maketh Faith a Condition of-'bothJuftification and Salvation: andfo it doth Obedience alio-, asis before expla ined. Therefore we are juftified, that we may be faved. It would be as derogatory to Chrifts Righteoufnefs,if webe faved by wofks, as if we be juftified by them. Neither is there any way to the former but-by the latter. That which a man is 'juftifled by, he is laved by. Thdugh Cloriflcation be an adding of a grenter happinefle'»then we loft ; and fo juftification is not enough thereto : Yet on our part, they have the fame Conditions.

Yet here I fay ftill, [pur full Jts-

j}ificatien r \beczufe i as I have fhew-

\ ed, ourfirft pofteflion of it is upon \

! our meer Faich or Contract with j

Chrift. But I think our Glorificati- I

on will be acknowledged to have I

the \

=*>

the fame Conditions with our finall Juftification at the batre or Chrift. And why not to our entire continued juftification on earth ? You may Object. Perfeverance is a condition of our Glorification ; but not of our juftification here. I Anfwer, i. Perfeverance is nothing but the fame Conditions pcrfevering. 2. As the fincerity of Faith is requifite to our firft pofleflion of Juftification; fo the perfeverance of Fai h is the Condition of perfevering ] uftificatt-on. See Hebr, 3.14,

2. That Obedience is a Condition of our Salvation is undoubted, He fa. 5. 9. Chrift is tfee Author of eternall Salvation to all them that obey him; fo fully, Rom* 2. 7. 8.9. 10. Revel. 22.14. Biejfed are they that doe his commandements, that they may have Right to the tree of Life, and may enter in by the Gates into the Qit^\ And hath that no hand in their juftification, which giveth them right to the tree of Life ? Jam. 1. 22. 23. 24. 25. Mat. 5. from

the

, : 1— . ,

the i. to the 13. efpecially the 19. 20. Mat, 7. 13. 21. 23. 24. with a multitude the like. Befides ail thofc under Pofiu 22. which prove a per-fonali Righteoufneffe, fo called from the conformity to the Gofpel. See £«*(.£, 4.13. ___ —i ' 1

Thefis 79.

T His Doctrine is no whit derogatory to £hrifi and his Rtgh-teoufneffe : For -he %hat afcrtisth to Faith or Obedience no part of that \X>ark^ which belongeth to Chrifts fatisfaBory Right eonfnejfe, doth not derogate ,i n that^ from that Right e-oufnejfe. But he that maketh Faith and. Obdience to Chrifi, to be onely the. fulfilling of the Conditions of the New: Covenant y and fo to be enelj Conditions of jufiification by him 9 doth give them no part of the w&\of ht6 Right eoufnejfe • Sce-ing he came not to fulfil the Goff tl % but the Law.

T Ixpli-

Explication.

-

(Have proved "this before, Vtfiu 10. I fhall here onely Anfwer fome objections. Ob'pcl. ,i. Chrift was baptized becaufe he mail: fulfill all Righteoafnefs : Put that was no part of theTpsgail Righteoufnefs. Anfw. The Priefts were to be wafli-ed when they ehtred upon their office : There were many Ceremonious walkings then in force : Either Chrifts Biptifme Avas legall ; or elfe by ^fulfilling Rightemfneffe ] muft needs be meant, The fulfilling all the works of his own office ; whereof one was;, the inftitutingx>f Church Ordinances: land he thought meet to inftitute this by Example as Well as Do&rine. He that will af-feme, that Chiift hath fulfilled E-vangdicaHlVighfe^fheffe for us, as well as D^gall,-<hall overthrow the office of Chrift, and the nature of Chriftianity. Objett. 2. Hv*£rad-

Jhawe,

Jhawe, and moft others fay, That he received the Sacrament, of his Supper. An fa. Wholly without book; I beleeve not that ever he did it : for the Scripture no where fpeaks it : And many abfurd conlequenas would hardly be avoided ; All the probability for it, is in thofe words, / toi/I drink, no more of the fruit tf &c. Anfw* 1. That may be a Reafon why he would not drink now; and doth not neceffarily imply that he did. 2. But clearlv,£*^ who fpeaketh difti&ly of the two Cups ( which the other do not J doth apply, and fubjoyn thefe words to the fir ft Cup, which was before the Sacramentall.

2. If it were granted, that Chrift did receive the Sacrament; yet he never did it as an obediential Acl: to his own Gofpel precepts ? Did he obey a Law not yet made / or his own Law, and fo obey himfelf ? Much lefTe did heperformeit as a part of the New Covenant Condition on our part. But as a Lawgiver, and P 2 not

gi6 The Nature of

not an Obeyer thereof: It was a Law-making Adion, (if any fuch had been. )

ObjeEl. If fincere obedience be a pirt of the Condition, then what ' perplexities will it caft us into to finde out, when our obedience is fin-cere? Anjw. i. This difficulty a-rifeth alfo, if we make it but the Condition of our Salvation : and yet few (but Antinomians) will deny that. 2. Why is ft not as hard to difcern the fincerity of faith as of o-bedience? 3. Obedience is then fincere, when Chrift is cordially taken for our onely Lord; and when his Word is our Law, and the main defire and endeavor is to pleafe him; and though through prevalency of the fiefti we (lip into fin, yet the prevailing part of our will is againft it, and we would not change our Lord for all the world.

Mr Saltmarfb thinketh, that be-caufe we have fo much Sin with

our Obedience, all Beleevers have caufe to fufpecT: it; and fo cannot conclude J unification from it. As if fincerity might not (land with infirmity ! Or could not be difcerned where there is any remaining imperfection ! Might not Taul conclude of the fincerity of his Wiliingnefs to obey Chrift, becaufe he did the evil which he would not? And might he not conclude his Justification from that Wiliingnefs to obey? Read Ball of the Covenant, chip. 11.

Thefis8o,

rO conclude : It is moft clear in the Scripture, and bejond all difpute, that our Atlual, mofi proper, compleat ' Jujfification , at the great Judgment, will be according to our Works, and to Vihat we have doneinfiefi, whether CJood or Evil: which can be nd othersife then as it was the Condition, of that

P 3 jHfti

faftification. Andfo Chrijl^at that great Afli&e, Will not give his bare Will of Pffrpofe y as the Reafon of h^ proceedings : but as he governed by a Law ;Jo he Will judg by a Law : and will then give the Reafon of his Publiqtte Sentence from mens keeping or breaking the Conditions of his Covenant; that fo the mouths of all may be flopped^ and the equity of his Judgment may be manifefi to aH\and that he may there {hewforth his hatred to the fins, and not onely to the per font of the Condemned • and his Love to the Obedience and not onely to the perfons of the Jufiified.

Sxplicationl

HEre I have thefe things to prove: i. That the Juftify-ing Sentence fliallpafs according to Works, as well as Faith* 2. That the Reafon is, becaufe they are parts of the Condition.

For

Worh^ opened. gig

For the flrft, fee Mt*<z£* 21,23

Well done , good And faithful fer~ vant! TboH haft been faithful over a few things ; / will makg thee fH» ler aver many things: Enter th*H into"the joy of thy Lord. And m©ft plain is that From the mouth of the j Judg him&lf, defenbittg the orckr of theproceft at that day, Matty. 54,55, Come ye Bit fed! inherit the Kivgdoin\y ore. [_Fsr} I was hm~ \ py&eJ$o W.ii.uiyJVkowitSmt\ rtfpeti. of perfons judetb according to every mans ttw^So 2 Cor.^aoWc mnft all appear before the Judgment feat of Chrift, that every one may receive the things done in his body? according to that he hath done, whether good or bad. So i^. 20.12,13. They ftere judged everg man accor* ding to his Works. Heb.l^.lj»Thil. 4. 17. Mat. 12. 36. &c.- But this is evident already.

2. As iris beyond doubt that Chrift will then juftine men accord- P 4 in g 1

! ng to their Works: So that this is not onely to difcover the Gncerity of their Faith, is as evident] but that it is alfo, as they are parts of that E-vangeiical Righteoufnefs which is the Condition of their Justification. i. The very phrafes of the Text import as much, Adat.2$.2i,2i. Well done good and faithful ferv ant y &e* Mat -.25. 34, 35. [_for2 I Was hungry,&c. And in the reft [According] to their Work*. Can any more be faid of Faith, then that we are jnftified or judged to Life, both [Tor]it, and (^accordingto] it?

2. If Works be not then confider-ed as part of the Condition ; how then? t. Not as the Righteoufnefs which the Law requireth: For fo fliall no man Jiving be juftified in the fight of God* Row. 3.20. P/rf.143.2. 2. Not a&ameer fign whereby God doth difcern mens faith: For he feeth it immediately and needeth no fign. 3. Not as a meer fign to fatif-fie the juftified perfon himielf: For 1. There is no fuch intimation in

the

the Text. 2. Then itfhould be no further ufeful then men remain doubtful of their fincerity. 3. The godly then know the fincerity of their Faith. 4. Neither is the. bufi-nefs of that Day, to fatisrie the doubr ting about the fincerity of their; Faith, by Arguments drawn from' their former works: But to judg ; and juftitie them, and fo put therrir out of doubt by the Sentence, and; by their Glory.

4. But the common opinion is\ That it is to fatisrie the condemned ; World of the fincerity of the Faith of the godly. But this cannot ftand with the Truth : For 1. It is clearly exprefled a ground or reafon of the Sentence. 2. And to the Confola-1 tion and Juftificatbn of the jtiftified: I and not to the fatisfa&ion or conviction of others bnely or chiefly.

3. The poor world will have fomewhat ~tlfe to take up their thoughts, as the Text fli^weth; to wit,the excufing of the (in for which they are condemned themfelves, 4^.25.44. P 5 4.It

4. It feemeth that drift doth in the Text call them \_Righteom~\ in reference to this perfonS Evangelical Righteoufnefs mentioned in their Jultifying Sentence, verf.46. [The Righteous into life Eternal J]

5. If Gods Juftice engage him, not to forget their work and labor of Love, H(b. 6. 10,11,12. If the dead in Chrift are bklled, becaufe their Works follow them, Rev. 14. t 3» If in every Nation, he that fear-eth God and worketh Righteouihes be Accepted of him, ^#.10.3$. If men fhalireap the fruit of well-doing in due time x GaI.6.j } 8,9. If Mini-Ilersfave thanfelves in taking tieed to themklves and to doc1:rine,i Tim, 4.16. If he that doth Righteoufnefs isrighteous, 1 Job. 3.7. Ifwhatfoe-vcr good thing any man doth> the fame he fhall receive of the Lord, JEpkef.6.%. If hearing and doing be building on a Rock, Mat.j. 24. If the doers of Gods Will be the mo-

j triers* fillers, and brothers of Chrift, i Mat, iz.^o^c. Then the mention

of

* ■ —___—

of thefe works at judgements more then to fignifie their fincerity to the condemned world.

6. If Chrift mention thefe Works ro convince the world, r. Either itmuftbebyhis own Teftimonyof thefe works, that they are fincere evidences of a fincere Faith. 2. Or elfe by the difcovery -which the works doe make themfelvcs. But I. Chrift may teftifie of their faith immediatly as well. 2. Works are no certain fignes of Faith to any ftander-by, who knoweth not whe-the Works themfelvcs are fincere, or not. See more under the 76. Po-

fmo;/t>

If any fay, that it is to filence the Accufation of Satan, that thefe works arc mentioned at judgement ; The fame Anwer will ferve, as to the laft. Bolides, Scripture giveth us no intimation of any fuch accufation; but onely the managing the Laws Accufation. But if he fhould Accufe us falfely of Hypocrifie, as he did Job \ It muft be onely Gods ^i—-- heart-

'324 The Nature of

heart-fearching knowledg of our fin-cerity that can clearc us.

Yet do I not deny in all this, but that Works are effeds of Faith, 2nd to the perfon himfelf, who knoweth their fincerity, they may be fome Argument of the fincerity of Faith, and God will vindicate his peoples Righ-

l teoufnefs before all, and be admtred iq them. But his JuftirTcation primarily refpecleth the Law, and his own Juftice, and the Righteoufnefs and Salvation-of the Juftified,. and

t but remotely' the beholders.

I __ ..

Let me conclude with two or three cautionary Qna*res concerning the' inconvenience of the contrary doctrine.

1 Qu. Doth it not needk fly con-ftrainmen towreft moft plain and frequent expreffions of Scripture ?

2 £}m. Doth it not uphold that dangerous pillar of ihe Antinomian Do&rine,. That wemuft not work or perform our duties for Life and

Sal-

Salvation; but only from Life and Salvation : That we muft -not make the attaining of J unification or Salvation an end of our Endeavors, but obey in thankfuinefs only, becaufe we are faved and juftifie-d? A do&rine which I have elfewhere confuted ; and if it were reduced to prafttfeby all that hold it, (as I hope it is not,; would undoubtedly damn them: For he that feeksnot, and thatftriveth not to entcr,fhall never enter. Now if good Works, or fincere Obedience to Chrift our Lord, be no part of the Condition of our full Juftification and Salvation, Who will ufe them to that end ? For how it can procure J unification as a Means, and not by way of Conditional cannot conceive. 3 «2^. Whether this doctrine doth not'tend to drive Obedience out of the world ? For if men do once beleeve, that it is not fo much asa part of the Condition of their Judication, will it not much tend to relax their diligence ? I know meer love and thankfuinefs fhould be

enough;

enough : And fo it will, when all our ends are attained in our Ultimate End; then we fhall aft for thefe ends no more: we (hall have nothing to do but to love, and joy,and praife, and be thankful; but that it is not yet. Sure, as God hath given us the affections of Fear, and Dcfire, and Hope, and fo Care, fo he would have us life them for the attainment of our great Ends. Therefore he that taketh down but one of all our Motives to Obedience, he helps to deftroy Obedience it ft If, feeing we have need of every Motive that Cod hath left us.

4 Qu. Doth it not much confirm the world in their foul-cozening Faith f Sure that Faith which is by many thought to juftifie, is it that our people do al molt eafily embrace, that is, the receiving of Chriit for their Saviour, and expecting Pardon and Salvation by him, but not with-all receiving him for their Lord and King, nor delivering up themfelvcs to be ruled by him. I meet not with -

one,

Works opened. %ij

one, but is refolved in fuch a Faith, till it be overthrown by teaching them better. They would all truft Chrift for the faving of their fouls, and that without diflembling, for ought any man can difcern: Are all thefe men juftifled ? You will fay, They do it not fincerely. Anf. There is evident a (incerity oppollte todif-fimulation: But a Moral or Theological fmcerity there is not; Why is that ? but becaufc they take but half of Chrift, Let any Minifter but try his ungodly people, whether they will not all be perfwaded very eafily to beleeve that Chrift will pardon them and fave them, arid to expecl Juftifkation from him alone? But whether it be not the hardeft thing in the worjd, to perfwade them really to take him for their Lord, and his Word for their Law, and to endeavor faithful obedience accordingly ? Surely the eafinefs of the former, and the difficulty of the latter, feem-eth to tell us that it is a fpiritual, excellent, neceflary part of juftifying

Faitlv

Faith,to accept unfeignedly of Chrift j for our. Governor, and that part which the world among us will mod hardly yeeld to, and therefore hath more need to be preached then the other. (Though Come think thac nothing is preaching Chrift,but preaching htm as a pardoning, juftifying Savior. )Indeed among theTurks or In-dians,that entertain not theGofpdjt is as neceflary to preach hispardoning Office, yea and the verity of his Natures and CommiiTion:Therefore the Apoftles when they preached to J ews orPagans,did firft&chitfly teach then; the Perfon and Offices of Chrift, and the great benefits which they might receive by him-.but when they preach (as fames) to ProfeiTors of the Chri-ftian Faith, they chiefly urge them, to itrive to enter, to fight, that they may conquer, fo to run that they may obtain to lay violent hands upon the Kingdom,and take it by force, and to be unwearyed in laborious o-bedience to Chrift their Lord; to be ftedfaft, immoveable, always a-

bounding

bounding in the Work of the Lord, forafmuch as they know their labour is not in vain in the Lord.

5. Laftly, Is not this excluding of (ince.re Obtdiencefromjuftification, the great ft umbhng block of Papifts? and that which hath had a great hand in turning many learned men from theProteftantReligion to Popery? When they fee the language of Scripture in the forecked places fo plain to the contrary : When JllyricHt , 6 latins, AmfderfuSy&c.Qx&X account it a herefie in George Major, to fay, That good Works are necefTary to Salvation : And when (if Melchior Adam pis fay true) eo dementia & impietatis vtntnm erat, ut non du-bitartnt quidam h<ec axiomata pro-fugnare ; Bona of era noafunt ne-etjJArja dd faltttem: Bona opera_ ojjiciunt falnti ; Nova cbedientia non eft necejfaria. When even Me-Unfthons credit is blafted, for being too great a friend to good Works, though he afcribe not to them the kail part of the Work or Office of

Chrift I

Chrift: And wheri to Ms day many Antinomian Teachers, who are magnified as the only Preachers of Free Grace, do aflfert and proclaim , That there is no more required to the perfect irrevocable joftification of the vikft Murderer or Whoremafter, but to beleeve that he is juftified, or to be perfwadfd that God loveth him. And when fuchs Edokasthat, MtdthtMar-rfi»of Moderne Divinity, can Have fo many applauding Epiftles of fuch Divines; when the Doctrine of it is, That we muft not Acl: for jufti-fication or falvation; but onely in thankfulnefs for it: contrary to the main drift of the Scripture, which fopreflethmen to pray for pardon, and to pardon others, that they may receive pardon themfelves: and to ftrive to enter, and run that they may obtain, and doe Chrifts Corn-dements that they may have right to the Tree of life, and enter in by the

'gate into the City, Revel. 22. 14.

I Doe thefe men thinke that we are

perfect-

perfectly juftifyed arid faved already? before the abfolving fentence at the great TribunaU ,• or the poffeflion of the Kingdome, for which we wait in Hope ? Indeed when we have that perfect fakation, we {hall not need to feek it, or labour to attain it; but mult everlaftingly be thank-full to him that hath ourchafed it, and to him that hath oeftowed it., But in the mean time, he that feek-ethnec, (hall riot find, and he that runnesnoc (hall not obtaia : No, nor all that feek and run neither, Luk. 1 j. 24. Lttks 12. 31. z Tim, 2.5.

This Do&rine was one that helped to turn off Grotitu to Caffandrian Popery; See Grotii votum, Pag.ii. 22.23.115. And was offenfive to MelanEhhen, Bucer, and other Mo-derateDivinesof our own.And al ari-feth hence.That men underftand not the difference betwixt Chrifts part of the work, which he performeth himfelf, and that which he requireth & enableth us to perform:nor know

the y|

! they, that true juftifying Faith doth at once receive Chrift, both as Lord and Saviour; and that (incere Obc dience to Chrift, is part of the Condition ot the New Covenant. Works (or a purpofe to walke with God J (faith Mr. Ball on the Covenant pag.73.) doejuftifieas the Paflive qualification qf the fubjecT: capable of Juftification. See Calvin on Luke 1.6. The common affertion t)\m[That goodfVorks do follow Jh-fttfication^ but not go before it ] muftbe underftood, or it is felfe, viz,. Adtuall obedience goeth not before the firft moment of Justification, But yet it is as true, 1. That the taking of Chrift for our Lord, and fo delivering up our {elves to his Government (which is the fubjec^i-on of the heart, and refolution for further obedience, and indeed an ef-fentiall part of Faith,) doth in order of nature goe before our firft juftifi-; fixation. 3. That Acluafl Obedi-I encefas part of the Condition) doth in order of Nature eoe before our

Jufti-

Works opened, jjj

juftificacion as continued and conformed. For chough our Marriagtcon-traft with Chrift doe give us tfye firft pollefllon,yet it is theMarriage faith* fuiiie.s and duties,which muft continue that pofTcflion. 3. That perfeve-ranee in faithful obedience doth both in nature and time go before our full, compleatandfinalljuftification; and that as part of the Condition of obtaining it. If we walkjn the light , as he is in the light ^ we h^ve fellonvjhif one With another,and the blood offe-fits ChriB his Son cLcanfeth us from • all fin, 1 Joh,l.7..So'7/^. 1.16.17. ; I %.\9.fV4fbjouymakejoucltAn*pHt I away the evil of your doingsy ceafe to do evil; learne to doe well^crG.Come \ now^rc. though your (ins fa a£.fe*r r i let,they fhal be as White asfnow^ and 1 though they be red like crirnfoflythey fhal be like wool£o E^ekt 3 ?. 14.15, i <5. #• 18. 21. 22. Neither kt any objecl 3 that this is the Law of works: For certainly that hath no promifes of forgivenefle : And though the

difcove-

jj4 The Nature of

difcbveries of the way of Jufitfica-on be delivered in the old Tefta-rbeht, in a more dark and Legal language then in the New; yet not in termes contradictory to the truth in the New Teftament. Thus you may fee, in what fence it is that Chrtft will judge men according to their Works: and will fay, Come ye blef-feA of my Father, inherit the king-dome, &c.For I "toas hungry, and ye fed me, &c. Well done, good and faithfull Servant, thou haft been faithful! in few things ; I Will make thee Ruler over many things: Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord, Matth. 25.

For being made ferfetl, he be-became the Author of Eternal! falvation to all them that obey him, Hebr.5. 9. Of-whom it (hall be ♦(aid, when they are glorified with him : Theje are: they that come out of great, tribulation,: and have iy toa(hed their robes in the blood of the Lamb e, ad made them white: Therefore are they before the

throne

throne of god, and ferve him day and night in hi* temple ; and he that fttteth on the throne Jhall dwell among them, Revel. 7.14.15. To whom be Glory for ever, Ameny

REader, becaufe an ex-ad: Index would contain a great part of the Book,! (hall omit it: and inftead of it, I here lay thee down lome of the chief Diftin&ions, upon which this Difcourfe de-peildcth. defirirtgthecto underftand them, and keep them in memory.

Youmuft diftinguift,

i; T> Btmxt Gods Decretive or

LJPtfrpoftng mil : And his

Legiflative or ^Preceptive Will.

The i, is his Determining of E-

J2^ vents.

vents. The a. of 'Dntj and Re-Ward.

2. Betwixt 1. the Covenant or Law of fVdr\s, Which faith, Obey perfedly, and Live; or fin,and Dye. 2. And the Covenant or Law of Grave, which faith, Eeleeve, and be faved 5 &c

3. Betwixt the two parts of each Covenant ; viz. 1. The primary, Sfcovering the djtty in Precepts,

I and prohibiting the Sin. 2. The fe-ainJary, difcovering the Rewards and Penalties, in Promifes and Thref.tnings. .

4. Betwixt a two-fold Righteoufnes . of one and the fame Covenant. 1. Of perfeCi Obedience, or performance of the Condition. 2. Of Offering, or fatisfallien for difobedience, or nonperformance ,Which maketh the'Law to have nothing againfi hs, though WedifobeyeL See-Vtmhk. of- Jufti-fcation,^^.!. Our Legal Right e-oufnes is ofthttUfcfort^uoi of the firft. 'Both thefe forts of Righteouf* nefs are not poffible to be found in a- \

v\

nj one perfon^except Chrifl, who had the former Righteoufnefs as his own, (incommunicable to us in that form} The 2. he had for ns> m he was by imputation a firmer: And Jo we have it in i or by him. Mark this.

5. Betwixt two kinds of Righteoufnefs, fuitable to the two Covenants and their Conditions. 1. Legall Righteoufnefs, Which k onr Conformity, or fatisfall ion to the Law. a. And Evangelical Righteoufnefs, which is our Conformity to the new Covenant, Note, that 1. Every Chriftian muft have both thefe. 2. That Qur Legal righteoufnefs is onefy that of Sat if all ton : but our Evangelical is only that of Obedience, or performance of the Condition, 3. That our Legal Righteoufnefs it all Without us in Chrifi, the other in ourfelves,

6. Betwixt Evangelicall Righteoufnefs, improprrly fo called ,viz. be-becaufe the Gojpel doth reveale and offer it. This u our Legal righteoufnefs in Chrift. 2. And Bvangc-

lical right etxfaefs properly fo culled viz. Becaufe the ne^ Covenant is the Rule to which it is conformed. This is our performance of the new Covenants Conditions*

7. Betwixt the Life or Reward in the firfi Covenant: viz. Adams paradije vsippinefs. 2. And the Life ofthefecond Covenanty Which //, £-tcrnal glory in heaven.

8. Betwixt the death or curfe of the old Covenant,which U oppofite to its reward: This onely Was laid 01$ Chrift 3 and is due to Infants by na-ttire. 2. And the death of the J econd Covenant , oppofite to its life , called thefecond death t & farforer puniib-ment.This finaU nnbeleevers ftffer.

9. Betwixt fins againft the firft Covenant : For thefe Chrift died. 2. And fins againfi the fecond Covenant ; For thefe he dyed not.

I o. Betwixt finning againfi Chrift andtheGofpel, as the objetl of our fin only: So Chrift died for them. 2. And finning again ft the new Covenant as fitch, or as a threatning Law : So Chrift dyed not for them. 11. |

11. Beftoixt delaying to perform the conditions of the new Covenant. This is not threatned with death, 2. And final non-performance. This is proper violation of the Covenant, and a fin that leaveth no hope of recovery.

12; Betwixt paying the proper debt of obedience (at Chrijl did him-felfy) or off offering (as the damned do.) 2. Andfatisfying for non-payment ; as Chrift did for us.

13. Betwixt repealing the Law or Covenant (Which is not done) 2. And relaxing it or dijpenjing With it (Which is done.)

14. Betwixt relaxation or difpen-fation in the proper fttbjett and cir-enmflances of the 'Penalty. This is done in removing it from us to Chrifl. 2. And difyencing with the Penalty it felf This is mt done ;for Chrifl did bear it.

I5# Betwixt the change of the LaW: 2. And of the finners retention to the LaW.

16. BetWixt the Lawes forbidding Q 5 and

and condemning the fin ' (fo it doth fiill.) a. And its condemning the finner : (So it doth not to the jufii-fied, hecaufe Chrifi hath born the enrfe, )

17. Betwixt the Precepts as ab-firatledfrom the Covenant termes t (Which really they are -not at all)

|2.. And at belonging to the fever all Covenants,

18. Betwixt perfection of Holi-neffe (Which is a quality.)'This is

" not in this life, 2. And Perfection of Right eoufnefs, (which is a Relation:) This isperfett 7 or none all.

I p. Betwixt recalling the Faft y or the evil of the Fail, or its defer t ofpuniJhment.Thefe are never done, n$r are pajfible. 2. And removing th£ duenefs of ppmifhmentfrom the. Offendor.This is done.

2Q. *BetWixt Pardon and fufiifi-cation Conditional, Which is an immediate effetl of Chrifi s Dejtth,and Refurfeltion, or rat her of thema-

Iking of the new QovenanU 2. And pardon and Jufiif cation Abjofate, Vtken

when we have performed all the Conditions.

2r» BetVeixt Conditional Tar don and Jvilification, Which is only Potential. (Such is that which immediately follow tth the enabling of the new Covenant to men before Faith, or before they have finned.) i.jdnd Conditional J unification, which is aftual, and of which the perf on hath true pojfefflon, fitch is our JufHfica-tion after Faith, till the lasl Judgment y whkh is ours aelually, but jet upon condition of perfeverance in Faith andfincere Obedience.

22. BetWixt "Furdon andfufti-fication, as they are Immanent Atls in Qed, (improperly, and without Scripture,cafted Pardon orjufiifica-tion)i. An^arJon &Junification, as, they are- Tranfient Alls performed by the Go/peJ Promije as Gods In-ftrument. This is- the true Scripture purification.

23. Betwixt J unification in Title and Sence of Law, ( which is in this Life.) 2. And /unification in

„ _-_ fen

fentence of the Judg/which u at the

laft Iudgment)

24* Betwixt juftifyittg us againft

a true Accufation, (as of breaking

the Law.)Thus Chrift juftifieth us; I and here it is that we muft plead hi*

Satisfaction* 2. Andiuftifying us a-

gainflafalfe Accufation, (as of not \ performing the Conditions of the : Gofpel,) Here we mufi plead not

guilty ^nd not plead the Sat isfallien

ofChrift.

25. Betwixt the Accufation ef the Law, (from Vthich Chrift doth juftifie believers.) i.And the Aecufation of the Go/pel or *e& Cove-

I nan*) f or **t performing its Condi-■ tions at all,{ from which no man can be juslified,andfor Which there is no facrifice*)

26. Betftixt thofe AUs which recover us to the ftate of Relation* which we fell from*, that is, Pardon, Reconciliation ani luftifcation, 2. And thofe which advance us to a far higher ftate, that is, Adoption and Vnion with Chrift,

27* Betwixt eurfirft Pojfefpon of Ixftification/which is upon our contrail: with Chrift or meer Faith.) 2. And the Confirmation^ Continuation and Accoptpli/bment of it, (Whofe Condition is all 9 fine ere O-b edit nee and Perfeverance.)

28. Betwixt the great fummary duty of the Gosf>el to Which the reft are reducible: which is Faith. I .And the Condition fully exprejfed in all its farts\ whereof Faith is the Epitome.

2p. Betwixt the word £ Faith]] as it is taken PhyficaHy.andforfome one Jingle Atl: 2. And as it is taken Morally , Politically and Theologically here; for the receiving of Chrift With the whole font.

30. BetWixt the Accepting of Chrift as a Saviour only 7 ( which is no true Faith , nor can juftifie.) 2. And Accepting him for Lordalfo (which is true ^ftifjing Faith*)

31. Betwixt the fore} r aid Receiving of Chrift himfelf in his Offices ( Which is the AH that Juftifeth:)

*. And Receiving his Promifes and Benefits, (a confecjuent of the former : ) Or betwixt accepting him forjuftification; 2. Andbeleeving that we are juftified,

32. BetVrixt the Metaphyseal Truth of enr Faith: 2. And the Moral Truth.

33. Betwixt the Nature of the Atl of Faith, which juftifieth, or its Aptitude for its office (which it, it* receiving Chrift:) 2. And the pro* per formal Reafon of its fuftify'wg power, (which is, becaufe it is the Condition upon which God will give hs Chrifts Right cottfnefs.)

34. BetWixt Works of the LaW (which is perfetl Obedience:) 2. Ani Works of the CjoFhel Covenant (which is Faith and fine ere Obedience to Chrift that bought w.)

3 5. Betwixt Works of the Cjoftel j ufeAas Works of the Goffel, f. e. in I fubordination toChrift,a*Cenditions. ' of our full fuftif cation and Salvation bj hint. 2. And Workj command-I ed in the Qejpel *fcd as Works of the

Laft, or to legal ends, viz. to make up in Whole or in part our proper legal Right eoufnefs ; andfo in oppoji-tion to Chrifis Righteoufnefs, or in co-ordination with it. In the firfl fence, they are necejfary to Salvation : In thefecondy Damnable*

36. Betwixt receiving (fhrift and loving him as Redeemer {which is the Condition it felf: ) 2. And taking the Lord for our God and chief Goody and loving him accordingly 3 Which >ii -ftill implyed in the Covenant as its End and T.erfeCli-on; Andfoas more excellent then the f roper Condition? of the Covenant.

(jlory to (jod in the higheft, and on Earth Teace ; Cfood+mll towards we^Luk-i. 14

Pofi-

Tottfcript.

WHereas there is in this Book an intimation of fomething whicMhave written of Vmverfal Redemption, Underftand, that I am writing indeed a few pages on that fubjecl onely by way of Explication, as an Ettay for the Reconciling of the great differences in the Church thereabouts: But being hindered by continual ficknefs,and alfo obferving how many lately are fet a work on the fame fub jed,(as fVbitfield,Stalbaw> Howe, Oveeyty and fome men of note that I hear are now upon it,) I (hall a while forbear, to fee if fomething may come forth which may make my endeavor in this kinde nfelefs,and fo fave me the labor: Which if it come not to pafs, you (hall (hortly have it, if God will enable me.

Farewel.

AN

APPE NDI X

to the fore-going

TREATISE;

BEING

An Anfwer to the

Objections of a Friend

concerning fome Points therein contained.

And at his own Defire annexed for

the fake of other* chac may have the fame thoughts.

Zanchim in Philip. 5.15. trhai can be more pernicious to a Student.yea. to a Teacher, i>icit to think that he tyiow-eth all things, avd no l{nurvhdg can be wanting in him ; For being once puft up with this falfe op'nion , he^rviU profit no more. The fame is much truer in Christian Religion y and in the fyowUdg of Christ.

Rom. j. 2 j. whom God hath fct forth to be a propitiation, through Faith in his blood, for Remiflign ofjmsthatarepaft, through the forbearance of God,

RE ADER

The diforder of the Interrogations and ObjeHions y which extorted from me this wholeTraBat? by pieces one after another, hath caufed me (an unfeigned lover of method) to give thee fuch a diforderly, im-methodical Mifcella^ ny % Alfoihe quality of thefe Obje&ions hath occafioned me to an-fwer many things trivial y whilefl I know

A a 2 wore

more difficult ana weighty pointy are o~ verloo^ea: thefe tbingi need no excije-but this infer mat ion * o That I was to follow & not to I ad : and that I write only for thofe who know left than my felf» if thou kriow more 0 thank God, and joy n with me for the Anflruclion of the 'w nor ant i whofe in-

I r ° • r J •

formation, reformation falvation^andther-

• -

&

by(jods glory is the top of my ambition, R.B.

j4ppe?iAix.

ANSWER

to fome

Obje&ions 8c Qucftions

OF

One that perufed this fmall

Tractate before it went to

the Prefs*

The ftint of the Objections is as followeth.

T feemeth ftrange to

me, that you make

the death which the

firft Covenant did

threaten to be only

in the everkfting differing of foul fe-

parated from the body, and that the

body (hould be turned to earth, and

A a 3 fufttr

Appendix.

differ no more but the pains of death; and confequently not whole man, but only part of him (hould be damned?

2. Though you feem to take_ in th^AcTiveRighteoufnefs of Chrift with the Pafilve into the work of Juftification, yet it is on fuch grounds, as that you do in the main agree with them who are for the Paflive Righteoufnefs alone, againft the ftreara of Orthodox Divines ? 3.I pray you clear to me a little more fully in what fence you mean, that no (in but final unbelief is a breach or violation of the new Covenant, and how you can make it good, that temporary unbelief, and grofsfin is no

! violation of it, feeing we Covenant

I againft thefe ?

4. Whether it will not follow

I from this doctrine of yours, that the new Covenant is never violated by any; for the regenerate do never finally and totally renounce Chrift, and fo they violate it not; and the unregenerate were never truly in Covenant,

Appendix.

Covenant, and therefore cannot be faj4 to violate the Covenant which they never made?

5. How you will make it appear, that the new Covenant is. not made with Chrift only ?

6. How make yon Faith and Repentance to be conditions of the Covenant on oar part, feeing the. bellowing of them is ; part of the condition on Gods part: Can they be our conditions and Cods too >

7. Seeing God hath promifed;US thefe which you call conditions, is not the Covenant therefore rather abfolutei and more properly a pro-mife?

8. In making a general Covenant to all, you bring wicked men under prprpife,whereas all the promifes are Yea and Amen in Chrift, and fo belong only to thofe in Chrift : I find no promife in Scripture made to a w.ictediipan..

9. May you not elfe as well give the feals to wicked men as the Covenant^ Except you will 'evade as

A a 4 Mr

Mr Blake, and fay the Sacrament fealbut conditionally; and then let all come that will.

10. How can you make it appear, that [_Do this And live~] is not the proper voyce of the Covenant of Works ? Or that according to the new Covenant we muft aft for life*, and not only from life; or that a man may make his attaining of life the end of his work,and not rather obey only out of thankfulnefs and love ?

ii. Why do you (ingle out the boek called, The marrow of modern Divinity to oppofe in this point ?

12. Seeing you make faith and covenanting with Chrift to be the fame thing; do you not make him to be no real Chriftian that never fo

j covenanted ? and confequently him 1 to be no vifible Chriftian who never profeffed fuch a Covenant ? and fo you bring in a greater neceflity of publique covenanting, then thofe who are for Church-making Covenants ?

13. Do you not go againft the

ftream

ftream of all Divines, in denying the proper aft of Faith, as it juftifieth, to be either Recumbency,Affiance, Per--fwafion, orAflfurance? but placing it in Confent or Acceptance ?

14. Dtfyc*a not go againft the ftream of all Divines, in making the Acceptance of Chrift for Lord, to be as properly 3 juftifying aclt as the accepting him for Saviour, and all that you may lay a ground work for Ju-(tifkation by Gofpel Obedience or Works; fo do you alfo in making the Acceptance of Chrifts Perfon and Offices to be the justifying acl, and not the receiving of his Righteouf-neis and of pardon?- *

t f. How can you reconcile your Juftirlcation by Works with that of £0*0.3.24. <£• 4.4,5,6?

16. Idefire fome fatisfaction in that which Maccov w,and Mr Owen oppofe in the places which I mentioned.

A a $ The

The Jnfwer.

TO the firfl Objection about the death threatened in the firft Covenant, I anfwer : i. I told you I was not peremptory in my opinion, but inclined to it for want of a better. 2. I told you, that the Objections feem more ftrong which are againft all the reft, and therefore I was conftrained to make choice of this, to avoid greater abfurdities, then that which you -object. For, *. If you fay that tsfdam . fhould have gone quick to Hell, you contradict many Scriptures, which make our temporal death to be the wages of fin. 2. If you fay that He fhould have dyed,and rofe again to torment: i. What Scripture faith fo ? 2.When fhouldHehaverifen? 3. You contradict many Scriptures,which make Chrift the Mediator, the only procurer of the Refurrection. 3. If you %,

1 ...tmiU ii i. ii u, 1 . i n -" J -" ' " »■ " ■■■ ».or > •

fay,He (hould have lived in perpetual miferyon earth, then you dafh on the fame Rock with the firft opinion. 4. If you fay. He (hould have dyed only a temporal death, and his foulbeannihilated,then i.you make Chrift tohave redeemed us onlyfrom the grave, and not from hell, contrary to I Thef. 1.1 o,who hath deIiverect hs from the wrath to come. 2.You make not hell, but only temporal death, to be due too, or deferved by the fins of believers, feeing the Go-fpel only (according to this opinion) fbould threaten eternal death, and not the Law; but the Cofpel threatened it to none but unbelievers. You might eafily have fpared me this labour, and gathered all this An-fwer from the place in the book where I handled it; but becaufe o-ther Readers may need as many words asyou, I grudg not my pains.

T

O your fecond Objection about

Chrifts active and paflive Righ-

teoufnefc;

teoufnefs: You (hould have overthrown my grounds, and not only urge my going againft thcftreamor Divines: As I take it for no honor to be the firft in venting a new opinion in Religion,!© neither to be the lait in embracing the truth : I never thought that my faith muft follow the major vote; I value Divines al-fo by weight, and not by number; perhaps!may think that one Parent, Pifcator, Scvltetus, Alfred w, Cufellnsy Gdtaker .or UradfbaW) is of more authority then many Writers and Readers: View their Writings, and anfwer their Arguments, and then judg.

TO your third, about the violation of the Covenant, I (hall willingly clear my meaning to you as well as I can, though I thought what is fa id had cleared it. The 34 Aphorifm ( which is it you object a-gainft)doththus far explain it, 1.That I fpeak o£ Gods Covenant of Grace

only,

only,or hisnew Law, containing the terms on \v ch men live or dye.2.That-by [[violation] I mean the breaking or non-performance of its conditions, or fuch a violation as bringeth the otfendor under the threatning of it, and fomaketh the penalty of that Covenant breaking due to him. 3. I there tell yoiuhat the new Covenant may be neglected long, and finned a-againft objectively ,and Chriits Commands may be broken, when yet the Covenant is not fo violated. The Tenor of the Covenant metbinks (hould put you quite out of doubt of all this, which is [He that belie-vethjhall be faved, and be that be-lieveth not /ha/I be damned.'] The unbelief and rebellion sgainft Chrifl:, which the godly were guilty of before believing, is a neglect or refufal of the Covenant; and I acknowledg that all that, while they were in a damnable ftate, that is, in a ftate wherein they fhould have been dam-ned, if they had fodyed ; for then their unbelief had been final.

But

But your doubt may be, whether they did not deferve damnation t while they were in their unbelief for refilling Grace ?

I anfwer you as before : I. I look upon no punifhment as deferved, m fenfuforenfijn the fenfe of the Law, but what is threatened by that Law: Now you may eafily refolve the Queftion your felf, Whether the new Covenant do threaten damnation to that their unbelief? If they believe not at all before death,itpronounceth them condemned , otherwife not. 2. Yet might they in this following fenfe be faid to deferve the great condemnation before they obeyed theCpfpel, viz* as their unbelief is that fin for which the Cofpel condemned men, wanting nothing but the circumftance of finality or continuance to have made them the proper Tub jeds of the curfe; and if was no thanks to them that it proved not final; for God did make them no promife of one hour of time and patience, and therefore it was meerly

his

his mercy in not cutting them off, which made their unbelief not to be final and damning: Many a man that lived not half fo long in rebellion, did yet prove a final condemned rebel; fo that they did deferve, that God in the time of their infidelity fhould have cut off their lives, and fohave let their infidelity be their destruction. But fuppofing that God would not fo cut them off, and fo their unbelief fhould not be final, (which is the cafe,) and fo they are condemned or threatened by none but the firft Law or Covenant which Chrift did fatisfie: But as for the fe-cond Law or Covenant it condemned them notj fo that Chrift need not bear the condemnation of that Covenant f©r them; for He doth not fetch any man from under the condemning fentence of it, but only in rich mercy to hischofenHe doth prevent their running into that condemnation, partly by bearing with them in patience, and continuing their lives, (for into the hands of the

purchafer

purchafer are they wholly committed,) and partly by prevailing with them to come in to him by the efficacy of his Word and Spirit; fo that confidering them as unbelievers who were to be converted, and fa they were neither the proper fbbjects of thePromife cf the new Covenant, nor of the threatening and condemnation of it: Promife tfoey had none, but conditional, fuch as they had not received, and fo were never the better for; and fo they were without the covenant,&withouthope,and without God,and ftrangers to all the pri-viledges of the Saints: But yet not thofe to whomtheLaw orCovenant faith,You flialfurely dytf,except they had been fuch as fliould never have believed : And for that wrath (Efb. *.3.)whtch they were children of by nature, it muft needs be only the wrath or curfe of the firft violated Covenant,and not thewrath or curfe of the fecond; for no man is by nature a child of that. But I perceive you think it a ftrange

b

Appendix, 17

ftrange faying, that a man by the greateft, groffcft a&ual fin may not be (aid to violate this Covenant, fo as to incur its cur fe,. but only for final unbelief: Do not the godly fometimes break Covenant with Chrift ?

Anfw. I have two things to fay to the helping of your right under-ftanding in this, «te; a two-fold diftin&ion to minde you of, which you feem to forget. 1. Either the grofs fins, which you fpeak of, are fuch as may ftand with fincerity of heart, or fuch as cannot: If they be fins of really godly men, then certainly they violate not the Covenant, fo as to make them the fub-jec*rs of its curfe: For the Covenant faith not, He that finneth (hall be damned; nor he that committeth this, or that great fin, (hall be damned : But, he that belecvethnot (hall be damned.

ObjeEi. But is not this Antinomt-aniftru which you fo deteft? Is it not faid, that no whoremonger, or

unclean

unclean perfon, or covetous per-* fon,&c. (tall enter into the Kingdom of Chriftj or of God? Rev.n. 8. & 22.15. & £/>/?.5. 5. that for thrfe things fake cometh the wrath of Cod upon the children of dif-obedience?

Anfw. I pray you remember that I have already proved, that Faith is the confenting to Chrilts Dominion and Government over us; or the accepting of him for our Lord, that we may obey him, as well as for our Saviour, that we may have affiance in him: And confequently UnbdicP (in this large fence in which-the Go-fpel ufeth it in opposition to that faith which is the condition of the Covenant ) containeth in it all Rebellion againft drifts Government: I could prove this to you out of many pUio Sctiptaares, but theplainnefsor: H naay fpare me that labor: Even in the Text objected, the word ttanf-, lated \ChiUren of oUfobedience~] ' doth fignifie both Vnbeliefznd Dif-,: obedience ; or obifeate,iinper£wade-

able

\

Appendix. ip

able men, that will not be perfwaded tobeleeve and obey: 2Thejf* 1.8. Chrift {hall come in flaming fire to render vengeance to them that obey not his Gofpel: Certainly thofe are unbeleevers. Or if you will have it plainly in drifts own words, what is the damning fin oppofed to Faith, fee it in Luk. 19.27. But thofe mine enemies , which Vwuld not that I (boald reign ever them, bring them hither ,av A Jlay tb&m. befere me. It is not then for every ad: of thofe fore-mentioned fins that the ever-lafting wrath of God doth come upon men; for then what {hould become of Davnl,Noah, Lot,Mary Magdalen, and all of us ? But it is for fuch fins as do prove and proceed from a confederate wilful refufal of Chriits Government, or an unwill-ingnefs that he {hould reign over us.: and that not every degree of unwill-ingnefs,but a prevailing degree,rrom whence a man may be (aid to be one that would not have Chrift reign, &c. Becaufe this is real unbelief it felf, as

oppofite

oppofite to that Faith which is the condition of Life, which is the receiving of ChriftforLordas well as Saviour.

Yet it is true, that temporal judgments may befall us for particular fins ; as alfo, that each particular fin doth deferve the eternal wrath which the firft Covenant doth denounce; but not (in a Law-fence) that which is denounced in thefe-cond Covenant. Every great fault which a Subject committeth againft-his Prince, is not capital, or high Treafon. Every fault or difobedient act: of a Wife againft her Husban i doth not break the Marriage Covenant, nor loofe the bond: but only the fin of Adultery ( which is the taking of another to the marriage bed, or the choofing of another huf-bandj and actual forfaking the Huf-band, or renouncing him. . And you need not to fear left this doctrine be guilty of Antinomia. nifm; For their Error (which many of;their adverfaries alfo are guilty

of

of J lieth here; That not underftand-ing, that receiving Chrift as Lord is an effential ad of jollifying Faith, nor that the refufal of his Government is an etfential part of damning unbelief; they do thereupon ac-knowledg na condition of Life, but bare Belief in the narrowest fence; that is, either Belief of Pardon, and J unification, and Reconciliation, or Affiance in Chrift for it: fo alfo they acknowledg no proper damning fin, but unbelief in that ftridl fence as is oppofit to this faithjthat is the not beleeving in Chrift as a Saviour.

And upon the common grounds who can choofe but fay as they, that neioher drunkennefs, nor murther, nor any fin, but cnat unbelief doth damn men, except he will fay that every fin doth; and fo fet up the Covenant of Works, and deny his very Chriftianity, by making Chrift to dye in vain: fo. great are the inconveniences that follow the ignorance of this one point, That jufti-

fying

tying faith is the accepting of Chrift for Lord and Saviour ; and that fin-cere obedience to him that bought us, is part of the condition of the new Covenant.

I have been forry to hear fome able Divines, in their confeflions of fin, acknowledging their frequent violation of this Covenant; yea, that in every finful thought, word or deed they break the Covenant which they made in Baptifm. Did ever any fober man make fuch a Covenant with Chrift, as to promife him never to fin againft him ? Or doth Chrift call us to fuch a Covenant? Doth his Law threaten, or did we in our Covenant confent, that we fhould be condemned if e-ver we committed a grofs fin ? I conclude therefore, that thofe fins which do confift with true faith, can be no breaches of the Covenant of Grace; For elfe (Faith being the condition; we*fhould both keep it, and break it, at the fame time.

2. But all the doubt is about the . fins

fins which sire inconfiftent with Faith. Thofe are cither, 1. Difobe-dience to tke Law of Works; ( but that cannot violate the Covenant of Grace as fuch.) 2. Or elfe Refufal ofChriftby Rebellion and Unbelief privative, ( for of negative unbelief I will not fpeak: 3 And that Refofal is either, 1. Temporary, (of that I havefpfckenalready: ) Or, 2.Final ( and that I acknowledg is the violation of the Covenant.)

Perhaps you will object, That the fin againft the Hfcly Ghoft alfo is a damning fin, and fo a breach of the Covenant. To which I anfwer, Final Unbelief is the Gemu, and hath under it thefe three forts. 1. Ordinary final Unbelief, viz. againft Ordinary mean's. 2. The fin againft the Holy Ghoft. 3. Total Apoftacy: All thefe are unpardonable fins.

I have in another Treatife adventured to tell you my judgment concerning the fin againft the Holy Ghoft, viz. That it is when a man will not beleeve in Chrift notwith- {landing ^

ftanding all the teftimonial miracles of the Holy Ghoft, which he is convinced de fafto were wrought, but yet denyeth the validity of their Teftimony. This is the unpardonable unbelief, becaufe uncureable: for it is the laft or greateft Teftimony which Chrift will afford to convince the unbeleeving world; and therefore he that deliberately refufeth this, and will not be convinced by it, is left by God as a hopelefs Wretch. So that the fin againft the Holy Ghoft is but a fort of final unbelief. Lay by your prejudice againft the (ingularity of tnis interpretation, and exactly confider what the occa-fion of Chrifts mentioning this (in was, and what was the fin which thofe Pharifees did commit,and then judg.

Laftly, For the fin of total Apo-ftacy, I confefs it is the moft proper violation of the Covenant, not only as it is a Law and Covenant offered, butalfoasit is a Covenant entered and accepted. But it is unbelief

which

which Apoftates do fall to ; for it is only an explicate or implicite renouncing of Chrift either as Lord or Saviour,or both, which is the unpardonable fin of Apoftacy, which is called [falling away~] (that is,f rom Chriftand the Covenant,) and crucifying the Son of God afrejh y and putting him to open fhame, Heb«6.6. And which is called Heb+ 10. 16,19, \_finning wilfully J (that is,confider-ate, refolved rejecting Chrift, or refuting his Governmentjand fo called [treading underfoot the Son of god, and counting the b(ood of the Covenant, wherewith they were fanblifi-ed y an unholy thing, and doing de~ fpight to the Spirit of Grace.'J As the nature of this Apoftacy lyeth in returning to infidelity, fo being Total it is always sdfo Final; God having in his juft Judgment refolved to withhold from all fuch the grace that (hould recover them; and fo this is a fort of final unbelief.

A fecond diftinclion,which I muft

here mind you of, is, betwixt 1. the

6 b main

main Covenant of Grace: and 2. Particular, fubordimte, inferior Covenants, which may be made between God and a believer. The former is not violated,, but as I have (hewed before: The latter is ordinarily bro^ ken by us, If any man make a vow like Saul s orfephtha%he may break ic pofilbly, and not be damned, but recover by repentance. If in your ficknefs, or other affliction, or at Sacrament, or on days of Humiliation, or Thankfgiving, you fhould Covenant with God to forfake fuch a fin, or to perform fuch a duty, to mend your lives, to be-more holy and heavenly, &c. this Covenant you may perhaps, break, and yet recover. And of fuch Covenants it is that I mean, when in confefilon I do bewaii my Covenant-breaking with drift, and I not of the main Covenant of Grace; i for then I fhould confefs my fetf a j total irrecoverable Apoftate. The Covenant which ought to be made with Chrift in Baptifm, and which Baptifm is the profeffing fign and I

feal

Append*

IX,

feal of, is the main Covenant of Grace; Therefore is there no ufe for re-baptizing, becaufe fuchApo-ftacy is an uncureable fin.

So you fee what Covenant it is that the godly break, and what breach it is that tiiey ufe to confefs. ______

To the fourth Obje&ion.

YOur fourth Objection. £ that from this do&rine it will follow, that the Covenant is never broken] iseafilyanfwered. i. I think it is true, that the regenerate do never break the Covenant: But yet the breach in it felf, and in refped: ofourftrength is more thenpoffi-ble; and the controverfie de events will hold much difpute. AuHin feemeth to me to be ©f thkopinion, That there are fome effe&ually called that yet may fall away, but the elecl cannot; fo that he difkinguifli-eth of calling according to purpofe Bb2 or

or ele&ion, (and that he thinketh cannot be loft,) and calling not following election, (which he thinketh may be loft,) fo that he placeth not the difference in the calling, but in the decree. I do not recite this as af-fenting to it; nor yet can I aflfent to them, who make the very nature of •Grace to be immortal, and from j thence do argue the certainty of per-! feverance. I think to be naturally Im- j mortal is Gods Prerogative, and pro- j perly incommunicable to any crea- i .cure.: Even Angels, and foulsof men are Immortal only from the will and continued fuftentation of God; and if God did withdraw his hand, and not continually uphold it, the whole Creation would £dl to nothing,miich more the quality of holinefs in die j foul: To fubfift of himfelf without j continual influx from another,is proper to God, the firft,natural,necefTa-ry,abfolute,Independent Being: Yet Iacknowledg, that when God will perpetuate any Being, he fitteth the nature of it accordingly,& maketh it

more

J more fimple, pure, fpiritual, aridlefs i fub;e<5t to corruption. But yet to j fay, that therefore it is of a Nature i Immortal, or that cannot dye, I think improper : But I know Philo-fophers and Divines do think bther-wife,and therefore I do d\flent, cjHaft co aft as & petit h venia. 2. But whether the Regenerate may break the Covenant or not, certain I am the unregenerate may and do: And whereas you objecT:, £ That they were never in Covenant, and there-' fore cannot be faid to breaks it : ] I muft defire you, befides the former diitindions, to remember thefe two more. 1. Betwixt the Covenant as promulgate, and only ciiered on Gods part. 2. And the Covenant as accepted and entered by the (inner. The former is moft properly called, The Law of Chrift, or new Law, as containing the conditions of our fai-vationor damnation; yet it is properly alfo and frequently in Scripture called a Covenant, (though not in fo full a knfc as the latter,) becaufe Bb^ it

it containcth the fubftance or matter of the Covenant, and exprefleth Go&s confent, fo we deny not ours; and alfo becaufe the great prevailing part in it is Nfercy and Prormfe, and the Duty fo fmail and light in com-parifon of the (aid Mercy, that in Reafon there fhould be no Queftion of our performance : And fo Mercy obfcuring or prevailing againft Judgment, it is mort frequently called a Covenant and Gofpel then a Law; yet a Law alfo moft properly it is, and oft fo called. Now then that the Covenant in this fenfe may be broken,is no queftion: God hath faid, He that believetk {hdl be fiaved^ And he that believeth not ft;all be damned. Doth not he that never be-! lieveth break this Law or Covenant, ; and incur the penalty ? So that men that never accept the Covenant, do thus break it by their refufal, and fo pcrifli.

i. Youmuft diftinguifo betwixt i. The Covenant accepted heartily and fincerely, 2. Or not heartily and

fin-

fincerely : And fo I anfwer you, Though unregenerate men did never fincerely covenant with Chrift, and foare not in Covenant with him as the Saints are, yet they do ufually Covenant with him, both with their mouths, by folemn profcfiion, acknowledging and owning him as their Lord and Saviour, and alfoby their external fubmitting to his WorQiip and Otdinances } and taking the feals of the Covenant, and alfo in fome kind they do it from their hearts, (though not in fincefity. ) Either they do k 1. Rafhly, and not deliberately ; Or 2. they do it out of fear, as a man that Is in the hands of a conquering enemy, that lriuft yield to his will to prevent a worfe inconvenience, though heaccountethitan evil which he is forced to,and had rather be free if he might, and doth covenant, but with a forced will, partly willing (to avoid greater mi-(ery)and partly unwilling. 3. Or dC^ they keep fecret refervations in their hearts, intending (as a man that as 4-B b 4 ferefaid

forefaid covenanted with the conqueror J to break away as foon as they can, or at lcaft to go no further in their obedience then will (land with their worldly happinefs or hopes, ( though thefe refer vations be not expreffed by them in their Covenant J 4. Or elfe they miftake Chrift, and the nature of his Covenant, thinking he is a Matter that will let them pleafe the flefb, and enjoy the world and fin, and understand not what that Faith and Holinefe is which his Covenant doth require, and fo they are baptized into they know not what, and fub-fcribc to they know not what, and give up their names to they know not who; and then when at laft they \ find their miftake, they repent of the • bargain,and break the Covenant; or 1 elfe never difcerning their miftake, J they break the Covenant while they } think that they keep it; or if they ! keep their own, they break Chrifts. J All thefc ways men may enter Colt venant with Chrift, but not fincere-

ly; for fincerc covenanting mull be 1: Upon knowledg of the nature, ends and conditions of the Covenant. Though they may poffibly be ignorant of feveral Accidentals about the Covenant, yet not of thefe Effen-fcntials,if they do it fincerely. 2.They muft Covenant deliberately, and not in a fit of paflion,or rafhly. 3. They muft do it ferioufly, and not diflem-blingly or flightly. 4. They muft do it freely and heartily,and not through meer conftraint and fear* 5. They muft do it intirdy, and with refolu-tion to perform the Covenant which they make, and not with Refervati-ons, giving themfelves to Chrift by the halves, or referving a purpofe to maintain their ftefhly interefts.<5.And they muft efpecially take Chrift a-lone, and not joyn others in office with him, but renounce all happi-nefs fave what is by him,and all Government and Salvation from any which is not in direct fubordirwtion { to him. Thus you fee that there is a great difference betwixt covenant- Bb5 ing

ing (incerely, and covenanting in hy-pocrifie and formality; and fo betwixt Faith and Faith. Which I have opened to you the more largely, be-caufe I forgot to do it when I explained the Definition of Faith in that Aphorifm, whereto you may annex it.

I conclude then, that multitudes oFunregeneratemen are yet in Covenant with Chrift, though not as the Saints in fincere Covenanting, j which I further prove to you thus : Thofe that are in Chrift, are alfo in Covenant with Chrift: But the un-regenerate are in Chrift ; therefore, &c. That they are in Chrift is plain, in Job. i?. 2,£. There are branches in Chrift not bearing fruit, which are cut off, and call a way.. So Heb. 10.29,30. They are fanctified by the blood of the Covenant, and therefore they were in Covenant in fome fort. I fuppofe, it would be but loft labour to recite all thofe Sciiptures, which exprefty mention wicked mens entering into

Cove-

—■■ —.<iwm.jnJiiiwpj.w ■ ■ " ■ ' ■ "

Covenant with God, and God with them, and their Covenant-breaking charged on them: you cannot be ignorant of thefe. Wherefore you fee, that it is a common (in to violate the Gofp.l-Covenant.

To the fifth 0&je£tio*.

YOitt fifth is a meCr demand of; my proof,That Chrift is not the | only perfon with whom God the Father entereth Covenant. Which Queftion I confefs I am afhamed to anfwer : Nor can I tell what to fay to you, but [_Read the Scriftftrt} Doth not the whole fcope of it mention Gods Covenants with man? Turn over your whole Bible, and fee whether it fpeak more of covenanting with Chrift, or with us ? Nor can I imagine what (bould make you queftion this, except it be be-caufe Mr Saltmarjh (or fome fuch other) doth deny it. How could

Chrift

$6 appendix,

Chrift be the Mediator of the Covenant, if It were to himfelf, and not to us, that the Covenant were made ? I know Dr Trefton and o-ther orthodox Divines do affirm, That the Couenant is made primarily with drift, and then with us: But Iconfefslfcarcerelifh that form of fpeech : For it feemeth to fptak of one and the fame Covenant; ani then I cannot underftand how it can be true. For is this Covenant made wkh Chrift ? \_Beleeve in the Lord ?efw> and thoujbalt befaved ; and if thou hie eve not, thou Jhalt be damned?^ This is the Covenant that is made with us: and who dare fay s that this is made with Chrift ? Or is this Covenant made to Chrift ? [_J W/// take the hard hearts out of their bodies, and give them hearts of fiejh 3 &c. I will be merciful to their tranfgreffions, and their fins and iniquities Will I remember no more . ? ] Had Chrift, think you, a hard heart to cure ? I know fome think the latter ciaufe belongeth to him firft,

and

zsfppendix* yj

and fo • to us j viz* as he was a (inner by imputation, and fo had our tranfgreffions upon him: but very ignorantly: For was God merciful; to him concerning the debt ? Did he not deal with him in rigorous Ju-ftice?, and upon the terms of the ; firft feverer Covenant ? and make him pay the uttcrmoft farthing? Sure the Covenant, whofe curfe' Chnft did bear, did know ho mercy* to tranfgrelTors.

Again, the Covenant is alfo a Law, and thrift himfelf isftiled theXaw^ giver; therefore can he not be under the Law,or under the Covenant: He is not King and Subject too. Moreover (as I faid before^ he is the Mediator, and therefore not he to whom the Covenant is made; Perhaps you.will.fay, wasnoti^^i fes both? To which I anfwerr i. Mofes wasbuta Typical improper Mediator. 2. Mofesw&s in another refpeft a Subjed: to the Law whereof he himfelf was the Mediator; as he was one that had a foul

and

and body to fave, orlofe, upon the fame terms with the reft of the people : But it was not fo with our Lord Jefus; He was only a Mediator, as being a middle Perfon betwixt the offended Majefty, and the offending Subjects : But Mofes was one of the offending Subjects, chofen out to fnpply the place of a true Mediator, as his Type. So that though Mofes was both Mediator, and alfo a Subject to that Law and Covenant; yet it is not fo with Chrrft. But the words, and tenor of the Covenant it felf, are fo plain an Argument, that I need to fay no more.

Yet do I acknowledg that there are feveral Promifes in the Scriptures made only to Chrift: As That he Jba(l fee of the travel of his fonl^ ■, and be fatisfied: and by his k*o&-ledg jt'ftifie manj, Ifai. 53. 10,11. I That the Heathen fhall be given for his inheritance ', ani the utmofl farts of the earth for his pojfejfi-o* t £zc. Pfa. 2. But 1. Thefe be

not

zsfppendix* ^p

not the Covenant made with us. 2. And for my part,I take it not to be any part of Gods Legillative Wtll, as it refeneth to Chrift, but onlyasitbelongethtous, as a pro-phefie, what God would do in the a ivancing of Chrift and his Kingdom, and fo of us; and fo h|th partly the nature of a promife to us aifo.For that which is commonly called the Covenant betwixt the Father and the Son, is part of Gods pur-pofe or decree, rather then of his Law. The Covenant betwixt the Father and Son was from Eternity : So is not the Law, or Covenant written. The Divine Nature, which undertook the Mediatorfhip, could not be fubjecl to Laws, or proper Covenants. Chrift had no need of engagements from the Father by word or writing for his encouragement or confirmation. So that all the Promifes to Chrift in Scripture, are eitlxr meer Proprieties, or do al-fo intimate fome Promife to the Church ; and fo are written for our

fates

fakes, and alfo for the fpreading of the Mediators Glory; tut not for proper Covenant-ends betwixt the Father and him. And this interpretation Chrift himfelf hath taught me, JoJj» 12.28,30. Chrift prayeth to the Father to glorifie his Name, viz. in the Sons Death and Refur-re&ion • He is anfvvered by a voyce from Heaven , / have g/orified it, and rvi/l glorifie it ; Chrift tetteth the people that flood by, That this voyce.came not becanfe of him, but for their fakes.

I conclude therefore, That the Gofpel-Covenant, properly and u-fually fo called, is made betwixt God and man by the means taf a Mediator, and fo delivered to us in the hands of a Mediator; and may alfo fitly be faid te be betwixt Chrift and us: But not properly that it is betwixt the Father and the Son t Much lefs is the Son the only perfon covenanted with. God doth indeed give up the World to Chrift ;. and more efpecially the Heft to be faved

by

by him: But thefe arc not the work of a written or temporary Covenant, but of an.etcrnal Decree.

To the fix th ftndfeventh OhjetHons.

THe fame Anfwer will ferve to your fixth and feventh Quefti-ons; viz. How Faith and Repentance are bothpromifed of God, and required of us ? Can they be his conditions and ours too ? And then whether the new Covenant be not abfolute ?

I told you before that the Scripture mentioneth two forts of Covenants, abfolute and conditional. The Abfolute Covenant is found in £^.11.17,18. j^r.3 1.31,32,33,

34.7^.32.37,38,39,40,41,42- and mentioned by the Apoftie in Htb$. 10. Concerning this Covenant you muft underftand, that as in the firft promife of it here by the Prophets, it feemeth to.be made to the particular

Nation

Nation of the Jews, and is joyned with the promife of their temporal Reftauration; fo fome do queftion, whether it be yet to them fulfilled ? or whether it be not a promife of fome extrordinary permanent hap-pinefs which they fhall receive at their laft and great deliverance by the Meflias> ( whether by coming per-fomily to raign among them, or not, InowdifpntenotJ Yet as the A-poftle in Heb. 8.8, p. doth extend it further then to the Jews,fo muft we; but whether the Apoftle mention it a5 an abfolute promife, is a great doubt; or whether he only refpe<ft the fpirituality of the benefits, and fo oppofe the writing of the Law in our hearts,(which thenew Covenant promifethj to the writing of it in ftone, and revealing mercy in the dark way of Ceremonies > But yet, for my part, I think you may call it an abfolute Promife: But then understand, that this is not the new Law or Covenant made with mankind, revealing to them their duties,

and

and the terms on which they mult live or dye: This is made to the e-led only; this fpeaketh nothing of duty: No man can have any comfort by this Covenant, till it be performed to him, and till he have received the promifed benefits 5 for too man till then can tell whether it be made for him, or not: It is made to the eled only; and no ican can know himftlf to be elect, till he be (andified, and when he is fan&ified this promife is fulfilled; therefore the benefits of this promife are not to be received by Faith: for faith is part of the t promifed Good, as it is, contained in a new and a foft heart feminally; and therefore to receive this promife by Faith, were to believe, that we may receive grace and power to believe, then which what can be mere abfurd: No man therefore can fay beforehand, that he fhall have a new and foft heart, becaufe God hath promifed it; for he cannot know that it is promifed to him: So that I conclude, that this is moft

pror

properly but a prophefie what Cod will do, de eventu, as ft hath reference to the parties on whom it fhall be fulfilled, and fo is the revealed part of Gods Purpofing Will, and bclongeth not at ail to his Preceptive or Legiflative Will, by which he doth govern, and will judg the world: But as it is revealed to the Church vifible in general, and fo in regard of the fubjeft is indefinite, intended only to reveal the quality and fpiritual excellency of the Mercy of the new Covenant procured by Chrift, that fo Chrift may be honored, and men drawn ro feek after, and entertain this precious Covenant, and not to flick to the old imperfeft Difpenfation; In this fence it belongeth to Gods Legiflative Will: And in this fence I think it is that the Apoftle to the Hebrews doth recite it; and not in the former fence, as it doth refpeft the particular perfons that (haU have it fulfilled, and fo is an abfolute Covenant to the unknown Eled.

But

But now the Covenant which is mentioned through the whole Go-fpel isof another kinde, £ He that beleeveth, Jhall be faved\ and he that beleeveth not, Jhall be damn-ed>2 This is frequently and plainly expreiTed, and not fo darkly as the former: This is made to all the world, at leaft, who hear the Go-fpel: This is the proper new Law and Covenant, by which men muQ: be judged, to juftification or condemnation. This properly fucceed-eth in the place of the fM Covenant, which faith £ Do this and live"2 '• And this is it which I ilil mean,when I fjpeak of the newLaw or Covenant.

So that now I hope you can hence anfwer to both your own demands. To the 7. you fee there is a Covenant abfolute,and a Covenant conditional; but the kft is the proper Gofpel-Co-venant. To the 6. you fee,that in the abfolute Covenant, ©r Prophefie, he promifeth feith & repentance(in pro-mifing his Spirit,and anew heart) to the eled,who are we know not who.

And

And in the conditional properCove-nant he requireth the fame Faith and ! Repentance of us, if we will be ^uitified and laved. So that they are I Gods part which he hath difcovered that he will perform in one Covenant ; and they are made our conditions in another.

Neither is there the leafc fhew of j a contradiction betwixt thtfc: For in the abfolute Covenant he doth not promife to make us Beleeve and and Repent againftour wills: Much left, that He, or Chrift, Hail Repent and Beleeve for us; and fo free us from the duty ; But that he will §iwe ns new and fort hearts, that we may doit our feives,and do it readily and WiHingly.- which that we may do,he commandeth and perfwadeth us to it ; m the.conditional Covenant t not bidding us do it without his; help • but directing us to the Father do. draw us to the Son; and to theSon,, as without whom we can do nothing; and to the Spirits the fanfti-fier of our hearts, and exciter of our Graces. To

Appendix. ^j

To the eighth Objtftien.

IN your eighth Qiieftion I obferve feveral miftakes. i. You obferve not how ill it agreeth with the two former. For if the Covenant were only abfolate, then it can be made to none but wicked men: and indeed the abfolute Covenant is made to none other. Sure thofe that God doth promife to beftow new hearts upon, and fofc hearts, have yet their old and hard hearts: f except it were meant of a further degree, and not of thefirft faviag Grace.) 2. And as the abfolute, fo the great conditional Promife \_Beleeve and be [a* ve<f\ is aifo made to ungodly men. Is not this fpokento Unbeleevers? Will you fpeakit to none but thofe who beleeve already? Were none of thofe Jews ungodly, to whom Peter faith ^#.2.39. The Promife is made tojoptand t9yeur children t\ But I have proved a little before,

that

that not only as it is a Covenant offered of God, but alfo as it is a Covenant enteried by them, even wicked men are within the Covenant.

2. Yet you fay,that[ you no -where find any promife to a wicked manT^ Why then you have found but a few . of the Scripture promifes. I have (hewed you, that the abfolute pro-rnife of a new and foft heart is made to wicked men, and the great conditional promife of the Cofpel: Would you have particular examples ? In Gen. 4.7* there is to Cain a conditional promife of acceptance, and the donation of Superiority and Government. Gen.9.1 1,12. There is a Covenant betwixt God and every living Creature. Gen. 27.39,40. Jfaac is Gods mouth in biefsing Sfau: Were all the Israelites godly, to whom the Land of Canaan was promifed and given ? 1 Sam.\ 0.4,5 ,6,7. There the Spirit of God and other favours are promifed toSattL 1 Xing. 11.31, 32,33,38,39. There are promifes to Jeroboam. How many (core places

in

in the PfaJmes and Prophets doe mencion promises and Covenants of God to ungodly I fraelites ? If I fiiouid inftance in all the promifes made to Ahd* t{eb*chadnez,x,ar t Cyrut^VsriHs^* it would be te« dious.

ObjtB* But all thefe are rather Proprieties then Promifes. e/*»/*r. If that which exprcfleth the engaging of the word and Troth of God toj^cftow good upon a man, be not a Promife, I would you would tell me what if. Otytt. Thefe predictions doe onely declare what God will doe, but give no title to the mercy a» a Promifc doth.

tsftifw. Did not God give fain a title to his Superiority and Government and the Ilraelites Title to the Land of Promife ? and lb the reft.

Promifes doc give Title to the thingpromifed; i. Either full and abiolme: a.Or imperfect andeond;. tionall. In the firi* fence we have title both by an ab.'olute promife, Cc * <*

and by a Conditionall Promifc, when we have performed tire con-ditioD. In cheJatter ftneejt giveth title to men that have not yet performed che condition.

Oh)ttt* Bat th<ie things which are given to wicked men, are not good to them, but eviil; therefore it is not properly a promise. Aafir. 11 is good in it felfe, and would be to them, but for their wilfull abufe. Shall mans (inncs make Gods pro roiies and mercies of leffe value ? God promiied that Chrill Chould come to his owne, the Jewes, (//*, 5.3. Mal,%, 1,2,3,) and yet h.s owne received him no y/«&. 1.11, Shall we fay therefore, that God threatned them with aChrifr, rather then promiied him ? He pro-roiled and gave them both Prophets and Apotfles; wasitnopro-mite or mercy, becaulethey killed and pertecuted th<m ?

To conclude this, the Scripture e?prefly contradt&eih your opinion, Rom%}.^ To the iiraelites was

the

the Adoption and Glory and Cove-nants, and the fcrvice,andthePro-mifes: And even to them for whom Paul would hare been accufed: So Aft a i ?. And Htb. 4.1 Tak* heed ie' apranifebeing made of cmrirg into his Reft , any of you teem to come (hort of it* ^rov. 1.2^24,25. Chrift prom feth the foolifh and the fcomers, that he will poureout his Spirit to them^fthey will tume at his reproofc. Amos 5,4,6 See^tbe Lord, and jour fiui pall live. lfa.^.6 t <?.SeektbtL*rd while bo may be found ; Call upon btm while bets neer : Let the wicl? edfor fake his way, and the unrighteous man hts thoughts, and let htm returne un 0 the Lard and he wiU have mercy en him ; and to our God, and be wtll abundantly yard**.

Are not all tbcie promifes to wicked men ?

Ot>)eft. But when they returne and repent, they are not wicked.

Anfw&m u not this conditional! promiie made to them before they return? Cc 2 Ob

i

ObyEl. The Promife is onely to Beleevers, therefore not to all.

*Slr.fw. Either you fpeak of the makirg. or of the fulfilling of it: Jt is fulfilled onely to Bclecvers, but it is made and offered to all that heare it, onconaition cf Belecving, as is proved. OtjeB. Bcleeving is not the condition of ihe promife, but oncly the qualification of the per-fbns to whom it is made, t/infw. This Objection hath more fubtilty then fence: Is not Belceving (in pkincEnglifh; a Duty required in the Picmile by the fiee Promiier and Law- giver>ofhim to whom the Promife is made and fent, and that upon thefe termes, that it he per-forme ir, the ihing promifed (hall be his,otherwife it (hallnot ? And is not this pioperly a condition re-quiredofthe party if he will enjoy the thing promifed ? When you fay [It is a qual.ficationofthc per-fon to whom the Promife is made] you r peak in the darknefie of ambiguity : For i, Doe you roeane ic is a qua-

a qualification which he hath before the Promife is made to him? If (b, I have proved the contrary already. Oris it his qualification afterward ? fo it is indeed : But not of all to whom it is made; but of all tow om it (hall be fulfilled. Againe,doeyoumcanean habitu-ali qualification, or an Actual 1 ? I doubt not, but you know it is the act of Fai:h which wedifpux of: And what is the difference betwixt fuch an Active qualification, required on the term:* before-menti. oned, and a proper condition. ?

But I perceive that which you ftick at, is, that the Promite* are all Yea and Amen in Chrift, and therefore are made to none but thofe in Chrift.

A#fo. It will be long before you will prove the Confequence. They^ are made onely on the ground ot Chriiis undertaking, and he is the Mediator of them,and inhimthey are fure. But doth it therefore fol -low, that Chrift difpenfeth then to Cc ? none

nose but thofe that are in him I Wicked men have benefits by Chrift, even thofe that are xjot in him fo much as by a vifible profef ~ fion : And why then may they not have fome promifes ? Yet I know that Beleevers are o r t called in Scripture, the Children , and HeiresofthePromife. Buttoun* tfand this, youmu t know, i.Thar the Holy Ghoft hath chiefly the re-fpe& to the Thing promi&d, and of that Beleevers are the onely Heires: If yon a'fo e nfider, that he fpeakes chit fly of the great Pro-miks f Reconciliation, Remiflion, SancVificauon, Adoption,glorification. 2. I told you before, that the promise before we perfbrme the Condition doth give a remote, imperfe#, loofable title to the goodproroilcd : And fo the wicked are children of promife. But the Promifewhen we have performed the Condition, (a$ alio the abfo-krepromiies) doth give an immediate, proper, certain Title to the

good

Appendix. tf

goodpromifed, (b that a man may fay, it is mine : And thus bnely the faichfull are the heires or the Promife: They onelyha*e a pro-;,priety in the fpiritnall and ipecial j Mercies there promised. But a wk4*d Ii^aelife may haveproprie-ty in his Inheritance, by vertue of Divine Promile and Donation, For Chriftha^h led captivity cap. live, and received gi«ts fei men , even for the Rebellions, ihat the Lord might dwell amoBg thctn,

To fbe o. 0b\*8io*.

YOur p. Objection is, That if I make the Covenant to belong to wicked men, I may as well give them the iealet.

To which I anfwer you; 1 .You murt meane onely the main Covenant of grace* and noc inferiour C c 4 promi-

promifcs and Covenants: For the Sacraments are onely to fcale to the maine Covenant. 2. As you muft remember Ididingaifhed betwixt the Covenant offered and the Covenant entred by mutuall eon-fent; fo mult you diitinguifh accordingly betwixt two forts of wicked men: 1. Open Infidels, w,ho never accepted and con fen ted to ihe offered Covenant. 2. Thofe who haveconfented and entree the Covenant, and- lifted their names in therollofChriit: but yet notfin* cerely.unrefervedly, entirely, as is neceffary to falvation. To the former of thefe you may not give the feales: For they are not willing of them as fueh : And they are not to be forced upon any : Neither are the feales ufefull till the. accepting and entring of the Covenant.

But to the latter the feales are m©ft properly to be given by the Minifter, except they doc againe renounce Chrift by word or deed, otby fome gnoffefindoeeonftrain

us

Appendix, $j

us to fufpend their enjoyment of fuch privifedges while they are under tryall, and till they dHeover their repentance.

Q**Jt*- What doe you rake for fueh a renouncing of their Covenant?

Atjfw m i. When they (hall in plaine terms renounce it, as Christians do that turn Turks.

2. When they renounce or deny any fan Jamentall Article of the Faith,

3, When they do (not through weakne(fe,but) wilfully and obfti-nately refufe to yeeld obedience to Chrirt ; for this is a renouncing erf their fubjedion to him, whicb i> an eflentiall part of their Covenant and Faith ; and it is a renouncing of hi, kingly Office, and ib a renouncing of thrift, when they fay, Hee (hall not reigne over us. And chough fuch may acknowledge him in words, yet in worfcs they doe deny him, being diibbedienc, and to every good worke reprobate,

Cc ? Tit.

Tit.1.16. If therefore you (hall deny the feales to any man that is thus in Covenant with Chrift, before he doe thus difelaime his Covenant, you rouft doc it at your pe-rill. Therefore you ro«ft not un-dertake to be the Judge of hi* fin-cerity in he Covenant, except hee plainly difcovcr that he is not feri-ous. Dare not you to aflume Gods Prerogative oflurching the heart, nor to difpenee Gods fea'es upon your eonjeduresofthc probability or improbability of mens fineerity. Neither rouft y< u deny he ieales to them , for any fmaller fin then as aforefaid : For as every fin is not a breach of Covenant, io eveiy fin tnulf not deny them the feales.

Cb)ttt. '' hen w tnnft not deny h to them for every grofle fin neither ; feeing yea affirme , that every gr^fle finne breaketh not Covenant

dnf*\ Yet becaufe hee that li-veth in known grofTe finne.cannot eonkntio the Kingly office or

Govern.'

Government of Chrift over him, therefore we have jutieauic to iuu p*nd the giving.of the leases, and ! alibof felowmip witfrhim, wh le we try whether he did it through wcakneiVe or wiifulnefie.

0£.But how (hall we know that?

A*fiv. Chrift bach lined us out the way: Wemuft reprove h?tn, and lee whether he will heare and re>orme; if he doe not, we muft tell the Church, and Co admomfti and fhame him publikely : it hee heare not the Church, we are to account him as a man without the Covenant, and founfit for feales or communion.

Q«fjh But when fhall I take him for one that will not heare the Church ?

sinjv* When hee will not be psrfwaded to confeiTe and bewaile his fiane, nor 10 give over the practice of it.

. So that I doe confiderately advife you (after long (iudyof this point , and as cauteious

j JZL .

a proceeding as moft have uted ) I ( for you know my former Iudge-1 meet,and that f never adminiftred j the Sacramcnc,till within this year* ! and that 1 was then invited to it by j ancmment wonder of providence) I lay, I advife you, to beware how yon deny to men the fcaks, till yon have tryed with them this way pre fcribedby Chtift: Chrift is free in Sen ertaining, and fo mnft wee ; j Chri't putteth away none,but them i that put away thetnfelves; and j then doth he call after them as long ! as there is hope of hearing, as one j that is grieved at their de(Uu6tion; I ard not delighted in the death o£ j finners, but had rather they w£>uld I returne and live : And even thus. imutiwedo too. Lazincffe is the common caui'c offeparafon: when we (liould go with words of pitty and toves and with teares befeech finners to return to their duty, and Chew tbem their danger; wcreg-left all this, to fave us the labour and the fafTering that fometirne follows

this

this dutyj f wee will plead that they are no Church. Members, and fo not thcBTerhrco that we are bound f to adoaonifli, aid fo lazily feparatc from them/ and fay as C*in t Am I my Brothers keeper? or as the man to Chrlft, who is my Neighbour < And thu* when we have made his finneourowneby our filence, and not reproving him then we excom -munieate him fori tone or" our foci-ety and from the Ordinances, and lb judge our felvcs oat of our own mouths. O r we Separate fr^m him tor the neglect of fome duty, when wee our fclves have neglected b>th to him and others, this great and excellent duty of faithfull admonition. Ic. is more comfortable to recover one foule then to cali off many by iepara tion* Though I know that the avoiding communion with wilful! offeodours, who by this due admonition will not be reclaimed, is a moft neceffary andufe* full duty too. But do not execute a man before he u judged; nor judge

him*

$ I Appendix.

him before you have heard biro fprak # tnd fully proved that obftinacy is added to his finne; (except it be to fafpend him while he is under this legall try all,) But perhaps you will object, t at we have no difci-pline ciiabiilfced, and fo no Authority to do hus and themcancs a e vaine which eannot attaine their end. To whieh 1 anfwer: i ♦ You have divine Auchoricy : 2, And may do as much is I preflfe without a Presbytery. Firlt, you may ad-monifh privately : Secondly % before Witnefle: Thirdly, you may bring your Congregation to this, that the parties cn\nd.d,niay accufc them openly: ( The Piesbyeerians deny not to the Congregation the audience a-d cognizance , of the Fad, out onely the power of judicial! fentencing. ) And here you may admomfh them betbie all : Fou thly. it yci they prove obtW* nate, you may by your Miniftenall Authority: I. Pronounce again!* him by name what the Scripture pronou c* h

pronouneerh againft fuch iieners : parreularly, that be is uufitto bee a Church-Member, as < penly de-living obedience Co the kn^wne Lawes of Chrift 2. You may charge the people from Scripture to avoid familiarity .with him. 3. You may a Mb acquaint 'he Magistrate with his duty, to thruft him out, i; hee violently intrude into Commurio >, ordilturbthr Ordinances. 4. You may foibeare to deliver the Sacrament particularly to hi* hand*. 5. You may en er and publish your diflfent aod diflike, it hce intrude, and take it h-mlelfe* All his I could molt eafily and beyond doubt prove your duty as you are a Chriliun ^nda Minilkr. And ifther bee any more that a Claflfis may do, ycc do you do this in the roeane time : only be fure you try all meanes in private ( ir the fault be not in publique) before you bring a man in publique: And be fure ycu do it in tendernefie and love, and rather with wary then parfiomte

paffl onate reproaches. A nd be fare , that you do it only in cafe of unde* j nyable finnes, and not in donbtfull : difputable Cafes * And be lure that | the matter of Fa& be undoubtedly ; proved: And that no man be fuf fercd to traduce another pitblickly in a wrong way: O r if he do> that ; he bz brougnt co acknowledgment, j The word Excommunication com-prizeth ievcrall Aits: Tnofc be r ore I mentioned belong to you as a Mi-nifter, and are pare of your proper Preaching d:daratiVepower,which you may pcrforme by your Nunci-ative auchority. The power of Clafles and Synods (I chink ) doth differ oncly gradually, and not fpe-[cifically fromihat ofevery frlinitfer. j I am afhamed that I \\avq contrary i to my firft pnrpofe, faid fo much of this unpieaiingcontroverfy. But when you a e n.xt at lei fare privately, I ihili under ake to prove all this to you from Scripture; an J that the Keyes are pit by Chrift into the -hand's of evry Mi after fmgly i i and

appendix. £f

and that with fobriety and wife-dom youmay chus .name the ofren-dors publick!y,as all Scripture Mi-nifters have been ufed to do. And if you que ion whether our ordinary Congregations are true reall Churches, where fuch works may be managed, I fliall prove that they arc,b) giving you a better definition of a Chu'.ch, then that which you gave, me; and then trying our Churches by it.: In the mean ume this is not matter to intermixe here.

BUt you cannot, it feemes di-gettMr. £/*^j aflertion, that the Sacraments do feale but conditionally. Anfwer,Ihavenot Mr, Blakes book by me, and therefore how he cxplainech himfelfc I cannot rell ; But I remember hee hath ofc laid ib in conference wiih me. But let me teJl you two or three things, i. That I queftion whether you wellnnderitand him. 2.

Or whether you be able to confute it at thus to except againft it, 3, That Mr. 8l k* is as truly confei-entious whom hee admitceth as you.

But for the Controversy, you mutt consider it a little more di ftin&Jy before you are like to underhand ir rightly. It is in vaine to enquire.whethertiic Sacraments dofeale abiblutely or, conditionally, till you firft know well what it is that theyfcale. Ltcan firft there* fore refolve thar Qucftion , what they feale? and then enquire how they feak t You know a Chriftian do:h gather the aflarance of his Juftificauon and Salvation by way of Argumentation, thu 5 ; He tk*t beieevetb v jafttfitd, and fhal/befa-ved: But, I beJeeve; therefore lam jttftified and jball be faved. Now [the Qjertion is which of the parts of this Argument the Sacrament idothfea'ro? Whether to the Major, the Minor, or the Conclufion ? To which I anfwer : 1. That it

fealeth

fealeth to the Truth of Gods pro. mile ( which is the Major Propositi n ,) is unqueftionablc. But whether to this alone, is all the doubt? 2. That it fealeth not to the Truth of the Minor Proportion, (that is, to the truth of our Beleevif g ) I take alfo for to bee b-yond diipme. For, firft it.£houid t\% fcale to that which h nowhere writen: For no Scripture faith, that I dobrleeVi. a. And then it fhould be ufed to flrengthpn my Faith in that which is no object of Faith: For, [ thai ldo beJeeve j is not matter of Faith, or to be be-Iceved , but matter of internal! fcn r e 9 or to bee knowne by the reflex acl of the undemanding. 5. A<fo God fhould clie let h,s feale, to my part or condition of the Covenant, as well as his owne, and feale to the truth of my word, as well as to thetiuth of his own ; for a? juftifying and favmg us is Gods condition, which he undertake^ to performe ; fo bclceving

or

or accepting Chrift is ourcondicion, which wee there profefle to performs. So that it is doub Ie(Te, that a Sacrament as it is Go Js engaging figne or feale, doth not feal to the trurh of my faith,or (ineerity of my heart in Covenanting: it were a molt grolfe conceit to imagine this.

But withall you muft unJer-ftand, that as there is in the Sacrament rectprocail action;, G xh giving, and our receiving ; fo is the j Sacrament accordingly a mutuall encasing figne or feale. As it is .given t it is Gods feale; fo that as in this full Covenant there is a mutual engaging; fo is chsre a matuaU dealing. G >d faith tous,£ here is my Sonne wh) hath bougntthce, tak; him for thy Lord and Saviour, and I will bee thy reconciled God, and pardon ind glorify thee ? ] And to this he fets his teale. Ine /inner faith, [ I am willing Lord, I here take Chri \ fot my King, and Saviour,ani Husband \ and deliver

"P

up my feffe accordingly to him: ] And hereto by receiving the offered elements, he ietteth his engaging figne or ieale; (o that the Sacrament is the ieale of the whole (Covenant.

But yet you muft remember, chat in the prefent controveriie we meodle not with it as it is mans leal, but onely as it is Gods.

So then it iscleare, that as it is Gods ieale , it iealeth the major propofitionj and as it is curs, to the minor.

But yet here you muft further diftinguim betwixt lealirg up the promiie as true in it fclf, and iealing it with application as true to me. And it is the latter that the Sacrament doth , the delivery being Gods ad of application, and the receiving ours; fo that the Propo» fuion which God iealeth ta, runs thus [If thou belccve,l doe pardon thee, and wili fave thee.]

3. Hut the great Queftion is,

Whether the Saciamcnt doc ieale

l_ to

-o

to the conclusion alfo, [That I am ;u ^ified, and fhaU be Gved ? ] To which Ianfwer, No, direcl'y and properly it doth not ; and that is evidnt from the arguments b fore Iaiddowne, whereby I proved that the Sacraments iValc not to the mnor.

For ?. thisconeluhVn is nowhere writcen in Scripture.

2. And therefore is not properly the object of Faith , whereas the fealcsare for confirmation of Faith. 5. Otherwise every man rightly receiving the lealcs, muft needs be certainly jultificd arrd faved.

4. And no Miniftereangroun* dcdlyadminifter the Sac amemsto any man but himfelfe, becauic hee can be certaine of no mans juftifi* cation and ialvation, being not eer* taine of the fmcciity ot their Faith. And if he (hould adventure to administer it upon probabilities and charitable conjecture? j then (hould he be guilty 01 prophaning the ordi* nance,and every t me tie mataketh,

be

Appendix, ji

he ftiould let (he fcale of God to a lye : And who then durf? ever adminifter a ^aeramen*,being never ccrtabe, but that he fhall thus abnfe it ?. I contefle ingcrmoufiy to ycu, that it was the ignorance of this one point which chiefly can ed mee toabftaine from adminiftr ng the Lords Supper Co many yeeres.■ I aid not under ft and, that it was neither the minor, ror conclufion, but only the major proposition of the fore-faid Argumen , which God thus fealeth. And lamforrytoice what advamage many of our mott learned Divines have given the Pa-piiis here. As one errcur drawes i onmany,andieadrthaman into a labyrinth of abfurdities • fo our Divines being rlrft mitfaken in the nature of justifying faith, thinking that it eonfirteth in [ A Beiicfe of the pardon of my owne fmnes, ] (which is this conclufion ) have therefore thought that this is it which the Sacrament fealeth. And when the Papiiis aliedge, that it is

no

j 7 a appendix*

no where written [that fueh or fuch a man is juftified] we anfwer them that it being written Thathethat beleevethis juftified] this i$ equi-valent: A groffe miftake : As if the major proportion a lose were equivalent to the eonclufion; or as if the eonclufion rruff, or can be meerly Credenda % a proper object of Faith, when but one of the pro-mifes is matter of faith , ana the other of ience or knowledge. The truth is, the major [he that beJce-veth (ball be faved] is received by Faith: The minor [that I doe fin-ccrely be'eeve] is kno^ne by inward fence and felt-reflex ion: And the eonclufion [therefore I {hall be faved j is neither properly to be be-lecved, nor fcit,but known by rea-fon, deducing it from the two firmer ; fo that faith, fenfe.and rca-Jon are all neeeflary to the producing our atfu ranee.

So you fee, what it is that is feal-ed to, 2. Now let us confider, how it iea eth ?

fealeth t Whether abfolutely 01 conditionally f And 1 anfwer, Ic fcalcth abfolutely. For the promife of God which it fealeth is not-con-ditionally,but abfolutely true.

So that the fumme of all I have iaid is this (which anfwereth the feverall queftionsj

1. The Sacrament fealeth not theabfolme Covenant or Promife, but the conditional! [Beleeve and live,]

2. It fealeth not the truth of my-Covenant, as kisGodsfole; or ic fealeth not to the truth of my faith.

3. It fealeth not to the certainty of my juftifioation and falvauon.

4. But it fea'cth to Gods pa tof theconditiocall Covenant.

5. And fealeth this conditional! promife, not conditionally , but abfoluielyyas of undoubted truth.

6' And not onely as true in it elfe, but tru: with application to mee.

So that by this time you may di'ccrne what is their meaning,who

D_<« [ay ,1

fay, that the Sacraments doc feale but conditionally, that is, as it feal-cth to the truth of the major (which is the promiie) fo thereby it may be faid to feale conditionally to the conclufion; for thecondufionis,as it were, therein contained, upon condition ©r fuppofition of the minor propofition. Hee that faith [AH Beletvers (hall be favedj faith as much at that [I (hallbe teved] it being fuppofed that lam a Beleceer: And fo you mutt under ft and our Divines in this, Yet this fpecch is leffe proper; For to fpeak properly, it doih not feale to the conclufion at all ; yet is it very ufefuli to help us in railing that conclufion, and to beperfwaded, thatwearejuftified, becaufeitio confirmed! our beliefe of that promife, which is one of the grounds of the Conclufion.

For your inference in the la& words of your objection [then let ail come that will;] If you meane LAli that will, though they come to mock or abufe the ordinance,]

then

then it will no way follow from the

do&rinewhichl have now opened.

But if you mesne, L Let all come

1 that wifc ferioufly (really or appa-

i rently) enter or renew their Cove-

j nant with Chrift, ] • I think that to

! be no dangerous or abfurd confe-

I quenee. If Chrift when he off* reth

I himfelfe,and the thing fignified, do

! fay, [ Let him that is athtrfl i come ;

i and whoever wil^ let him take the

witter of hfe freelj , Rev. 22. 17.]

j Why may not I fay fo of the figne

! and l'cale, to thofe that ferioufly

; profefle their thirit. Sure 1 fliall

ipeake but as Chrift hath taught me,

and that according to the very fcope;

of the Golpel, and the nature of

the Covenant of free grace. And

I wonder that thofe men, who cry

up the nature of free grace fo much,

fhould yet fo oppofe this free offer

ofit,andthefea:ing the free Co-

venant to them that lay da me to it

upon Chritis invitation.

Dd2 r#

To the Hnth atteL cUvtnth Cfyjeftions*

YOur i cand 11. obje^ions you raife upon my exceptions againft the book, called, The UWtrrw of McfornDivinity : And fiill you mention the Dodrine, and then the Book.

i. You think, that [Do this and live] is the voyce of the Law of works pnely, andnot of the Law , or Covenant of Grace, and that we i may not make the obtaining of | life and falvaiion the end of duty, j but mud obey in meer love ? and! j frcm thankfalnelTe for the life we ! have received.

To all which I apfwer. j. By way of explication; and 2. of pro. bation ofmy affertions,

1. Doe this a»d live, in feverall fences, is the language of both Law and Gofpel, ,. 1. When the Law fpcakethit,the fence is th $ j If thou perte&Iy keep the Lawes that I have given thee or Ch all give thee

fo

fo long thou /halt continue this life in the earihly Par'adife which I have given thee: But if once thou finne,thou (hair dye.

a. When the GofpeJ fpeaketh it, the (ence is thus: Though thou haft incurred the penally of the Law £y thy fane, yet Chrift hath made fatisfa&ion: Do but accept him lor Lord and Saviour, and renouncing all other, deliver up thy felfe unre-fervedly to him^and love him above sfli, andobeytiimhncerely, both in doing and fuffering > and overcome and perievere herein to the end; 2nd thou (halt be juftified from all that the Law can aceufe of, and restored to the favour and blefliogi which thou lull loft, and to a farre greater.

Thus the Gofpel faith,?)* this and live. That the Gofpel comtnan-deth all this, 1 know you will not qucftion ; and that this is doing, you muft needs acknowledge* But all the qucftion is,whether we may doe it that wee may live? I have

fully

folly explained to you in this

Treatife already in what fence

our doing i$ required, and to what

ends, viz,, cot to be any part of a

legall Righteonfncffe, nor any part

of fatisfacYion for oar unrighteouf-

j nefle; but to be our Gofpel righte-

oufoefle, or the condition of our

I participation in Chrift,whois our

| legal! Righteoufnefle, and fo of all

i the benefits that come with him.

In thefe feverall refpeSs and jfeofei following the Golpell cctn* mandeth us to a& for life.

I. A wicked man, or nnbelee-ver,may, and mnft hear the Word, pray, enquire of others, &c xhat fo he mayobtainetbe : filtt U& of grace and faith. This I now prove, //*5 5.^.6,7. letus^ZtQ^o. Pro. 1.2^,24,25. Awt^Sf)^ A&.i. 37. If*.}.i6. Mm. 11.15. & 13 43. £*(,i&i?,3i. /*&.5' 2 f • '4$' 10.1,2.12.2V R,om ;o. 15.14.

Yet doe I not affirm, that God never prevented mens endeavours;

he

be is ibmetime found of them that fought him not. Nor doe I fay, that God hath promifed the life of Grace to the endeavours of nature; But their duty is to feek life; and halfe promifes,and many encourage* ments God hath given them ; fuch as that in loci. 2.12,15,14, who knoweth hue Gcd will, &c So Zepb.2.%. Exod.$*^o* And that in Aft 8.2*. *PrAj therefore if per* hdpj the thoughts of thy heart m*y be forgiven thee.

a. That a man may aft for the increafeof thisipirituall life when he hath it,methinks youfhouldnot doubt, if you doe fee, 1 Tet. 2.1,2. & I. 32. & I Pet.U%fi t -J 9 %. & J.

18. And the Parable of the Talents LMat.2 5.2<5.27.38«?o.

3. That wee may and muft a£fc for the life of Reconciliation, and Juftification, and Adoption, is beyond difputc: How oft doth Scripture call on men, to Repeat, to Be-Ieeve, to Pray, to forgive others, and to reforme, that their finnes Dd 4 may

So Appendix.

may be forgiven them f I have quoted the Scriptures before, when I opened the conditions of juftiflca-tion, /y4,t.i6\i 7 ,i8. 7/455.6,7.

je^#.g. 22. 7<M0«;.i'5* And we

J are ft ill faid to be juftified by faith,

iwhich is anacl of ours.

I 4. That we may a& for to ob -

j taine afiurarscc both of our jultifica-tjon and fan3ih*cation. is undeny-

j able, 2 Ptt.x.io* 2 OM3.5.&C.

5, That wemaya& foreternall

life and fal vat ion • me th nkei, he

thatbearerh thefac^ofa Chriliian,

fhonld not deny: arid that both for,

Lit Tide to it, *. A (Tu ranee of our enjoying it : and 3» for poffeflion

j nfelf. I foall but quote the Scrip-

jtures for brevity fake, defiring you to read them, and fzvt me the la bour oftrancribingthem, Rtv. 22. 14. John$. 5 9,4©, '^ AU MVlS.

;and7.ig. Lu'^i^i^ Thil. 2,17. Rgm. 2,7,10, I ^.9.24. 2. Tim, 2. 5.12. iT//w. 6.12. 18.19. Phil. 3.I4. UW4t, 25. i^ir. i5.1aft. *C°**\*ll» ands* 10, ii.z Pet.

Appendix. gi

1.10,11. Luke xi.'2%\ Hb t a. i # , Lkktiz*. UW.17. ThefrJaft [ place* iKew^tha^ cfje Piping hell, I and dammtfoh, is 3 neceiTary end ofoura-iVin-^ and dams, as well as j theobta'hiag of heaven.

If when you have read, and weigh* cAchef? Scriptures you be not con -; vinced, that we rmy aft or do?, for ' life and-alvauon,(and Toe tHat [Da I ; tins andltve] is in Tome fence the j : language of the Gofpell) I (hall ! queftion,-whether you make the 'Scripture the Rule of yourfaith, or be not rathe r one 4 of them that can force upon thcmfelves a faith of their owne or others making.

Oyjdh But is it not the motf excellent and Gospel-like frame of fpirit, to doe all cut of meere love to God, and from Thankfulneffe for life'obtained by Chriit, andgi-venus.

A*fa I 1. If it come not from love to God, it is not fircerev

•2. Yet doth not if.; : any

where (et our love ro "G&J/aVHrb

$x . A}}tvfcx %

\ ourowneioules, in oppofition \ nor | tcaeh cs to love God, and cot our jfelves: bitcontrarilyjoyneth them [bothtogether, andcommandeth us both. The love of our fcivej, and defirc of our prefervation, woqid never have been planted fo deeply in our natures by the God of nature, if' it had been unlaw full.

I conclude therefore, that to love

God, and not our felves, and fo to

doe all without refpeel to our own

good, i$ no Gofpell frame $f fpi*

i ric.

| a. TbankfulnerTe for what wee ■ have received (either in pofieffion, title, or promife, muft be a fingular fpurtoput m on duty. But I pray you tell me, Have you received all the life and mercy you do expect ? Are you in Heaven already ? Have | you all the grace that you need or defire in degree ? If nor, why may you not labour for that you have -not, as well as be thankful! for that youhavc . ? Or have you as full a cemjpty of it hereafter^* you doe

d-fire t

defire ? If not, why may you not labour for it?

ANd to fhew you the vanity, and intolerable, damnable wickednefle of this do&rine, Jet me put to you a few more confederations.

J. Doe yoa think you snay a& for your naturaU life , to preierve it, or recover and repaire any decaying! in it. ? if not, why will you labour, and eate, aod drink, and ileep f why will you leek to the Phyfician when you are fick? Doe you all ihis in meere love,or thank, fulnefle, or from obedience which hath nofurthcrend ? Orifyoudo, why may you not dee as much for your foule, as for your body ? Is ic leffe worth, or doth not God require it, or will he not give you leave ? Hath not Chrfti redeemed your body alfo ? and is k ^ot his purchaie, and cha^gq^Dd merit to piovidcfor it ? And yet yuiknow

well

wtll enough, that this excufeth not you from your duty ; and why then (hould it excufeyou from ufing mcanci for your foulc?

2. Nay, hath not God put you upon farre more for your foule, then for your body f For this life.he bath bid yeu . be careful! for nothing ; cai^ aliycur careonhim, for he ea-reth for you; Care nor for romor-row: Why are ye cart full, Oyee of little fait bt Labour not for the food that penjbeth : Lay not h? for your fehet a treaffirm on earth t e^r. But hath he faid fo concerning the life bfyourfoulesin in-itnorrality, Care j not, labour not, lay not up a trea-| fure in heaven / Or rather hath he j not a mmanded you the clean eon's trary, to care, to ieare> to labour, to ftrive, to fight, to lun, and this -with all your might and flresgth.? And yet do'you think you tnay.not aft or work for iifc and falvation ?

5. I pray you tell me, Doe you ever u(c to pray or no ? Doe ycu think it neceffary orlawfull. to pr^y

(pardc n-

(pardon me for putting iuch groffe interrogatories to you ; for the j maine queftion which you raife, is\ farrc more grofle ?) Ifyou do pray, | what doe you pray for ? Is it only for your body, or-alfo for your foul?• And is not earneft praying for life, pardon, andfalvation, fome proper j kinJe of doing ? It may be you j j will fay, ycu pray onely for <$6d$ glory s and for the Church : But I hath not God as much care of his i Church and his glory, as of your foulef Or may you pray for other mens foules, and not your ovvne, when you are bound to love them but as your felfe? Sure, if yon may i not make the obtaining of life, the ei=d of yoar labour and duty f you may not make it the end or your Prayers, which areparcofycur labour and duty.

And indeed sccoxdirg to the opinion wh.ch I oppofe, it mult needs follow, that Petition is to be laid afide,and no part of prayer Jawiull, burpraiie and thankfgiving.

4. Doe

4, Doe you not forget to make adifferencebstwixtearth and heaven? IafTureyou,if you do, itvvill prove 2 foule miftake; if you once begin to think you are in Heaven, and as you would be , and all the work if done, ani you have nothing to doe but return thanks, you fliall ere long, / warrant you, be convin. ecd roundly ofyourcrrour. And / pray you, what doe you lefle by this opinion, then fay, Soule, take thy ! reft, I am well, I have enough : For if you mutt not labour for life and falvation, bat onely in thank-fn'nefle obey him that hath faved you .- What is this, but the work of Heaven ? Indeed there, and only there, we fh ill have nothing to do, but to love, and ;oy, andpraifc, and bctrunkfull.

y. Mechinks,ifyoudobutcon-fider what Heaven and Hell, reward and the pumlhmmt are, you fh ould cafily com: to your fclfe and the truth. Heaven ind reward is nothing die but the enjoyment of 1 God

£

jippittdix. 87

God eternally in perfection: Hell or the puni(hment is moft in the lofle of this enjoyment, and the feif-tormentings that will eternally follow the confederation thereof", and of the folly that procured ir.

Now is it fuch a legall fkvifli mercenary thing for a Chtiftian to feck after the fruition of God ? Or to be carefull that he may not be everJaftingly deprived of it ? is it poffiblc that any ibber confidering man can think lb?

6* Doe you not think that you may and muft feek after the enjoyment of God in thofc beginnings and fore-tarts which are here to be expe&ed ? May not that be the end of yoor dwties, care, feare, labour, watchfulnefle . ? May you not groane after him, and enquire, and i urne the ftreame of your endeavors this way ? And may you not bee jealous, andcarefuil, and watchfull, left you fliould iofe what of God ydu do enjoy ; and left any jftrange-ncfle or difpleaibrc (hcuid arife f I

dare

| dare not qucftion,but that this is

| the very bulinefle which you tnind,

and the ufaall frame of your fpiric.

And is it poflible, that you can think it your duty, tofcekthefore-talb, and the firtt finks of Heaven, and yet think it ualavrfnU to labour for the full everlarting pofleffi • on ? How can thefc hang together. ?

7. Coniider ferioufly , / pray you, to what end God implanted fuch affection* and powers in your foule. Whydidheereare in yon a power and propenfity to intend the ultimate end in all your endeavours, to value that end, to love it, drfire it, ftudy and care how to obtain it; to fears the lorte of it, -and to loath all that rfcflftcth yonr fruition , to feekand labour after itsenjoym:m< s Why is the love of our lei vs. and de-fire ot our prefervation Co natural! ? Surely it is la*fn'l for you to care and defire, and labour for God In Heaven or for nothing.* Arid its ourduy to fea re the loifeofthij, or w feare no evill at all -5 And I can

hardlyj

hardly think that God would create fiich powers in the fotsle whieh fliould be utterly afeleffe. Then let us no more cry downe the abnfe of our affections and powers, but the ufeof them; and lb turne worfe then Stoicks: This is fuch a miking God the Author of fin, as few men durft ever before be guilty of. And certainly, if the efeaping of HelJ.and the obtaining of Heaven may not be the end and work of aJi thefe affections, then much lefTemayany inferiour thing*

8. Nay , eonfider whether^ou doe not make thefoule and life of man to beufelcfle as to the obtaining of any futare happinefle : And foyou takedown the biefttd order which God ha?h efiabliflicd in nature by Creation, and maintained in the conftant courfe ofprovidencej and this you uodenyably doe in taking downe from u? the ultimate end : Take downe that, and all inferiour ends are nothing , and all meancs doe !©ic their nature, and

become

t A

go Appendix.

becomeufcleflc: Audio the foule of the moft gracilis man (hall be no fitter to attaine and proiccute its end, and do no more thereto, | then a bcaft or a Hone; Thii confluence isunjenyab'e.

9. Nay, confider whether you doe not make all the graces of the Spirit (except love, joy and thank-fulnefle) toDea!rnoftvaine 3 andtbe blefled Jupernaturall work of the fpirit upon us, to be a ufeleffe labour? Doth not God oncly create in nature, but alio new create by grace in us fuch things as Defire , Care,Feare, Zeale, Courage, Diligence, WatchfalnefTe,&c. and may we not ufe them f Surely, if wee may not ufe them for Heaven, then for nothing. And I cannoc beleeve that God will at fo dear a rate plant in us a heavenly nature, and thefe heavenly Graces, and then make it our (in to ufe them for Heaven, and that while we arc here in the way where we have fush need of them.

10. But cfpecially, I would have

Y™

you throughly confidcr to what end God did till his word fo with Precepts, Prohibitions, Promifes conditional and Threats ? Doth not almoftall the Scripture for the do&rinall part eonfift of thefe ? And are not Precepts to put us on to du-tic /And hath not every duty its end even for our felves ? And can it be any other then the obtaining of the fruition of God in Heaven ? fo what end have the prohibitions elfe } And what are the conditional promifes for, but to I tirre us up to belccveand to performe the conditions, that fo wee may enjoy the promifed good ? And why are the Threatnings but with thefeare of the evill ihr^atned to deter us from xhefinne j and to the duty * What think you is the reafon that God doth fo commonly Promife Hea-(Ven r and threaten Hell, if it be un-iawfulifor us to labour for Heaven, and toefcape Hell ? Doe you not hereby infinuate an accufation of vanity at ieaft againft God and his

Lawes ? Nay, the very eflenec of the Covenants doth conGft in all thefc parts conjunct r And will you alio overthrow the very cfl'cmiall parts of the Law or Covenant, by tnaking it un .awful! for us to admit their proper ufe > To quote the particular places for this.would bee needlcfleand endlefife.

is. Methinks you mould be fo farrefrom qneftioning the lawfull-neffe of labouring for Hcaven.that you mould rather think you have almoft nothing elfe to labour for. Gods glory and your falvation, not disjun^ but conjunct, are all the bufinetfc you have to look after: What doe you live for * Why have you all the mercies of your life ? Is it onely that you may be thankfull for life and mercy ? Or that you might alfo improve them to fome further advantage? I hope (for all yourqucftion) that you make it the greatett labour of your lite to feek for afTurance and obraiument of your eternall hap-pinefle in God. 12. And

Appendix, q^

fcfc And once more let me tn-

treatyou to con/ider, whether there

be any hope of that mans falvations,

who fhall reduce this your doctrine

into his practice ? I abhorre cenfo-

riQufaeffe, but I defire it may bee

confidered, beeaufcitisa matter of

fuch unfpeakable importance: For

furely, if this Doctrine pra6tifed

will not tiand wiih filvatfon, it is

time for you & all men to abhor it:

And indeed , this isitihatmaketh

me fay fo much againft i^becaufe it

hath a holy pretence, and is very

plaufible totheinconlidcrate, but

yet is no better then damnable if it

be pra£ifed; 1 fay f if praaifed 3

tecaufc the op nion as toch is not

fo; for 1 bekevemanyagodJy man

doth ere as foufely as this. But it

I is poffiblefora man by readings and

I argument, tobe drawn to entertain

: fomt opiniom in bis braine , (not

oneiy confequemly, but) directly

contrary toihepra&iceofhis heart

and iite, and yet himfelf to continue

that praclice ,• Even as a w eked

man

|94 appendix.

man may entertaine thofe troths into his braine in fpecuiation, which dire&Jy contradi& his continued pra&ice. Now ic being the pra&ice here that is of abiblute neceffity to fa-vat ion »• and not the opinion, I donb: not but fuch thaterre ©nely in this opinion , not reducing iti into pra&ice.may be faved.

But ifpra£ifed,I cannot fee but it will certainly damne.

For fearch the Scriptures impatf- -tially and confider,whether feeking i Heaven be not nccefiary to the ob -taining of it ? And whether thofe ' that fcek net, and labour not for ic, j be no; (hut out ? View over the places which I.quoted you before, and th?n judge. Mutt nor z\\ that will have lire, come to Chriii, that they may have it ? Job. 5. 39. ^ 0 . And mutt not they drive to enter ic at the Itraight gate, and lay violent hands on the Kingdomc of Heaven ? And by up forthcmfelves a treafure in Heaven, and feek the Kingdome ot God and bis Righte-

outnefle

oufnefle id the firft place, A&t. 6. 3 3. And prcfle on that we may at-taine the Refurre&ion, PhiL 3*14. And lay up a good foundation a. gainft the time to ccm^doing good works, and lay hold on etcrnall life, 1 TiwG.12.18,19. And workout our falvation wkh fearc and trem. bling, 'Phil. 2»i 2. And do hiscon> mandmems^that we may have right to the Tree of Life, and enter in by the gates into the City, Rev. 22. 14. And make friends of the unrighteous Mammon, that they may receive us into everlafting habita-Itions; See aifo Atv.a. 7.10,1 1,13, I4>**»i7*ip *3« 2^27,28,2?. &3.M.4»5- 8* 1©*H* 12,12,15, 16,20,21,**. Scealfo^f.iS.8, p. M.5.29. ^#.2. 28. iTim. 4. 8. /«fw.t.i*. 1 frr.9.10. ^w.2.7, 7/>. 1. 2. iT#w.4.i8« Mat^.i2. &6,i, & t?.ai.'£»4to.ift.P£<A 1.19, 1 y/M.9. Hct.2.i.2Tsm. 2. 10. i Thftf: 5% $ t9 . ^tf.16.17. Yea, weare commanded to feare him that is able to dcftroy both foul I . . and

and body in Hell: even under that consideration to feare him, Z»£.ia. ?. And to feare, left a promife be* ing left us of entring into refl, we fhould ccme (hort of it > Heb. 4. 1. And what is that but to feare the loflTe of Heaven 9 or to feare Hell ? Prov.% 5,14. Mar.^.ig. & 16.16. Afat.$,r<$, Rom.ii* 21.44. 1 Gr. J o. 12. Hdr. 12,15,16. /*»#; J 5. p.12.

But Imuft flop; for if I (hould ! quote all Scriptures that prove this, j 1 (hould tranferibe a great part of the Bible.

Confider then,if even many that feck to enter (hall not be able, whether they are like 10 enter that never feck ? And if the Righteous be fcarccly faved, what fhall become of them that thought it unlawfull to labour for fal vat ion?

13. Laltly, how h it that you doe. not fee, that by this doctrine you condemne not all the Saints, but even the Lord hirnfelfe? Did aot'P.a*t therefore keep under his

body,

body and bring it bio fubje&ion, left whea-hcaad preached to others, hfmfcl^fliOttWbe a calkaway/i Car. 9.27* What can bee plainer? Did not Air Ahum obeybecaufe helcok-*dfora City which had foundation* I JJehi l.iQi And LMofes, becaufe behad refpect to the recom* j pence of Reward? 26. And all that j cloud of Witncffes obey and fuflfer,} that they might attain abetter Re- \ fiirfc&ion? 3 5., & did they not feek a better ■Countrey, thac is, anhea- j vcnly?- and therefore God is not -tfhamed to bee called their God : far he hath prepared for them a City y j ver.16. Doe not all that confelTe therrsiejvef Itrangerson earth,plainly declare that they feeke another Countrey? ver.13.14* Whofoevcr therefore (hall hereafter tell you, that you mult not do good to attain falvation. or cicape damnation , as beifcg too mercenary andflavifli for a Son of God; abhor his Doclrine, though he were an Angel from heaven : And if this fatisfie you not, Ejc look

look to Jefus x he Am hour and Hiou fhcr of your Faith t who forth* $tty that wa* fee before iwmgUwJared theCroffe^efpifingthe flkamc, and is fetdownat the right band of God; Heb. 12, i j. Rem. 14/p. And as j4dam fell to bee liker the BcviM when he needs would be as <3cd : fo take heed whither you are failing wberi you will be better then Jefus Chrift. >uh And doe I after all this needto anfwer the Common Gbj&Sfoite;, that it is mercenary and flav fti, to labour for falvation. ? Muft 1 be put to prove that the Apoftles and €hrifth mfelfe were nor mercenary flaves ? or that Gods Word hath notprefcribedusaflavifhtask? Indeed ifwe did all for a reward diftant from God, and for that alone, w ith-out any conjunction of FiliaU love, and expected this'Reward for the worth of our work, then it o^gHt beweli called mereenarytandfk*)&. Bur who among us plead for fuch a working ?

From

FRomall this yon may gathcrpart of the Anfivcr toyour nextQue» fttoo : why I except againft the book called, The M*rr$waf Afodern *J>ivif»itj} Becaufe it is guilty of' this hainous Doclrine. Yet further let me tell you, that I much value the greatcfl part of that Bcok, and commend the iuduftry of the Au-thour, and judge him a man of god-linelTc and Moderation by his writing : And had I thought as meanly of i^as I do of Coljftr■,Sprigs , Hsfr*. /***>& many fuch abominable Pamphlets that now fly abroad, I fhould not have thought it worthy die taking fo muchnoticc of. Butbecauie it is otherwise ufeiuh, 1 thought meet to give you warning, tha: you drink n^t in the cv ill with the good. And eipcciaily becauie the names that to applaud it, may be a prooabie fhare to entangie you here in. And: I conjecture the Authours ingenuity to bee luch, that he will be glad to Ee 2 knowt

too zsfppentlix.

know his own miihkcs, and to cor red them: Ocherwife I am un-feignedly tender of depraving or carping at any mans laboars. Some ©fthefe miftaking patTages I will ihew yon briefly. As page 174. Q*efi* Would yon not have believers to efchew cvill and do good for fear of HelI,or for hope of Heaven? A*f* No indeed, I would not have any believer do the one or the other: for fo farre as they do fo 0 their obedience is but flavifti, &c. To which end he aliedgeth, ln\e 1. 74.75. But that fpeaks of Fieedome from feare of our Enemies, fueh as Chrift forbids in L nken. 5. where yet he com mandeth the fearing of God: And conlequently, even that fear of enemies is forbidden, as they ftand in opposition toGod,and not ashisin-rtrumtntsin iwbordination. Orjit it be even a feare of God that is there meant; yet it cannot bee all fear of him or his difpieaiure: fofar . as we are are in danger of En or iuffering, we mud feare it: and io

farre

Appendix, rojT

farrcas our affu ranee is ft ill imperfect : a jealoufieofour own hearts, and a dreadfull reverence of God alfo are neceflary. But not the Le-gall terrours of our former bondage, iueh as arife from the apprehenfion of fin unpardoned, and of God as being our Enemy.

In the i So Page, he denieth the plain fence of the Text. Mat . 10.1S. In the 155 page, hec makes this the difference between the two Covenants: One faith , [ Do this and Live] the other faith, [ Live and do this 1 The one faith, [ Do this for life] The other faith* I Do this from life.]

But I have proved fully, that theGofpel alfo faith,r Do this for life.]

So in his fecondpart, page;ipo. His great note to know the voice of the Law by, is this, [ that when in Scripture there is any morall work commanded to bs done, either for the efchuingof punifhmenf, or upon promife of any. reward temporall E e 3 or

i ~ ' ——-

oreternall j or ehe when any promife is made with the condition of any work to be done,which is cotnanded in the Law ; there is to be under-ftocd the voice of the Law.] A notorious and dangerons mi-i fake, which would make a Imoft all j the New Teftament, and the vety ! Sermons of Chrift himfelfe to bee ' nothing bar the Law of work s. I j have fully proved before ,th at tnorall j du-ies as part of our fincerc obedi-j ence to Chrift,ire part of the con. ditionof our Salvation; andfot it to be performed. And even Faith is a morall duty. It is pkty that anyGbriftianfhould no better know the Law from the <&ofpel • efpeci-ally om that pretendcth to difcover it toothers.

So in the next page iqt, hee intolerably abufeth the Scripture, in affirming that of 2 Thefi. 12. to be thevoiee of the Law, and fo making 2W a Legall Preacher.

And as (namefully doth he abufe I Cor. 6,$ 9 \o. As if the Apoftle

when '

when he biddeth them, not to b^e deceived, were deceiving them him-felfe in telling them, that no unrighteous perfbn, fornicators, adul-terers ; &c. [hallinherit the Ktnglom of Cod* Is this Law ? Then let me be a Preacher of the Law. If TauI be a Legalist, I willb* one too. But thefe men known it, that the Ape* Hie fpeaketh of thofe that die fach ; and that thele finues exclude men theKingdome, aschcy are Rebellion againliChrifVtheir Lord, and fo a violation of theNew Covenant.

So in part fir ft page 189. Hee

mentioneth a Preacher , that faid,

hee durft not exhort nor perfwade

tinners to belieyc their finncs were

pardoned , before he faw their lives

reformed, for feare they fliould take

] more liberty to fin. And he cen-

; fureth that Preacher to be ignorant

intheMyitery of faith. I epnfelTe

! I am inch an ignorant Preacher my

j felfe; and therefore malldcfirc this

: knowing man torefolve me in a few

1 doubts. 1. Where he learned, or

_ E e 4 h ow

| Jwhcccao prove, that JuftiftW iFaith W abe]ecving t hatoiirfiin« are pardoned? when Scripture ib often Klfcthui, that wc areja!lificd by Faith: and fore the Objeclmuft & wfoft the Ael; and therefore that which followed, the A^ is not the Object.

. If we muft believe that we are pardoned, that fo we may be pardoned; then we mull believe a lye to make it a truth. Alio db:h not j the Scripture bid us Repm\ heUeve j **dkec tapti<ed fir the remiftg* of \p*mt\ but not firft to beleeve the j jRemiflfionofourfinnes?! have pro-jved already that juftifying Faith is I another matter: and this which hee jealleth Faith is properly no Faith at J4ll ; but the knowledge of a conelu-ifion, one of whofc premifes is afforded by Faith, and the other by Scnfe. -

If therefore the Preacher had faid, that he would not have men accept Chrift, and fo bdeeve for Remiflion^before their lives be re-'^*zs==a formed.

Afpen&x. Jo; i

formed, then I (nculd have iubteri-bed to this mars cenfurc of him. 2.1 dcinc him to cell me, whether he can prove that any mans tinnes are pardoned before chey have ae. eepted Chritt for their Lord f that is, before Faith. If not, 3. Whe. thcr this be not the fubjeclion of the feule to Ch ift to bee governed by hjm ; and (b a heart-reformation ? 4. Wretrrer the reformation of the life doih nor immediately even the fame moment follow the hearts reformation ? And if all this bee lb, ( as I know ic is) then the ignorant Preachers doctrine mull ftand good, that Reformation of life muit goe before the bdie.'e or knowle, ge of pardon, though not before juliifyifjg Faith.

Many other intolerable errcurs I could (hew you in that Book: as his making the New Covenant to threaten nothing but pre tent Af- j Hiilions, and loiTe of cur preient ! communion with God, page 208. j and that we pray for no other kinde! E e 5 of1

of pardon, page 206,210. contrary to Ulfar* 16.16. Heb, io, 26*. %7* 28.29.30,31. Hfb.2^.Ioh.i^ m i»6* & many other places: To his affirming that wefinne not againft the Cove-nant of works; which /have confuted in the Aphorifmes.

So his making the Law of Chrift and the Law of Faith to bee two Lawes or Covenants: when that which he ealleth the Law of Chrift is but part of the matter of the New Covenant.

But this is not my bufincfle; on* ly becaufc you urged me , / have given you a graine of fait whercwich to feafon fbme paflages in your reading that and fueh like Books.

And that paffagein lA.Shepbeardt Selctt **/*/, page 96. 102. [ that no unregenerate man is within the eompafle of any conditional! pro-mile ] had needof a graine too.

To

\f\7 Hat you objectconcerning V V my making a neceffity of pubhke covenanting, / wholly ac. knowledge: And /heartily wifli, that inftead of our large mixtNati-onall Covenant; and inReadofthe /ndependants Politicall Church, making Covenant, we had the Gof-pel or New Covenant conditions formally in publike tendered to all tbe people of this Land; and that the fame being opened tothem^they ! might knowingly and ferioufly pro-feflc their eonfent, ( and ;fthey fub-fcribed their names, it would bee more folemnly engaging: ) and this before they receive the Sacra-. tnent of the Lords Supper.

This, x. would takeoff mofl Ar gumencs which are brought for a neceflfity of Re-baptizing : 2, And would tend tntch to engage men to

thci?'

their obedience to Chrirt,when they havefo foleronly promifedit under their hands. 3. And / think that as an unfeigned heart covenanting with Ghrift is true f fauh, andoftheEf-fcneeofourChriftianity ; foisthis publike eovenaniing of our vifible Chriftianit}%

Though other mens protnife* on

ourbehalfemay beof ufe to infants;

j yet when we come to age, we are

I bound of abfolute neceffity to a per-

fbnall Faith and covenanting.

This alfo would anfwer the ends of the ancient cuftom of Confitmati. on : And to this end is ic,that the \ Church hath Hill ufed to rehearfe the Creed, or Articles of Faith, and to reqnirethe people to Hand up to hgnifie their Affent and Confent: which % for my pare, / think not onely a laudablecurtome.but for the fubftanceofit, amatterofneceflity; fo wee do but carefully Keep away 1 that Cu^omarineffe, ceremoniouf-| nefie and formality, which fpoileth 1 the molt aeceflary and weighty du «

I could wi(h therefore that this practice were efbblifoedby authority. And,formy felfe,I doadtni-Dilier the Sacrament to none, that do not folemnly profeflfe their aflenc to every fuodamentall Article of Faith exprefly mentioned to them, and their content that Chrift (hall be their Lord and Saviour, and that they will faithfully andfincerelyo-bey his Scripture Lawcs.

To the thirteenth and fourteenth Qb\t£tions..

Y

Our 13. and 14. Objections, which charge me not with er-rour, but only 'with angularity, I willanfwer together. And I am the leflecareiull to anfwer you in this matter, becaufe I refolve to fiand or fall to the Iudgement of Scripture only. And to tell you the truth, vhile I bufily read, what other men

iav

T

fay imhefecontroverfies^mymind

wasfoprepofleiTed withtheirno:i-

ODS,that Ionrdnorpoflibly fee the

truth, in its owne nature and naked

evidence: and when I entered into

publike deputations e ncerning it,

though I was truely w illing to know

the truth, yet my mind was lb fore-

ftalled wirh borrowed notions, that

I chiefly fludied ho v to make good

theopioions which I had received,

and ran further ft ill from the truth :

yea when 1 read the truth in Doctor

Prejlon and other mens writings, I

did not confider and underhand it:

and when I heard it from them,

whom I oppofed in wrangling difpu-

tatiom, or read it inbookes ofcon^

troverfie, Idifccrned it leaft cf all,

but only was fturpened the more a-

gainft it: till at laft, being in my

ficknelTecaft far from home, where

1 had no booke but my Bible, I itt

toftudythe truch from thence, and

from the naure of the things, and

naked evidence; & fo,by theblerTing

of God, difcovered more in one

^ x _ week,

weeke, then I had done, before in feventcea yea res reading, hearing and wrangling. Not that I therefore repent of reading other mens writings: forwichout that I had not been capable of thofc latter ftudiei.

So that as I fetched not this doctrine from man, foyoumuft beare with me. if I give you the lelTe of mantoatteft it.

Yet that you may fee I am not fingular , as you conceive, I will (hew you the concurrent judgments of one or two.

. Mr. fVallis (a man of Angular worth, I am confident, by his own writing,though I know him not) in his anfwer to the Lord Brook* ', pag.94. faith, That Faith is an ac« cepting of Chrift offered, rather then a beleeving of a Propofition affirmed.

But becaafe I will not fill my pages with other mens words, I wiU alledge but one more; and that one who is beyond all exception for piety, Onhr doxnelfe, and Learning, even Di.Ptefloz. iThat

i. Thai Faith ccnteinethfeve-rali a&s.

2. That it is both in the under* Handing and will.

3. That theprinc'pallafl is accepting or eon fenr.

4. That it i$ the accepting of ChriM for Lord as well as Saviour.

5. That the object is Chrift him-fclf, and not his benefits, but in a remote fence and fecondarily.

6. That Faith confiiicth in Covenanting or Marriage contract. All thife he is fo plaice and full in, that /findehimfpeaking my ovvae thoughts in my ovvne words; and begun to think.when /readhim, that men would think /borrowed ail from -D. Preftsn Read -him in his Trcatife of Faith, pag.44,45,4^, 47.48,49* sorfifijjp Alfo Of Eftflfiail Fmh t pag, 40, 41, 87. hrAlrettife ofFaith,$zg> i^, 15, 16,20,. 21, 56,57,58.

7. But efpecially,the chief point that I ft and upon, and am like to be oppofed raoft in^hehandleth fo fully \ and>

and aflerteth fo frequently, as if it j were the choiceft notion which he defired to divulge, viz,, That jufti-fyirg faith as fuch, if a taking of Chrift for Lord as wellas for Savi-our. Of fo many placcs,I will tran-» fcribe two or three.

And firft his definition of the a&ivepart of faith, is the very fame with mine. Of Faith ,pag.^4. [It is toBeleeve,notonely that €hrift is offered to us, but alfo to take and receive him as a Lord and Saviour] that is,both to be faved by him, and to obey him. Mark it (faith he) I put them together, to take him as a Lord and Saviour; for yon (hall finde, that in the ordinary phrafe of Scripture, they are put together, Jefus Chrirt our Lord and Saviour; therefore wee mutt take heed of disjoyning thofe that God hath joyned together .- Wee mult take Chrift as well for a Lord as a Saviour; let a man doe this, and he may be aflured that his faith is a juftify-ing faith ; therefore mark it dili-' gently,

gently; if a man will takeChrift for a Saviour cnely, that will not ierve

I the turr:e \ Chri \ giveth not him-feJie to any upon that condicion on-

\ Jy to fav<- him 9 but we muft take him as a Lord too, to be fabjeSto him, and obey him, and to fquarc our anions accordingto his wii,&c.

So of EffcttHiU Faith, pig.o2. Now faith is nothing but this: VVe come and tell you that Chrift is offered; if you will be content to kc all thefe things go, and to turn your hearts to him. then the whole beat ofa mansminde is turned the con-. tr*ry way, and let upon Chrift; this is fudb Faith indeed, &c. Now if we were not riiiftiken in it, there would be no qudtion of this: We think that faith is nothing but a per -fwafion that our fins are forgiven, a perfwafion that the promhes are tru:, and the Scripture true, a per-iwalion that Chril* died for my iios; And thence it is, that men are apt to be deceived in ir. If they took

Faith

Faith as it is in its felfe, [a Marriage four feives to Chrilt, with all our heart and afre&ions, when hee hath given himfeife to us as In Mar-riage,andwc are given to him,]iti doing this, we fliould never be deceived.

So in his Treatife of the New £w*»4nf,pag.4;S*you mu % know that the Covenant is then diflbJved, when that is diflblved that did make the Covenant : Look what it is thatputs a man into the Covenant of Grace at the firfi; when that is taken away, then the Covenant is diiaonulled between God and us • but till then the Covenant remaines fure. Now what is ic that makes the Covenant ? Mark it: This is that which makes the Covenant when Jefus Chrift offereth himfciftouSjand makes known his content, &c when wcagain come and take him, and give our confent to make him our Lord,and we fub» je£t our feives to him to be his ; whenwc lay to the promiied feed,

He

\l6 Appendix*

He (haH be my God and my Go-

vemour, and I will be among his ! people, and be fubjeft to him ; I fay, I when the heart gives a full confent

to this,3cc* now the Covenant and I contract is made between them, j Now as long as this union con-; tinues between Chrift and us, the ! Covenant is not difannulled ; So j that in a word, the Covenant is nc-i ver nullified till thou haft ehofen to j thy fclfe another husband, till thou

haft taken to thy felfe another

Lord J &c.pag.459. So that here you fee 8 l /.that every

infirmitj breaks not the Covenant.

See alfo TrestiftofLove, pag. 147. 9. That there is a Gofpel curfc

followingthe breach of the Gofpel

Law, and that icis unrepealableand

more terrible then that of the L*w,

pag. 19,20.

to. What neer conjunftion love

hath with Faith in jnftifying. See

Tretttfe of Effc8»*U F.titb^ t t \%. ii. That the promife and offer

of Chrift isgeneralJ, fee Trettifeof I Faith % \

F *^,pag p.io. I will tranfcribe but one more, Treatife of the New Covenant, gag.$i7,ji8. Youmuft know theie is a two-fold Cove-nam, one of works, another of grace &c. The Covenant of grace runs in thefe termes [Thou thali be-1 leevej thou (halt rake my Sonne j for thy Lord and thy Saviour, and thou (bait likewifc receive the gift ' of HightecufneiTe , wh'eh was wrought by him, for an absolution for thy fimus, for a reconciliation with me, and thereupon thcu&alt grow up in love and obedience to-wards me, Then I will be thy Gtd t *nd thou (halt be my people.] Thins tke Covenant ofgrace,&c.

In tkis.youfeealfo, li-lvThat love and fincere obedience are parts of the condition of the New Covenant

Thus yon fee I am not in thefe 1 2. points lingular ; And in more could; I alio prove his context ; though in feme things I eonfeffehe diircreth; as in making Faith an

inilru-

inftrument in our justification, p. $4. Of Faith, Bnt as i take that to be ^fmall difference ; fo it is apparent by the forccited places.that he took Faith to juftifie, as the condition of J the Covenant j and fa the difference , is but veiball; yet fpeakmg in the , common phrafe put him upon that I abftirdity.pag.5-6. Treatifeof Faith, viz,* to lay , That reconciling and juftifyingarea<9s of Faith : If he had faid,but that they are effects of Faith, it had been more then (in proper ftrid* fence taken) can be proved.

To the fifteenth Okjt&io*.

TO yout fifteenth OjecYion I aniwer, 1. The Apoftle in thole pkcesdealeth with the Iewes, who truftedco works without and againft Chrift: This is nothing a-gai.-irt them that fet not up works

in

appendix. v\$

m opposition nor go ordination » but oncJy in fatofdinaton to Chritt.

2. If I affirmed that works, are the leaft part of that Rightcouf-nefle which the Law reqaircth, and which mull* be fo pleaded to onr pailirlcaucn, then I ftiould ofrend againft the freenefle of grace : But wfien I affirme, that all our legall Righteoufncfle is onely in Chrift, then doe I not make the reward to bectf debtor IciTefne,

3. The Apoftlein the fame verfe Rom* 4. j. faith, that his Farth is conn ted for Righteoufncfle; and I

I have proved before that fubjc&ion is a part of Faith.

n 4. The-Apodle plainly fpeaketh of that Righteonfneife whereby we are formally righteous, and which we muft plead that we may be ju-ftified torn the aceulation of the Law ; and this is neither in Faith nor works, but in Chrift : But he nowhere Ipeaketh againtt that which is only the condition or our

par-

_ , .—_

i*e Affet&x*

r _ , ■ ■

? participation of that, and whereby werraiti efcape the coBdcmoatiori Of the Gofpel, which is Faith/ as I have opened be fore.

5. If the Apoftle fiiould meanc I othciwifc, itwere aj much againft •

fourDc&rine as trice. Fox is not j aufa a work or a6t of ours t But • ^i wHl lay , That though Faith ^ k±usa work do juiliHc, yet not j ; as a work, bat as an icfirument. I j

• aniwer.

i. Tobeaaacluall appfebenti-; ODoiCbri.t ^whichycu call its in-j ilmmentality) is to bee a. work": j ! There lore, if it juftifie as ic is fa:h ' ; anapprcbcjnnoni.it juftifieth as.a 1

• werk.

a. Soalfo fay J, ihxt fub;e£tion ; j and obedience jufcifie, 1. Not as ? works fitnply considered; 2. Nor I as legail works; 3. Nor as meritorious -works; 4, Nor as Good noxks .which Gcd is pkifed with;

tgiitas the conditions to which free Law giver hath promifed location am file*

Nay

Nay , your Do&rine afcri-beth farremore of the work toman then mine; for yo j make juftifi-eation an effect of your own Faith; and your Faith the inft rumen tali cauicofir, and fomake your felfe your owne juftifier. And you fay your Faith juftifieth, as it appre-fcendeth Chritt, which is the mod intrinfecall, eiTentiall confederation of Faith ; and To Faith hath much of the honour. But while / affirm that it juftjfieth onely as a condition, which is an extrinfecall ( confident ion, and aliene from its j cflcnccor nature, /give the glory j to him that freely giveth me Jile, j and that mace fofweet a condition to his Covenant, and that ena-bleth me to performt the faid con* dition.

And thus I have according to my meafure of under Handing anfwered your Objections, as fully as ncceiT^ taiedbrevity would permit,

Ff And

And for that quetficn which you propounded about Relaxation, A» brogation, &e. of the Law, which you eonfetfe you doe cot well underftand; I refer you to F»ffiu\ Defixf. grot it 2c Sattsf cap^s^, where (among other things) hee telleth you that si'pud Romanos feu ferendaejfet Lex, populus regabatur an ferri veUet t feu tolUnda, iog*~ batur, an to lit earn placet et ? Htnc rogari lex dtcebatur y an* ferrebat»r t utdicitVlp.Tif. l.ReguL EidemA que de CAttfk abrogari dtccbatur i cam antiq**retur\&c % And then he explained all thoft; phrafes to you out ofVlpian. Lex rogatur t ideft,fcr-iur 3 velabrogdtnrjdt/}, prior lex toEiiur ; velDerogatur y id eft, pars prtm<c tollitur : aut fubrogatur, id efi.adjicitur aliquidprimalegi i am Obrogatur id eft> mutator altqmd ex prima lege. And fo eon-cludcth, that the firft Law was not abrogated, but relaxed, difpenfed with, and obrogate. , ^ g ]

How faire it was cxecu

ted,

Jfpendix. lij

ted, I have (hewed you in the Treatife.

But the Iaft task you fetme, it

of all the reft moft ungratefulJ;end-IciTe, and (in my judgement) un-ntceiTary, viz,. [ To anfwer what other men have written againft fome doctrines which I have here aflerted.]

i. It is a work ungrateful! to feareh intoothcr mens weakneffe and miftakes • 10 handle the truth in a way of contention or to fpeak in way of derogation of the labours of the learned and godly.

2. And fliould I fall upon a confutation ofevery man that hath written contrary to any thing in my Book, the taik would be endleffe, and I might ftuffe a great dealc of paper with words againft words, and perhaps adde little matter to what is already written ; which is a work unfit for me to undertake, who have fo much better work tor '*% Ffa doe J

doe, and am like to have fo flaort a time to doe it in.

g. And it feemcs to me a need-lefle task ; partly beeaufe from the eleering and confirmation of the pofitive truth, you may be enabled to anfweroppofcrs your feife.

2. The A utkors which you mention doe focafilyand effectually af-J fault the doclrines men-joned, that JI (liculd think no judicious man ean thereby be daggered.

But at your icqucit I wil briefly eontider them particularly.

The Authors which you refer me to, are two, D.LMaccevitts, and Mr. Owen. The points which they contradict are three.

I. That our legal RighteoufneiTe which we haveinChru%coniifteth not formally in obedience to the Precept of the fi rid Covenant, bm onely in fatisfa&ion for our Disobedience. ] This Mtccovius op-pofeih in Lolleg.TkeeI f par*i. Dtjp. 10. &par.^Dtfi>.9.

2. [That Chiift payed not the

* -

fame debt which was in the firft obligation, but the value; and fo the Law was not properly and fully executed, but relaxed.] This, yt>u fay, Mr.0jw*eonfutethin^ntf/fltf, in his late Treatife of VntverfM Redtmptio*t t \ib.'$.aip.7 ,p,i qo*

3. [Thar no man is actually and abfolutely juilified (no notfo much j as in point of Right) either from | eternity, or upon the meere payment of the debt by Chnft , till themfelvesdoe beleeve,] This, you fay, is confuted by both of trum, t^Uccov.pau 3. Dtfp 16* & f ar * 1. ^^.17. Et Own tibifapra.

If mens names did not more take with you then their Arguments, you might have fpared tne (this labour. But briefly to the firl* of thefe I anfwcr«

i, Moft paflages in Maccovmt doe affirm but that ChriH obeyed for us, as well as fuffered for us; and who denyeth that ?

2. Oi- thofe paflages which yet goe further, there is few of them F f 3 . that

i

—_ . > --—; —

that fay any more then this, that

Chriils a&ive RighteoufnciTe did

merit for us that life and glory

which is given by the New Cove-

nan^more then we loft by breaking

theOld: But thisisnothngioour

Quetfion which isonely about jnil'u

fication. For 1 have cleared to you

! before, that Juftification is (proper*

| ly and ftrt&ly taken) one of thofe

! a&s whereby we arc recovered from

j the condemnation of the Law, and

j fet xnfttttt quo prtHs ; and not one

I of thofe acts which give us that ad*

| duionall gloy, whkh is Adoption,

| U nion* Glorification,

3. Thofe few Arguments which iyetdoedrivc higher then this, are lib fully aniwered already by Mr, | G*t*kfir againft Lucius, (jomarrus, [ &c. and Mr* Cjoadmn (notwuh-I Handing Mr. koborongh$ Anfwcr) I and divers ©then, that I am refolded not to lole fo much time and f labour* as to doe thai which is bet-jter done already, then can beex-'; pe&ed (Vorn me*

4. Only

4, Onely one argument mord then ufuall I findein^rr tfDifpttj 1 cu And which I eonfeffe defcrvc tit a fpeciall confideration } And that isxhli. [If Chritf onely fufferedfttf us,then the fighteoafncrleof Addm\ had hee continued in- innocent?* would have h$en~ more e*eei!e«: then th* right eouuWe of thrift: For the law rcouircth obedience principally, and furfering butper ac-cii#u. But thecoufequence isfalfe, becawfe elfe Chrift hath not fet us in as good a ftateas wcfellfrom.J

To this 1 aniwer* r# Thisrightc oufneffe may be tertmd excellent in fcverall refpecls. x In reference to its Rule; 2 Or in reference to its ErxK The 1.denominated! it Good in it felf t The fecond denominateth it good to u?# Now the Rules to mfiafurc it by,are two : 1. Thence* reft inferiour Rule; which is the Law : 2 The remote fuperiour Rule j which is the good pleafure and will of the Law-maker.

2 Theends which may denotni-F. f 4 nate

■ I ■ 1

——> .

aate our righteoufneiTe more ex cellent, ate: i The glory of Gods jufticeand mercy : a The glory of the Mediatours love,and the fctting up of his kingdom : 3 And the good of the creature: Or rather all thefe in one.

Now thefe things thus (tending, I anfwer thus. 1 f acknowledge that the Law made for mankinde doth primarily require obedience, and but fecondarily fufrering, and upon fuppofition of diibbedience.

2 But you muft diftinguifli betwixt what the law requireth ofus, and what of the Mcdiatour: the law to the creature, and the law to thcMediatour,arein feverall things different: The will* of his Facher which he came to doe,confided in many things which were never required ofus: fueh are all the works proper to the office of Mediatonr-ftiip. Now though the Law required ofus meer creatures primarily Obedience aclive - Yet that which W2S principally impofed upon the

Media.

Med»atour>and undertaken byhitn^ was to (atisfie for ourdifobedience ♦ And To the principal! part of his wofk was paffive obedience ; an4 that in him was as excellent or more then aclive obedience; though in us it would not havebeeo fo ; be* caufeihe law didnoL require- It of i$ in the firlt p!acc, as it did of Chijft.

3» Ifyou call that mod excellent which is beii pleafing ro God the Law-maksr'$ then certainly the fa-tisfa&ion ofChritfdid pleaie hirar better, then v^aamt perfeverance in innocencie would have done. Thisnecdethnoproof but thecon* fideraticn of the event.

4. AndfortheendsofrighteouC nefle, iec us ccnfider them diftincV jy; 2nd lee whether Chrifls facisi faclion do not attain them all more eminently and fully then Ad*ims peifevejacce would have done.

1. The glory of Gcds juiYice would not have been manifetted fo, if vid*w hadilood^as kwas. by j Ff 5 Cbriflsl

~r ■ 1 1 1 ■■ 1 1

Chrifts fufferings: i Nor the glo, ry of his mercy and free grade. 3 Nor the Mediatours love: 4 Nor would the Kingdom of the Media-tour have been fetup, nor his ho. nour fo advanced. 5 Nor the faints advanced to fo high a dignity and happinefle, as now they are and OiallbebyChrift.

So that in what rcfpecl is our righteaufneffe lefle exceilcnc ? or whois the loofer \ Not the Father j Not the Mediatour: All theqae-Ition is of our felves: But that J*! onely in point of our honour: It is I acknowledged, that to the cream re' it would have been more houourable \ to have kept bis innocency,then to have his difobedfcnce fatisfied for by another. But hereconfiderthefe things, 1 Godihonour istobepre-ferred to ours, a And the Media-tours advancement before our ad* vancemenr. % It was the very -de-. (ignof Godin the Gofpcl way of ourfalvation to take down our ho fioui*, that the creature might nor

: ; 1 fc

1 gloty in it ielf, but all might be ac-! knowledge^ to free grace r And i mall we think it a wrong, if we have not a righteoufnefl'e as honorable to our lelvcs as that which we ; fofi:? 4 Our happinetfe will be

ffearer though our honour will be | fle : For we (ball have a far greater glory. And that is better then f mecr honour. 5 Yea we (hall have.; more honour then we loft : Area!! honour of being the fonsof God, and members of Chrilt, and heirs of glory: And this is greater then the; honour of our perfeverance would j have been. Ortely this b ing all > freely given redoundeth to thegi- [ ver:Dut ftill fHU rcall honour and I hapj ineiTe we enjoy. Therefore is it theevcrfarting work of Saints, to praifeihe Lamb who hath redeem-ed them out of all nations^ 2nd made them Kings ard Priefli to God; which implyeth an acknowledge*. ment of their foimer difebedience and['tnlferyUand fo taking cifho-joour 10 thcmfelve*) and yet' the j

*fc

^9 Aftentix,

greater glory to Cbrift, and happi. neffe to them.

6 Moreover we have now be-fides the righteoufaefle of Chrifts faiisfa&ion, a perfonall evangelic all righteoufnefle, confifting in the fulfilling of the condition* of the law of grace.

So that our little lofle of the ho. nc>ur of felf- performance you fee is inthefe-6. refpecls abundantly re-compenfed.

Sothat to our felves a righteouf-ntffeof fatisfadlion^s better then a righteoufnes ofperfonali obedience. Ajndas it is found inGhrift, it isai-fo in it felfmore excellent. .

Yet further; that it is not dtro-gatory to Chrift,<k>th thus appear, i He had in himfelf both forts of righceoufnefle; viz, , Of obedience to the Precep:, and of fatisfc&ion to the threatning* Though both could not be ours retaining th<ir forms as fu:h: becaufe the Jaw re-quirethbut one (brt of righteoufnes ofoncperfonfox himfelf: fo that,we I dero^

derogate nothing from Chriflsrigb* teoufneflc or perfe&ion.

2. Both thefe forts in Ghrift, viz,, his a&ive and paffive (as I con* eeive)doeconeurre to make tip that one fort ofrighteoufhcfle nccefiary for us, viz,. O' fatisfa&ion to the thrcatning : and fo both conjunct areourrighteoufnefie * though not as two forts of righteoufneiTe > but as one. Yet I knew that this ift fomewhat dark and doubtfull, be-caufe Obedience is a thing commanded and not threatened: But yet feeing ChrUt pa *ed not the Idem /out the Tandftmdew; not the very fame debt mentioned in the thFea*ning, bur the value; I think therefore that his obedience asiucri may goe in to his iausfa&icn*

3« I alfo freely acknowledge^hat the additional! happinefle which we have by Chiift,more xhen we Joft in Adtm, contained in oar Adoption, Vnion withChrilt and Glorification, are procured by Chrifts adive obedience, #s fuch,a*wclljas

——~— , -h

1 34 jtyfi**$k«

by hisfatisfa&ion in fufrering.

If yet befrdes all this, any will maintain that we fulfilled the pre- j cepts of the law in Chrift > or that-j his fulfilling of them asfuch , i* our j righteoufnefTe, let them fhew me | folidly' what ncede we have of j Chriftsfurferings, and let t'neiman-fw£r what is faid to the contrary by the forementioned Authors j and I flhall quickly yeeld.

To conclude, rhat God accepteth this righteoufnefTe offatisfaSion as being equivalent to that of obedi* ence (though obedience be firft in the law, and the precept theprinci-pall part) and To that he is as well pleafed with us as if we had obeyed: may appear from the end and nature offatisfaclory pumfhment. For the penalty of a perfect juft hw is fup-pofedto befuch , thatit will make a perfect compenfationor fatisfa&i* on for"all the wrong we have done, to tbe law- maker or the publique ? fo that being paid or fuffered, we fcnuft needs io point of mnbeeney be

infidttt quo prius. I know fome ob-* je&cbus, If a thcefbe burnt in the hand and fo the law fatijfied } fti'he hath loft his credit, and will not be taken or trulled for an honeft man. -Anfw. You mutt diftinguifti i. betwixt his breach of mans law^and his breach of Gods law.

2. Betwixt his a&uall fault 3 -and

hisbabituall pravity. And then you

will fee, i that his burning in the

hand was for the breach of mans

law ; but die perpetuail infamy is a

I part of the penalty iDfiictedbyXSod

| for the breach of his law , by the

j fame fad. 2 Phat his flittering was

1 onely for his a&uall fau't .• But ou?

ditiruft and contempt of hitnisalib

for the pravity of his heart by that

fa& liiuovered, of which mans law

taketh not notice.

But if you inBa-nce in the breach-of a meerpenalllaw (as for keeping Artillery, tor forbearing to eat flefa. inLent 3 &c.) Yon will fee that the meer fuffering or paiment, doth put ihc offendour in as good a condition

as 1

1 ■ ' mi m i 11 w 1 l i 1 1 >» M i' ■

as he was before.

But the Difputant in Mtcceviui thinketh to ftrike ail dead, with this cafe. In i Sam. 11,7. the penalty for them that would not go out with S*xl to battell. was ,that their oxen fliould be hewed in pieces; yet (faith he ) they fhonld befides this have loft their part in the prey or Ipoils. To which I anfwer,

1. Then the lode of the fpoil was knplyedas part of the penalty. 1 He all along runneth upon a falfe fuppo-fition j viz. That ddam befides the continuance of the happineffe which atfirft was freely givenhirr^fhould moreover by his ob:dienee have met iced or procured feme further reward.- Now (faith he) this reward muft be procured us by Chrifts I active lightet ufnelTe, though his fa-tisfadion put us into the Mate, we fell from.

But all this is a racer fiction. For where doth the fcripturc talk of Adams meriting any more ? or where doth it promife him any \ more]

■wwwy n »» ■' '■ < > ■■ mwp ■ »■ ■'!■■ . —■■ » ■■ 1 ' u " ' '

more then the continuance of that happineffe which he then had? -

So I have done with the firft Queflion.

Your 2 is [whether Chrift paid the fame dtbt which was in the firft obligation? ] And here you fend me to Mr. Owen.

An[w. i I had farre rather yon had objeaed your felf. For I czmot wellunderthndMr.0»*»' minde, mjxtg.iSj. He diftinguimechbetwixt paying the very thing that is in the obligation; and paying of fo much in another kinde. Now this is not ourqueftion > nor any thing to it; for we affirme that (Thrifts fafferingwasof the fame kinde of punifnment/at leaft in the main; ) but yet not the very fame in the obligation,

Inp*£. 140. He ftatesthe queflion farotherwife,(and yetfuppo-feth it the fame) vtz, , whether Chrift paid the Idem, or the T*n±

tundem I

.1 -.

' " ' * — • i

tkndeml whfchheinterpreteth thu?? [that which is not the fame, nor equivalent to it, but onely in the gracious acceptation of the Credi-tour] Now what he means by [not equivalent] I cannot teuY

it If he mean [not of equal Value,] then he fighteth wuh a 0>a dow ; he wron$cth 6roti*i > (for ought I can finds in htm ) who teacheth no fitch doftrine: However , I doe not fo u% to cnglifl* tjtfatfo Taxtidem*] But if he mean that it is not equivalent in procuring its end , ipfi fafto > delivering the debtour, without the intervention of a new conceffion or contractor the creditour, ( as fsimie ejufdem doth, ) then I confeffe Grctwt is agai&fthim • and foam I.

So alfo (Gods Gracious, accept^ ance] neither his accepting leffe in value then was due, and fo remitting the reft without payment .• (this I plead not for, ) or els it is his accepting of a refnfeabe pay. meat, which though equal in value,

yet

I yet he may ehufc to accept aecor-ding to the tcnour of the Obligation* This is gracious acceptance, which C/Tflf/*'tnaintaineth ; andfo doe I; andfo diftingnifh betwixt folntio & fAttijttltt, pay men: and fatisfa6Uon#

Yethere Mr.0w*«entemhthe lifts with Grotms\ And

1. He overlooked his grcateii Arguments.

s. He Qigbtly anfwereth onely two.

And 3. when he hath done, he faith as Grotms doth, and yeekleth thewhole eaufe.

Thefe three things I will make appcare in order.

1. The chicfe Argument of Gr$» tins and Vefllw is drawne from the ; tenor of the Obligation, and ftom j the event: The Obliguionehajgeth punifbtnent on the offender-him. ielfe. It faith U*thed*ytkoueat*ft> tboufhsltdjC] And U'»rfcdis eve-ij we that .cwtinutth wot in *U thiW>&e.\ Now ifthe famein the

Obh-

Obligation be paid, then the Law is executed, and not relaxed ; and then every (inner muft dye himfeif ; for that is the /<&**, and very thing thrfatrted : So that here, Dum altar folvhyfimul aliudfihitur.Tht Law threatned not Chrift, bur us, f Befides.that Chrift fufferednot the lofle of Gods love, nor his image and graces, nor eternity of torment, of which 1 have fpoke in the Trea-ttCeJ What faith Mr. Owen to any of this?

2. The two Arguments he deal -eth with, are tfaefe.

1. [ The payment of the vety debt > doth ipfofaftofiet the debtor] To which he anfwcreth,that Chrifts death doth actually, or ipfofatto, free a*. This Anfwer I fhall ebnfi: dcr under your laft qweiVton wherto it belongeth.

To the feeond Argument [thill

the payment of the fame thing in

the Obligation, Jeaveth no roome

for pardon I he anfwereth thus;

1. Gods pardoning corriprketh

sW- ^J^ e

the whole difpenfation of Grace in Chrilt : As j. The laying of oar finne on Chri(K 2. The imputation of his Righteoufnefle to as; which is no lede of grace and mercy: Howevec, Godpardoneth all to us, but nothing toChrift: So that the frcedome of pardon hath its foundation

1. In Gods will freely appointing this fatisfaclion of Chriii.

2. In a gracious acceptation of that decreed fatisfa&ion in our ftead.

3. In a fiee application of the death of Chrift to us, &c] fo farre Mr. Owen.

To which I anfwer.-1.Pardon im-plieth Chrifts death asacaufejbutT would he hid (hewed the Scripture, that inaketh pardon fo large a thing, as to comprize the whole difpenfa* tion of Grace \ or that maketh Chrifts Death to be part of it, or comprized ink.

2. If fueh a word were in Scripture, will he not confefle it to be

, figurative !

figurative, and not proper, and Co not fit for this Difpute >

3. EJfe when hee faith , that .Chrifts Death procured our pardon, hemeaneth that it procured k felfc.

2. Neither is imputation of Rjghteoufnefle any part of pardon, but a nceeflary antecedent; fo that i here is no part of pardon yet in all I this.

3. The fame may be faid of Gods Acceptation.

4. Its Application is a large phrafe, and may be meant of feverall *&$ ; but of which here, I know not*

5. How can he call it, [A gracious Acceptation, a gracious imputa-tion, a free Application, ] if it were the fame thing which the Law required that was paid ? To pay ail according to the full exaction ofthe Obligation, needeth no favour to procure acceptance, imputation, or application • Can Judiee refafe to accept of fueh a payment ? Or

can

can it require any more t

Objett. But it is ofgracc to ui, though not to Chrirt.

<>A»fir< Doth not that clearely

intimate , that Chrii was not in

■ the Obligation f that the Law doth

J threaten every man perfoBally ; Or

die it had been no favour to accept

it from another.

g. That Mr. Onwgiveth up the caule at laft , and faith as Cjmtus (having it feemeih not underftood Cjrotim his meaning) appcarcth,p # 141,142,145.

J?or 1. he acknowledged that the payment is not made by the party to whom remiffion is granted, (andfo faith every man that is a Chriftian J

2. He faith, Ic was a full valuable compenfation, ( therefore not of the fame.)

3. That byreafon of the Obligation upon us, we our fclves were bound toundergoe the puniflimenr, (therefore Ghrifts puniihment was not in the Obligation, but onJy

ours,

ours, and fo the taw was not fully e-xecutedybut relaxed.)

4. He faith, he meaneth not that Chriit bore the fame punishment due to us, in all accidents, of dura* tion and the like; but ihe fame in weight andprefiure, (therefore not the iamc in the Obligation, beeaufir not fully the fame : Not the fame numerically ; nor perhaps fpecifi-ctlly in all refpe<5ts, if the lolTe of Gods Love and Image, and incurring his hatred, the corruption of the body, the lolTe of right to, and ufe of all the creatures,and the lolTe of all comforts corporall or fpiritn-all, &c. were any part of the curie.) yet that it was in the greateft re-fpec-ts of rhe fame kinde, I doubt nor,

5. He faich, [God had power fo farre to relax his owne Law, as to have the name of a furety put into the Obligation, which before was not there; and then to require the whole debtofthat furety,]

And what faith Gmius more

then

tbaTthii Mf the fame thing in the I Obligation be paid, then the Law is executed; and if executed (property and fully) then not relaxed. Hereheeonfefleth that the furetics name was not in the Obligation ; and that God relaxed the Law to put kin. Now themainebuficeffe that (jrotius there drives at, is but to prove this relaxation of the Law, and thenon.cxeeutipn of it on the offenders threatned.

I judge that, Mr. Omn hath no better fiicceflc in his next alTaolt of Grotws on that queftion [Whether God manage this work of relaxing the Law, punifhing Chrift for us, &c. as a Creditor, or as an abfolute Matter,orasa IudgcunderLawes, or as the fupremc Re&or ? j the laft of.wbJch§r0*/0/ maintaineth ? He that readeth Grotius ard fofswt own words, doth need nofurthcr defenfative again!* the force of Mr. Ofl*a;Anfwers.

Cut this is nothing to me.

Onely I would not have any

G> truth

_ —2 ——•

truth to fare the worfe for Cjrotius his defection. It washimfelfe that deferred the difcredir, arid not the Truth of God.

The third and Jaft contradfcfod Article is, [That n<3 man is -ftftuaflfy and abfoiutely juftificd "uport trie meere payment of the debt by Chrift, till they become BeW-vers*]

Againft this, you-tend mee to r both the ibre-mentionedlAuthor*.' . Anfa. 1. When I fi'rft caft my eye upon the two fore-cited Difpu* tations in LMaccowtkf, 1 had thought he had fpbkeonely of the umverfall conditionall Jutflfication ofmen, when he faith, [that active Justification was at the beginning of the firft promiie \ ; ] But my charitable thoughts I fooncfaw were miftaken.

But I find, as his Doctrine is very ftrangc, foarehis proofesas (lender, as any mans you could have Tent rne to. u I s

'"iris it not ftrange that A&ive juftification (houid bee perfeacd 50C0. yeares before Pafsive juftifi-cation is in being? I thought Paf-iivc juftification had been the immediate effca of the Aaive; And that God bad juftified no man, who is not thereby juftified.

2. And as ft range and abhorred to me, is the other par t of his do -arme, ws.That Faith onely takcth knowledge of juftification formerly wrought, j

And his Arguments are as weak | as the doaiine erroneous.

1. Thefirft: is[Bec3ufe the Ob-1 je6t rauft reeds go before the A#. ]

tyinfw. But is it-not pity that fo excellent a Dockr (fcouli think that jurtifieation (and thatnot only in offer, but in atf uall being) flic old be the objea of juftifying Faith ? I am afhamed to confute fo fence-leiican afietticn* Sure ic is ChrVft, and not aauall juftification that it the Objea. When the Scripture faith, ihn[?rhofrevcr Meevc$hjh*/l

be

be ytftifye&l is it a learned Expofi* tion which thus interprcteth ic? [You that arc eletf, are already ju. tiified, and if you will beleeve it, you (hall know it:]

2. He citeth Para**, faying,that Faith doth not effect jnitificaticn, but accept it..

tsinfrv* t. They that fay, Faith is the inftrumentall eaufeof justification, muft need* fay, that Faith cffc&eth ic.

2. Faith aecepteth Chrift for juflifieation.

3. It aecepteth not juftification as being actually and abfolutely our owne before the acceptance .• But ic aecepteth a conditional! juftihea-tion offered to me, that by the acceptance it may become abfolutely mine.

His citing of Tojfartus words is nothing for h.m : For when hee faith, twat[ All theElcdare jultih-cdin Chril^inrefpedof the merit thereof] it is no more then to lay that [ Chritt hath merited their

jufti-

juftificuion : ] which who deny-

eth? w u

But the great Argument which

he and all of his judgement do truft to, is this: [Ifche mrety Co undertake or difeharge he debt, that the creditor reft la isfied with that undertaking or difeharge; then is the deb:or free from the debr. But Chrift hath Co undertaken and dif-eharged the particular debts of the Ele& j therefore the Ele& are

Anfw. i. Payment is refutable, or not refutable : That payment which is of the fame thing in the Obligation, eitherbyourfelves or. our Delegate, is not by the Creditor refnfable ; ib that if we had paid it,or Chrift had been our Delegate, appoimedb/ us to pay trie fame that was due, then God co-aid not have refufedto take that payment: But Chrift being appointed to this by the Father, and not by us; and alio paying not the very fame, bur the value, God might have refafed the Ipaymcnr, a. Where

2. Where the payment is Dot refufable, there the difeharge of the debtor is not refutable, but doth follow ijfafaElo : But where the payment is refufable, (as here it was ) the Creditor may accept it upon what termes he pieafes, and chufe to give the Dcbcoi an abfo-lute difeharge; fo that it being the full agreement and pleafurcboth of the Creditor and the Surety, the father and the fonne, that the Deb-tor (hould have no difeharge by the payment, but upon a certaine condition by him to be performed, no doubt he (hall have none till he have performed it.

5. So that Gods accepting the payment and being fatisfied with it, may be underHood

i, /n refpe&tothc Surety, and the value of his payment; and fo God was well plea fed and fully fatisfied in Chrifts payment, as being thefuil value that hisjurtiee did require, and bey ond which be expect -d no more at his hands.

2« Or

r

a. Or it may be fpokenin reference to thedebtor^ the iirner,. and theeffe&ingofhisfreedome: And fo Go4 was not immediately upon Chrifh payment. v fo fathfiedorweU pkarerfwuhthe4>*fti.GuJaiQfi«nders4 j as to deliver and di charge them j without rcquuingany thing atthek ' hands.

I. For he will £rft have thetn performe .the iropofed cooduionof iak#g Cbtift who hath -.bought tbem> foi theirojpcly Savioui,^*? band and Lord.

Tothefeof 'MdctdviusJ&x.Ow* itvthe place againft Grotim) « bieh you rcferre mee to, addcth fopi* more.

As [ i. By death he deliver us from death :j

*Anfr. Not immediately nor abfolntely. nor by his Death alone; but by that as the price, iuppofmg other caufes on his part, and conditions on ours to eencurre before the a&uall deliverance.

^. He fakb [Tec Eie& ate laid Ge a to

to dye and rife with him. ]

Anfn. Not in refpea of rime, a* if we dyed and rofe at the fame I time, either really or in Gods e-fleem : Nor that wee dyed in his dying, and rofe in his rifing. • But u ii fpokenof the diftant, mediate effe&s of his death, and the immediate effe&s of his Spirit on us, rifing by regeneration to union and Communion with Chrift.

f. He faith, [Chrift hath redeemed us from theeurfe being made aeurfeforus &1&3V3,]

*sinfw< I explained before how farre we are freed by Redemption; He hath redeemed us, that is, paid the priee ; but with no intent that we (hould by that Redemption be immediately or abfolutcly freed.

Yec when we are freed, it is to be afenbed tohii d?ach as the meritorious caufe ; but not as the oneiy cauie.

4^ He faith [The hand-writing that was againlt us, even the whole obligation is taken out of the way

and

and nailed to his Crofle.

Anftv. 1. By the hand-writing of Ordinances, is efpeciaily meant the Law of Ceremonies.

a. If it be meant alibofthecurte of the Old Covenant, then it cannot be (o undcrftood, as if the Covenant it feife wereabrosate,for the rea'bns I have before given in the Treat ife.

3. Nor yet that any are abfohite-ly difcharged from the curfe, till they pcrforme the condition required for their difcharge.

4. But thus farre the Law is tar ken down,that our Redeemer hath bonghsus from that nectffityofpe-riflimg, that lay upon us for cur tranfgreffing that Law ; fbthar no man is cow condemned forthemeer violation of that firft Covenant;

! and fo he hath taken the Ltw into ; his owne hands, to charge only upon thofe that break the conditions of the New Covenant.

5. And <bhe bath taken downe theconderr n ng power or rhe;Law

G g ?

*54 Afftn&ix,

asitftandethby itfelfe, and notas it is und^r the Covenant of grace: And hee hath freed us from the eurfe conditionally, and the eondi tion is eafie and reasonable.

6. So that cjuoadmeritttmj the work is done. Allthefatisfa&ionis made, and price paid; and therefore mHcb. i. 3. it is faidto be done. Ifa manwere a 1000 1.indebted had tryed all meanes, and had no hope left to procure his difcha ge: And ifa Granger to him goeto the Creditor, and buy the Debtor who is inp,ifon into his owne hands, by paying all the debt, yet refolving* that if he refufe his kindncfle, hee (hall have no benefit by it, but lye and rot there; May it not be fitly faid, that the debtor is delivered ? becauie the great difficulty which hindered , is removed ; and the condition of his freedomeis forea (enable, that common realbn fup pofeth he willnot ft ck at it; and if he doe, it is utterly agaittft rea-fonand humanity, for hee may be /reed if he will. There-

Therefore it is no unfit ph*fe,to fay; thejxgtrii freed a§ iboo as;Kis debus payed ; Butyecceisjaatab. folutely freed, nor aduaHy neither in point of neribnall right, nor ©f poffeifion. And tor his humane re-.fu & 11. of the kindneffe of his Redeemer, may lye and perifh there, and ^e never the better, but the worfe for all this.

7. Yet it being the abfolute pur-pole both ©f the Father and Media* tor, tocaufc all the Bled to perform this conditio© of their d^chargd; therefore Redemption is a caufe of their certaine future difcharge, and a linke in the inviolable chaine of the caufes of their falvation: But to the rett pi the world it is not fo. . Rut I doe not well underhand the meaning of the Author you re. terre me to: For he kith , [ That Chrift did actually and ipfefaBe , deliver us from the curie and oblfv gat ion ; yet we doe not inftantly apprehend and perceive it, nor yete pofleileit; but only we r.avca&n-

alL

aU right to all the fruits of his death: At a pnioner in a farre Gountrcy who is ranfomed, but knoweth it not, nor can enjoy liberty till a Warrant be produced, &e.

But i. Whetheraman may fitly be faida&ually, and ipfi fatfo, to be delivered and difeharged, who is not at all delivered, but onely hath right to deliverance, 1 doubt.

a. Knowledge and pofleflionof a deliverance, are farre different things: A man may have pofleflion and no knowledge in fome cafes ; or if he have both, yet the procuring of knowledge is a fmall matter, in comparifon of pofleffion.

3. Our knowledge therefore doth a©t give us pofleflion; (b that the fimilitude failes; for it is the Creditors knowledge and fatisfa-clion that is requifitc to delive ranee. And our Creditour was not in a farre andftrange countrey, but knew immediately >and could either have made us quickly know, or tur ned m free before wc had knownc tjie, caufe. 4.N0X

4. Nor can it eafily be mider-ftood, how God can fo long deny n$ the poffeflion of Heaven, if wee had fuch abfolute a&uall Right (as he fpeakethj fo long ago; whieh feemeth to exprefle a jus ad rem & in re*

If it be faid, wee are yet in our minority, and no: fit for prefent pofleffion.

I anfwer, That this fimefle and our maturity is part of the deliverance, or benefit (which he faith, de fatfo, we had right to:) And fo we fhonld have had that alio in prefent pofleffion.

4. But if he doe meaneonelya right to future pofleffion (for fuch there is,) yet Iconfefle it is beyond my conceiving, how in regard of the relative part of oar deliverance, that right and the pofleffion fhould ftand atfo many yeeres diftance. To have right to Gods favour and acceptance, and to have 'poffeflion of that favour; to have right to the remiflionof finne,and adoption^and

to

t^have pofleffion of chqfc, dp fecme to me to be of neerer kin. Except he mould ,think that poffetfvon of favour is nothing but the knowledge orfeelingof it; and that paf-fcflion of pardon is the like ; and that Faith juftifieth us but it* fore confeienti* ; But I will not eenfure fo hardly till 1 know it#

Indeed there is a juftification by 'publike declaration at the great judgement, which much difrereth from ameer Right. Butonr juftifi-cation by faith here is but a juftify-ingin the fence of the Law, or giving us right to that full jurtifica* ,tion : So that [To have right to j it, ] and I to have poflfefsion of ic in point of Law or Right i ] is to me all one : For what doth Faith g>ve u$ polTelTion of in its jufti-tying A& t but this legallright?

5. And jndeed, it leemcth to me a full definition of ail pardon aixfc justification which is here to bee expe&ed, which he layeth downe; ,Hee faith, [Chrilt did deliver ns \ from-

from the curfe, and take away the Obligation which was againft us ipfo ftfto.'] And I think to be ju« ftified, is but to be freed from the eurfe or condemnation; and to be pardoned ,is nothing elfe but tobe freed from the Obligation to punishment. And is remiflion and justification the immediate ctfeft of Chrifts Death ? , ■

What ever this Writer thinketh in this j is nothing to u^; But bc« caufe I would not have you lb palpably and dangerouily erre, let mee lay a little moie againft this mif-take. You may remember I have oft told you, ot how great moment it is in Difinity, tobe able foundly to diftinguifli betwixt Immediate and Mediate Effects of Chrifts Death. ( I think J ho. iJWoorc meant the Immediate and Mediate Effe&s.which he calleth [£»</>] which hath caufed a great many pages about the-Ends of < hrilis

Death;

Death, to be written by his Antagonists to little purpofe.) Now 1 would have you know , that this a&uall RemifTion and Juliifieation, are no Immediate, but Mediate effects of Chrifts Death • no, nor a pcrfonall right thereto, if there be any fuch thingdiftincl; from a&uail frcedome.

And to this end I pray you weigh thefe Arguments

I. What Right foever God gi-vethtomen to things fupernaturall (fuch as juftification, remiision, a-doption) he giveth by his written Lawes. But by thefe Lawes hee ha.h given no fuch thing to any Be-Jecver. (inch as are theEleft before converfion,) therefore, &c.

The major is evident : Godi Decree giveth no man a perfonall right to the mercy intended him. And for the minor, no man can produce any Scripture giving to unbe-leevers fuch a right.

2* If God hate all the works of iniquity, and we arc all by nature

. the

i

Jpftniix, \6\

the children of wrath, and without faith it ii impoflible to pleafe God, and he chat Wlecveth not if condemned already: then certainly the Ele& while they arennbeleeversare not actually ^defatlo, no nor inper-fonall Right, delivered from this hatred, wrath, difpleafure and con. demnation. But the major is the rery words of Scripture; there* forc,&c.

* 5. If wc are juftified onely by Faith, then certainly noc before Faith : But we arc juftified onely by Faith; therefore, &c.

I doe in charity fuppofe that you will not anfwer To groflely, at to fay, we are juftified inforo € Z)ei y before Faich, and onely in foro ewfeientit, by Faith, til! you can finde one word in Scripture which faith, that an nnbeleever is juftified. If I thought you were of this opinion, I ftiould think it an eafie task to manifeftitsfalftiood. j And if you dy that we are juftified in (Sods Decree before Fiith:

I anfwer, i« It is no jttftific^oafj* (hew me the Scripture <*hat ealletfr it fo.

2. Nay,icclearely,implyet(ithc contrary. For Decreeing is a term of Diminution, as to juttifying. He that faith he is purpofed to free you fromprifon, &c. implyeth that as yet it is not done. To bejutified or faved in Decree, b no more but that God decreeth to juftifie and favc us ; and therefore fore it h yet undone*

4. If we are exhorted while wee are unbcleevers, to be reconciled to God, and to beleeve for remiffion of finnes 5 then fure we are not yet reconciled, nor remitted 5 But the former is evident in Scripture ; therefore, &c.

5. No man dare affirmed that we are untried ia ly upon Chrifts death, delivered a&ualiy , and tyfo fatte^ from the power or prefence of fin, nor from affli&ions and deatb,whkh are the fruits of it 5 nor yet that we are freed from the diftance & fepa^

ration

ration from God which fmne prceu • red. And why then fhouid wee think that wee were immediately delivered from the guile and condemnation ?

I know the common anfwer is, that /unification is an immanent a&, and therefore from eternity; but SancYificationisa transient a6t. But I have disproved this in the Trcatife, and cleared to you, that juftiflcation is alfo a trachent ac"t: Otherwife SociHtamfme were the founded doctrine, that Chrift never needed to fatisfie, if we were jufl i. fiedfrom eternity. Yet (to con-feffe the truth) I was long deceived with this Argument my felfc, ta-! king it upon iruft from Dr* Tmfe^ and Mr. TembU, (whom I valued above mott other men;) andib continued of that fame judgement with thefc Authors you allc^ge, and remained long in the borders of AntU nomt*nifme % which I very narrowly efcaped : And it grieveth mee to fee many of our Divines to fight . againft

againft Jefuites and Arminiant With the Aminomian weapons, as if our caufe afforded no better 5 and fo they run into the farre worfe ex-treame.

I undertake to manifcft to you, that this Do&rine of Chrifts immediate A&uall delivering us from guilt, wrath > and condemnation,! is the very pillar and foundation of the whole frame and fabrick of Antinomitnifme.

But theft things which you draw out ofme here unfeafonably, I am haudlinginafitterplaee,(ina fmall Tra& of Vtiverfdll Redimpti** :) But the laft week I have received hwrtlcLvs againft Spaohemws ex-ereitations, who hath opened my very heart , almoft in my owne words; and hath fo fully laid the very fame things which I intended, for the greater pare, that lam now unrefolved whether to hold my hand, or to proceed.

The Lord give you to fearch after , the truth in love , with a humble, [ untyaffed,

unbyaiTcd, fubmiffive foule; neither lofing it through negligence and undervaluing, nor yet diverted from it by inferiour controverfie*, nor perverted by felkconfidence, nor fotcftalled by prejudice , nor blinded by pafTton, nor loft in contentions, nor Tub verted by the now-ruling fpirit of giddincfle and levity, i nor yet obfeured by the eonfoun. ding of things that differ ,• that fo by the conduct of the Word and Spirit, you may attaine the fight of amiabie naked truth, and your under (landing may be enlighrned,and you/ foule beautified by the refle-| xion and participation of her light and beauty, that your heart being raviftied with the fenfe of her good-nclTe, and awed by her Authority, you may live here in the eonftant embracementsofher, and cordiall obedience to her, till you arc taken up to the prime eternail Truth and Goodneffe.

Rom.

ji£6 Afpemim.

Rom. 14. <?•

Far f 0 *W* on/ Cbrift both dyed^nd rofe } and revived y that ke might bee Lord both if the dead and living.

Ephef. r. 22. And(God) hath putallthings under hisfeet , and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church.

Hcb. 5. 9. And being made yerfeft, hee became the Author of eternall falvation to all them that obey him.

Revel, 20. 14. BleJJed are they that doe his commandements^that they may have right to the Tree of Life, and may enter in by the gate in. to the Ctty.

Sayings

4fpt*&ix<

Mymg* of excellent Di-

vines • a*dtfd to fatisficyou

who charge mee with

Singularity.

#r, TwifTe bh ^ifeovtry of Dr.

fyA? Hat onc ofour Church * n J V V maintain, that any one ob-Mm a#&all Redemption by Chrift withou Faith J efpecially coirfide-nrg that Redemption by the Blood

of Chn^andforgivcneflcorfinnes areaIlone,£/*.i.i 7 . f d /., il4#

■

Bifbof Hoopzr citedby DoBor Jackfon.

(Chrifi) oneiy received our infirmities and Original! Difcafe,

and

and not the contempt of him and his Law*

Expounded bj/D.TviJfeagtfofl DAack$on y ipzg. 584.

His meaning in my judgement isonely this, that Chnft hath made fatisfaaion for the imperfe-aions of our Faith and holineflc, although we continue therein un-till death : But he hath not made fatisfaaion for the contempt and hatredof his Word;&e.in cafe men doc eontinue therein unto death.

Alfitdifts Dittintt. The$l.

The condition of the Covenant of Grace, is partly Faith, and partly Evangelicall obedience or holi-neffe of life proceeding from Faith J*

in Chrift.

Idem

Jppendix. \69n

I

Id<Mtiid*c*p*a. :nr,rn

Cfirift isotir Right«eufaefe in a iDfafl fcnfe, bnt pot in a fcrmall

ICDCC,

' S**€elsdvtrf.h*m*H, fAtisf<tcl.

(ShriftsSatisfa&ion is to thern pro-fitable to whom it is truly applied. The way of application is thk*; that the merits of Chrift be imputed to us: This imputation is done when the Koly Ghoft begetteth in us a true faith, which receiving the be-joefit ©fChrift, doth at onee aifa produce in us the true fruits of our Regeneration.

• Ramus in 'Difput. de S*. tiifttlitot. God was not bound toaccept the fttisfa&ion performed by another,., khotigh iuifieitnt -, unleflc (which ie could not ) man had Jatiified Ha him-

c

■ ' i

himfeif, and had borne the pudfEh* ment due te his finne'••" therefore therewasa neceflfity that a Covenant Should iatercede, and God himfclfe propound a Mediator*-

That there mud aft 4gf#&»snt intercede on his part who was fatis. 6cd, I have proved, without which the fatisfaftibn had been in vaine* Ibidem %

Hem. ibid, Thef. 4, $, eV The A6fc which in fatisfaftioa God pcrformeth, i* of a. fupreme Judge,freely relaxing hkiowa I aw> and transferring the penalty on a-nother: So that in this relaxation Gods fupreme dominion may bee obferred: For how eonli God have relaxed hii, Law, it he had not been the fupreme Rector, or had beene under a Law himiclfe ? And by the transferring the penalty from the (inner, andexa&ing it of the furcty^

thd

J«*.4«I2.

the relation of a party offended, as Inch, 11 itmoved frctn God>#c

So he proeeedeth to prove, that God couldanddid reltxhis Law as being politive, and fo relaxabie; that it if abrogate, not expounded *Wf vmstixaA* And what of it waf relaxabie, and what not, &*

— 7 ,

m.j.) that our opinion is right, if we meane, that Ghrifts merits are iinputcdus; becanfethey are given us, and we may offer them to God theFather for our finnes, bceaute Chriff underrodk theburden ©f &-> tisfyibgfords, anditconolingus to Sod. Which #*#* approrcth ,

■

Hha Dr.

■i Dr. Twifle Viniic. grat. I. z. par. %.crim. 3. $.£.

I confefle falvation, and To par don and adoption, are offered to all and lingular men on condition they beleeve, &e. And to I deny nor, that Redemption is fo farre obtained for all and every mau,

Dr.Twiffe againfi Cotton, M£ 74t

Still you prove that which no man denyeth, vi*> That God purposed lifeto the world sppn condition of obedience and repentance 5 provided that you understand it right, viz. that obedience and repentance is ordained of God, is a condition of life, not of Gods purpofe*

Dr. Twiffe

Appendix. 175

Dr. Twiffe CwfUL *f Tilenus Synod Dm & JirU$ reduced to prae. pag.^i. Cjtr.K$Jpmt interpreted* the will of God touching the falvation of all of a conditionall will, thus; God will have all to be faved, to wit, in cafe they beleeve ; which conditional! will in this fence,neithcr Anjhn did, nor doe we deny.

Idemptg. 145,144;

I willingty profeife that Ghrift dyed for all in re(pe& of procuring tne benefit (of pardon and falvation) conditionally t on condition of their faith.

So alfo r pag. 154,161,164^6;. 170,194. And Difcovery of Do ftor lacbsons vtnity, p.5 %j* 5 51.

Innins ParslleU. 3. Heb. 5,9. For the promife of falvation is made to obedience, and bequeathed H h 3 to

to it in the Teftamcnt himfclfedyk

g-

Tardus in Hebr* y.o. To obey Chrift, is not onely to profefie his Name, but to acknowledge him the onely perfect Redce-mer,tocleave to him in true affiance, and to live worthy the Gofpel. This condition in the whole Gofpel is required in thofe that (hall be fa-ved. Univerfall SJraee bclongeth onely to the obedient*

Chril* i* not the Author of falva* tion to all men, but onely to thofe that obey him, that is, whobdeeve his Promiies^nd obey his Precepts.

The benefit of Redemption is u ► 'i niverfall, and indeed belongs to all in gcnerall, fo be it we obey him.

Calvin

- Wcttw^ibexpoufldwbatfoever the Scripture fpcaks of the Righte-oufnefle ofmen, that it overthrow not the forgivenefle of (innes, whereon it refteth as a building on its foundation* They- who fimply expound it, that Zachary and £/*-z*bctb were righteous by Faith, becaule they were freely accepted of Gcd for the Mcdiatours iakejdoe wrell the word > of Lnh to a ft raifjge fence .• Acd as to the matter it felf, they fay fomcthing , bat not the whole. I confeffe indeed, that the rightcoufnefse whkh isafefibed to them, ought to be acknowledged as received from the Grace of Chrift / and not to the merit of works; ytt the Lord, becaufehee imputed not to them their (innes, doth dignifie their holy life, with thetitleofRightcoufnes. The folly ofthePapifoiscafily refellcd, who oppofe this Righteoufnes to the Righteoufnes of Faith } when as it flowes from it, fo it ought to bee H h 4 placed

jj6 Jppendtx

placed inTubotdinaciofi to^t, that (o therebee no difagreemcm, between them. ' 9th

firkins*VeL I. p. 66l.The. true Game*

And left any fliould imagine , that the very ad of Faith in apprehending Chriftjjuftifieth, wee are tounderftand,that Faith doth not apprehend by power from it feife, bat by vertue of the Covenant. If a man beleeve the Kingdome of France to be his, it is not therefore his; yet if he beleeve Chrift and the Kingdome of Heaven by Chriti> to be his, it is his indeed * Not (imply, beeaufe he beleeves, but because he beleeves upon commandment and proraife: For in the re-nour of the Covenant > God pro. mifeth to impute the obedience of Chrift to us, jor our righteoufhcffcj ifwe beleeve*

Perking Vol* I. p. 4 7 6. en Hab. 1 » 4.

Juftice mentioned in the word is | two fold, thejuftieeoftheLaw,and the juftice of the Gofpel: The ju* ft ice of the Law hath in it all points and parts of juftice, and all the perfection of all parts; and it was never found in any upon earth except ddamatid C'knft* The juftice of theGofpel hath all the parts of true juftice, but it wants the full perfection of parts. And this kinde of juftice is nothing dfe but the con-verCon of a (inner, jwith a purpofc, will, and endeavour to plcafeGod, according to all the Commandments of the Law. Thus was ^{m/j juft, hb y Zachtrjt Elizabeth ; and thus muft the juft man be taken in thisplace, Hab.2.4^

Sop* 649. in The true (jaine. God doth as it were keep a double Court, one of juftice,. the other of H h 5 Mercy.

Mercy. In the Court of jultice hec gives judgement by the Law, and accufeth every man that continucth not in all things, &c. In this Court nothing can ihnd but the Patfion andRighteoafnefleof Chrift ; and for the beft works that we can doe. we may not look for any acceptation or reward, bnt ufe the plea of David, Enter not into judgement with thy fervAnt,0 Lord, for mflefh $k*Rbe jvflifitdw thy fight. Now in the Court of Grace and Mercy <?od hathtodcal with hisown children, that ftand before him juftified and reconciled by Chrift, and the obedience of fach fie accepteth in this Court, and mercifully regardcth, though tmperfc&— for Chrirt.

Perkins, VeL I. p*g. 124. On the Creed, Chrift as he is fet forth in Word and Sacraments, is the obje& of

Faith. Faith apprehendeth

whole (ghrifU ——- pag, 125. Firft,

icapprchendeth the very body and blood of Chfift ; and then in the feeondplace the vertueand benefits. — Whereas fome are of an opinion that faith Uan affiance or confidence., thatfeemestobe othewife; fork s a fruit of Faith.

That Faith is fo large as tocon^ ! taine very many acli, iee Zahchj on Eph. 1. inloc9Communi dc fide*

That Word and Sacraments are the initruments of juftificaticn on. Gods part, Zatchj affirmeson Er phef.t.kcocommunide \uft>fiC*tidne>

That the forme of Righteoufnefle is conformity to the Law,he tcaeh-erhon'M/Y.i.ti.

That there is a neceffi .y of a twv fold Righteoufnefle, one imputed, the other inherent. Zanchy ibiii &freq.

Good wrkes ate fequired a« a condition in thoie which are to bee

fayed,

faved, not as a meritorious caufe of their falvation.

The meaning of this fentence [the doers pf the LHtirfhtll be jttftified , ] is the fame : God will apprwe, j*. ft'fit.9 reward them that doe the works of the Law, whether lew or Gentile: Yet it followeth hot that a man is therefore juftified by the works ofthe Law; But God appro* veth and rewardeth the workers,, not the hearers and profeflburs: So here the Apoftle rreateth not of the. caufe of jutHficat ion, which is faith without the works of the la w^ But ofthe difference between fuch as fball be juftified, and fuch as are not*Faixs. They onely which have a lively Faith, which worketh and k eepeth the Law in part, and fup-plyeth the reft which is wanting in themfelvesby the perfect obedience of Chrift, they (halt be yttfttfied ', not thofe wnich onely profeffc the Law, and keep it not. The A-

poftle

-^_ ,—^—^ „ 1 —*

Afttndix. \%\

poftle then here fbewethvvh© (ball be juftificd,not for what:

By iheic words it is evident that Dr. Willct and Faius acknowledge ftnecre obedience to be a condition of juftifleationjOr of thofe that {ball be juftified, though not a caufe, as they fay (I thinke miflakingly) Faith is.

Dr. Davenant ts£*imadv$rJio*s on (]ods love to mankind ,p.j8 5.386.

The Doftrineof PredeftinatioD permiceth no man to peri wade him-felfe that his falvation is certaine, before he fl nde that he is truljr eon-verted, truly faithful], truely fan&L-fied

Beeaufe you wilt perhaps heare Mr. Owen before Grotins* fee Mr.

Ballon / ovcnant.$.i$Q*

There

There is a two-fold payment of debt, one of the tiling altogether the fame whieh was in the Obliga* tion; and this ipfefa&o freeth from panilhment, whether it be paid by | the debtor himlekc , or by bis furcty. Another of a thing not altogether the fame which is in %hc Obligation, ib that lome adVof the Creditor or Governour mu ft come unto it, which is called reraiflion ; in which eafc deliverance doth not follow ipjsfttto upon the fatisfa&i -on ; and of th.s kind is the fatisfa&L

on of Cbrift. Thus this great

learned, holy Divine as almoft Eng-lavdevcr bred, doth go on (even in (jrQtitiS his owne words tranflated) betwixt whom (had he been living) and Mr. Owen would have been but

impsr congrejfut*

Ballon Covenant, p.»4O. AsthefefalieTeachers % Pct.i.i were called into the Covenant accepted the condition, bdeeved in \ Chrift,

Chrift, for a time rejoyced in him, and brought forth fome fruit, fo we eonfeffe they were bought by the blood of Chrift , becaufe all thefc were fruits of Chrifts Death , whereof they were made partakers*

As in the Parable, Mat. 18.25. the Lord is laid to remit to his fer-vant a 1000. talents when he defi-red him, viz>. lncho*tely % or upon condition, which was not confirmed, becaufe he did not forgive hisfeHow* fcrvant: Sothefalfe Prophets are bought by thebloud of Chrift, in a fort, as they beleevecV in Chrift. We read of Apoftates who had bin enlightncd &c. Heb. e.^&S]. and did revolt from the Faith; To thefc men their finnes were remitted in a fort in this world t and in a fort they were bought with the blood of Chrift,but inchoately onely, and as they tafted the word of life. Had they eaten the word of iife,had they foundlyand truly bcleeved in C hrift, they had received perfect and eon*

fummate

x&4 Apftndix.

fumrhate rcmiflionof fins, both id this world , and in the world to come ; they had been perfectly redeemed and reconciled to God; Batbecaufe they didnoteite, but tafted onely, they received not perfect RcmhTion, they were not perfectly redeemed.

Idem* pdg. 22 5. There is this mutual! refpe& be-twixt the promife and ftipulation ; that the promiie is as an argument which Goduieth, that hee might ob*aineof man what he requireth; and the performance of the thing required > is * condition , without which man cannot obinine theffomife of Cod*

Idem, pag.tf.

Of this Covenant be two part*,

1. a Promife.* 2. a ftipulation* The

Fromife is, that God will pardon

the finnes of them that repent mi*

feignedly, andbelecvein his mercy.

2. The . ~

. 2. The Stipntoidn h, tb*t they jbeieeye in him chat juftifietb the i^godly,and walk berorc himifiill weli-pleafing.

Sec him aiib delivering the moft of Amirttdns dextrine, p.344,145.

»0«^'.

Milin&us dc clctt* exfide$. 31£.

We know remiifam is not obtained before Prayers (four.) But I fay that ic was decreed before Prayew; and that it is fought by Prayer5 f al. though it be decreed.

Scarpiusfimphnia. p. 93. Thefubftance of the Covenant lyeth in the promife of grace made in Chrift, and the Reltipu'ation of Faith and Gratitude.

fdrtus *» *7«?e/l < 7. p. 113 o # The fubiknee of the Covenant Jyeth in the promife of free Reconciliation, Righteonfneffe, and life 1 eternall,

J

t%6 Appendix.

cternall,byandfachrift frcdy to be giveu, andinthereftipulatioii

of our Moral! O bedience and Gratitude.

BuUinger.'Decdd. I .Scrm.6*

fMg. 44.

We fay, Faith juftifieth for it fclf, Dot as it is a quality in our tninde, I or oir owne'work : but as Faith ; is a gift of Gods grace having the J piomife of Rightcouibdlc and life, I &c. Therefore Faith juiiifieth for Chrirtj and from the grace and Covenant of God. ; ___

LMr.ssfttt. Burgcgioflnftif.

Scripture roaketh no pardon ©f finne to be but where the fubje& hath fuch qualifications as thisx>f forgiving others. It is not indeed put as a cau&, or merit, b-Jt yet it is" as a qualification of the fubje& ; therefore our Saviour repeatetb, Except

Except ye forgive 9tk*rs,&c. So^#.

10.43. £*».*•*?• So * /# ^ uo ' Ifwoconfefc&c. By the&and the like Scriptures it 11 plaine,Tir4f rt-miffiin offinm ts given us only in the nfiofiheptfraccr.

tMr.Burga offopf. LiQ.1%*

Prop. 2. Although the Senpture attribute* pardon of finne to many qualifications in a man, yet repentance is themoft expretfe and proper duty, —— If we fpeak of the exprefle fortnall qualification, it is repentance of our nnnes, &c.

Prop. 3. None may bcleeve, or conclude that their (innes are pardo-ned before they have repen ted, Mat 3.2. Lukti ?•$•

Prop. 4. There is a neceffity of repentance if we would have pardon, both by neceflity of Precept, and of meanes. The Spirit of God woik-et h this in a man to qualify him for this pardon, p. 150*

You

l You fee then that Faith is not the only condition of remiflion, and confcqucncly nor ofjuftificatfon.

Not as an appealc to men, but to

fill upthe vacant pages, and fatisfy you who charge me withfingHlari-ty, have I added thefc promifcuous Teftimonies, fuppofing you can apply tfum to theif intended nfe's.

FINIS.

J

J

f