^'^|1 r':^;*^. * »W^.s. 7- Vjt Mc il 9 / *^7 \ M '■4 /" DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Treasure %oom A I 4 Of Juftification: FOUR DISPUTATIONS Clearing and amicably Defending the Trudi, againft the unnecefTary Op- pofitions of divers Learned and Re- verend Brethren^ "Bj "^chard "Baxter, A fervant of Chrift for Truth and Peace- John 318,19. Hethat Believethcnhim^ u not condtmned : hut ht that hiitvethnct is condemntd aire tidy ^ hecauft he h/ith rot believed in the Nam* of the only begotten Son of God. And tMit « the condemnation^ that Light is come into the woridi avdmen loved dark»efs rather then Light ^ be* caufe their deeds roere evil. Dr. TwUs^ y indie. Grat.lib.l.pMrt.^.pag. (Vol.min.) 302. [Verumin divcrfo genere ad Juftitiam Dei rcfertur Chrifti falif- fadio, & fides noftra : Chrifti fatisfadio ad eandem refertur per modum.meriti & cond'gnitatis ; noftra vero fides ad eandem re- fertur duntaxat per modumcongruaedifpofitionis. J r:pi LONDON, Printed h^ R.^.^ Nezil Simmons Bookfeller in Kederminjler^ and arc CO be fo'd b^ t^■^ there ; and by N-nhan-el €kj»J^ at the Gun in Prfi^' <"hurcb.Yard. 1658. cK-iijb:j...... The Preface. S35SJ Chriftian Readers, O pr eve fit pur trouble andmifunder- (landing in the perufal ef thefe Dif- putatwns : 1 have two things here at the entrance to acquaint yourvith. Firft^ 7 he occafton of all thefe Wri- tings : Secondly^ The true fiate of the Controv'Crfies here managed. The firfl Difptttation u upon a Que ft ion of conftderable. rveight , whtther Chrijl as Chrifl , an^ fo as Pro- fhet ^ Priefl and King , be the obje^i of that Faith by. ivhich fve Are juftified < Three points efpccially ?ny Reverend Brother Mr, Bhkt was p leafed to pHblijh his Reafons againft^ which in my A^boriCms I b^d ajjerted.'. Thefe bein^ vindicated by metn an Apologie^ he renewed tbcconfli^inhisTrcatife ofthe Sacraments, The firft A ? about The Preface, aho^tt theSdcramsnU I h/ive defended i^dn in a Volnmi bj it [elf. The fecond is this in hdnd , which I had finilh- cd aboit^ fifteen or fixteen months ago. The third is about the Inflrumental efficiency of Faith to our fufiificatisn, ofrvhich I had alfo begun Above a twelve month ftnce. But it bath idtelj f leafed ear tpife and gracious Lord to call this Reverend Broth:r to himfelf nvhereupon^thongh this firfl Difputation was gone fo far ^that [could not well recall it^yet the others ^whtch was not out of mj power j I re- folved to condemn to perpetual ftlencejfyou ask me a red- fon of this refolution^J mufi deftn that my dtfpofition and fafsion may go for fart of a Reafon this once. The grief of my heart for the lofiofthis precious fervant ofChri/l would not permit me to appear any further in a way that feemed to militate with the dead , and with one whofe death^ wi have all fo much caufe to lament, k^Ios^ that our fin fhould provoke our dear Father , to put out the precious Lights of his San^uary^ andtocall in fuch experienced faithful Labourers , while ignorance^ and error ^ and prophanefs^ and all Vice doth fo plenteoufly furvive. When the fe plants of Hill do thrive upon uSy under all our -care to weed them up : what willthey do when the Vineyard is left def elate ? Though God in mercy is raiftng up a fupply of young ones , that may come to he Pillars in their dayet : yet alas^ what difference will the church find between thefe^ and their gf^ave experien- ced Guides : and how many years fiudy^ and experience, and patience, is neceffary to ripen thefe tender plants , to bring them 1 9 the Jiature, and fiahility, andfirengthof fuch at this Bleffed fervant of chrifi, that is- now takers from us. The fenfe of our lofs dothmdke it doubly bit"- ter to my thoughts, that ever I was unhappily engaged in-. any wxy of ferving the l^rd of Truth > which mufi con-i- tein The Preface. ttinfo ntucb c6ntraM6ficn of [uch 4 frknd of Truth. As It is for God J or for Truth , or for the ufe of the churchy 1 dare not diJ9w» it •, hut as it favcnreth of * difagreenient {though ftecefsitated to it ) it is verj un- grateful to me t» think of or revicjv. But our difeafes wtd knve their f dins* Wewuflbenr the fmitcs of our own and o»r Brethrensrpeakncjjes, rather thennegle^ tlefer- vice of Chrtftt his Church and Truth, We quickij pjr^ don one another^ and at the furthefl Htavtn agreeihm all: But the benefit of our fearch ^ though mixed with $ur infirmities^ may he Jomctvbat fervicfahU when we are gene. The fecond Difputation is yet more ungrateful to me ^ then the firfi : the Jleverend Brother whom I contradict ^elng,/u high and dear in my efieem as msfi men alive • indeed being an Honour and Blefing to the Church in this unworthy Generation, The Lord freferve him long for his jervice. But my Defence here alio is necefsitatcd. i. / did my befi to have prevented the Necefsity , and could not : I mean^ not by dtfwading him from offoftng me in frint^ for that might havt hindered the Church of the Benefit oj his Offofnton ( for ought 1 knew^ till I had ften it : ) But by trying fir ft ^ whether I could receive or give (atisfa6fion, 2, I had fublickly obliged my felf, if this Reverend Brother did Difjeiit , to fearch again : and by an Bpifile, became more accountable to the worU for Difjenting from him then other men. 3. His Name defervedly precious in the Church , h^ththe greater ad- 'vantage to over- lay the Truth ^ where humane impcrfecli- 00 engageth him again fi U^ Tet do 1 not blame him for beginning this Contejl with me •, but take the blame to y>iy felfthat might tccafion it , bf dilhonouring his l^^-me by a tem^racious prefixing it to my undigejied uppers 5 {though ..^he Preface. (though nothing bttt High efiimAtierK ^nd A^c6ikn was 7nj Motive.) The Letters that pi/l between us were never intended for the t'iciv ef the world : And therefore 1 rnufl defirt the Reader to remember it ft ffom^etjmc. I be more fr.sfsing and vehement ^then manners dndrevercnc^ require -^ he- cauferveHJe to [fcak freelier in private amon^ friends^ then in the hearing of the world,, ^nd yet I thought tt wj duty now to joyn them wi{h the reflfor ihefe Reafens. I. Becaitfc. fomepaffAgc^nthcJYrttin^fcfth^ Reverend Brother, do in a manner, invif.e vte Jjo'it^ 2,. Betfaufe the matter rcquireth me to fj^eak the fame things •, and there' fore it 16 as good affix the old ^ as be at the fame lab oar needle [ly again. 3 . And it can be. no ivrong to him^ he- caufe it u my own laferf, that are the, mainbulkpf i^h^t 1 ptiblijh: His Letters being brief ^ and annexed 'iut as the occafions of mine* 4. But e^eciaUyj. J was brought to think it -meet^ by the open blame that I have received ■from fome very dearan.d Reverend Brethren^ for not prt- venting this publike Contefl. And therefore I thdught good to let then; fee ) that I was not ^H^Jj^^^^i^ U^{^' vent it, .;.i >. ; 1 .. ,., . x.^ J f there be any paffagesin thcfe Wriiingi too eager er provoking {which 1 mu ft needs ftifpecf even where I havt not cbjerved them^ as being con fcio^is of toQ keen A.fliLe^ forgetting, the ferfonswhile I (^cak meerlyU) the r^oras and matter^) 1 do intreatmy Brethren te p. ifd&n it^as be- ifignot dtfgnedto their .prov(f cation or dijhonof^r^and mJ heartily ^0 the like by theirs^ and 06 J hope Gad will di- both theirs md.mine,- And hdo adjure fhe\%^ader to k^,^ Meve that this Contr oyer fie yfor all c{ir ii^firmtfexis md' ,mgcd with a very high eflee^m and honour of.thxif^ M eve- fend Brethren, whom I am necefit/ted io.g^infny^ Ner would The Preface. would 1 have it he anj dilbonoHr to them ( thettgh An eX' cnfeto me^) that thej have been th: A(j^ilants^Andhegun the corjfli^ : for the Truths of God mujl he f recto us to us all, and I doubt not but they were confident that it \V4i fome dangerous errottr^ which they jet upon^ and 1 have here proved to be the Truth, Nor m it any fuch ^vrohg to cither fide^to be openly contradi Bed, that Rcafens may be openly produced^ and men may have for-nc further help, to fee into thefe Points. Let the proud (well or fmart^ be- caufethej are thus proclaimed fallible y and mijlaken s but the Humble that are devo'.ed fervants to the Truthj are of another (^irit^ and have learnt another lejjon. And if any Papift: or enemy to our umty and Peace [ball from thefe V^rittngs predicate our dtffentions or dtvift^ ens, let them know to their faces ^ that cvin thefe differen- ces as momentous as they jeem^are not neer fo great as are commonly publif]jed amo-fjg thcmf elves : nor are the) for "Number one to twc/ity^ perhaps to a hundred^that are agi- tated in their Scbooles,andthe writings of their Doctors : Had we fuch differences as thofe of the Jefuit Cafuifts opened by Montaltas the Janfenian tn hts M\flcnc of Je- luitifm, out of their own writings^ fomething they miglt then fay again fl us. Tea I doubt not but we differ with more hearty Chriflian Love, then they agree \ ^n^ have more real union in our contr over ftes, then they have in their Articles of Faith, and are necrer one ariuthu in our fmallcr differences , then the French .iW !rali;uis r.re in their very Fundamentals, The third Difputation was called forth by A/r. Warner'i Trcattfe of the Objed and Office of F.^ith , and takey up the fubjeB of the firfi Difputation, with fome others,' when that was in thetrefyMr, Tombes^ Book a^ainfl Inhnt^i^iiCm came forth, in which J found the Pa- The Preface- prs that I [eftt to him ( ufon his imfortunity) frintedl rvithut my consent ^ {which if God mli^ I [ball yet vindi- cdte, ) And therefore feeing that it is his tpay^ I thought he might do the like by other Papers , which formerly I kid wrote to him on this [ubje^i of ^nflification, x^nd therefore thinking it fitter that I [IjohU publifJ} them ( of the tivo jthen he^{ 1 have faved him the charge of printing tbem^ and annexed them to the[e. The fourth Difputation was added, hccattfe it is thevC" rj heart of our Controvcrfie, which mofl of our Difputes about the inflrumentall Cattfality of Faith as to fu/iifir cat ion J and the other Concomitant ^are refolved into. That the Reader may under fi and thefe Difputations the better^ I fljallhcre at the entrance fhiw him the face of the way that I maintain j and alfo of the way that I ep' The way that 1 plead for is contained in theje Propofi' lions. I . Man having broken the Law of Nature or works ^ is lofl^ and difabled to his own Recovery ^or to do any works, by which that Law will ever jufti fie him. 2 . fefu^ Chrifl hath Redeemed him from this lofi con' dition^byhis Incarnation^ Lifc^ Death, Refurre6li-enj^c^ fulfilling the Law bj his obedience^ and fuffering for our not fulfilling it J and thereby fat iff jing the Lawgiver ^ and attainingthe ends of the Law ^and more: making him' felf an example to us ofholinefs.^ and be coming our Tca- cher^ High Priefi and King, to fave us from all ftn and. enemies^ and recover m to God^for our Salvation^andhis Glory and Pleafure. 3. 7 he offices and Works ofchrifl^ arc for other ends as well as for our jufitfication-^ even forourSan£iificA' tion^ Glorification^ &c. ■ ^yTht. Believer ought not to confound the offites^mrkfy " or. The Preface. br ends and effects , hut to a^^rchcnd them tu dipnBly as he can, 5. The fame Offices ofchrifl are exercifed in the ef- felting feveral works : He doth jufltfie m both as rrieff^ Frophet and King : and he [an6lifieth us as Priefl, Pro- phet and Kiftgy His Death purchaftng beth our ]ufiifica- tien and [anSttfieation • and his Teaching [hewing tis the way to both J and his Kingly Office conferring both^ though moji notably ourjufltficatton 5 and the Prophetical effeli- ing more of our fan^ification, then of our jujlification. 6y We mufl have part in Chrifi htmfelf as our Head^in Qrder of Nature before we can partake of jufii^ cation, Sanflification, ( as following our frjl fatth ) or Glorifi- cation from him. 7. Though our Phyjical Communion wit he hrf ft is ef- fe(lcdby a Phjftcal change on the foul •, yet our Right to him and to jujlification^ and other following benefits is the effe6i of a free Gift, or Teftament , or Promifej and that Promt fe or free Gift is our Title ^which is Fundamen- tum juris, or the efficient Inftrumentalcaufe. 8. chrift and pardon^ or ju/hfication^ and Right to Heaven/ Sec. are given us by one and the fame Deed of Gift : fo that he that hath Right to ChrtH , hath by the fame Title ^ on the fame terms Right to the[e his benefits. ■ 9. This Tromife or Gift is conditional-^ though Jt be but the Condition of a free Gift that u recruited. 10. No marts works. Repentance or Fa th u his proper Title to pardon or life , nor any proper meritorious caufe of it •, nor any efficient , Principal or Inftmmental caufes efhis Right -, No a5iof ours can be more then a meer con- dition of that Right • and a Caufa fine qua non {which^ as it is an a^f that's p leafing toCod^andhath the Promife of a Reward^ the Fathers called improperly by the Name (42) of The Preftce. of CAierit^ Vfhtchyet lefs fitly agrees to the Condition of Mr firflfuflilicittionthen of our Glorification.} 1 1 . Chrifls f-irdon and life arc given hj this Gofpel- Promife on condition of oar faith in Chrifl^ that is^ iftve become Believers in Chrijl -, or Chrifiians -, which is ^ If xve accept cf Chrijl as offered in the Gofpel^ and that is^ to bring m from our fim a>jdf elves to God, by the a^s of his Teachings Pricfily, and Kingly Office-^ Or, if we believe in Chrtfi as Chrift. So that it is not any one fingle a5i of Faith that is the condition offuflification : nor are the fever at Benefits of Chrifl given us on condition of fever al a5is of Faith •, as if we had Right te pardon bj one a^i^and to chrift him felf by another^ and to Adoption by another r, and to Heaven by another ^^c. Nor have the fever al aBs of our faith as divided anlnterefl in procurement of the Benefits as Chrifls aciions had: But it is one and the fame entire faith in Chrijl as Chriji, that is the condition of all thefe confe^ftent Jpecial Benefits • wit boat divifon in the procurement. So that the Belief in Chrifi as our Tea- cher and King hath as much hand in our fufiification^ as believing in him as rriefl -, it being the back war dnefs of nature to the acceptance of Chrijls Government and Do^ Brine, that is a jpecial Keaf&n why faith is made the con- dition of that pardon^ which Nature is not jo backward te accept, 1 2. The Reafons to be af^igned^ why faith' in Chrifl is mads the condition of fufiification^. is^ i . The will of the free Donor, 2. The fitnefof faith to that Office 5 as being fuitedto Gods Endi, and to Chrifl the object ^ and to mans neceffttous eflate. Not only becaufe it is the Receiving of Right eoufnefs^ bat for all thefe Reafons to- gether, in which its aptttj^de doth conjifl v and its Apti' inde to the Honour of the Redeemer and free fufltfier is the The Preface. the frind^al part of its Aptitude : it being impofthU thdt Ged [honld prefer man as his ultimate end before himfelf, 13. Though the Reafon why Faith is made by God the condition of our J^uliif cation y mufl partly be fetcht from the Nature of Faith, tvhieh fome call its Inftru- mentallitj in apprehending Chrifl^ yet the Reajon why we are Juftified by Faiih^ mufl be fetched from the Tenour of the Promt fe and Will of the Promt fcr. So that though the Remote Reafon be that Aptitude of Faith ^ which is the Difpofitio matQUX-, yet the formal neereft Reafon is^ becaufe God hath made it the condition (fthe Gift^ which jhall fufpend the efficacy till performed^ and when per- formed, the benefit fhall be ours. 14. As Faiihhath its denomination from fome one or few ahs^ which yet fuppofe many as concomitant ar,d confequent : So thofe concomitant and confequent A^s have their an fwer able place and Interefi in the forcfaid Conditionality ^ as to our part in Chrifl and ^u fit fi ca- tion. 15. K^nd therefore it was not the Apojlles meaning to fet Faith againfl thefe concomitant a^s^ ( as Repen- tance, hope in Chrifl, deftre ofchriftjove to Chrifijdcc. ) and to exclude thefe under the notion of Works : but con- trarily to fuppofe them in their order. i6,7he bttrdenfcme works of the Mofaical Law^fuppo- ed to be fuch as from the dignity and perfeBion of that Law J would jujlifie men by procuring pardon of fin ^ and acceptance with God , are they that the Jews oppofed to Chrifls Righteoujnefs and fuflification by Faith , and which Paul difffuteth again fi , and confequently againfl any works ^ ora5is^ or habits of our own, oppofed to chriji, fir this way of free jaflification by him. {as ) 17. Tbc T he Preface. 17. Ihe not Uoftng our luflificAtion And Title to Chrijl and Life , hath mere for its condition, then the fir ft Reception or Pofjefion hath. And fo hath the final luftipcation at judgement^ if men live after their fir [I believing. 18. ^uftiftcation at judgement ^ betyig the Adjudg- ing ui to Glory^ hath the fame conditions oi Glorif cation it [elf bath. Reader t In thefe Eighteen Propofitions^thou mayft fully fee the Dodrine that I contend for, which alfo in my Confeffion, Apologie, and this Book I have exprelTed. And now I will Ihew you fomewhat of the face of the Doctrine, which the Diflenters commonly do propugne, but not (b largely, becaufe I cannot open other mens Doftrinc fo freely and fully as I can do my own. 1 . 7 hey agree with me that Chrifls Right eoufne^ is the ■meritorious or material caufe of our luftification, though fome add that it is the formal caufe , / [upfofe it is hut a miflaken name. 2. 7 hey agree that Chriflyand pardon^ and Life^ are Given m by the Gofpel-Promtfe. 3. They yield that an entire Faith in Chrifl as Chrifi, is the condition of our Right to his entire Benefits. 4. But they fay that the ABs of Faith in their pro- curement of the Benefits , have as divers an Interejft as the aUs of Chrifi^ vfhich Faith believeth, J, And they fay, that it is Jome one a6i ( or two, or fome of them) that. is the (ok )uflifying a^ ^ though others be comprefent, 6. This The Preface. 6. This Utfliffm^ aEt [ome call the Apprehending of Chrijl as a Sacrifice : [erne jf fiance^ or Recumbencj^ or Reflingon him^ as a Sacrifice for ftn^ or as others^ al[o ort hs A^ive Rtghteoufnefs ; or an 4ppreherjfion of Chrifts Eighteoufnejs •, or as others , A pcrfrvafion that bis Pro- mile is true ^ or an Afjem to that truth • or as others^ an Affurance^ or atkafi a Beliefs fide Divina , that we arc juflified. ^^ 7. They fay, th'at the ncerejl Reafon of our lufUfica' tion by this fiith is^ becaufe it u an Infirument of our lit- fiification^ or of our Apprehending Chrifls Righteoufnef : Andfo, that we arc juftificdby Faith as an Inftrumental efficieht caufe-^ fay jome : and as a Pafsive Receiving Jnflrumcnt^fay others. 8. They fay^ that there being but two wayes of lujli' f cation imaginable, by faith:, or by works ^ ail that de- fertthe former way {if they defp air not of I unification ) fall under the expe^atton of the latter : And I grant that Scripture mentionetb no third way . 9. Therefore [ay they, feeing that Pauls I ttfiifi cation by Faith ^ is but by the a6l before mentioned : whoever looketh to be juflified^ in whole ^ or in party by another a[l ( as by Faith in Chrifi as Teacber^ as King , by de firing him^ by Hoping in him^ by Loving him , by difcla ming aJhur own righteoufnef ^8zc.) doth feek luflifcatisn by fVorks which Paul difputss again fl^ and fg [et again fl the ^lytrue lufiification by Faith. 1 o. . Tea^ and they hold , that whoever looks to be. lu- fiifedhy that aci of faithy which themf elves call the lu - fiffying a[i^ under any oihcr notion then as an Infrumenti dfith fall to juflification by works ^ or turn from tht- trfte^uft'fication by Faith. • Ry tbefe umvarr ant able Definitions^ and DifUn^ions^ and * The Preface. and additions to Cods Word 5 A UmcntAhU perplexity is prepared for mens fouls •, ;'/ bein^^ not pofsiUe for any living man to knotv^ that he ju[i hits on the jnflilying Actt and which is it, and that he takes in no more^ &c. andfo that he is not a Legaltflj or Jew, and falls not fir om Bvangelical lufi/fication by faith in Chrift. So that lu- fltfi cation by fatth in Chrifl as Chrifly { confidcred in all cfjential to his office j) is with them no lujlif cation by faith in Chrijl, but jufltfication hy Works, fo much dif^ owned by the Jpo/lle, the expectants of which are fo much condemned. J have gathered the fum of wofl of the DiJJenters minds as far as I can under fland it. If any particular man ofthcm^ dtfown any of this t let him better tell you his own mind: For 1 intend not to charge him with any thing that he dijowns. The Lord Illuminate and Reconcile all lis people , by his Spirit and Truth, Amen. The The C o N T E T s. T)ifputatm I . Queft. litther vft are jujlijie^ hy btUeving in 'Jefut Chrifi ai our King and Teacher^ as well a» bj believing in hit bloe^ ? Aff. pag.l. The ftatt And jveight »f the ^oMtroverJte. p. 2 , ^c. Ten Propofttions for filler explication, P«io, &c. Argument firfi, p. 13 Argu. 2. p. 14 Argu.3, p.rp Argu.4. p. 24 Argu-s- p. 27 Argu. 6. p.28 Argu.7. p.30 Argu. 8. p.31 Argu.9. p.35 Argu. 10. p. 3 8 defended againfl Mr. Blak's ajfaalt. p. ^0 Whether Xibf LaW of Grace condemn any, and how. p.44 45 The Difin^ion oj fidcs quae juftificat,^ qua juftificac confider. fd. p^6y&c. ib) Mr. TheCoNTE NTS^ Mr, BUk's/iry? Argument attfifPereJ, p-^S Argument 2. anfwered. p,5$ Argument 3. p. 5 7 Argument 4. p.6 5 Argument 5 . and 6, p. 64 Difputation z. WH ether '^orks '«''* <* caniltlon of coKdition of fafitficiition^ andfo rvhetloer vre art jufi''^ fiedify vforkj as fuch a condition ? The term^^[fJ^ot\t and f unification'^ txplained, p-7<^i7l The Term Condition expUiitd. p.72 The. Vruth lalJi do'^n in feve>^al Provofttions. p.75 Neiaiiveand Affirmative The main ^ropofition proved. P'79) C^^* Queft. C^nChr.fl be I'flrumentalinjuflifying. p.84 Queft. DdChrifi exp dte the fins^ that by the Go^el men are obliged to pi4ni/hment for ? p. 86 Of Riptntance, and the habit of Faith in Jufiificationt "p. 85, 86 Qaeft. DoththeGofpiljtiliifie tut p.86,87,88,89 Other points briefly dtfcuffed. p.^O The Opponents fiating of the ^eflion, P-94i9s9<^ Divers unjufi charges repelled. p.pj.to lOI The Opponents Thefis^iW ArgHmtntt. p. 101,101 HoVlf Abraham ^as juftified^ debated to p. i lO All ^orl^s m^tke not the Reward to be not of Qrace^ proved hy fix Argument s» p. 1 1 1 ,to 1 1 5. And by ExpO' fitors. p.iij.e^r. Hs/fecond y^rgumtnt from the difference pftt between faith and other Graces in fttfi fixation. p 1 18 The cafe of faiths Intere/} osetted bj a ^miiituh. p. 1 20 Hiis third Argument confidered : Oftr firfi Juflification hoW dfe^. The C O N T E N rs. differtnt from the following. p. 122, 1 2^ Hit fourth Argumtnt of feif Kighmufn^s and tAufultandi- tiont. p.i24,c?-f. His Fifth Argument, Workj '^re thtfrms^ therefore net tht condition. if.il^ His ftxth Argument. P- ^ 3 2 HisfeventkArgnmenU Of a twofold Righteoujnefs or Jufti^ cation. P ^.53 His eight Argument that cannot be a condition of Jujlificatton, which it/elf needeth fu/lffication. P- 1 3<5 AfifVcerid. Vnulju^geth them dung. pi4^ Horv jnftif J ng faith belongs to the LnWy and the dipt ence be- tween the La^ and Gojf el, PI42 More of Chiflsfufftring for the violation of the »f\V C ove- nant. P^^^ Hu ninth ^Itgument^ mfill men ^ith doubts. p. 1 47 A»ffPerid. His tenth Argument. P-H9 Of the reconili*:g of Paul and James. p 1 5 o- &c. Letters thatpaft burvrcntkis Rtvtnnd'Brotherandme. p. 157 In vhich ut difcud'fd the Argument from Abrahams fujlifica- tion. ^nd in the lafl Letter thefe ^ueftions. l.fVhethir vidcre,audi.e , be on'y Grammatical aBtont, and ' Phjficd T>afftonf. P- 1 94,^C- 2. Whether Be! eving be only (0^ and credere onlf^m. p 1 98 3. pyketherF.ahbe l\TiveinitsInJ}ru>r.enta!itj. ^ P ,^^7 4. Whether the Opponents WaymAkenot ether Graces as tfcpir Inflrumentt of fufiif cation. -r rfr^'"^^^ 5. whether f^ith be a proper Infirument of Jnjtipcaijn. p.2l2 6. Queflion. If Faith be an Infirument^ whether it ju/Lfie primarily and proxtmc as fuehrer as an apprehenfion oj Ch.ijl orR^ghteoufyieis, P-^^H 7» Jlucllion, \S'hich is the mere clear Jafe and certain Doarme. ' '^^ ^ p.220 Repentance, yihether exelnded. P'^^7 '^ (bi) Of The Contents. of Faith relatively taken, p.2z8 Of thrt AJfttnlflies Dejinietion of faith. p«*30 The Judgement of Jome Divines. p • * 3 ? ,^^ rfihether a dying man may look, on hit own A^J Atthe^ondir tiont of the Covenant performed. P»'4 ^ » ^f^' Further Explications, 9.244.^*^. Difputation 3. WHether "Befides the Right eottf»eft of Chrifi impu ted^ there be a per- fonal evangelical Right eoufnefs »r- te(farj to Juflification and Salvation ? Affir. p- 25 9 Dijiinnions and Proportions Negative and -Affirmative for ex* plication, Pt260y^c ^Proved. p,266. Ol>jeSiotit anf^fred. p^269,C^C.. Mr.yVAVTiQi'i Arguments confuted. P'27J /9 28$ Mr, Warner's i j* chap, confuted about Juflijicatien^ and the . Inter efi of Obedience , &c p.286 . Mafier Warner's ty^rguments anfvfered, by T»hich he^ould exclude Chriji asKing^ &c. from being theObjt^ «/)**[/?»• 'fp»£f'*if^' P-,293- ^^' The other chief pajfages in hi^ Sookjconftdered, p. 305,(^. His difiinElion of fides quae & qua. p. 3 o Sjd'r, His Preface anf'^tredtn an Eptjili, P«3iJ, Mnfiir The C O N T E N T St MR. John Tombe's , hit friendly y^nimadverfions on my Aphorifms^ mth a Difcujfion of them. . p. 3 2 2 fftfiification tn Law.title hythe Tromife fnllj vin- tlicated. P-?52,«:^tf, Whether fujiificatioft be a conti^us^ A[l^ or bnt one AH. p.541 &c. whether Faith comprise Love, Stib'jstlion or ether Qracei . at large. P.HS&C. whether Fdith be only in the Intell(Si,or alfo in the WUl, p.3 ^4, &c. ftf(iifying Faith receiveth Chriji as Lord, &c. P« 3 5 8 it it Faith, and not only Love , or other Graces, by which the Will receiveth Chri/h P- 5 6 1 &c. The Cj ojpel is a Lavf. p. 3 69,&c. Repentance neceffary to fftji ideation, p.370,&c. Ho'^ Faith ju/iifieth. P-377 whether Chriji had a Title on €arth to Rule. P- 3 7^ Of Chrijis univerfal dominion and Redemptiott. p. 3 80 Afore of the Jttftification by the Gofpel- Promife. p. 3 84 Of Preparatives to fufiification. p. 3 87 what Paul excludeth as oppofite to faith in J ujlip cation. p.39r. Of Intercifioftt of Jujiificationi andthe gmlt of particttUr (ins. p.393,e^r. Difputation ^, WHether the Faith which Paul oppofeth to fporkjin fttjitfication^beone only Phyftcal ASi of the SohI ? Or, Whether all Hu- mane AUsi except one Phyfical Afi of Faith, be the Veorkj Vrhich Paul excludeth from fujiijication ? N«g. p'39P The ^uefiionoftntdi and its fro-i^d that this Faith is not one on* (ki) If The Contents* iff yf 5. X . Eithtr Numtr icsU;, 2,0ref 4n inftrior GenHt^ fo 41 to he of ont only Faculty : Nor only God tht Father^ Chrift, 'f romtfi'PartioM,Hea vtnJtCQ. tbi Oh^tU. 3 . Nor in rpccic fpefi€liUJina,^rtfWi^ muny Argumtnts, Errata. Errata. PAge 6. line ij. read that I. p, ii.Kio.r.fute ChriHum. pA^./.^.r.prom'nentl'. I • iJ.r.hath.p.ii.'.^.T/uthis.li'i.r.proofof.. p if.'.i^.r.bctbe. l-H-f'*^"'' P'^i* l.i7.r.ffc<:rib»«. p.i4./.35.r.r/j«'. p.ip l.t^.r. though, p.jz.'.jz r.w«/7/'f p.?9. l.6.r-with. p.^^.t.j.r.Ineed. p.^^.'.io. .Commmttion. p.Ji.'. i i.r.<«j. p.55./i6.r. noflyi.^'li't.exclu/ton. p.64J.jo.r.r«'/"f. p.74-'.'^.r.cJWfi^w. p.8 i./.i j.'.«o. I.20. r./<^'« ^%^-i6.b'MoutagAin(l. p.97. 1. ii.r.th-it is. I. i^.r. execution, p.88./. iz. read r;be>'c-p.94. /.io.r.7>fl/io«. p 95 l.i.r.u.l.^-r.yo.ri-. p.99. l.i<).x.ai mediate it* p.i 19.?, l6.x.as. p.ii^,'.^ r.that hehsthnol. p.i j6. /,i8.r Cb>ift. p-i?9 /. i J.r. flwftf«j.page 1 Si.^ 17. r. bien.p.\(>6 l.iS.r. rve m:y. p.i^B.r.Gorfx. p.i7o7.r7.r /Jgw. p.175.^ 15. T.divers. p.i79.l.i9.>.he thHrvj ifet «o/. p.i'^o.A4.r.or. p.i8 j.'.i9.r.cd,''«-'fc.p.2 94./.2i.and/.i6.andf.z6^/.2j-3nd z6. iot.qute r.qua.p.^^^.l. l.r.unprovedp. Ii^.'.l6.r.cull.p i^9.'.i^.x.tbat u. p.^io.l.,^ -.fur. p.^i6 l.^i. r. /r«if. p.3$4-/olt.r.pr(W3^fl;?f. p j6o./, ij.r G3d.p.i6i.l.ix.i.thought.p,i^6.'.i7.r. lilt mt.p.i^j.l.iz.xfanHificAtuin. p.i^o.'.ii.r. morally, p. j98.^ 1 ^.x.probAkeA.i^ . ^!ii«^'i^« si^ii^'-^r^ii*^' m^^v '-1^ 'W^dW, CO Queft. Whether vpe are fujlified by ^eliveing in fefus Chri/l^as our ]{ing and Treacher • as we/las by believing in his 'Blood: Aff. Hough I have oft fpoken to thi? Qiicftlon ^ in the ears of the world , as taking it to be of very great Confequence ^ yer upon the Invitation of this opportunity, 1 (hall once again attempt a brief Difcuilion of it ; and the rather, becaufe the Anfwers of a Reverend Brother (Mr. Bi^kf ) to my for-^ mer Arguments, and his Arguments for the contr.irv opinion, may wrong the Truth and the fouls of men , if their Fallacy be not manifefted by a Reply. Andlfliallfirft fpeak fomewhac of the Importance of the Queftion, and thenof thefcnfe ofit, and then endeavour a B cleat CO ckar RcfolutioD, and the Confirmation thereof , and the Con- futation of the contrary conceits. And for the firft, I fhall give you my thoughts of it in thef€ two Propofitions. Propoftioft I. The difference amongft Proteftants about this Queftion is not of fo great moment, that either party muft Eo romins be judged to deny the Eflentisls ( or Fundamentals ) of the faith,and fo to be of a different Rchgion from the other, or to fall fliortof Salvktion. I lay down this Propofition firft, Bccaufe of the Papifts who ftand looking upon all our differences with a mind too like the raind of the Devil ; rejoycing in them , and endeavouring to encreafe them, and to make them feem greater in the eyes of the world than indeed they are, that fothcy may make ufe of thera for the reproaching of our Profeflion , and take an advantage from them to make the truth and Servants of Chrift become odious unto others* Secondly, And I do it alfo for the fake of fome C even too raany^ among our fclves, that fpcak of controverfics as they arc concerned in thcm,or as the party to whom they joyn doth fpeak of them, or as they appear to them in the dark, or at a diftancc, or upon a hafty fuperficial fearch ; but have not the skil ( nor fome of them, the wilU to open the true ftate of a Controver- fic, and make the difference appear no wider, then indeed it is. To the proving of the Propofition, it muft be obfetved, Firft, ihat the Affirmers do yield, that it is not the Dodrine or Go- vernment of Chrift. but his blood that is the Ranfome for our fins, and his RighteoufneA that is the folc Meritorious Caufe of our Juftification : and th?.t believing in Chnfl as Psophet and King, isnotaproper Inftrun^ent of our Juftificarion; and that Chrift as a Ranfome for us, and a deferver of our juftification, is the formal Obje(3 of that other ad ( which accordingly bc- lieveth in him, ) and not of this ad of believing in him as Pro- phet ar.d King. On the other fide, it is granted by ihcm that are for the Ne- gative, th?t it is our duty to believe in Chrift as a Prophet and King nnd thar it is of ncccfiity to falvation, yea to juftification it fclf J For they yield that it is the FUts ^na Jufiifcat/.hQ faith C3) by whch we arc JuRified ; but not qna Jft/Iificat^ or that it Ju- ftificth not ^»A talU^ as fuch : They yield alfo that it is a Con- dition of Jultification , for fo they confcfs that Repentance it felf is • but they only fay, that it is not the Inftrument of Julti- fication, as they think the other ad is. So that the difference is here : They yield all that we affirm( if I can underftand thenii ) but they affirm fomewhat more thcnif'elves , which we do not yield : Ihcy grant that believing in Chrilt as our Teacher and Lord is a Condition of our juftincation,and ihefidts ^H£ fftfti- feat ; which is all that I dcfire : I'Ut then they add, that the Be- lief in ChriUs blood and Righteoufnefsis the Inftrunsent of our Juftification, and that it jnitifieth ^«<»;^i/(;< • which we utterly/ deny, if the- words be properly taken ; and Tropes fliould not upon choice be made the terms of our Queftion , while there are plainer to be had. So that by this time its eafie to fee that neither of thcfe opinions are fuch as muft unchurch or damn us, or raakeusHereticks. Fid}, We that are for the Affirmative are out of that danger; for we hold no more pofitivelv then is yielded us by the orher. AH that they can charge us with, is this Negative, that [ believing in Chrifts blood doth not properly Juftifie as an Inftrument ( that is, as an efficient Inftrumentai Caufeof our Juftification) nor yet , ' .astbc Papiftsdo : ( though wc deny not but fometkncthe word jmay be fuunu in Scripture in fome fuch fenfe : ) For thus it is patl coritrovtrfie that our Juttification, that is, our fandificati- on as to all that followeth laith, is as much, if not much more, from our belief in Chnft as Teacher and King, as from our be- .lief'inhira as a Ranfome. But by Juftirication we mean that Relative Change which Proteltants ordinarily mean by this word i which we need not here define. The Prcpofition \ B) ] (^when we fpcak of being juftificd by faith ) is not by all men taken in the fame fenfe. tirft, Some- time Its ulcd more ftridly and limitedly to fignifie only aneffi- ciency,or the Incereft of an Efficient caufe. And thus fome Di- vines do feem to take ic, when they fay that we are juQified by faith in Chrifts blood and Righteoufnefs, and not by faith in him asa Teacher or a Lord : wh.ch occafioncth the Papif^s to fay our dlflf.rence is wider then indeed it is : For the word f /Z?*! hath an ambrguity and in their fence, we yield their Nrgative though not their Affirmative, in the laft mentioned condufion. Secondly, Somerimi- the wocd j By'] is ufed to (igmfie a Condi- tional(ty,or thelntcreft of a'rondicion only in fpecisJ. And thus we take 't when wC explain our felves in what manner it is that weare jul^'fied by faith, and by thefe queilioned ads in particular. And thtrefore thofe Protcflants thatdifpute againft us who are for the Affirmative, do ( if I undcrfland them ) deny only the propriety of the phrafe which wcufe, but nottfie ikwg or fenfe wh-.ch we cxpre's by it ; for they grant that thefe ads ot faith are Conditions of our Juftification, when they have never fo much difputed, that we are not juf^.fied b; them, ;;nd foa fmall fyllable of two letters, is much of the matter of their con- troverfie. s ; ;-,J . Thirdly, fcmet ime this word is ufed to fignifie the Interefl of any other caufe as well as the Efficient, and that eithtr general- ly, orefpfcially of fome one. This Paper is white !Sf^ the white- nefs as the fo-^mal caufe : we are moved to a godly life By Gud and falvationas the final caufe ere. Fourthly, Sometime the term {_ Bj '^ is taken yet more .largely i a?id fitly enough ) for 1.II or any 'J\4eans in Genera! or the-ntercflof anj means in the attainment of the End. And B 3 fo /v2 fo it comprehcndeth all Caufcsj, eventhofe Per accident and Conditions ai well as ^..r.u.c,, an all that doth but remove im- pediments. And in thiscompr hcmve fenfc we take it here in the Qicrt- >n, hough who i we come to determine what« the fpccial ln:ereft of fait'a in Jufli^cation, I take ic in the fccond lenfe. Take notice alfo. That I purpofciy here ufe this phrafe [[we are Juft.fied b. Believing;, or by Faith J ra' her chanthefe, ([ jaftifying faith ] or Q Faich doth juftifi * us. ] And \ here fbretellyou,thatiti (hall ac any time ufe thefe laft expreilions, as led to it by thofe with whom Ideal, it is but in the fenfeas is hereafter explained. The Reafons why I choo/e to ftickto this phrafe, rather then other, arcj Firft, Bccaufe this only is the Scripture phrafe, and [he other is not found m Scripture •, ( that I remember j It is never faid, that[[ Faith doth jufti- fieus ] though it be faid that [_ weare Juftified by faith.] And if any will affirm, that I may ufe that phrafe which is not found in Scripture, he cannot fay, T muft ufe it. And in a Controverted cafe , cfpecially^bout fuch Evangelical truchf, the fafety of adhering to Scrf^cure phrafe. ajid the danger of departing from itisfo difcernablc» ("and fpecially when men make great ufe of their unfcriptural phuafes for the countenan- cing of their opinions, ) I have the more reafon to be caiite- lous. Secondly, Becaufc the phrafes are not alwaies of one and the fame fignification.The one is more comprehcnfive then the other, if ftridtly taken. To be juftified by faith ] is a phrafe extenfive to the Intereft of any Medium whatfocver: And there are Media which are not Caaifes. But when we fay that [[Faith doth juflifie us ] or call it [ juftifying Faith J we ex« prefs t Caufality, if we take the word ftriSly. Though this laft phrafe may fignifie the Intereft of a bare Condition, yet not fo properly and without ftraining as the former. The Re- verend Author of the feond freacife of Juftirtcation, is of the fame mind as to the ufe of the rcrms;but he conjedures another reafon for the Scipture ufe, then I fhall ever be perfwaded of, vi:tj. that it is becaufe Cr^s'^r^ is not Ag^ere^hMl Tati ; to Believe is to Stffer, and not to AB ■ that it is a grammaticall ABiont but Phyfically a Pajfion. Though I think this no truer, then (7) then that my brains arc made of a looking glafs, and my heart of marblCjyet is there fomwhat m this Reverend mans opinion, that looks toward the truth afar off. For indeed it intimateth that as to Caufalicy or Erticiency; faith is not Adive in the juftifying of afinner, but is a meer condition or moral difpo- lition, which is necedary to him that will be in the neareft Capacity ro be juftifyed by God. The laft words, [^ Believing in his blooi~\ I ufenotasthe only way that is taken by the Opponents ; but as one inftance among divers. For they ufe to cxprefs themfelves fo varioully, as may caufc us to think by manyc as we know it of fome ) that they take more waics then oie in oppofing us. Firft, Some of them fay, that the only Adof faith that juftifieth, is our believ- ing in Chrifts blood, or fuffe rings, or humiliation. Secondly, Others fay, IhitiCis the bclievmg in, or apprehending, and refting on his whole Rfghteoufnel's , even his Obedience as Obedience, to be it felf imputed tons. Thirdly, Other Re- verend Divines fay, that it is the apprehending and refting on bis Habitual as well as Active and Paflive Righteoufnefs ; that hisHabirsmay be imputed to us, as our Habitual Righteouf- nefs, and his Afls as our adive Righteoufnefs ; in both which together we are reputed perfedFulfill-jrsof the Law ; and his fufferings as our Satisfadion for our breaking the Law. As for rhofe that mention the Imputation of his Divine Righte- oufnefs CO us, they are fo few, and thofe for the raoft part fufpeftedofunfoundnefs, thati 'vlllnot niiqiber it among rhe Opinions of Protcftants. Fourthly,Others fay,thar rhe jaftifying Ad t if Faith is not theapprehenfiorofChriltsR'ghreoufneJsor Ranfome i but of his Perfon, and that only as he is Ptielt, and not as Prophet or King. Fifthly, Others chink thai it is the apprehenfion of Chrifls perfon, but not in his innrc Pr'ieftly office j for he performcch fome Aft^ of his P ieftly office for us ( Interceffion ) after wc are )uft;fied : Therefore it is hi- Perfon only as the Satisfierof f^ftice, and Meritor of Life, which they make the adequate Objedcf the jaftifvitig Ad of Faith, Sixthly, Others fay,that it is both his Perfon ard his facisfadion, Merit, RighteoufncN, ye)*, Pardon an.i ju(U- ficAtion It felf, that is the adequate Objcd : By which thty muft- CO muft needs grant that it is not one onlyfingle Af^, but many. Seventhly. One Reverend man thats now with C^od ( Bifhop V flier J undcrftanitng c!uc I was engaged in th sControverfie, did of his own accord acquiint me wiai h s Judgement, as tend- ing to rcconcih.ition : A'dbccaulcl never heard sny other of the fame fninJ,and it h.ach 2 coi.ficifij^ble alped, I (hall briefly and truly reporr it ashe expeflidit.- He cMd me, thac there arc two Ads (or lort ol Ad> ) ol F lirh. B tht firrt we receive the Perfoniji Chrift. ds a woman i.i M irrj :ge doth firit receive the Terfon of her Husband Thi« is our Implanration 'nco hrift the true Vine , and givesi us thar U i n wich him which muft go b(;fore Gommunion and Comu.untc^arfon of his Graces, and fo before juftidcation. The fecond of Faihs AAs are thofe thac apprehend the Benefits which he offerech ; Of which Juftification is one, and this is ftTidly rhe 'uftifym^ AA of Faith, and followeth the former. Soth^t i^ faiJ ht ) it is true that the firft Ad which appiehendech Cb ft' perfoti doch cake him as King, Prieft, and Propber. as Hira \ -nd Huib -nd rhat v^-e may be united to him •• but the following ad- which Rereivt hl^ .Be- nefits do not fo, but are fuited to the feveral benefits. ]" The opinion is fubt'.le, and I perce.ved by his Readincfs in it, thac it was one of his old ftudicd points, and chat he had been long of that mind ; my anfwer to him was this .• [You much confirm me in what I have received :, for you grant the principal thing that T defire j but you add fomcthing more which I cannot fully ciofe with, but fhall plainly tell you what are my apprehen- (ions of it. Firft, You grant that the ad of faith by which we are united to Chrift, and which goe firft, is the Believing in , or Receiving whole Chrift as Pneft, Prophet, and King. This will do all thac I defire. Secondly, You add, chat another ad,even the Receiving of his Righteoufnefs is after neccffary, that we may be juftified Your reafon feems to be drawn from the dif- ference of the cffeds : Union goe^ before Juttification,therefore the unumg ad goes before the juftify'ng ad. This is it that I deny - Mv Reafons are thefe. Firft, Scriprurediftinguiflrech be- tween our Union with Chrift and our Juft fication-.but no where between the uniting and juftitying ads of faith. SecondlvtThc nature of the thing reqaireth it not , becaufe faith juftifies not by \ Cp) by a Phyfical ca ofality, as fire warmeth me ; but by the moral intereft of a condition : and the fame ad may be the Condition of divers benefits. Thirdly, Scripture hath exprefly made the Receiving of the perfon in his Relations to be the Condition of the participation of his benefits : Q As many as received him^x.o them gave he power to become the fons of God; fohni.ii. whoever believeth in him Pj.j.II not periP}, but, &c. beltive in the Lordjefus^andthou Jhdi he fuved^^Q.'^ Fourthly, Your own Similitude clearcth what I fay : Though the wife have not fo^ef- /ton of all that is her husbands as foon as (he is married ^ yet ilie hath Fi^ht to ajj that is her part , and pcfTcflion of the bene- fits mceriy Relative, which confift but in a Ri^ht. 1 he accepting his perfon in marriage is the condition to be by her performed to inflate her in his Honours fo far as fhe muft partake of them. When fhe is made a wife by that Confent , there needs not any other ad before fhe can benoble,honourable,a Lady, a Queen, &c: For the former was the full condition of the firft pofTeffion of this benefit ; and the benefit immediately refuiteth from the Union. Fifthly, I conceive that thefe two ads which you men- tion are but one moral work(though divers Phjfical ads)and to be done without any interposition of time, before we can have Chrift for Union or Juftification. For the end is Effential to Re- lations: and he that receives Chrift, muft take himtofome end and ufe : and that muft be to Juftifie, Reconcile and fave him ; to bring him to God that he may be blefTed in him. He that doth not receive Chrift to thf fe ends , recciveth not Chrift as Chrift, and therefore cannot b? united to him; and he that doth thus receive him, doth both thofe a^s in one which \ on require. Sixthly, And the cafe is much different between Phyfical and Relative benefits : For its true, that when we are united to Chrift, we may have after need of renewed ads of faith to adu- ate the Graces of the Spirit Inherent in us; For here Ri^ht is one thing, and Po^ejjion is another : But the Relation of Son- (hip, Juftification. e^c. arc benefits that arife from the promife or free Gifcby a meer refulcancy to all that are united to Chrift ; and whoever hsth prefent Right to them , even thereby hath poffelTion of them, fo that this anfwcreth your Reafon. For there is no fuch diftance of time between our Union wi:h Chrift C • and Cio) and Juftification, as that any ads of our own mftft interpofe ; but they are »» todcm tnflanti^ and differ only in order of nature. In liim , we prove a promife of pardon to all that receive Chrilt himfelf, and believe in him : If any will affirm the neccflity of any other ad before we can be juftified, it is incumbent on them to prove it. This was the fubflance of my Anfwer, to which the Reverend Bilhop faid no more j whether fatisfied or not , I cannot tell . But I thought meet to recite his J udgemcnt, both becaufe it comes fo neer the matter, and becaufe I know not of any other that faith the fame orfo much of fecming ftrengch againftus. Agiinft all thefe fevcn particular Opinions, lam novvtode- fend the Thefis ,- when I have firft told you, in certain diftin- ftions and propofitions, how much I grant, and what I deny ; which I (hall in (hort difpatch. A nd here I need but to rchearfc what I have faid already to Mr. Blake ^ pflg. 3 . 4. or to give you fome (hort account of my thoughts to the fame purpofe. Firft, We muft not confound Juftification by Conftitution or Guiftjand juflification by the Sentence of the Judge, and the Execution of that fentence , which are three diftinfl things. Secondly , We muft not confound Juftification with the aflii- ranceor feeling of Juftification. Thirdly, We muft diftinguifli between our firft Juftificati- on from a ftate of fin, and our daily Juftification from particu- lar Ads of fin. Fourthly, Retween thatwhirh \s neccflary on Chrifts part, and that which is ncceffary on our patt to our Juftificati- on. Fiffhly, Between Chrifts purchafing our Juftification, and his adual juft fying of us. Sixrhly, Between thefe two fenfcs of the [)hra(c\ ji*fti fed hy faith'] z'iz. as by an efficient Caufe, or as a meer Condition. Seventhly, Between the Caufality of faith in the Phyfical tflFev'isof fandification on the foul, and its conducing to the efficiry of the Promife in our Juftification. Propolition i. .Ex pme Chnjli^ We eafily grant that iE c^o it is not his Teaching, or Ruling us, but his Ranfome and Obedience that are the Meritorious caufe of our Juftification and Salvation. Propofttion 2- Therefore if Chr'i^ did juRl fie us per troMitn cbje^li apprehenfiln the neareft fenfe, as the Belief of facred Truths doth make a Qii^alitative imprcflion on the foul in our Sanftification, and the exciting and ading of our Graces then I fhould confefi that it is only that A(S of Faith which is the ap- prehenfion of this Objei5t,that doth help us direftly to the bene- fit of theObjed. Propofition 3. But it is not fo ; For the Objeft juftlficth us caufaily by way of Merit and Moral procurement, and the benefit of that Merit is partly the Promile conveying to us Juftification, and partly Juftification conveyed by that Pro- mi(e ( not to fpeakno^v of other benefits^ and the Promife conveyech Juftification by Moral Donation as a deed of Gift, oraPardonto aTraytor : Therefore the Gift flowing purely from the Will of the Giver, and the Promife or deed of Gift being the Immediate Inftrumental efficient Caufe of ir, as it is fgntim voluntatu Donat ris ■> our Belief or Apprehenfionfw4 talis cannot juftific us , nor have any nearer or higher inteteft in our Juftification, then to be the Condition of it, as it is a free Gift. And therefore the Condition muft be judged of by the will of the Donor cxpreflfed in his Promife, and not immediately by the conceits of men concerning its natural agreeablenefs to the Objcd in this or that refped. PropofitioK 4. Yea, Even (X parte C^rifl if though he Merit Juftification by his Ranfome and Obedience, yet he annai/j jnfiijieth us as King of his Church, and that in regard of all the three forts or p:irts of Juftification. He givtth itconfti- tucivcly by h;s Promife, as Lord and Lefijlator &r\d Be>iefa^or, onthcfe termsof Grace. UQ/eKte>!cethm Juft, as ourjudg; and he cxecuteth that fentcnce as a Jnfl Judge, governing ac* Cording to his Laws. So that if Faith Aid juftilie ex natura rei, which they call its hflruweyttality , I fee not yet but that theapprehenfionof Chrift as Lord and Judge maft juftific us, becaufe the Ohjcft apprehended doth thus juftifieu* Propofition 5. I eafily grant that moutSayitlificJtio-: or the C2 exciting Cii) exciting an i exercifc of our Graces, the cafe ftandcth as the Opponents apprehend it to do in Juft ficarion. This Interett ot the Aft maft be judged of by the Objeft apprehended. For it is not theBehef o a Promife that feareth us, but of a Thrcitni g-^ nor the Bchcf of a ThreutnlMg that (^omforieth u«,but of a Prom fe. For here the Objed worketh immediately on our minds, i>ey m dum ob]eBi apprehen/i : But in Juftification ic is n t fo, where God is the Agent as a Donor, and there can be norhing done by us, but in order to ma'xeus fit Subjects; and the change is not $lualitativt by an Objed: as fuch, but 'KjUtivehy 2iFMndft , to make up the whole breach, that is the Condition ff our p*irticuUr Pardon, ( fo far a? a parti- cular Act of iathis a Condition) which though it be not a Retciving hr.iU for Union wiib him,as wc did in the beginning,, yet is it a receiving him ad koc et ftcundum cfuid ; and a renewed. C onfent to his whole Office, and adhefion to him as our fpe- cial remedy for recovery from that fall, by freeing us both-, from. the giult:aud ftain of Sini. Propoft om 0}) Pr6pofi'i)n 9. It is undoubtedly the duty of every Sinner, in the fcnfe of his guile and mifery. to fly to theRanfomeof Chrifts blood and the Merit of his Obedience, as the fatisfa- dionto Gods Juftice, and thePurchaftrof our Juftification. And he that doth not this, how willing foever he may feem to learn of Chr ft as a Mafter, or to be ruled by him, yet cannoc be juftificd or favcd by hvn. Propjition lo. I e.^fily grant that F^ith^«'i r;f;r//?«»? PrtJ- phetam et Dominum recipT^ doth not juftifie i but only ^Jis/r/ ^hd (^hrifttim Trophetam (^ Dommum recipit^ (^ proceed to prove the Theiis, which is thi?. r Thefis. iVe are jafftfitdkj ^od^ by our 'Believing in Chri(i <^ asTeachir and Lord^ and not only hj ^tUevittg itt his biood or C Right eoufnefs. Argument i . My firft Argument (hall be from the Con- ceffionof thofc that we difputc with. They commonly grant us the point contended for : I hcrefore we may take ic for gran- ted by them. If you fay. What need you then difpute the point, if they deny ic not whom you difpute with? I Anfwer, fomc of them gran' it , and undcrftand not that they grant it us , becaufe they underft ind not the fenfe of our Aflercion . And fomeof chemunderftind th^tthcy grant it in our fenfe,but yec deny it in another fenie of their own ^ and fo make ic a Itrite about a fylUble. But I fhall prove the ConceflioUj left fome yec difcf rn ir not. Jf ir be granted as, that Believing in JefugChrift as Lord and Teacher, isarea'p-irc of rhe Condition of our Juftifica- tion then is itgnn'cd us, that by this ^eleving in him we are juftfied> as by a < ondition ( which is our fenlc, and all t'lac wc aflVrt ) But die former is true : Therefore fo is the la- ter For th? p'onf of the AnteceH^^nt ^ which is nil j Firft, Try whecheryouc^i meet widiiiny Di ineihat dare deny i', v«/ho C3. believech: Cif) believeth that Falthis the Condicion of the Covenant.Secondly, Ar,d 1 am fure their wiitingi;do ordinarily confefs it. Their Doctrine that oppofe u?,is, i hat Faith is both a Condition and an inftrument : but odier Acts , as Repentance &c. may be Conditions, but not Inltrumcnts. Aud thofe that have waded j'o far in:o chis Controverfie, feera to joyne thefe other Aces of Faith wih ths Conditions, but not with ihelnftrument.Thirdly, They eiprefly make it antecedent to our Juftification, as of mo- ral ncceflity, ex conjiitHHone permittentti-^ and fay it is the Fidet qMajifttficat : which is the thing defired, if there be any fenfe in the word?. Fourthly, They cannot deny toVaith in Chrift, as Lord and Teacher, that which they commonly give to Repen- tance, and moft of them to many other Act?. But to be a Condition ( or part of the Condition ) of Juitification is com- monly by them afcribed to Repentance j therefore they cannot deny it to thefe ads of faith. So that you fee I may fairly here break off and take the Theju fro Co»cejfa, as to the fenfc. Nothing more can be faid by them, but againft our phrafe whe- ther it be proper to fay that we are juftifiedBy that which is but a bare Condition of our juftification, which if any will deny .• Firft, We fliall prove it by the confcnt of the world,that apply the word [Bj/] to any Medium: And Dr. Trvifs that told them ( contr. (^orvinHm)o\cT and over that a condition is a Me- dium, though it be not a caufe ; and 1 think none will deny it. Secondly , by the confent of many Texts of Scripture : But this muft be referred to another Difputation, to which it doth hz- long,z//«.. about the Inftrumentality of faith in juftifying us, which, God willing,! intend alfo to perform. 9y4rgument 2. The ufual language of the Scripture,is,that we are juftificd b/ faith in Chrift, or by believing in him , without any exdufions of any cffontial part of that faith. But faith in Chrift doth efTentially contain our believing in him as Teacher, Prieft, and King or Lord : therefore by believing in him as Teacher, Prieft and Lord, we are juftified. : The C^ajor is paft the denial of Cbriftians, as to the firft part of it. And tor the fecond part, the whole caufe lycth on it ; For the ^//Kcr alfo is niill all controverfie. For if it be eftential to Chrift as Chrift to be God and man, the Redeemer, Teacher, Prieft, C'5) Prieft and Lord : then it is eflcncial to faiLh in Chrift ( by which weare juftified) to believe in him as God and man, the Redeem- er, Teacher, Prieft and Lord. But the Antecedent is moft cer- tain : therefore fo is the Con.equent. The reafon of the ConfequencCjis, becaufe the ad here Is fpe- cificd from its Objcd. All this is palt further queftion. AH the Queftion therefore is Whether Scripture do any where expound it fcif, by excluding the other cfTentiai parts of faith, from being thofe ads by which wc are juftified ? and have li.r.ic- ed our Juftiiication to any one ad? This lyeth on the Affir- mers to prove. So that you rauft note, that it is enough for me to prove that we are ju^iticd by faith in Chrift Jefus : for this Indudeth all the cflcntial ads ; till chey fhail prove on the con- trary, that it is bar fecmdum tfnid^ and that God hath excluded all other effential ads of faith fave that which they affert ; 1 he prooftherefore is on their part, and not on mtne.And I fliall try anon how well they prove ir. In the mean time, let us fee what way the Scripture goeth,and obferve that every Text by way of Authority^ doth afford us a fcveral Argument, unlcfs they prove the exclufion. Firft , LMarl^ 16.15,16,17. [^Go ye into ali the vorld aytd preach the Gofpsl to ever) Creature : he that hetieveth and is ^^»- tiiLed pjull he f'ived '^ andhethtt believeth not fhttll he damned ', and thefe ftgns [hall fo^otr them that hi/ievf^&cc ]] Here the faith mentioned,is the believing of the Gofpi I , and the fame with our becoming Chriftians : and therefore pot confined to one part or ad of faving faith. That Gofpel "vhich muft be preached to all the world, is It that is received b) the ''aith here mention - ed ; But that Gofpel doth encntially contaaj moever they be- lieve and are bapnzfd, which comprchendcth Juftification : And the Scripture here and everywhere doth make the f^me fa-th without the jcfaiidiltir.ction.to be thecM.ul r^»u vf Juftiftcaiion and of our litlc cu Glonf.cation : and never parcels out the feverai 06-) feveral effects to feveral acts of faith ; except only in thofc Qjalities or Aces of the foul w.hich faith is to produce as an efficient caufe. To be juftified by faith or Grace , and to be (i- vcd by faich or Grace, are promifcuoufly fpokcn as of the firae faith cr Grace. Secondly, ?'h>: 3.15.16,18. He that believetloin ki-n /h'll net ftrtfht but h.ive eve) /.< t^g; /*/<'0 ^^^ ^^ -^ helitveth on him is ttct coKdetrned.'^ Not tobecondtmncdt is to he jufiifi.d. Con- demnarion and Juftvfication are oppofed in Scripture, f^om. 8. 5 ^ ^ 4, Here therefore a fwuing faith and a jt^fltj-ivg are made all one. And itis[^ ^t/ifi/^/ <« Chrif}] without exclufion of any eHtncial part, ihat is this faith ; It is ^Believing ii the Name cf the only begnten SonofGo'i.] ver.18. whichis more then to believe his Ranfom. Thirdly, / but the wrathofGod abideth on h'-m.'\ To have Gods wrath abide on him is to be ununified. And the unbelievers oppofed toihe Believers tefore mentioned, are fuch as [ Bd.eve not the fan : '] which phrafe cannot poffibly be limited to the affiance in his blood: It is the [o«'^«9&i' | often tranflated D//fl^f(i<>«r : figni- fying,faith fVillet^ both unbelieving and difobcdienf, but rather Difbedie^ty properly it is urf-:rfvadable. But of this more anon. And the faith here mentioned is [Believing on the fon~\ entirely, without exclufion of any efTential acts ; nay exprefly including the act in qucfticn , by fhewing that it is faith in Chrift as Lord, into [ whofe hards the Father hath given all things ] as the connexion of thcfe words to the foregoing doth manifeft. Fourthly, /fc/w.I.16,17,18. lamnota/hamedoftheGofpehf Chrifii for it u the power cfGod to falvation to every one that be- lieveth -for therein is the Righteoufnefs of Qod revealed from faith to faith^ as it is ^ritten^ the jufi [hall hve by faith,'] where favingandjuftifying faith is made the fame, and that is to be a believer of the Gofpel, or in Chrift, without limitation to any one efTential part of it. Fifthly, Rom. 'i. 22. ^ Even the Righteoufnefs of God, Vchlch ii hyf^'thofjefhs (^hrift^Hnto all^andttpon all them that beLeve.~^ Here Here it is faith in Jefus Chrift by which we are juftificd i which therefore includeth ail that iselfential to it. Object, Verf. 25. It is [Aid to he bj fa th in his blood. Anfiv, 1 . 15uc there is not a fyliabie confining it to faith in his blood <^lofje. It faith not, ( bj faith only in his bhoi ) Secondly, The ordinary courfe of Scripture is to call it by that name (faith inJeffiiClorifl ) which comprehcndeth all thats effential to it» But fometime upon fpecialoccafions , its denominated from fome one notable act or part, And that is, when it is the fcope of tlie text, to denote more the diftinct Intcreft ot that part of Chrifts Office which is related to that act of faith, then any folc Intcreft of that act of faith it felf. And fo the Apoftle here mentioneth faith in his blood as a fpecial act , becaufe he now draweth them efpccially to obferve that blood which is the Ob- ject of it^j and in other places he inftanceth in other acts of faith; bur commonly fpeaks'6f it entirely. And I think the Opponents will ^rant that- as ( otily ) is not here expreffcd , fo neither is it implyed : for then «t would exclude alfo, faith in the reft of his fatisfactory Humiliation, or at leaft, in his active Righteoufnefs, if not in his Pcrfon or Relation : of which more anon. So verf 1^.7,0,^1 . Us caWcd ( faith ) entirely, or withovk re- ftriction by which we arejullifiedj and therefore none of the effentials are excluded. ' ; - '" But it woul j be too tedious to recite the particular Texts : Its known that [^ by faith ] and \_ by believing ] in Chrift, without: cxclufion or limitation, is the common phrafe of Scripture,when it fpcaks how we are juftified : as may further be feen, Rom.^.i, 2. & 9.32. Gal. 2.T6. ( Wearejttfiifiedby the faith ofjeftu Chrifl^ and by believing in Jefus Chrift, as oppofcd to the works of the Law; butnotbyfaithinhisPficfthoodjOr RdnG3m,asoppofed to faith in him as our Lord and Teacher j C?^*/.^.! 1,24,25,26. & 5.5 6. Eph 3.8,9. & 3.12,17. Phil. 3. 9. Ron). 9. lo.Heb. 11. throughout, f}hn6 35,4047. ^^j 10.42,4^. Rom. 10 10. Acis 13.39. From thele and m«ny the like I argue thus. The Scripture doth afcribe our Jufiification tofaith ; and doth not limit it to any one part of faith, excluding thereft : Believing in Jefus Ctirii} as Redeemer, Prophet, Pricft and KingjiselTenti- allythisfaith. ^^/<7&c. D l( (i8) If the Scripture fpeaks of faith eflenually, not limiting it ad partem fidei,ihzn fo muft we : But the Scripture doth fo . E^;go * &c. It is nowhere njore neceffary then in fuch cafes this to hold to the Rule, of not diftinguiftiing «^; Uxnondifiinghit. Firft, I'ccaufc itisan itiot7, and not the lytng of Dominion ; But of that before. If I may Judge by your Doctrine elfewhere expre(fed, you mean only That thi ah of Faith vrhich accepteth of fajiif cation^ is the only Infinf- ment of fuftification ;of which in its due place: It may here fuffice to fay again, that I affirm not that in queition to the be Inftru- ment of it.Be not offended that 1 enquire into the fenfe of youf ambiguous phrafe, whxh I truly profeff, is to me not intelligi- ble, till you have expUined in what fenfe it is that you intend it ; and therefore my enquiry is not n^edlefs. ^r. 3. If the Scripture doth ( not only by the fpecificke Dcno- nination, as was laft proved, but alfo ) by defcription, and men- tioning ihofc very acts, include the believing in Chrift as our Lord and Teacher, &c, inthatfaithby which as a Condition, we are juftifiedj then we are ju(Vified by believing in Chrift as our Lord and Teacher, &c. not only as a facrifice or Meritcr of Juftification. But the Antetedent is true : therefore fo is the Confequent. I prove the Antecedent by many Texts. Rom, 10 4,^,78,9,10. Fo'^ Chrifi is the end of the Laxp D 2 /or Czo) for Righteotifntfs to eVfyote that htUiveth. "^ But tht R'ghteottfn^s \'vh:chii off^ith fpfaksth on this wife ' Snynotin thj heart, trho fljill --'fcend into He.tven ? that is to biing Chriji fiiovfn from '^bove : or -who pjalldsfcend into the deep? that is to bring ftp Ck iji agam from the dead : Bat ^hat f^ith it ? The word is nigh thee, even in thj month, andtn thy heart, that is the rpord of faith which we preachy that if Ujoh Jl^alt confefs with thy month the L'^rd Jefust and fl>alt believe in thy heart th.tt CJod raifed him from the dea^y thou pialt be faved ; for ^ith the heart r».nd his own received kum not '. But as r»a»y as received k im, to ihem gave he poVcer to become the font of Qod ^ to them th.it ^eliive tn hU N'ame.~\ Here it is manifeft, Firft, that it is the faith by whicll^ we are julufied tii.u \y fpokenof; for its coraaionl-y agreed that (ZI) thatjuftificationis here included in Adoption, or at ieaft thaf its the rims a6l of faith by which we are adopted and juftified. Secondly, Alfo that the objed of this faith is Chnft as the Z/z^^f, which is not his mcer Priefthood. Thirdly, And that ids his perfon in his full office, and not fome fingle benefit. Fourth- ly, that it is called [_ hts l^me • J and [^ "Believ'ni in hii NAmt\ is more then confenting to be juftified by his blood ; and in Scri- pture-fenfe comprehendeth his Nature and Office : and is all one as taking him as the true Meiliah, and becoming his Difciples. Fifthly, And its much to be Noted, that it is not by way of Phy- fical efficacy by apprehenfion f as I take Gold in my hand, and Jfo receive poffellion of it ) that faith hath its ncareft Intereft in our Adoption: but it qualifieth the fubjcct difpoficively in the fight of God, and fo God gives men Po'^er thereupon to •become hisfons. Sotheforecited words, /id X^ith pover, ruifed from the deifi^ and wade the Judge of ths quick and the dead • and it is called entirely a Bdisving in him, and the Remiflion is through his name. 9^cl. 16. 3 1. 1 he faith of the Jaylor as pcrfwaded to for life.' is the helievingin the Lori J ff*t Chriji entirely : and itt called a Beli ving in God^ ver. 3 4. I Tet.z. 4,5,6,7. The faith there mentioned is that By which we arc juftlfied ; he that btlifveth on himfhtllnot be co-founded • and the Objcd of it is^rvhole Chriji as the Corner ftone,Ele^ and FrecioHs.'^ fohn^. 10, II, 12. [Thcfaith there mentioned, is that by wthich wc have Chrij} and Life \: And'the Ohji€toi it is, { the Son fif god ] and [_ Qod ] and [ the record that God gave of ha Son ] even [^ that god hath given uj etern^tl Life, and thii life is in ha Son. ] iMat. 1 1. 27,28,29. The faith there mentioned, is called [_ a comming to (,'hrifi weary and heavy laden , thai he may give them reft 3 which muft comprehend Reft from the Guilt of fin and puniftiment. And the Aft of that Faith is direded toChriftas one to whom ifl^ but to learn of Chnfl and follow him : But neither their leaminq nor their imitation, but faith in his blood, td their freedom or f;ifiifi. cation. Repl. Properly neither one ad of faith nor odier is ourjuftification. Faith is a j^rfAr/ in the Habit, and an ad in the exercffe: and Juftificat'onis 3i Relation. Faith is a part of our Vandification • T herefoie it is not our Juftification. But fuppofing you fpeak Mctonymically, I fay both ads of faith arc our Jultification, that is, the Condition ofit. And the Text proves it, by making our Subjedion not only a Duty, but an exprei5 Condition of the Promife. And this Conditi- onaliry you here before and after do confefs or grant. j^rgument (h:> Argument 4 ]f we are juftified by Chrift as Prieft, Pro- phet and K n^ conjundly, and not by any of thefc alons^much l^fs by his Humiliation and Obedience alone ; then according to the Opponents own Principles ( who argue from the dift n(ft Intereltof the fcvcial parts of the Objed, to the diftinft In- tereft of the fcveril acts of faith ) wearejuftihed by believing in Chnft as Pnelt, Prophet and King , and not as Humble and Obedient only. But we arejuftifiedby Chrift as Prieft, Prophet and King, &c. Erp^ dec Ihe Confequence is their own. And the Antecedent I (hall prove from feveral texts of Scripture, and from the nature of the thing, beginning with the laft. And nrft it is to be fuppofed, That we are all agreed that the blood and Humiliation of Jefus Chrift, are the Ranfome and Price that fatisfieththc jufticeof God for our fins, and accor- dingly rauft be apprehended by the Believer: And many of us agree alfo, that his Aftive obedience as fuch, is part of this fa- tisfaction, or at leaft, Meritorious of the fame effect of our Juftification. But the thing that I am to prove,is, that the Me- ritorious Caufe is not the only Caufe and that Chrift in his other actions is as truly the efficient Caufe,as in his meriting, and that all do fwectly and harmonioufly concur to the entire effect ; and that faith muft haverefpect to the other caufcs of our Juftifi* cation, and not alone to the M eritorious Caufe, and that we arc Juftified by this entire work of Paith.andnot only by that Act which refpects the fatisfaction or merit. And firft, I (hall prove that thrift doth actually juftifie us as King. The word jHji'ficatio»^ as I have often faid C and its paft doubt) is ufed to fignifie thefe three Acts. Firft, Condonation, or con- ftitutive Juftification, by the Law of Grace or Promife of the GofpeJ. Secondly , Abfolution by fentence in Judgement, Thirdly, The Execution of the former, by actuall Liberation from penalty. The laft is oftener call'd Remiflion of fin • the two former arc more properly called Juftification. Firft, As for the firft of thefe, i argue this: If Chrift do as King and Benefactor, (on fuppofition of his antecedent Merits,) Enact the Law of Grace or promife by which we ?re juftified , f hen doth he aj King and Benefactor juftificus by Condonati- on. (iT) on , or conftitotion. For the Promife is his Inftrnment by which he doth ir. But' the Antecedent is certain, therefore fois the Confequent. As the Father by Right of Creation was Rector of the new created worU, and fo made the C ovcnant o/Lifc that was then made : fo the Son ( and the Father) by Right of Redemption is Rector of the new Redeemed world, ana lo made the Law of Grace, that gives Chnft and Life to all that will believe. As it is a Law , it is the Act of a King : As it is a Deed of Gift, it is the Act of a Benefactor t as it is founded in his deach.and fuppofeth his fatisfadion,thereby it is called his Teftamerc. In norefpect is;t part of his fitisfaclion or HuTjiiliation orMeric itf lf,bui the trueeffe^ of it. So that Chriftsmerit is the Remote Moral Caufc of our Jaftification, but his granting of this pro- mife or Aft of Grace , is the true natural efficient Inftru- raental Caufe of our Juftificatlon , evej? the Immediate Caufe. '^*^ J ' ; Secondly, Juflification by fcntcnce of Judgcr^eric' is unde- niably by Chrift as "King. For God hath appointed to Judge the World by him, A61. 17. 31.' and hath committed all Judge- ment to h'\m John 5. 22. And therefore as Judge he doth juftifie and Condemn. This is not therefore any part of his Humilia- tion or Obedience , by which he ranfomeihfinners from the Curfe. To deny thefe things , is to deny Principles in Politicks. - Thirdly, And then for the Execution of the fentence by aftual hberation, there is as little room for a doubt, this being after both the former, and the aft of a Reftor, and not of a Surety in the form of a fervanr. So that it is apparent, that as the MeVit of our Juf^t/Ication is by Chrittin his Humiliation -, So our aftual Juftification in all three fcnfesis by Chrift ts King. And therefore Faith in order to Juftification, muil according- lyrefpect him. Secondly,As the Teacher of the Church-Chrift doihnot imme- diately juftifie, but yet mediately he dotbjand it is but mediately that hejuftifieth by his Merits The Gofpel is a Law that muft be promulgate and expounded, and a Dodrinethatmuft be taught and prelTcd on Tinners, till they Kceivc it and believe, E . that Cii8, 19. iy4U things are delivered unto me of my Father^ %iQ. C^^ne to me allye that are nvearj^ &c. fo Mat.- 28. 18, 19. compared with /t/uri^i 6. 15,16. (hew that itis an ad of Chrift exalted or in Po;^r, to pardon , or grant the promife of Grace* John 1 . 1 2 . To give power to men to become the Sons of Qod^ muft be an aU of T oreer. John 5.22,25,24. it is cxprefs of the fentcnce. aA^s 5.31. [_tiim hath God exalted to be a Prince and a Savi- our^ for to give Repentance to Ifraelattd forgivenefs of fins. ] He forgiveth as a Prince and Saviour. e^ff. 10.42.43. he is preached as the Jttdge of ^uick and deadi and famadethe Objedof the faith, by which we have Remiflion of fins. Ron9.^.2%. [[ fVho TV at delivered for our offences^ andraifedfor our lufiification. 1 And this RcfurredionCas is faid)was part ofhis Exaltation. And the Apoft'le thence concludes fas is aforefaid) that this is the faith that is Imputed to us for Righteoufnefs []// we btlieve in him that raifed up fefw our Lord from the dead. ] Rom.Z.l%-)l^-X,f^ho JhallU) anything to the charge ofGsds JE/e^ ? it is^odibat jujiifieth: Vfhou hethatcondemneth ? it ia Chri^ C2^7) Chriff that died, J*a ratlnr that u rifem ^gain , who U tven at tkt ti'ht handofQod ^ nh» affo m^keth interce^on fcrus. ^ Here ^oi/^ aod the RtfurreFltert^ and Sejfton at Cjods > ight hand , and the trite cfjjionff Ch*-'fi, are all made the grounds or caufcs of our JuUificatron, and nor only Chnfts death ; Yea, itisejcpicft by [^ tt M Chrift that dud^j/ea rathtrthat is rtfin^SiC J I ^o>.i5.i,2 ;,4. The faith by which F^u/ieWs ihem they were fiived, had Chrifts Relurreftion for its objed, as well as his dying for our fins. /'^'/.3.b\9,io. P4«//wayof Tuftification was firft to \_wi» Chnfi^ and be f.undm h m^ and fo to have a Righteoufxeft i)f Goa bj faith in Chriji ( whole Chritt, ) and not that of the LaVP ; that he mght kjowthe pnivfrofhtt RefMrreHtoK dcc. The true^4atureof th sfai:h is defcribed, i Pct.i.21. [fVho hy htm do believe in God that r*i' fed kirn from the dtad^ andgAvt htm Glcrj^ that your Faith and Hope may be in God.'] I Pet.^\i\. [_ The like Figure Vfhereunto even "Saptifm f doth tU>-t» 0lf« fuve m b) the RelurreEiion of fefpts Chrifl , rifho i4 gone Into Hesvtn^ and u on the right hand of God ; Angels and Ah' thoritifs, andTo^ers, bti'^g made fttbjtEi to hm.] It is certain that the falvation of ^apttfn confiiicth very much in Remiflion of finor Juftification. In a word, it is moft evident in Scripture, that merit and fatif- fadion are but the moral, remote preparatory Caufes ofour Ju- ftifica«on ( though exceeding eminent , and muft be the daily ftudy,andeverlafting praifcof the Saints ) and that the per- feding nearer efficient caufes, were by other ads of Chrift ; and that all concurred to accompiifli this worJr, And therefore even tx parte ' hrtfti , the work is done by his feveral ads, though merited by him in his humiliation only. And therefore it s paft doubt on their own principles , that faith muft refped «itf,in order to our Juftification. And the faith by which we are juftified muft be that of the Eunuch, AEls 8.37. that believed Xf th a'l his heart th t Chriji tt'/W $hefon of God ^ and fo received him as Chrift entirely. Argurueni 5. If ir be a necefTary Condition of our ^eing ^jipttKtdfor the Remiffion of fin , that wc profefs a belief in more then Chrifts Humiliation and merits then is it a necefTary CondL- £ 2 tion CiS) tton of our aSu^l Rtmijfitn offm^ that we rully IfeUeve in more than Chrifts Humiliation and Merits : But the Antecedent is ccrtain.For ihePrcfcript,A/'rf;.38.i9,2Q,and thcconQantly ufed form of Baptifaj , and the Tests even now mentioned, i Tet.i, 21. y^£?.8.37.do all Qiew it: And I have more fully proved it in my Difpute of Right to Sacraments. And the Confequence is undeniable : And i think all will be granted. ^rgumtnt 6. If the Apoftles of Chrift thcmfelves before bit death, were juftified by believing in him as the fon of GovJ, an- the Teacher and King of the C hurch, fyea perhaps without bed lieving at all in his Death and Ranfom thereby) then the belie- ving in him as the Ton of God , and Teacher and King , con* jund with believing in Ws blood , are the faith by which we arc fiowjuftificd. Bat the Antecedent is true : therefore fo is the Confequent. The reafon of the Confequence is, becaafe it is utterly im- probable that the addition of further light and objei^s for our faith, (liould null the former, and that which was all or fo much of their juftifying faith, (hould be now no part of ours. Tbe Antecedent I prove, CManh.i6,'l i .22,23 . [ From thdt timi forth hgan fefus to fbetv unto hit *J)ifciplit^ how that he mufi go unto Jerufahnt^ and [uffer many things of the Slders mtd ehitfPrieJis $»d Scriht, ttnd bt killedtand hi raijed again the third day ; then Peter took, him and began to rebuke hmy faying, "Be H far from thee Lord^thii fhali not be unto thee ] &c. ^John 1 1. 1 5. Thefe things undtrfioodr.ot his Difciples at the firp ; but when fefus was ghrified^ thfn^dcc. Luke 28. [ Then he tockunto him the twelve^ and faid unto them ; 'Beheld ^ we go up to Jerufalem^ and ali things that are "bitten by the Prophets concerning the fon of man ^ p3 all (ft accomplished : For he (hall be delivered to thi Gentiles f and (hall be mocked andjpitefully intreated andJpSt upon^ and they (hall fcourge him and pnt him to death, and the third day he Jhall rife again : And they under (lood none of theje things \ and thii' faying tvas hid from them^ *t§ither knew they the things which Veere fpoken^\ Luke 2^.20,21,12. {The chief Triejls atj^.Rul-ers delivered him to he condemned to death^and have crucified hm ; but Wr truji* ed t h- 1 it hfid been he which (hould hav* redeemed ^f^ael : and be * fik (19) fide all this to daj ii the third day ft nee thefe things Vftre done ; and certain reomtn alfo of ohr company made us a/ion^/bea tpbich Vpere early at the ^tfitlchre fools and jltW' cf heart to htl.eve do only juftifiej then the apprehending of the fame Ranfom as meriting ranctification,(hould only fandify. And neither the juftifying nor fanctifying acts of faith fhould refpecc either Chrifts following acts of his Priefthood, (Inter- rtHion ) nor yet his Kingly or Prophetical office at al!. And therefore as the fanctifying act muft refpect Chrifts following applicatory acts, and not the purchafe of fanctiHcariononly ; fo the juftifying act ( to fpeak as they ) muft refpect Chrift > fol- lowing Collation or application, and not only his Purchafc of Juftification. And then I have that I plead for : becaufc Chrift effectively juftifies as King. Argument S. It is the fame faith in Habit and Aft by which we are Juftified, and by which we have right to the fpi- rit of fandification ( for further degrees J and Adoption, Glo- rification, &c. But it is believing in Chrift as Prophet, Prieft and King,by which ve have Right to the fpirit of fandification, to Adoption and Glorification : Therefore it is the believing in Chrift as Prophet, Prieft and King, by which we are juftifi- ed. The m finer I fuppofe will not be denyed - lam fure it is com- monly granted. The Al^j/r T prove thus. If the true Chriftian faith be but one in cfTence^and one un- divided Condition of all thefe benefits of the Coveninc, then it is the fame by which we arejuQified, and have Riglit to the other benefits ( that is, they are given us on that one undivided Condition JBut the Antecedent is truecas f prove by parts thu?. Fitft, Thit it is but one in effencc, I think will not be denied ; If it b-,I prove it , firft, from Ephe. 4. 5. Thtre is one faith. Secondly, If Chrift in the Edcntials of a Saviour to be be- lieved in, be but C»^, th^n the fiich thatreceiveih him,Ciinbe but (30 but One : But the former is true : Therefore fo is the later. Thirdly, ]f the belief in Chrift as Prophet. tsPricft and as l^ing, be but feveral Effenoal parts of the Chriftian taith, and not Icveral forts of faith, and no one of them is the true Chri- fttan faich it felf alone ( no more then a Head or a Heart is a humane body, ) then ttue faith is ^«r o»r ( confiiftirg of its effential paits ) But the Antecedent is undoubted, therefore fo isrheCon'cquenr. Secondly, And as Faith in Effence is but One faith, fo this One faith is but One undivided Condition of the Covenant of Grace, and it is no: one part of faith that is the Condition of one benefit, and another part of another, and fothe feveral benefics given on feveral ads of faith, as feveral conditions of them : but the entire faith in its ElTentialsis the condition of each benefit: and therefore every eflenrial part is as well the Condition of one promifed benefit , as of another. This I prove : Firft, In that Scripture doth nowhere thus divide , and maiic one part of faith the condition of Juftification,and another of Adoption, and another of Glorification ^ c^c. and therefore it is not to be done. No ma,ncan give theleaft proof of fuch a thing from Scripture. It is before proved that its one entire faith that is the Condition. T ill they that divide or multiply conditions according to the feveral benefits and ads of Faith, canprovc their divifien from Scripture, they do no- thing. Secondly, we find in Scripture not only Believing in ("krifi made the One Condition of all benefits; but the fame particu- lar afls or parts of thi» faith, having fevera! forts of benefits afcribed to them (though doubtlcfs but as parts of the whole conditions. ) Its eafie, but needlefs to ftay to inftance. Thirdly, Otherwife it would follow by parity of reafon, that there muft as many Conditions of the Covcnantjas there be be^ nefi:s to be received b^ it, to be refpefled by our faith : which would be apparently abfurd. Firft, Becaufe of the number of- Conditions.Secondly,Becaufe of the quality of them. For then not only Juftificationmuft have one conditionj& Adoption ano- ther nnd Sanftification another, and Glorification another ,and Comfort and Peace of Confcience another j but perhaps feveral graces (C30 ;grac« muft have fevcral conditiom, and the fcveral blcflTngs for our prefent life and Relations and Callings, and fo bow ma- ny forts of Faith (hould we have as well as jultifying faith ? even one faith Adopting, another Glontying. &c. And ( as to the quality) it is a gi ouiidleis conceit that the be- lief or Acceptance of every particular inferiour mercy (hould be our title to that particular mercy : For then the covccous would have tide to their Riches, becaufe they acce^ t them as trom Chrift, and the natural man would have this title to his health, andl fe,andfoof thereft : whereas it is clear that it is fauh in Chrift as Chrift, as God and man, King, Pricft and Prophet, that is the condition of our Title, even to health, and life, and every bit of bread lo far as we have it as heirs of the Promifc. The promife is that all things fljall^ork^togethtr for gcod{ViOt to every one that is willing to have the benefit, but) to them that love (j d, Rom.8.28. ^f we feei^ ftrft the Kingdom of God andhii Righteoufefsy ( not rightcoufnefs alone,much Icfs pardon alone) other thingi Jhalllfeadded^Mglth.6.'il' Fourthly, If the Receiving of Chrift as Chrft, effentially.be that upon which we have title to his benefits, then there are not fe eral acts of faith receiving thofc feveral benefits, neceffary as the condition of our Title to them. But the Antecedent is true : as I prove thus. The Title to Chrift himfelf includeth a title to all thefe bene- fits ( that are made over to the heirs of Promife : ) But on our acceptance of Chrift we have title to Chrift himfelf : therefore unon our acceptance ofChrift(as the fimple condition)we have title to all thefe benefi's. Rom.S, ^1. [_ He tbdt jpared >ict hu orvu fon^ but gave him up form all^ hew fhallhe not with him alfo freely give Ui all things ? I fo that all things are given in the gift of Chrift, or with him> Th erefore Receiving him is the means oi Receiving all. I John 5.1 1, T 2, {_ God hath given us eternal life ^and thii life u in his fon . He th^t h^th the fon hath life ; and he that hath not the fon hath net t ft.'] So that accepting Chrift as Chrift, makes him ours ( by way of condition; ) and then our life of juftifica- tion and fandifitttion is in him, and comes with him. (joining to Chriji as Chdft, is the fole undivided condition F of C34) of Ltff^ fo^n '5 4O. Ye "^illfKn come to rue that ye mky hiv LVe. ] Yet here T muft crave that Inqenuou; dealngof the Reader, that he will o^jferve ( once for all, and not exptrd that I fhould on every call recirc it j thatthough'I maintain cheunityofthe condirion, not only in oppoliticn to a fe^xraung divifion , bat alfo to a diftributive divifion of Conditions;yet 1 ftill maintain thcfe thr'ce things. Firft.chat cjuaatimAteriile Co-^dnijMis^ that faith which is the condicion,doth believe all thetflential parts of Chrifts office dtftincllj ; arid fo it doth not look to his Bx iitati • o« in ftead of his HHjj^.ilUtion-^ nor e Contra \ but looks to be /J^K/^jj^^^by himas a facnfice^nni m€yiio-4ottfij juftifiei by his A'f eritt^ find aSiaali^ piftified by him as /Cmj^, Jftd^e , and^«r- faHor^ &c. And that it eyeth alfo^iy?/«c7/; thofe Benefits which falvation doth eff ntiallj ccnfiil in (ac leaft.) And, it takes Chrtft finally to Juftifie, Adopt, SanAifie, GloriHe, ctt^. Hjiintily, But ftill its but one condition on which wfehave Titlif'to all this. ... . • -l;!^,;; ■^♦;^- Secondly, Th5iil\ikmti\kih^x.mi\\zReorh^oif/itJ^ifi' cation^ the feveral ads of faith on feveral objects arediftinct cificientcaufesof the acting of feveral Graces in the foul. The Belief of every attribute of God, and every Scripture truth, hatb a feveral realeffect.upon us ; But it is not fo in Jufiificati- an, nor any receiving of Ri^bt to a benefit by Divine DonAtion; fdr there our faith is not a true efficient caufcj but a Condition : and faith as a condition is but One, though the efficient a6^s are -divers. The Belief of feveral Texts of Scripture, may have as many fanctifying effects on the foul; But thofe are not feveral conditions of our Title thereto. God faith not Iwill excite this Grace if thou wilt believe this Text, and that grace if thou wilt believe tha t Text.In the exercife of Grace God worketh by ourfelvesas efficient caufcs: but in the Juftifyingof afinncr, God doth it wholly and immediately himfelf without any Co- cificicncy ofourown, though wemuft havethedifpofitionor Condition. . Thirdiy , I ftill affirm, that this One undivided condition may have divers appellations from the Refpect to the Cotift^uent bc- aefits (fori will not call them the tS^ftsi^ ) This one faith may fee C 55>r ^ be denominated ( importing only thcTnfercft of a conditfon ) ti Argument 10 If the condemning Ur.belief which is the Privation of the faith by which we are juttifitd, be the Not-be- belicvingin Chrift asKing,Prieft and Prophet, than the faith by which we arc jaftificd, is the believing in him as King, Prieft and Prophet. But the Antecedent is true : therefore fo is the Coil- fequent. Only the Antecedent needs proof, though the Confcquence have the hard hap to be denyed alfo. Here note, that by The condemning ZJnbelisfy I mean f hat which is the peremptory-condemning (in according to the fpe- cial Commination of the Gofpcl : Where I fuppofe firft, that there is a condemnation of the Law of Nature or works, which is fimply for fin as fin. Secondly, And a diftindl condemnation by the New Law of Grace, which is not Hmply for fin as fin,but for one fort of fin in fpecial.that is,the final rejection of the Re- fnedy : And of this fort of condemnation I (peak in the Argu- nient. The confirmation of thisdiftindion Iftiall' be further called to anon by Mr. 'BLke. The Antecedent I prove. Firft, from John g. 18,19,20,?.!. (^ He that believeth on him it not condemned ^{^^ here's the jultify- ing faith : ) But he that bclteveth yiot , u condemned already^ (Thcrcs the condemning unbeltef,concradidory to the juftfj'ing faith ) \_Becaufe he hMh not believed cm the name of the onij he^ot' ten Son of god : ] ( here is a fpccial condemnation proved, ^iftind from that by the Law of works. ) [[ Anii tbii ii the cor.- demnAtion ( ihsLt is the condemning y?;? or c^ufe) th/tt light is come into the Vcorld, and men loved dA-> k*i(fs rather then Itghtj be- cauje their dtedtvreyc evil^ For every one that dcth evil hate'ttf tht light, &c. The 19 verfedefcribeih the Condemning Unbi^- licf, and the 2o.gives the reafon of mens guiltinefs of ir. And tht unbelief defcribed is a (hunning or not coming to Chrift a«i he is the Light to difcover and heal their evil deeds. So that if con- tradiftories will but fliew the nature of each o.hcr, I think our controverfie is here plainly refolved. So is it in Ffai. 2. 12. [ Kife the Son Itfi he hi angri^ and je ferijhfrom the ^ajf -, when his ^rath is kindled ifUt 4 litth, iiejfed are CiP) are allthej that put their trufi in him.~] The faith that favcs from punifhmenr, faveth from Guile : the faith that faves from ^uilr, is jultifying faich : The faith here dtfcribed , is that which favv'sfrom p^nifhment: And the faith here defcribed is r k:ffi"g the Vtf«, ; whid^comprehendjrch fubjccflion, anddep.eH- d.ince, and love ; and is the fame for all that, which is afccf called [_ trujlinn m fjirtl. ] So Luk.^ 19* J7 C lit*- thofe.mim enemiet yvbkh would tfot tk^t I (7:o'*Ur.itntj over (hem, bri^g hither , a-ig life \ a -dhe th^t be- Ifjetveth r.ot the Sm, jhiUnot fee Ufe, but the tv^ath of God abid- eth on kiot. ] Here it is apparent that this Unbelief is the pri- vation, the contradictory orcontiary to juftifying faith. Firlt, becaufc they are fo directly oppofed here denominacively, that elfc the words would be eq'jivocal,an i not inrelligible.Secondly^ Bccaufc the contrariety of cfftdsalfois added to put the thing .pa(^ doubt. (2 The \\>ra:h of God ,ibideth on klm ; is contrary to vifiifjing^ which takes the ivrath o^ God off him ; efpecially confideringjthat it is curfing, comminatory, obliging wrath thac is principally meant,- the great executing wrath being not on men till their damnation. And that materially this unbelief thus oppofed tojulifying faith doth confift in contumacy, rebellion, or unperAwsdabknefs, is plain in the words , C ° 3 am^^v tJ vid. ^ which fignifie * r They that are ccntumaciof^s or difobeditnt to the Son, or unfer- f^adible, ] And I '^oh>i$. 10 I T,i2.This faith and unbelief are oppofed; and the unbelief corfiftcth in [ .not beli^vifigjhe record th^t God h*th fiven of his \on ] and tbxt record isinotonly concerning juftification, orthemericof it. So 2. Thtf ,2. 12. C Thut all they mi^ht be damned^ ^ha believed not the truth, but had pieafwe in t4!irighteofifnefs. ^ So 2 Thcff, 1.8,9, I o. [ That obey not the Gofpel of our Lord Jefus Chrift ] (4^) Chrifi ] is the defcriptlon of the VrfhlievtrSiO^^poCed to {them thatbtligve,'\\tT, lO. So Jo. 8. 24. [ // jt beittve rctthat I amhe^j': PjuU die injour 7>»;,]which as to the act and effect is contrary co jultitv ing taitli. Ax\^\_tl:At 1 em ke\\% riot or\\y\^ that f am the RAnfvme \ tut alfo [_that 1 am the ' yiUJfiah and Redeemer.'^ So John 16.8,9. Q He ^Ull reprove the rvorld of fin. ( not only in general that they are finners , hue of this fin in specie) hecaufe thej believed n»t in me?\ Many texts may be cited where juftifying faith and condemn- ing unbelief are defcribed from acts o\ the undcrftanding { though the will be imply ed ) as believing^ or net beliei i>fg that Chnji « the fen ofQod^tcc. which cannot poffibly be reftraincd to his Ranfom and Merit alone. The Confequencc cannot be denyed, if it be but underflood that ihis unbelief doth thus f feci a/I jr condemn, not in general as fin, or by the meer greatnefs of it, but as the privation of that faith by which only men are juftified. For Privatives (hew what the Pofitives are. And if this unbelief did condemn only as a fin in general, then ail fin would condemn as it doth : butthat is falfe. And if it condemned only as a great fin, then firft, every (in as great would condemn as it doth; and fecondly, it would be Derogatory to the precioufnefs and power of the Remedy, which is lufficient ^gairft the greateit fins, as great : It remains therefore that as it is not for the fpccial worth of faith above all other Graces, that God afilgncd i^ to be the condition of JulHfi- cation; foil is not for a fpecial greatnefs in the fin of unbelief thae it is the fpccially condemning fin , but as it is the Privation of that faith (which Jhecaufc [of its^^ peculiar aptitude to that Office, is made of ^uch ncceflicy to our Juftification. But faith Mr, B/ake (^ ** Thit it like the old Argtimert ; Evil ** vfork^ merit condrmKation : therefore good Vcorks ment falvati- *^ on. Anitlnjeaning damtjs cur good meaning', therefore (aves."^ Repl. Firft, A p3lpjblerai^ake. Meriting, and faving by me- rit, arc effefts or efficienccs./o pl'^i oly feparablc from the things themfelvcs, that the invalid'tv of the Con fcquence eafily ap- pears : i^'Utingoodfadnefs, did you believe when you wrote this, that he that argueth from the defcnption or nature of a pri- vation, C+i) vation,toctiedcrcriptionorn;»iurcofthc thlnj^.ot which it is the Privation, or rhacargueth from the Law of oppofies and con- tradidions,doih at-guc Ike him that argues from the mora! fepa- rable tffi Jcncy, or effed of the one, to the like efficiency or ef- fect ot the other? Secondly But underft-ind me to argue from the effed it felf if you pleafe.fo it be as affiled by the unchangeable Law or Cove- nant of ■'. od : I duubt nor but the Argument will hold good. As under the Law of works it was a good argument to (si)\?^t-per- ftH-obeytngis the condemning evit : therefore perfetl'cbejinqit the piJiif)mgco':ditio».]S<'i is it a good argument under the Cove- nant of Grace ro fay- Not-helievmg in Chnfl m King ,Prie(} and Prophet ^ is the fpecijllj-co^demmHg nnbeliefi therefore btlitving in Chrifi a< Kiig,Priej} & Prophet ^m the faith b) Which ire are jfifii- fed'^ The main force of the reafon lyeth here , becaufe elfe the Covenant were equivocating, and not Intell!gible,ifwhen it faith \^He thut believeth pjallbefa'iied^tnd, he that believeth not fhallbe damned~] ft did fpeak of onekind or 2(5t of faith i none Pro- poficion,andof another in the other. If when itisfaid , [ He thatbeltevethpj^ll be jujiiftd from alhhingt^Bi.c, and he that believeth not (hall be co^hmned^ \ if you btlieve you pjall not come ittts condemnation ; but if you believe not^you are condemned^ and the rvra^h ofGodabideth on ycti ] [ f/f that believeth jhall be fo^givtny andhe that believeth not pjall not be forgiven "J I fay, if the Affirmative and Negative Proportions, thcProraife and the Threatning do not here fpeak of the fame believing, but di- vers, then there is no hope that we (hould underftand thcm.and the language would ncceflitatc us to err.. NowthePapifts Ar- gument 4^ rj^^^whach no fuch bottom \ Bad Tvork,! damn, they e- fore good irorkj f*ve. For the Covenant is not [^He that doth ^oodWorkj fyaUbe faved ^ andH)i t hit doth badtpotk.s /hall be condemned] But \ he th-it obejeth ferfe^Jlj Jhall b:- y4{li'.td^ and hethatdothnot Jhall be condemned^ Of if they argue from the thrcatningofthcGofpelagainftbad works, to the merit ofgood, quoad modum procurandi ^\tw\\\r\oiho\diyViz> that Evil varies procure damnation by way of merit : therefore good Workt procure falvation hyn>ay of merit. For there is not eaiem ratio^ and fo no ground for the Confequcnce ; Nor dtd I argue ad rmdum pro- G CHlrandiC^ C urAyidi-^\ Rtjt^irg Ch> ijl m Kir)^ doth condemn by waj cf mirit; thtrehre accenting htm 04 King doth (ave hj Veay of ttierit '\'\h\s was none of my arguing : but tMs [_ RejeSli.,g or mt believirg in Chrift elieve^ thcuJhaUbe jufiifed, implyeth, // thou believe not, thou Jhalt net be jujiifed, Jf you confent not to this, you then muft maintain that this Co- venant exdcdeth not Infidels frgra falvation,the term only being not implyed in the promife of pardon to Believers : But if you grant all this, ( as fure you will ) then it is moft evident that Believing is taken in the fame fenfe in the promife, and in the threatning : For no man breathing can tell me , either how a Promife to one kind of faith, can imply a threatning againft the want of another kind or aft of faith j or elfe what that other faith itmft be chat is fo implyed, if nocche fame. And • if C4-3) if it be the fame faith that isimplyed ( w'lich isamoftevidenc truth ; then it wH follow thit it I prove the Threatned unbc- Jiefrobe a Kejedingot Chrift as King, the faith then that is made the condition of ihepromif,", mult be the accepting of him as King as Wtll as Prieih But I have proved that not be- lieving m C hnft as King, is part of the unbelief that isfpecial. ly rhicacned weith condemnation • therefore believing in him asK'rg is parr of that faith which hath the ptotnife, or is the ConditK n of Jufttfication. But faith Mr. 3 i^', [ I furlhtr anfw(r ^ RejeFlin^ Chriji as Kt> gt ts a Jill a^^l -jt the moral Law, yvkkh d.4mns : Tet fomc •pchit more theof^bjfSiim to the lMotaL ^cdp is rtqnired that a finner m^y brfived ] Repl. Formy pait, I know no Law but moral Law. Its aftrange Law that is not Moral as itis a ftrange K^rimal ihs^i is not ijtiii Phyftcum. Buc yet I partly unde-^rtand what fome others mean by the phrafe cJ^or hat ycu mean I cannot tell, for all your two volumns. And it*, to (mUl purpofc to difpute upon terms whofefcnfc we be not agecd in, nor do not underftand one another in : And you mult better agree with yourfelves before you agree with me; 1 cannot iQ- Conci\e thefe fpeec he s» Mr. Blakf of the C I j^wo^V no other Rule hnt the old Rule: Covenant, fag. <:^ the Rule of the Moral Lii^". xhaturciih III. C^ mea Rule^a ferfefl Rule, an -i the only Rule, Mr. B'^kj here. C Tet fotte'^hAt more then fubjf^ton to the pag.^6^. <^ Aioral Lavftsreqitiredt that afinnermay C hefaved. I am confident you will allow me to think you mean fome- what more ex parte noflri. and x\ozor)\y ex parte Chrtfti-. And can ihM J omsTvhtt morebe required without any Rule requiring it ? And yet I find you fometimes feeming offended with me, for telling you 1 underftand you not. • But I further anfweryou : The re jeAing of Chrift as King, is no further a lin againft the Moral Law, then the accepting him as King, is a duty of the Moral I aw. Will you not bcl eve this without a Difpute , when you are told by /*W,tkit W'here tbtre it no Law^ there is no trAnj^reffion^^xA elfewhere that [%n is a G 2 , tranfgrtjjion Ch) tranfgrejfion of the Law ? And need not ftand tp prove that the fame Law which ts the Rule prefcribrng duty, is the Rule difco- vcrinq fin, even that fin which is the Privation of that duty. 1 defire no Readers that will not receive thcfe things without any more arguing. Mr- BUke adds Q VMbelief/f^'eff-;.\prc^:rly^dothot at all condemn, further then as it is a breath of a Moral _ ommar.dmer.t. The privation of >^hich you feak^orJy holds the ftntence of the La^ in force and fo^er agan^ us : wh.ch tne th'mkj ffvjuld be J eur judgement as ^-ellas fnine, feting you are VVo»f to compare the ner» Lctw 'as you cull it ) to an a6l of oblivi>.n : And an a^of oblivion fives many^bu: condemns none. ] Bepl.lt IS in more th*none thingl perceive that we differ. ^ut this is a truch that you muft not fo eafily take out of our hands. Though having had occafion to fpeak largely of it elfewhere, I ftiall fay but httie now. Firft, Again, I know no Commandment that is not moral. But if you mean by Afcril the Commandment either racerly as delivered by A/oft-s, or as written in Nature ; I am not of your mind, nor ever (hall be. To be void of the belief of thefc A) ctctes of the fairh f that thia Jefus is the Chrijl, that he ^4r aHually conceived hy the Holy Ghofljjorn of the Virgin Mary, fffertd under Pontius P-Iatc, iV<8/ crucified, dead and buried : Kofe again the third day .^ ajcendedinio Heaven ; fitteth tn our nature at the right h^nd of Cod ; gave the H.ly '''hofi to hit Apoflles to confirm tht 'Dc^rine of the Qofpel 1 with many more j doth cou- demnfur'her then as it is a breach cither of the Molaical or Natural Law : yea in forae rcfpeds as it is no breach of thofe Laws. And yer fhe fame fin materially may be a breach of fevcral Laws J and condemned by fcveraL Secondly vou vcr/ much miltake mv Judgement here , if you think it the fame with yours ; Nor will the mention of an adt of oblivion jultifte vour nuftake I [uppol'c an A to confute the Arguments OJ the Opponents. I call it the Principal work, becaufe itis 'ncumb nt on them to prove who make the limi- tation and rcftrid.on and add a new propofuion to the Dodrine of the Oofpel ; and till the; have proved ihis propolition, our ground is good ; we fay that [] B ieving in the Lord itfm Chri(i u the futh bj which ^eare ]f*lt d'-d [_ and thi« is pall denyal in the Scriptures. They fay,that Q 8el eving ii htm xt j RAnfom and *P»rch^fer^or Appnhtndtn^ hi) Righ'eoujr.efs uthe onij n8i offa>th by which we are jufiified, ]] and not alfo Believing in him as i ord^ Teacher. IntcrccfTor, ^c When they have proved the reftri- dion and exclufion, as well as we prove our AlTertion that ex- cludcth no edential part of faith, then the work is done, and till then they have done nothing. And firft, before I come to their Arguments, I fhallconfider of thar great Diftindion, which containeth much of their opinio on, and which is the principall Engine to deftroy all oar Argu- ments for the contrary. And it is to this purpofe. \^*BelievtMginthe Lord^efm (^hriji at Ktrjg^Teacher,~\S>LC.is the '* fides quae J uftificat, hm it jufiifieth not qua talis • hut qua fides *• inChriftum fatisfacientcm.^if. Fides qua J uftificat , mufi be •* d'/ii^guf/hedfrom fides quae J uftificat. A man that hath tyet *'■ doth ht^r^andthAt hath ears doth fee { but he bearethnot as he •' hath ejest but 04 he hath ears ; And he feeth not oi he hath ears^ ** hut M he hath eyes. So f tilth ^hich helieveth in Chrifl as King *' doth jufiifiey but not qua talis, l that as the act of believing in Chrifts bloo:l-(hed hath a fpecial aptitude in one refpect,fo the act of believing iH hisRefurrcction, Interceflion, &c. and re- ceiving him a^Kmg, Teacher, &c. hath a fpecial aptitude in other refpects, upon whic'li God haih certainly made them the Conditions of our Juftihcation with the other. But if any (hould diftinguifh of the act of faith,and not the Habit , and fay that [^ t'des qua credit in Chrifium ut Regem^ j u[}tp:atj fed non Cfuci credit in Chri(lum fit Regem ] I accept the former as being all thatldehre, and grant the latter : But then 1 fay the like or the ciher act of faith, that [_fides qua credit in Chrtffum f^tisfucieMtem non j n Jit fie at ^ htQ2iXiSc fides i.4 fhjfificatio)/. This it dear. Chriji in his o'^n inflitnted ordin/Mces Vfft/{>Joe vuf- gnde us ; 'Bti'- thefe U id hs to Christ juffiring^^^ djin^ for thgpar- din of fi^^ Mac 26 28. A broat^'n^ ble^diyig^ ^J^'*^ Chriji in the L>rds >upper is received. i?7>/j',Firft,I hope you would not m «ke th-'; .vorlu believe chac I deny ic ; Did lever exclude a dying Chrirt fiom the oSj v.^ of juftifyingfaich ? Bat what ftrange Arguments ate rhefr, chat arefu^h ftrangers ftill tofhcquellion ? yon pmvc rhe inclulioii of [ faith in Chrtj} dying., j buc do not To much as m.'ntion the exclufion of the other ads of faith, which is che thing that was incumbent on you. Secondly , If you fay that [ only ^ is meant by you, though not exprefll'd, then I further r(^ply,thac this Nrgum-.-nc labou.ingof the fame difeafe wih the lalt,reqii rcth no other mfwer. Firft , The Sacraments being not the -vhole Go'pel.you cannot prove your ExclttfioH from them unlefs you prove fomewhac ex'-luftve in them ( which you atrempt not, chat 1 fee,) Secondly, If there- fore you underftand the Minor exclufivcl , as to all other parts of Chrifts {.fficej deny it, and the texts cited fay not a word to prove it. Thirdly And if they did, yet faith may eye a dying Cbrift only as purchafiig Pardon ; and y^z ex parte Chrtjit that aft that fo eyeth him may not be the only ad: that is the condirion of our Ti:le to a dying Chrift or to the pardon purchaied. Fourthly, And yct(though it would not ferve your turt))evi;n tx fnyteChnfli^ your exclufion is fo far from being proved thac its contradided boih by the Sicrament* and by Scriptures : much more tx parte no/lriyyour excujion o( the Other ads of fa^th. For FirU,ln Baptifm its app.ircnr(which is appointed for our fol'^mn initiation into a ftate of J unification ^ whch the Lords Supper is not. ) Firft, Chrift foundech it in his Dominion, '^fit.zS. 18. {aticr,s, haptiz.ingtbeni. Thirdly, The words of the Jews to ]ohn(^ ^f thou he not that Chrifl nor EllaJ, nor thit Prophet^ Vch) hptize/l thou ? John I- 25. ) and iheir flocking to his baptilm, and the words of Patt/y i Cor. 14. 15, ( lth.i"k God that ^ hafti^ed mne of you, hfl anj fljculdjUj , th^t I l>apti^ed in mj own name^do plainly ftiew that baptizing was then taken, as an entering into a ftarc of Difciples. Ard have be- fore proved that baptifm doth hft us under Chrift the Comman- der, King and Matter of cheChuich. Fcunhly, And therefore the Church ha h ever baptized into the name of tlie Father Son andHoiyGhoft, withanabrenunciatioiioftht flefh the world and the devil, not only asopp>ifite to Chnlts blood,but asop- polites to hisKingdom and Doctrine. Fifihly, And the very water fignifieth the fpirit of Chriit as well as hi^ blood : Though I think not, as Mr. fJMend^ that it figmfiech the fpirit only. Sixthly, And our coming from under the water was tofignifie our Refurredion with Chrift, as Rom. 6. (hews. So that it is certain that Chrift in all pares of his office is propounded in bap- tifm to be the object of our faith, and this baptifm comprizing all this, is faid to be {_fcr the Rem'ffmn of fn. ]] Secondly, And though the Lords fupper fuppofe us juftificd, yet he undcrftandeth not well what he doth, that thinks that Chrift only as dying is there propounded to our fa^th. For,Firft, In our very receiving we profefs Ob^-diencc to Chrift as Kir g, that hath enjoyned it by his Law. Secondly, And to C hrilt ouc Teacher that hath taught us thus to do. Thirdly, Thefigns themfelves arc a vifible word ( of C hrift our Teacher ) and teach us his fufferings, promifcs, our duty, ^r. Fourthly, By i:aking,eating,and drinking,we renew our Covenant with Chrift; Ana that Covenant is made with him not only as Prieft, but as the Glorified Lord and Kmg of the Church. On his part the thing promifcd which the Sacrament fealeth,is, ( not that Chrift: will dye for us,for thats done already, but ) that Chrift will adu- ally pardon us on the account of his merits And this he doth as King: and that he will fandifie, prcferve, ftrengthen, and glonfie us: all which he doth as King, though he pur chafed them as afacrifice. On our pare we deliver up our (elves to him to Cr?) to be wholly his; even hisDifciplcs, and Subjects, as well as pardoned ones. Fifthly , Yea che very bread and \wine ea- ten and drank do fig iifie our rpiricuU Union andCo:nmu- nion with Jefus, whois pleaTed to become one with us, as that bread and wine is one wich our lubftance. And furely it is to Chrift as our Head (hu we are United, and not only as dying for us : and as to ourHuiband, who is moft deatjy tobeloved by us, and is to rule us, and we to be fubied :o him, being made bone of his bone, and flfftiof hisfl.fli; £i)he. 5. z^.2-1-,2^ ,50. Sixthly, We are to do it as in remembrance of his dearh, (o alfo in expectation of his commin^^ which will be in Kmgly Olory, when he will drink with us the fruit of the Vme new m che King- dome of his Father. Ob]iEi Bur Chrift doth not pardon fin inall thcferefpects. Anfvr. Firft. But in (he acramert he is reprelen'ed to be be- lieved in cn'ircly in all thefe relpects. Sccrndlyj And he par- doncthasKing, thouj^h he merit it as af^cnficc. And as his Sacrifice and Mo it are the caufe of all that following, fo there- fore it is fpccially rvp-reftnted in theSacr.imcnt, not excluding but including the reft. Thirdly, Believing in Chrift as King and Prophet,evcn as his offices refpe6 his Honor and out fdndi- ty, may be Jstiuly the condition of our JuiiiticatioOj as. belie- ving in his blood. Mr. Bl ike. At the fpirit of Go^ guides faith, fo it wufl go to Qoci jor prcptiHtion and r.ttonemtnt. 'Bat the H(,ly Qhojl gtiidt faith to (JO to the blood of Chrifi for attonement^Rom.l.Z'y . & 5.9, Sph.i.-J' I f hK.f.j. Kcp\)\CoMced<}totfim:Thc conclufion can be but th\i[_i here fore faith mnjl go to the h/ood of Chrift for attonement "^Whoever qneftioned this I But your Thefis which ^oufct at the Head of your Arguments, was Q Faith in {^hrij} qua Lord doth no: j'l fi- fe "] which is little kin to any of your Arguments. But in the explication, you have here, at laft,the tcrmO^^, and therefore I may ta^^ if we believton himthatraifedup fefw our Lord from the eiead.'vsr.i^. and and It u Cjod that jn/flfieth : who u he thAt condimntth ? it u Chrifl that dyei^ yen, rathtr that is rifen again , who is even at the right hand cf §od; wko alfo m^keth Intercejfion for us, Rom.^ 3^,34. hcthat bclieveth all thcfe texts will not add o»lj to the firft,aclcaft if heundcrftandthcmi for they do not contradift each other. Well ! but you msrvell at my qucftion I I am glad of that 1 Are we To well agreed, that you marvell at my iup- pofition of this difference ? To fatisfie you, my queftion im- plycdthis Argument. If the Refurrcdion, Interceffion, e^r. be not in thole texts excluded, nor faith in them, then wc may not add erti'y to interpret them ^ but d*<:.Ergo. Bur let us hear the reafons of your marveling. Firft, As to Obedience, you hy Hii /heddiug of blvod^as in Obedience. An- fwer. But though all blood-(hed was in Obedience, yet all Obedience was not by blood-fhed, nor fuffering neither. And the text Rom. 5.19 Teems to fpeak of Obedience as O bcdience, and not only as in blood (lied. Secondly, You fay Hm RefHrreHionwat his freedom ^8cc. Anf, But Suffering is one thing.and freedom from fuffering is another thing, i herefore faith to our jui^ification muft eye Chri fts con- queft and freedom from death as well as his death it felf. Moreo- ver, Refurredion was an act of Power, and his Entrance on his Kingdora,and not a mcer act of Pricfthood : Nor will you ever prove that faith ( to Juftification ) muft only look at the Refurrection as connoting the death from which he rifeth. Thirdly, You fay , Bu Intercejfion is founded on hiihlood,hLC. ^tif^tr. So is his Kingdom and Lordfliip, Rom.i^ 9. Mat. 28.i8r T'W. 2.9,10. It feems then faith in order to Juftification mufl ndfc only look at Chrifts blood.but that which is founded on it. His Government, inLegiflation , Ju^dgement , Execution, is all founded in his blood. &c, becauf*; he hath drank of the brool^ in the ^aj> , therefore did he lift up the Head , Pfalme 1 10. 7. You add He Interceeds by Merit. Anfwer. Not by new pnrchafing Merit, but by the virtue of his former Merit, and the collation of the effects of it from the Father. And fo he Rcigneth andGovernethbothby virtue of former Merit, and for the applying that Merit and attaining of its Ends. 1 2 Whereas C^o) whereas therefore you fay If I fxcludethefe^I/haHtxc/Mile hu blood J 1 1 is a weighty Anfwcr. And the l.ke you may fay alfo of his Kingly and Piophctical oificc. The operation of them are fo woven and twilled together by infinite wifdom, that all do harmonioufly concur to the attainment of the ends of each one; and if you lay by one, ) ou lay by all ; you exclude Chrifts blood as to the end of Juftification, if you include not his Kingly and Prophetical offices, and look not to him as making the Co cnant or Grant ol pardon in his blood; and as teach- ing and perfwading and working us into Union with himfelf that we may have part in his blood; and as conferring daily the fruits of his blood as King, in Renewed pardon of.daily fins^ and as juftifying us at Judgement as King and Judge. His blood is a Foundation without a building,if you take it without allthcfe : Overlook thefe, and you deny it as well as by over- looking his Refurrcftion. Befides, Stjfton at Gods Right Hand Vih'xch. is one thing that the Apo[ileinftancethin,/ii7W4«/ 8. 35. is his Glorifica ion it felf And when you fay [_ He prefents hit blood as High Prief}^ &c. ] I anfwer. But not as a renewed facrificc ; prefenting it is not (bedding it,or offering it in facrifice. And the prefentation is not a minding God of what he knows not.or hath forgot,or an arguing with h;m to extort his Mercy ^ but as the value and me- rit of Clirifts facrifice hath its continual Being before God, fo Chrill doth give out all his bcnefis to his Church as procured and received from the Father by the merit of his facrifice : and this is his Interceflion. But your arguing yieldeth, tha,fio Ju- ftification, we muft not only believe in Chrift as (heddinq his blood for us on earth, but alfo on Chrift as prefcnting his blood for us in heaven ; which is enough to my ends. ijllr. Blske. Tcti tell me [urthtr that the thing I hadto frove was not the exclufton of faith in hU commanit^ bttt of faith i.t (^hrifi at Lord and Teacher. I can no more difiinguipj Lord and Com- wand than 1 can 'Blood and Sacr fice j it being the office of a Lord to Rnle, ai of blood to make atoneme: t. Repl, Fit ft , If you cannot diflinguifh, there's 110 remedy butyoumuftcrr byconfufion. its obvious toan ordinary un- derftanding (6 1) dcrftanding that even Blood and S-icrfi:em^y as weHbediflin" guidied as Ea>'ih and Ma»y or Ink^and (Vnting \ \_ Blood J llgni- fyingonly tbe matter, yea but part of the marcer j anJ {_ a Sacri'ice'] fignifying that matter With irs moral Forrn. Secondly ,And its as obvious that Lor^ and Ctfr.m^nd do ochcr- wife differ then BUoddin^Sacr ficti^ot Lord^^s it fignt.itch princi- pally a Proprietary's toto c^th diftinA fr<.m command, as ftanding in anotheryirnri •. And Lord us it (iirnifieth a Kedor,c!oth d'fCcr from Command, as the efficient from the eff;.d ; which is other- wife tht'n as part of the matter doth from the whole informed. It is no Argument againft the truth which I maintain, that you cannot dirtmgu'ifh thefc. Thirdly, If it be the office of a Lord to Rule ; then you may well diftinguifh betwen the office and the work : But indeed in the f.r.t fenfe Lord fignifieth a Proprietary, and but in che fe- cond, a Rulers Power ; which is not alwayes properly called an Office neither j no more then the Soveraign is properly an Offi- cer. Fourthly, To make ^^tonemcKt is not all one as to h a Sacri- fice^ which was your former term : for Atonement is the effect: of a Sacrifice ■ not of blood as blood, but as a Sacrifice meri- torious and accepted. Fifthly, And as to the point in difference between us, the diflFe- rcnce is palpable and weighty between believing in Chrift as King, and believing or obeying his Commands. As his King- ly Power belongs to the O»/?!'/if(0« of his myfticalbody or Re- publike, and his commands that flow from it to the Adnth i(}ra~ tion : fo Subjedion to his Power and Relation, and confcnt- ing to this conftiturion do enter us into the nody and unite us to him : wht'n believing and obe; ing hi> Latp^ for Admir,i^ration^ do follow as the fruits. If you could have diftinguiflicd between the Root and Fruits , between Faith and Obedience, between making Difcip'es^a 'd teaching to ohferve,S>LC. Mat. 28. 1 9. 2 ~. or if coming T)tfc:p/es^ and Learmng ; you might have dillinguiftied between becoming a SubjeH 2ind okej/ing. And what ever you do, 1 am furc others of your wAy do grant , that Receiving ChriJ} as Lord and Teacher y is the faith that juftifieth, though not f »*i talu^ but they will not fay fo by receiving or obeying his 1 3 ^ovtrninl^ Govermng Laws, which arediftincc from the conftitution or fundamental Law. Mr. Blake. Touytt tell me it vpm fittefl for Paul tofay^hyfditk in hia tlood •, becaufe he intends to connote both ^hut we are jf^ft-fi' edby ex parte Chrifti.-W "Of hut ft?^ are jujiified by ex parte noftri ; but the former prtncipull^. Toth^i^Jay, If this rvere fir tt^ for Paul, then ii u nnftfor any to come in with Animiadver/ionf ^ and tell iu of ^ny other thtngzx parte ChriftI, or ex parte noftri/or fuJ}fi:ation. J pray j oh reft here <*« i ^e are well agreed. Her e id Chrjis Priefily Office on hu part alone, andl^m refolved to lool^no further. Tijpl. Though I may not hope to change you, if you are Refolved, yet I may take leave to render a reafon of my con- trary as perempto'-y Refolution : I am refolvtd to look further ex parte Ch>ijii^ then to his blond, yea or his whole Merit . yea or whole Prieft-hood for my Juftification; even to whole Chrlft, and in fpecial to his Regal conftitution and fentence. Yet J reft where you defire me, as to the Truth of what! faid;andif we are agreed, its better then I can perceive in your other words. Firft, Though Paul there mention the Priejlly office aloxe, yec that's not all his Epiftles,nor all the Scriptures^nor doth he here exclude the reft. Secondly, It may be fitteft to Pauls defign in that particular dif- courfe tomenuon faith i» hii blood, and yet it mjy be fit for another to come in with animadverfions, and tell you of more ncceffary both ex parte Chrifii & nojlri. Its common to cxprefs cur meaning of a whole in a fummary notion taken from a chief part: And indeed in Political difcourfes it is hard to meet with a fitter way oi' expreffion. Thirdly, Paul himfelf was not of your opinion, nor Chrifl: reither.and yet it was not unfit for them to difcover it.The fame F<^ul that here thought it fitteft to mention faith in his bloody did elfewhcre think ic fit to mention Juftification b) hu Obedi(nce,ind that he llofe again for our jujlificitisn j and to promife Jmputa- tion of Righteoufncfs to us, if Mice believe on him that raif' ed upfefw our Lord from thedeai, Rom. 4.24, 25. with the like paffages before mentioned. Cut moft frequently it is the comprehcnfive phrafe of [ believingin Chrifi Jefut our Lord} thac that he ufeth.The fame Chrift thatcalleth bimfelf fo ofs the Lord and Matter of his followers, excludeth not thereby his other Rdacions • And when he faith in one place Q I am the Vine'] he may freely fay elfe wherc,[^ ^ am thegoo^i SheploerJ: ] And he that fpeakcth oUxymg h'^n his life for the [hit f^ doth not there- by make it unfit to mention other Paftoral acts for them. And ^^l^2XX.^\i\i% o'i eaUnghi4f.tP] ani drinking his bloody mtended not ihecxclufionof zhe fptrit th^t tjiiicl^eth. lam therefore Refoived by his Grace to adhere to whole Chrift as the obje(3 of that faith which is the Condition of Juftification. And I think this full comprehcnfive faith isfaferthen the groundlefly diftinguidiing faith; and this Dodrine more agreeable to the Scriptures. Mr. BUke. Fourthly, Ourfaiih muji Uok^on (^hrifl'foa^ to obtain right toufnefs bj him^ b) virtue of which ^e may appear be- fore God Oi righteous : Bnt it ii by his Obedience as a fervant that V^e obtainrighteoHfnefs^andjiand before God as righteous^ Rom. 5. \g. by the obedience of one many are made righteous. Repi. Firft, Igrant the whole: but its nothing to our Que- ftion. Its a ftrange error that runs through fo many Arguments, that they (hould be impertinent to the queftion. You fhould have concluded that ; Faith in Chrifi qua Lordjoth notjuflifie ] which in termini^ is the conclufion that you undertook to prove: whereas all that this Argument will conclude, is, that [] our faith mtifi hok^at Chrifi s obedience for Ryghteoufnefs^ &c. ] which I have faid no more againtt then you have done. Secondly, But if [_ Only '] be implyed as adjoyned to [ ebedi- f«« then it will exclude his fuffering as fuffcring in that formal refpeiJ^, and take it in only as the Matter of his Obedience. Thirdly, And by this Argument you deftroy what you not only mantained, but refoived to ftick to in the laft , that is, that it is not fit for any one to tell us of any other thing then faith in his blood for juftification, and that you are refoived to look no further then Chrifts Prieftly office alone. For Obedience ' extendeth further then blood- (bed: therefore if we are juftified by Chrifts whole obedience, then by more then his blood. Yea you will be put hard to it to prove, that all Chrifts obedience was offered by him as aPreift co his Father: Ic belongs to a Subjcd, (^+) SuVjfft . a Servant, a Son to obey; but obedicrtc€ is far from being proper to a Prieft. Fourthly, If you intend the Major exdufively as to all other confiderations of the objed, Iftilid::ny itasfalfc Our faith (even as the condition of Jurtincacion ) muft look at Chr(ft, Kot or)!j to obtain Righteouf lefs by him , but al(o to fubfeft ourfelves to his fcjching and Government, and to glorifie him in and for his Mercy. Fifthly^ Yea, the Minor it Telfis falfe, if you imply theex- clufive 0>tly. For we obtain Ki^i^heoufncfs and are Juftified before Cod effectively by Chnlt as King firft by conttitution, and fecondly^ bv fentence, as well as mentor ioufly by Chrift as Prieft. Mr. ?yU\ie.Fift hlyyTljnt wav that Chrijl tool^ to hrlrg us to Goi^ cur f Pitt b mu(i eye amifullovt : Bat Chrifl by de*th the S*crtfice of ofhmfelfbri-gu-s to C/od^lPe'.'^.iS.ChriJi a/fohath once jujfer- ed for fins,th^ j -ftfo^ the uy>ju{l,8cc, Repl. Still the lame error ; an Ignoratia Elenchi. I grant the whole, but the concluHon's wanting. Did lever deny that/l BUkt-Sixthlyt At Chriji freeth usfrfm the curfeyfo he jit" ftifie ' usandi' that notion our faith muji look to him for JufiijicA- . t'ton. Thii ^ pi din •, fuJJification being no other but ottr acejHittal from thec(4yfe, tvkich u thi fentence of the Law of Mofes,/^^. 1 3. %,bHt Chrtfifrteth us from the caufe infnffering 'ts a Sacrifice^mt ruiing as aLord f Gal. 3. 13. Chrifl hath Redeemed us ^icc. Repl. ¥\\^.\j)nly ~\ is again left out in the Major propofition, and fo I grant it : But if it be implyed thac faith mufi look to htmf'r Ju(lification only in that notion ns he j(t(iifiethus^ yea only at henieritetbjufliflcatlon, then I deny it, and you fay nothing to ptove it. Secondly, The exclufive of your Minor is a dange- rous error ; C hrift frceth us from the curfe by j uftifying us as a King, and teaching, and ruling, and fanftifying us j and not only by C here put in [^ 0»/y f6n plainly exclude all his Obedience as fiicb, and much of it mate- rially ; for it is not a c^r/i?^ thing to obey God. TheLawcurf- eth for difobeying : therefore Obeying is not the Curfe, nor is it materially a Curfe to Love God, and Tiuft him,and be zealous for his Glory, c^r. The whole office of Ch rift isimployed in freeing us from [he Curfe : and when Paul faith, he was made a Curfe to free us, he never faid or thought thathedid nothing -elk to free us, for an hundred tcxrs do tell us of more. Thirdly, And on the by I muft fay, that I am not of your mind inthc defcriptionof Juftification ; for, omitting the conrrover- 'fic whether Juliificarion only free us from [he Curfe, I do not believe that this curfc is only the fcntcnce of the Law of Mofes. If it were, either you muft prove that all the Gentile world that heard not of it was under the Law o^ Mofes ( which abundance of moft Learned men deny with better grounds then you have to affirm it ) or elfe that all thefc are under no curfe for Juftificati- onto remove. The Law of Nature was materially pare of the Mofaica? Law; but the form denominateth. So much to Mr. Blak^es Arguments, which are fo little to the purpofe, that if the weight of thecaufe, and the prejudice of fome Readers did not call moreearneftly for a Reply, then any appcranceofrtrength inthem,! hadfparedmy felfand the Rea- der this Labor.But that[ ChrijioiChri^ « the obynofthatfaitk hj rvtoich as a C'^neiition ^e mujl bejuflflei^' and fo that rveare not ^ujiif'd only by believiyi£ in hid bloody bftt alfo bj belttvin^ in Joins enti-^elj as Jefus Chrifl our Lord, and bj becoming h's Difiipks^ or true Chrijiians^] this is a truth , that dcferveth more then tny Pen to defend it; and that while God affordech me time andl ftrength, I (hall never defert. 2S[oa;. 1 6') 6. K DIS P VTATION OF fVSTIFIC^TIO:AQ, JJ^hether any Worlds beany Conditions of it ^ Conteining a neceffary Defence of ancient Verity , againfl the annecefjary Oppofttion of a (very Learned , ^e^verend , and dearly fBelofved brother , in his Treati/e of Imptitation of Kighteoujnejs^ and his Lectures on John xy. By ^chard ^axter\ LONDO 2^, Printed by Rohtt ivhhe-, for Ntvil Simntt»i\ Book-fcllei: in Kederminficr^ 1657, (.69) Whether Worlds are a Condition of fujlijication C (^nd fo v^hether vpe arejufiijied by Works as fuch a Con^ dition C Hough we have faid enough already on thcfe Queltions ( which for dilpatchi joyn toge- ther, ) yet feeing there are feme that mud needs have more, or the fame again; I (hall yield fo far to their Importunity , as to recite here briefly the ftate of the Conttoverrie,and fome of that evidence which is clfcwhcrc spore largely produced for. the truth. And Firft, We muft explain what is meant by fP'erJ^t, and what is mcanr by ^ufiHcation ; what by a ^ Condition'^ and what by thePrepofirion hj here, when we fpeakof Juftification ^jr works .* And then we (hall lay down the truth in feveral pr^o- fuions. Negative and Affirmative. It feems ftrangc to me to hear men on either fide to fpeak K 3 : againft \ (70) agtinftthe iMfgaciveor Affirmative of the Queftion, and re- proach fo bitterly chofe that maintain them, without any diftin" dion or explication J as if either the error lay in the terms, or the terms were fo plain and univocal, that the Propofitions arc true only on one part,what fenfe foever they be taken in. No doubt but hefaiihtrue, that faith that Works are the Condi- tion of Juftihcation: and hefaithastrue.that faith they are not, if they take the terms in fuch different fenfes as commonly Dif- puters on thefe Queftions do cake them. And its paft all doubt that ^a man iijujiifie^bj faiihrvithont thewerkj of the Lx^ ; and cbat-/> u not of fVorks, but of Grace : and its as certain that {a man u jufiiped h r»orkj aKdmt h) faith only; and that by thetr fVords menjhall hejujii^ed, and by their Words thfy fjall be con- demned. ~] Gods word were not true , if both thefe were not true. We muft therefore neccfTarily diftinguifh : And firft of Work?. Firft, Sometime: the term, ivorki »s taken for that (in general; which makes the Re'i'pard to be not of grace but of Debt : Meri- torious works : Or for fuch as are conceited to be thus merito- rious, though they be not. And thofeare materially, either Works of perfea obedience ^ithcut ftn^ ( fuch as riy^ dam had be- fore his fall, and Chrift had, and the good Angels have,) or clfc fVorkj of obedience to the CMofaical Ln'iv , which fuppofed iin, and were ufed in order to pardon and life, but miftakingly by the blind Unbelievers, as fuppofing that the dignity of the Law did put fuch a dignity on their obedience thereto, as that ic would ferve to life without the fatisfadion and merit of Chrift, or at leaft muft concur in Co ordination therewith. Or elfe laftly, they are Gofpel duties, thus conceited meritorious. . Secondly, Cut fometiroe the word iVorkj is taken for that which ftandeth in a due fubordination to grace : and that firft, moft generally, for a»j moral lirtuous ^Qions, and fo even faith it k\l is comprehended , and even the very Receptive or fi- duciallaa of faith: or lefs generally, for external ads of obf- dience, as diftind from internal habitual Grace.and fo Repen- tance, Faiih, Love, e^£-. are not Works; or for all ads ex- ternal and internal; except faith it felf. And fo Repentance, Defirc (70 Defire after Chrift, T-ove to him, denying our own Righteouf- ners,diftruft in our felveSje^-c. arc called Works^ Or eife for ail Ads external and internal befides chc Reception of Chrifls Righreoufnefsto Juftification : And fo the belief of the CJof- pel, the Acceptance of Chrift as our Prophet and Lord by the Title of Redemption,withmany other afts of fai;h in Chrift, are called works : befides the difchiming of our own Righte- ournefs,and the reft before mentioned. Secondly, As for the word JufiificAtijn^M is (o variouQy taken by Divines, and in common ufe, that it would require more words then I (hall fpend on this whole Difpute, to name and open its feveral fenfcs-, and therefore ( having elfewherc given a brief fcbem of them ) I fhall now only mention thefe few which are moft pertinent to our purpofc. Firft, Some take fufiifica- //o« for fome Immanent Acts of God,and fomefor franfient. And of the former fome take it for Gods eternal Decree to juftiRe, which neither Scripture calleth b^ this name, nor will Reafon allow us to doit, but improperly. Sometime its taken for Gods Immanent prefcnt Approbation of a man, and Reputing him to be juft , when he is firft fo conftituted. And this fome few call a Tranfient Aft, becaufe the Objcd is extrin- fick : But moft call it Immanent, becaufe it makes no Alterati- on on that objed'. And fome plead that this is an eternal a(^ without beginning, becaufe it is Godseflence which is eternal ; and thefe denominate the Ad from the fubftance or Agent; And other fay, that it begins in time, becaufe Gods EfTencedoth then begin to have that Refped to a finner which makes it capa- ble of fuch a denomination : And fo thefe fpeak of the Ad de- nominatively, formally, refpcctively : Both of them fpeak true but both fpeak not the fame truth. ; Sometime the word fuflificationx^ taken for a tranfient Ad- of Godthatmaketh orconduccthto a change upon the cxtrin- fick object. And fo firft, Its fometime taken by fome Divines, for a Conditional Juftification, which is but an ad that hath a tendency to that change ; and this is not actual Juftilication. Secondly, Sometime it is taken foractualjuftification, and that is rh'^cefold. Firft, Conftitutive .• Secondly, Sentential : thirdly, executive. Firft, Conftitutive Juftificacion, is firft either in the qualities C72^) qualities of the foul.by inherent holynefs ; which is firft perfcft, fuch Adam (once ) and the Angels, and Chir ft had j rccondly,or ImperfeiS, fuch as the fandified here have. Secondly, Or its in our Relations : when we are pardoned and receive our Right to Glory: This is an aAof God in Chrift by che free Gift of the Gofpel, or Law of Grace : and ic is firft, The firft put- ting afinner into a ftateof Righteoufnef^ , out of a ftate of Guilt. Secondly , Or it is the continuing him in that ftate,and the renewing of particular pardon upon particular fins. Secondly, Sentential pardon or Juftification, i% firft, by that Manifeftation which God makes before the Angels in heaven. Secondly, at the day of Judgement before all the world . Third- ly, Executive Juftification, x//?i. the execution of the aforefaid fentcnce,(lefs properly called Juftification, and more properly called pardon j confifteih in taking off the punifhment inflicted, and forbearing the puniftiment deferved, and giving poffefllion of the bappinefs adjudged us '■ fothatit is partly in this life, viz.. in giving thefpirit, and outward mercies, and freeing us from judgements ( And thus fanctification it felf is a part of Juftification j and partly in the life to come, in freeing us from Hell, and poffefling us of Glory. Thirdly, As for the word Condition^ the Etymologifts will tell ^us, that it firft fi'gnifieth t^Eiionem condtmii : and then, *PaJj7- ontm^qtta (juidconditur^ and then efttalitatem infant per Defimtifotet Difpvfi itnu jufpenjio rx eventu incerto fututo ei 'ppofito. Sic fane apstdho-fAnet qutfutti* Yu non nornntj ied''Denijt4b certis condttionibtK eti^m t:obifcnm a^it . at omt i 4m event ttum ip'jC ^nvpti^ pro i'ifiKit.i fuA lap tntia ^ft.i p-aVidet (^Hid occur Krum nobu^^ (jnidnos t^intplexuri, velde- ctinaiurifim'^. Cor,fer. Dent. 28 29 30,ji. &■ ^2. Ca* pitobftJ. I Commonly the reafon of. appDincing Conditions is the defireab ncfs or the thing tobe pert'ormed^conjoyned with fome backwardnefs or podib lity of backwardnefs in the perfon that is CO perform it. and therefore he is drawn on by the pro^ mife of that which he is more wiihng to receive : But many other reafonsthert mjv be. Ihefi.ft caufcof ihe Condition, is theRequirer, whether he be Teftator, Donor, Stipulator, Lcgiflacor, &c. And fo the Condition of the Law or Covenant of orace, is fit ft. Gods condition <2^ the Impoftr. Secondly, And is the condition of each i';;g ( hnjiiAn as having Prort ifed the perfor- mance. Fourthly, And the condition q{ true Chrijiinns only 2.S actual Performers oi it. The condition of the Gofpcl hath feveral refpects according to the various refpects of the Law thatdoih impofe it. Its the Condttwn of ajret Gift j for the Gofpel is a free Gift of Chrift and Life :* It is the Condition of a Promife •, becaufe muth ol the Gofpel benefits are future. .It is the Condtticn of aTefia- ment^ b^^caufe Chrift dying did leave this to the Church as his^ laft Will, and it was confirmed by the death of the leftator. It is the Condition of a premi4nt La^^ and Ad of Grace and oblivion ; becaufe God made it as Legiflator and Redor of the world , in order to theconduding of his people rotheir happi- neA ; Tt is the condition of a ^Hnatory Latv , in that it is a duty commanded on pain of death and for the avoiding of that death. Fourthly, The prepofition {^^y"] in our prefent queftion,' may fignifie, either the ufc and Intereft of any Medium ir> General ; or die of a tijuc canfe eonftitutive or efficient. So aiuch of the terras. '• fropofitm (.15) PropofitioH I. Since Ada^s fall , it is impoflTible for man to be juftified by a perfed: finlefs Obedience of his own, ( except Chrift only ; ) and conltquently impofliblc for him to be juftined by the Lawconfidered m that form aud tenor a^ ic was given to //^««»» : for all men are finners j and ihat LawwiU uft.fie nofinncr. Propofuion 2. By the works of the Mofaical Law , no man canbe juftified. And therefore the Jews feek Righreouf- ncft where it is not to be found, while they think that pardon of fin and acceptance with God arc to be obtained by the bare works of that Law: while they overlook or rejtd Chrift who is the end of that Law for rightcoufnefs to every Believer Speci- ally now that Law is Abrogated or ceafcd,it were a double error to expeA Juftification by its works. "Propofuion 5, Much lefs can they be juftified by the forefaid Law, who in ftead of fulfilling it, do but falfely imagine that they fulfill it. Prcpofition 4. No man can be juftifi'd by works properly meritorious, becaufe nomin hath any fuchatali; nor may we once imagine that we have any fuch works as T>aul fpeaks of ( and the Jews thoughf they had ) which make the reward to be not of f it ace biit of Debt, /?tJ4dli/p:ft(iva^ and Tome c<<«/< /ine (fui non , and its indeed bac a Ti^minallcmfe^ and truly no c^w'^ at al'. Profofiion 7. Whatfoever woiks do ftand in offofition to Chritt^or difjunct from him,yea or that ftand not inaduefubordi- fiatioa to hira,arc fo far from Juftifying even as conditions, that ihey are fins which dodefervc condemnation. Propoftiott 8. Works, as taken for the Imperate Ads of Obedience external, diftind from the firft Radical Graces, arc not fo much as conditions of our Juftificationasbegun, or our being put into a J uftified ftate. 'Propcfitlon 9, Repentance from dead works* denying our our felves, renouncing our own Righteoufnefs, c^c. { much lefs external Obedience ) are not the receptive condition of our Ju- ftification, as faith is, that is, Their nature is not to be an ac - rual Acceptance of Chrift, that is, theyarenot faith, and there- fore are not defigned on that account to be the Condition of our Juftification. Propofttion 10. God doth not juftiiie us by Imputing our own faith to us in ftead of perfcd Obedience to the Law, as if - it were fuffie lent , or cfteemed by him fufficient to fupply its place ; For it is Chrifts Righteoufnefs that in point of value and merit doth fupply its place: nor doth aiiyworkof ours jujftifie us by fatisf^ing for our fins : for thats the workofChrill the Mediator .- Our faith and love and obedience, which arc for the receiving and improving of him'and his Righteoufnefs and fo ftand in full fubordination to him, are not to be made co-parc- ners of his office or honor. Affirm. Prepofiticn ^i^. We are juftified by the meritsof a pcrfe^ finlefs Obedience of Chrift ( together with hs fuffer- ings ) which he performed both to the Law of nature, the Law of Mofesy and the Law which was proper to himfelf as Medi- ator , as the fobject obliged. PrcfofttioH 2. There is fomewhat in the nature of faith it kii in jpicit, which makes it fit to be clt^gd and appointed by God to be the great JttmmAry Condition of the Gofpel ; that ic be Rfceptivc ( an Acceptance ;cf Chrift J is the nature of the thing? C77) thing ; but chat it be a condition of our Juftification, is from the will and conftitucion of the Donor and Juftifier. Prcpojitfin 3. There 19 alfo fomewhat in the nature of Re- pentance, felt-denyal, renouncing all other Saviours, and our own righteoufnefs, deliring Chrift,loving Chrift,intcnding CJod and Glory as our end, ( procured by <^ hrift, )confctiingfin, ^j. which make them apt to be Difpofnive Con^liions.andfo to be comprized or implycd in faith rhe fummary Receptive con- dition, as ics necertary attendants at icaft. Propofi ion 4. Accordingly God hath joyncd thcfe together in hisPromife and conftitution, making taith the /«»«jw«»r7 unci receptive Condi ion ^ and making the faid acts of Repentance, fclf denyal renouncing our own righteoufncfs, & difclaiming in heart uft ficition by the works of the Law,and the renouncing oi A\ other Sav ours, alfo thedefiring and loving of Chrift offer- ed and the willing of God as ouruod, and the renouncing of all othtr Godsj. and fo, of the world, fltfti and devil; ac leaft in the refolution of the heart ; I fay making thcfe the dip- pofiii-je Conr.i ions , which are everimplyed when faith only is expreffed , forae of them as fubfervient to faith , and per- haps forae of them as real parts of faith it felf. ( Ol which more anon. ) Tropofi im 5. The Gofpe! promifeth Juftification to all that will Believe. ( or are 'Believers. ) '1 o be a Betirver and to be a 'Difrip'e of Chrift, in ^chpture fenfe is all one,and fo is it to be a DiJcipU and to be a Chriftjan : therefore the fenfe of the pro- raife is. that we (hall be juftified, if we become true Chriftians or Difcip/eto( ChrifT ; and therefore juftifying faith comprc- - hendeth all that is efifential to our Difuplenfhip or Chriftianity at its conftitutive caufes. Pro:ojition 6, It is not therefore any one fingle Act of faith alone by which we are juftifi:d, but it is many Phyfical acts conjunctly which conftitute that faith which the Gofpcl makes the condition of Life. Thofc therefore that call anyone \zt : or two by the name of juftifying faith, and all the reft by the name of work>. and fay that it is only the adlof recumbency on Chrift as Prieft, or on Chrift as dying for us, or only the act of apprehending. or accepting his imputed Rightcoufnefs. by "L 3^ whith * C78) which wc are juftified, and that our AfTnt, or Acceptance of him as our ' eicher and Lord , our dctire of bim our love to him,our renouncing other aviour. and our own Righteoufiicfs &c. are the works which P.ni doth exclude fro.n our Ju' ifi' cation, and that it js Jew.fh toexp^t to be julhficd by thefe though but as Conditions of Julificution ; thde perf..ns do miih.ke I'auU and pervert the DoAnne of Faith and Juftificati- on, ard their Dodrine tendeth tocorrupt the very nature of Chriftianity it felf. Though yet I doubt not but any of thefe aas conceited meritorious (or otherwifeas before explained in the Negative ) if men can believe contradictories ma^' be the matter of fuch works as /'^«/excludeth : And fo may chat one actalfo which they appropriate the name of juftifying faith to. ^ Trtpfu'toyt 7. Sincere obedience to God In Chrift is a con- dition of our con inuance in a ftare of Juftifici tion, or of our not lofing It. And our perfeverance therein is a condition of our appearing in that ftate before the L^^d , at our departure hence. 'Propofit'tovt 8. Our Faith, Love, and Works of \ ove, or fin- cere Obedience, are conditions of our fentcntial Juftihc'ation by Chrift at the particular and general Judgement { which is the great Juftific^iion. ) And fo as they will p ove cur Intereft in Chrift our Kighteoulnefs, fo will they materially themfelves juftific us againft the particular fajfe Accufation of being fi- nally impenirenr, Unbelievers, not Loving, not obe\ ing fin- cerely. For codcnya talfeaccufaiiunislufficient toourjufti- ficacion. Prop'firloK 9. As Glorification and Deliverance from Hell, is by fome called Executive pardon or juftiHcationi ^o fhefore- faid ads are conditions of thatexecu i )p, which arc conditions of Jultification by the lentenceof the Judge. "fropo^t^n. 10. As to a real inherent Juftice, orjuftifica- tion, in this life we have it in part ( in our SanAification and Obedience ; and in the life to come we ftiail have it in perfec- tion. So much for the explicatory Propofitions. I come C7P) I Come now to prove che fumof the Afifirnatlve Propofici- on> toge her To far as they relolve the Qu^lTion in hand,^ / ^. thac works or acts of min have (uch anin crcft in our jultifica- on, and ■iire fo far cond tions as is here aflerced. My Hi ft proof is from chofe Texcs of Scripture which ex- preflyfpeakof Juftfication by fuch actsor works. If we are jui'i.ied 5/ our words and works, then arc they nolefsch:n cordidons of Juftification. Buc we arc juftified "Sy them. Er^o.Sic. The Confcqucnce of the Major is plain, firft, In that the Prepofition . 'S » ]] doth figmfie no lels chen the Inrereft of fome mean';: but thefe Works can be no means, but either a conditi- on or a caufe.whch is more; Acaufe.rhe perfons that now I deal with, will not affim them Co be: If thc\ do, chen they afcribe much more to them then to be a condition. Secondly, ■ he Inte- reftoF faith it felf is expreffed by no higher terms then [!5/, ] that is, Ki or =^>x, or -f : and fois the Intereft of thefe othec acts. The Minor is cxprefg i . In Mat. ii. 5 6, 3 7. [[For i>jtljj words thou (hjit be jttftified^ and by thy ^rords thoti fh^t be conhmyied~^y ( h'/, ry/>'3 .V ; jchic is , ac t)ie day of Judgement, in the great Juftification. 2. J'w. 2. 24. it fte then how that B) Works (--^ *?>■•'•' J amanis jufijid, and not by fiith enh ( Krt k< s'jt ■y^wi f/.ot'oi, ) rhisfpeaksof Juftification in this life. When men argue againft Ju:tific^tion by our "iipordf or woykj, I dcfire i.ro underftand whether it be the words or the fenfe that they argue againft ^f the ft'(3r<^/,then it is either againft theufeof them fimp/y^ as being falfe or unmeetorelfe againft «»/^««/or;«- ble ufe of them. For the former thev have no ground;for you fee it is the exprefs language of Chrift himfelf and JjisApoftle.And as to the later, I cafily grant that no '•cripture phrafe (houldbeun- feafon?bly ufed. But if it be not the words but the fenfe that they blame, why then do they harp fo much on the words sbemfclves, and raife the moft of the odium from thence ? And what (8o) what is the unwarrantable fenfe ? I know not of any lower fcnfc that they can put on thefe words, then what importeth theln- tereft of a condition .- As for that of Mat. 1 2. they fay little to it. And as to that of Jame^, they interpret it differently amongthemfclves Firft^Sonieof them fay that 7 . it is R.th/b her I'elfthat is fiid to be juflified by workj. Secondly, The anfwer concradicceth themfelvcs , or pranceth what 1 defire : for if works juftifie the fdith, they mult needs juflirte the perfon j'j t an- tftm^ againd any accufation of grof-. Infidelity and Hypocrifie. Sometime the perfon is juftificd when his Action cannot be jufti- fied (as in cafe of fatisfaccion and pardon,-) bjt to juftific the action it relf,is the higheft fort of juftifying the perfon. So that ail other Interpretations b:;ing cither overthrown^ or refoived into that which we maintam , I need to fay to more for the defending of it. My next proof is from thofe texts that fay, we (hall be fftdg- ed according to our workj, and rt\\>arded according to our Labour ^ &c. 2 Cor. 5.9, 10. iCor.3.8. I Pet. i.\6,\j. MattheVp 16. 27. &c. If men (hall be juftified^crord'jw^ to their works, thenthofc works are no lower then a condition of that juftification ; But the Antecedent is true, as I prove thus. If men ftiall be judg- ed according to their works, therefore they (hall hcjufttfitd according to their works : fhe reafon of the Confequencc is evident; becaufe;«j/jj»«^is the Gtntu ^ which comprehendcth Juftification and condemnation as hsfptcies. The reafon alfo of the confequencc of the former Argument is apparent : be- caufe the term Q f>f judging according to workj'] doth in the common ufe of men fignifie ordinarily that which they call the yUeritumcaufa, but never any thinp lower then abareconditi* on •. nor can any hwer tolerable judiciary fenfe be put upon them, as might eafily be (hewed if it were worth the ftanding on. My next proof is from thofe tcKti^ that exprefly promifc the pardon of fin on condition of Repentance, Confefiion, Cf'c. If Repentance, and other a(^s are made by the Gofpel, conditi- ons of pardon, (and our firft general Pardon J then are they made conditions of our Hrft admiffion into a ftatc of Juftifica- tion. But the Aiitecedenc is plain, in ^O.i.iS, A-i>ir. 14. M LPiks (SO Lukf 1^, 1$. 7/4.55.^7. and 1. 16, 17,18. j5*f^,55.il, id;, and 18. 28,2.9,30,3 i, :; 2. FroT/.28. 1 3. ^^' 3 19 with ma- ny more. 1 he Conleqvicrce is plain, in that Purctcn is by very many made the uhole of our JuftiHcation ; and by others eonfeflVd a chief part ; and by all itsconfelTed to be madeours on the fame terms as is Juttificacion ic fejf. My fourth Proof is from ihofe texts which make thefe kind of A di to have the place of a condition in order to fa/vat ion ; if they are conditions of falyation, then are thcynolefs then conditions of our final Juftification : But the Antecedent is or- dinarily acknowledged by the Opponents, and its proved, 1 Tim. 4.8. Heir. 5.9. i Tim, 6.18,19. Luk. U. 28. and 13.24 I Cor. 9. 24,25,2^,27. %jv.22. 14. foha 12.26. 5o«i. '8. 13. LMat. 5.20. Mat. 19.29. Mat. 6.1,2,4,6. and 5. 12,46. and 10. 41,42. 2 Thejf. 1.5,6. Co/. 3. 23, 24. Htb.6. 10. 2.Tim. 4- 7,8. g^L 6. 4jS.6,7,8,9,io. zCor. 9. 6^9. fphn 5. 22, 27, 28, 29, &c. The Confcquence is proved good, firft, fn that final Juftification and Glorification have the fame conditions ;, as is plain, both in many Scriptures ( mentioned ) and in the nature of the thing : for that Juftifi- cation is the adjudging us to that Glory • and there- fore*fo far as any thing is the caufe or condition of the Cijory it f^l(^ ; it muft be the reafon of the fcntence which adjudgeth it to us. Secondly, And falvation is as free as Juftificacion, and no more defcrved by man r and therefore the Apoftle equally exclude h works from both,£p/??. 2.5,8,9. By (jracejearejaved, through fait hfdtjd that not of jour ft/ve', it if the gift of God-^not of Vpofk.j left any man fhonU hoaft. \ fo Tit. ■?. 5.6,7. more fully. Now \i SalV'^tion by grace tyoHgh faith VpithoHt »?<7ri^f, exclude not fincere obedience from being a Condition of Salvation, then Jufi^firdtinn hy grace through fW- Marl^-J.ip. 1 John l-iz^i^. John lO.if, Rev. 3. 10. and 54. ^hd 7.14,1 5. ef^. And though fome of thefe texts fpeak not of Divine acceptance to lifej yet firR, fome do ; fecondly, and the reft fpeak of no mercy but what is as freely given as fujlificaiion. A mans own works are exclu- ded other Means and parts of falvation, as well as that. I run over th^fe briefly and generally, both becaufelexped thit the bare texts without my Corilments,fliould work upon the Confideratc, afid bccaufe I have been fo much upon it former- ly in other writings(asConfefs. v>. 3./;. )6. c^f 5. (^ cap.$,^.2. fag. 1 17,1 1 8. ^ alibi pajfin^) as that I apprehend in this work mofre tedioufnefs than neciflity. " ' *"* v* v v- But the chief thing that I further 6cre Intend, 'is'to anfwet fome Obje(5lions,that by a Reverend Brother in his fecond part of his Treatife of Juftificati6n art brought a^aiiift me. But before I come to his Arguments, its neceflary that I a little animadvert oi^' his Defct iption of Tuftification, that we may firft agree upoh the fenTdof our te/m's , or at leaft, know how to underftand one another. Treat. Of JuflificatiM. p.ii6. [] ffiftijication u a gratiotis andjttji AH' of (jod^ w'herehj through Ctirifl our Mediator and Surety y a fmner^ hut repenting and Relieving ,is pronounced jnfi, anct hereby put into a fiate of Reconciliation and favour with Qod^to the p -at ft' of Gods glorious attributes^ and to the 'Believers eternal falviitioK. I /hall not examine i his Defcrlption hy accurate Logical Rules ^^Q. AnfA\ Firft. Doubtlefs an accurate, rather then popular definition wouU as foon be expcded from you, as frcmmoft; and here as anywhere in a Treatife purpofely on the Subjed. Secondly, ProriUnciatTon doth not go before Conftitution, nor put us into a {Ure of Reconciliation and favour, but find us in it, you fay your felf. pig/ lio. Tojuflipe^ U to confiitute and to declare'cy [ronounce righteous, And iriyour firft Treatife of Ju- ftification. z?**^. j.Indeid the Apo^le, Rora. 5. faith, many M 2 ure C8+) are mtde righceon* by the fecond •A^am \ which if noc meant of inherent holinels doth imply that rherightcoufnefs we have byChrift, is not meerly declarative, but alio conftitutivc ; and indeed, one is in order before the other ; for a man muft be righteous, before he can be pronounced or declared Co to be. ] Treat, p. The m^pplhatiort of ( fufiijication ) is attri- buttd to the Holj Ghofr. Anfvp. I know not of any fuch , except firft , where Ju- ftification is taken for Sandification, Secondly , or as the Holy Ghoft is made the Author of the Promife, though I doubt not but he is the Author of faith alfo. Treat. 16. Tht Socinians fs, for he is called by himfelf the way to the Father : and a way is a means. Thirdly, He is called the Fathers fervant : therefore he may be an Inftrument Fourthly, He is faid tocorae to do his Fathers will, therefore heishislnftrument. Fifthly, All Po^erh fa?d to be given him, even the Power of judging, fohn^. 22. and Ate bji hi'S death fins againfl the Lave and Covenart ofworkjt hht that thoje that are agdinj} the CovcKant of Grace-, tiC- Anfw.K fin is againft the Law of Grace or Gorpel,firft,becaijre itisagainft fome objed revealed in iheGofpel, which the (in is againft,( asChrift) Ihus fin wascxj iated by Clirift : zly.Asit is againft a Precept ot the Gofpel and thus it is expiated by Chrift : Sly.Asitisa breach of a mans own Promifeor Covenant made to Chrift upon the Gofpel invitation. And thus it is expiated by Chrift. 4ly. Or as it hath refpcct to the Gofpel commination, fo as to make a man theobjeft ofthe aAuall curfc of this New Co- venant, or the pcrfon to whom its proper penalty is become actu- ally due J as every fin msde the penalty of the Hrft Law actually due to us. This is it that I have faid.that C hiill doth not expiate, and none but this. Some Divines fay^the Gofpei hath no proper curfc or commination &penalty.l am paft doubt that it hath,even non-liberation, a privation of all the lalvation offered thera,and the Remedilefnefs of their ftate, &c. and I have oft opened this, and proved that only final Jmpcnitency and Infidelity , or the finall non-performance of the conditions of life, are thus peremptorily threatned , and make a man the SuSjed: of the proper actual curfe of this Law of Grace. And if afcer all ex- plications , you will ftill carry it in confufion, or intimate that men hold intolerable Doctrine, omitting their explications, and by generals making that theirs which the v disclaim .- our next reply fhall be patience ; or if you think indeed, either that the Law of Grace doth oblige any under the penary of reme- d lefs non-liberation, bcfides the finally Impenitent and Unbe- lievers, or that Chrift dyed to expiate any mans pvedominant final Impenitency or Unbelief, 1 will not trouble you with any ©iher confutation then a denyal of it. Treat, p. ibid. RtpeKtance is not an i*7^red'ent to our JnflifcA- tVK ai faith u ; Repentance quilifeththe ^ubje^l^but fi'.l'h tmme- iutl) rcciivith it, M 3 Anfw6T^ (8^) iy^nfver. The Word /t«^reMf»t "s more ambiguous then to be worthy the labour of difcuHing : But your affigncd difF^rence I ever did allo-iV. And yet mul\ we voluminouily differ, when I have cold you that I allow it ? But then I add, that this difference is in the nature of the ads, andincheir aptitude to their oKicc. But in the general nature of ^#/«(r Con- ttttions of p^rdon^ which is the neareft reafon of their intereft,they agree, though upon feveral reafons they are made conditions. Treat. [ ive are not jftflifiid bj tite Habit of faith - but by theAa,-] ^ Anf^er. I faid fo too in my Aphorifms. But the reafon? of a learned man ( Dr. fValti^ in his friendly animadverfions ) h^ve perfwaded me that it is unfound. Treat, p. 129. It u ajfertedf that fnfiijication called \h Titulo, or virtual^ ii nothing but the Grant of it in the Gof- pel : 'But I fee not how that can be called oftr fujlificdti- on. ■•«"" Anfw, Firft, That which is aflerted, is, firft,That thcGof- pelisthe Initrument juftifying. Secondly, That the moral act of theGofpel-GrantC andGods Will by it) is Juftification in fenfuaUivo. Thirdly, That the Relation refultingthcre-frona, is our paffive Juftification. Secondly, Can you fee how a Princes pardon under his hand-writing can be the Inftrumentof a Traitors pardon -^and how the moral or civil Action of that Inftrument, and of the Prince by it, can be active pardon ; and how the Relation effected by it can be paflivc pardon ? If you can fee it there , you may fee it here ; And if yon cannot , many a one can. Treat. // « the fgn or Infirumsnt declaring it :. mtjufifi' cation it f elf, j^-^Viho ever faid,and wh{re,that paflfive J u(lification(yea or active) C87) sctivc ) is the Gofpel it felf, or thefign? The Letter is the ign ; The adual fignification of Gods will thereby is the jufti- lyingaft. The Relation thence refultingon us, is ourpafiivc J unification. Thefe have been oft recited. Treat. ^As the grant orfrotnife of our Sanliifcation is not vur SantiijicMion, Anfvp. Goodreafon: The difference is notto you unknown: Sanftihcation ;^ pa'sivcj being a Phyfical effcd , mufthavca PhyficaJ caufe , and therefore a bare moral caufe cannot pro- duce it. But pardon or juftiHcation being but a Relative etfed, may be produced ^er nadam rffuhanttam a, fundamtnto. 2. BuC fuppofe God had made a promife ofSanf^ification on condition of faith • would not the /?/|^^rtoSandification have refulted immediately from this promife, the condition being performed ? And that i?/^i5?f hath the fame Relative nature , as conftitutive Juftification, and pardon it felf hath. Treat, yind as oh the contrary our condemnation rvhile ft'* ahUe in /in, or Qods an^er /tgainfi the [inner ■, it not the threatning promtilged , i^ut that rvhich comtsjrom God himfelf. Anfvf. I . Our Condemnation ^er fertentiam Judicii , is not the thing in queftion , nor yet the explication ot it ^ but our conflitu:ivc condemnation. And that it is not indeed the Letter of the Law, ( whoever faid fo ) but a^^ve , it is the adion of the Law , & p-^JJive famfta^ it is the Relative etTedt of the Law. 2, From your own Argument reverft, Tunrefiftibly make good my Caufe againft you. ^condemnation adive is the Laws act, and condemnation Pafsive is the Laws immediate effed : therefore Juftificaton is alike produced by the Promife or Gift in the Gofpel The Antecedent is proved, /ohn 5. i 8. he that htlitvcth onhiw^isnot cor.demned^ ( for the Obligation isdiffol- ved ) but he thi'.t bilievcth mt^ts conden'.ned already, j Vvbich muft be by fome Law. it being before Juugement and Executi- on, 2 Ccr. 3 9. 1 he Law in its delivery is called [ the miniftra- tion C88) tl«n of condemnation] and that of the Gofpcl [|che mini- ftration of rightcoufne'ls ] /#'«■ i. o. men arc faid ro be Q eoi- •vincedoftheLii^MtrAKfgrf^'j's.^ Though 'l\i'il confute the faWe conceics of Jurtification by t!ie Law, yet he rook them for no unfit phrafes , to (peak of ^the Latv w-^orkJKg ivr^th'2 Rom. 4. 15. [ rhecurfc«f the Law ~\ Gal. 5. i ^ And faith, ivhitfo- ever the L-:tVi> Jaiih^ it faith to them that are under the Law ~\ Rom. 3. 1*9. When the LaW' cowes ., ftn reviveth^Arti'^e die, Rorn. 7. 8 9. tlierefore we are faid to be [delivered from the L-iW^ j Jiom. 8. 2. & Gd. 3.1;;. Rom. 7, 6. ^n^Gal. 3. 21. // there had been n L:iw oiuen rvh'ch cou'd have ^'ven life , ri^hteoufnefi pjould have been by the Larv. Hence then is mention of being iH^ified b)the LaVc^g,il. 5.4. and mens being debtors to the Law^ Gai. 5. 3. And fomewhatth s way is implycd by Nicodemtu , lohn 7.51. doth our LaW judge any m.tn before., &c. ] In a word, what more common among Divines , then to fay, \ the La^ curjeih or condemneth finners'^ And then it is not abhorrent from the nature of a Law of Grace, an ad of Oblivion, to ab- folvcand juftifie finners. Treat. Neither then could wefaj^ that we areJHJiified by Chrifi c'lven to us-, but by the propofition laid down in the Scripture^ Tvhereas all fay that the objed um quod of our faith is ens incom- plexum , not the promife of (^hrift , bm Chrifi himfelf fra- nfifed. eyinf^* Its no impofsiWe thing to be juftified both by Chrift, and by the Promife. There is no ground to fuppofe co-ordi- nates to be contraries. Why may not Chrift given us, juftifie us as the meritorious caufe, and a principal efficient; and his Gofpcl-grant, as his Inftrument ? And accordingly each of them may betheobjedcf faith. The principal objcd: isanf«/ incoMplexunt^ Chrift himfelf: but a fubordinat Objed is both the Doftrine Revealing what he is and hath done, and the promife whichofferethhimtous, and tclleth us what he will do, IF a Princes Son redeem a woman from Captivity , or the Gal- lows, and caufe an Inftrument under his own band (and the Kings ) to be fent to her, aHuring her of pardon ? and liberty, and C89) and honours with himfclf, if (he will take him for her hu«iband, and truit him for the accomphfhraent ? Is it nor polsible roc this woman to be pardoned and dehvered by the King by the Prmces ranfom , by the Prince cfpou fed , and by her marriage with him, and by the Inlkument of pardon or conveyance You may be encidied by a Deed of Cifc and yet it may be an ens in- complexum that is beftowed on you by that Deed, and enncheth you too. Your Money and your Leafe, both may gi\ c you title to your houfe. The promife is Gods Deed of Gift , bellowmg on us Chrift and pardon, or JuftiHcation with him. Treat. Befides^ Abraham vfas Itijiifieii, and ke i' m>tde the pat- tern of all thjt /hill be lufi'^ed : Tet the^e was no Sc iptare- grant, cr deed of gi J in verittng^declaring th^s : God then commtt' fjiCAting hirnftif to "B clivers tn dn immediate manner. Anfw. Was there no Gofpel-grant then extant ? no deed of Gift of Chrift and his Righteoufnefs to alUhatdiouId be- lieve ^ Nothing to affure men of Ju'tificationbi' faith , but im- mediate communications to Believers ? If fo, then either there was no Church, and no falvation : or a Church and falvation without faith in Chrifl : and either taith in the Mefliah to come for pardon and life , was a duty , or no duty : If no duty, then If a duty, then there was a Law enjoyning it , and that Law muft needs contain orbeconjunil with a revelation of Chrift, and pard(»n and life to be had by him. I fuppofe tliat whatever was the ftanding way of Life and Juftification then to the Church, had a ftanding precept and promife to en- gage to the duty and fecure the benefi'. 1 know not of duty without Precept, nor of faith without a word to be believed. But this word was not written ! True I but what of that ? Was iteverthelefs a Law or Promife, the Objcft of Faith,or Inftru- menr of Juftificarion -* The promife of the 'eed might be con- vc'ghed by Tradition,and doubtlefs was To. Or if there had b en no general conditional grant or offer of pardon through Chrift in thofe times , but only particular communications to fome men, yet would thofe have been nsverthelefs inlirumen.al M Treat; Treat. Threfore t$ cj'l thisCrant «r CoaJrUul Prtm'feitt the Scn^ tttn^ Whofocver (hall be leve lliall be juftificd, a tran- fis'.t dH of Go^, ii verj w^prop--, uvUJs in fuclo a Je^.fe^ m ^e fay^ fuih >i marts writing uloii hand , and th4t is wholly i'npert.mnt to our purpyfe. A»f'^. There are two diftindadsof God here that I call Tranfient. The hrft is the Enafting of this Law, or giving this promiTe. If this were not Gods aft,then it is not his Law or pro- mifc If it be his ad, it is either Tranfient, or Immanent. I have not bcfn accuftomcd to believe tbatLegiflation , Promi- fing, c^^. are no ads, or are Immanent ai^s. The fccond is the continued Moral Adion of the Word, which is alfo Gods Afti- on by that Word as his Inftrument : As it is the Aftion of a written Pardon to Acquit, and of a Lea fe to give Title, ^r. And fo the Law is faid to abfolvc, condemn, command, &€* jyhat it fi^thiit Jaith to themthut are under the La\\> : And to fay, is to Ad. Though phyfically this is no other Adion , then a fign pcrformeth in fignifying , or difandamentum in producing the Relation, which is called the near eft efficient of that Relati- on. Now either you think ihdit to oblige f tbemofteflential ad of Laws ) to abfolvcy condemn, &c. are Gods ads by his Word, or not. If not, the miftakc is fuch as I dare not confute, for fear leaft by opening thegreatncfs of it , I offend yon. If yea; then either it is Gods Immanent ad, or his Tranfient. The former I never to this day heard or read any man affirm ic to be. That which is done by an Inftrument, isnolmmanent ad in God: To oblige to duty, to give right to Impunity and Salvation, &c. are done by Inftrumcnts,t/;?..the Word of Jod, as it is the fignifier of his will : therefore they are not Immanent Ads. Moreover, that which is begun in time, and is not from Eternity, is no Immanent A51. But fuch arc the fore-mention- ed : because the word which is the Inftrument,was indited in lime. Laftly, that which maketh a change on the extrinfick ob- ject is no Impaancnt act, but fuch are thcfe Moral acts of the Word : for they change our Relations, and give us a Right which we had noc before, 0'c, therefore they arc certainly tran- fient licnt arts. A thing that I once thought I fliould never by man have been pat to prove. Treat, pag. i?0. ^ti true at tked^y of f^dgetmnt there wll h afolemn and more com f lent Jnfttfjing of u. ,« / have eij where Jhervsd^ ^Anfvr. Youhavevcry wellfliewedit: and I take grateful^ ly that Ledarc, and chis Concelsiou. Treat, pag. i^i. Indeed r^ecAnnot then be fa'id to he j'^ffified hj Faith, Sx-c. Hence thi k-nd of Infiificatton jViU ce^t/e it hta* ven ( Ai imfljmg imperfe^ijrt, ). Anf^. And I dcfirc you to obfcrvc , that if it be no dif- honour to C hrift, chac we be there ( through hjs grace ) cvcr- laitingly juftified without hi- Impu edrighieoufriefs, or pardon, or faith pro /«/«>-o, it canno: be any difhonourtohim here, :hat we (hould repent, and believe, and be fanctified, nor that ihofe fhould be conditions of further mercy , and fufficienc of tliem- felvesto ju(tifie«S3gainftany falfc charge that we are Impeni- tent, unfanctified Infidels. If a perfect cure difgrace not our PhyHtian then furc an imperfect cure and the acknowledgemenC of it, is no diihonour to our Phyfician now. Treat, pag. 137. Thus all thofe Arguments^ If vte be Jht fiifedbyfAtth, then by our ovfn^ork,^ tmd that thststogivetoe much to faith, yea more then fotnt f*^ thij do to rvor^j ^ rvhich they hold a condition of our Jujiiflcaion ; A I thefe and the l\e Obje^iont vanifh \ becaufe -we are not ^u/fifiedby/Atth^ as fffftifi' Cation u confidered a^ively^butpajfivelf, Anf^. I. I yet think that I have faid enough In my private Papers to \ou, to confute the conceit of faith's being PafTivc. 2. If I had not, yet you v>cldme whati dcfire : f fai^h »A nor, but luft:r, to our Juftifjcation, then is ic no efficient IpIVju- mcntalcauie. Forall true efficiency is by Adion. And *o you keep but a Metaphorical Inlkumcnt. But of this more hereafter. N 2 Treat. (po Treat, pag \jifi, PVe cannot call Remlf ion of fin a fiAte\aiWi calljufi ficauon. Ar.fiv. T do not believe you : and I can bring many Scripturei againftyou. Tut to your felf its enough to ask , How can yoa conftantly make Rcmifiion an Effencial part of Juftificacion9 and yet fay, that we cannot call it a ftate, as we do Juftification. In your firft Treat, of Juft. Le6l. i7.;>-«^^.H5- youfay,/'r<>;>.4. Remifllon is not to be confidercd meerly as removing of evil, butalfo asbeftowinggood. It is not only ahlativamali^ but coiUtiva boni^ \ plenufulvouchfafing of many gracious fa- vours to us, fuch as a vSon-fhip, and a Right to eternal life, as alfo peace with God , and communion with him. ] And why may we not fay, [ A fiate of Sonfliip or falvation J as well as of Juaification ? Treat, ib. There is a Juflt fixation of the CAufe^ and of the per' fon^ alwAtes to he dijiinguijhed. Anfw, There isno Juftification of his caufe, which doth not fofar juft, fie the perfun : Nor any fentential Juftirtcation of the perfon , butby juftifyinghis caufe. Though his adions may notbe juftifiable; yet when the caufe to be tryed is, Whether finful adions be pardoned by Chnft, that caufe muft be juftiti- cd , if that man be juftified. Even as Accufations are not charged upon the perfon, without fome caufe real or pre- tended. Treat, pag. 152. NotonlyBucer^X'hoiskaio'A'ntoplaceJu/ii- fication both in Imputedriohteottfnefs ani Inherent^ thereby endea* vouringa Reconciliation rvtththe Papifit ' But Calvin //'. 3. cap. 17. fe6i. 8. ^ Tothispurpofe alfo Zanchy . Anfvc, Why then might not I have had as fair meafure as Lud. de 7)««, Bucer^ Calvin^ Zanchy ? efpecially when 1 go not fo far. And yet I take my felf beholden to gut/. Rivet , for helping mc to fome fcraps of Phii. Codnrcus^ who drives at this mark. (P3) mark, as you fay Bucer doth, though I cannot yet get the Book it fclf. Treat, pag. 158. O this u txctllent, when a man w umAx^ed and in an hoi) manner confonndei at hn holinefs , as ^ell as at his offinces- Anfw. So you before fay , they muft be afhamed of their Righteoufnefs as well as iheir fins. I do not well underftand ihefediftindions. Nothing in all the world confoundcth me fo much as the imperfection of my Holinefs : But I dare not think that imperfection to be no fin, left I muft think the perfection to be no duty, and fo come to works of fupercrrogation and Evangelical Counfels. And Holinefs confidered in it felf, and not as finful and imperfect , is amiable in my eyes, and I know not how fo be afhamed of it, without being afhamed of God that is its object and exemplar, and heaven that is the ftace of its perfection. Treat, ib. Setfomife^^ even a remnant aftJe^ comparativelj , the whole (^hrifiUn world hoth ^oSlors and people, learned and un^ learned, fajien on a fttjltjj cation b) work/* Anfw. I hope not fo many as you fear, or affirm. Firft , all the Doctors and people of your judgement do not ; And if you thought thofc fo excecdmg few among Chriftians, vou would not take me for fo fingulnr as you do. 2. None of the truly fanctified are fuch as you here affirm. 3. The multitude of groundlcfs prcfumers of Free Grace arc not fuch. And truly though I doubt Jufticiaries are too common, I do not think that fuch Prefumptuous ones are fo fmall a Rerananr, 4. The Li- bertines and Antinomians, and many other Sects of their mind, are none of this great number. 5. I will yet hope for all this, that you cannot prove ic of the Doctors and people of half the Chriftian world. Their hearts God knows. And I will not yet believe that in their Doctrine about Juftificationby works, the Greek Churches, the ^rraemans, Jacobites jCopti's, Abafincs, &c. do faften on fuch dangerous lands, or differ fo muchfroni you.. you. 6. I heard as eminent Divines as moft I know ((omeytl living) m a publick meeting fay , that B Oiop V/her and Mr. (74t*)^fr artirmtd, that the Papifls did not lundamentallj differ from us in the Doctrme of Juft.fication. Treat, pag. 167. ByAUthefejubttU DJlinBionsy men^ohU ht thought' Arj"^. Your fcope in that page feems to be againft any diftin- gulhipgwhatfoevcr about worKs, jn this propoficion , iVe ure iu(iifiedhj faith, andnvt hj worki y IT fo , that we muft not run to any diftindion, but fay that in every motion or fenfe. Works are excluded J and dcjuft:fie in none, then I profefsit ispaitmy uttmoit sk 11 to jutt fie you for accufing /^/t/j^wrr as you do, for faying, Menttm Jacobe in curtit tunm : Yea if he had upon the reading of Mat. 12. 36. rifen higher, and faid, Afemirt^Chri^ fie in caput tuum. For furehechat faith \^B) thy words thou /halt hejtiflif^ed ~} Or by rvork ' a man *.- ju/f fi'd-, an4 not by.fatth only 1 can no way toffibly beexculed from that crime, if nodi- ftinftion may verifie bis words ; bu: they muft then be taken as abfoluteiy faife : which I will not be perfwaded of. Treat, pag. 21^. Scrm i^.Obferv. That even the mo [I holy And re^ercate man u not Ju/lifiea bj the veotkj of grace which he doth. Tkit truth « the mart diligently to be ajferted^ by hoxv much the err ox that confronts it ia more fpecious and refined , an^ main' tained by fitch ^bettorfyVfhofe refute is net fo eafilj cafl cff m the former ^efpakf of. Now you come purpofelyil perceive to deal with me. I con- fefs the repute of Abettors doth much to bear up opinions through the world, even with them that fpeak moit againft im- plicit faith. But you need not defpair of cafting off the repute of them you mention. Mr. Robert fon and Mr. Crandon can teacb any man that will learn that leffon. Treat, ib. The fyeffionismt ^ ivhether fae are ^uftified by ^orkj^ though fiomng from grace, us meritorious or efficient of fw Jiification. (91') flificdt'lcn. This the Ofiikmfis rve h4ve to deal with, do rrjeSt Vfith ind'^natioK. To make ^^orl^t either merits or efficient cnufes of our Inft ideation before Gad , the]/ £''^*^ '^ direEll^ to opfofe the Scrptttret ; jiea they feem to be offended ruth the Otthgdox^ as gU viKgfoomuch to faith ^ becanfeits made an !njlrument of our Ih~ fltfication', therefore they are to be acquitted at leafl from grofs Poperj. t/inftv. This is one pafTige which I undcrHand by your Pre- face to you Sermons on John 17. you lookt for thanks for ; and I do freely thank you for it : for the world is fuch now , as that 1 muft take my felf beholden to any man that doth injure me with moderation and modefty. But you might have done than juftice to us Opinionifts, as to have put [ any caufes at all ] in- ftead of [ efficient cjtHjes ^ when we had fo often told you ( the Orthodox ) that we difclaimed all true caufality ^ and then your Reader would have been ready to hope that we are free alfo from the finer Popery as well as the grofs. But fince I have heard of late times, what it is that goes under the name of Antichriftianity and Popery , even with many that arc able to call themfclves Orthodox, and others that diflcnt from them , worfe then Opinionifts j I confefs I begin to have charitable thoughts of a man that is but freed from the charge of grofs Popery : and if thofe tongues Qiould free him alfo from the im- putation of all the finer Popery, I (houjd begin to fufped that fomewhat is amifs. Treat, ib. 2. Although to tn*intain faith 4»d ObedieMce to be the condtioKS andaciufa. fine qua non of our Jujiification^ be thi profeffcd and avowed Do^lrine of the Socinians^ yet fame of late have averted the fame DoSinne ^ th*t Jiet abhor Sccinian^ ifm ' . jittf^\ For this alfo T give you the thanks which you exped- ed, on the forefaid grounds. But if we aflert the fame Doctrine with the Socinians , eitherit is thefime/Oi//'* Dodrine , or the fame found Dodrine. If the later, you might as well have faid , the Socinians afTerc that there is a Cod, aodfodo we : but to what (pO what purpofe ? If the former ; then cither it is falfe ijuoaJ ter" ntmos, or ^Hoad (tnfum. The former cannot be faid without abfurdicy ; the words can have no other falfnefs, but anunfit- refs, diiiinfl from the fen e ; And if the terms be any part of Socinianifn, then Chr.ft and famei were guilty of Socini^" nifm -^(jttodahfif. If it be the fenfe , Firft. I crave nootherfa- vourof the impartial Reader, before he judge, then to read the ScciKtAnj explication of themfelvc, and to read my expli- cation here, and in my confeflion. Secondly, And if he will alfo perufe the Allegations in the end of that confeli]on,Iet him judge whether the Orthodox be not guilty of SociniaK'fn. Or if he be tempted to believe Dr •OlV/'jjiintimation^ as if I had dealt injurioufl/ with the Authors there alleadged, I only delire him to turn to the places cited, and perufe them m the Authors, and freely cenfure me. Treat. 220. Neither is thetjUejlion about tke neceffitj of ho- lirefs, &c. Only the ^uefiiot* u upon what account theft are required in juftifted perfons ; whether »«/ow^caufaUty, er concurrence as fait his ^ only not^'ithjuch a degree of txcelltncyt PVbether good ^orkj he requiredai "iveU asfdtth, fo that tt-f maj fay^ JH'ttfying Repentancei j«/?'X.'*\? LaW^ ( Love it Jhould he ) as well as jujitjying fatth ? This is pofitivelj and vehmently nffrmedhy fome : but certainly thofe "'irguments and Reafotithhey bring are too Wr<«/^ to £ainfay the Torrent of the Orthodox Divines. Anfvo. Upon the reading of this I complained of hard mea- fure in the Preface to my confef Secondly; you (zidfCaufaliias cfuaclanty which is terminus dimtnuens.'] 1 f quoad ejfe caufahtatu it bc termi- tiHs dimtnuens, then the meaning is,ihat I make them no caufes. But do you think any Reader will Eng\\(h Caufalitasork,s jifji*fji»g under ^ny pretended^ Notion ^'hztfoever. Anfxver. By the help of this, I (hall interpret all your Ar- guments. And if fo,then they militate againft the ad of faith Juftifying under the pretended notion of an Inftrument, unlcfs you you will fay that faith is no Ad, or Inftrumentality isnoprc- tcoded notion. ? Preface. And thu maketh me admire ho^ my learned Brother could let fall one pajfa^e Vi'herein he way be fo filpuhly andocuUrlf cenvincedto the<:ontrary by the fir Jl hol^Kg upon my Arguments ; that ^^hich he fAith « {_ the ftrength of my -Arguments, lies up- on a fpippofitton^ that conditions have a moral efficiency 1 There t4 no one of thefe ten Argtitnems hr ought againfl fujli^ca- ticnby ^orks, as rccftr;K^it. But /atres fpeaks of Works as fuppofing the perfcd Saiisfe<3ion and Merit of C hrift, and that all that is valuable to the caufal procurement of our Juflification is to be found in him alone, and therefore he leaves no caufality herein to woiks : but takes them as a meer condi- tion, which ceafe fufpending when performed. For the c fficien- cy of a condition, is only in fufpending till performed : And fo Rebellion can (ufpend ^ when the ceafing of that Rebellion by obedience, doth not caufe, but only ceafe fufpending. Now I anfwer to your Minor ^ that Abraham was not juftifi- ed by works in ?«<»// fenfe, but he was in Jama's fenfe, unlefs you wil! own the fajing which you chide Althamtr for. ( Though I muft fay that in his Cor.ctlUtiones Lcc. Sctit. y^l- ri(?<«wfr deals more mannerly with \amts. ) Abraham was not juflified by works , as making the Reward of debt , and not of grace : for he had no fuch works : But Abraham was jullified I. By the act of faith, as a condition : therefore by an act under feme notion. I l«t hrft Juftificition, for be was juft be- fore this ; but It was a renewed Acceprance and Approbation of God, and a kind of fentential Declaration thereof, by the voice of the Angel. But a Jurtiiication it was, andfo/sfiancedinfor fuch Vforkx , &C. IVben )fre read the Helj (j ho [i f pake generally of all >dcforks ^ wh are ^e that "^^e fhould limit it to fame ? — « 'Bj their interpretation, the believir (hoftld be oppofed only to fome kind of works and fait kj Sec. Anf^. I, Theordinaryftrainof the Apoftles fpeech, being cxpreflive of the xvorkf 0/ f ^^ Z^^w, is Expofitory of the reft, 1. Becaufe a few paflages muft be ufually expounded by many. 2. Andbecaufca few (much more abundance of^ limiting paflages, muft expound thofe where the reftriftion is not ex- prefled. 2. Have not I ever yielded to you that all works are excluded from Juftifying at works ? but it follows not that therefore they are (as you may fay) excluded under any Notion whatfo- €ver. 3. And why might not Abraham be inftanced in > Your proof is none. i. Isit not a good Argument 7>(ega'ive y (Abraham wasnot juftified by works, therefore we are not ? And a good Argument to prove the Antecedent : Becaufe he had no works ihatcould juftifie : No nor thofe which were thentruftedon tojuftification 2. Doth not T^«/fhew thathc fpeakofthefe, when he proves bis aflertion, 1. Becaufe Abraham was then in uncircumctfion , Rotu. 4. 10. (what's that to Gofpel obedi- ence? ; 2. Becaufe the Law was long after the promife, and was nor then given, gal.^.zj, 5. T/iW maketh it all one to be juftHedbv works, and to be juftified by the Law ; as abun- dance of pdflages fljew. A mukitude of particular Texts do es pre fly o°o expreQy fhcwthatitlsaCcganuftification only thathefpeaks of, and that he dire(ftly intcndeth only ^cgal works. I will now inllancebutinone, viz. Rom. ^. 1 3. compared with C/fw. 22- 1 8. [^ For the promife th/tt h/boutd bt hs:r of the world , woi not to Abraham and his feed bj the Z^.-iw, but through the right eotifnefs of faith. "J Now compare with this, the words of the .promife it felf, L cyfud in thy feed (hull all the Nations of the earth be blef- fed^ bee Atffe thou ht»fi obeyed my voice. '2 So ver. 16, 17. Be- CAufe thoH h4f} done this thin£, &c- ] 4. Its not cafie to conceive how any man canexpeft aLegal or Pharifaica! luftificafion by Evangelical works without a grofs contradidion : For example • to be juftified Legally by Evan- gelical faith, defire, love, thanks, joy, felf-dcnyal, confeflion , (^£-. are all palpable contradidions : And fuch a mans faith rauft be thus expreft ; / expe^ to merit lujiification legalljft by believing in Chrijl as the fole Aferiter of my iHJlifcationAnd fafvation, or by de firing Chrtff^or by loving Chrifi 04 the fole Afe- riter of my fa'.vation : Or by th.wkjng him^ or rejoy-cing in him as the Sole- merit era f my fulvM ion .t\ Or / expeci legally to merit luftificAtion, by denying that Icarfifserlt if, by any right edufnejt of my own ^ or by conf effing that I defer ve damnation by my fins , or by praying 0^ fceklrg far fihation by free gift, as raetited only by Chr'!{l.~\ All thefe arc palpable contradictions •, and no man can hold both that knowcth what he doth. ^ 5. Yet I will fuppofe that though no man can fo truft to his works for lef;a!fuftification, that are apprehended by him as Formdly Evangelical , yet perhaps he may do it by fome works thit are .i/.^r^^r.'//; Evangelical, and'fancied by him to be what they are nor. And fo I ftill fay , that though it were Legal works ihac P.^«/did directly difpure againll , yet confequenti- allv and indirectly he difpureth agiinft works commanded only IntheGofpel, if men will do them to Lcg^l ends , and fancy them Co b-* of the value legally ro juftific them. 6. I will t'lerefore fuppofe fome men to be fo unreafonabk, as ro expect a Legal Juftification , by their bjlicving or confef- ling that Chri;Vonly can Legally juftifie them, and not them- fclvcs J and fo I will grant you, that P^«/doth f confcquenti- aliy) exclude ,i//jiw^/, even Evangelical works from Juttifica- P tion : (.0^) tion : Buc though he exclude all works ^ yet not in every notion, rordothhe txclude /III i>4irtji oi All works in our jufti/icaci- on. All wo» ks as vaihable ojfenr.ns , he excludes, and lo as me- ritorious, not only in point of t omn^utative Junice,but aifo in point of Ltgal woith and Icgaljufticc, as the Pharifecsfup- pofcd thetp mcr:torious : All works he excludes fi om ali proper Caufality. But he doth not exclude all works from having any Jnterdt at all in fubordination to Chrift. Do you verily believe that Repentance and Faith have no Intcreft in our Pardon , in fub-ordinationtoChriU ? If you fay, No,not a>}y, you contiSi- did Lod, and your felf, and all the Chriftian woild. If you fay, Tea-i httt they jttjiifie not qua works; you fay nothing to the coniroverfie : For 1 have over and over as loud as you, profeffed that they juftifie notfermaliter as works, ^f you fay they have any Intereft: i. Tell us better what it is. 2. And then you confute your general afTertion. There's no Chriftian that I know but will confefs that the Gofpel works have the inte- reft of Declaring/^»/ in our final luftification. And few will deny that Repentance hath the intereft of a necefTary qualifica- tion , or condition to our firft Juftification. Now would you perfwade us that ?4«/cxcludeth this kind of Intereft , or oppo- feth faith to it?If not againft ihc /t^^»al intereft of works,ihen not againft all Intereft ; therefore if Pauls general exclusion will conlift J^ith your fi^nal Intcreft, then I (hall maintain that it will conhft with the fore-explained Conditional intereft I will not therefore be guilty of yc ur charge of limiting the Holy Ghoft. If he fpake of all works, 1 will believe he means All'deorkj, But I. If he over and over near an hundred times at leaft, explain himfelf as fpcaking of the Law, I will not (hut my cars againft that explication. And 2. 1 will grant it is alfo all EvangtUcal tv rk' , at leaft by confequence : F'utlneed not therefore grant that bccsufe he excludeth >^V^c? ^^there- fore he exdudeih Allkjnd of ^nterefi of all woiks j but only that fort which he difpuceth againft. Bcfides all this, I muft diftinguilh of Jt//Jificaticn , Lega/ and €vAngelical-> refpedive to the projnifes and threatnings of the Law and Cofpel, which do differ. No works at all did ju- ftifie ^^brahAtfi^ from the charge of the Law,r^», the ttKgodly. By the ungodly is one meant that hath not afufficient and adequate holinefs'.fothat Abraham though re generated, jet at to lujiification « ungodlj^ he cannot jiand before God, or endure , if all his intferfeSlions be e»- ^uired after. Ne^ certainlj he thatfulfilleth the conditions oflufli- (ication, cannot be called ungodlj j for he doth all that is required. iy4»f^. I . Again , I grant all works excluded ; but not in all their relations ; nor are all their Interefts injuftificatioa excluded. 2. This Argument I fhould not have expeAed from you. You confcfs that by ungodlj^ is meant fuch, though Rege- nerate and holy,that have not an adequate holinefs : Adequate ; To what ? to the Law ? or to the conftitution of the condition in the Gofpel ? Marvel not if I deny the Confequencc of your Argument, and if 1 be unable to digeft your reafon for it. You fay , [ Hethitfulfilleththe Condition of lufliflcation , can- not be called ur.goJilj.'] ^\jiivi\\2Li Condition ? I confefs he that P 2 ful- (loS) fulrilleth the La^i condition cannot be called unfndh^ nor be unJuftifiablcbyibatLaw. ^Bu:hc that pcrformetli il;c CofptI' Condition of liberation, may be called tingodl) m the fenfe ^ou now mentionedjihat iSjUr.juftiaablc immediatly for his works by the taw : or one tha t hath not an holinefs adequate to the Law. Though indeed he cannot be called EvAngflicAllj urgodl}'. I fuppoie you clearly fee that your Argument makes as much agauift any Condition of Juftihcation in us, as aga nit works being the condition. For againft faith it felf, being any Condi- tion, you may equally argue , [ Its the ungodly that are jujlified: But b( tPat fpilfitleth the coKditicni of ^tifiificatioM ^ is r»t to bi ^4iUdt4»godly. Hrgo, &c.'\ But if you take ungofU'mefs ( as you do) for unadequate holinefs (to the Lawj I deny your Mi- nor- Can no man but the Perfedly obedient, perform the con- dition of pardon in the Gofpd > Treat, ib. Sb that this is very co*)fidernhle^that alhhof§ ^h^m Godjujitfietby hej^/iifieth them mtfor any thing they have ofihfir oWw, cr finy conditions they have performed ; i;fit ns fttch tvho are fii$»»rt itkafiriH examination^ anil fo deferve condemnation , and therefore no ^orkji •/ grace art looked uf on. t/inf^. I have anfwered this fully in Colvinns. i. Though Proteftantsoftfay, that Cod favef.h men /or their obedience, and Scripture ufe the term [ btcaufe ] oft , yet I am willing to yield to yon that men be not favcd nor juftified for any thing of their own, or/ , confidered as the matter of a Legal righteoufnefs^or as cppofire toChrift , or co-ordi- nate with him : but not without any humane ad, as fubordinate toChrift, and asthematrer of that Evangelical righceoufnefs which is required in this Corft.tution [^Repent and BtVive the Go/pel] viz. fincerely. Treat, pag. 223. fiAndivdeed it uat/aflconfefed^ th^t its faith only th<*t makes the contrMCl between God and the foul ; that good rvorkj *re not reauired to this initial confenting^ unto Chrifl , fo 04 to maks him ours, hut in the progrefs. Thii it th-^t in fjfeSl , ^hich the Pap Jis a ff.rm in other fiords ^ Th^it the fi^-fi fujhficati- en M orJj hy faith, hut thefecond by good works, An[\\\ How would you have your Tveaddr urideiftand thefe two itfinuations?- i. Have 1 fo oft afferced that which you call myConfeffion, and put it into an ^ndex of diflindions, left ic fhould be over-lookr, and told you as much fo long ago in pri- vate writings, and do you now come out with an \ Itsatlaji co>-ft'f^'ed ] J hope you would not intimate thyt ever I denyed it : or that ever I wrote Book of chat fubjcd, wherein I did notexprcfly averr it. But then ( that you think not better of me then 1 deferve ) I muft fell you, that when I ftill excluded works from our be^un Juftification ic was external Obedience , and not Repentance, nor thofeadsof faith (even theKecei- P 3 vine (no) ich tSftfe ving Chrift as Lord and Teacher j which tnOTcthatoppofeme call works. a. If you take it but for an argument to convince fucb as I, that [^the Papi/hhoUit : Ergo, e^^-.] I mult complain that it isuneffedual .- But if you intend it for another effed on other perfons , viz,, to affright them with the found of fo horrid a name, or drive them away by the ftink of it, then you may pof- fibly attain your ends. But you fhould have attempted it only by truth. Is it true, that Q tkh is that in efe^, ^hich the Papijis affirm in other vpords ? J Yea is it not a notorious truth , that itu^tiite another thing which the Papi/h affirm in fomen^hut /ik« words ? I. The world knows that the Papifts by the firft Juftifi- cation, mean the firft infufion of renewing fpccial grace. 2. And that by the fecond Juftification, they mean, the adding of fur. ther degrees of Sandification. or aduating that which before was given. 3. That they hold, faith juftifieth in the firft Jufti- fication coHJiitutive. 4. And that works or holinefs juftifie ff««l/?tV«t»fMn the fecond Juftification , even zi Albedo facit al* bum^ veldoElrina inditafacit doElum. On the other fide, I have told you often privately and publikely, that, i. B^r Juftificati- on I mean not Sandification, nor any Phyfical, but a Relative change. 2. That by firft and fecond, I mean not two ftates, or works, but the fame ftate and works as begun, and as continued. 3 . That faith juftificth neither con^itutive ^ mharenter, nor as any caufc, but as a Receiving Condition. 4. And that works of external obedience are but a difpoHtive condition, and an exciufion of that ingratitude that would condemn. And now judge on fecond thoughts, whether you here fpeak the words of Truth or Equity. Treat, ib. Aiainft this gentral exclnftonof all'^srksi isoppo- fid ver. 4. where the Apoftle faiths To him that workeih the Reward is of debt ; from whence they gather that V^orkj onlj which 4re debts ^ are excluded. jfnfw, I never ufed or heard fuch a coilcdion. All good works ire debts to God ; but our colledion is , that works which are fuppofed by men to make the reward of Debt,and not of Grace, are excluded. Treat, (no) Tieat. 'But if tht'^he ferloujlj thought ort, it makfs flrongly avamji them ; for the ApofiUs Argument it a Gencre : */ it he hjVi'orkjy its of Debt : therefore there are not works of Debt ^and Works of Ko Debt. ^nfvf. I. If the Apoftle argue <3 Qenere ^ then he arguech not from an Equivocal cerm ; and therefore of no works but what fall under his (jr«w. 2. And the Apoftles Gentu cannot be any thing mcerly Phyfical, becaufe his fubjed and difcourfe is moral : and therefore it is not every ad that he exdudeth. 3. Nor can it be every Moral Ad that IS his Genns : but only ffor/^; in the notion that he ufeth the word j thatis, All fuch Works as Workmen do for hire, who exped to receive wages for the worth or defert of their works, I ihall therefore here confute your aflcrtion , and (liall prove that All workj do not make the Reward to be of 'Dtbt , tind not of Grace : and confequently that Paul meancth not either every Ad, or every Moral Ad, here ^ but only works fuppofed Re- wardable for their valu« I ( What you mean by d'ork; of Debt, and fVorkj net of Debt^ I know not .- they are not Scripture words, nor my words ^ Forftilllfay, All Good works are of Debt to God from man. ) Argume.t I. Sxn^turaret •, There are many Moral Ads that make not the Reward /rho hathfuved «j, And called m With an hoi} ca!li>«gt not according to our yvorkj^ hut hu orvn fnrpofe and gr^ce^ &C. Ephcf. 2. 8,9. For hy Grace ys are faved, through faith, and not cf joftr [elves, it is the gift of (jod : not of rvorl^t , left anj mm Jhottld hafi^ Tit. 3 5i6,7. Not hy >9fforks of Kjghteoufntfs ^hich rve have done^ but according to hi4 '^Urcy he ftived m hy the rvaj?ji'.g of Regener.xt'orj aid the renetvingof the HI) Cjh»fi^ that bemgj'jtifitd by his Grace, we fhould be made Heirs according to the hope of eternal life, Rom ,6. 23. For the \oages of fin u death, but theCift of Cj$d is eifr»'il life through Jeftu C'..rij} our Lord, \ A6i.4. 1 z. Neither is there fulv<'tion tn any otbe-', Mar. 25.3-!. Come je blefftd of my F cither ^ inherit the Ki"gdom prepared for yoft^ &c. ] whence Expofitors conclude againft works. The Minor may be proved by an hundred texts, Ol-fat. 25.' 35. For I WM hungry, dct. Rev.zz. I2. and 2. 13. '1/arl^ 15. 54. Rev.20.ii' Jam. 2 14. I Tet.i.lJ. H e Will ju^ge every MAn according to his Workj, &C. Argument 4. Thofe works which Grace commandeth, and caufeth the Godly to perform, do not make the Reward to be not of Grace, but of debt. But there are fome fuch woi ks.£r^, the oppofite term [] he thatworketh not ] doth not fign fie him that performeth no moral ad. Therefore in the fourth vcrfeX he that worketh] doth not fignific him that doth perform any moral ad. The confequence is undeniable from the evident immediate oppofition,betwcen him that work- eth, and him that worketh not. The Antecedent I prove , Firft, From the words of the Text, which mention one ad, even believing, as oppofite to working, and iraplyed in, or confident with not working. [ To him that worketh not, but l>elieveth. ]] Secondly, Bccaufeelfe it would fu b vert the Gof- pel. What fenfe would you make of \t if you (hould inter- pret this and fuch texts as this of all moral Ads? Such as Chriftian ears would abhor. Jf [ working ] be the Genus, atrd the TcKt will huld as extended to Belicving,Repenting, &c. as the fps'iss, and that even in their due Evangelical notion: Lee as try them a little in fuch an Expofition. 'V£r,/\^^.\ to him ihat workeeh, that is, Rcpcntech, Believeth, &c, the Reward is ^QCaf :Grace>byc of Debc, Buc co bim chac WQrkab ncE^ ( chat " ' " ' ts. C"J) is, that Repenteth not, Lovcch not God, Defireth not Chrlft or Grace, believeth notinChnft, ) bat believeth in him that juftifieth the ungodly, his faith ( fuppofing he have it not ) is imputed to him for righteoufnefs. Jlsthis a ivvcccand ChriPian fenle ? If we (hould ran oveV an hundred fuch Texts by fuch an Intcrprctation,vou would hear no fweeicr Melody. Let us hear fome modern Expofitors , f for I will give you no thanks to grant me the Anc'enrs, \vithou': citing thc'Ti ) I. Calvin^ ( that excellent Expofitor ^ faith thus [| (?/»'- rant em vocAt ^m fi4'i merit ti alxjui ' fyomereiur : non opciyHcfttt cut nihil dthetttr opernm merit 0. Ne» he. Teriitim Arq^HmeAtum ex v' ril ttlvorum^ ope rAjnf^ul 'nt wercedem ft4'> j-*^e ac dehim non ex g^aihtfeJ Abraha* mo jttjlitu delfit\ non/''*-! jurcfed ex gratijeji colLita: E'go, ^c. "Ver. 5". iV-^'W// opera '/tou opm f(i[(ftt imputaiiontt fed ta^^'^dv ccederrf. 7. Anton. ^Ajiti m loc. iy^rq^urrtitttAtur Ap'>(lolliit. ex lo^ cats c^ condntii inter hominef recepto jufe : qni eni*f* locat cpfram ju m , pitfcifcitur cutn condttCl^re - ut cor.grttens oper£ p^etium ipfi xHwerftftr : adeo ut non obtmeat mercedtm gratis^ pd ex ope^£ cumipf.imercede d:'^?0) inter homlnei : «jti la^rat pro mercede^ in vi»ea, mlfitU, run, veldumi. •» mfrcefiper ado labore ttonlmfHtatur vti dfymtHr ex era i^, jea te-i i rex Uhito ut meritufn •, id^ie ex online jufli- ti£ ffvvM^-ny.Mi qttt funct tCCjU'ilit ittm -iriihwetic^m labori4 c^ fnercedu. 1 aIU iniml.b >- e(i - r hum, yf'^s indeh turn, merce- demtx mdciifi fuciem debii'nn pnpter jnftitiAW. Abrahae ioitur prow'lja & impiitMiujt*it jufiitia merces^ nitUo operum me- rit o, fed mtra gratia. ■ * .-^* reronon operatftr ^ nempe pro merceh , b. e, v.irdihAt God fjouUtn ujlice give^ if men haJdefeerved.'t by their works. 12. Hemi gfus ( even a Lutheran ) fuppofeth the Argument to be thus. Jmpi4taiia gratuita non eji operantis merces : j«/?i- tia cred(»tis eft imputatio gratuita : ergo jiifiiti* credentis non eji operuntis merces. Afapr prob.itur per contririum ; Mercet operant*^ id eji^ li qui aliijuid operibus promeretur^ dtftur ex de- bto. 'Prebatio ke}itMmenim^^B.w\\is Jentit ^ quod (juifquAm ex debit fiat j-^fiui revera^ fed (J4£ fit nature rerum indtcat — Imputare efi alicjuid gratia conferre , non ex debito tnbuere. Merets proprie e/i quod debebatur ex merito : hoc «■/?, Debit ffo' lutio. Yea in his blow at the Majorifts he confefTcth the truth f 8. Evertitur eorum dogma ^ qui clamant^ opera nece§ ana ad faluttmy qua falus cum djufiificatione feparari neqttit , non ha* Q 3 hit CiiS) ^et alliU caufoi aut nttrlta^ (j'tam ip/a fu^ific^tto^ Uoc tanttn fattndumeji quod operA mceffario rtcjuirantm infuJlrficatU, ut iter I'termtdium, ion ut cn^-'ft aut merita. 13. Adtck Rtig(rus { a Lutheran ) in loc. Impufarofniei oppor.i- tnr imptttationi ex nntrifo -^ im^utitio fiJeijit fucundum ^rutiam : S. fides in nrgotto JufitficMiunn^ ntn conftderatur ut orui morale : mnidemm per woaumfpiru ittiktatur, fecundtim debitum C^ tti^' rttone iwpttatur ■ - [ Et qui operator ^; ^ve operjtm renatus Jit ^ five non^ dummodo ek i'te?itioy!erperetifr,'t>tj<4efi)ie, ut mtrcedtm reportet & opera [u a ceijorio '^Oii judicio oppofita vtUt. 14. In like manner Georg CJ'Xtuj ( a Lutheran ) in loc pag. a6,28,&c. To thefeT might add many other ProteftantExpoficors,and the votes of abundance ot Polemical DiVines* who teilchcPa- pifts that in P-iuls fenfe its ail one [^ to be juftified by works : to be juftified by the Law : and to be juftifted by me- rits, i But this much may fuffice for the vindication of that Text, and to prove chat allworki do not make the Reward to be of Debt, and not of Grace, but only mrritoHous mercenary works, and not thofe of gratitude, eirc beforenamed. Treat, ibid. \Thefeca»A Argumeyt maybe from the pfculur Mnd exprefs difference that the Scripture giveth between fahkand •other gracefi in rfpecl of fufiification. So that faith and good Tvorki are not to he confldered as concurrent in the fame manner , thoHgh one primarily, the other feconit us, and would do HiOre , if ic were not for fear of contradiding the Scripture. Treat, pag. 2:4. From thefe txpreffions it is that our Onho- dox Dizi'jcs fay ^that filth ytfiificth as it is an Inflrumtnt, Ufing hild on Chrift ^SiQ. ad pag. 226. c^«/rt\ Though I could willingly difpatch withone man at once, yet becaufe it is tlie matter more then the perfon , that muft be confidered, 1 muft crave your Patience as to the 'S.n- I'.vering of this Paragraph, till I come to the Difpute about faiths Inftrumcntality, to which it doth belong, that fo I may not trouble the prefent Difpuce by the Interpofition of ano- ther. R Treat. (.22) Treat, pag. 226. The third Argument is. If in the continu- anct anii progrefs of cur Jujiificatton we are jufiified after tiefamt manner we ^ere dt fi^ft t then its not hj faith and^orl^/^ but hj f^ith onl) 04 diftincl to X^orl^ ^ Rom. I, IJ. GalaC. 5. vAnfrv. I . I grant the whole, underftanding faith and works as Taul do h, but not as you do. 2. By \_the [ame manner ~\ either you mean , \ the fame fpe- cifical/y ( as fpecified from the Covenant and Objed ) as di- ftind from Jewifli Righteoufnefs , or from all falfe waies, or all Mercenary meritorious works ( fo intended ) , or any manner that is no: fubordinate to Chrift, and implyed in Believing ] And thus your Antecedent is true , and your Confcquence ( in your fenfe of faith and works ) is falfe j Or clfe you mean [ the fame manner 2 in oppofition to any additional ad implyed in our firft believing as its neceffary Confequent. ] And thus your Minor or Antecedent is falfe. If you will not believe me, believe your felf, who as flatly fpake the contrary Doflrine, as ever I did , being not as it feemsin every Ledure of the fame thoughts J pag. 1 1 8. you write it for obfervation in a different Charader , thus [_ For though holy rvorks do nttjujiifie , yet by them a man 14 continued in a fi ate of Jufiification : fo that did not the Coven.int of grace interpofe, grofs and wicked ^aies would cut tjf our fu/i location , and put pu in a flute of Condemnation. J But becaufe you may avoid your own authority at pleafu^e many waies, I (hall give you a better authority that cannot be avoided. !. In our firft Juftification , we were not jujiifed by our words : but in our laft Juftification at Judgeraeni: we fhall, Ol'Ut. iz. 36,37. therefore they fo far differ in the man- ner. 2. In our fifft Juftification we were not juftified^;o«rft'<>r;('/-, but afterwards we are, in fome fenfe, or elfe '^ames fpoke not by the Spirit of God, ^nm. 2. 24. The Major is plain , in that the works of Abraham^ Rahab and fuch like , that lames fpeaks of, were not exiftent atthcic firft Juftification. 3. In (1^3) 3- Incur firftjuftification we are not Judged, ( and fo Jo- ftified ) occoriiyig to our rvorkj. But in the laft wc are ; therefore they differ in the manner. 4. In our firft Juftification we arc not juflified by the mouth of thcludge, in prefence parting 51 final irre^^r^lblc fentence on us : but in the laft wc are ; therefore they differ in the manner. 5. Our firft pardon is not given us on condition of our firft forgiving others : but the continuance is, LMjtth. 18. 3$* €^6.14,15. ^ 6. Our firft pardon is not given us i[ ^e cor.fifs our fms : ( For we may be pardoned without that ) : but the renewed or continuei pardon is, if we be called to it , i John 1.9. 7. Reconciliation and final Juftification is given to us in title, If we continne in the faith grounded an by whichheandatlare juftified. Repentance is works with them : And this is one of Gods Conditions of our pardon. The Love and Defire of Chrift our Saviour is works with them-.but thisis part of the faith that Paul was Juftified by. The hkel may fay of many ads of AfTenc , and other ads. Treat. Led. 24. p. 227. Argu. 4. Hethatijjafiifeii hyful^ falling a Qon^'uion^ though hi he thrtunto enabled hy grace ^ jet hi is jufl and righteous in himfelf '• But all jtt/lified ferfons , oi to 9 lujiification , are not right eons in themfelves, hut in Chrifi their Surety and Mediator. • y4»f^. 1. If this were true in your unlimited latitude. Inhe- rent Righteoufncfs were the certaincft evidence of damnation. For no man that had inherent Righteoufnefs,/. e. Sanguification, could be juftified or faved. £uc I am loth to believe that. 2. This Argument doth make as much againft them that take faith Om) Faith to be the Condition of Juftification, and fo look to be ju- ftified by it as a Condition , as againft them that make Repen- tance or Obedience the Condition : And it concludeth them all excluders of the true and only Juflification. J am lolh to dif- fent from you : but I am loather to believe that all thofc arc unjuftified , that take faith for the Condition of Juftificati- on. They are hard Condufions that your Arguments in- fer. 3. Righteoufncfs in a mans felf is either ^^//W;^, or Re- lative^ called imputed. As to the later , I maintain that all the juftified are Righteous in thcmfelves by an Imputed Relative Righteoufnefs^meritedfor thembyChrill , and given to them. And this belief I will live and die in by the grace of God. Qualitative ( and Active ) Righteoufnefs is threefold, i. That which anfwers the Law of works , [ Obey perfectly and live. ] 2. That which anfwers the bare letter of Mofes Law, (without Chrift the fenfcandend) which required an operous task of duty, with a multitude of facrifices for pardon of failings, { which were to be effectual only through Chrift tvhom the un- believing Jews under ftood not. ) 3 . That righteoufnefs which anfwers the Gofpel impofition R/peut and Believe. As to the firftofthcfe, A righteoufnefs fully anfwcring the Law of nature, lyield your Minor, and deny your Major. A man may be juftified by fulfilling the condition of the Gofpel which giveth us Chrift to be our Righteoufnefs to anfwer the Law, and yet not have any fuch righteoufnefs quilitative inhimfelf, as (hail anfwcr that Law. Nay it ncceffarily implyeth that he hath none: For what need he ro perform a Condition, for obtaminq fuch a Righteoufnefs by free gift from another, if he had it in himfelf. And as to the fecond fort of Righteoufnefs, I fay, that it is but a nominal righteoufnefs , confilling in a conformity to the Let- ter without the fcnfe and end, and therefore can juftife none ; bcfides that none fully have it. So that the A4ofiical Righteouf- nefs, fo far as is neceft^ry to men, is to be had in Chrift, and not in themfelves. But the performance by themfelves of the Go» fpel Condition, is fo far from hindringus fiom that gift* that without it none can have it. But then as to the third fort of righteoufnefs qnalitative, I anfwer , He that pcrformcth the R I Cofgeli (lid) Gofpel Condition of Repenting and Believing himfelf, is not therefore Righteous in him(elf with thacrightecurncfs qualita- tive which anfwereth the Law of works. But he that perform- eth the fiid Gofpel Conditions,is Righteous in himfelf. i. Qma- litativtly and afiively ^ with that righteoufncfs which anfwers the Golpel Conftitution, [_ He thAthtiieveth f^alUe/aved-tic':.] which is but a particular Righceoufnefs, by a Law of Grace, fubordinated to the other as the Condition of a free gifr. 2. And Relatively, by the Righteoufncfs anfwering the Law of Works, as freely given byChritton that Condition. This is evident, obvious, ncceflary, irrefragable truth , and will be fo after all oppofition. Treat, pag. 228. Tea I think, if it he velt weighed, it will bt found to heacontr/idi6iion ^ to fay they are Conditions , and jet a. Caufa fine qua non of our f unification \ for a caufa fine qua non , ii no Caufe at all : kut a Condition in a Covenant fir :tt I j taken-, hath a Moral efficiency^ and u a Caufa cum qua , not a fine qua non. Anfiv. I. You do but //^mi^/o J and that's no cogent Argu- ment. I think otherwife , and foyouareanfwered. 2. And Lawyers think otherwife, ( as is before (hewed, and more might be ) and fo you are over-anfwered. A Condition c^aa talis C which is the y?«^r/? acception j is no Caufe at all ; though the matter of it may be meritorious, among men, and fo caufal. If you will not believe me, nor Lawyers, nor cuftom of fpcech, then remember at leaft what it is thatL mean by a Condition ,• and make not the difference to lie where it doth not. Think not your felf founder in matter of Dodiine , but only in the fenfc of the Word Q Condition 3 ; but yet do fomewhat firft to prove that too • viz., that a Condition as fuch,hath a moral efficiency. Prove that if you are able. Treat, ib. If Adnm h^td flood. in hU intea^ritv^ though th.U con- firmation Vi>ould have been of grace ^ jet kis works wculd have been a caufiill (Condition of the hle\\e^nefs promifed. In the Covenant of Crace^ though Vehat nxin doth ii by the gift of God^ jet Uok^ Hpon the tkefami gift as our duty , and as a Condition , rvhichinottr fer- fons u ptrjormtd , This inferrethfome Moral Efficiency. An[w. I. See then ail you that are accounted Orthodox, the multitude of Proreftant Divines that have made either Faith or Repentance Conditions, what a cafe you have brought your felves into- And rt Joyce then all you that have ag.iinlt them maintained that the Covenant of Grace hath on our part no Conditions ; for your Caufe is better then fome have made you believe : and in particular, this Reverend Author. Yea fee what a cafe he hath argued himfelf inro , while he hath argued you out of the danger that you were fuppofcd in : i-or lie him- felf writeth againft thofc that make Repentance to be bttt a fign^ and deny it to ke a Condition to cjualifie tbefubjeEifor lajl fictition. Treat, of ^ujlif. pzrt. i. Le^. 20. And he faith thaz in fame grofs fins thtre are many Conditions requifite ( be fides humiliati- on ) rtithout rvbich pardon of fin cannot be obtained : and inftan- ceth in refiitmion. pag. 210. with many the like paf- fages. 2. Either you mean that Adams ft-orks would have been Caurall^«4lf««/a Condition performed, or elfe ^uatenus McriiO' rious ex natnra materia -, or fome Other caufe : The firft I ftill deny, and is it that you fhould prove, and not go on with na- ked affirmations : The fecond I will not yield you, as to the no- tion of meritoriou":, though it be nothing to our queftion. The fame I fay of your later inftance of Gofpel Conditions. Prove them morally efficient, ^ua tales, if you can. Treat, ib. Anifo^ though in words they deny, jet in died they do cxalc tpork^s to fome kind of caufnlity. Ar.f\^. I am pfrfwaded you fpeak not this out of malice : but is it not as unkind and unjufl, as if I fhould perfwade men that you make God the Author of fin indeed^ though you deny itinjfcjr^i ? I. What h&iht Deeds that you know my mind by to be contrary to my Wor^i ? Speak out, and tell the world.and fpare me not. But if it be words that you fet againft words, I. Why fhould you not bclieve'my Negations, as well as my (fup. Cu8) (fuppofed) affirmations. Am I credible only whenlfpcak amifs, and not at all when I fpeak right ? A charitable judgc- Hicntl 2. And which fliou d you take to be indeed my fenfe? A na- ked term K^ondition] expounded by you that never faw ray heart ? and therefore know not howl underftand it , further then 1 tell }0u j Or racher my f.v/j/f/'; expLcAtim of that term in a fenfe contrary to your fuppolicion. hear all you that are impartial, and judge \ I fay \_ -^ Condition u ko (^aufe] and J[_ Faith a*idRepe»tattce are Condi'.ioKs.'^ My Reverend Brother tells you now, that in n-ordl deny them to be efficient Caufes, buti-j t^ff^I makethem fu:h, tj*. 1 make them to be what I deny them to be. Judge between us,as you fee caufe. Suppofe 1 fay that [ Scripture t^ Sacred'] and withall I add that by Sa- cred^ I mean thatwhich is related to God, as proceeding from him, and feparated to him : and I plead Etyraologie, and the Authority of Authors, and Cuftom for my fpecch. if ray Re- verend Brother now will contradid me only as to the fitnefs of . the word, and fay thi^t facer fignificth only execrahUis,\ will not be offended with him, though I will not believe him : but fhould fogood and wife a man proclaim in print, thAZ facer (ignifieth only execrabilis , and therefore that though in rvordl call Scri- pture Sacred, yet in deed I make \i execrable ^ I fhould fay this were unkind dealing. What ! plainly to fay that a Verba/ con- troverfic is a Real one •, and that contrary to my frequent pub- lifbed profefTions / What is this but to fay, ivhitever hefai:h,I kno^ hi4 heart to be contrary. Should a man deal fo with your felf now, he hath fomewhat to fay for it : For you firfl pro- fcfs Repentance and Re/lirutiov to be a Conditim f as I do j and when you have done, profcfs Co/iditlons to hive a Mcr.-il Effici- ency ( which I deny } : But what's this to me , that am not of your mind ? Treat, pag. no. A fifth Arj^idment it that which fo much fcundf in all 'Book^s. If gjod workj be the fffctfl aid fruit of our fuffification, then they cannot be (^onditi)ns^or Caufa fine qua non of our lufl^ fixation. Bn^SfLQ. «y^nlw» I . I deny the Minor in the fenfe of your par:y ; Our firfl (up) firft Repentance , our firft defire of Chrift as our Saviour, »nd Love to him as a Saviour , and our firft difclaimingofali other Saviours,and our firft accepting him as Lord and Teacher, and as a Saviour from the Power of fin, as well as the guilt ; all thefe are works with you • and yet all thcfe are not theef- fedsof our Relative Juftificationj nor any of them. 2. As to External ads and Confequent internal afls, I deny your Confequence, taking it of continued or final Juftitication ; though I eafily yield it as to our Juflification at the firft i . All t*ie ads of juftifying faith, befidcs the firft ad, are as truly cffedsof our firft Juflification as our other graces or gracious ads are. And doth it therefore follow that they can be no Conditions of our continued Juflification ? Why not Condi- tions as well as Inftrumcnts or Caufes ? Do you think that on- ly the firft inftantaneous ad of faith doth juliifie, and no other afcer through the courfe of our lives ? 1 prove the contrary^ fromtheinfianceof Abraham: It was not the firft ad of his faith that P^w/mentioneth when he proveth from him Juftifica- tion by faith. As its no good Confequence [ Faith afterward ii the tjfe^ of Iu(iification before ; tkirefore it cannot afterward jujiifie, or be a CoKdition. ] So its no good Confequence as to Repentance, Hope, or Obedience. 2. It only follows that they cannot be the Condition of that Juftification whereof they are the effed, and which went before them (which is granted you.) But it follows not that they may not be the Condition of conti- nued or final Juftification. Sucking the breft, did cot caufe life in the beginning: therefore it is not a means to continueit : It ' followeth no,t. You wefl teach that the Juftification at the laft Judgement is the chief and raoft eminent Juftification. This hath more Conditions then your firft pardon of fin had, yea as many as your falvation hath, as hath been formerly proved, and may be proved more at large. Treat, pag 230. Bjf this we may fee that more things are re- 4}U\redto our Salvation^ then to our lufiificatiou j to be pojfeffors of heaven , and ( thM it pjould be ) to entitle m thert" to. (I30) Anfif. I. Ttstrue,as toour firft Juftifying ; and ics true ts to our pvefent continued ftacc : becaufc perfeverance is ftill rc- quifite CO faWation. But its not tiueas toour final fentcntial ju'hfication : i here is as much on our part required to that, as to falvation it felf. i . The promife makes no difference. 2. The nature of the thing doth put it part doubt. Iror what is our fi- nal Juftihcation, but a Determination of the Queftion by pub- lick fcntence, on our fide , Whether vce have Right tofaivatUn w not ? The 25 • of Matthev (hews the whole. 2.1 argue againft you from your own Dodrine here, thus ; If Juftificationbeitthat gives us Right or Title to falvation, then that which is the Condition of our Right to falvation , is the Condition of our Juftification : the Antecedent here is your own Dodlrinc, and is partly true : And the Confequcnce is undcnyable; whereto I add, QBut the Doing of Chrifls Comraandmencs is the Condition of our Right to falvation : therefore alfo of our Right to Juftification, w«. as Confum- rnate. The Minor I prove, from Rev. 22. 14. Blejfed are they that do hid CommandemeMts^ that they ntaji have Eight to the tra of life, andmaj enter ini%iC.~\ TVhofoeverJhallcallon the MMme of the Lordjhallifefaved, Rom. 10. 13. Ads 2. 1 1. We are fa- ved by hspe, Rom. 8. 24. Whofo "^alketh uf rightly pjall befaved^ Prov. 28. 18. BAptifmdothfaveus^ i Pet. 3. 21. [ /« doir,gtHs thou pjall beth fave thj felf and them that hear thee. ~\ l fim. 4. 16. If he [^h^venot ^orkj , can fttith fave him ? J lames 2.14. Treat, ib. Its true, that Inflification cannot be vcntinue^ina man^unlefs hecor,tni4e iv goodworkj : ITetfoy-all that y they are not Conditions of h'^ luflijiccnion : they are ^lualifioatioiis and 'Dcterm-ndt'ons of tht Jubjefl who i^ jfsflified '^ but no Cor.ditiont tff hit luflificfition. As in the gener/ition of man. (^c. Light id necejf.rily re(jHlred-, and drynef ^ Oi qualties in fire , jet. Sec. A»fx>. I Its well you once moreconfefs that the thing is ne- cc-ffiry I C^ur quelhonthcnisoiily of the nature, and reafon of that neceflicy ? Whether it htnecijfttai raedti ad fiiew,^s to the (I30 tht continuance or confummation of our Juftification? This r hops you will never deny. If meoi'\ then what meAium'\%'\t} not a caufe. If not acondlcion, ihen cell us what, if you can. '• econdly, You fay nothing to the purpofe, when you give us Inftanccs of Natural properties and qualifications. For bc- fides that fon[ie of them arc net mtdia ( as Light to burning ) the reft that arc wtdia^ arc T/I^^y/M/// neceffary adfinem: But Firft, Wc arenotdifcourfingof Phyficks , and Phyfical neccf. fities ; but of Morals, and moral neccflity. Secondly, You caa- not here pretend f or at leaft prove ) that there is an abfolutc Phyfical iiccefliicy adfinem to every one of the things in queftion to their end. Thirdly, Much lefs that ths is the neareft rcafon o( their Intercft, and that God bath not morally fu- peridded the necefsity of a Condition by his Conftituti- on. I prove that the necefiity is moral. Firft, U is impofcd by way of Precept, which caufeth a moral ncceflity. Secondly, The Precept hath varied at the pleafure of God , there being more Duties now, then formerly were, and fome ceafed that were then impofed. Yea, That its a condition having neceflity adfinem, isevi- denr. Firft, Bccau'c it is rhe wtfd'w;>r<»w»^<7«/j' impofed onus by God as Promifer in a conditional form of words, as neceflary to our attaming of the benefit prom'.fed. [ // thott co»fe(s VPtth thy mcuth the Lord fefnSy and h Iteve in thj heart thut God raif- ed him from the dead^thouflja't be [AVtd ^ Rom. 10.9. If jot* forgive me*> their trefpalfes, jour heavenlj Father i^ilt forgive jou^ &LQ. ] AUt. 64. 15. Secondly, And it is not of Phyfical necelsi y ; for then God could not f^ve u? without \i, but by a Miracle. Whereas he favcd men before Chrift by believing in a il<^*j//j*» in generaljWithoutbel'veing that this jefus is he, and without believing thar he was actually conceived by the Holy Ghoft, born of the Virgin '/ary, was crucified, buried , rofe again, afcended, r^rc Aid he faveeh Infants^ that themfclves believe not a: all ; fo that ivhcn you fay it is a hat fort, if not conditions ? Treat, pag. 231. The Jixth ^rgumerJ : If Jufiifi'^ation ve h) ^orks asaconaitioa , then one mxn is more or lefs fujiifed then anothtr j and thofe wor^s are reejuired to one mans fftfii fixati- on whch are not to another, (o that there pjullnot be two godl) men in the >X>orld fujiified alike. For if faith Jufitfied as a workj then he that had aflrongerfaith^ would h more faflified then he that hath a fceak^r. Anf'f^er. Firft , I grant the conclufion , if you had taken Works in PWi fenfc, for theworksof ahirling, or any that are fuppofed to juftifieby their value. Secondly, I deny your firft confequence ; And I give you the reafon of my denyal ( I hope a little better then yours for the proof of it ) Firft, It \i not i\\t degree oi Repentance or Obe- dience that is made the Condition of our continued and final. Juftification : but the Sincerity. Now the fincerity is the fame thing in one as in another ; therefore one is no more juftified. hereby then another. Secondly, You might as well fay, that different degrees o( faiths make different degrees of Juftifica- tion. But that is not juft, becaufe it lies all on the fincerity;. therefore it is as unjuft here for the fame reafon. Your Reafon is fuch as I expcded not from you. [ For if Faith ( fay you ) juftif-e as a work^ \ But who faith it doth ;«- jiifie as a work^ ? Your Reader that fufpefteth nothing ^^but fair in your words, may think I do; when I have again and again in rfrw/»«difavowedit. And do you think it is a cogent rea- fon indeed, [^ // workj or faith jufiifie as a conditions, there ^ill he various degrees offujiification : Becaufe if it ju/lifie as a work, there will he various degree}. ] The reafon of the Confequence is as ftrange to me , as ill bnKg'm ajtijii- ficationt^o ^a'les, or make a tveofotd Ju/}ificatio», whereof one will be ntedlefs. For thfy grant an ImfntAtion of Chrift s Right e- oufnefi in refpt^ cf the Law ; he falfil/edthat^ and fat is fled Cods J ft (lice i thit the Ln\^ cannot accufe tts- ^^nd be fides thai ,they make an Evangelical perfonal Righteoufnefs by our ovpk £van- gelical workj. Now cert i in I j this later is rvholly [uperfltispcs ; for if Chrijts RighteoHfinefs be abundantly able to fatisfie for all that righteotifiefs^hich the La^ retjuireth of us ; '^hat is the matter that it removethnot all our Evangelical failings ^ a-'dfup- fly that righieoufnefs aljo? furelytbis is to make the ^ars p.iney ^hen the Sun is in itsfuHluftre. Thus it may be obferved^ \\>hi/e men for feme feeming difficulty avoid the good known way cf truths the J dj commpulj bring in C^jfertions of far more difficulty S 3 ri>' C'34-) to te received. lu this cafe its far more eajie to mdintMn one Jingle RighteoHjnefi^ viz. the Obedience of onr Lord Chriji^ thentomal^e t^o, &c. -^k/w. Firft, This twofold Righteoufnefs is fo far from be- ing needlefs, that all (hall perifli in cverlafling torment that have not both. I doubt not but you have both your felf; and therefore do but argue wich all this confidence againft that which you muft be faved by, and which you carry within you. As if you (liould argue that both a heart and a brain are needlefs, and therefore certainly you have but one. But the beft is» con- cluding you have but one, doth not really prove that you have but one ; for if it did, it would prove you had neither j and then you were but a dead man in one cafe, and a loft man in the other. Firft, Did ever any man deny the neceflky of inhe- rent Righteoufnefs , that was called aProteflant.^ Obje^f But thats nothing to its ncceffity to Juftification. e^w/tt'. Firft, Its the very being of it that you plead againft as needlefs, if your words are intelligible. 2ly. Itsasgrofs acontradiftion to talk of a Righteoufnefs that makes not righteous, or will not Juftifie in tantum, according to its proportion, as to talk of wbitnefsthat makes not white, or Paternity that makes not a father, or any form that doth not inform,or is a form, and ts rot a form. Secondly ,If there be two diftind Laws or Covenanrs^then there isa necefsity of two dftinft HighteoufnefTc* to our JufttHcatian. But the Antecedent is certain. I fuppofe it will be granted that Chrifts righteoufnefs is ncceffary to anfwer the Law of works. J^.ndl (hall further prove that a perfonal righteoufnefs given from Chrift jsnccelTary to fulfil! the condition of the new Cove- rant or Law of Grace, btLeve and be faved ^SiC. Thirdly, Chiiftdid rot himfelf /«//7// the condition of the Gofpel for an/ man, nor fatisficfor his final non-performance ; therefore he that will be faved, mu(V perform it himelf or pe- ri(h. '1 hat Chrift performed it not in perfon, is paft doubt. It was not confi'tent wirh his ftate and perfeftion tor(-pentof fin, who had none to repent of ^ roreturnf om fin to'^od, who never fell from him; to beleve in Chrift Jc-fu% that is to ac- cept himfelf as an offered Saviour, and to tske himfelf as a Savi- our I C3'0 our to himrdf, that is,is one that redeemed himfelf from fin,to deny his own righteoufnefs, toconfefshis fm^ to pray for par- don of it, &c. Do you ferioufly believe that Chrift hath done this for any man ? For my part, I do not believe ic. Secondly, Thar he that hath not fatisfied for any mans final predominant Infidelity and Impenircncy, ) know you will grant, becaufey^u will deny that be dyed for any fin of that perfon f or at leaft, your party will deny ir. ) Thirdly, All that iliall be faved,do adually perform thefe conditions themfclves. I know you will confcfsir, that none (adult) but the Pentcenr, Bel. cvcrs, Holy, (hall be faved.This fort of Righteoufnefs therefore is of neceflity. Fourthly, The Benefits of ^^^hnlh obedience and death are made over to men by a conditional P.omife, Deed of gifc^or aft of oblivion. Therefo e the condition of that Grant or Aft mui' be found beforeany man canbe iuftifiedbythe righ. teoufncfs of C hrift. It is none of yours till you repent and be- lieve : therefore you muft have the perfonal Righteoufnefs of faith and repentance, in fubordination to the imputed righte- oufnefs, that it may be yours. And will yeu again conclude, that [ Ceru'mly this later tj Wh^>/i)'/tfpnfiu^l>ts.'^R^ith not God faid ? ]Hethat bclievtih^ Poallbt JAVtd \ and he thai bUieveth not, pjaU be damned.'] And Repent and be converted^ th it jonr fins ma.y be bhttedottt. &c. ~] Is it not ncccffary that chefe be done then, both as duty commanded, and as a condition or fome means of the end propounded and promifed ? And is this whollv'fuperfluoui? In Judgement, if you be accufed to have beeii finally impenitent, or an Infidel, wjl' vpu not plead yonc perfona! faitb and repenrance, to juftifie yOTragainft that accu- fation ? or fhill any be faved that faith, [] / did not refsnt or btlici'f^ b:it C^nft did for me ? ]] If it be faid that [_ C hrifis fa- tisf.iSiion id fujficient ; but vhats that to tbee that jierformedji not the conrUtiom of bti Covenant, and therefore hajl no pjyt in it . ? J Will yo J not produce your faith and repentance for your Juiti- ficition agiinll this charge, and (o to prove your Intereft in Chrift? Nay is it like to be the great bufinefs of th\c day to enquire whether Chrift have done his pirt orno ? or yet to enquire, whetherthe world were finncrsl* or rather to judge them according to the terms of grace which were rcvealetJi so* Ci3<5) to them, and lo try whether they have part in Chrift or norland to that end, whether they believed, repented, loved him in his members, improved his Talents of Grace. or not ? Or can any thing but the want of this perfonal righteoufnefs then hazard a mans foul ? But you ask [ Jf Chrifisrlgtoteottfntfs he ahlt to [atvfie^vehat u the matter that it removeth not all our Evangelical failings / /&c.]/^»/>r.Eithcr you ask this qucRion as of Sl penitent 'Believer, or the finally impenitent Unbeliever . If of the former, 1 fay, Fir[\, All his fins Chrifts righteoufnefs pJrdoneth and coveretb j and confequently ail the failings in Gofpel dutie«. Secondly, But his predominant final Impenitency and Infidelity Chrift pardoneth not, becaufe he is not guilty of it; he hath none fuch to pardon j but hath the perfonal righteoufnefs of a per- former of the conditions of the Gofpel; And for the finally impenitent Infidels, theanfweris, becaufe they rejcfted that Righteoufnefs which was able to fatisfie, and would not return to God by him^indfonot performing the condition of pardon, have neither the pardon of that fin, nor of any other which were conditionally pardoned to them. If this Doftrine be the avoiding the good known way, there is a good known way befides that which is revealed in the Gofpel .* And if this be fo hard a point for you to receive, IblefsGod, it is not fo to me. And if it be far more eafie to maintain one iinglc righteoufnefs, viz.. imputed only ^ it w»ll not prove fo f fay fo> and'you fay more then we that you condemn> and fall under all thofe ccnfures thsit per fas aut nefas aj:€ caft upon us. If it be no caufe of pardon ; Is it a con- dition fine qti* non^ as to that manner of pardoning that youc prayer doth intend ? If you fay yea, you confequemially recant your difputation ( or Leflure ) and turn into the tents of the Opinionifts. But if it be no condition of pardon , then tell us what means it is if you can. If you fay, it is a duty. I anfwer, Duty and Means are commonly diftinguiflied, and fo is necejfitas practpti & medii. Duty as fucb, is no means to an end, but the bare ifefult of a command. Though all Duty that God comraandeth is alfo fome means, yet that is notf«4 Duty. And fo far as that Duty is a means, it is either a Captfe, (near or remote) or a Condition ^ either of the obtain ment of the benefit, fimply, or of the more certain, or fpeedy, or eafic attainment of it, or of obtaining fome inferiour good, that conduceth to the main. So that ftill it is a Caufe or a Con- dition, if a means. If you fay, lus^n Antecedey.t. 1 fay. ^«4 /^/f, that isvio means, but if a A^rcr/rir^ antecedent, that which isthereafon of ics neceflity may make ic a means. If you go to Phyricalprcrequifit€s(as yoatalkt of a mans llioulders bear- T 2 ing iflg the head that ht may fee, ^c. ) yan go ^A'/n^ */V*^ ; Tr» a moral means chat we treat of, and I tliink you will not affirm Prayer to be a mear s of phyfical necefliiy to pardon. If it were, it muftbe a Phyfical caufe, near or remote, or a Difjofiti^ ihAtina of natural necefljty, &c. If you fay , that prayer for pardon, is ciifpofiiio fuhjeEli^ I anlwcr, thats it that we Opinionifls do arfirm : But it is a dlfp^fitto mcralu^ and necefla- ry Ht intd'iHm aci finem : and that neccllity muft beconflitured by the Promifer or Donor : ar>d that can be only by his rffcdus pro' rnijfionis , which makes it in fome meafure or other a condition of th« thing promife4. S'othatther-eis rtjeElio»\ hj fajing , th(tt Cjojpl graces^ tvhich are the Conditions of the Cove- rant^ are redncible to the L^ar^ ani fo Chrifi in I at is f) in (r the L-irVy dcth remove the imperfedions cleaving to thent : And they juige it abfurdtofay, thit Chrift hath fatisfied for the fins of the ftcond Covenant y or breaches .^ which is f aid lo he onl) fin^il tsn- belief. Anfrfi. As this is brought in by head and flioulders , fo is ic recited lamely, without the neceffary diftindions and cxplicati- T 3 ons / (14-2-) onsadjoyned, yea without part of the Sentence ic fclf : and therefore unfaithfully. Treat. But this a<^fwer may be c a lied Legion ; for many err our $ and co»iraitftwns are tn it. i . Hovf can JHJhfjin^ faith qua talis in the afi of f^flifytrtg^ and Rep:tttatice , he reAncible duties to the Lxvf taken JtrtU:lj } indeed as it tpoa in a large fenfe discovered to thefeWf^hein^ the (Covenant of Qrace ^ at I have elfe^irhere pro- ved ( Vindic. Lcgis ) Jo »■ required fuliifjing Faith and Rep en- tar.ce. 3Ht take tt in the fenfe as the Abettor of this opinion mu[l: do J jfsflifjing faith ami repentance mnfi be called the workj of the Lav/. Anftv. Its eafilier called Legion then faithfully reported, oc folidly confuted, i. Let the Reader obferve how muchi in- curred the difpleafure of Mr. Blake ^ for denying the Moral Law to be the fufficient or fole Rule of all duty, and how much he hath faid againfl me therein ; and then fudge how hard a task it is to pleafe all men : when thefe two neighbours and friends, do publikely thus draw me fuch contrar/ waies , and I roaft be guilty of more then ordinary errour whether I fay Yea or Nay. And yet ( which is the wonder ) they ditF^r not among thcra- felves. 2. But feeing your ends dired you to fetch in this contro- vcrfie, fo impertinent to the reft , its requifite that the Abettor do better open his opinion, then you have done , that the Rea- der may not have a Defence of he knows^t what. My opinion fo ofc already explained in other writings, is this. 1 . That the Law of Nature as continued by the Mediator, is to be diftinguifhed from the Remedying Law of Grace , call- ed the N€W Teftamentj the Promifc, &e. ( Whether you will call them two Laws , or two parts of one Law, is little to the purpofe , feeing in fome refpsd they are two, and in fome but one. ) 2. That this continued Law of Nature hath its Precept and SanSion, ordothconftitutetheDuenefs, i. Of Obedience in general to all that God hath covimanded or (hall command. 2. And 0+5) 2. And of many duties in particular, g. And of everlafting death as the penalty of all fin. So that it faith , The ^aget of (in ii tieath. 3. That to this is affixed the Remedying Law of Grace, like an ad of Oblivion, which doth i. Reveal certain points to be believed. 2. And command the belief of them, with other particular duties in order to its ends. 3. And doth offer Chrift, and Pardon, and Life , by a Conditional Donation en- ading th?.t whofocver will Repent and Believe (hill be Juftified, and perfevering therein with true obedience, (hall be finally ad' judged to everlafting life, and poffcffed thereof. Its tenor is* He that Repentech andBelieveth (hall be faved , and he that doth not fhall be damned. * 4. That the fcnfe of this Promife and Tbreatning is, Hs that Reptfjteth and'Believeth at alUn this life , though but at the laft hour^jljdl he f^ved ; ayid he th^^t doth stnotatallJlyMlhe damned. Or he that iifound a J^enitent Believer at death j 8cc. And not, he that believeth not today or tomorrow (hill be damned, though afterward he do. 5. That the threatning of the Law of Nature was not at firit Peremptory and Remedilefs ; and that now it is fo far Re-- medycd, as that there is a Remedy at hand for the difTolvingof the Obligation^ which w.ll be e fecSual as foon as the Condimon: i$ performed. 6. That the Remedying Law of Grace , hath a peculiar pe- nalty, that is, I. Non-liberation, A privation of Pardon and life which was offered (For that's now a penal privation-, which if there had been no Saviour, or Promife , or Offer, would have been but a Negation. ) 2. The certain Remedilcf- nefs of their mifcry for the future , that there fliall be no mo'cc facrifice for fin. 3. And whether alfo a greater degree of pu-» ni(hmenr, I leave to confideration. 7. I ftill diftinguiftied between the Precepts and the Sanfiion oF the Law of Grace or New Covenant, and between fin as itrcfpeAeth both :And fol faid,that Repentance and ?ai:h in Chrift (even as a means to Juftification;) arecomraandcd »«//>«■»- cisin the Gofpei, which conftiruteth them duties, but co mm and- €il confequenily ingsnsrt- intheiaw of nature'. under the ge— CiH) neral of Obedience to all parcicuUr precepts : and whether al- fo the Law of Nature require the duty in fpecie ^ fuppv^fing •Jod to have made his uipernatural preparations in pr.M'iding and propounding the objeds, 1 left to enquiry. Accordingly 1 affirmed that laipcnitency and loii.^elity , thojgh afterward Repented of, as alfo the Imperfcdions ot :ruc i'Mih and repen- tance, are fins againft the Genera! j;>rcteptof tl:t Law of Na- ture , and the fpecial precept of the Law of Grace, and that Chrilt dyed for them, and th?y are pardoned through his blood, upon condition of fincere Repentance and Fai.h. 8. Accordingly diftinguifliing between the rtfped that fin hath to the precept and prohibition on one fide , and to the promifc and thi eatn.ng on the other, I affirmed, that the forefaid Impe- nitency and Infidelity that are afterwards repented of, and the Impertedions of true Faith and Repentance anc condemned by. the Remediable threatning of the Law of Nature only , and that the per fon is not under the Adual obligation of the pe- culiar Threatning of the Law^of Grace ; thar.is , that though as to the Gofpcl Trecept ^ihek fins may be agf.inft the Gofpcl as well as the Law, yet as to the Threatnng , they are not fuch violations of the New Covenant, as bring men undtr irs adual curfe J for then they were remedilef-t And therefore I faid, that its only final! mpenitencyahd Unbelief, as final, that fofubjeSs men to that Curfc or Remedilefs pereraptory fentence. The reafon is, becaufe the Gofpe! maketh Repenting and Believing at any time before death, the Condition ofpromifed pardon: and therefore if God by dtath make not the contrary impeni- tency and unbelief final , it is not that which brings a man un- der the Rcroedilefs Curfe ; (except only in cafe of the Blaf- phemy againft the Holy Ghoft, which is ever final. ) 9- Accordingly 1 affirm that Chrift never bore, or intended to bear the peculiar Curfe of his own Law of Grace, i. As not fuffering for any mans final impcnitency and unbelief,wbich is proved in his Golpel con-Titution , which giveth out pardon only on Gcndition of Faith and Repentance : and therefore the non- performance of his Condition is exprefly excepted from all pardon, and confcquendv from the intended fatisfadion, and price of pardon, z. In that,he did not bear that fpecies of puniflimcnr, (i4T) punifliraent, as peculiarly appointed by the Cofpel, vU. To be denyed Pardon, Juftificacion and Adoption, and to be Remedi- lefs in mifery, &c, lo. Alfo I faid , that all other fins are pardonable on the Cofpel Conditions j but the non- performance ( that is, final ) of thofe Conditions is cvcrlaftingiy unpardonable (andcon- fequently no fin pardoned for want of them. ) Reader,this is the face of that Doftrine which Reverend Bre- thren vail over with the darknefs and confufion of thefc Gene- ral words ; that I fay , [ C^riji hath not fatisHeti far fins a^ainfi tht fecond Covtnant.'\ And all ihcfe explications I am fain to trouble the world with, as oft as they are pleafed to charge mc in that confufion. But what remedy ? This is the Legion of CD* tours and contradiftions •, which I leave to thy impartial Judge* ment, to abhor them as far as the Word and Spirit (liall con- vince thee that they are erroneous, and to blcfs thofe Congre- gations and Countries that are taught to abhor them,and to re- joyce in their felicity that believe the contrary. Treat, pag. 2 55- ». If fo , then the W/ the Covenant of Grace ? our unthankfulnefsj unfruit- fulnefs^ yeafometimes With Vettr^ our grievous revolts andapojlo/m cles ; PPhat are thefe but the fad fjakjngs of our (^ovenant-intt refty though they donotdtffolveit ? But it is not my purpofe to fall on thfd^ becaufe of its impertinency to my matter in hand. Anfiv, I rather thought it your purpofe to fall upon it, though you confefs it impertinent to your matter in hand. For 1 thought you had purpofed before you had Trinted or Preachy id. Reader , I fuppofc thee one that hath no pleafure in dark- nefs , and therefore wouldft fee this intolerable errour bare- faced. To which end , befides what is faid before , underftand , 1. That I ufctodiftingullhbetweena threefold breach of the Covenant, i . A fin againft a mecr prectpt of the Gofpel,which.^ precept may be Synecdochically called the Covenant. 2. A fin againft our owwProwf/f to God when we Covenant with him. 3. A violation of Godsconflitution , Q Believe and be fwed , and he that believeth not JhaH be damned ^ making us the proper fubjcdsof its AdlualCurfeor Obligation to its peculiar pu- nifhment. 2, On thefe diftindions I ufetofayas followeth ; J. That Chrift fuflft-red for our breaches of Gofpel precepts. 2. And for our breaches of many promifes of our own to God, 3. And for our temporary non-performance of the Gofpel Cofldicions,; which left usundcr a non-hberation for that time, (and C '47 ) ( and therefore we had no freedom from fo much as was execu- ted. ) 4. But not for (ucb violation of the New Covenant, or Law of Grace, as makes us the actual fub/ects of its Curfe or Obhgation to Remedilefs punifhment. Thefe are my ufnal limi- tations and explications. A nd do I need to fay any more now in defence of this opinion, which my Reverend B rothcr faith is not to be endured ? i. Is it a clear and profitable way of teach- ing to confound all thefe,under the general name of Covenant- breaking ? 2. Or is it a comfortable Doctrine, and like to make Congregations blefled , that our defects of repentance , un- fruitfulnefs, and unthankfulnefs, &c. are fuch violations of the Law of Grace , or the Conditions of the Gofpel , as bring us under its actual obligation to Remedilefs punilhment ? That is, in plain Hnglidi) to fay, We (hall all be damned. Treat, ib. Argument 9. ^f ^orh bt a condition of our Jufii' fication^ then mttft the godlj foul be filUd ^ith perpetual doubts ■, and troubles t whether it be dperfonjuftifiedpr no. This doth not follow Accidentally through mans perverfnefs from the fore^ndmed 'Dc^rine : but the very Genius^/ it tends thereunto. For if 4 Condition be net performed, then the mercy Covenanted caunot be claimed : At in faith ; if a mtn do not believe, he cannot fay y Chrifi with his bent fits are hi^. Thus if he have not warkj ■> the Condition U not performed, but (lillhe continueth without this be- ntft. Rut for ^orks •, How (hall J know when I have the full number of them ? fVhether it the Condition of the fpecies or indi- Viduums of works ? I snot onekiffdof work^ omitted ^ben its rt-j duty, enough to invalidate my fujlification ? li'i/l it not be at dangerous to omit that one as all ^ feeing that one is required At a Condition ? ♦ Anfr, Your Argument is an unproved Affertion, not having any thing to make it probable, i ■ Belief in Chrift as Lord and Teacher, is ^cri^/ with the Opponents. Why may not a man know when he believeth in Chrift as King and Prophet , and is his Difciple, as well as when he believeth in him as Prieft ? 1. Repentance is f^tfr/^/ alfo with the Opponents. Why may not a man know when he Repenceth, as well as whc;n he belie- veth. U 2 3. Do Ch8) 3. Do you not give up the Proteftant caufc here" to the Pa- piftsin the point of certainty of falvation ? We tell them that we may be certain that our faith is fincere. And how ? why by its fruits and concomitants , and that wc take Chrift for Lord as well as Saviour, or to fave us from the power of fin as well as the guilt ? And is it now come to that pafs that thefcxannot be known ? What not thefignsby which faith it felfltfbuld be known, and therefore (hould btnotiora ? This it is to eye man > and to be fee upon the making good of an opini- on. 4. Let all Proteflants anfwer you, and I have anfwered you. How ^ili thtj knot* when they Repent and Belteve;»hen they have ferjormed the full of thefe ? believed all jtecejfary Truths ? /fr- fented of all fins that muji be Repented of ? fVhether it be the fpe- oi^i or individual a^s of theft that are necejfary / fVtll not the §miffion of Repentance for one fin invalidate it ? Or the om'tjjion of many individual alls of faith i are not thofe ads conditions} ice. Anfwer thefe, and you are anfwered. 5. But I (hall anfwer you briefly for them and me. Its no impoflible thing to know when a man fincerely believeth, re« penteth and obeyetb , though many Articles are ElTential to the AfTenting part of faith, and many finsjnuft be Repented of, and many duties mufl be done. God hath made known to us the BfTentials of each. It ii not the Degree of any of them , but the Truth that is the Condition. Afiian that bath imperfect Repentance, Faith and Obedience , may know when they arc fincere, notwithftanding the imperfe6tions. Do you not believe this ? Will you not maintain it againft a Papift when you are returned to your former temper P what need any more then tobefaidof it? 6. Yo.ur Argument makes as much agiinft the making ufe of thefe by way of bare figns, as by way of Conditions, For an unknown fign is no fign to us. 7. And how could you over-look it, that your Argument flyeth too boldly in the face of Chrift , and many a plain Text of Scripture? Chrift faith, John 15.10, Jf je keep my Com- mandmentst ye fijall abide in my love , even at I have kspf , &c. 14. Teare my friends i if ye do what fotver J command j on tM&t. 7.2U 7. II. Not every OMi that faith Lord^ Lord^ Jhall enter into the Kingdom of heaven^ but he that doth the »iU of my Father which u in heaven, 23,24. ff^ofoever heareth thefe fajings ofmine^ anci doth them. Sec. Mat. 5. throughout, verfc 20. Except your righteoufnefs exceed the right eoufnefs of the Scribes)ind Pharifees^ Jfe Jhall in no cafe enter into the Kingdom of heaven, i John 3, 10. ^n this the children of God are manifefi > and the children of the Devil : vfhofocver doth not righteoufnefs u not of God , neither he that loveth not hu br other. "^ An hundred fuch paflages might be cited. And will you meet all thefe with your objtdions, and fay, [ tlove fhall I k»orP ^hen I have the full number .' &c. ~] Know that you hivefincere Faith, Repentance and Obedience, and you may know you perform that Condition of the Gofpcl : elfe not. Treat, pag. 236. That if good Works be a Condition of fj^fli- fieation, then none are jujiifiid till their death; becanfe in every good work.is required perfeverance^ info much that perfeverance u that to vthichthe promife is made , Mat. 24. 6. Heb. 10. 38. Rev. 2. 7, 20. So that it is not good \\>orkjfimply , but per fevered in that u retfuired : and therefone no ^uflification to the end of our daitSt fo that we cannot have any peace with (jod till then. Nd- thtr doth it avail to fay, Juflifcation is not compleat till then ; for it cannot be at all till then^ btcaufe the (Condition that gives life to all is not till then. e^w/W, I. And is not perfeverance in faith as neceflary as perfeverance in obedience ? Read ^ol. 1.23. fohn 15, ^,^,&c. and many the like, and judge. Will you thence infer that none are juftified till death ? 2. But a little rtep out of the darkncfs of your Confufion , will bring the fallacy of your Argument to the light, and there will need no more to it. The Gofpel conveyeth to us fcvcral benefits : feme without any Condition, and feveral benefits on (c eral Conditions, i . Our firft Adual pardon and Juftificati- on, and right to life, is given on Condition of our firft Faith and Repentance : and not on Condition of External works of Obe- dience, nor yet of pcrfevering in faith it fclf, much iefs in thac U 3 Obedienct. I Obedience. 2. Oar (late of Juftificatlon is continued on con-' ditioncf the continuance of Faich and Rcpemance, with fin- cere Obed;ence. 3. Our particular following fins have a par- ticular pardon, on Condition of the Continuance of the habits and renewing of the aft$ of that faich and repentance, for known obferved fins. 4. Our full Juftification by Sentence at Judgement, is on the fame condition as Glorification, vi<.. On perfeverance in Faith, Repentance, Hope, Love and fincerc Obedience. Prove now if you can that perfeverance is the Condition of our firft pardon. Prove if you can that final perfeverance is the Condition of our continuance in a juftirted ftate till now. You fay, J unification and peace cannot be ours till the condition be performed. But what condition ? of that gift ? or of another gift? If of that, its granted ; but its ftill denyed that perfeve- rance is any of the Condition of our firft pardon ? If of ano- ther gift ; its no reafon of your Confequence. I f you fpeak of final Juftification and Salvation, I grant you all thus far, that you have no full Right of polTeffing them but on perfeverance ; nor no Right at all, or certainty of Salvation , but on fuppo- fition of perfeverance as neceffary to the pofTeflion. And there- fore if you can prove that we have no certainty of perfeverance, 1 will yield chat we have no certainty of falvation. Treat. Thus Vre hdve ajferted this truth hj many ArgU" Mints ; and though any one finglj hj it [elf may not convince , jet altogether »M}Jatijfie — ■* NoVp to the great OhjeSlt- ' em Anf». I heartily wifti that wifer Readers may find more truth and fatisfa(Sion in them'then lean do, if it be there to be found ; and CO chat end that they make their beft of them all. Treat. James /^«r/5>, Abraham was jttfttfied hy W(?;'j^/— — '• [0 that in outward appearances thefe two great ApoJIl^i fpeak^ cor.' tradiclionf^ which hath made feme deny the Canonical author ttyi)f Id^mtis Efiftle. Tea one /aid iflafphemeujly, AkhAme'ivius, Men- ciris Jacobe in caput iuum.Bftt this ia to crtt,not nmic the hot. — i.Tht I. Tht fcope of the Apoflle Paul u to treat upon our fuflificatton before God , and what u tht Inftrument and means of obtaininf^ it' — 'Bfit the Apoftle JKinti takes f unification for tht "Declara- tion and Maniftfiation of it before men, Anf"^, This is not the only fenfc of James ( as I have proved before, to which I refer you ) no oor any pare of the fenfe of the word fufiification with him , chough he mention fie^ing faith by works to men^ as an argument for his main conduHon , yec he nowhere expoundeth the word JuftiHcation by ic. fames expreOy fpeaks of Imputation of Righceoufnefs by God, and of that Juftification which is meant in the words of Qen. concern- ing Abraham^ even the fame words that Fk^k7iu "•. is a verb, and i^ynv is a noun, and fo of the reft j bnt he war- ranteth you to fay fo without any unjuft addition fuppoHng that Grammer fo call them ; If the Scripture fay, that God erf Med the Heavens and the earthen doth not fay here in terms, that God was the efficient caufe : but it warranteth you to fay fo .- If it fay, that Chrift dyed for us, and was a Sacrifice for our iins, and hath obtained eternal redemption for us ; yet it faith not that he is the meritorious caufe, or the material caufe of our Juftification ; But it will warrant you to fay fo, without the guilt of unjuft additions. If you may fay as a Grammarian and aLogiiian,, when you meet with fuch words in Scripture, \_ Thefe arc Paronyma , and thefe Synohyma , and thefe Homonyma, and this is an univerfal, that a lingular, that a particular, and that an indefinite ; this is an efficient caufe^that a material, formal or final • this is a noun, that a verb,the other a participle (ijO participle or an adverb ; I pray you then why may not I fay, when I read in Rom, lo. 9. th^\.[_lf than cor.ftfs Vaththy momh^ani hlieve in th) heart, Sec. ] that [ //J is a conjundion con- ditional? Is this adding to the Scripture unjuftly ? If j did, when ever I read that we arc jurtiHed^7 faith, colled thence that faichisanlnftrumcntal caufc, as if />; were only the note of an Inftrument, then you might have accufcd me of unwarran- table addition, or colleflions, indeed, Laftly, If you have a mind to it, I am content that you lay by the unfcriptural names (or additions as you fpeak ) of nouns, pronouns, verbs, antecedents, conkquents, eiHcienc.or mate- rial caufes, c^t, and I will Ity by the name of a condition, m you do of an Inftrument- and we will onlyufc the Scripture phrafe, which is, If jom forgivt men, your Fathtr ^UI forgivi yoH j if xtt eonftfs onr Jint, he it faitbftiU andjkfi to forgive : we art jujlifiedhj faith ^ithoptt the workj of the Law : A man it juftifiedhy yoorkj dndnot by faith only : By thj^ords then /halt be jafiified. Every min Jhall be jndged according to his worl^Sy ] ac.Let us keep to Scripture phrafe if you defire it,and you (hall find me as backward as any to lay much firefi upon terms of Arc. Having gone thus far, I (hall in brief give you a truer re- conciliation of Taul and fAmes then you here offer us. i. They debate different quettions, 2. And that with different forts of perfons. 3. And fpeak diredly of different forts of works. 4. And fomcvyhac differ in the fenfe of the word Faith. 5. And fomwhat about the wordjuftification. 6. And they fpeak of works iu fevcral Relations to Juftification. I. TheQucftion that ?ahI difputed was principally Whc- |J|her Juftificarion be by the works of the A'fofa'calL^^, and cmifequenrly by any mercenary works , without Chrift, or in Co-ordination with Chrift , or any way at all conjunft with Chrift ? The queftion that J tmes difputed , was, Whe- ifier men are juftified by meer believing without Gofpcl-Obedi- rnce > 2. The perfons that F4«/ difputed againft, were, i The unbelieving ffW;, that thought the (JMofnical Law was of X fuch inch perfcftion to rfie making of men righteous, ih%t there needed no other , much lefs {hould it be abrof^ite. V^ here fpccially note, tha: the righceoufneU which the fr.'rs expected by that Law,was not (as is commonly icnagined) a righteoufnefs of finlefs obedience, fuch as was required of /^ditm ; but a mixtt Righteoufnefs , confifting of accurate Obedience to the Mofa'tcAl taw in the main courfc of their Uves,and exaiS facri- ficing according to thacLaw for the pardon of their fins com- mitted, ( wherein they made exprefsconfelfion of fin j fo that thefe two they though: fufficient to juftifie, and lookt for the A^eJJioi but to frve them from captivity, and repair their Tem- ple, Law, e^<:. And 2. Prf^A difpiKed againft fahe Teachers, that wx)Uld bare- jq^/ned thefe two together ( the Righteouf- nefs of Mofes L^W,a*nd Faith inChrift ) a^neccflary to life. But p;jwf/ difputed againft falfe Ghriftians, that thought il enough to falvaiion barely to believe in Chrift, (or lived as if they fo thought) its fike mifunderftanding F^«/i Dodrinc of ]u!;i(icati6n as mitiy now Aq. 3. The works .th^t- Pw«7 fpcaks of direftly, ace the fcrvice* appointed by Mo^ts Liw ftippofed to be fufficient, becaufe o£ the fuppofed fufficiency of that Law. So that its all one with him to be juUfied by the Law, and to be juftified by works -, and therefore he ofter fpeaksagainft Juftification by the Law expre{ly,andufuallyftilech the works he fpeaks of, the works of the Law.yet; by cOnfequcncc, and a parity of Reafon,he may well befaidto^fpeakagainft any works imaginable that are fee in oppofition to Chiift, or competition with him, and that are fuppofed meritorious , and intended as Mercenary. But J Ames fpeaks of no works , bat Obedience to. Cod in Chrift, and that asftanding indue fubordmation to Chrift. • • i •■• -i 4. By faith in the DoArine of Juftification,P is wiih Pw«/, to bea DifcipIeofChrift, oraChriftan: Though fomttime he fpecially denominates ihaq faith from one part of the the objed ( the protnlfc ) fomctime from another ' the blood ef Chrift ) fometime from a third ( his obedience. ) And in other cafes he diftinguiftieth Faith from Hope and Charity.buc not in the bufinefsof Juftification, confidering them asrcfpc- ding Chrift an4 the ends of his blood. But fames by faith means a bare InefTedual Aitent to the Truth of the Chriftian Religion , fnch as the Devils thcm- felveshad- 5. P*iul fpeaks of Juftification in its whole ftate, as begun and continued. But }ames doth principally, if not only fpeak of Juftification as continued. Though if by works any undtrftand a difpoiition to work in faith, or conjunA with It (as Dr. lickfen^o\h) fobis words arc true of initial juftifica- tion al fo. 6. The principal difference lyeth in the Relations of works mentioned. Paul fpeaks of works as the immediate matter of % legal perfonal Righcroufnefs, in part or whole. Bilt fAntrs Ipoak of Works, not as anfwering the Law, but as fulfilling the condition of the Gofpel , and implyed ( as promi- fedor refolvedonj in our firft believing, and fo as fubfcrvicnt to the Sacrifice, Merit and Righteoufnefs of Chrifl , as the avoiding of poifon or dangerous meats ( that may kiIl,thou^h the conrtary cannot cure ) is fubfervient to the curing mcdjcine of a Phyftcian, and implyed in our taking him for our Phy Ocfan at firft. And fo much briefly to fatisfie you and the world, of rtic Reafonsof my Diffent from you, that I may not differ from fo Dear and Reverend a Brother, without making it appear, that necelTicy did compel me. That which I have paffedov^r, being about the Inftrumen- tality of Faith, 1 (hall fpeak to, ( if Ood will ) together with ^r. Blakes Reafonings on thaf Subjeft, in another Difputation. X 2 O;. Avingheardthat Mr. diflik^d fome things in my A^ phortjm standby the perjlva/t-- ons of fome, intended a (Confu- tation of them : I wrote to him dn ear^ ncfl ^^quejl^ that he would acquaintme with what he diflil{ed , annexing his ^J^c^fons to convince me of my Errors^ pro- fefsing my carne/l 'De/tre of Information^ efpeaa/lj from him : T'o which he re^ flyed, as followeth^ . Dear aAaaaa&A&aAAAAAaaaAA AAAAAAAA TejiY Sir. Have indeed declared to fome, who happily may have informed you of it, as I defired* thac there were fcvcral Dodrinal points aflerted in your Book, to which I could not fedtbwire, much lefs cordi ; fuch are many pofitiors about Chrifts Righteoufnefs, aboQC faiths Juftification in your fenfe, and the Efficacy of new Obe- dience in this work as well as faith. Yea Love made fome kind of the aflings of Faith : The good old found definition of Faith waved, and a new one fubftituted. Not the -n^ereAtrt^ but the '^ operari alfo called into Evangelical Righteoufnefs, and this made our pcrfonal Righteoufnefs. Thefe things and divers others do make me vehemently diffent from you in the matters afferted. Yet I do really honour you, for your great Abilities and zealous Piety ,earneftly defiring of God that he would pro- long your life, and have mercy upon hss Church by fparing this £paphrodituf. But whereas you have been told, that I had aniraadverfions on your Book, thiiwasamiftake : for the truth is, though I have caft my thoughts upon fome part of it, yet I have not anydi- gefted or prepared confiderations about it: but do defer fuch a work, till Ifiiail have opportunity to difchargc that part I have publiquely promifed about imputed Righteoufnefs ; which Subj'ed 1 cannot \et profecute, being hindred by other avoca- tions : It is true, I have had advertfement from fome honour- ed friends of m'mc zt London, that it is expefted, I rtiould do fomethingin thofe points, becaufe by your [nfcription of my name f which I take as an Ad of your real Love and refpcft to mC; though I ara unworthy of any fuch Tcftimony ) they think Ci6i) think I am inrcrcfted. Had I known the Contents of the book before publiflied, I would have inoft importunately urged you at leaft to have taken more time of deliberation about the divulgation of them , which you know have much novelty in them. I know things are not to be embraced or rcjedled, becaufc either old or new ; yet Tattl doth diflike ^(j^vo^uyUf ^ if we may fo read it , and not Mvozwia.?. I fhajl con- clude with this : Let not any difference from you in Judgement be any obft^udion to improve your utmoft Abilities ( which arc many and lovely ) to the finding out, and propa- gating of Truth. Jf God prolong your life, I hope this next Summer we may have mutual oral Conference together, which is the moft conducible way to clear both Truth and our Opi- nions. Tour fjithfnll Friend and Brothtr Decemb. 3^ To the Rtvtrend , and hi^ much Honoured Friend , L^r, Baxter, Preacher of the H'ord of qod at Kederminfterj theft ^Deliver' 1 Received yours , which I acknowledge a Favour .- but notfogreat asl expeft. Your diflent is fo generally known, thatlcannet buthope to know fome of the Grounds of it. I hope you cannot fo vehemently diffent in points of fuch Mo- ment, and vet deny me a difcovery of mine Error. The defer- ing of fuck a work till you have wrote another Book, doth intimate what will be injurious to the Church , your felf y and (1^1) and rtie : If you intend to publilh a Confutation , when I am dead, and deny me any help for convidion while I live. I. The Church will lofc the fruit of my own Recantation. 2. And your felf, one part of the fruit of your Labor. 3 . And I may dye in error unrecinted, and you ( b ing nuw importuned for your he!p ) be guilty of it. If you did but know how gladly I would publiquely recant, you would not deny your help. You that would havefo importuned me to deliberatCjif you had known before, I hope will not deny your ailiftance for my recovery. I did not hahily that 1 did. But though 1 wanted the oppor- tunity of confulting you before, yetl hope itisnot too late. I am confident if you kiow rae,you are not fo uncharitable as ro think me uncurable. Ic is therefore your flat duty rot to fuffer fin upon me. Let me therefore intreat you to fend me one or two of your ftron^efl Arguments againfl fome of the weightyefl points in difference; and to anfwcrmine. I know it is not an hours work with you to do that much ; and I would beftow twenty for you. If you fufped that I will any way mif-imploy your papers, you Aall prcfcribe me the Law therein your felf. Whether you will read jceso^wU? or K.^vc!p:vi'icti^ I am indifferent, being no friend to either. I thought it a greater novelty to fay, Faith jufilfieth enlvor frimarilj as an Jnftrumenti then to h^, \X. ju^tfieth as the (^on^itiont which the free LaWfgiver h'itbpromifedfft/lificatioyj upon. I knew it was no novelty to fay, we rauft have a perfonal Righteoufnefs be- fides that imputed : And I took it to be as old as the Gofpel, to fay, that this confifleth in Faith and finccre Obedience. I called it Evangelical, becaufe I trembled to think of having aa inherent Righteoufnefs which the Law of work; will fo deno- minate. What you fay of the [] Efficacy of Obedierce and Faith ] I difclaim both, as never coming into my thoughts; I acknowledge no efficieKcj as to JtijiifiCAtion in either,bur a bare coMditiomlity, I aver confidently that I give no more to works, then our Divines ordinarily do, viz. to be a fecondary part of the ConMtioK of the neif Covenitnt^ a-tJ fo of J^f/fijica- tion^as continued andconfftmmate, and of Qlorifi'^at;o-'i : only if I err, it is in giving lefs to Faith, denying it to be the bijlrumen- tal Cmfe of Jujlification^ but only acondiLion. My Defini- tion tion of Faith is the fame ( in kn(e) with Dr. PrtfionSt Mr. Cnhe-' well, Mr. Throgmorton , Mr. Norton of new EKglnnd \n his Catechifm, &c. O how it grieveth me to diflent from my Reverend Brethren ! Some report it to be a pernitious Book: others overvalue it, and fo may receive the more hurt if it be unfound. Truly Sir I am little prejudiced againft your Arguments ^ But had rather return into the common road then not, if I could fee the Light of truth to guide me. I abhor affected Angularity inDoArine: therefore 1 intreat you again to defer no longer to vouchfafe me the fruit of one hours labour, which I think I may claim from your Charity and the Intereft God hath given one member in another, and you (hall hereby very much oblige to thankfulnefs Jm. 11. 1649. Tour unWorthj fellow '[ervarit Richard Baxter. To my %jvtrencl and very much vulaed friend') Mr, . i' 'Preacher of Gods fVord at ' ■' § Thefe prefent. Dear Sir^ I Received your Letter, and I returned fome Anfwer by Mr. Brya>i, viz.. that now the daies growing longer and warmer, I (hall be glad to take occafion to confer with you mouth to mouth about thofe things wherein we differ ; for I conceive that to be a far more compendious way, then by letters, wherein any midake is not fo eafily reftified .• I fiiall therefore be ready to give you the meeting at Bremicham any Thurfday you (hall appoint that may be convenient with your health ^ that fo by an amicable collation, we may find out the truth. In the mean Y 2 while (if hath ^•'ed, r/i^-excelient ConraJ. Bcrgiw^Ludov. Crocius.fohcVJ.CrOm • f, Joh.;n. Berglus &c.Who though they all difpute for Juftifi- cation by fath without works,underftandingit of the firft Jui'ti- fication ( for moii Divinss have taken Juftification to be rigidly fimul gt* fewel, till Dr. Do^Mam evinced that it is a continued Aft ) yetthey both take worki for meriting works, that refpect the revvard as of Debt, and they fa/ that othcrwife Obedi- .. c i& d Condition I or caufe as they make it ) of continuing, ot no* lofing JuiHfication once attained. And is not that to fay as much as ]?And many more I can name you that fay as m.uch. And you approve of Mr. 'B.>i> book.which faith that rvorkj ( or apnrpofeto\\'a/l;^'nit''oGod J do '^nfiifie as a pajfne qualification of the SubleH: capable ofj'ijltfi^iition. You add that \_ W- way difpute^ &.C. bt/«"^^^"'.'^^!,>^"i" ^iJ'- lofophy, yet I muft confefs I never read fo much m any Auchor, norcanfo'cemyfelf tobei.evcic,C.«^M ^«^«;;", '/^^^/^ fAiu^. h is as SMler and others, a mcer Antecedent, i he word .1^.r./isambiguou.. but if you mean.t as Iconjedureyou • do.for an efficiency, interpretative in fenlc of Law, as ifchc Law ivouldafcnbc efficiency to him that fulhlls the condition : lu- terlydeny it in the present cafe . orif ycumcan that our fulhl- lingthe conditions hath an efficiency on God to move him to iuftifieus.as an impulfive procatarctick caufe ; I not only deny it, but deny that any fuch caufe is properly with God, or hath efficiency on him . nor can it have the pperation of the fi- nal caufe, which fome call moral, feeing it is noneof Oods end, nor can any thing move God but God, nor be his end but himfelf. If you mean by moral efficiency any thing elfc which is indeed no efficiency, I flick not on meer words. Sr 1 lliould net have prefumed to cxpcd fo much labour fromyouastowriieafheetformyfatisfadion, had I not per- ceived th^t others eicpea much more to Ufspurpofe, and that vcur letters exprefs that hereafter you intend more. It you deny rr.eyouranfwer to this,I will trouble you no more. And becaufel would have your labour as (hort as may be, ^ (hall only defire vour anfwer to thefe few Qaeftions. which I ground on both your Letters, Becaufe the clear refolving of the(c,will bethereaJieft waytofatisfieme. , ..^ ru Q»(fl I. Harh the Covenant of Grace (which promifeth Juftification and Glorification:) any condition on our parts, or none? If it have ■ , ^, ■• £lHijl. i.What are the Conditions?Is not Love and Obedience part of the Condition? ' > , -v £iHt(i. 3 .Muft not thofe Conditions be fulfilled by our felvcs ? C lyo): ot hathChrift fulfilled them by biiofelf forany.man. ^Iftefi. 4. IF we muft fulfill chem, why may not a dying m:jn look on them ? Or what meansP-iw/torejoycein theteftimony of his Confdjnce,th»t in limplicicy andgjdly (inccrity he bad his converfation? &j.\nd that he had fought a good fight, and finifhedhisdourfe, er-.and that in ill good confciencfijC^r.and Hez^^kjab , Remember Lord that 1 have walked before thee, J^eft. 5. Can a man have any afTurance ordinarily that death (hall not let him into Hell, who hath no afTurance that he hath performed thefe cjnditions, and how H-iould he have it ? Can he know that all (hall work to him for good, though he know not whether he love God?or that there i> no condemnati- on to him , though he know not that he is in Chrift, and walk not after the fie(h, but after the Spirit ? £>Hef. 6. If our Love and Obedience have no tendency to falvarion , but as meer figures, then is not the Antinom'.- an DoSrinc true, that we may not Ad for Salvation ? .^. 7. What do you mean yourTelf,whcn you write againft thofc that deny Repentance to be a, Condition to q'4ali(ie the SubjeH: to ob^ taiKforgiveneft^ ^«^ 4 y/^w Led. 20.of Juftification? Andwhep you fay that Scripture limits J nfltfication^and Pardon only totbofe Subject that are fo andfoejtMlified. p, 171. where you inftance in Repentance^ C'^^feffion^ Turnings Forgiving others^ c^". and make faith zn Injirumental caule^ but hy^there are wanj qtiali- fications in the Subject, p. 172. And what mean you when you fay, p. no. In fame grofs fms there are many condt li- ens reqtiifte ( be fides humiliation) without Vi>hfch Tardon of (In cannot be obtained : where you inftance in i?^'^^a» either living or dy- ifig} Ot what do you fay lefs then I do here .^ I know you arc none of the men of contention, and therefore will not recant your own Dodrine in oppoficion to me. And if you did not mean that thek arc conditions of Pardon,and Juftification,when y on hy the/ are, whocanunderftand you ? If ihok grofs fins beintheunjuftified,youwillnotfay that the conditions of his Pardon are no conditions of his Juftificacion. I know that you give c ^rn give ffjore to faith ( and fo to rosn ) then I do, vi<.- Co be the Jnjirumtnt of his own jupficAtiop^ ( which I will tiot contend againft withany thatby an improper fenfeof the word Inftru- mcnt, do differ only in a term ) butwhatdoyou ^We^efs tv Rt- pe>ita»c€,ind the reft then I do ? yeu fay they arc^ondkions.atid i fay no more. . .^«.8 And whatdothcgeneralityofour Divines mean, when they fay that Faith' and new Obedience are our conditions of the Covenant? As I have cited out of T'sre^r^, Sci).trpi-fis, *yviUet, Vifhator, Junius^ Areiifis^ Aljltdifts, tlrho faith, the con- dition of the new Covenant of Grace is partly faith, and part- ly Evangel'c/«l Obedience, or Holinefs of life, prottcding from faith in Chrift. PifiinB. C^ap. 17. /».73. And fVeviitltn the like^ &c. If it be faid that they mean 'hey ate conditions of Salvation bat not of Juftification ; Then <^«f/?. 9. Whether and how it can be proved that 001* fin a4 Juftification at Judgement (which you have tmlv fhewed is more compleat then this^«y?ij''""rttf/(?rf Seeing Chrift is 1 Savioar ^s properly as a Jufti- fier, and Salvation comprizcth all. -^tte/}., IT. What tolcarablc fenfe can be given of that multitude of plain Scrip'urcs which I have cited ? Thef.6o. For my part, when Thave oft ftudyed how to forfake my prefent Judgement, the bare reading of the a> of CMattht^io hath iV\\\ utterly filenced me,if there were no more. Much more when the whole Gbfpel runs in the like ftnm. ^nefi. 12. Is not the fulfilling of the conditions of the new Law or Covenant enough ro denominate the party righte- ous, that is, not guilty of non ftlfilling, or nor obliged to pu- nifliment, or guilty as from that famft^w Or Covcnan ? And doth Tiot every man that is faved fo fulfill the conditions of the new Covenant ? and fo is Evatgelically righteous ? The con- dition is not Believe, m:i ohej ftrftEl!j^\i\Mfincerelj. 1 z ^«*/?. (I?^) ^mfi. 13. If therebcnpfuch rhmgas a pcrfonal Right€- oufnefs neceffary to lalvacion, befidcs imputed Kightcoufnefs . 1. What is the raeaningof all thofe Scriptures ciced Thef.zz rhat fay there is ? 2. And of our Divines that fay there is inhe- rent llighteoufnefs ? And i. What real difference between the godly and the wicked, the faved and damned ? «^«f//.i 4. Have you found out any lower place for Love and Qbedicnce, then to be bare conditions, tf you acknowledge Vftem any way conducible to final Juftification, or Salvation? If you have, wlwt place is it ? and how called ? and why hath it nol been difcovered unto the world ? To fay they are^w/iA'- jicatiotjs of tht Subje[l^\s too general,and comprizcth qualihcati- ons of diflfcrent Natures ; and it Chews not how they are con- ducible to the faid ends ; and why a man may not be faved with^ out qualifications, as well as with chem.if God have plbt made •them fo much as conditions ? ^utft. 15. Seeing I afcribe not to Evangelical Obedience iheleaft part of Chrifts Office or Honor, nor make it any jot of our legal Righteoufnefs, where then lies the error or danger of my Dodrine ? .^Hefi, 1 6. Do not thofe men that affirm we have an inberenc Righteoufnefs, which is fo pronounced properly by the Law of works, accufe the Law of Godforbleffing and curfing the the fame man and adion ? And how can that Law pronounce a raan,orhisaftion righteous, which curfeth him, and condemn- cth him to Hell for that fame Adion ? It makes me amazed to think what (hould be the reafon that Divines contefi fo much, that ic is the Law of Works that pronounceth chem inherently righteous, which they know condemns them ; rather then the Law of Grace or new Covenant, which they know abfolveth them that fincerely perform it. When all Divines acknowledge an inherent Righteoufnefs, and that the Law of Works is ful- filled by none, and that itpronnuncethnonerighteousibutthe fulfillers . and when the condition of the new Covenant muft be performed by all that will be faved : and when the Holy Ghoft faith that it was by faith ( and fo pronounced, and mea- fured by the Law of faith ,) that Ahel^ ( the fecond Righteous ffia-nin the world ; oSiircA the excellent Sacrifice, and by it ob- tained (173; tained witnefs that he was righteou^Go'd tefllfying of his gift, ^e. Heb. 1 1.4. ^He^. 17. Do not thofe Divines that will affirm that {_ our inherent Righteoufnefs is Tq called from its imperfed conformi^ ty to the Law of works ] and that [ i: is the Law that pronoun- ceth them righteous] lay a clear grouud for Juftification by works in the worft fenle ? for if the Law pronounce their works, and them properly righteous, then it juftifieth them j and then what need have they(at leatt lo far ; of Chrift, or Pardon ? yea and what Law (hall condemn them, if the Law of Works jufti- fiethcm ? AtUaftdothey not compound their Righteoufnefs (as to the law of Works; partly of Chriftsfatisfadion, and partly of their own Works? ^tfl, 1 8. Whether you fliould not blame Dr. Prejlon-^ Mr. Norton^ Mr. Cuhtnvil, Mr. Throgmorton^ &c. for lay- ing by the 'good found definition of Faith fas you call it) as well as me ? And is it not great partiality to let the fame pals as currant from them,which from mc mull be condemned ? And why would you agree to fuch a corrupt definition, being one of the Affembly, when theirs in the leflcr Catechifm ( and indeed both ) is in fence the very fame with mine ? And why may not I be judged Orthodox in that point, when I heartily fubfcribe te the National Affemblies Definition? viz.. thatF^i/^ is a faving Grace, tvhersby rvtreceivei and reflon Chri/i alone for Salvation^ as he it offered to us in iheGofp^l."^ ^. 19. Do I fay any more then the AfTerably faith in the prcr ceding Queflion?[ff/74f doth God require ofm, that we may efcap. hid wrath and cttrfe due t§ us for fin ? Anfw. (jodrequirtth ofus(t(? efcape the/aid wrath and curfc, &C.) Faithin fefhsChri/}^. repen- tance unto life, '^ith the diligent u/e cf all the cuto;aril meunJy "thereby Chrijl communicateth to Ui the benefits of Redemption. J And is not Juftification one benefit } And is not final Jullincatir on a freeing us from that Curfe ^ Slueft. 20. Which call you the good, found definition of Faith .^ When our famous Reformers [.laced it in AlTurance ; Camera, and others in perfwalionC fuch as is in the under ftand^ lag) others in A(Fenr,as Dr. Downam,c^c .Others in a Belief of God« fpccial Love, and that fin is pardoned. Oihccs in AtE- Z 3 , ancc ('74) anceor Recumbency. Others in divers of thefe. Some, as Mr. 5^//, calling it a fiducial ^f^:nt. Others an obediential Affiancce- Did not each of chefe forf'kcthac which by the former was accounted the good found Definition ? And why ni3y not I with Dx.Preflon, \Ar.' ivalli4, tec. fay it is an y-ic- C€ytarce/rc'Mfetit,pyHed With A^tntf or with the Aflcmbly,and the reft, f:.y it is a rtceivlng^ which is the fame in a more Meta- phoric::ltirm. ^Kejt. IT. If you fudge as MeUnchton., JahnCrociu/^Da- venr,:t, zy^rnefins^ &c. that Faith is in both faculties ; how can you then over leap the Elicite Ads of the will ( which have re- Jptft to means; hi>£eye,co»:e»tfre^ uti ?■ ^fft- 32. Jf the formal rcafon of juftifying faith lieina Belief or Perfwafion that Chrift will pardon and fava us : or in an Affiance or refting on him, or.Trufting to him only for Salvation: or in an Acceptance of him as a Saviour, meerly to juftifie and fa ve from Hell ; Why then are not almoit all among us juftified and faved ? when I fcarce meet with one of an hundred, that is not unfeignedly willing.that Chrift (hould pardon, and juftiiie, and fave them, and do verily truft, that Chrift will do it ; and the freer it is, the better they like it. If ihey may whore and drink,and be covetous, and let alone all the pradifeof Godlinefs,and ^ct be faved, they willconfent. If it be faid that they reft not on Chrift for Juftification fincerelyjl Anf They doitrcally,and unfeignedly, and notdi{remblingly,whi9h as we may know in all probability by others, fowemay know it certainly by our own hearts, while unregenerate. So that it is not the natural, but the moral Truth, that is wanting : And what is that ? And wherein is the EfTen'ial, formal difference between a wicked mans refting on Chrirt for JuftiHcation, and a true Believers ? To fay it is feen in the fruits, is not to (hew the EfTential difference. ^efl. 23. If refting on Chrift for Juftification be the only condition of final Juftification, What is the reafon that Perkins., Bolton., Hooker, Prefion^Taylor. Elton jVloately,2LX\^3i\\ the godly Divines alfo yet liv ng do fpend moft oftheir labour to bring. men to obey Chrift as their lord, and not the hundreth line or word to prefs them to Truft that he will pardon and fave them? All the po werfull C^TT) powei'full Prrachers that ever I heard, however they d^/'pute, yec"when they are preaching to the generality of pe>ple, they zealouQycry down iazinefs, lukejvarmncfs, negUgenc8,unholy- nefs, prophanefs, &c. As thic which would be the liklycft caufe of the damnation of the people. Bat if only the forefaid faith be the condition, and all other Graces or Duties be but mecr fignal effeAs of th s, and (ignal qualifications of the fub- jeft, and not fo much a« conditions, wtut reej all this? Were it not then better to perfwade all people, even when they rire whoring, or drunk, to truft on Chnft to pardon and jaftifie them ? And then when they have the tree and caufe , the fruits and fignal effeds will follow. ^eft. 24. Yea, Why do the beft Divines preach fo much^ againft Prefump:ion ? And what is Prcfumption , if it be not this very faith which Divines call juftifying? viz.. the Trulling to Chrill for Pardon and Salvation only, without takng hm for their King and Prophet ? If it be faid that tliis laft mull be pre- fent, though not juftifie ; How can the bare prefencc of an idle Accident fo ma^»e, or marr the efficacy ot the caufe? «v« . £iuefl. 16. SeeingreftinginChriflisnoPhyfical apprehen- nonof him f who is bodily in Heaven j nor of his Righteouf- nefs ( which is not a being capable of fucb an apprchenfiori ) How can that Refting juftifi." more then any other Ad> but only as it is the condition to which the Promifc is mWe? Reftrng on a friend for a Denefit, makes it got your*, but hi? gift dices that. As Perkins ( cited by me )T& believi the K:n^.icmof FrAKCe Podlb* mine, wakes it not mtxe : 'But to belicvs Ckrijc; and the Kingdom of Htavm, c^c. ( vfj.loc. where he faith as much as I j vol. i. p. 662. If God had not faid (^ He that believeth fiall be jujiifieei and faved , ] would BtUevitrg have done it ? And if jie had faid, [ He tlMt refenteth^ or /avcJf^ cr caUtth OK the name of the Lord, J7:>.di be jtt(i*Hed nr lAved \ would not thefe have done it ? if fo ; then doth not faith juftifie -dircdly, as the conJition of the Gift, Promife, or new Cove- nant? nam? \r\d'\[s apprthenfton hhntki aptttudt to be fee apart fof ibis Office ; And if it juftifie as a condition of the Promifc : muft not others do it fo far as they arc parts of the Condi- tion? 5iV, If yea (hould deny me chc favour I hope for in refol- ving tbefe doubts, yttJetme hear whether 1 may cxped it or not. And in the («rfriwl(hall fearch in jealoufie, and pray for diredion ; But till your Arguments (hall change my judge- ment, I remain confident that I can maintain mofi of the ty^nti- »r7wirt» Dotages againft any man that denyech the principles of my Book : and that which is accounted novelty in it, is but a more explicate , diftmd , neceffary delivery of common Truths, Tours, Richard Baxter. ^pril 5, 1^50. IAra forry that you are not in capacity for the motion I pro- fered .* I thought difcourfe would not fo much infeeble yon, efpecially when it would have been in fo loving a way .- And I judged it the more feafabie, bccaufe I had been informed of a late folcmn conference you had about Padohaptifm, which could not but much fpend you. I (hall prcfs no more for it, al- though this very letter doth abundantly confirm me, that let- ters are but a lofs of time : for one word might have prevented many large digreflions. Is nr)t that endeavour of yours in your feventh queftion to prove out of my book,that Repentance is a necefiary condition, or qualification in the Snbjed to be pardoned, &c. a meer impertinency ? You earneftly defirc iatisfadtion of your confcience, therefore I cannot think you do (177) do wilfully miftakc. For is that the ftate of the queftion with us ? Is it not this, whether the Gofpel Righteoufnefs be made ours, otherwife then by believing ? You fay by believing, and Obedience, 1 fay only believing. I fay faith is only the condition juftifying , or inftrumcnt receiving, you makfi a juftifying Repentance, a juftifying Patience: you make orher ads of grace juftifying as well : fo that whereas heretofore,.we only had jufti^ing faith, now there arc as many other qualities, and all juftifying, as there are Graces. So that I do firmly hold ( and It needs no recantation ) that repentance and other exercifes of Grace are antecedent qualifications, and are/wf- dia. orMnata^ in the ufe whereof only pardon can be ha4. But what is this to you ? Who exprcfly maintain the righteoufnefs of the Covenant of Grace to be made ours, upon our godly working , as well as believing. If therefore you had fpenc your fclrto Qiewthat faith had no peculiar Inftrumentality in our juftification, butwhat other Graces have, thenyouhad hit the mark. What is more obvious, then that there arc ma- ny conditions m juflificato^ which are not in a^a julrificationta ? The fattening of the head to the body is a ncceffary condition in homine vidente, but it \s not fna^H videntii. You grant in- deed fome precedency to faith, but you make Faith and Works aqae^ though not aquAliter^ the conditions of Juftification. I fhould fay much more to the ftate of the qucftion.but I forbear; In other things you feem to come off ; and though I do not fay you recede from your A flertions, yet you much moHifiethem, that I need not therein contend with you. Bat here is the ftick. Let it be dcmonftrated,that whereas the Scripture in the current of it attributes Juftification to believing only '- as throuih f*tth\, and by Faith , and through faith in his hloodf that you can as truly fay, its received by love, and iti through love of his blood flied for our fakes, &c. This is a little of that much which might be faid to the ftate of the quefti- on This I Judge new Doflrine, juftifying Repentance, jufti- fying Charity. And in my Letter I laid down an Argument, R^pm.^. Concerning sy^^r^^fc^w; Juftification, the Pattern of all others. To this you reckon up minyAnfwers, but I fee not the Argument iliaken by it. tirft you fay, you exclnde a co-ofe- A a . ration '('78; , ruticM iftftive^ but why do we ftrive about words? You do not ei;clude jror^/j*f/?.'/;;>;^, as well as faith, let thecxprellions be what i hey will. Wl>cicas Paul faith, he vpchld btfonnd ha- v':r.g the Righeoufr.ejs n h clo t-s bj faith, "^OM Will add, and ^ifhch n by love^ by zeal. ' 2 . You defire it to be provei:!^ that Faui excludes all ■A'crks under Anyr.cuon; 1 think its very eafily done: Irirft, becaufe of the ;>ww(?i/^r^e;>;?i7y;/i'5« between Fauh and Works j now you will contradid /-'<««/; Argument, and give a ternum^ works that are of Grace. But the Apoftles oppoHtion is fo immediate here and in other places, becween faith and any thing of ours , that he admits of no med'um. 2. He inftances in Abrahnmt works, and excludes them.- now were Al/rahams works, works done by the meet ftrength of the Law ? Did not -Abr) Other Graces : this is the feeming ftrcngth of your Exccpcion?, For Repentance is not excluded as tjti.iiifj/ir^g, but as recipient which is a tifth Exception. As For your difcourfejWheiherT.iJw/dirpuLes what is our Righ- teoufnefs? or upon whit terms it is made over to u«, itdo:h not much mitccr; for indeed Paul fpeaks to both ihoK 0"ly inclulivelyor collareral!y,'is you fay : but that which hcchrefiy intends, is to fhew in what manner we ace juflifieJ, whether by believing or working, and thefe he makes two immediate oppo- fitcs, not g-anting any ttrtium. You fpeak of Fauh taken re- latively for Chrilts Rig'-.teoufnefs ^ but how can you find out fuch a figure for faith in your fence,ur,!efs you Wilf acknowledge Loveor Obedience relatively for Chrifts Righreoufnefs ? Indeed thofe that hold Fai h inftrumentally,receiving the whole righte- Oiifnefsof Chrift, and no other Grace,thcy often fpeak of faith taken relativcly,but fo cannot you,who hold that not only feeing this brazen Serpent, but any other adions of fence will as well heal the wounded Chriftian. You fay you acknowledge the AfTemblies definition of refting or receiving, you cannot take in that fence, as they declare it, as the Scripture words which are Metaphorical , do imply : for its the retting of a burdened foul qpon Chrift only for Righfeoufnefs, and by this ChriHs Rightcbufnefs is made over to us • and its a receiving of Chrift, ss the h«nd embraceth any ObjeA : now you make the Righfe- oufnefs of Chrift made over to us iriany other exercife of Grace as well as this, so that although you would willingly feem not to recede from others, yet you plainly do.-and although you think your Affcrrlons are but more diftind explications, yet they are indeed deftrudive Aflertions to what our Divines do deli- verrneither may vou, while you intend to difpute, exaftly build upon fome homiletical or poputerexprefsionin any mans book. You reply to a fecond part in ray Letter : whether a godly man dying, may be aflfeded according to your pofition, and thereupon you inflance in Hez.ek}ah tPdu/^and that no man can dye with comfort without the evidence of thefe works. But is this the ftate of the queftion with us ? Do you think that I de- ny a godly life to be a comfortable teftimony, and aneceflary qualification of a man for pardon ? You cannot think that you A a 2 fpeak i (I So) fpcak to the point in this, But here is the queftion, Can a godiy man dying, think the Hightcoufnefs of Chrift ii made hjs by working or believing? l$u repcnt» and Chnils Rtghceoul- neis is by this made yours, and reft in Chrift ? Ccrcainlychc dying Chrjftianisin agonies direded to this refting onChrift, CO the eying of this brazen Serpent, not to be Touud in any thing but the Righceoufnefs by faith. Its an ad of Dependance, not of Obedience that ir.terefts us in Chrifts Righteoufncfs. its that puts on the robes of Chrift, that our nakednefs may not appear. And that is very harfli ftill, which you exprefs, to ex- ped thc^Righrcoufnefs of the Covenant of Grace upon the conditions fulfilled by your felf, through Gods working., lam unwilling to parallel this with fome paflagcs that might be quo- ted out of unfound Authors ; but that I am confident, how- foever your Pen- writes, you have a tuitJfimNmeJI to rcA only upon Chrifts Righteoufnefs.and that by bare refting, and b^leiv- ingyou look for a Righteoufncfs. As Philofophers fay, we fee or hear tKtus recipiendo^ not extra mittendo : otherwife "Beliar- mine argues confonanCly enough, that Love would juftifie as well as faith ; but we fay that Fatth doth pati, Love doth agere. Not but that faith is an aUive grace, only in thisaCi it u meer recipient.' Sir^ I have not time, nor paper to anfwer thofe many quefti- ons, the moft of which I conceive impertinent to this bufinefs : and your Explication of your felf, how imperfections incur Gracei^are done away^and yet the conditions of righteoufnefstis to me mpj.Jc'^-Ta.roy : but I cannot go any further. What I have written with much love and refped to you , I fliould account it a great mercy to be inftrlHiental to bring you to the right way again; If there.be fo much Joy for reducing a wandring (hecp.be not offended if I fay there will be much more for an er- ring fliepheard : though I hope at laft your error may prove in words rather then in fence ; with hcartfy brotherly love I have written this, and fo let it be received from your fellow-labou- rer, who honours Gods gifts in yoU) andisalfo fenfiblcof his •wn infirtnities, and pronenefs to err. C 181 ) Dc.:, Siry IF youdoubc of the truth of my bodily infirmity, icisbe- caufe you neither know my body nor mind, "i he diTputc ac Btvi>dley,\% it was almoft at horrie, fo I had the choice of the time, and luchftrengrh vouchfafed from Gcd, which I cannot again expect, much lei? promifc my Iclf. I told you I iwive feme liicUa tnterv^i-ijt^ perhaps a few hours in a moneth .• but if up- on fuch uncertainty! fhould draw you to a journey, and then ten to one fail you, I fhould be injnriou?. But feeing you fo far and freely condifcend, if God wil Oicw me fo much Mercy, as to enable this reftlef? uncedan'ly-piined i'cf/^forks'^ as if I did give more to them } the task you now fet me is to prove that faith doth no more, and not that works do fo much : That faith is not an inflrument, and not that love or obedience are conditions. A nd to this I anfwer you : i . I have in my book faid fomewhat to prove faith no inflrument of juftifying, and you faid nothing againft it. Why then fhould I aim at this mark ? 2. 1 think I have proved there that faith juflifieth pri- marily and properly as the condition of the Covenant, and but remotely as A receiving ji^flifca'-.on^ this which you call the in- ftrumcntality, beingbucthe very formal nature of the ad, and ioihc cju,j final eri a ox \i^ aptitude to the office of Juftifying. And becaufe 1 build much on this fuppofition, I put it in the 4^»fn>/,which you judge impertinent. 3. Yet if you willun- derftard the word in/lrnnuMt laxely , I have not any where dcnyed dcnycd faith to have fdch an Inftrumentality ('that is,' receiving orapprcherfivenefs) above other graces: Only 1 deny and moft C9tffidtnelj deny that that is the formal, proper or ncereft cauTe of faith's juflifying: But the formal reafon is, bccaufe God hath made it the condition of the Covenant, promifing juftificationto fuch receiving, which elfe would- have no more juftified then any other aft : And therefore fo far as others are made conditions, and thepronaife to usonthcm,' theymuft rccdis have fome fuch ufe as well as faith : And that they are conditions, ycuconfcfs as much as I. 4. But what if I be miflaken in this point ? what is the danger ? If faith fliould deferve the name of an inftrument, when I think it is but a con- dition ? I. Is it any danger to give lefs to faith then others, whilelgivenolefstoChrift? (For ifyourtiould think I gave lefs to Chrift then others, I fhouid provoke you agiin and again to (hew wherein ) 2. 1 dery nothing that Scripture faith : It faith not that faith is an inftrument : (perhaps you will tell me Vtronius argues thus .- But I mean it is neither in the letter nor plain fenfe- and then I care not who fpeaks it, if true.) :?. You make man an efficient caufe of juftifyinghimfelf. ("For the inftrument is an efficient caufe) : And what if I dare npt give fo much to man ? is there any danger in it ? or fhoult! I be fpoke againft for the Dodrine of obedience , as »/ / gave wor* to man then you, when I give fo much lefs? 4. thofe that dident from me do make the very natural a(S of faith.whfch ismoftcflcntiaitoit, andinfcparablefrom it, as it from it feJf; z//«. Its afprthtnfton of Chnjls Righttoufntfj^ to be the proper primary reafon of its juftifying. What if I dare not do fo , but give that glory to God, and not to the nature ofour own ad ? and fay, that P-Jes tjuct recipit Jufiijlcat^ fed nonqua recipit primarily, but as it is the condition which the free juftifier hath conferred this honour upon? is there any danger in this .? and will I here be joy in heaven for reducing a man from fuch an opinion ? You (&y,£fVhat more ihvious then that there are many conditions in juftificato, vehichare not in aftu juftificationis .• < Thefafining the head to the bociy^ &c. ] Anfw. i. -You faid .before that they are Antecedents & LMedia ordinata^ and then they are Bb fare Ci8d; , fore conditions »«;«y?»,'?cWtf as well as »;3j«/?i^c4ri u^h jufii^catiouu^hu: noicon- ditiones vel cj:tAlif^cAiioms if fins aUn: . And if you did not think thit repentance is a condition ai]ti(iifca'ionein recipiendum^ and io inatitiJHftificjitionis^ how can you fay it is meMum ordina- turn ? A med\Hm;\% fuchjefTentially hath forac tendency or con- duciblcnefs toits end. s. As obvious therefore as you think this is, it is paft the reach of my dull apprehcnfion to conceive of your conditions in a judiciary fenfe, which are in jsffiificato for the obtaining of jaftification,and not be both adadwn &ina^tt jit(}ificationij : for I fuppofe you are more accurate and ferious then by the word condition to mean modum vel ajfeSiionem entu Aletaphyjicatt , vel fihjeSli alicujm adjunUunt vel tjualificati' onem infenfo Plojfico., when we are fpeaking only of conditions infenpuforenji. And there arc many thoufand honeft ChriQi- ans as dull as Ijand therefore I do not think it can be any weigh- ty point of faith which muft be fupportcd by fuch fubtikies which arc paft our rcacb,though obvious to yours : Godufeth not to hang mens falvacion on fuch School diltmdions which fewmencanunderftand. 6. And every fuch Tyro in Philofo- phy as I, cannot reach your Phylofopbical fubtilty neither • to un ^erftand that tbe faftning of the head to the body is not condi- tio in aFlu videntis \ ('though ic be nothing to our purpofe ); Indecdwema^ think it of more remote ufe then fome other, and but propter a li-4d, ejr qaafi conditio ccnntionis ; and if you fay fo of Repentance, &c. wefhould nor difagr'ee- You fay Q/« othir things I come cff^ andfo wollifie m) fl^erti- ons r C1S7) o»s,tbat yopt Meed not co»teyi4] Anfw. i. I would you bad told me wherein I fo come off : For I know not of a word. If you mean in that I now Tay obedience isno condition of our firft attaining juftiHcation, but only of the continuance of it, ^c. I faid the fame over and over in my book, and left it (hould be •vcr-lookt, ■ I put it in the Index of diftindions. l( you mean -^otthis, I know not what you mean. 2. But if explication of ny felf will fo mollifie and prevent contending, I fhall be glad to explain my felf yet further : Yea, and heartily to recanc where Ifce my error. For that which you defire , / defnon- f^rate that its By lave , and Tl rough love ^ O'C- I have an- Iwered before by diftinguiQiing cf the fenfe of B)i and Through: and in my fenfe I have brought you forty plain Texts j^ in ray book for proof of it , which fhcw it is no new Do- Arine. To your argument from Rom. 4. Where you fay that AbrA- hams jyfiificAtion is the pattern of all others^ I conceive that an uncouth fpcech , ftrange to Scripture for phrafe and proper* fenfe, though in a large fenfe tolerable and true ; Certain I am that /'^i^/ brings *y4l>rabams example to prove that we arc juftifiedby faith wi^tout-the works of the Law J but as certain that our faith muft differ from ^-^brahams^ even in the cfTenti- ah of it : We'muft believe that this J ejus is he, or we Jhall Ajt in our fins ^ which Abraham was not required to believe. Our faithisanexplicite Affentand Confent to the Mediators Of- fices, riz. that he be our I-ord and Saviour, and a Covenant- ing with him, and giving up our felvesto^im accordingly : But vihzihtT Abrahams C and all recited in f/«^. w.) were fuch, is queftionible. Too much looking on Abraham as a pattern, fceros to be it that occafioned Qrotius r give that wretched de- finition of faith, ( AtiMct. in /oJ&r<«/r^ ^/-^cji^, which faith, a man is jftjiifiedbyworkj andntt by faith on/y ; If the fe»fe, then you (hould nOtfali upon the /j^r^r/r :. and then to diftinguifh and explain, is not to ftrive about words- 4. If I do bring fa'th and obedience neerer in juftiiication then others, it js not by giving Wi?r*r(7B»(?n^f then o:hers, but by giving left to fAith i And if in that I err, you (hould have fallen on that and (hewed it, and not fpeak ftill as if I gave more to works then you. lamfurelgive lefstomtn, and therefore ««/f/} then you to Chrifi. I perceive not the leaft difadvantage herein that I lye open tO) butonl/the oit«« of the phrafe o^JH/fifi^^tioK by ^o^fy with m«nthat are carried by prejudice and cuftome. 5^ I willnot quarrel about fuchaword^ but I like not your ^hr»{c of [Faith ju/lify'iKg, and rvarkfjftfiifj'mg,] for it is fitter Kointroduce the conceit of an efficiency in them, then to fiiy, \jVeareji4^^ifedby faith and by Works~\ which are only theScrip- cure^phcafe, and OgniHe but a conditionality. To, - • («89). To that you fay oat of Thil. 3.9. I believe Paul dot^i fDoft sppofitely oppofe the righteoufnefs which is by faith to 'that whichisby the Law. But then i. He mtani not [By faith as an inftrumencof fiftification] 2. Nor by faith which is but ameer affiance on Chrift for juftification, oi" only as fuch- g. Nor doth he exclude Knowledge, Repentance, Obedience* ^c. 4. But to fay that righteoufnefs or juftification \si>j love, or l>yohedUfice^ &c. Without adding any more, is not a con- venient fpeech, as it is to fay that righteoufnefs is by faith. I . Bccaufe the fpeech feems to be of the firft receiving of righ- teoufnefs, wherein obedience or works have no hand. 2, Be- caufc faith having moft dear dired relation to Chrift, doth moft plainly point out our righteoufnefs to be in bim. 5. Becaufe faith as it is taken in the Gofpel, is a moft comprehcnfive grace, con- taining many ads , and implying or including many others which relate to Chrift as the objed aifo. Even obedience to Chrift is implyed as a neceflfary fubfcquent part of the conditi- on, feeing faith is an accepting of Cfirift as Lord and King, and Head, and Husband, as wcllasa juftifier. 5. Yet Scripture faith as well as I, that Chrift (hall juftifie us Bj his knowledge^ and we thai! be jftjiified hj our vforAs^ and by workj j, afid me thinks it fhould be no fin to fpeak the words of God , except it be (hew- ed that I mifunderftand them. It is not fo fit a phrafe, to fay , that a poor ignoble \^oman, was made rich and honorable by her Love, or Obcdien(!e,or Marriage, faithfulnefsjand conju- gal aftions, as to fay, it was by marriage with fuch a Noble man, or confent to take him to be hfr husband : For the marriage confent and Covenant doth imply conjugal affe- dion, afiion and faithfulnefs. Yetaretheielaftas flat conditi- ons of her continuing her enjoyments as the marriage Covenant, was of firft obtaining them. To my fecond Anfwer , you (hew thit Paul excludes works under any notion, i. From his oppofition between faith and works, where you fay 1 contradidP/»«/^ and give a tertium. To which I anfwer, to diitinguifh of Pauls terras, and explain hs meaning in his own words is not to give a tcrtittm^ or contradid ; but this is all that I do.I diftnguifti of the word }79rks i fomecime it is taken more largely for AUs cr A^ions^ B b 3 and (ipo) and fo famejtikti it ; fomctiraes more ftriftly for only fuch ASl'ons a-i a LxhoHrerfe>formeth for his fy.ij^es, Or wh'ch make the Rc\\\i^dtohenot of L/race, but of debt. So Paul tells you that he underftandeth or ufcth the tcrna^ Rom. 4.4. ufuilly there- fore cilling them (^i?rJ^/ of the Ltw. Now he th.n excludes Works only under tbis notion, doch not therefore exclude them under ever^' notion. Wiierc you add that Pauls oppofition it het\'>feeKF<4i:h i^ffertio»u ttnivtrfd without workt in gegtral ] Anf^tr, I. Doth not the Apdftle contradift you by expounding himfeff in the very next verfe before thofe j ou cite ? Rom.^. 4. That by works he means not fimply^W ^-^Uions^ as J^imes doth, but fuch as make the re- ward to be of deb: and not of Grace ? Indeed fuch works are univerfaliy excluded. 2. Therefore he excludes the wayprefence of works, and faith, ro ;{?;>« ribdrWorj^f/^«o;, Sic.vtr. 5. But the prefer,cio{ good aftions you fay is not excluded. Your laft Argument feems tome the fame with the fourth, and it forceth me to admire that youftiould think theconfe- (juence good. Blejfa^nefs u when fin u forgiven •, therefore no ^orl^ or good aEI performed bj man is the condition of fcrgtvenefsy either a^ begun or conttnued^ crcoitft4mrrate~\ If this be not your con- fequence, you fay nothing againft me : if it be, I afTure you it is not in my Power to believe it, nor to difcern the leaft fhaddow of probability of truth in it, nor to free ic from the charge of being the groffeft An:inomianifm ( ft pace tui iia dicam. ) And here I muft needs tell you alfo my utter difability'to reconcile you with your felf ; for you before fay,they are r^edia ordinatat and here you {^y^They are fxclnJ.ed under any notion x As if to be a medium were no notion \ or the medium did nothing in or to the very juftifying of the perfan. ^ To my next A nfwer. If w*. r\s be excluded under any no 'ion, then James his Vpords cannot be true^ thAt \\'e4rfjnfiified by works. -You You reply, // thfre Ifc jtijlifying tvorkj^ how faith Piul true ? 1 anfwer. Thisisamoft evident Pttitio principU. It is unde- niable that James indudeth works under fome^tion .- and that Paul exdudeth them under fome other notion : nowi therefore 1 mjoht well ask, How faith James true elfe >. Becaufe my fup- pofiuon cannot be denyed : But you ruppofe that Paul exdu- deth works under any notion/ which is ^he very Queftion, and is denyed. ) When you ask how faith Paul true } Paul faith true becaufe he fpeaks of works ftriftly taken,a3 is by himfelf explain- ed •• Jamei could not fay true, if works under every notion ( as you fay ) be excluded. Next you come to reconcile them by expounding Jumes ; wh'ere you fay. Faith )X'hich in refpeEl of its AB ad intra, only juflifies, jet it \X'orks ad extra : fades' ^uat viva^an qua viva. I anfwer. Whats this to the Qneftion? The Queftionijnoc whether Faith work? Nor whether Faith^juftifie ? Nor what Faith juftifieth ? But in what fence ^tmes faith, we are juftified by works, and not by Faith only ? You anfwer by a direfl con- tradidion to fame'^ ('\i I can reach thefence of your Anfwer^ faying, It is hy Faith onlj^ and that not atit liveth^ O'C, So darenotldiredly fay, itisnothyworkj^ when God faith itij: but think I am boundtodiftinguifti, and (hew in what fence works juftifie, and in what notjand not to fay flatly againft God, that yce art not ]H^i^tdbj works under any Kotiony but only by the Faith which worketh. Adenyalof Gods Aflcrtions is an ill expounding of them, To what you fay of the judgement of the Orthodox, [ th.-tt they go eadem via etfinon eadtmfemita~] I anfwer, you may un- derftand your diftinftionas youpleale, but I have fhewed the difference • fome underftand it of juftification before God j others before men, c^c. And if ypu pleafe to make the way wide enough, you may take m^ among the Orthodox, that go eadem via: if not, I willftand out with 7<»wf/. When you fay [jhey exclnde ^orks under any notion in the all cfjufijfication.^j I anfwer, i. Your felf include them as antece- dents and concomitarti (though I do nor,^ 2. I have (hewed before that [^inthesct, ^f.]is ambiguous. If you mean [^as jS gents or Caufes'^ fo do I exclude .ibem. If you mean [ at conditions ns M \ C193) cOff'Mdans rt^^aireii hy the ner» L^tiv to the contwuinjr and cmfttm- mating oHY ']Hfii^cM\ofr\ I havc (hewed you chacDiviaCSsdo judge other wife, Mynextanrwer was \IfVcorkj under any votlon bt excludti^^ then fuith it exclaimed] You reply l.[^ThiM BelUrmine., &c.\ An[i9. I knew indeed that BelUrmir.e faith fo. But Sir, you'f fpeak to one that is very neer Gods tribunal, and therefore is re- folved to look after naked truth, and not to be affrighted from ic by the name either oi'Bellarmine or AntichriJ};Sind who is at laft brought to wink at prejudice. I am tully refolved by Gods grace to go on in the way of Codas he difcovereth it to me, and not to turn out of it when 'Bellarm'me Hands in it. Though tb€ Divels believe, I will (by Gods help) believe too: and not deny Chrift,becaufc the Divcls confefs him. You dy^Non fetjMttttr^ Iprovfctbe confequeiice. If all works (or ads) be excluded under any notion whatfoever, and if faith be a work craft then faith is excluded. Bnt,&c.£r^c,&c. Bythercafon of your denya! I underftand nothing that you deny , but [ that faith is awork,er «ct\ which I never heard denyed before, and 1 hope never lliall do again. The common anfwcr to 'BelUr- mine is, that/^.-r/j 'Ahieh it a worl^^ jftfi-tfieth , bt4t not as it is a WoHi: Which anfwcr I confefs to be lound, and fubrcnbe to it. But then according CO that , faith which is a work juftifieth under fome notion (fuppofe it were under the notion of an rn- ftrument^ though not under the notio.i of a work. But you go another way, and fay, i. Faith is paj/ive in its iytfirumeM- tality^ and though to believe, he a grammatical action, its vcr- bum adivum , yet its fbyfice ^ •r hufer pbyjic'e pa/ftve. A man by heliering doth not operari, but rccipere. As videre, audire,jr» G'-amm^tttal aUions^ bt^t phy ficai »r nufurai pt-^tons, dfC' Anfwer. i. Thcfe arc very iublimc AfTertions, quite paft the re^ch of mv capacity, and of all theirs that I ufcto converfe with; and I dare fay itisnoHercfie to deny then^ nor can that point be neer the foundation that ftands upon fuch props which few men can apprehend. 2. What if Faiihwerc f*jjive in its ^nflrumtntaltty ? Is it not at all an AB there- fore? If it be ; Then that wbicb is attex/fl or fVcrl^^ is not cxclnded undtr the notion of a pajftve hflrumtnt ; and fo Cc not not under eveyy Motion ( I fpeakon your grounds. But) becaufe you told me before that I fhould have fpcnt ray felf againft this Inftrumcntality of Faith if I would hit the mark ; I Wiil fpeak the more largely to it now : And i . Enquire whether vidcre^ audi^e^ be only Grammatical Adions (as you call them^ and natural partions ? 2. Whether Believing be fo, only ver' bum dElivum^ but Phylically pafllive ? And fo to !^elieve, is not ag-re^hmpAiior recipere? ?. Whether faith be paflivein its Inflrumentality? 4. Whether the fame may not be faid as truly of other Graces? 5. Whether Faich be any proper Inftrument of our Juitification? 6. If it were , Whether that be the primary , formal Reafon of its juftifying vcr- tu€ ? 7. Whether your Opinion or mine be the plainer or fafer ? And for the firft,I fhould not chink it worth the looking after, but that I perceive you lay much upon it, and that Philolophers generally fuppofe that the Sence and Inte'lcd in this are al ke ; and for ought I difcern, it is fuch n. Pafsivenefs of the Intelleft that you intend : and therefore we may put all together, and enquire whether videre ^ intelUgere be only' Pafsions ? And here you know how ill Philofophers are agreed among them- felves, and therefore how ll ppery a ground this is for a man to build his Faith upon in fo high point as this in hand: you know alfothat Hifptcrates.Gden, PUto^ 'Plotinui , with the genera- lity of the PUtonifis arcdiredly contrary to you: you know alfothat Alhertfit MAgnutt and hi? followers judge fenfation to be an a "^ion, though ihey take the potently to be paffivc. You know alfo that Aquitof with his followers judge the very foten- tia to be iftive as well as paflive ^ pa/Jive while it receiveth thi fpecies •yfind-^ffivt'^DH'n per ipfamst^it c^ fenfationent proditeit. And T^/ef faith, that this is Scotus ^»; /f«**«f*i 2. dt Anim^. q* 12. ^ Capreol. & fere communis. I know A^^nnat faith , that xnulligere efl quoddam pui ; but he taketh pd^ti in his third wide improper fenfe, ^%oMneqtt d exitdepotentU in aEifim^ pot eft diet p4ti: i.q.79 a. 2.C.And no doubt every fc- cond caufe may be faid to fuffer even in its ading,as it receiveth tfee Influx from the firft, which caofeth it to ai3 ; but it will not Xhence follow that the"' viiere^inteiligert e^ form^Uttr pati : (»i?0 I 5 cannot think that you deny the intekeElnm agentem : and ycai ^nowthat j;cnerally Philofophers atcribure A(5l.on to zhepoj/i, tie Intelle^ : and that Jr- C c 2 oitf Cl9<5) ciet of them I and beyond my Capacity how we fhould dif- ccrh 'DtfUnce 38 well a& the Ohje^ dtfiuKt according to the paf- livt opinion / and more hard is it for me tobeheve thisDuft- rine, when I confider how Cats zud^Owls fee in the night .- and how a man in a deep ftudy, or that flcepeth with his eyes open, Teeth not any thing dillindly ( though i kI^^w the frivolous an- fwets CO thefe ; ) And yet more hardly do I believe it when I feel ^Pianto labor e & con ztu I mull fee to read a fmall print, or dif- cerrt a thing afar off : but above all when I feel the labor of my ftudics, I hardly believe that my underftanding is not adive; though I eafily believe that I am alfo too paffive. Why do [ not underftand with every dull thought? To believe alfo that every ftone is ftill adive, and that the eye and Intelled of the living Creature is but palfivc , is hard to me ; becaufe mt thinks Adion better tgreeth to the living, then the inanimate. And yet the lefs do I affent when [ obfervc what ftrefs they lay Bpon the firoilitude of a looking-glafs receiving the fpecier^ which I am very confident it did never receive, when I fee it moving as my eye moveth, and withdrawing when I withdraw, ( though the Objed be any ftone or other immovable thirg ) I judge that when I am gone, theglafs receivethno more fpicies from the Wall,then the wall from the glafs^nor that the water re- ceives any more /pedes of the Moon that there appears^thcn the earth doth; but that all is in mine eyes by the help of that rc- fiedion.I doubt not but you have read D'OrbelHs arguments , {Di(i. l,in 1. fent.pAr.^. ^.z.) againft both extreamsin point oi intellection .• Againft yours hisreafons feemto me ftrong : ^uia ejfectus aijuivocns non pote(i excellere in ptrfectione cau- fam atfuivccam totaUmfeddrfif it necejfario ah ea ; fed intellectio ejfet effectm atjuivoctufpeciei intelligihiii^ , Ji ab eafola cattfart' tur^ (^itaejfet ftmpliciter fmperfectior fpecie intelligibi/i^ tftteti %on eft Virttm. Turn etiam ^ttia tunc non pojfet falvari imago inimnie^ tit m^nsefl'. ^ianHoilipfius mentis haberet rationem purentis. Itemtjaomodo caufarentpsr relationes rationis, Jive in- ttntiones logica, (jttzfuntinABitcelUtivo? cum ilia intentio di- catur realis (jjUA caufatHr imediate a re vtl fpecie reprefentante rem in fe 'Even des Cartes h'ts Dodrine of vibration feemeth to make the fenfation and intelledion to be formally Adion , though the Organ muft firft be pa^ve to the producing it, before it be AdivCt Cip7) A<3ivt. Za^arelfCemhacchiu^, &c. fay chat in fenfation there is firft a receiving the fpeciet, 2. ^ judging, &c. The firft by the <)rgan which is partive, and the later f which is the very finfa- tion by the fenfuive foul, which is adive. The:efore Com- hacchi'.ts faith, IntelleElio eft opemtio ariim<£ rAtionalis ^ (^rc. but pajfio is not cperatio. Schtbler determineth it ( Top. p. 23 2. that the objeddoth but i. Exdtart potentias Acti- ve ad fictus. 2' Terminare iictiu .V'guenin Infitt-it. p. 261. befiJcs the intelleft Agent, afcribeth to the Poffible three offices. I. To draw and receive the //jraV/. 2. A(3ually to underftand. 3. Toconferve theZ/JfCff/. The hm^Viguerihs^ tnjlit.p. 17. & /i^uin. I. if. 18 a. 5. i. StiAr(z.Tcm.l.dlfp^^. ^.6. Scaiiger Exercit.^oj. f. t. ^%z\[o Bradivaraintf Scona , Cfijetatii ambo, Albert: D'Orbtlhs^ Ruvio, Al^tdust Ktc- kerman Stieriu/^ Zitnchius^ Bttrgerfdicias, A. C. fafcic. log, Trideaux HjpomKem. with many more , have taughc me to ac- count vifion, intelIcdion,and vohcion for Immanent Ads. And though there be a reception of thc//?fofj,and fo fornewhat of paflionaswellasef adion, vet that of paffion is but a prepa- ration or t^tiafi matertaie^zm the formnUels inai^ion, as Kec- l^trman^ Sjji.log.p. I lO. PhjficinonntiUid'tfcernHnt materiale ^formate : fie matertah in vtf(4 efi rectptio [pecitrHm vifibilium in oculoj ^M£ ejl pajfto : tfl dtinde dtindicaiio ret li/ibJis per il- las (pedes ^Ht hant a nigre^ &c, [k in rebus Divinti vis nofira mentis e?" voluntatis & p^-^Jfiva (^ a6li- vaefi. PaffivaejHatenusrecipit gratiamaDeo ia nobis tperante : ABiva veroquAtenm afetla Dei gratia, ipf/i Credit^ipfa Am^tt ^ A^i enim Agimw. Res fua natura inrellg blrs vis \xc anima: Patiens intelleBas appellata, efficit fuo lum ne , fuaque AElione^ nt res aUu intelligantHr. Hoc lumen inttll, Sins Agent is, hcc efi, anima. no/Ira ^ non minima pars tjl imagir.is Det in (jua crtati ft^^ mus. Obfcuratufmtlttx nobis ccjnmynlcAiapsr peccathm ^-dtj cc 3 /fa C.c^S) fed illffflratur cler.Ho per (^lorijium t uncie hac nova luce Dtnm Dii^ue mjfleriavuelligimiu ^ fi<£certe ^nimaiis homo percip^re n >n potejl. Troimeie {um fjjemtu tenthra, cier.Ko fa^i Jftmus c^ voc^mur lux /» T)om'KO. tx h:tc noy** luce doKatA per ChnJIum , i»teLigimfis cju-.dfti iitelle^ui A^tnr. Zanch. ibid. p. 596. You lee ho»v is^r Zunch.K^ Philofoph^- and Divinity is from yours . fj f • 594* Sji antem mtmfefla ii nohis hcc i»-e//eiJfis '^£iio^ lumpct iniellgcre. £t p.ig.61'^. He faith the inLelled hath feur operations, i. Sim;licium Apprehenjio. z. Hur^tm Contpo- ft'to. 3. CornfoftorHrTi xjiimAtio^to^tie er verorum a falfit divi- jh. ^. Ex Hj ratiocinatio. And you know that Ze/^z, having torfiierly thought, with ^y^pd. Paul. Vemt. & C-ja. ihac j'enfa'.'o ( er ita i?}te''ectio ) (ft formaliter pafsio ^ did cliangc his judgement, and at laft conclude that t^'tft:) -vel fenfAtio altAdmi muut diciti unummaterialtter^ ^ kic eft receviy fpe- citi'. altcrumfornja/lter, (^ hie eft JBio : Prior infft Orga- fjo rat'rone muter. a : pofterior ratione fotentia^ C^ a ima : tfimeu UterqHe liiemintft Orgayio. Prior (jHidcm non efi lubftantialiter & tjffKti,. liter Jet)fu[io^ fed concqmitaMs (;^ velut dfpofitio: pofte- rior eft e([eyitiaitterft»fAtio. But I have been too tedious on thif. vid. ultra in I. 2. de Ani- **t^ip. 7j;»ry^ff? hit the Habit ? No : Fori. That csnnotbepaflivc. 2. That isnot it that juflifieth. 3. That is net a paifion, as ^ou fay this is. 4. That is not a Grumw^ticAl Action (l^p) ''^Etion, as you hy this is ; What then ! U it the ASl of F^ith ? No: Fori. Tbatsitthatyou are denying,^nd fay its but z/f^- ' hum uSlivHtn. 2. YonUy, it :-i pijfive. But how an /;<.?;<»» can hcp.iJJ7ve, isfofar beyond the reach of my weak under- 1 ftanding, that I cou'd not believe if,though it wrre fuJged He-' relie to deny it. Pjifso intrinfecum ord^nem <^iil' ad fnojfctunr^ C ripifgnat dari pajjimem extra fnhjecttim^ faith St4 i.'t^. Tomz. d}fp^^.p:^%i. And chat Action cm be the lubjcrt of 'Taf- fim, (s Philofoph} that I never learned, and I think never TnaU do Efpecially if S:hibler and molt Philofophers fay true that Actio (^ pafsionon d jferunt remitter fed fecundstm iKax/x^t^a- to.f concept y J. For very many have taught me, thurothePc- ripateticksitis abfurd for the fame to be both the Ad'.on^Taf' /ion and Ta^nm ; yea to common reafon it is Moft certainly therefore it is neither Hairit, nor v^c r of faith which you callfaith. What is it thenPIs it a Pafionfi) you fay your felf, and therefore I muft take that to be your meaning : And 1 cannot imagne whatelfe you fhould call faith But here you leave me at as great a lofs as before. For, t. Youfayjtis P^f- fve; But I never heard or read before of a pafuve Puf fion^ any more then of a Pajsive Action'. And if I (hould fet my underftanding on the wrack ic would not apprehend or ac- knowledge any fuch thing. I cannot imagine that it is the foul it felf which you fay is pafsive. i . Bccaufe you fay it is faith, 2 Becaufe elfc your Argument muft conclude that the foul only is rhe inftrument But we are not qucftioning the inftrumentality of the foul now, but of faith. More I might urge to ilicw that this cannot be your meaning, but that I will not fuppofe that it is the foul it (elf which yoa call ftith. It being therefore nei- ther the Soul^ Habit , Act, nor Pafsion which you here fay is Pafstve in its it(irumtnta!ity , I am forced to confefs I know sot what you mean : Yet if you (houldmean any Potemia Taf- (iv'a. I. Whether there beany fuch in the rational foul dftinifl from the foul it felf,is a great doubt. 2. If there were, I know not how it can be called fuith.^. Nor is it fuch a Pottr.tia that is the i-.rirumentofjuftificatiop.Yet afterwards yoa fay, It is an act of dependance,which here you call a Pafsion. 2. But whether A^ or Poffion^ it muft belong either to the (200} VphrfiAndirg^ot }VUL ox both'. And i. If you (bould place ic only in the underftanding, you would C befides Dr. DownAm) havefew butthe Papiliswiih you. 2- If in the Will only, then ( as Scripture is moft plain againrt ir, fo ) you would alfo go againft che generality of our Divines McUnClhon, Jo. froci-^^ ylwefiM , Oavenavt, &c. make it the common Proteftant Tencc, thAticisin both. In aUu fi'iei jHflifiCantii tota annta fe convert'tt ad Cdftfum juftifica^tem : Davcnant,Detcrm. Q^ ^ 8. pj^. 174. F^des ilia quam Scriptura jitfitficantem agnofcit^habtl in fe CO ■ipLcatHm aEium volxtnmtn 0- ir.ttUeUu4. idem. ibid. •^•37-f^I- ^^^' -^"^ to them that chink it abfurd to have it in both faculties, I anfwer with the fame Author, i. ^(id philcf ikaKtfir volffntmiem f^ iKte/leHum e^t duM potentioi re ipfa dtJiiriCloi, dogma phi/ofoptjiCHm ej} ab omnibus hand receptum, (not of ^'coittf and his followers, with many morej &The- oLogicis d^gmatibtts firmandu out infirmandu fundament m mini* me idcHcum. 2. Ntq-^nobiiabftirdtim^ fed valds conftrtansum z'iaetffr^a^iiav i//ftm ano tota ant ma pun fie at ur cr jujiificatftrj aJ totam aniWiim pertinere : ita ut in nudo intelltctft habeat wittum^in V olftnt ate complement um. Idem. ibid. 3. if you fay it is in both ( as I doubt not but you will, it being the plain Truth ) then i. It cannot pofsibly be any one lingk ^-'ct otTaJfion which you call the pajfive Inftrumeatt and do you think to find out many fuch.^ 2. For that whicfi belongech to the underiUnding, i: muft be either ay* -wp/^^i^/jr*- henfion, a covtpofttton or dizifon, or a ratiocinttion or Jahemtnt. And I. A fimple Apprehenfionitcannot be : I. For fotheln- telledreccivech all Objeds alike. Ic receiveth fin, death, un- riphteoufnefs, Sscan, heil \n the fame kind asitrcceivethGrace, Life, KighceournefsChrift, Heaven. Forit underftandeth both in the fame way. receiving rhem per modhmobjectii. And thus it receivech not the very thng ic fielf EfTentially, ( though it under - )?:.-,ri^jtidic:ire, yati- indf) G^ r.cn cgtre.o} I think HO iD3n. When To/.*/ difputeth rtli'UKJ irtcliigerefit fat'i} lie i?^\\\\^ Adtertertii^nt (fi cjuodjc'una efi de ajp'ehty.ftcve -^ ram de con p->Jiticru C^ ftiJ do ran eji du- bt'tnapudomne'. 'Xo\. ck :ir.-mi. p.'i66. 1 will not therefore fuppofe you to differ in y cur Philofcpliy frcm all men. What Adofthe underi'.andirg ycu will maketobe part oi' JuHify- iug faith, I know not • tor I find Divines are very htik sgrecd in it ; Hut the moft make Aff nt to be the only Ad of the un- der ftanding ( thotjgh fomc add«c;if.\3 ) and of them feme make it £jff ;;fT preicqulfite Ad. Now if it were j^^eyfus Nocirftt^ yet it is impo'sibleit fliould be formally a P;ifsion : but much more im- pofjible when it is /^jfmfas dlanoeticus vtl difurftvjis^ as is mcft evident it \%^ a nd~4jnr judicious Rob. BarorApti truly teacheib, Phi/of. Thtcl. Aned. Exerc^. sy^rt. 16. Moft Divifie* plJicc the chief EfTcnce of Fa'thin fdttcia .• but then tbeyare jis ill agreed what to mean by fiducla. 'T tmble wowld fain pcrfwade us that to Believe the Truth of a particu- lar Promifc:, is to truft on the performance of it to me; and that the /:jfe»t of Faithwhich is gjventofuchaPromife,is properly c^WciJi fidurif.fjrTrufl. But this is grounded ofi his lingular opi- nion , that 7~rf^rj[7 and G'f<7^«f/} are all one, c>"C. Baroriasy pag- i:i,2. tels us of a four-fold /i3'»f*4 : The firft he makes to be but a confident Aflent to the Truth of the Promife, and a firm fisre Perfwafion of thcRemilsionpf my bvn fins and of nry Salvation. The fccondis a Reftingon GodsGoodnefs alone, err. He placeth ihejuftifying venue only in the firft, which ret containctft but partly Aflent ( which we plead againft the Papiflsufuallv nor tobc the juflifying Ad) and partly a par- ricultr Ferfwsfioti or Belief of Pardon, which is properly no D d Faith. C2-01) I'akh, but that commonly called Aflufancc. Now this kind of fi.Ucia is but the Affcnt v\e have fpokcn of, and is beyond all difpute no meer Paffion^hni an A^ of ihe UnderlUnding. 2. But moft Divines make thar^-/«o,j which is an ad of the /■f;'/ to have the chief hand in this work of jul\fiying : though B*roKi:is is fo confident that it is not an act of Faith, but an Ef- fect and Confequent, that he takes it for a thing fo raanifeft, that irneedeth no proof, p 234. And Dr. Downam hath brought not a few, nor contemptible Arguments to the fame purpofe againft Pemble , Afpsnd. to Covennat of Gr. Yet though we have found it in the Will, yet it is hard to find wliat act of the Will they mean. If it been Elici; .-^cf^it rouft firft cither refpect the End, and then it is either velle intendere vtl frui • But fure fidvcia is none of thefe • and if it were, it is more furcthatat leaft the two firft are not Pajfioas-^ and I think not the laft, though it be nothing to the prefent point : Of elfc 2. It muft refpect the Means ; and then it muft be £U^ere, (^onfentire vtl Vti ( in which joined to AJJentt I take juftifying Faith Co confift ) : Cut it is both evident that none of thefe isfidficU, and if they were , that none of thefe are paf. fietis or f^Jfive. So that hitherto we are to feek for this Pafsiyc Faith. Or elfe it is an Imp.irate Act ^ and then we are in a wood to feek among fo many that there is little hope of finding it. The Truth feems to me to be beyond difpute,that fclucia is no one fingle Act ( though one word ) but a compofition of many im- plying or containing the aWffent of the undcrftanding, the £/^Oul ii Paffive and not sy^ctiwe ? Indeed Hope and Fenturoufnefs are Pajfiont^ but in another fenfe ( as Keckerm. and Tolet ubiftiprA have well opened j Its in refpect of their tjuafi materi- ale. ) I amcontcnttoftandor fallby thevoteof Philofophers, jiving yen i OQ to one, whether the Formality of thfe motions J (Z03) of the fVillUe iiPafiion or Astion} And if they Attt^cts , whether t bey can betke Subjects of P^ifsion ^ und jo htpafsivt Acts ? So that yet J cannot find out your pafsive Faith. g. But yen further, if Faith be paUivc Phyfically, let us f'nj out fi.'lt what is the /Igent f z. What the .'Jction ? 5. What [he /W/e«^ or Object ? 4. What is ibe Terminfts ad I. I doubt not but it is agreed that the Agent is God ; for it is hethat juftifieth. 2, i [xQiermims or ret motnfaSla i^ two- fold. I. jutiificacion infen^M UgUf rommonfy called co^/- ft itfttive fftflific.it inn (pafsive. ) 2. 'PubLcjae Jaflification by pleaandfeateKceatfi4(igement (pafsive) 3. The Aftion muil: be therefore two-fold, or two Adions according to rlie two- fold Terrnintis. Yea in the former we may (' if we accurately confider it ) rind out a two-fo!d AtlioH and Termi^uj^ though the difference be narrow ; In which we arc to conlider, i . Of thelnftrument, 2. And the nature of the Actions, i. The Inftrumcnt is the word of Promifc or Grant in the Gofpel ( for if you know any other way of Gods juftifying,or any immedi- ate Ad of God herein which is 1 ranlient Jwould it were reveal- ed What Ad it is. ) Herein 1 have Mr. Rfttherfoy-d hying as I , over and over againft the AnttKomiant. 2. The Adion there- fore can be no other then a moral Action, as a Leafe or Bond, or written- Law may be faidto act. Now the Gofpel pcrform- cth to our firft Juftification a two-fold Action, i. It doth as a Deed of Gift beftow Chrift and his Merits on men, fo it be they will Believe. This Action doth not immediately and di- rectly conftitucc them Righteous : for Rightcoufncfs being a Relation, muft have its Foundation firft laid : This Act there- fore of Donation (^ which fomecal! Imputation) doCh directly lay the F««c/4i»f';;«»»,whence the Relation of Righteous doth i Immediately arife ( when the Condition ispeformcd ) pernu" iXAnt r tfnlt Ant i am Without any other Act to produce it. And this is moft: properly called Juflificatio conjiitHtiva aUiva. 2. When the Gofpel hath by Gift conftituted us Righteous, then next in order it doth declare or pronounce us Righteous, and rcrtually acquit us from Condemnation. This is by the like filet^t moral interpretative Action only as the other. ( And per- • Dd 2 bap» iiap; m \y be moft fitly called the imputing of Rif^lueoufnefs, or ellecmingus Righreousjas Pifcutor. ) And for the litt:g him ; ] Ic is much more beyond my reach to conceive how faith can in refpect of it be pafsive : For 1. Befides that it is amoral action as the former, and fo cannot of it felf produce a phyfic.1l pafsion. a. It doth not therein fpeak of or to faich , pronouncing it juQ, snd ac- quitting it , but of and to the Believer. So that li Faith were phyfically pafjivc in the former, yet hereit is irapofsible. .^. If you fay that it is phyfically (ormorally)paf5ivcinreg3rd of the latter full Juftification by fentence at Judgement, you would tranfcend my capacity moft of all. To fay faith'is the Patient of Chnfts- judiciary publiquc fentence.is a fentence that ftiall never be an article of my Fsith : and is fo grofs.thac I con- jecture you would take it ill if I (jiould take it to be your mean- ing s therefore 1 will fay no moreagaiuft it. Nowyouknow^ that this is ( as you fay in your Lei}. ) the moft conjp/e^t Jujii- fication-^ and which I moft ftandupon : and therefore if your arguments fatl in refpect of this, they yield me almoftill I expect. Next I will tell ycu ray Rcafons Theological why I believe not that juftifying faith, as fuch,is pafsive. i. All Divines and the Scripture it felf hath perfwaded me, that Chrift and the Pro- mifes are the Object of this Faith : but a Pafsion hath no Ob. jcctj but a fabjcct, &c. Therefore according to you Chrift, ^c. Dd 3 is is not the object of it ; which is contrary CO all that I have heard or read, ^ 2. I have read Divines long contending ft'WA »/ the Act of juftifying faith , qua talis. And Tome fay one , and feme another; but all fay one,or other or many. Now you cut the Knot, find contradict all, in making it (at leail ^mtenus fn- jiifcani) no Act atall^ huta Pa fsto»: unlefs you will fay it is a pafsiveaci^ which I dare not imagine. And doubtlefs thefe Divines (hew by their whole fpe-rch that by Actus Fidei, they mean Actus fecuMc-H: vil Actic^ and not ActHSprimf^s vei enn- tativus vel occidental's, five ut informiinSf five Ut operativut, fed ipj^cperatic. 3 . 1 am truly afraid left by entertaining this opinion I (houlJ ftrikeinnot only with the ^»/»'o>r>.^w; (whocannotendure to hear of any conditions of life of our performing, but even with the Lilrer tines, who tell me to my face, that man is but Pafsive, and as the foul Ads the body, fo Chrift in them raovc:h the loul to Good, and Satan to evil, while they arc mecrly Paf- five, and therefore the Devil (hall be damned for fin who committeth it in them , and not ibcy j for who will bite the Itoneor beat the i!aff,or be angry at the fword-?-(^f, 4.Elfe you mutt deprcfs the excellent grace of faith below all orher, in making it meerly Pafsive while others are adivc : For doubdefs life and excellency is more in Adionthen PaC fion. .5. If believing be only fuffering , then all Infidels arc damned only for not fuffcring,which is horrid. 6. Scripture frequently condemneth wicked men for Adion, for Kebellion, Refufing, RejedingChrili, Ink' "i 9' 27 They hate him and fay ,we will not have this man reign over us, &c, and this is their unbelief. If they refitted the Holy Ghoft only PaJ/ive er non ay^Siive , then it would be only an intptiiudo tnttteriei^ which isin all alike at firft, and fo all fhould be alike rejeders. 7. Ifto believe bebut ?/«r/,then itisGod and not man that fhould be perfwaded : For perfwafion is cither to Action or forbearing Action ; and God is the Agent: But it is in vain to pcrfwade any to be Paftive, except it be not to ftrive againtt againftic. This therefore would overthrow much of the ufe of the Mmiftry. - 8 . And then whcnChrift foex'ollech dol^rg ths VfHI of God, ^r\d, doing hU (^ommanimeyitty crc. you will exclude juftifying faith, as being no do:^^. 9. Is it credible, that when Chrift cals faith Obeying the Cojpely and fiich, Th's U the work ofGod^ thi'ye believe on him i.vhrm the fa: her h^th [ent-^ and calls it the rvork^ off/tit h, 2 Thef. I. II. and faith, God gtvcth towill, (that is, to believe) ^Wrt? do^ cfrc. that all this is meant of meer Pafsion ? I undertake to bring forry places of Scriprure th.u lliew fj;:h to be Action. I o. It fecmeth to me fo great a debafing of fciich, as to make it CO benovertuc at all, nor to have any moral gnod in it. For though \ have read of Paffio ptrfen;iv:i it genere entii vet Tjatur.c, andconducibkcovertuc^ Yet am I not convinced yet that any Pafsfonas fuch, hath any moral vertue in ir. Indeed Pafsion maybe the ^f4afi mueri/tle^ but the vertue is in Acti- on. Yea, even in non-acting, fas filcnce) the venue lies formally in the actual exercife of the Authority of Rcafon, and fo obeying God in caufing that (ilence, Suic if men (hall be all judged accordin{» to their works, and according to whac •they have done, 6^ ^'. then it will not be becaufc they did ei- ther Pati oel »on pati. And thu^ youh?.ve forae ofmy reafons why I cannot believe that 'Believing is pafiion, nor fhal! be- lieve it I think, till Credere be Pati , and then I may whe- ther I will or no, becauf: pati .vel nen ptti are not in my choice. '■' - ', '■ '^ ■■ ■ r '■ ' ■• ^ ^ > - 5. The third Q^t^\orC^^^yhetherf-iiih he pvjlve inhfi'njir'k^ mentality ?' Vtx And I think that is out of doubt, if my former arguing have proved that faith is not pallive at alitor if 1 next prove that faith is no phyjical infrftment. Cut yet if I (liould grant both that faith is pji/}»V?, and that it is an Inftrument^ yctmuft I have either more or lefs Logick before I can believe that \z is pafsive in its inflrumentalitj . My reafons againft it are thefc. 1. Every Inftramental caufc is an efficient caufe : but all tra? efficiency is by aftion .• there- 2o8) tberefore all inftrumentality is by z^'ion.Tlut cJuftHt-^s effi.icn- t:-i ejl Actio ; 'S' hac ejl form^ per (juam denorKinaUir ejficiens\q tit agent (^ effiiiem fttnt idem^Scc. 1 have been caught fo oft and fo confideiKly thiC i believe it , (^ov oportet difcentcm credere) : andthacby Philofophers ofno mean efteem.as Snares: Tcm.i. difp. iS.j.lO J4vel. C^ietuph l.g.ij. \6.Conim. (^olleg. Ployf* i- Z.'g. 6. ar:. -1. cj^'j. Scnliqtr. Izxer it. 2^-^. A^Hinis^^^vio^ Perrece, MeUnUk, Zwichmi^Zuhirel, Pererifn.Schihler^ Scierias^ Ctt. Temped, in Kam. with many more. And if there b»' no fucli ihin^rnre'^urft natura as i Pafjive iftli>tf»feKt, chen faith is none fuch. I know Kccl^erm. Aljied. & Bargerfdiciys do talk of a Paifive inftrument ; but I think m proper fpcech it is a contradidion,in adjectoznd fay as Schlhler Metapkyfl.i sAp.ii. Tit y.p, 3»l 9. Nift Actionem propriam hiberet In^rumenttan, ef~ ficiens noa ejfet-^ ^ proindep^fnvum in(lri4mini.umtj(toi Ktckerm. voCAt, reverainlirHmentum nonefi. £c at Idem ^Topc ctp. 2. mtm. 34. InjlrHmentumtotHmhoc hahet ijuid ad caufam (ffi.ien' tern adJHvantem (adqujim referimus c.iufam infirumentalem) re- ejuiritHr. R^tio enim communis ilUrumefi hx'. 1>efervire ope- rationi principxhs aeey,tii per ulteriorem operationem. Et Idem, Topic.cap.z.yiHitJ. 6. i^er. An efficient!^ Caf*fitIitMlAdio ? Refp. dtA ponitur in Theor. 56. & fen tit it a hsdie (.M^xim^ pars Lagi- arum & 'J\teti'^phy[i:arHmJ''tde ultra pro confirmAtiane ai nu.g., Stceiiim cap. 3. ««wi.i ?-t-*j way (hould hold of irifufing grace into tne will /lleiiante afdioneintelU3.us,i\i<.n the intelktc would be Pa/sivc pJI£cc^"fving [?racerntp jt felf , and an in{}rHme>:t orc'\nveying ic to the will : but :hcn \t would be noPdiVivebucan Active i-^lirument : and the action of Godon the Pafsive intellect, nnd of the intellect on the will,are two Acti- ons with dillinct eff-'cts. 2. rhou{;h there were fuch a thing in the world. a& a P^iWe inftrument, yet that/^.f/a Hiould befuch, and \hupky/,caL^ I dare fay is cither an unfic aflertion, or clfc I am of » ilupid. a^- pre- (^op) prchcnfion. For there rouft be found in it fif it were fuch) thefefour requifites. i. There rauft be a phyfical panionor re- ception. 2. A pbyfical efficiency; 5. This efficiency muft be ■patier.do^ nottAgtndo. 4. And ir muft be fuch an efficiency a? is proper to inftrument*. 1 may nor ftand to enquire exactly in- tocllchefe. i. The firft I have confuced alrendy , y.id fn^il add this much more. i. What doth faith thus receive ? 2. How doth It receive it > 3 . Whence ? Or from what Agent and Act ? IT 's it Chrift himfelf that is ph^fically received by Taich ? 1. Who dare fay fo, hniih^Vhiquitanuns ^ and Trarfubibn- tiacionracn? and perhaps not they. ChrilUs in Heaven, and wcon earth. A multitude ofblafpbemers, Libertines, and Faml" lifts,! lately meet with that dream of this, but no lober man. 2. And indeed if Chritts perfon were thus received, it would not make a man righteous, or juOifie hira. As all our Di- vinesfay, his bdng in the body of ol/^r; would not have jufti- fiedher : Nor did the kiffing of h;s lips juftifie Judas ; nor eating and drink'ng inhii prefence juflifie thofe that muft de- part from h\m for working tniquity , C^'IatthtVc 7. If we bad fo known Chrift, we (hould know him no more : It was neceflary -to hii Difciples thzt he ftiould go from them • wc muft not have the Captrnaites conceit of eating hij flcfti. Yea, to talk ora;»/[^yyic^/ receiving by faith, is far groflcr : For the month was capable of that phyHcal^contacc, which faith is not. 3: And then this will not ftand with their Judgement,that blame me for making Chrift himfelf the object of juftifying faith, and not the promife directly. 2. If yoo fay that the thing received is Chrifts tightcoufnefs , ( as moii do that I read ) I anfwer, I . Righreoufncfs is but t relation : And therefore a thing which is naturally uncapable of being of it felf phyfically apprehend* ed. This is part doubf. 2. If it be phyfically received, then either ai a principle and quality, oris anobject. Notthefor- mer; For fo wc receive our firft, (and after/ grace in fancti- fication ; but none ever faid foin Juftification ; Nor indeed canchs: (ighteoufnefs which is formally but a relation , dwel in us as a principle or quality. If we receive it as an objed , then by an Ad : Or if thc.foul were granted to be pafsive in reception of an ob;e£^, I have (hewed that, i.Itisbutfn up*' Ee ftthtH" QUO) frehenfionejtry)\>ltci : None pleadcth for more : But faith is nor ruch.2. And (o ic would receive Chrift no otheiways dienit rc- ce;vech anyobjcd whatfoever it thus apprebcndeth. 5. And this is not to receive Chrift or his righteoulnefs, but the meer fpecies of ic according to your own Philolophers, ( and if righ- tcoufne fs be but a relation ; and s relation, as Darandu; , Dr. Tvlfs.^rA n'.any anoiher think bebuc£«/ R^tionu, then the fpeciesofan £x/ Ratiotiu is a very curious Web J Knowledge (iiS^iyOrhei/is faith in i.fer.r.D>f.:\. ^i. ) is twofold,/, c Jen- fitive and intelle^ive ^ and each of thefe twofold, Intuitive and yihftrallive. Intuitive hjiofvleige is indeed de ohjecio Mt in fe prapnsi }/ J to retain it ^ and embrace and enjoy it ^hen fir/} rvekr.ow it to he ours : ]] For though this fay as much as I need to plead for, acknowledging Love to be as properly aphyiical Recepti- on for retention, as Faith is for firft Poflef$ion,yet if affiance be taken in any proper ordinary fence, it cannot thus hold good neither ; for fo iA {fiance muft fignifie feme ad of the will irt order of nature after love, or at leaft not before ic I ackoow-' ledge that fo much of Faith as lyech in the underftanding is be- fore Love in order of nature ; Jicnt tpfeintelle^Hs tji ftmpltciter _ prior voluntate.at motivum mobili^& aSlivumpaJJivo^ »r Aquin. ' i.q.$. 2.a. 5.a.4«ucly produce the effect ( orily fup- f/ofing Faith as a condition. ) 2. .- nd it is but a moral Inltiu- mental caufe it fclf, ard how fathcan be a Ph^lical, 1 know not. J. Nay the a A if bac a n-.oral act , fuch a- a Stature or Bond actetb, and what need Faith to be 2 phyHcal Inltru- inenc? 2. My fecord Reafon is this : Ins generally concluded, that TetsinlirttmtKttcait/MirM iji inufu c-r afflicAtior,e\ It ceafeth to be an Inltrurnent, when it ceafeth to be ufed or acted by the principal caufe .• But faith doch moft frequently ceafe its action, and is not ufed ( pbyrically)whcn we flcep or wholly mind other things : Therefore according to this Doctr.ne, faith ftiould then ceafe it»Inftrumcntality;and conffquently either we Hiould ail that while be unjuftificd and unpardoned, or elfe be juftified and pardoned forae other way, and not by faith. All which is abfurd ; and eafily avoided by difcerning faith to be but a Condition of our JuftiHcation, or tCaufa ft>.t cjua non. 5. If Faith be a phyficsl Infirumtnt^ then it fliould juftitie from a reafon intrmfecal^ natHval .'«c^ tfeMttal to it, and not from Gods meer ordination of it to this office by hs Word of Promife ; but that were at leaft dangerous Doccrine .- and fhould not be entertained by them who (truly) acknowledge that itjultifies not as a work ^ much Icfstiren asa Phftcalxt- ception which they call its Inftrument-lity. The ccnfequencc of the Major is evident.inthat nothirgcir.be more intnnfecal and cffentialto faith f this faith ) then to be what it is, t//«. a Reception or acceptance of Cbrift or bit Righteoufnefs : thcre- Ec J fore a fore if ic juftific directly as fuch, then it jaftifieth of its own Nature. 4. It is to meahardfaying, that God and Faith do the fame thin|5, {hat is. Pardon and jailiHe : and yet fo they do if it be an Inllrument oi Juiiificacion : ror eadem efl Actio Infiruruenti 0" yrir,ci^aU< cau[£, V;Z. qitoad dettrmimtionem ad httnc ef' feSlttm, ut Aquinas, Schibler, e^c. I dare not fay or ihinlf, that Fai:h doth fo properly , effectively juftifie and pardon us. 5. It feems tome ncedlef^i to feign this Inftrumentality, be- CZ\x(tfrufira fit per plitra (j nod fieri pot efi per paucisra. 6. Vca it derogateth from the work j for as Scotus faith, ( in 4. dift. 45. q. I. pag. ( miht ) 239. D. ) Actio fitte inflrumento eft perfectior quttft actio cttm iadrumento. 7. And this Doctrine makes miziiohtlhtcaHJaproxima, of faisown Pardon and Juftiticacion. For it is man that believes and not God:God is the can/a pri*na^buz mtn the ca»faproxima cre- aendiy and fo of iuftifying,if Faith be an Inftrument Or at leaft man is a caufe of his own Pardon and Juftification. Yea faith b?- ing by Divines acknowledged our own I nftrumcnr,it muft needs follow that we juftifie and forgive our felves. Dr. .^wf^wj faith, {"Bellar. £r2ervat.To.4.\[6,p.(m\h\)^i').)PIf4rimf{mrefert:^uia fcfit (acramentA (judmvis alicjuofnfttpofsir.t did In^rumentA no- ftra^ &c. priprie tamenfiint f-nflyumtnta Dei:ftc etiam fides cffnani' n/ispofsit vocari hftrumentiim Dei, cjaia Deus jttfiificat nos ex fi- de & per fidem, prtprietamen efl InfirfimentHmnojirHm. Deus 190s biptizit (^ pafctt, non nofmet ipji : Nos creciimHS in Chri^um^ non Dens. Whether faith may be a moral Inftrument, I (hall enquire,when 1 have anfwercd the next queftion ; which is,Q^6. // faith yvcreJHcha Phjfical Pafsive(or Active) Infirument, "Whe- ther th:tbe the formal direct reafqn of its jttftifying ? and rvhether {oiit 16 ) it dojtiftifie dinctlj andprimart/yy quatenus cR apprc- henfioChrifti, juftitiae^vel Juftificationis. And this is it that I molt confidently deny.and had rather you would flick to in de- bate then ail the reft : for I ground many other things on it.I af- 6rm therefore, i . That faith juftifierh primarily and directly, as the condition on which the free Donor hath beftowed Chrift, with all his benefits in the GofpeFconvcyance. 2. And that if it were C^'O were a meer Phyfical apprchenfion ic would not juftifie; nO nor do us any good. 3. And rhac theapprehenlion called rhe recep- tivity whicn IS truly its nature, is yet but its aptitude co its juftify- in^ otficCjandfo-a remote, &: notthe direft proper formal caulc. iheJe three 1 will prove in order. 1. And f.)r the firft it is proved, i. From the Tenor of the jul^ifynig l^romife, which Itill afTurcth Juftification on the condition ot Bdievmg. [] He that believeth~] and [_ rvh'^ fever believith'^M-\d [_ if thou he- iieve^ do pliuily and ur.queftionably exprcis fuch a condition, upon which we (hall be jullified, and without which weftiall no:. The //«rf«i7/wM«; moft unreaionAbiy deny this. 2. And the nature of Judification makes it unqucltioinable : for whe- ther you make ic a Law-ad, or an ad of Gods own Judge- ment and Will determining of our ftate, yet nidierwill admic of any intervening caufc, ( cfpecially any ad of ours, ) but only a condition. ". Befidep, Conditions depend on the will of him that beftowcth the Gift, and accordmg to his Will ihey fuccecd ; but Inftrumencs more according co their own fitncfs : Now it is known well, that Juftihcation is an ad of Gods meer free Grace and Will, and therefore nothing can further conduce to Gods free act as on our parr, but by way of Condition. 4. And I need not fay more to this, it being acknow- ledged generally by all our D. vines, not one that I remember excepted, bcfides Mr. fVulkjcr^ that ifAth jn^ifieth as the condi- tion of the Covenaya^ Mr. f^l'otton de Reconcil. p4r. i. /, 2. cap. 1 8. brings you the full Teftimony of the En^Hfh Homilies. Fox^ Terl^iKj, Paratu^ Trelcatins^ ''Dr. G. ^j^natf, Sch^rpifts^ Th. CMatthtm y Calvin^ Aretitis^ Sadeel ^ OUviun ^ CMe- lancth, Be^a .: To which I could add msny more : and I never fpoke with any folid Divine that denyed it. 2. Now thata phyfical apprchenfion would not juftifie, as fuch, is evident, i. Elfe /Uary (hou\d be juftificd for having Chriftinhcr womb, as I faid before. 2. Elfe juftificati- >n» aslfaid, fliouldbeafcribcd totbenatureof the act of faithic felf. 3. You may fee what is the primary, formal reifun why faith luftihcs, by its infeparablilicy from the effect or event ^ and which is the improper remote caufe by it? fepuab;!! y. Now fuch a phyfical apprehcnfion may be Cas fuchj fepar red from itd) from the CJffecf, and would Hill be if ic had not the further na- ture of a condition. We fee it plainly in all worldly thing?. Eve- ty man chat take; in h^s hand a conveyance- of land, (hall not pofTefs the land. If you forcibly feiz-; upon all a raan« eviden- ces and writing?, you fha!l not therefore p^fTefs hiseltafe. If a traytor fnatch a pardonby v olcnceourofanothcrfhand, he isnot therefore pardoned. (But more of ohis under the next\ 4. And for your piilivefairh, I cinnot conceive how it fhould ^as pifllivej havr any Moral good in it Casisfaid,) much lefs juftifieu?. And lb when God faith that wichout fai:h it is impofiibleto pieafe God we fliall feign that co be jj'lifying faith, which hath nothing in it fclf, that can pleafe God : and how it can juftifie that doth not pleafe, I know not. I know i*i ^e»tre entit the Divels peafe God j They are hii creatures ; and naturally Good , as Ens &boKMm convertHn' tHr : h\ii in gentrtmoyif^ 1 know no! yet how p^i (juatemdt pati can pleafe him. For it doth not require fo much as lib;fr- ty of the will : The reafon of Paffion is from the Agent : As ^Hflrez dif. 17. vj. 2. Stcunium frtcifas rationts formnfet U- tjMtndo^ Pajfto tji ab ACfiont : ^ non i convnft. lieoqite vt- rA e(h i^ propria hdc CAufalU locutio^ Qui* agtns agh , nutteria recipit. Now fure all Divines as well as the free-will men , do acknowledge, that there can be no pleafing worth or ver- tue, where there is not liberty. And SnanK. faith truly in that (T. idiff. 19 pil-imiht) 1^0.) '^AMimui vtrohancfacMltA' lem i}ffAttnti4 Itbtra tfl , non pojfe (jfe n ji /i£iiv4m- ffue converfo ftU5 donaverit fiilei'ihtts (^hrifiHin dr ovir.i / cum eo^ Scr'ipiurA di[ertiivtYb'^tefiatiir^Rom,%.%z. 2. And that if any other fort or a^ of faith, as well as this, or any other grjce would have juf^ifiedjif God had made it equally the conaition of his gift, isalfopaft alldoubr. i. Becaufe the whole work of Ju- Itifyingdependethraeerly on Gods free Grace and will, and thence it is that faith is deputed to its office. 2. who do^bceth but God could have beftowcd pardon and juftiricaiion on other terms or conditions, if he would ? 3. Yea who doubtctli but he might have given them without any condition , even that of acceptance ? Yea though we had never known that there had been a Redeemer, yet God might have juftified us for his fake. I fpeak not what he may now doafrer he refolved of a courfe in his Covenant: But doubtlcfshe might have made the Covenant to be an abfolute promife without any conditi- on on our part if he would, even fuch as the Antinominns dream it to be. And me thinks thofe great Divines , that fay with Tivijfe^Chamier , lyal^'n, &c. rhat God might have pardoned us without a Redeemer, fhould not deny this efpeci- ally. 4. And doubclefs that faith which rhe Ifraelites in the firftagesweie juftified by , did much differ from ours now. whatever that doth which is requTed of poor Indians now ^ that never heard of Chriih 5 And God pardoneth and ju- ftifieth Infants, w.thouc any adua! reception of pardon by their faith. 2. And nre thinks they that ftand for the inftrumentality of faith above all flijuld not deny this ; for (according to my Logick) rhc formality of an Inf^rnment is in its adual fub- fcrviency to the principal caufe : and therefore it is no lon- ger caufainflrHmcntdlii then it is ufed : and.thercfori: wkaifoc- ver (ZIc^) vcr is the »3^?fn4 of the iuftrumenc, or whatfoever is natural toir, cannot be its form : Now to be a reception or appre- henfion of Chri!!:, is moft clfcnrially niturai to this ad of faiCh, an J therefore cannot be (he form of its inftrumencalicy. For as Scc/itijhhh (i» JSf.fcy.t.cii'}.\.q.%. Fol. {mitsi ) I ^.H.) >nltrn. mentiidonejt IS f etc edit natural iter ufftm ejus ut inflrumeKtum. And what is the /^i/^Tft'^/ or ^ijpriV^^r of faith but this? And as Scot us /^tci.Uith, Nullum uiJlrHmentttm formaUttr eft ideo ap • turn ad tifuniy quiaalicjnis uritur eo utinjlrnmeKto : butic is an Inftrament^wM ah^uis fit:tfir,(^c. ?. And if the reception were the moft dircd, .proper caufe, f efpccialiy if the phyfical reception) then it would follow, chat julUfying faith i as fuch) is the receiving of juftification , or of Chrifts rightcoufnefs, bu: nor t!ic receiving of Chrift him- felf, or that the reccivingof Chrilt wculd be but a preparato- ry art,wh:ch i^i I dare fay foul and falfe Dodr.ne, and contrary to thcfcope of Scripture which makes Chri!^ himfelfche objcd of this faith ; and the receiving of ^/w ( fohn i.ii, 12.) and believing mLtmiobe the condition of juftification ; and the reccmng oiri^htconfnefs^ but fecondarily or remotely, ^me- fitis h'llh (ubi fffpra ) hie tamen obfervaH^um e't .'ccurate lo- tjuendo^ appreheijiojem Chrifi ^ jujlidx ejus ejfe fidem j^fti' ficantenfy ^aia jiffiificatio no/Ira exftrgit tx apprehenfto^e Ckri' flit C^ apprehen '0 juflijicationM ut pojfejfioni^ noflrJtigit cttra ilitus actionem : r.ec material!* dtfpojitio eft Iyjjirumentnm^ &c. ut Schtbler^ Top.c. -^.pa^.ioz. Even ihe Gofpe!-Pro- mife, wtiich is far more properly called Gods moral Inrtrumenc of juftitying or pardoning, is yet but Ibmewhatto the waking, up that fundumentum, from whence the relation of y-<(itfitd doth refulc And the Fun^dmotttiM is called a caufe of the ic- htion which arifeth from it without any ad, but what went to caufe the foundation, even by ameer refultancy, as ]y0rhilli4 fully in 1 . fent. d:ft. i-j.ci. i . But to call a condition in Law an Inftrnment^xi yet far more improper. The Law or Promife therefore i will call a moral Inlirument ; the condition which we mud perform, I will not call a moral Inftrument, cither of the Aft which God performcth, or yet of the effeift which flowech from that ad immediately. Yet if any will fay that it is properly and principally a condition, and that it fo juftifieth ; and yet that it may be called aninftrumcnt moral in an im- proper fence, as it is a condition firlt, or el fe in regard of its receiving ufe , will ftretch the word In/irfiment ib wide, as to apply it to it ; I will not con'cnd for a word , when we agree in fence. And thus Mr, fVottov yieldeth as with an ill will to call it an fnftrumenr, proving it firlt to juftilie as a condi- tion. But I am loth to give it any proper caulaliiy in juftify- ing. And now let us fee whofc fence W, i . More obfcure. I avoid and abhor all vain niceties in fo fundamental a point as Juftification is ^ therefore I fay plainly but Q Tk^t faith is the condition on which CjodhAth heflorved C hriji and all hs benefits in the Gofpel ] What woman cannot underfland thi< at a word ? But your DoArine, what Oedipus is able to unfold ? for my parr, it is quite paft my reach ; and mott that I convcrfe with, areas filly as ray felf. Can every poor man or woman reach to know what a pajfive ABiot^ or a pajjlve Tafsion^ or a Pafuve Infiru- mentis} and how we receive Chril^, as a man takes a giftii his hand? or to fee through all the difficulties that I have difco- vercdherein yourDodrine? Even they that raife queftions, jphat »ne a£i of faith doth jfffttfie ^ rthetherof the V/;derflaniing cr Willi Whtther Jjetft or Jfi^nce^ &c. Do feem vainly and F f 3 huK fully (12Z) burtfully curious tome : much more thofc that reduce all fo anunconc€ivab;e/?jam fietrnder.ttir ^dum falvo metn peccant. Again, your Dodrine feemcth to me to overthrow the comfort of Believers exceedingly. For how can they have any comfort that know not whether they are juftified and fliall be fived ? and how can they know that, who itnow not whether they have faith? and how can they know that, when they know not what juftif^ing faith is? and how can they knowwhac it is, when ic is by Divines involved in fuch a cloud and raazc of difficulties ? feme placing it in this, act and fome in that, and fomcina Pailive inftrumentality, which few underlUnd, (If any man in the world do.) For the Habit of faith , that cannot be felt or known of it feif immediately , but by Gg its US a As C for fo it is concluded of all Habirs , Snart^, MttAp.T I'difp. 44 v>. i./)^^ 5 3^0 *" aid when trsdidfijfuxl) rect've rifhteouftefsiOr f-ijiification , or ChriJ} fortheje /which let him anfwer for himreU'thstcanj for I cannot. Hut now, on the other fide, what inconvenience is therein the Doftrine of faith and juftification as I deliver it ? As ic is plain, and certain (faying no more then is gencaliy granted) fo I think it is fafe. Do I afcribeanyof thrifts honour in the work to man > No man yet hach dared to charge me with that, to my knowledge : and no confiderate man I believe w.U do it. I conclude that neither faith nor works is the leali part of our legal righteoufnefs •• or of that righceoufncfs which we muft plead againft the accufer for cur jurtification : which is commonly called by Divines, the matter of our juftification. The Law which we have broken cannot be fatisfied fnor God for the breach of it) intheleaft mcaTure by our faith oc obedience,nor do they concur as the leaft degree of that fatisfa- dion : But we muft turn the Law over wholly to our Surcty.On- ly wherea? he hath made a new Law or Covenant containing the conditions on our part of the faid juftification and falvation, I fay, thefc conditions muft needs be performed, and that by our fclves: and who dare deny this ? and I fay that the perfor- mance of thefe conditions is our Evangelical righteoufnefs (in reference to that Covenant, ) as Chrifts fatisfadion is cur legal Righteoufnefs (in reference to that firft Covenant^, or as perfeA obedience would have been our legal righteouf- nefifc, ifwe had fo obeyed. And tor them that fpeak of inhe- lent Righteoufnefs in any other fenfc, viz.. as it is an imperfeft conformity to the Law of works, rather then as a true confer* roity to the Law or Covenant of grace, I renounce their Do- arinc.both as contradidory toic fclf, and to the truth, and as that which would make the fame Law to curfe and blefs the fame man, and which would fct up the defperate Doctrine of Juftification by the works of the Law : For ifmen are righteous in reference to that Law, then they may be fo far juftified by ir. Nor do I sifcribe to works any part of the office or honour of faith C2-2-7) faith fThough that were not (o dangerous as to if I gave more then ihemfclves to man, when I give fo much lefs. And thus Sir, I have according to your sdv'ce, fpent my felf ('as you fpeak ) in aiming at th.ir ma k wh ch yt u were pica- fed tofetme. And now 1 ihall proceed tothe rcftofyourcx- ccptions. My next arfwcr to you was, that [If vfo^kj ander every no- tion dtre excluded {as jcm fay thej art) thenrtfer,tance li exclti~ ded under the notion of a condition or preparative : Bht rtpentar.ce finder that notion is net excluded : Thertfuenet ^orks under every Kotion.To this you reply,ihat [_RtpeKtance it net excluced ai e^uaUfung, but as rtcifient^ which what is it but a plain yield- ing my Minor, and fothccaufe: For this is as much as I fay. If repentance be a work or a A of ours, and not excluded un- der the notion of a qualification, for as you elfcwhere yield j a (Jl'fedrum or.'iiaturn, and a condition , then works are not under every Qotion excluded. And that repentance is not reci- pient, howeafily dol ycild to you? But do you indeed think that when 7^^. iiz8) To my next you fay, [^lyhether PaAldifpate wnjt m our righ' teo4fnefs, or ufm trh-it terms it is m ide ours i dothn t much mat- ter \ But I think ic of very j;i eat moment ; they being Qqettions fo very much different,both in their renre,and importance. And whereas you ch nk Paul fpeaks chitflyof the minner, I think he fpcaks of both, but primarily ofche(^«-w/f/f. And I doubt not but Love to Chrift and Obedience to him as Redeemer, do relate to him : but not fo fully, clearly and diredly exprefs him as related ro , as Faith ; Faith being alfo fo comprchenfive a grace as to in- clude zip) cU'de fome others. Itis a truefaying.thata poor woman that ism.'rryrdto a Prince is rmde honoKrahle by love, and con- tir.ued^obj dmy to her huih^Kci : But it is more obfcurc and improper iherj to fay, (lie is made honcyr.ihh hj 'jAtar- M^£f,or takidgfuchamin to her husband, which includes love, and implycth dutvand fdithfulnefs, a^ neccfTirily rubfvquenr. 1 conceive with Judicious DoUtr n'refior.^ that fa:this truly and properly fuch a confcnr, contra^^.or rnarnage with C. hri'ft. Next toycur fimlitude : you fay [th4t 1 bilit'hat r.ct only fti^q this ir .'iefi Sey^(nt^bpit a'^>y ctker ABiont cf/erfe, vrill m W'ell he^l theX^ouKdedChriJlian.'^ To which I anfwer. Simi- htudes run noton all four, fhus far I believe that this held?. I. Chrirt was hftuponthc Crofsauhe brazen Serpent was life lip. 2. He war lift up for a cure to fin-ftung fou'f ,?s \\ c brazen Serpent for the (lung bodies. 5. That as everv one that look- ed on the '>erpcnt aas cured fan eafie condition, ) fo every one iha: belitveth Chnftto be the appointed lledecmcr, and heartily Accepteth him on the terms he is offered , and fo truHeth in him, flull njr per.fh, but have evetlaftirg l.fe. 4. That as the cure ofthtir bodies came not from any natural leafon drawn from thee^e, or from any narural excel.ncy or efficacy of feinc;, above hearing or feeling, but meerly^rom the free will and pleafure of Goc',who ordained that looking fhould be the condition of theircure .- So all thofe Afls(u''M- ally comprized or implyed in tlic word believing) which jufti- fie, do it not from any natural excellency , efficacy or inflru- mentaiity , bu: meerly from the ^ood pleafure of the LaA'- piver : And therefore the natural Receptivity of Faith ( that is its very formal cfTencc ) muft not be given ns the proper dir^-ct caufe of its Juftif^in^ : Bur that is its conditionality from the free appointment of God. But on the ot!)c r fide,! . 1 1 was r nly one Act ofone fen^c which was theconditionof their (lire :but you will not fry! believe that it is only one act ofone facul y which jullt^eth ; however ( wi!l not. 2. It was the Aft off .-eif)^ which cu»ed rhem, without toucii- ing, laying hold On, apprehending, re'-ing on, (f-r. But you will notfay foof fuftifyirg faith. 5. The fight, whichwas the condition of iheir cure, was no aduall reception of the bra- G g ; leiT icnSerpent, but ihe fptcies oi that Serpent by the eye; and io the eye did no otherwife receive the Serpent, then it received every Objtd itbihcld, even che Serpent that ftung them. But if you fay, that cur receiving Q\\x\^\%h\ii fer fimpltctmaffn^ kerifijntmibj-Mi , and chat i: is areceiv ngof his fpicirj^ ard fo that we receive ( hrift no otherwife then we receive Satan, or anyObjedof Knowledge, I will net be of that opinion 4. Their cure was fimul e^ femcL\ tuc our Juft.ficacicn is a continued Ad; asreaily in doing all our lives, asathrft. 5 Therefore though one ad finillied their cure, and there was no condition perfcribedas requ fice for the confummation or continuance : yet when our j ultificacion is begun, and we truly juftified, there is furcher condici ns preicrsbcd for Irs continuance and con- fummaciop. To conclude, I am To far from Taying, that any other Ad will as well heal the wounded Chnllian, befides what God ha:h made the exprefs condition cf his cure, that 1 flatly arer 00 other will doit, t'ut whether he haih made anyone fingle ad^ or Pafs!on}to be the whvole of that condition, 1 have elfeiA/here out of Scripture fhewed you, and you do not deny what I fay. My twolift Anf^ers to \our expofitionof P<;«// words, you arc pleafed to overpafs ; the laftof which ( the ninth ) being the main that T made ufe of : t«c. that P^ul takcth the word Wo-fk^- mo:eilridiy, for fuch working as maketh the Reward to be not of Grace buc of debt: andm this fence I diftlaim all work?, not only ( a, as the B (hops did the Ce- remonies, wh'ch they m:?de indifferent in word, bu:neccflary indeed: ) Bntnow I p.Tceivcthe mitter comes ail to onein the IfTue ^ w'len you cannot make a definition of Fath in fuch Languag; as isanye;ifi.r to be underliojd then the Scrip- ture : when you and I cannot both underhand it : and I find that many are ot /»f//4?-w/>3f' Judgement ( ^pol, r. y.cieedby Mr. Vmes'xn hi? Sermon agair.ft H£ref. pjp 50. ) That a man miy be an H£yetic'?^, though he beVieve the JJcriptures, the three Creeds, and the four great general Councils. But to r the fence of the AfTemblies definition^ 1 I know not what you mean hy x.htv}ov6s[ 04 th:y dtcLive if. ] If any private declaration, I am not to take notice of ir, nor do I know what it meaneth, and could wifli they would do, or might have done as Mr. Visits defired inhisSermon, J/t-?. 28. 1645. that is, [Tofecond their conclufioMS with the Reajons and Grounis of them j vchich ^ill' do much JO make them pajs for currant : feeing ( f'tith he ) the Gorgons head^hich firuck.all dumb in former t mcs^'Xhc Church,, TheChurch,« nn likely to havi the fame operation rvrv in this feeing 4ndfearchiy.g age ., for though men bevrilliKgto befuijfEi' to ty^uthority^ jet xi they are men thy ^Vt / be flwes to Re>ifon.'\ So that if there were any private expufiion, 1 would we had ir. But if you mean only wfiat is declared in tlie words of the De- finition, lam molt confident,thoughI never wasinthe Aflem- biy, that I have hit on their fence far neerer thtn you feemto have done; and I darenot think oihcrwife, IcftI be hainoufiy cenforious- {^}^) ccnforious of To reverend an Ailembly, which I amrefoUednot to be. I. Their very words are a receiving of C^^ifl^ anJ not immediately anJ primarily his Righteoufnefs, buthimftlfj and in the confcilion they fay as I do, thac ic is an accepting, re- ceiving anJ reOing on CfaritK 2 And as {'hrij} zbe anointed, wlii,.h Name lignifiech the Offices wh'ch he is anointed to, vi<.. K'.n^^ Priclt, c^c. 7,. It ma'iech it to confillin no one aft, but feveral , exprefT^-'d in tuvo p'lra'es : i. Receiving Chnit. 2. Ilcitirg on him alone fjr fUvation. 4. It cxprelly fiitl% that it \%,irtceni''gof kim^ oi he u ojfered in the p 'y-^ I an- fwcT. When I fee that manifeited I fhill believe ic. When it i-; faid foh» I. He came to htsown^ and hu o^nreceived hint not : i.Is it meant they took him not in their hands^or received no: his Perfon into their houfes? the later is true ; But i. Only in a lecond place •, but their heares werethe firli Receptacle 2. Elfe thofe were no Unbelievers where Chrilt never came in perfon ; And that had n > houfcs ^ 3. And tbdc receiving cannot belong to us that never faw him, nor to any fii^ce his AfccnHon, 2. Or {■s it the Incelledive Reception of i\'\s fpeciej? I trow not: I have faid enough of that before. 3. O: is it a moral Recepti- on of him as thus and thus related, volendo^ eligendo^coyjfentieri' do, ^iiigtndo ( pardon this lift, it is but the qualification of the rert ' & confer^uenter fidtndo ? I think this is ic. If you can find a fourth way, you will do that which was never done '( to my knowledge ) and then you will be a Novellift as well as I. Foryour next expreflions, I anfwcr to them, that you do truly apprehend that I am loth to feem to recede from others, (and as loth to do it, but m.igU arnica Veritas: And I can- not believe what my lift, nor like thofe that can. ) By which you mav tiuly know, that I doit not out of affectation of fin- gularity Cashcknowcth that knoweth my heartj, nor intend to be any inftrument of divifion in the Church. And if my af- fertions are deftructive of what others deliver, it is but what fome men, and not what all deliver; Not againft riie AfTembly , nor many learned Divines who from feveral parts of the Land have fignified to me their A(Tent : befides all thofe great names that appear for* me in print. I'ut you tell me that [] / W4)' not bttild on fome Homiht'cal popular exprejjions in Any mam bo»kj.} Anj^er^ Let me again name to you but the men I laft named, and try whether you H h will C2-5+) will again lb entitle their writings. The firft and chief is Dr. rrejlorty who was known C) be a man of molt choice notions, and fo Judged by thofe that put cut his book',3.nd his credit fo great in ^w^/4«^, that he cracks his own that fecks to crack ir. And his Sei^ons were preached before as judicious an Audito- ry ( at leaft ) as your Lectures, and yet you defend your own cxpretTions. Yeaic is not on. e nor twice, nor five times only, but almoft through all his Books, that Dr. rrefton harpech upon this firing, as if it were thechoifeft notion that he intended to difclofc. Yea it is in his very Definition of faith as juttitjing ; arkl Dr. Prejion was no homilctical Dehner. I can produce the likeTcftimony of Dr. Stoughton: ( two as great Divines in my eftcem as moftever England or the world bred. ) Another is Mr. fVuU-s : I>oubtlef8 , Sir, no homiletical popular man in Writing : nor could you have quickly bethought you ot an ^.riglifh Book that lefs deferves thofe attributes : His words are ihefe. / a^e>tt not to pbce the faving 4^ of faith , either Vf'tih Mr, Cotton ( at bi^ Lcrafhip cites h'm) in the laying hold o/> or ajftnttng to that Tromife-, &c. nor jet in a fariicnUr ap- plication of Chrifl to myfelfi't ajjurance^or a believing that Chrifl it mine, &C. But J cheoferi-tker to place it in an afl of the fVtl/y then in d hir ofihsfe forenamed a'^s of the ZJ nderfl anding. It t6 an Accepting ofChriji i^ered^ rather- then an A^enting to a fropo/ition ajfrmed.To as many at received him,SiC.that is, to them that believe in hU name John r. Qod mak/s an Offer of Chrifl to all (elfe fhoptldnot Rtp'-obatfS he condemned for not accepting ofhim^as nei- ther the Devils are^bicatife he W.w nJ offered to them. ^PVhofoever vrill^ let him come andtakj of thervuteroflifefree/jJ.^Qy.zz.l'/, fVheretup'Jn the believing foftl rfphes, I will : and fo ta^et him, when aGift U offered tome, thit which makjeth It to be mine is my Acceptation^ &c. // you ca I tkis taki'Jg of Chrtfl ( or con- fenting that Chrifl/hallbe my Sazi''ar)a depend r.g,a Refling or relying on Chnfl for falvatien {if you fpeak^of an att of the Wtll ) it it all ont-^for Talking ofChrifi to be my Saviour^ and committing my f elf to C hrifi to befave^l^ is the fame : Both of them biing but aconfenting to this (^ovenant.^f will be your Qod^ and youfhallbe my T^eople^ &c. And if yon make thif the fuvivg AlI of faith, i'btn Will Repent^ime (/<» far at < / i^ diJlinU from Faith ) ha con- fe.^f iwpl. /f^.pag. 87. ) cjHod inttrdnm. eodem verba caufa-n (^r e'TeHut compleEH- mur rs-Ttl 9vvcKd'.o)iYiy. Ita accipipoteft fides, Heb. 13.7. and 12.1,2. Rom. 1.8, I Theff. i.8.Ier.7.28.^ ^.Necdn- bimm eft cum tficitur^ he f/? mandatum ut iredamus ^ DUtgA- mtts\ 1 John 3.2?. ficut in precept T)tligendi & habitus churi- tatu ^fruBus atcjue Opera, ai c^ua habitus ordmatur^ manduta funt : it A etiam in pracepto creder,dt & habit utn fidei ^ frw [ius ejus nobif mandatos effe. IJnde cumipfa etiittn ch^ritas in- ter fruElus fit fidei ^ fit ut tot a doHiina Chrifiiina aliquAndo ver- bum velprAdieatiofi^ei, tota t\jl:gio ChriftiaKAf tot^ ceconomia tievi Teftawer.ti fides pracipue appelietur-,Gu/. I. 23. i Tim. 4.6. Gal. 5. 6. and 3 23. So he proceeds and alledgcs Lu- rA^>' taking faith in that large fenfe, including charity and obe. dience j and by Works, meaning a[liones faBoi cum opiniont merit't^ ^ cum ex^eUeitione jnfiifcAtionis & vita aternt tan- ^uammerccdis debits Strm. de mif. er i'- de I^ert. ChrifftAna. Tow. 2.fyit.f.^. 5. & Tom. %.com.irt Zacb. 2. 8. £?-«?<:/ Gsl.c.a. f. 3c o. Et ultrA p. 977. Cum dic'ttttr [^fine operibus legit ] excludurtur^l .Opera foiCla m veritate obeditKtia lega/sj,ac meriti pnirtdepir inr.tcenti(im.,cui deiur Mtrcesci'.rn rtm'^ffior.em peccAti ^impntAtionem ftcundum gratiam. Rom. 4. 3- C" / ^iacau- fAtuseft Apofiolus toto capite i & 2. & f- Ta/em Obtd enti^md nemir.ehaberi^ fedomr.es fub peccuto ejje, &C. 2. Bxcluduntur etiamoperAfa&acumopioriione vers. cbedieKtiiH legalis ae meriti per innccentiam ; cjh%a hac ipfA funt ttifim peccata (^ mtndacia tnenfitiapoemm^VhWryy 3 . Ex- Ci37) 3. Excluduntfir etiam Optra facta cum oftnione merit i fine obi' dientia ^ep- iriKCcentla legali aut ex (jHalicuKCjue imperfecta aut p^r* ticiilari ohedientia cm alufualiter dttttr i^Mercei citra imputa- tionew fecur.dum qratiam^bic.So x]\7Zth\i\i all the exdufionof Works, chat he acknowlcdgeth .• and fhews that '^eiLrmir.e is driven to this, which he approveth. iitio^\\om. 3.27. Afterwards, one kn(e in which he faith Ftdes jola y.tflijicat, is this,/e/i. But the chiefthingi intend is in the next words, y^t qnem- admodum catera aHiones fign ficata per Jidem tfuafi matertalitir C^ Sj/necdochice per fe C^ direile n^n ordinantur ad amicitium Dei & falutem proprie Efficiendam (as he miftakingly thinks faith is^ fedvtladfidem cui^uaqtio modo profunt^ vcl ad amicitiam 'Vti Hh 3 & ^fAluteffifaltem non araittendam ; tta, nfejut Jr^JliftnUfunt^ c^ jalvubunt propri'e d* (iirtde. Proderunt tamen Ad utrum^tit ijt^tenus funt, i. zel difp'>fiti-or.es ai fid£m,ut'''P tireuuZ. Efft^w^ ^c. -^. Q^atenH! j)tr ilia excludimttf ^ cavimuj peccata ^ /»- emt fdintm^tjua omr.iaovera canfa .imittendt ']nJlitU dr faltt- ru futura ejfent : ejHAUm CAufum removtKtem prohiheus appdUre^ (^ AdcaUjOi per accidens rtjerre Jolent. Omnn enim a r her qua non^ &c. ('Here he fpeaks only of the natural conducibilicy of works, and omittcch the moral conditionality j and fo gives a caufaluy pcrrfcrtifw/ toth€m,wbichi5morethenI doj v\ 54. ^ in hitcfru[iupnn compArationeJub notione proprit c&u[:u^ fottntU amrrtt motihtu corporis^ non cjtttd acl ejfent'am fed cjttod ad uf» m ) fivepxfens pm dmiciiia per ilia firmstHr ne cifjilta'^ vtl euam augeutttr ^nod ad efdim aliquos , & hoc modo cjuafi implea- tur. And he concludes thus. (, 58. V»a verba : foli fiJt jftfi' fic^mur : hoc ejl : Nullo noftro meritc, five ipfnu fi^ei/tve al- ter iw aflicMis prater fiiem. Prober ur evident er f^ c^uhoHceme- ritHm (jHule d mfiris negMnr^ tunc eti *m tllnd pra:cer lolam fidem ^imiffw^i (nmru. Lud. Crocius faith, ( Sjrtsg 7.4. pag mi.) f ides etiam foil j-*j}ificat tegtntMyju(lifica-e^fed& tidejfe tarn injufiificato, qukm injufitficando. Joh. Crocius^* ;«/?»A Mp- ^ ^- P*g- ^7h ^rf^^/fw/i/^^d r/? fromijjia^ fide accepturum rtmiffioiem peccatorum : mendico & £gro nonefl fAHa promijfij^ fi iHe ma*>um extendat , d^tum iri eleemofjnam ; fi ifie pharmacum manu capiat conva/itm- rum^ C^c. Mr. GaukcT ag4in(l SMtmarfij fiado^j, &c. p3g.?-6.40,4i, 43»44t45,46 47,48,49,53,64. dtthfnlly give as much coFaich, Repentance, Obedience as I do. Nor know I any reafon tvhj, ( Johns ) 'Saitifmfor thefftbfiance of it^fbonldnot it an example t9 to Ht alfo in theft timts^ being the Buptifnt of Rifentance unto Ke- Tttijfion of fms^ that «, if I m'fi'iks tt<-t^Baftifm obfgning remiff^- en of fins np)n condition of Repentance, pag, 40. ! and pig. 4I. He faich, [^that pirdon (f fin and falvat'.on are propounded and preached uponco»':iition of Faith, Repentance, and '^^'^nefs of Itfe^ vph-.ch are the conditions oj the Gofvel : a ^d yet may thej alfo be fo termed m conditions of peace upon agreement unto, and perfor- mance whereof peace mzj be had^ rchichother^ife cannot be ob- tained. ^; And he evinceth [his by an Argument drawn from the dcHnition or nature of a condition, thus, f T")??^? xyit;V/t« 7O f^-o- potinded^oi that being performed^/ife and falvation may undoubte ■'- Ij be attained, and without which it cannot be had., may Well be termed a conation: but fttch are the things before mentioned -^ therefore the) may juftly be termed conditions] vid.ult. and p. 4*^. Suppofe a King be content at the fuit either of the parties them- felves, or any friend, to grant hi^ graiciouspArdon to a company of notortoHS Rebels that h-^dnfen up againfi him^ &C. upon condition thit the) acknowledge their offence ^attd their farrow for it ^ ^'ith purpife andpromifeof living loy:iUy for time to come \ whether "^ould yoH deem thi^ to be free grace or no? SiCC. PV ere he not a mofi ungracious wrctch^that hazing his pardon onfuch terms grant* edandfignedhiff, fiould in regard of thofe conditions deny tt to be of free'Cirace ? and Whether they do not blafpheme Qods free Grace^ that dmy itto befree Qrace, if it be propounded on terms of Be- lief^ Repentance eind Amendment of life. Sir, Whatfoever jou fuy to us , tak^e heed hoW you tell Chnfi, that he doth not freely fave )ou^ if he will not fave you unlefs you believe^ O-c. J In ma- ny more places, and more fully Mr. Gata^erChcws that Faith, Repenrance, Obedience,are jointly conditions of Pardon, ^r. Only he gives Faith a peculiar Receptivity ^ which 1 never dc- nycd : A nd he yields to call it an Inttrument, which fo largely -taken, I willn t contend againft. Butftilll fay that this Re- ceptivity is but the aptitude of Faith in a fpecial manner to this work of juftifying : and the reft arc apt to be conditions in their place, or elfe God would not have made them conditions. Even in regard of its natural aptitude and ufe {^Hnmiliation, ( asMr. r«wf/ faith, Serm. on y^wf/4.8. pag. 12. ) though it do net properly cleanfe the hands ^jtt it pluckj off the Q lover ^ and m ^kes ^..^^. .,3emh^rtforx»AJhing : and Godij fatrotv with its ftvtn •T>4nlherJ, 2 Cor. 7. 1 1 . are cU»fmg things. Dr. Sto\ig\MO\RighteoHs m^ns p/eafor hi pp. Strm. ^.pag?2« Fii'th comp'-ehsTtds not only the ^il of the Vn 'er^anding^ hut ih^ ..i[l ef the fVifl too^ fo oi the fViil dothemhra:e and adhere^ and cleave to tbofe Truths ^hich the under Ji^yiding conceives : andr.ot only embracing metrlj bj A'^ent to the Truth of it, but by clcf%ng rviththeGoodof it : (What is that buc loving ? ) tafiing and rtlipjngit. As fa thin Chnfl is not only the Ajjenting of 4 mans mind that Chriji is th- Savitur^ but a rtfultAncy of the Will on Ch^iflas a S ivi^nry tmbracng of him^and lozi g, tfleemingaKi honouring him as a S^wiour, The Scrip ure compyehendi both thefe together ^ andthe^e i^ a rule for it , which the Kohhmi give for the opening of the Scripture ^xz-Verba fenfus etiant deuotant af- fenus,(is]o.i7.^. ^ ha u eternal life to know thee.BcQ.lt is not bare Knowledge the Scripture means, but Knowledge joined with affe- Elions, ~\ You fee Dt.'^oughton look Love to be full as near Kin to Faith as I do. Many the like and more full in him I pafs. 1 cited in my Append. Alfledius, fuKtus^ Parcc.m^king Faith, & Obedieyice,& Gratitude Condi- tions of the new Covenant (& who faith not the famc^) If all thefe be hj'at'letica/ cind popular,! much miftake themjwhich yet I cite not as if no words might be found in any of thefe Authors that feem tofpeakothcrwife^ but to fhew that I am not wholly fingularj( Though if I were, I cannot help it when I will. ) On the next Q.fP^hether a dying man ma) loof^ on his Faith and Obedience.c^ Dmy us the condit en of the N.(^cv. bj him perf rm- ed ? You would perfwadc me that I cannot think that I fpeak to the poin: in this:buc you are miftaken in me: for I can miftake more then that comes to j and indeed I yet think I fpokeas di- TeS\y to the queftion in your terms laid down, as was pofsible ; for I changed no: one of your terms, but mentioned the Affir- mative as your felfexprefled it .- If you did mean otherwife then you fpokc, Iknewnot ihar, nor can yet any better undcrftand you. Only I can feel that all the difference between you and me miift be decided by diftinguifhing of f Conditions : ] but you never yet go about it fo as I can underftand you. You here isk/n^, [^H'htther Ithink^joff deny agadlj Ufeto be a comforta- li hh (Hz-) bU TeJiimoMj^ or nictjfAyj (jualtf cation »f tt man fw pardon ? ] Anfwer. i But the Qa^cftion is not of the fynificancj or Tejiimo^ njy nor yet of all kind of qualification •, that is an ambiguous term, and was not in the Queftion, but of the conditionality. 2. Vou yield to the term (Condition your felf elfewbcre , and therefore need not (hun it. g. Qaalihcations and Conditions arc either ph'j (ical and remote, of which I ratfe no queftion : io the EHenci of the foul is a condision , and fo hearing the Gofpel is an.itural Condition of him that will underftand ic • and underftanding is a natural Qiialification of h^m'that will be- lieve it; For ianoti nulU fiies. But it is another fort of condi- tions you know that we are in fpeech of, which I haye defined, and Mr. Qataker before cited .- viz. ^orAi legal condition {q called infenjuforenfi veJ legaliiwhea the Law of Chrift hangs our adua! J unification and falvation on the doing or not doing fuch a thing. Yet do I very much diftinguifli between the Nature and Ufes of the feveral Graces or Dutic,s^^(yi:ained in ti>9 conditions^ for though they 4re all conditions, yet they were not.^U for the fiine reafbn^or to the fame ufe ordained to bccqndiiionsi)but,rq- pentance irfdne fence as preparatory to faith ; and Faith, "i ^Bf- caufeit honoureth Chrift, and debafeth our felves. -• Becaiife ic being in the full an Acceptation of the thing offered, is the moft convenient means to make us Pofle^ors without any cqn- tcmpt of the Gilt :^ with other rcafons.thatmig|it be founi;! ; So 1 might affign the reafons ( as they appear to us ) why God hath afiigned Love to Chrift, arid fincerc Obebience, and. for- giving others, their feveral parts and places in this conditionally ty • ( but I have done it in my Aphorifms •, ) but then all thefe ^re drawn from the diftinfl nature and ufe of thefe duties EfTen- ciallyin therafelves confidered, which is but their Aptitude for the place or conditionality which they are appointed to, and would of themfelves have done nothing without fuch appoint- ment. So thatit isonequeftion'to ^sk.fVhy doth Faith or fVorkj of Okeditnce to Chriji fttjlipe ? f To which I anfwer ^ Becaufe it was the pleafureof God to make them the conditions of the Covenant,and not becaufe of their own nature direSIy : ) an4 its another Queftion, IVhj did God choofe Faith to the Prtce- dewy in this work} To which I anfwer. i. Properly tl^erc is DQ caufe of God« anions without bimfetf. 2. But fpeak- (H3) mgof liim after the manner of men, ss we rr.uftdo , itisbe- caufe Faich is fitter then any other Grace for thisHonorand Office, as being both a high honouring of God, by believ.r<» him(chats as for A{rent)and in its own Eflencial nature,a hearty thankful! Acceptance of his Son, both to be our Lord (which is both for the Honor of God and our own good J and our Savi-! our todehver andglorifieus : and To is the raoft rational way that man can imagine to make us partakers of the procured hap- pinefj, without either our own danger f if a heavier condition had been laid upon us ) or the difhonour of the Mediator .- ei- ther by diminiOiing the eftimationof the favour (if wc had done any more to the procuring it our felves ^ or by con- tempt of the Gift ^ f' if we had not been required and conditioned wirhfo much as thankfully and lovingly to accept ir. ) Andthenif the Queftionbe, fFhj God hath trjjigneci firi" cere Obedience and Pcrjeverance therein to th^t.fUce of feccn- dary Ccnditiormlity fr the continunrce andcotifummaticnof Jum /Itf.CMioa, And for the Attaining cf fdlvtitid'n ? T aflfwcr. Not' becaufe they have any fuch Receptite nature asfaith,but becaufe Faith being an Acceptance of Chrift as Lord alfOjand delivering andrefign.ngup the foul to him accordingly in Covenant, this Duty is therefore necefTanly implyed, as the thing promifed by' us in that Covenant , and fo in fome fence greater then the co- venanting it felf, or the end of it: and Chrift ncVc-r intended to turn man out of his fervice, and difcharge him from Obe- dience; but to lay on him an eafier and lighter yoak and burden, to learn of h'm,d"i".ar,d therefore well may he make this the con- dition of their finding Eafe ar d Reft to their fouls, A^at. 1 1.28 2p. Fcr/or ihisend hedyed,tbr.the might be Lord, Rom. 149. And thjereforc when we are freely pardoned.Sc bought from hell, it isequal that Chrift (hould rule us, who bought us,and that his Covenant hang till the continuance of our Legal title to pardon juftification, and glory, and fo the full pofTefiion cf them upon this perfeverance in fincere loving grateful fubjection tohimthat bought us.and by him to the Father.Aod thus^Sir, I have digre(Ted and ufed many words on this, fwhich to ycul think needlefs j not ©nly becaufe I perceive that yougcknow- Icdge the conditionality of obedience in fome fenre,bttt tell me 11 2 roc CH4-) not in what fenfe.but left you fliould not difcern my fenfe, who dcfiretofpcakas plain as lean, that you may truly fee where- in wed ffcr; And that I alfo may fee it when you have as dearly opened your meaning of your UTr[\^[_^alif}C(Jticyjj.'2 And for your Qyeftion \_l^loeihtr a goMji wan can th'nk. ihe ^iqhteou[ntfsofChij} made his bj Tvork^ing^ or only btliexing.'\ lanfwer.caufally and efficiently by neither, 1 think, C though you think otherwife ) j I dare not fo advance faith , and fo advance man. 1 remember good, old , learned , folid Gatd- ktrt words to Sa'tma'/h(pAg.^i,) It isyourfelj rat ker then any of us th^t trip at thn jione^ when you ^ould have faith fo much pref^ fed in the 'Doctrine offalvation^ in regard of the glotioufnefs and emine^cj «f the grace it [elf \ rrhichto ejfert^id not found- (fie in Animadvin Lucium fart. i. $• 9. f. 7. j Therighteoufnefs of Chnft is made ours by Gods free gift j but faith and true fub- Jeciion are conditions of our participation ; and what intereft each hath in the conditionaiity, and on what grounds, I have (hewed. 1 fear you give too much to faith and man. You ask \_Is it repent, and Chrifif righteoufnefs h] this u madt joyrs}"] Anf'^er-, It is ofcimes,/ffpf«r and he forgiven ^ and rc- tent and he baptized ; and repent and believe^ and be forgiven : but not effclentljf hj repenting nor believing: but on condition of both ; though in ordaining them conditions God might intend one but as preparative or fubfcrvicnt to the other ; and not on equal terms, or to equal ufe immediately. And when you fay, [that the dying Chrifiian is directed to the Rejiing on Chrifl^ and eying the hniz.en Serpent^ not to be found in any thiyigbnt a righteoufnefs hyfaith,~] 1 never durft entertain any doubt of this ; iti? no qucfticn between us : only in what fenfc it is called a Riglitfecufnefs by faith , I have fhewcd ,• even in oppofition to Works in Pauls fenfc, which make the re- ward to be of debt and notof Gracf, /?». ^. 4. where you fay [Jt isan /j^of Dependence not ofObtdiencethat interefis us in Chrifls Righteoufnefs ~\ I anfwer, It is no one Ad but many ^ It is an act of /lf[ent firft ( and thence the whole hath the name of faith , it being fo hard a thing to believe fupernatural things , as it would have been to us to be- lieve Chrift to have been God when we bad fecn him in the fliapc cho fliape of man, had wc lived in thofe timer, whenthc Dofirine offdithcame not with thofc advantages as now ic doth J And then it is an ad of willing, confenting, eleding, affeding f which three are but a vtlte Rejpectivum, and fo in the at5\ all one): and this in order of nature goes before any ad which you can in any reafonablc propriery call Dependance: and 1 doubt not are far more effential to juftif^ing faith : ^et I ara heartily willing to take your acts of dependance (for thofe al- fo are more then one j in the next place. But it confound- ethand abufeth us and the Church in ihis controveifie, that many learned Divines will needs fliunthc rtrict Philofophical names of the feveral Acts of the foul, and overlook alio the natural order of the fouls motions, and they wil! ufc, ar.d ftil ufc the Metaphorical expreflions, is apf rehe^jfofi ( improper^ depenJ/fice , relying, ^*fl^' i-, recomhency^ adhertncci emhraeing^ with more the like. 1 know Scripture ufcth fome of thefc ; but then it is not in ftrict difputing, as fuh.Crociusith EdUrm. we may ufe apprihsttd figuratively, bccaufe Scripture faith, apprehcndite difci-lmam, and lay hold on eternal life : But this would quickly end difputation , or elfe make ft endlcfs. Ye: in the places cited, who knows not the fime word hath d ffcrent Penfes ? in the former being ufed for to accept and (loop to ; in the later for ancarneftprcirmgon, and endeavouring after as arunner toca:ch the prize. And they will be loth to fay , thefc are all and each of them the juflifying acts. And where you add that iij«of an Wjt of obedimce. lanfwer, I. Iwou^dyouhad firft anfwcred the many Scriptures to the contrary produced in my Aphor. a. Its true ofche firR inte-- rcltin Chrift, (further then faith is called obedience) but not oFthc further continued and confummate in'creft. 3. Doth not Chrift (ay, Taken*) jc'dk^ltamofme to be mtck^andloWly ^ that ihcy may have eafe and reft ? Eafe and Refl ? From what ? Why from what they came burdened with } and that was fure gnlt and cfirfe^&nd what ever is oppofed '..o pardon and y4llifi:utiott, <^M4t, \ I . And Slewed art thej that do hU commandments^thut thej maj have right to the tree ojlife^and may enter in ^ &c. Rev.ZZ, 14. And^^ is the /Juthor of eternal falvAtion to dl them that obey him^ Htb. 5. 9. And CMat. 25, is wholly I i 3 and and convincingly againft you. And fo is the fecond l^falm whol- ly ,which makes fubjection to Chrift as King, the great pare of the Gofpel condition. \Kifs thefon~^ conteine^h more then 2?fc<7w^(f«cy,in my judgement : and yet no more then that true faith which is the condition of juftificacion. But no word in your paper brings me to fuch a ftand as your next, where you fay. And that u very harfj/IiU which yott ex' prefs^toexpiBtheRifhteoHpjefs of the CovcKant of Cjrace up- on the conditions fnlfi'lcdby jour felf^ throttgh G ods workings . ^ Anfw. Truly iris quite beyond my (hallow capacity to reach what you here mean to be foharfh: what fhould I imagine? That there are conditions upon which the Tenor of the Gofpel gives Cbrift Righteoufnefs, you acknowldge : And that he that performeth them not, the Gofpel giveth him none of ic : I know you conftfs thefc ; And that we muft needs perform them our felves, through Gods workings ( i.e. both enablement and excitation, and cooperation: ) 1 know you doubt of none of thefe ; for you have wrote "gainft the ^ntinomtans : and Mr. G'itiiker hath evinced the fortifli ignorance or impudency of Saitmarjh, in denying Faith, Repentance and Obedience to be the conditions on which, performed by us, we muft enjoy the things promifed, Pardon, c^c. or elfenot. Yea in this paper you yield to this conditionalicy . What then is the mat- ter > Is it harfti when yet you never once (hew the fault of the Speech? It muft be either the falfhood, or the unfitnefs ; but you have yet accufcd it of neither ; and yet fay it is^har(h. But the reafon you intimate, becaufe 'Bellarm'me hath fome fuch phrafe : which I never rcmembred or obferved in him : and iittle do I care whether he have or no : If the Papifis be nearer to us then I take them to be, it is caufe of joy arid not forrew : But fure I am that Proteftant Writers generally ufe the word Condition j and fVetidelim faith, Tht Pafifts abufe us in feigning as to fay the Gofpel is abfelme ; and faith,the Gofptlin each fence 14 conditional. In one fence Faith is 'the Condition ; 'in .Another^ Faith and Ohe^ieme^ <^c. But here you come again to the Labyrinth and tranfcendent Myrterie qi pajfivt Faith : nay you enlarge the Myftcric yet more: i. You fay again, [^ Faith do ihpsiti. 2* And jet Love doth (H7) doth agere. 5 . Elfeyou vpoaldyielJ that Bellarmine argues cok- fona'it/j enough^ that Love rvouid jujfifie tu well as Faith. 4. Tec jfou ack>ioV;>ledge Faith an A^ive Qrace : bm only in thi4 yi^i its meerrecipient. tyinfrver* I confefs my reafon utterly at a lofs in this ; but yet it it were in my Bible ( to me Intelligible ) I would believe kas I do theDodrioe of the Trinity, and ceafecrqiiirinf^.BucI cannot To do by any Creature, to make liira the Lord of my 1-aith and Reafon. i . V/hecher t'aiih doth Pan I have enquired already. 2. That Love doth Agtre^ I verily believe : and yet I have olter beard Love called a FcJJlony. then Faith : And as K-eckeram faith, the . ^ifftBtons n^e more Pfljjive then the im- tndKCHt Elicit A^s of the I- telle^ and (fill. A nd I hough as it IS in the Rational foul, Love, ( faith Atfuin. ) is no Pafuoyi, bu: a tytUing ( which caufeih me to judge it fo near Kin to Fa th ) yet as it is in the fcnluivc, \i is a Fcifior.. So that I am quite beyond doubt chat phylkaiiy love is more properly called a JP^fTiontnen Faith. 3. TiKrcfore for ought i know, it is no w^dcr if RtlUrwne bear the Bell,and Papifts be unconvinced, if yqu have- no better Arguments then this; efpecially if no body elfe had better. 4. But yet the Myfterie is far more un- fearchable to rae,that/^,whichyou make fuch a Proteus, to be //^if f and 7'<«/0*t/f as to fcveral Obje^s? Yea when it is acknowledged the fame Fiiith, which rcceiveth Chrift and Righteoufncfs, and the feveral promifts, and refteth on Chrift for the Pardon of each fin, for hearing each Prayer, for Aflurance,Pcacc,Comfort, Deliverance from temptations, and dangers and fin, and is thusufefull through all our lives, for the fetching of help from Chrift in every Itreight , yet that this fame Faith fliould be y^^/jvc in all the Reft, and Tafsiveooly in One juftifying Ad. Oh, For the face of an Argument to prove this ! Sure its natural Reception of one Objed and ano- ther is in point of Pafsivenefs alike : and its affigned Conditio' nality in Scripture, is of like nature as to each branch of the good on that condition promifed. 5. And here alfo I perceive by your fpeech y ou make it confift in fome fingle ad. Andy et you nevcc tell what that is;, and how then can itbe infeveral fa* cultics, H8) tolties, as T>av€r:af)t^ Amejiitf, f(yh. Crociw, AfeUncth. with moft do affirm? 6. But yet the depth of the myftcricto me lies in undcrftanding and reconciling your word?, [ O.ljintht^ Ad: Its meerlj Reap ent. ^ Is this an /I6i too ? andyec metrlj Recifient f ( which you make a meer Paj.ive reccpiicn. ) A mterlj Passive Atl is fuch a contradidion in a^jeClo to my un- derftanding, that I cannot welcome the notion thither; yeAif you had faid lefsjthat it is an '-ict in ayj Pa>t or Degrte "^f.fnvt- 1 never knew that an Ad could Pati-^ yet am I more confctous of mine own infuffieiency, then to contend with one of your knowledge in matter of Phiiofophy ; but I muft needs fay that your notions arc yet fo far beyond my reach that pofiibly [ might take the words as true upon the credit of one whom I fo highly value,yct am I not able to apprehend the fence. The foj :» Heaven which you mention for a ^andrrng Pieep^ I think is meant of the firft/T fome eminent recovery to Chrift^ and not of every Philofophical notion : fure. Sir, if fafvation hang on this Dodrincas thus by you explained, I am out of hope that either I or ever a one in all this countrey (hould ever come to heaven • except by believing as that part of. the Church believes which is of your opinion: When I am yet apt to think , that fiding with any party in fuch opinions will not conduce to any mans falvation : For I am of i?fr^f«/ his mind* that as it is not the Jew, the Pagan, or the Maho- metan , or any Infidel, (privative, ) thatfliall be faved , but the Chriliian; fo it is not the Tapifi^ the Lutheran ^ the Calvintji^ the ^rminian^ thtit Jhxllbe faved ( :f^ faithy Oi fuch^ is un Accfpting of Chriji for Kivg , and Frcphet .is well as forafuflifier^ aK^ cenfttfucrjly that it is Are^ ftgning our felvts to be ruled k) loim ^ M^^ellastobefAvedhj %iTrf^ I fliall then be content for peace fake to lay by tbcphrafe of fafiificationbj rvorkj, though it be Gods own phrafe, if the Church were offended with it, and required this at my hands .- (Sothey will be fatisfied with my filencing it, uirh- out a renouncing it. ) I have written thus largely, that I might not be obfcure » and to lee you fee, that though I have fcarce time to .cate or fleeep , yet I have time and paper for this work , and that I make not light of your diffcnt. The Love and Refpeft which you mention to mc 1 do as little doubt of, as I do whether I have a heart in my bread: and your defires of my reducing I know do proceed from your zeal and fincere affedions. That.which I take worft is, that you fliould fo defire me not to take it ill to be called an erring fliepherd ; As if I did not know my Pronenefs to err, and were not confcious of the weaknefs of my underftanding: or as if the expreffions of fo fincere love did need excufc ; or as if I were fo tender and brittle as not to endure fo gentle a touch ; as if my confidence of your love were Plumea, non Plwnbeaiind would be blown away with fuch a friendly breath! Certainly Sir,yourfliarper fmiting would be precious Balm,fo it light not on the Truth, but me ! I ara not fo unftuous,nitrous, or fulfureous, as to be kindled with fuch a gratefull warmth. My Incelled were too much adive, and my afFcdions too paf- five, if by the reception of the beams of fuch favourable ex- prcflions, my foul as by a Burning-Glafs fliould be fct on fire. I amoftafliamed and amazed to think of the horrid intolera- ble Pride of many learned Pious Divines,who though they have no worfe Titles then r>>» i/o^<, revermdi^cehbtrrmi: yet think chemfelves abufed and unfufferably vilified, if any word do but McriiupHngtre ^01 any Argument do/<«.vf»^«/ p^fjwfr^(v;itncfs Rivet and S^Anhemius late angry cenfure of u^vtjrAlms ) Can K k v.:^ Cz5o> we be fie Preachers and Patterns of meekncfs and humility to our people, who are fo notorioufly proud, that we can fcarcc be fpokc to ? My knowledge of your eminenc humility and gentelnefs hath made me alfo the freer in my fpeeches here to you : which therefore do need more excufe then yoors : And I accordingly intreat you, if any thing have pafTed that is unman- nerly , according to the natural eagernefs and vehemency of my temper, that you will be pleafed to cicufe what may be excufed, and the reft to remit -and cover with love, afluring your felf it proceeds not from any diminution of his high efteera of yon,and love to you, who acknowledgeth himfeif unfeigned- Jy fo very much below you, as to be unworthy to be called ToHr ftlloVp-fervatit Richard Baxxbr. June 28- 1650. Kedermiftflero Ffififcript, C^5i) Toftfcript. Ear Sir , while I was waiting for a meflenger to fend this by, Mafter Brooksbf acquaints me, that you vviflit him to tell me , that 1 muft exped no more in writing from you. My rcqueft is , that whereas you intimated in your firft, a purpofe of,writing fomewhatagainft me on this fubje(i^ here- after, you would bcpleafedtodo itin my life time, that I may Have the benefit of it, if you do it fatisfa- dorily •, and if not, may have opportunity to acquaint you with the reafons ofmydiffenc. Scrikunt Afinium rolitoncm dixiffe aliquAndo fe parafje ora,tiones contra. Piancum, quas non fJifi peft mortem ejjet editurus 5 c^ Flan cum refpofs'difje , cum mortuis non nift lar- vas luiiari : ut Lstd. Fives ex Plimo , dr Dr. Hum- frcd. ex illo ^efuit. 2. p. 640. i^rfo I requeft that if polTible you would proceed oh fuch terms as youi Divinity may not wholly depend upon meer niceties of Philofophy : For I cannot think fuch points to be neer the foundation : Or at leaft that you will clearly and fully confirm your Philofophical grounds: For as I find that your Dodrineofa Paflive lnftrumentalityoftheA(^ of faith (and that in a Mo- Kk 2 ral ral reception of righteoufnefs which is but a relation, yet calling it Phyfical) is the very bottom of the great cliftancc between us in the point of juftification : S.o I am of opinion that I may more freely diffentfrom a brother in fuch tricis philofophicis then in an Article of i^aith : Efpecially having the greateft Philofophers on my fide •, and alfo feeing how little accord there is among themfelves^that they are almoft fo many men, fo many minds : and when I find them profefling as Combacchitu in frdf. ad Phyf ihdit they write againft their own fenfc to pleafe others, (d* q»od miiximam ofinismm in lib. content arum far tern nonjam frebaret) dr Anjlote- l&m nonefje nor mam veritates ^znd wifhing Ht tandem alt' quando exurgat aliquisqui per/e^ioranobts princifia mon^ y?r^/;and to conclude as he, falfttatem opinionum(jrfe»' untiArum& fcientiarum imperfe^ienem jam pridem vi- deo , (ed in veritate docenda deficio. Et Nttlli aut vaucis certe minus me [atisfa5iurum ac mihi ipfi fat fci&. And how many new Methods and Dodrines of Philorophy this one age hath produced ^ And I am fo far fceptical my felf herein, as to think with Scali- ger {jb'td. cit. ) Nos injlar vulpis d Ciconia delitf^ vitreum vas lambere^ pultcmhaudattingere. But I believe not that in any Mafter- point in Divinity , God hath left his Church at fuch an utter lofs , nor hanged the faith and falvation of every honeft ordinary Christian , upon meer uncertain Philofophical fpeculations. •! do not think that Paul knew what a Pafsive inflmment was 5 much lefs [_ an a^ that rvas fhyfically pafsive in its injirumentality i/t a meral caufation.'] You muft give me leave to remain confident that Taul built not his Do- ctrine of juftification on fuch a philofophical founda- tion 2 (^55) rion, till you have brought one Scripture to prove that faith is an inftrument, and fuch an inftrument 5 which can neither be done. Efpecially when the fame Paul profefleth that he came not to declare the Teftimony of God, Kx'i'u'a-.fi')(^)]vi'oy-a » s-cifitif f and that he determined not to know any thing among them fave lefus Chrift and him crucified •, and that his fpcech and preaching was T\othTet^oiiA\Spa>Tr'mi(tT9pU{io)ji{) that fo their faith might not ftand it tro-^iadr^pa^Tc^i: &that he fpoke the my- fteries of thcGofpel ^k ^^(/rfiTo7f *»9fc/<,aAA' c;' Jlif'UKruf This is my faith of the nature of true juftifying faith 5 and the manner of its receiving Chrift. THE < III • II C^T) ^^' HB ^ader mujl underjlandthat after thisj had aperjonal coni- fer encemth tUsDear and ^e- verend^rother^vpherein be (lilt ov^ned and 'inffledon the pafsivenefs of fuflifying faith;vi^. That it is but a Cjrammatical aBion, '( or nominal^and a phy/tcal^ or hy.^ perpjh/icalpa/sion^ vphich alfo hegiveth ii. again in the Treatife of Imputation oj rtghteoufnefs. FINIS. DISPVTATION, Proving the Necefsity of a two- fold Righteoufnefs to fujltfication and Salvation. And defending this and many other Truths about luftifying Faith, its Obje<5l and Of- fice, againft the confident^but dark Affaults of Mr. lohn Warner, By ^ichard^axter. Him bath Cad axalteJ with his right hand , a Prince and a Saviour^ to give Me^entance unt» Kncl^ and for- give nefs of fins, Rom. 4. 22, 23, 24, 15. jfnd therefore it was iwfuted to him for Righteoufnefs : Norp it was not written, for his fake alone that it was Imputed to him % hut for us aljo, to whom it fi^ail he Imputed., if we Believe on him that raifdup Jefus our Lord from the dead 5 who was delivered for our offen- ces, and was raifed again for our ^uflt fiction. LONDON, Printed by R,iv, for Nevil Simmons^ Book feller in Ke- Jirmi»J}ery2nd are to be fold by him there , and by Nutka- nielEkinSiii the Gun in Tauh Chnrch-ysrd, 1658. ( 2-59 ) Queftion. JJ^hetherTBefdesthe^gh^ teoufnefs ofChrijl Imputed, there be a Terfonal Evangelical ^ghteoufnefs necejjary to fuflijication and Salva^ tion ? Affirm, Hough it hath pleafed a late Opponent ( Mr. Warntr ) to make the Defence of this Propo- fiti^n necelTary to me ; yet I fliall fuppolc that I may be allowed to be brief, both becaufe of what I have formerly faid of it, and becaufe the Qucftion is fo eafily decided , and Chri- ftians are fo commonly agreed on if. For the right underftandingof what wc here maintain, its necefTary that I explain the Terms, and remove confufion by feme nccefTary diftindions, and lay down my fenfe in fome Pro- pofirions that make to the openirg.of this. To trouble you with the Etymologies of the words iafeveral Languages that fignifie Righteoufntfi or fufiification would be a needlefs lofs of time, it being done to our hands by fo many, and we being fo far agreed on if, that here lycth no part of our prc- fentcontfoverfie. L I 2 The Ct6o') The Form of Righteoufncfsjfignified by the name is ReUtivt, as,/?>x'r or crooked iS. (For it is not the Hibit ofjufticcby which wegive everv man his own. that is the Subjed of our Qucfti- on; buc Rigliteoufnefs in a judicial or Leg^l fenl'e ) i. Righ- teouftttfs is either of the caufe^ or of the ^trfon. Not that thcfc arc fubjects actually ftpirattd but Jiftin^^ the one being fubor- dinate to the other. T he caufe is the nearert fubJL'(fi, and fo far as it is jnfi zndJHjii^ *lfle, fo far the pfrfon is ju/} and juftifi^hU, Yet the perfonraayor^^^-t*?!/* be juft and juftified, whenoneot many caufcs are unjuft^^'able. 3. Riihtioufnefs is denominated either from a Reluion to the '^rtcept of the Law , or tothe SanRion. Tu be rtghttom in Re- lation to the Precept^ is to be eonfa> m to that Treccpt ; An AQi- (»i or Di/pofi io-t conformtothc Precept, i{ called a Righteous A<5tion or Difpofition : and from 'hence the pnfon being fo far confermriscalled a Righttont pnfon : And fo this Righteoufnefs^ as to the pofitive precept, is his ohtyiag »V j ar\d as to the pj^okibi* tton^ it is his //;Kocr«7, contrary to that ^«///, which we call Rta^ tHfCttt'pa. RighteoulnefiKii Relation tothe Sanfiion , is either a Rela- tion to the i^omminntion and penal A.A of the Law,or to the/?ro-. mi([$rj or Premi int A '^. As to the former. Right tou[ntfs it no- thiflgv \i\Ml\\zNit-dftenefs of the puni/bitent , contrary to the Re^H* pcen^i^ as it refpeds the executisn i and fo A not heing Ij^ able to condemnation^ as it refpe^Ss the fentei^t. This is fome- time founded In the perfons Inancencj laft mentioned : fomc- timeon a /r*fpW#'» or acquittance : fomerime on iatiffaHion made by himfelf : An J fomeiime on fttUf^isn bj Mnether^conf junft with free pardon Cwhich is our cafe.) Rightewfnefs as a Relati jn to the f^romife^ or Premiant pari of the Sandion, is nothing but out Right to the Rtwsrd^ Gift, ovBtftefit^ gi p'eadible and jufitfjable ituforo. Which foinetimc is fouided in rnerit of our own ; fo netime in« free Gift : fomc- time in the merit 9f another, con^nnR mth free Gift^ which is our cafe, (other cafes concern us not j This laft mentioned, is Righ- seoufntfs as a Relation to the [nhfiance of the T^romife or Gift : But jwben ihtProm^fe^ or Gtft^ or TefiAmenh or Premiant Law iscondimnAlf as in our cafe it i$, then there is another fort of Rigbtc- Righteoufncfs neccflTary , which is Related to the MoiHspro" mfjl^nti^ and that is, Th« ptrformance of tht condition: which if itbe not p'"operly called Ri^htcournefs£r/&iVwt or Law of Grace requireth as its Condi- tion •, Or z. Becaufe its a Rightcoufnefs rtveaUdby the Golftl; Or 3. Becaufeitis f7ii'f»by ihcGo^f/ ; 4. Oc becaufe icis-a ftrfe^ fuifi'iing if lie Precep:: ofthc gos}el. i;y £4 /),"';<7»;4/ J RightcoufnefSjWe mean here, not that which is ours 5y mecr Imputation, but that which is founded in fome- what Inhcenc in USjOr performed by us. [ Ntctjfi'j ] is I . of a mcer i^-lntecedent, 2. Or of a MtMix We raeanthelart. Means SiVe c'.ihcr caufes^ or contiiiieni: I Hiall now by the help of thefe few diftinctions give you the plain truth in fome Propofitions, both Negatively and Affirma- tivcly,as followeth. ,f-\w^ Propofition i. Itis confejfed by ail that k^orv thmftlves^orman and the Law^ that none of us have a Perfonal univerfal Rightc- oufnefs. For then there were no fin, nor place for conftjfutn^ •rpav don, or Chriji- Prop. 2. An^ therefore we mnfi all confefs^ that in regard of the Prcceptive;><uh\i Chrift 3« Judge at the great day , ha:h the vtry fame (.. i^ndicor-s «s Salvation i5>/if^, it /'««_^<«» adjudging us to Salvation. <^ind therefore that this perfonal Evangelical Righreoufntfs ts of nccef- fiti to our Jufttficaiion at that J udgemenc. . Prop 8. ''Ind I think Wf a^'e agreed that no wan can conrir ue in a^&te of fhflifi edition , th.xt coniinueth «<>t in rtftate'/ Faith, Sanni^cai(on,ondfince^eObe!iiencr. Prop. 9 ti'e are agreed lamfure that no man at age if'y^flifitd before he Repent and Believe. Prop. 10 And v?e are agreed that this Repenting ^^ndTelleving i^boththe matter of the Gofpel-Precept, and the Cond cion of M m the (166-) the Protnire. Chrtfi hath madt «vtr to ui himftlfwith his imfmti RighttoHfnefmndKingiim^ o* condititn that wirtfent anibe- lievt in him. prop. n. It cannot then be denied thu Faith and Rtpentance he- ■InghotbtheDiiiy comtninded, and the Condition reqa'ited and pcrformcd^y* trttlj a particular fpccial Rightcoafnefs, fubordi- natero Chriftand his Righre^ufnefs , in order to our further parctcipation of him.and from him. Prop. I z. /indUftlj itspifi difpttte that this pcrfonal Righ- teoufnefs of Faith and Repentance, is not to he called a Le- gal, hat ^« Evangelical Righteoufnefs, hecaufe ii is the Gofpil that both coramandeth thim^ And proraifeth life to thofe that per- form them. Thus mechinks all that I defire U granted already : what Ad- verfary could a man dream of among Proteftants in fuch t Caufe? Agreement feemeth to prevent the neceffity of a further Difpute. To be yet bricfcr,and bring it nearer an IfTac ; If any thing of the main The fit here be denyed, it rauft be one of thcfe three things. I . That there is any fttch thing as Faith , Repen- tance or Sandification. 2. Or that they (hould be called an Evangelical perfonalRighteoufnefs. g. Or ihat they arc«fff/l fary to fufiif cation and Salvtaion : The firft is de exi^tn- ttA rei I The fecond is de nomine : The third ii de ufu ^ fine* The firft no man but a Heathen or Infidel will deny. And for the fecond , that this name is fit for it, I prove by parts, i. It may and rouft be called A Right eonfne ft, 3. Cd Perfonal Righteoufnefs* 3. zAn Evangelical Righteosef' vef:. 2 . As Righteoufneft fignificth the H-Ahit by which we give to alt their own, fo this is RighteoHfnefs. For in Regeneration she foubl is habituated co give up it fclf to God as his own, and So give up all we have to him, and to love and ferve all where ihis lojvcand fervice doth require it. No true habit is fo excellent H^tt which is given in Regeneration. 3' The fiftcere performance of the 'Dmief required of as by (26'/') the Evangelical Precipty is a /»trrr JSvangtUcal Righmufnefi : But our firft turning to God in Ghrift by faith tnd Repen- tance, is the fincere performance of the duties required of us by the Evangelical Precept. Ergo. Object. The Co/pel recjuireth aEitiAl external Obedience and perfeverance aifa. y^nfvf. Not at the firft inttant of Converfion'- For tKatin- hant, he that Btlitveth and Rtftnttth, doth fincerely do the Duty required by it : and afterward, he that conthueth herein with Ex prejftve Obedience, which is then part of thisRighte- oufnefs. 3» The true Performance of the Conditions of Juflificatton and Salvation, impofcd in the Gofpel-Promife, is a true gof- pel Righteeufnefs : But Faith and Repentance at the firfl, and Jinccrc Obedience added afterward^are the true performance of ihcfe Conditions. Ergo. 4. It is commonly called by the name oi Inherent Righte- ottfntfi, by all Divines with one Confcnt : therefore the name of [^ RighteoHfuefs ] is paft controverfie here. 5. That which in Judgement muft be his j«y?/;j<» caufe, the Righteoufnefs of his caufe, is fo far the Right ecnfnefs of hii per- fan : ( for the perfon rauft needs be righteous quc^i kanc cau- f^Wt as to that caufe) Butour Faith and Repentance will be much of the Righteoufnefs of our caufe at that day ( for the , Tryal of us will be,whether we are true Believers, and penitent or not ; and that being much of the caufe of the day, we muft needs be righteous or unrighteous ss to that criufe .- \ there- fore our Faith and Repcncance is much of the Righteoufnf fs of our perfonSjdenominatcd in refpect to the Ti yal and j udcc- mentofthatday. 6. Theholy Scripture frequently calls it IVghteoufnefs, and calls all true penitent Believers, and all that fincerijy obt'v Qhx\^^\^righteoH!~\ becaufe of thefe qualifications ( fiippoHnq pardon of fin, and merit of Glory by Chnft for us : ) therefore wemay'andmuft fo call them, Mat.2^.-^j,^6.The» /^'a/ithe righteous anfiver- bf^t the righteous into life eter>taljMit.lo. 41 . He that receiveth a righteous man in the mme of a t i^hteottf man, fhaO receiver righteous mans reward. Heb. 1 1 .^. 'By faith Abel ofered, • bji yvhich he cbtaphom tt flj*Uhe imputed^ if Vee believe on him that rxifed up Jefus our Lordfrom the dead- So Jim.2.23. Gal. 3. 6. IfanjfAji thathj [ Faith^^ in all thcfe Texcs is meant Chrifli right eoufaefs^ and not Faith^ I will bc- kivs them when I take Scripture to l>e intelligible only by them, and that God did not write it to have it underftood . But tbac Faith is imputed or accounted to us for Rightcoufnefsinafenfc meerly fubordinate to Chrifts righteoufnefs , by which we arc juitified, I eafily grant. As to Satisfa^ion af\d LMerit we have no righccoafnefs but Chrifts, but a Covenant and Law we are ftill under, and not redecmedto be lawlefs ; and this Covenant is ordained, as. the way of making over Chrift and his meritorious righcecufafif&;, and life to us : and therefore they being given or madeoiv^oon Covenant- terms, thereisa pcrfonal performance of t^' conditions neccflary : and f6 that pcrfonal performance is all the righteoufnefs inherent or proprix:.iSliMiiy tihat God reqiiireth of us now, whereas by the fir ft Covenant pcrfe(5k Obedience was required as neceflary to life. Sothat in.pointof meer perfonal performance our own Faith is accepted; and imputed or accounted to us for Righte- oufnefs,, that is-, G/}d^iilreefui''e no more as neceffarj tojuflifi* cMii>nMtottr o'don h^ndf, but that We believe in the righteoufnefs af another* and accept a ReJeemer C though once he required more; ) But as^tothe/ufij/}/-*^ of the Juftice of theoflfended Majefty, and the meriting of life with pardon , &c. So the Righteouftiefs of Chrift is our only Right eouf»efs. But nothing IQ Scripta^e is niore plain chen that Faich it feif isXaid to be ac- counud. WJ - 9iUnttdtousforRighitoHfnefs\ and not only Chrijis oVenriih* ■uoufnifs : He that will not take thii for proof, muft cxpcd no Scripture proof of any thing from me. Efh. 4. J4. Tht new mttn nfter God it ere Attain rigbteouf- ntfi. Many other Texts do call our firft Converfion, orftate of Grace,our faith and repentance , and our fincere obedii^nce by the name oi Right eon fneft* 2. And then that it may, and that moft fitly be called at\ i?t/4«^f//(r4/ righteoufnefs, I will not trouble the Reader to prove, left I feem tocenfurehii underftanding as too ftupid. Its cafic to try whether our Faith and Repentance , our Inherent Righteoufncfs , do more anfwer the Precepts and Promifeof Chiift in the Gofpel , or thofe of the Law of workj. 3 . And that this is a perfonal righteoufnefs, I have lefs need to prove : Though it isChrift that purchajed it ( and fo it may be called the right eoufnt ft of Cbrifi ) and the Spirit that vfork^- tth it in us,yetitswethaEarcthe J'«^;*fl/andthe/4^r«f/as to the aft. It being therefore pift doubt that, 1. Thcthingitfelfis 9X'iJ}tnt and tftct^Ary. 2. That rlghteoufnefs i$ afitnAme for it. 3. All that remains to be proved is the life of ic^ ^y!ceihtr it be nectjfurj to Jujiifvcaticn and Salvation. And here the com- mon agreement of Divines, (except the Antiaomiam) doth favc us the labour of proving this ; for they alt agree that FaUh and Repentance are neccflary to our fir ft Juflificatioti ; and that fincere obedience alfo is neceffary to our Juftification at Judgc- ment.and to our Salvation.Sothat here being noconteovcrficj will not make my felf nccdiefs work. Obejd. I But faith andrepivtaKct are not necejfary to fufiijicar ticn qua juftitia qiaedam Evangelica, under the netionofar'gh- teoufnefs^hut faith as an Injlrurr.ertt ^. Reader, Icravc thy pardo^orl(_eth not, but bdieveth n him that jfij^ fith the urgodl)^ kis faith is counted {or right eoefntft. A)ijVv. I. I fuppofethc Reader underftandeth that the Le- gal or rather Pro-legal Righteoufnefs, thatIpleadfor,isChrifts Meritfr i Ivferits and SatisfaAion made over to us, for the effects ; and that the pcrfonal Evangelical Rinhteoufnefs is our believing and repenting. Now that thcfc are both necefTary, this very Text provetb,whicbhecit€th-acainftit. For the neceflity of Chrifts meritorious Righteoufnefs he will not deny that it is here imply- ed : and the neceflity of our own faith h twice expreft, \To him that beHeveth:^his faith it counteci for righttottfr.efs. ] If ft be the Bting of Faith that this Brother would exclude ic is here twice expreft: U it be only the naming it \_ariihteoti[»efi~\ That name alio is here expreft. How could he have brought a plainec evidence againft himfclf ? 2. Tohis Argument, I diftinguifli of {VngodliHe[i'\ If it be takcnforan unregencrate impenitent unbeliever , then I deny the Al nor^ at ieaft wfenfu compcfito •, A perfon in the inftant of Juftificationisnoc an unbeliever; This Text fhameth him that will affirm it. But if by ^JUn^^oMy] be meant [^Sinners, or per- lons unjuftifyable by the Aorks of the Law, who are legally im- pious] then I deny the confequencc of the Major. Do I need CO tell a Divine that a man may be a finner and a penietnt Be- liever ac once. The Syri^ick^ and £ri{7io^/cl:„tranflating the word {_ finntrs J do thus expound the Text ; and its the common Ex- pofitionof moft judicious Divines. It is not of the Apoftles meanmgtotcllyou that God juftifieth impenitent Infidels, or haters of God : but that he juftifieth finners, legally condemn- ed and unworthy, yet true Belie vers,as the Text expreffeth. 3 , If any reject this Expofition, and will take [ ungodly 1 here for Q the Impenitent , ] then the other Expofition folveth his Objection, "z,/^. They were Impenitent and Unbelievers, in the inftant next foregoing, but not in the inftant of Juftification : ' For faith and Juftincation afe in the fame inftant of time. 4. Rather then believe that God juftifieth InHdels contrary to the text, I would interpret this Text as Bez.a doth fome other, as fpeakmgof Juftification as comprehending both Converfion and Forgivenels, even the conferring of Inherent and Imput- ed Righteoufnefs both : and fo God juftifieth Infidels them- felves ; that is, giveth them fir ft faith and Repsntance,and then for^ivenefs and eternal life in Chrift, 5. But I wonder at his proof of his Sequel {^^eca^fe he N n 2 Vfho who iiunioMj is not le^aUy righteitts"} what is that to the Q^e- ftion ? It is Ltgalrigheottfrtefs in C^riji that Juftification givcth biro: Therefore wc all fuppofe he hath it not before ; But h€ is perfonally Evangelically Righteous as foon as he Believes, fo far as to be a true performer of the Condition of Juftfication ^ and then in the fame inttantbe receiveth by Juth'ication thac Rightedbfnefs of Chrift which anfwcreth the Law. Mr. W. If nothing ought to he ajferteJ by tu Vrhicb over* riroftv tyfpopoiicitl rcrltiKgs , then the ttecefptj of a two-fold . righteoufnefs ought not ts be aprtfd ^ But Ergo. The Stcuelts proved hj this T^ilemita. Apo^oHctl Writings are utterly agi'.infl a trro-foU Righteoufnefs in thu V¥«r/^ j thereftre to afert both the fe kinds ii to overthn^ thfir TPrutrgi, far to wh a pur- fcfedidPau] d (put e again fl fhjiification by rvo-k/ of the X«»», if the rsghteoufae/sofFuith were »ct fujficletit ? And certainly if both were rftjutred as abfolutelynecejfury, it would *rgue eX' tre^m ignorance in Pau\ if he Jhould not hAve kj^own it^ and M great unfaithfulnefs ify&ic. ' y^«/B».Either this Writer owns the *wo- fold Righteonfnefs thae he difputcth againft, or not : If he did not, he were an Infidel oc wretched Heretick , directly denying Chrilt or Faith ;For Chrift is the one Righteournefs,and faith the other. If he do own them ( as I donbt not at all but he dorh^ is it not good fervice to the Church to pour out this oppofition againft words not under- ftood, and to make men believe that the difference is fo mate- rial as to overthrow (he Scriptures ? But to his Argument, I deny the confequence of the Major ; and how is it proved ? for- aboth b^ a DilemmuX which other folks call an Enthymeme) Of which the Antecedent (TAa^ Apofiolical "ivritings areagamfl a iwo-fold righteou/nefs)\s proved by this Writers word. A learn- ed proof ! into which his Difputations arc ultimately refolved. It is the very work of ''Pa»liE^\Mcszo prove the necefllty of this Two-fold Righteoufnefs Cunlefs you will with ihePapifts call it rather two parts of one Righteoufnefs, ) Chrifts merits ^nd mans faith, one in our furety, the other wrought by hira in our /elves. Bur, (2-77) Bat, faith he, towhst purpofcdid /^Wdifputeagtinft Jufti- fication by the works of the Law, If the Righteoufnefs of faith were not I'utficient? 1 anfw/cr yoUji.Becaufc no man hath a perfonal legal Righteoufncfs ; But ?»i«/ never difputcd againft a legal lltghceoufnels in Chnft, or his fuelling the i-a:v, or be- ing made a curfc for us. Do you think he did ? 2. A R ghte- eofnef*; of faith is futficicnc : for ic fi^mieth this two-fold . ig'i» teoufnefs. 1. Thatrighteoufnefswh'n faith acceptcth , which is [" of pAiih 3 beciu'e proclnrneJ in the G ifpel , and is the c^^ffl of Faith -, and yet it is leg il, tnthar ic wasiCi^formity totbeLaw,andaHl hath let us fee by revealing both, that he was neither ignorant,unfaithfuli nor a Sophifter. CMr. W.^.If both Leg^l and Evangelic 4{ rifhteottftiefs ^erg^ thtti re^jnired to tht furpoje of inji'f)iig,theyi it muii be becaufe the Evangelic*! is of it felf infufficient. But For if {^hrijls righ' teotffnef be tn'^M^cient to Satvation,loe Vper^ not a fafficient Savi- oHr^ And If the Righteonfnefs of Faith tn him rvere ofttfelfinfuff'' tnt. Anfi9. By thistime I am tempted to repent that I medled with this Brother. If he live to read over a reply or two, he may poflibly underftand them that he writes againfl. He will prove that a Leg*l Righteoufnefs is not neceffary , becaufe Chrilh righteoufnefs ( which is it chat I called legal ) is fuffi- cient. Its fjlfficient alone: therefo'c not NecefAry. Am not I line to have a fair hind think you of this Difputer ? To his Argument once more I diftinguilh: Evangelical righteoufnefs is twofold. I. That which theGofpel reveaieth and offereth i and this isChrifts righteoufnefs, therefore called Evangelical : but alfo Legal^ becaufe ic anfwered the rule of the Law of works,and its ends. 2,Tha; which the G.ofpei hath made the Nn 3 Con--- (278) Condicion of our part in Chrlft and his rightaoufnefs : and this is Faith it felf. Both thefeare fufficient to J unification : but Faith is neither/«j^rXhere one of them is \K>anting in a perfon^ there can be no Juftification of th.it perfort. But Ergo. "^ For Whtre Veas any Legal Rightcoufnefs of the good thief o» the Crofs, condemned for legal tCfirighleoHfneJs ? Anfrv. Jnfrv. I deny your minor. The converted thief had a legal righteoufnefs hanging on the next Crofs to him; even Chrift that then was road^curfe for him, and was obedient to the death of the Croff?^ begin to be a weary in writing fo much only to Cell men that you underftand rae not. CMr. \N,6. If legal Righteoufn(fi be thu necefirilj to be jow^ ed "A'ith oftr EvangcUcal Righteoufmfs to Jtsjtificatieii^ then there wuli be ttpo fcrrtJAl caftfes cfffifiification, Anfrv. I deny your confcquence. If the formal caufe con- fiftin remifiion and imputation as you fay , then Chrifts meri- torious righteoufnefs is noneof th« Form.hwt the AUtttr. And if befides that Alatter a fubftrvient particular righteoufnefsi^of faith ) be ncceffiry as the condition of our Title to Chrift j this makes not two forms of this Juftification. 2. And yet I grant you that it infers a fubfervicnt Juftification that hath another form, when you are made a Believer, or juftified againft the falfe charge of being no Believcr(or penitcnt)this i5 not remiffi- on of fin, but another form and thing. Mr. W.7. That ^hlch msiKeth void C'hrifis death^cdnnot be 4tbfoluteh necejfary to Juftijice our felvss are not the fubje^s of Evangelical righteoufnefs , / fjall endeavour to prove by thefe Arguments, i . // our Evangelical righttoufnejs be out dfta in Chrijl , then it it not in ut, confifiing in the habit or Ads Qf faith and Go f^el obedience , but it is out ofta i : Chrijl. Anfw. We fhall have fuch another piece of work with this point as the former, to defend the truth againll: a man that lay- 'Cth about him in the dark. 1 . 1 have oft enough diftinguifht of Evangelical righteoufnefs. The righteoufnefs conform to the /..tip, and revealed and ^iven by the Go/fel is meritorioufly and materially cut of us in Chrilh The righteoufnefs conform to the O o ' Go.q)th Go^tl^ as conftituting the conduku of life, Q He that hlievtth fhatl not rerifh : Rtfe^it audbe converted iha: jour fms way he blotted oHt,'\ This i« in our felvcs materially, and nut out of as in Chrift. Mr.W. zJffatpjfaiiioM to Divint jHftici vfere not given or taufedb) anj thin^ tn Ht , but by Chriji alone , then Evttngehcal ri/kteoulnefj « in Chriji alvne. Bat — ^ Ergo — without blood no remijjion. Anf^. Your proof of the confequence is none ; but worfe then filence. Bcfidcs the fatisfaftion of Juftice and remifllicnof fin thereby ; there is a fubfetvicnt Gofpel righteoufnefs , as is proved, and is undeniable. LMr. W. 5. If Evangtliciil rlgkteoufntfs be in orer [elves , then ptrfe^ righteoufnefs u incur fdves. But thAts not Jo. Ergo. Anfw. Still you play wich the ambiguity of a word,and deny that which befeems you not to deny , that the fj^lfillmg of the condition [ ^«/i>v^ ri""^ ■^»i'f] is a Gofpel-rigpieoufnefs , par- ticular and fubfervient and imperfc f '[tificafion rcottlddifcon- Anf^. If you thoaght not your word muft go for proof,you would never lure cxpefl that wc (hould believe your Conle- quence. For i What rticw is there of reafon that the intci c fion of the ad fliould caufe the celTation of that Juftiftcatifn which is the confequcnc of the Habit ( which you put in your Antece- dent?) The Habit continueth inour fleep,when the .ids do not. 2. As long as the caufe continueth (which is Chrills Merits «nd theGofpel-Grant j Juftification will continue, \{ the con- dition be but fincerely performed (For the Condition is not the caufe, much lefs a Phyfical caufe j But the condition is fincerely performed, though we believe not in out fl<:ep. I dare not in- ftance in your payment of Rent, left a Carper be upon my back; biit fuppofe you^ive a man a Icafe of Lands on condition he come once a moncth, orweek, or day,andfny, Ithank^joHy or in t^encraljCrti condition he bt tkankful. Doth his Title ceafe as oft as he fhuts his lips from faying, / thaKk, yon ? Thefe arc ftrange Dodrmes. J/r.W. 5. If S'ja*igelical rigkteof4fr,«fs veere in our ftlvtf, a»a faith Wuh our Go^el- obedience ^^ere that right eeufrept then he who hath more or lefs faith or obtdieKce,vcere more or Iffs jujfifi' ed^and wore or lefs Evangelically righteous^ according to the and will lake your Medicines? Y.our. proof is as vain and null, that it derogates from faith.' What, that Faith (hould be this fubfcrvient Rightcoufnefs? Doth that di(honour it?Or is it that Repentance is con joyncd as to our firfl Juftification,and obedience as to that at Judgement ? Wbcnyou prove.eitber of thcfcdiQionourable to faith, we will b&Jieveyou ; but itmuft be a proof that is ftrongcr then the Gcfpelthatisagainftyou. We confefs faith to be the r*ff«t//«£ ConAitia^y and repentance but the difpojing (Condition : but.both are Conditions, As for Phil.-^^g, Do you not fee that it is aga^inft • you / I profefs with T^w/j not to have a righteoufrnfs of my o^^$ ^hieh U of the,LaWy ( which made me loth to ca^l faith and ire- pentance a legal righteoufncfs ) but thit rvhich ii through tk§ faith of Chrift^the righteonfvefs ^hich ii $f ^odhj faith :]fikh yoa fee is the means of our Title to Chri'is Righteouf-, nefs : And if you deny faith it felf to be any particular Righteoufncfs, you mu^ make it a fin, or indifferent, and iQntradid the Scriptures . And prefencly contradiding what you have been arguing, for ( chat Evangelical RigbteonT- nefs is not in us , and we are not the Subjeds ef it : ) You profefs pag, 178. That Inherent Right eoufnefs is in ns. C^St ) It fcems then either Inherent righttottfntjs is not righteoh/- ntfs^ or it is not EvangelicAl but Legal.or'ii is in us,and not in us. Had you only pleaded that we are not /uftlHed by it as a Righteoufnefs , I (hould have anfwered you as before orr that point. Not as a Legal Righteoufnefs ; nor an Evan- gelical Righteoufnefs co ordinate with Chrifts • but as a fulfilling, of the Condition of thjit Promife, which gives us Chrift, and Pardon , and Lift ; by which performance of the Condition , the Benefit becomes ours by the Will and Grant of the free Donor ; and we are no longer tmpe* mrenc Infidels , but juft, and juftifiabic from the falfe charge of being fuch ; and fo of not having part in Chrift» Its one thing to be accufed of fin as fin : And another ahing to be accufed of the fpccial fin of not accepting the Remedy : and fo of having no part in Chrift and his Righteoufnefs. From the larcr we rauft have a real Faith and Title to Chrift, which muft materially juftifie us : but from the former, even from all fin that ever we are guilty of. Chrifts Righteoufnefs only juftifieth us materially and itieritoriouny, and our faith is but a bare condition. Oo J ^ CiS(J) (^ Confutatton of the Error of a$ lofs apd dung, f^t ftood in oppofition to, oncprnpL'titfon with Chrid : and To would I do by faith and love it fclf/fliould they be fo artoganc 2. Paul exprefly naracth the works that he exdudcch, that is, the Righteoufnefs r»h!ch u cf the Lav^ or in Legal^orkj- A^^ do we mdiie any doubt of this ? No,nor of thofe works that materially are Evangelical : for if they arc formally Evangelical, they canno: be fee up againft Chrift, their very nature being to fubfervc him. Once for all, remember this Argument. Thofe works that are commanded by God in the GofpeK are not excluded by God in the Gofpel in that nature and to the ufe fo: which they arc commanded. But faith in Chrift Jefus the Lord and Sa- viour, ( an entire faith ) ajid Repentance towards Gc^ and love to him are commmded' by God in the Gofpel in crder to the pardon of fin ; and the continuance of tbcfc with fincere Obedience, are coraKitinded as rwr^^/of our continued par- don, and as a means of our final Juftfication at judgement. Therefore none of chefe are excluded by the Gofpel from any of thefe ufes or ends. He citeih alfo, Aii, 1 5. and Heb. 2.9. and Rom. i . 1 7. to as rauchpurpofeasthe reft. Tag. 228. He begins his Arguments, The firft is [ Becaufe in VAi» Art additions of nHmberSy^ithout wbich any thing may be done '. Bnt ^X'ithout addition of Wsrkj the kSl of j^fttfpng it jitrftB, Srgo.'] Anfwer. i. As if the Queftionwereof the [A61 ofju/iifyiMg,']aLnd not of Juftification pafiivcly taken.Gods aft hath no imperfedion , when yet it makcth not a perfeft work. 2. Itsbucfpleen and partiality to harp upon the term f^tvorks'] ftillto feduceyour Readers to believe that 1 2m for fuch works as P4«/denycth.I ufe not the pbrafe oilfttflification by wo rk^s ] nor think it fit to be ufed,un!cfs rarely, or to explain fuch texts of Scripture as do ufe it,or terrostquipollent.s.Jufti' fication is neither perfed nor real, without a faith in Chri!\ as Head and Husband, and Lord, and Teacher , and Interceffor, as well as a Sacrifice for fin. Nor is it perfect or true, without repenting and loving Chrift. 4. Juftification is fo far perfed atfirft.asthatnofinpaftor exiftent is unpardoned, "^ucitis not fo perfed, but that, i. Many future finsmuft haverr- newed (288) newed pardon. 2. And means is to be ufed by us, ( believing again at Icaft ) for that end. ?. And the continuance of par- don IS given us but conditionally, ( though we (hall ccrtamiy perform the condition, ) 4. And themoft perfed fort ofju- ftification ^by fentencc at Judgement J is ftill behind. Arc thefe things doubtfull among Divinesor Chriftians ? That the Church muft be thus molefted by fuch difputing volumes againft ir, to make the Papifts and other enemies believe we hold L know not what ? Read the many Arguments of learned Said- ford and Packer de "D tfier^fu ^;ind Bp. V/her de Defcenft* ( to tht Jefhite ) by which they prove that all feparated fouls, as fepa- , raced., are under penalty ,and that Chrifts foul as feperated was fo : and then tell us whether your fancy of abfoiutely perfedl Juftification at thefirft will hold or not. I wonder that'men fhould fo little know the difference betwixt Earth and Heaven ; a.finner in fiefli,and a Saint that is equal to the Angels of God ? and Qiould dream offuch perfedion fliort of heaven , the place of our perfedion ? His fecond Argument is,£ Faith and worh are here contrary : If of Faith ^then not of vi>or\s ] Anfwer. Its true of the works that Paul excludes : but not of the works that you exclude : For Faith in Chrifi is [ tVorkj ] with fuch as you, fave only thataA thatrcfteth on hisfatistadionfor rightcoufnefs : And .repentance and love to Chrift, and denying our own righteouf- nefsare workj with you. And all thefe are neceflaiily fubfervient toChrift and Grace, and therefore not contrary. Aff^uJ}int,9nd after him the School- men, put it into their moft common de- finition of Grace,thac its a thing [ ^ua nemo male utitur. ] And as toefficiency its certainly true: Grace doth not do any harm : And if I may prefumetotell Angupinet\i2X[j)bjeElivil)~\ Grace may be ill ufed.yet perhaps he mightreply,[not cjHatatu;^ithout contradiBion'yin good fadneff,Is it not a ftrangc thing for a man in his wits, to exped to be juftified in co-ordination with Chrifts nierirs, by denying that he hath any merits of his own that can fo juftifle iiim, and by repenting of thofe fins that have con- demned him, and by defiring, loving, hoping in Chrift alone for his Juftification : orby Thankfulnefsto Godfor juflifying l)im by the fole merits of Chrift ? And is it not a ftrangc Expo- iicioQ C 2-8p ) fition that feigneth P^t4l Co mean and exclude fijch ads as thcfc under the name of works. But yet really if fucli a man be to be found, that doth chink to meri' Juftificacionby de- nying fuch merit,! am againft him as well as you. His third Argument is,|^ {ffAlthy-tftifie only js the hrginrtirg of otiV J ujitp cation, then there /tre dtgrees of 'jufiifiration : hut there are no degrees. Ergo. ~\ f^-1rf\ieer. i. Faith is nei- ther the Beginning nor End of Juftification , but a means of it. 2. If you would infinuatc that 1 deny faith to be the means of our continued, as well as begun Juftification, yoii deal deceitfully. 5. I deny your Confcquence. \t may prove more neceff^ry to the Continuance oi our Juftificarion, thbn to its beginning, and yet prove no degrees. 4. But how Juftificuionhath or hath not Degrees,! have told you beforf, and ful'er in other writings. His fourth Af^gument is, f BecAufe good ^orkjiio not precede^ IfHt follow J^ffi^cAnen.'] Anfwer. i. Repentance, and the "love of God in Chrift, aud faith in Chrift as Lord. and Vli^id^ and Teacher, tIo po before the pardon of fin^ and fo before Jjftification.. 2. External obedience goeth before Juftlhca- cion at Judgement. and Juftificacion a: continued here. Did you doubt of thele? '' . His fifth Argument is, that [ Thefe t^o J»ufficauoni over- thratv each other : If bjf one ive have peace with Go4^ tvh.it nfed. the othifrf Howctn ^oodw^rkj perfe^} our 'Jnffificano»^ ifeing themfelvet imperfe^ ? ] Anfwer, A jj (his is anfwered in th'e fecond Difputation. i. Its no contradiction to be juftified by God, by Chrift, by Faith, by Words, by Works, if God be to be believed, that affi meth all. 2. As imperfed fatth may be the condition of pardon, fo may imperfect Rcpen. tance, and inrperfcct Obedience of our fenrentia'l Abfoto* ton, Pag. 23,3. He snfwcreth the Ol^'ectioni £ Bhlftdnefs « fifcribtdto other Graces 1'^ thus \ Not Af^fHippineft were i>t them per iz, h^rnnlj as they are fiins. ] Anfwer. Fr^tJiJfig Is more zhfnt^firikng: It? a great advamrage foryou co hsve the forming of your OMcctions. 2, Happinefs perfc is as much in Love, as in Faith, and more. 3. Oih but not of our Juftification at Judg€n:ient, nor the non-omifliion here. 2. We muft have recourfe toChrift with Repentance, andcfteem, and felf-denial, and defire, &c.^% well as that aft of faith which you plead for, as the total caufe. And when you would fetZ^-^c^jf againftZ^wc/;^, you do but mif-underftandhim. He faith truly with Paul^ihii neither in whole or part are our own works ( fuch as Paul fpeaks of^ our Righteoufnefs, that is, to anfwer the Law as Paul menti- onethjOr any way to merit or fatlsfi€, or Hand in co-ordina- tion with Chrift. But Zinchj never thought that Repentance and Faith in Chrift as Head, and Lord, and Defire, and Gra- titude, &c. might be no means or Conditions of any fort of Juftification, or of that which we alTert them to be means of. • I would anfwer much more of this Difputation ; but I am perfwaded the j idicious Reader will think I have dons hira wrong, in troubling him with this murh. See fAg, 298, J99. how he anfwereth the Objed;on, that pirdon is promifcd to Repentance, &c. I will not difpa^agc the Readers undtr- ftanding fo much as to offer him a Confutation of that, and much more of the Book. Only his many Arguments on the Queftion of my firft Difputation, I muft crave your Pati- ence, while I examine briefly, and I will tire you with no wore. lMt* W. ^41/. 411,412. / ^.7/ taUj up my yirguments Againji the for ej aid Defnition of Faith to be an accepiittg ofCkrift «i Lord ani Saviour ; proving th^^t ChriJ} only oi Saviour a»4 friefi, offering hiiifetftip to the dei&th of the Crofsfor onr ftnf^ is tht propir ObjeSi ofjuflifjing faith^ as jnfiifyiftg- Argument 1. If the Faith of the Fathers n»dtr the old Ttpament \>rai direU" fd to (fhrtft us dji»}g Priefl and Saviohy ; then alfo the Faith ofBeliiVers now ottghtfo to be direfteJ.'Sut. — Ergc, — - jlnfjv. I. Igrantthe wJiole, and never made queftion of But what kin is tlieconclnfion of this Argumenc to chat been added. Chriftasdyingor cannot. Mr. W. Argument i. If Chrijl at dyings and as Saviour Ja fatiife CJods Jufiice^ an J paci^e a ftnners confctenee^ then ms djing and Saviour he « the Objtfi of jitjiif/i^g Faith. Bui Ergo. jiftfvr. The fame anfwer ferveth to thisas to the laft. The condufion is granted, but nothing to the Queftion, uniefs [Ow/7 ] hadbeen in. 2. Cbrift as obeying actively , an4 Chriii as Rifing, and as interceding , and as judging, as King, doth alfo juftifieus, Rom. ^.19. /iow.4 24,25. ^c'w o.3 3»?4. A/at.12.-;';. and25. 34,40. Pcrufe thefe Texts impartially, and be ignorant of this if you can. 3 . And yet the Arguraenl will not hold, that no att of t lith is the condition of juiiifica- tion, but thofe whofe object isconfidered only asjuftifying. The accepting of Chr ift to fanctifie us,is a real pare of the con- dition of Juftification. Pp3 Mr, ] (iP4) L^r. W- Argument 3. IfChrifl as Lord hi proper/f theObjeH of fe^r, thenhe u* not frofertj the Oi?je6l of Faith as jujiifjin^ : But f^^^- yinfvf. I . I f [ Property ] be fpokcn de propria quart ompdo^ thenisChrift properly the Objed of neither, that is, he is not the objcd of either of thefe Oi^lj- 2. But if [ fro- pirlj ] be oppofed to a tropical, analogical, or any fuch im- proper fpeecb, then he is the Objcd as Lord, both of fear, and faith, and obedience, ^c. 3. The deceit that ftili mif- leads moft men in this point, is in the terms of reduplication, {faith as jtt(iifj/i»g^ "| which men that look not through the bark, do fwallow without fufficicnt chewing, and fo wrong themfelves and others by meer words. Once more therefore underftand, that when men diftinguifh berwcen^^ri <]ua jufii" ficans^ and ejtta jufttfcans, and fay, [ Faith which jufitfieth, MCifteth Chrift at Headand Lord ; but faith asjufitfjing,taketh kirn only as a "Triefl, ~] The very diftindion in the later branch of it, [_i^uajiifiificans. J Is 1 . Either palpable falfeDodrine. 2. And a meer begging of the Queftion 3. Or clfeco- inci- dent with the other branch, and fo contradidory to their af- fertion. For 1. The common Intent and meaning is, that \_Fi^es tfuacrtdit inCkrtfiumjHJiificat : And fo they fuppofe ihat Faith is to be denominated formally [jufificanf^ai; objf[lo tjua object fivj : And if this be true, thcDfi^^es qua fides jujhfi- cat: For the ob;ed is effentiai to faith injptcie. And fo in their fenfe,[/2 honoured, enriched, and all upon conditionof their thankfull acceprancc of him,»nd of this act of Grace:Hcre th^rc is no room to diftinguifh of their Accep- tance, as if the acceptance of pardon were the condition of pardon, and the acceptance of riches were the conditionof jhcir Riches, cT'-'. But it is the fame acceptance of their Prince and his Act of Grace, that hath relation to the feveral confc- qjent benefits, & may be called pardoning,honouring&enr!ch- ing'iti fevcralrefpects. It is the famemarnage ofa Prince that ■XCTakes a woman rich, honourable, c^c. So it is the fame faith in whole (-hrift,asChrift, that is fanctifyingandjuftifying.as j[t relatcth to the feveral Benefits: that is, it is the condition of both, fo that the'ir[gumtnt 4. Th^t vhich is thefn/n and fuhjlayjct of SvMgtlkal preaching , it the chjt^ of Ihf^tfjing Faith. 'But Chriji as crncifitdy is the fubjiance of Evangelical preAchiftg* Ergo. 3^1 y^nfvf. I . When I come to look for the condufion which excluded Chrift as Lord, Teacher, ^c. from being the ob- ject, I can find no fuch thing in any Argument thct yet I fee. They have the fame face as Mr. BUket Arguments had, to con- " _ elude (2-9.6) dude no more then what I g. an, th AC is, that Chrift as cru- cified, is the '^bjecc or jj"iiurig faith. ;'utwhercscb- [[OwZ/j] or any exclufive 1 f che tcft. 2. Buc ificbeimplyed.thei i. I fay ot the term crucified, that Chtilt crucified to purchafc fanctificaticn and falvation, is the object of that faith which is the condition of Juiiificatton, and not only Chrift crucified to procure JuHification. i. 1 deny the Minor, if by [^(\im and fubftance] you exclude Chriftas Lord, Teachtr, Judge, Head| CJ-f. Surely Evangelical preaching containcth Chrifts Refar- rection, Lord-(hip, Intercefiion, ^c. as well as his death,or elfe the Apoftles preached not rhe Gofpel. 1 his needs no proof with them that have read the Bible.' Mr.'W.Argtim.'^.That ^hich we Pjould dejire to k*t9n> ahovt ^llthwgs^is the Ohje-^ ofjvjiifjingfaith : But that is Chrlji crw^ (ifed. -Br go. ^'^ ' An[vc.iS\\\\ the Queftion wanting in the conciufion : Who denyeth that Chrift crucified is the object of juftifying faith ? 2. But if [p«/;'3^^^C'^^"nderftood, really doth not this Brother defire to know Chrift obeying,Chrift rjfenjChrift teaching,ru- ling, interceding, (^c? I do. Mr,\t^t Argument 6. ThAt in Chriji ii the ob'^eB ef faith ^ Asjtiftifjirg.vuhichheirigafprehen^eddothjufltfiens : Bftt the dfiUbJiiffering^ bloodtobedienc^ofChrifi to de^th is thxti' - " - Therefore it u the proper obje£l of faith ^ as jftflifj ing. Anf^, I. I diftipgu'fh of the term \ <« )tt^if)ir^^ ] and an- Iwer as before. No aft of Faith cffedeth our Juftification .♦ and whole faith is the condition : 1 he being or Nature of no ad is rhe formal or nrareft reafonof faiths Tntereft in Juftifi- cation It juftifieth not[[<»/ thiiAEi^nor as that ^^ 2. If[^o«/j»]]oC fome exclufive be not implyed in the conciufion,! grant it ftill.* Bjirif It be, then both Major and Minor are faHe. i. The Major is falfe , for it is not only the matter of our Jttni#- cation, that is the objtd of juftifying faith. To affirm this» i$bntto beg the qirettien; weexped yoor proof. 2 The '^ Minor •^ 097) . Minor is falfe : for befides the fuffenngs ircntioned, the very- perfon of Chrift, and the adivc obedience of Chri i, and the Title to pardon given us in the Gofpe), &c. apprehended by fai[h do juftifie. But the queftion is not what juftitieth ex parte Chrijiiy but ex parte nojiri. Air. W. Argument 7. That tvlkh the (h^el dothfirjlpre- fentpu ypith^ u the Ohje^ of faith Oi j'*fiif)i»g • 'But Chrifi :i in the Goffetfi'^Ji frefented m a Saviour : therefort he is tbtrein theohjeH of faith iU ju^ if) i *Jg- J'fip. I. Diftinguifhlng as before of the |[.*/ 'j^f^^fyi»g2 I ftiU grant the whole j the cxclufive and fo the queftion is (till vvanc.ng in the conclufion. 2. but if he mean only^ then both Maior an J CMi»or are falfe. The MJor is falfc;for that which the Gofpel doth firft prefenc m with, is but fart of the objed of juftifj'ing Faith. For it prefenteth us with the Articles to which W2 mult AfTent,. and to the CJood which we muft Ac- cept by degrees , andilotall inafentenceor word. TheJ/*- wo;- is falfe, beciufe in order of nature , the Defcription of Chrifts Perfon goeth firft, and of his Office afterward. 3 . The word S^viofir^ comprehendcth both his Prophetical and Kingly Office, by which he faveth us from fin and Hell j as al- fohisllefurredion, Afcention, Interccfiion, c^c. And in this large fcnfe I eafily grant the Conclufion. 4. If by a Savi-^ oar^ he mean only ( as his caufe importeth ) a facrificc for-fin, then (as this is a ftrangely limited lenfe of the word Saviour^ fo ) certainly the Incarnation, Bapcifra, Temptation, Miracles, Obedience of Chrid are all exprett before this ; And if it were oiherwife, vettheconfequenceofthe .ifaior is utterly ground- lefsand vsin.Pnoricy or Pofterioricy of any point delivered in the Gofpel, is a poor Argument to prove it the Objed ( much lefs it alone ) of jufiifying faith. A/r.W. Arguments. 7 hat xtkich the Lords Supper doth as a feal prefent to ]»fttf)tKg faith , that « the ohje^ of faith as JKJi'fjliMg : But the Lor,h Suppr doth frefentm with thrift as djir>g, E'^gO. Q q AnfVi\ Anf^A. Still the queflion is wanting in the conclufion. What a pack of Arguments arc here? 2. Do you believe in your confcience, that Chrift is prdented and reprefented in the Supper only as dying ? Mr.W. Argument 9. If ^e leave RedtmPtion and rem'Jfton of fins through faith in his bloody then faith oi juftifying pjould only Uok^upon that > But ^e have redemption and remtjjion of fins b] h>s bloody Col. i . Anfvff, Here'sone Argument that hath the queftion in the conclufion. But i . I deny the confequcnce of the C^ta'jor^ as not by Chriftians to be endured. 1 he [^ onl^ ] followcth not . Though we rauft be juftified by his blood, .1 have proved be- fore, that we are alfo juftified by his Refurredion, Obedience, I nterceffion , J udgementj<^r. 2. Moreover the confequencc is falfe on another account : Juflifying faith , that is, Faith the condition of J uftification , muft look at more in Chrift, then that which purchafeth Redemption. It juftifieth not effi- ciently, nor of its own nature, but the Promifc juftifieth with- out faiths co-efficiency ; only it makes the condition fine cjua noH: and this it may do by another Ad of faith, as well as that which apprehendeththeRanfom. 5. The [^ejuajuflifi^ cans^ Ibavefpoketo : ^a cannot hci-e properly refer to the nature of the faith, but to the I'cnefit. And fo faith qua jftfijficarjs, is neither this ad, nor that a6t, nor any ad j but Iqpia jufiificans'} noteth only its refped to Juftification ra- ther then to Sandification, or other benefits. As when I kindle a fire, 1 thereby occafion both Light and Heat, by putting to the fewel. And if you fpeak of that ad of mine | qtia calefa- ciens : or (jHAilluminans ] this doth not diftinguifh of the na- ture of the ad, but ofthe Refped that the fame Ad hath to feveral effeds or confequcnts. (J^r^. W, Argument i o. JfChrlfl only at crucified he the Me- ritorioHi C^tffe of our Redemption and f afiification , then Chrijf crncifedi-i the or,lj ol^jeH of faith oi J(*fifjing, B(tt Ergo. Opp) Anfvfi. I. Theconfcquenceof the cHfrtjor is vain and an proved. More then the Meritorious Caufeof our Redempti- on is the objed of jiilVifying faith. 2. The Miner is no fmali errour in the Judgement of moft Proteftants , who maintain that Chrifts adive Obedience, and fuff^ring life, are alfo the Meritorious caufe of ourjuftification, and.not only his Cru5-« cifixion. Mr. W. Argument II. IfChrifi m a fervant did fathfie Gods Jfiflice, then he U fo to be belisveci on to Jufli^c^tion. But as a fervant he did fat U fie Geds fffffi:e.— ' Ergo. 'Anfw. I. I granttheconclufion, Chrift as a fervant is to be believed in. 2. But if [ erjj ] «vas again forgotten, I further anfwer. i. I deny the confequencc o^ the Aif a j or ^ bccaufe Chrift i? to be believed on for Juftificacion in other refpeds, •ven in ?M effcncial to his Office, and not only as fatisfying. I inftanced before in Obeying, Riling, J^^g'f^g, from exprefs Scripture. 2. If the conclufion were granted, icsagainft you andnotforyou. Fori. Adive obedience is as proper to a feryant as fuffenng. 2. Chrift Taught the Church as a fervant tohisFather, sndisexprefly called A'J^iinijier oj the Cir- cumcifion. So that thefe you yield the objects of this faitb. • A-Ir.W. Argument 1 2. If none cAn call Ch^ifi [[Lord] before he be juj^ifiedbj fttth, then faith as j^^ifj/injr u not an Ac- cepting him OA L'^rd, The Minor « true , becaufe none can call him Lcrd^ but b^ the Sfirit ; and the Spirit is received by the hearir,(roffith^ after we believe, ■Anfiv. Any thing muft ferve. i. V^oth Major ^nd Minor are fuch as are not to be fwallowed in the lump. If by [CaS^ you mean the f*i//of the voyce, then the confequence of the j^^jor IS vain and grcundlefs. For a man may believe in Chrift with the heat as Lord aai Saviour, before htcall him fo with the mouth. But if by [J/f ?/i/] you m^'\x\\^Believe^ then the Mi- nor is falfe,& fo confeflcd by all Proceftants and Chriftiansthar. Q^q 2 ever (300) ever I heard from of this point, till now : For they all confefs that faith in Chrift as Lord and Teacher, and Head, o-i:. is the fides ^H(t jufiificat, or is of neceflity to be prefent with the believing in his blood, that a man may be juftified. Ne- ver did I hear till now that wc firft believe in Chrift as dying only, and fo are juftified before we believe in him as Lord> . ( and it feems before we are his Subjects or Difciples,and that is.beforc weareChriftiansJ 7. To your proof of the yl/i»or I anfwer, i. It is no proof becaufe the Text faith only that, [[ No Tffun can call him Lord bttt bj the Spirit ] but our quefti- onis of Believing J and not o^ Calling which is C^^fejfiyig. 2. Many Expofitors take it but for a common gift of the Spi- ric thats there fpoken of :• and do you think juftification muft needs precede fuch common gifts ? 3. But if it had been \_ "Believe in ftead of Call ] its nothing for you : For I eafily grant that no man can believe in Chrilt as Lord but by the Spi- rit : but I deny that this gift of the Spirit is never received, till afrcr that we believe and arc juftified. And becaufe it feems you judge that Believing in Chrift to Juftification is without the Spirir, I pray anfw'cr firftwhat we have faid againft the /IrmimiifHy and A»g:^fline againft the Pelagians , for the con- trary. Who would have thought that you had held fuch a point ? 4. How could you wink fo hard as riot to fee that your Argument is as much againft your felf as me , if you do but turn it thus } [ // none can call Chrift Jefn^^or the Saviour^ or believe in him to ftfftification, before he be juftified by faith^ . then faith as j»ftif)ing is not the accepting him as a Saviour: The U^linor is proved, becaufe none can call him Jefus, or be- lieve to Juftification but by the Spirit] This is as wife and ftrong an Argument as the other, and all one. Sec i lob. 4. 1 5. & 5.5. Believing in Chrift as Saviour is as much of the Spirir, ns believing in him as Lord. 5. The Text makes againft you ( I ^w^, I--3.) For there when Paul would denominate tl>e true Chriftian faith or Confeflion, hemaieth Chrift as Lord the Object. Afr.W. Argument 15. If thepromife of Salvation be Ike proper ebje^ of J^ft*fj^^^ faith, then not the commands of Chrift £s Lord and Lti^'givtr* Bftt' j Ergo> /tnf^ CJoO w tAnf^. T. The concIuHon is nothing to our Queftion, which is not of CowmdK^;, but of Chrift as Lord. Icmay be you know no difference between the Relation and fubfequcnt Du- ties, between the Authority and the Command , between fub- jedion and obedience. 2. The .Ww^r is falfe, U by proper, you mean Only ( and if not , the confcquence is vain and nullj For the Perfon of Chrift, and his Office, and the fruits of his Office, even Pardon, yea and Glory , are the true Ob- jcds of juftifying Faith. Mr. W. Argument 1 4. Jfwe are mt jnf}ified both by Righ- teoufnefs Inherent and Imputed ^ then not by obeying Ciarijl its Lord Hnd LaXic-giver. But ^ Ergo. Anfw, Whats this to the Queftion ? i. About Juftificati- onby Righceoufnefs Imputed or Inherent wc fpoke .before. 2. The conclufion never was acquainted with our Qjieftioh ? Again it fcems you cannot or will not diftingu fli between Re- lative fubjedion and adual obedience. "A- man may become your fervanc and fo have the Privilcdges of a fervanr, by cove- riant^ before he obey you. A woman in Marriage may fubjcft herfelftoyou, and havelntereft in your eftate even by that Marriage which promifeth fubjcftion as well as LoveCwithouc excluding the firft from being any condition of her Intereft; ) and all this before fhe obey you, 3 . Your confequence would follow as much againft your felf as me. For Believing in Chrift as a Ranfom, is as truly a particular Inherent Righteoufncfs, as believing in bim as Lord. 4. We are juftificd by Righteouf- ncfs Inherent as a particular righteoufnefs, though not as a U- niverfal: as fubordinate to Chrifts Righteoufnefs that it may be ours, though not in.co-ordination with it. Mr. W. Argument 15. If our accepting of (^hrifl as Lord and LaW-givtr be not 'properly or formally faith , nor properly to be called obedience^ then ^e are -not formally jufiiped .by fnth in him 04 Lord, nor b] our obedience to him as Lord. But fetch an accepting of him is not properly > or in the account ofGod^ or in it aq -3 M (501) fc/f Pitith or ohJicKce. 'Ergo. — The Minor I provt: if pur' j)ofeSyifitenii:KS,or veri^.jl jirofejjions to helieve or obey are not proper I J faith or chedier.ce^ then fuch an accepting ii not faith or chdience. The Minor proved. That which is or mxj hi found in Hypocrites or Reprobates U not true faith or obedience, B H Ergo. Anf'ic. The Lord pardon the hardnefs of my heart that hath no more companionate fcnfe of the miferies of that poor Church , and the diflionourof God which fuch Difputes as this proclaim ; by Arguments as fie to be anfwered'by Tears as by words, i . A little before he was proving ( Argument 12) that none could call Chrift Lord butby the Spirit , and there- fore this ad was afcer Juftification : And now he provcth that its common to Hypocrites, & Reprobates. 2. Hsrc he de- livereth rae from ail the trouble and fallacy that the diftindion o( fi^es quA Juftificat and files qua Jnfitficat^ hath been guilty of. Forif the ad that wedifpute about , be no faith at all, thenit isnotthe j?i^f/^«je. And yet he often is upon the Q»^ Jfi(iificani himfelf, forgetting thif. 3. Had I but delivered fuch a Doctrine as this, what-Hiou^ 1 have heard? Jufiifying faith hath three Parts, ASSENT. CONSENT, and APFIANCE , ( which alfo have fcveral ads or parts, according to the divers elTential parts of the Ob- ject.) ASSENT is but Initial and introductory to the reft, as all acts of the Intellect arc to thofeof the Will. CON- SENT is the fame which we here call ACCEPTING, which is but the meer VOLITION denominated from its refpcct to the offer and thing offered. This, as it is in tliewill , the commanding Faculty, fo is it as it were the Heart of Faith ; the firft act being but to lead in this, and AFFIANCE the third, being commanded much by this , or depending on it : For as it is feated in tbeAtfedions, fofar itisdiftinct from this Velle or COMSENT. Now .when ever we name F^ by anyone of thefe three acts ( as the Scripture doth from every one ) we include tnem all , though to avoid tedi- ouTnefs we Oand not to name all the parts, when ever by one word we exprefs the whole. And aU thefe Acts have whole Chrift Oo3) Chrift in all the e/Tentlals of his Perfon and office for their ob- ject. Now that this faith in Chrift as Lord, or accepting him, ("hould be faid,andthacby a Chriftian Divine, and thac in the Reformed Church, to be no faith at all, fto fay nothing of his denying it to be obedience; ) is no matter of honour or comfort to us. How oft doth the Scripture esprefly men- tion faith in our Lord Je(us Chrift ? Receiving Chrift Jefus the Loid,Ce/.2.6. with other equipollent terms. But I will no: offer to trouble any Chriftian Reader with Arguments for fuch a Truth. 4. But 5iKt the man would bethought to have Reafon for what he faith; and to his proof 1 further anfwer. f. P«r- pofej^ Inter.tioni^ and verbal Proft(fions were none of the terms or things in queftion : but Accepting or ^eiievir.g in C^^nji as Zm^, Teacher ^tLC. Thefe are but concomitants (the two firft) and ( the laft ) a confequcnt. 2. Is it the Act [^ Accept ir.g [] that this Brother difputeth againft , or is it the Object [ Chn^ as Loril ~\ as being none of the faith by which we are juftified ? If it be the former, i . W hat Agrcerhcnt then hath this Argu - mcnt with all the reft, or with his queftion? 2. What Agree- ment hath his Judgement with the holy Scripture , that calkth Faith a Receivin/ ofchrijf , and maketh it equipollent with \_ Believing in husName~\ John I. ii- 1 2. Col. 2.6. 3. What Agreement hath hi? Judgement with the Proteftant Faith, that makerh Chrift himfelf as Good to be the Object of faith ; to beembraced, or chofen, or accepted by the will, as well as the word as True,to be AfTented to by the underftanding. But if it be ihtObjeEl that he meaneth , then what force or fenfe ls there in his Argument, from the terms, [ Piirpofing^ fnten4;ng^ Confefjii^g? \ Let him name what Act he pleafe, foit refpect this Object ; and if it be an Act of faith indeed, its all one as toour prefentC'^ntrovcrfie. If he take Q^yftnt^ rvUliKg. or ty^cceptiMgoi' Chrift to be no act of Faith, let h^m n.ime any other that he will own ( for I would quarrel as little as may be about words, or impertinent things, j and let that be it. 4. And how could he choofe but fee, that his Argument is as much againft [] /tccepting ChriJ} at Prieft ] as aganft [_ /ic- ceptly^g himai Lord~\ to Justification ? No doubt but a man thac (304-) that had the common Reafon to write but fuch a book as this, muft needs fee this if he regard what he faid. And therefore I muft take it for granted that his Argument is agiinft both ahke : even to prove that Accepting of, Chrift as Lord, or as Saviour, is no faith or obedience at all. But the Reader will hardly believe till he weighech it, that a waking raan would rcafon thus upon fuch a Queftion as this in hand. 5. Confenting chat Chrift fhall be my Lord and Teacher, and Head, doth imply a confent, and fo a Purpofe of future obeying, learning and receiving from him ; Andr ^- VV. faith [] Its worth the ohfe*vi'^g ho'^to XVJL evade the D,(HrMhnofthe A6ls of J^ith^ he. fith thatfuith (4 one aEl in a f?ioral fenfe , as Tal^'n^ a man to i>e mj Princej Teacher, Phy/itian^&iC and not inaph)/i:alfence •,, forJ« it u mayiy a5h,dcc. ] And he confuceth ms ihus : £ Here^ Ufaderf fee the ^It or forget (nine ft of the mirj, ivho to tnantaln hit own ground, doth often con ftder faich at Fhjficalljf feMtdin. the Mnifrflandingand^ill \ bfttn^hen we affanlt hint , will uot allow tu^ anj Phjfictl^ hut a moral »y4cc(^tkn of it. ] Aufwer A moft grofs untruth ! ( ani thats an Arguing that Faith needeth not) Your forgery is not only without ground, and contrary to mv plain and frequent wotds^but con- trary to the exprefs words that you draw your Ob/crvation from. I fay faith Phyfically taken, is many af?5 •, but moraL- ly taken it is one work : Hence you call out to the Reader to oblerve, that I will not allow you any Phifical but a Moral Acception of ir. ] Is it fit to Difpute with fuch dealing as this ? Do you t link that I or any man of brains doth doubt whc:her faithheaPnyfical Ad C except them of Urethjt take it to be but a Paflion and a Nominal adion ? ) Surely all know thit it is ^n Ad in order of Nature , before it is a moral ad. yJElUt wo>-4'/4,i-s firft cSftis Phyjicui^ Though MoruHter a^Tus^ i. e. aEiut Repatativw, may be butanon admg P'lyfically : Hi that wilfully famillieth his own child, doth k 11 him morally or reputafively. and (olsmoralner agens, thatis,Reputativc.BuC lictbitchcriQiethhim is an Agent na:ur3i and moral,, that is, Rr. Ethical. J (30^) Ethical or Vertuous. I wonder what made you think me of fach an opinion chat I have fo much wrote againft ? * lie next faith, that [ Though bj one moral aH: tve rectivt ^i- versbtnifits^ )tt )X'e receive them to divers furpofcj. J Anfwer^ True ! But many fuch parages of yours are to no purpofe-, and /uch is this ; impercment to the bufinefs. P Age 19^. He comcsto myDifiindion, where I fay, that ex pjtrte Chrifii hcfatisfieih Jufticc as a Ranfom, and Teach- eth us as our Matter, and Ruleth us as our King , yet ex parte mflri^ it is but one and the fame entire faith that is the conditi- on of our Title to his feveral benefits : From (jcnce he ingeni- oufly gathereth that 1 fay, £ That faitirkathbut one re^eH: to thofe benefit f^ and U not dtverjtfied by feveral a^s ; and deny the necejfity ofthefe dbfiinll alls in reference to the feveral benefits •fChriJf. ] Whereas I only maintained, that though the 'a'^s be Phyfically diftinfl, yet they arc not diftince conditions of our Intereft in the benefits, but the fame entire faith is the one condition of them all. Hereupon he learnedly addtfiffcth hi©* felf to prove that faith^ath feveral acts. And be that think- eth it worth his timeto tranfcribe and confuce his Arguments, let him do it, for I do not. Page 40 1 . He thinks Q ^* need not dif^ute whether the Re ception ofChrijl by faith-, be moral or Phyjical : however it is net ayi improptr, but proper reception,"^ Anf'Ai, i . Ic feems then wc need not difpute whether Chrifts body be everywhere, and (whether mans faith do touch him and receive him naturally as the mouth doth the meat ? 2. And whereas Ricpere , in its firft and proper fignification wa« wont to be pad , now i« is agere : And whereas confent or Acceptance was wont to be called Receiving but Metonymically , now it is becomt a pro- per Reception. page 3 o 3 . 3 04. Reafoning againft me,he faith, [^ The near- efi formal Reafon of a Believers Interefi , » noi (jods making it a condition, Xchich is the remote reafon thereof , but a Believers fulflltng the condition, Scc.^ Anf^.i. Here he changeth the queftion, from [ fVhat u the near efi reafon of faiths Inttreji ] to \_ what is the near efi reafon of the 'Believers Interefi. ") To the firft I fay, [ hi bdngmade the condition of the Promife^J^o the fecond Oo?) fecend I fty, [_ The Pr^mife orgrar.t it felj ,~\ 2. He findeth a IcArned Confutation foi^nie.z/jc. That ic is not Gods maki»£,hxiz the fftlfiHing the condition th»t is the formal Keafon. /^w/ft?. Per- formance, that is,Believing maketh faith to be faith, and exift ; but the Promife makes that the condition, i fpoke de effe, and he de exifiere: And yet I ufually fay.that [_The ttearef} Keafon of faiths interefi in ^ttftifi cation^ is, as tt is the condition of the Pro- mi fes fulfiSedJ that I m\ghi joy n both. 5. Note that in this his Afferrionhegranteih mcthe fumof all that I defire. For if this be true, then it is not the Nature or the Inftmmenta- lity of faith that is the neareft reafon, as is ufually faid. Page 200. He doth as folcmnly call his Advcrfarie adpar^ tes, as if he were in good fadnefs to tell him what is the caufa- lity of works in Juftificacion : And failing to his enumeration, he tells us lb&t[^The particle A or Ab notes the peculiar canfali- ty of the efficient : the particle Ex notes the m/iterial castfe : the pdrticle Per er B)-, the formal can ft : the particle Propter , the finale at* fe.~] Anfw. I mufl erave pardon of the Reader while - I fuppofe all this to be currant, that I may anfwer ad homintm. And then i . It feems faith is not the efficient caufe,and there- fore not the Inftruraental caufe : For ^4 or ab is not affixed to ic, in this bufincfs. 2. It fecms then that faith is the formal caufe of Juftification, becaufewe are faid to be Juftified ""'t' -sioEo)? /?tf)»».3.22 25,30, d'/'^^/wQ By Faith ] So that faith is come to higher promotion then to be an Inftrumental effici- ent caufe. 3. Hence it feems alio that faith , even the fame faith is [_ the material can fe j too : For moft certainly we are faid to be juftified ex fije : iK'^nT^wi-. Rom.^.z6,^o. Rom.f. i.C;4/.2.i6. &3. 8,7, 5,9,2a 24. & 5.5. fa»/.i.l^. Whether txfide ^ W-tfyf do indeed exprefs an Inftrumental efficient ^\ leave to confiderarion : But fure I am it fitly expreffeth the In» tereft of a condition. And if Mr. fr, will needs advance faith hereby to be the m^ter of our Rightcoufnefs , it muft be biiE of our fubordinate particular Evangelical righteoufnefs, which confifteth in fulfilling the eondi.ton of Juftihcation. Chap.'y.pstg.ig.lO-ili* He fpends a Chapter to open to us the meaning of [ fiaes^jnajftfltficat.] And profcffech that it is. the Cardo s«»troverji *A hy i. On the Negr.tivc wc are fatisfi'ii chat he means not [_!ih.;t fiiej ejH* fidescando : j rtnd thoM weare fecure that he means nothing that can hurt his Adveriaries caufe. 2. The Ltght then is all but this[^ Th'^' ^Ha here u not taken Rtduflicativeibi4t jptc^ji^A' tive, when hj the p^rticte qua or quatenus, thereUs fowe wett' or ftngtilar kind oj Denomination added to the fuhjtEi of the Propoji- tio» : as aGruce de/^ined to rhi^ aB or operation of Juflifj- tng./look^i on Chrif} oi Saviour.'^ it Juftifieth .- for its Nature is before the effed , and therefore cannot the effed be given as the caufe of it j (unlefs it were the final caufe- of which anon.) Qua or qnntenus properly and according to the common ufe fignifierh the proper reafon of the thing or predication^ and is appliable only to that which is ipoken yrtrd ttbu-ic,-. As to the terms, fomerimes there is a Reduplication of the fame term^ fometimes that reduplication is of the m..tier^ni in otktr term.\ as in a definition, or fynominal words, or it is implyed : fome- times ic is the terms of the Predicate or ^ttrihuie thit is Re- dnplicatc; {ovcitt\mQs\X.\imthdMt ^ Re Amplication ; And then fometimes it giveth a Reafon from an S^er.t aI Part : forac- time from the ^*«fr;V.«/iY4r«r* ; fometime (rora the Specific^ Nature ' fometime from an -^cctAent : and thofe are divers : fometime from a ^u ^Ity : (ometime from Qjumtit) : fome- time from /Jf/rfrxo« ; z\\il\\2il\i multtfarioM : If we fhould run into all the fences of this Term which Mr. iv. doth lap up in the word [_ Specificathe ~] the words might ejLceed the pro- fit. And its to be noted chit ufually the term is refpcdive as to feme other thing excluded which is contrsd ftind ; &: fo we give fometimes a more Rim^teaKJ J(»eral,2i fometime a neer- cr and mora fpecial 'AeaK;n by Qua or qtiAttnm. As ifycu mix ^ purging Elcduary in your Di ui\ , I fay th-at Purgeth (jur.te' »;«wfi^.r(aff.:^, wlich is to exclude the 1) i^.k. from being Pur- gitive. If I fpeak of the E/eHudry, I may fay that it purgeth tjuaterus DiagrUiate, to exclude miny other Ingredients from being Purgative. But if I fpeak ottUe^iJ^ridtuw, 1 may fay that it Purgeth as hdving an EltHive ficnltj^ &c. totx.lad* other Realons of its ope: ation. Rr ^ Now Oio) Now for the opening of the matter in hand, let us try cer- tain Propofitions that may be fuppofed to be laid down con- cerning Faith. [] I. Faith as faith jfifiifitth'] This is True , taken Uxely, for the excluding of [_ faith m a meer Phyficala^lt c merittrU tfU6:dcc. 2 hut it isfaife firiSllj taken,as fignifying the formal or neareft reafon. So [[2. Fides i» Chriflum^M4talii]f4(}ific4t'\ that is , W fihs iffjpecie] is trtte, liken Laxclj andmateriaUy to exclude all 0!;her Faith : q d. It is not faith in Peter or Paul, bnt faith in f^hr'fi M fuch that is the matter deputed^ to be the condition of Juftification. But its/^//ir taken jiriBly^derationefortnali. 3 . So [] This faith a* it is an y^pprehenfion or Acceptance of Chrii},jfi(fifieth.2 Its true, Materialittr & Remotiw^ Laxly: but falfeformaliter ^ firi^e^e ratione prexima. For this is the fame in other terms with the fecond. So H 4« Faith juflifieth as an ^nfirumenul efficient cattfe of our Jufitficatisn.] Izsfaife in every tolerable fence. So {_$■ Faith juflifieth Od an Infirument of receiving Chrifl.'] Its true, I. taking the word {Infirnment ] Metaphorically, and meaning only the Nature of this faith, which is [ to Believe in and Accept Chrif}.'] i, and taking J^^atenm remotely Jaxely^ and materially only,q.d. Faith is the SUEitd matter ff the condi* tion (or is ehofen to be the condition of Juftification J for this Aptitttdey as, or becaufe it ii a Reception or Acceptance of ^hrifi. But its falfc, I . Taking an [ In/lrnment "^firi^lj and LogicttU - ly, 2. and fpeaking de ratione formali. So [_^' Faith as a believing in Chrifis facrifice ^ jufli^tth.'] Its true, Luxly, Materialiter & partialiter i that is, Thia oTt of faith « part of the matter of the condition. But its falfe,/«n*4' liter dt ratione froxima. So C 7» Faith juflifieth Mly otitis a "Believing in Chrijlsfd' crifice or Righteoufhefs.] Its falfe both de materia & derations formali. So [ 8 . Faith as JufUfyingis only a Believing in^ or Accept" ingChrifias ourRanfom^ Here isdarknefs, and either non- fence or falfe dodrine. I. {Asjtifiifying'] fignifieth either t ^ ajtijlifying efficient cattfe ] 2. Or [as the merit or mmer of 9ur tUr Kightemfnffs P^ 5 . Or ^m the me am i. e. cmditiort of ettr Righteoufntfs , of which fttfiification u aconfejutJtt and fir, a i caufe.'^ In the firft fenfc it is every way falfe. In the fecond fcnfe it is every way fallc , fpeaking of our Univerfal Righce- . oufpefs. In the third fenfe, if fpoken laxely de materia^xii falfe, bccaufe of the exdufive [ Only. ] And if fpaken dt raiionefor'-* malive/proxima, i. Itsprepoftereus to put the Confcquent ~beforethe Antecedcnt,ifyou {^dkde ordine exequensii : 1. And it is falfe: Vor [t^aa J f»fiif,c arts'] fpeaketh of Juftificationas the confequentjOr as an ad, and not of the Nature of Faith ic felf. And therefore [ ^ua fufiificaMs ] f|iith u nothing ( much iefsthatadafone.) For it is not ditjfe ftdei that the term fpeaks, but of the confequent •, So that the [_ Fides atujufiifi- canseft'] what ever a(^ you mention, isabfurd andunfound: For as n:e Gcd ftrvice bj it. 1 love your zeal : and your ind gnation jrrjinfi Error ^ and your tendernefe of fo g^reat .< folnt as ihat ofjuji.fcatictt. And could J fn I your Light to be a»fwcrab!e to jju^heat , J hope I fh$uld alfo love ani honow it : Had ion not talker, me (ycith the tWo Re- vcrin^ Brethrtn'^'ho^K jou oppose ) /o ^f t lie enemies of the per- fonar.d Grace of theLord Jefus.or the followers of ihem(;ct hjvf either called fu fo^ or t h^ught your felf cJ'ed to this ^i fault, t^nd if J love ChriflJ muji love th^t tr.aK that hatethme, though mifla- ' l'ingly,for thef^ke of (^hrifl. Th^t pnntiple Witl. in you that hitk wade Chrifl and Truth fo dear to you^ that yau rije up for that which fetmeth to you to be Truth, I hope ^i/lgrorv ti/ljou attain perfeRior/m thxt yv)' Id of Light that will end our d jferer.ce!, I pjall not go about to deprecate jour indignation for my plain eX' preJpioKs tn thuf Defence, When {he nature of your matter dli re^ quire them : For I am not fo unreafonable ai to expel} that fur vrordi fjouldrecor.cile a good man ts thofe that he takei to be f«f~ wies to Chrifl, or to thf'r followers, ^ut as I Ctm truly faj if Ikmiv rvhatii in my heart i that ike Reading rf yoftr 'Book, hath Sf ' bred (5'4) i^reJ no ertmity tojau in my hrcjl^ but only J^m.-V^^u love to jour Ktal^yvith ac»n$pa[fion of -jjOHr darkncfi^and a d Jl kf of your fo ntHch confidence in the durk^ ; fo it pi ill be my CAte as it U mj du- tj^ to lov: you m 4 miJlAkjM fervAKt ofCh ifl, though yctt Psottld $ake me for hli gretitefl ttttmj. And therefore being confciom »fno yforfe affe^ions to you^ I defire'th^t Jujlice ofj-iu^asto I'w- fute the Hngratefnlt pajfaget that yon meet ^ith, to my apprehen. fion of the badnefs of jonr catife and Arguments, and a compajfion to the poor Church that mnfl be troubled and temfted^ andendxK- gereib) fuch grofs mifiakfj,and not toaiy contempt of your per- fon^ with which I meddle not, but a^s you are the iyinthor ofthoft jdrgnmertts. In your Treface f find a Lk^ impnfed b) you on your Anfwt- rer^which I have not fully obferved : I. Becaufe I hid'^ritten my Reply to your Arguments a confidtr^ble time before ^ fa^ your Preface •, For tt fell out that I frfl ft^ your B'iok^ without ihe Spifile and Preface. 2- 'Bec-^ufe ' thought it fi^tefi to fol- ic^ the Method that my SubjsB and the Riaiers hdifcation did require. 3 . Tet ^id I once purpofe ta have anfrcered all that wm of moment inymr Book agair-fithe Iruth: but upon trial I found your Reafons fo inconjiderab'e, th^t v earinefs interrupted me and put an end to my Reply , f.r.dvpith.d I" grew confident th^t my U- bour >X>euld be to little purpofe. For I dare venture any judui- otfi Divine upon your 'Book, w.thrut the help of a Reply '. And for therefi.it 16 nctreplyingthafnill ffrve turn : but either prtju- dice will hold them to the fide that they have takfn^ or clfe they VeiUthini^him inthe right that hath the laji word : Vchen thty have read mine,they will think that I am in the right ■, and When they have again read youys , they will thinks that you carry the caufe : and when they read my Reply agatn/hsj will fay, you ^ere niflaks'i ; but ufually they will go With the party that ii in great- efl credit ^ or hath mofl tut erefi in them ^ or advantage on them. But yet I think^you Will find that none of your firength againfl me ii ti?gltUed : For I can truly fay, that when i think not meet to Anf\'ver allthat amar, hath faid, Ineverpafs by that which I take to fe his firength, but purpofely call out that, and leive that Vehich 1 1 kink ts fo grofly weak ^^ to need no anfwer: So wuch 9fymr te» Dtm^fids or LaW$ as I apprehended nece^arf^ I have here (?>0 k htre anffvered ; fup^oftyig -what I hdd /UU of the fame poifttJ «• rttji f^Ji DijpHtation , \)chich I /4\V no Resfon too of tin to Rf peat. I am none ofthofe that b'aTC you for too much ^ f the Met4- pbyficks, hutrathey m,r vail that youfea^ednot leji jour MttA' fhjfical Reader W/// vtrcng yon by ml f- applying jour cited%z\\.t^' kius contrary to your better opimon of your jelf , and take both your Schcgkius ai^dyour Scaliger/(7r 'Prophets that could fpeak Oi if they had read your 'Baok^^ a-iti been ac^uai}:tedV^ithjonrar' guings. Titit itfeemsyoH are not thefi'-Ji of that ivaj. By your Arguments in your Pnface, I percdieyoa think, it a matter of very great morKcnt to jour cauje^ to f rove that there ^re divers aHs of faith^ y»htreas I am fo far from denying it , that 1 am ready to demon/irate , that even the faith by vrhich tt'e are fufiified^iU liker to have tnentjf aHs then one onlj ^ bttt many certainly it hath. Tourfi^J} Argument is, from the dferefit cb- jeUs becaufethiOb\eBs fpecifiethe ASlt. Afp/fficievt Argument which no man can confute. But I . This n no proof ^ that one at! cnly is it thatwf-are juflifiedbj, 2. fVhere jou add th^it Jufii- fjing Faith hath not re^ed to Chnf} as Lord rorrnalircr,^(?« beg the J^ejlion,and ajfert no light mijlttk^e. But where yon add i in its ad of Juftifying' yo'4 d-j but obtrude upon m your funda- mental Error ( which le-^deihyou to tharefl ) by y^^ked affrmar tions. Faith hath properly no juflifying a^ : Jaftificarc eft ef- ficere. Faith doth not iff-.El our iu/iifica'ion : ttv are jufi/ficd by faith indeedi , but not as by an e^cient caufe nnlefs Joh Will take J unification for SanHijicaticn \ Fcrreal^'fa'ttutive Mutatis on! it doth ffeEl j but the Jus or Title to Any me'^cy in the world it cannot Effc(^, bttt Accept wh^in 'jfered. If jcu fi'.n^or fee fa plain aTruth in its Evidence, yit oberve by the words of the Re- verend B>'other th^t is my Opponent in the(eco a Difputati^n^and by your Prefactrs Dr.Ki:)d&Uccurfejhat its apa/five iy-Jirum^r." taltty that the Defenders of y>w caufe at lafl art driven to -^ tind therefore talk, not of its ad of Juftifying unle/s you rviU mean Gods ad of Juftifying which fai:h is the Condition of. Aniwhereoi jou w^ji^f unbelief to be formally a flighting and negleding Chrift as a Saviour and effedively (' you muji mean only effeUivt & non formaliter ) a denying fubjection to him Sf 2 as c 5'^) as Lord. iCoueYr fogrtatbutfo nreantrror, thtt 1 fttp^eftif tit^dUfi t9 confute it. All (^krifiians a* far at I can learn kavt Iften till no"^ agrtei^tljM Beliiving in ^hrift at Prophet and King i^ areal pxrt cffitith, Andth^t»nbeliefor rejeHingloim xiPrc- pbtt and Kivg ts a reul p.irt of unbelief. Tourfecend yirgument is from the different fubjcds ^ ivhere ■joHgive m trvyfnch palpable Ftdimty that its a warder jch cjgfo,orthinkjn^tt. I k^20\\> that the Ajfent to ths ejfential Articles of Chrifiiar.itj ^containeth ^^'a^ty A^s^and that our Confent and A^tnce are many Phyfical AHsy Oi thep^rtJ tf Chrtfit Gff:e are ma>}y Qb'je^s. But yet I [do not think, ^«r) am ccreain that all thefe phyfic^A^s concur to WAke up th.it lMo- ral A-t which ii cafledCh^ian^ or favir.g^or Jfifi'f)ing Faith ; anJ that he that hlieveth notinChrifl as to all thtt ia ejfe»4int to Chrifl^ « no Chrijiian. And a man « nqt jujiified by Faith before heis aChrifiian. tyind truly Sir ^ meuth^tare iotij to flie from the Light , and that love the Trnth , and dilifentlj/ feek, it ( a* heartily^ if not oi happily as yon ) »»«/? yet needs teli yofi^ that if jot* produce your Aiormalnckj an hundred timts, and cant over and over [ a Papift, a Socinian, an Arminian j and an Arminian, a Socinian and a Papift] their Hnderfiandingtn'ill ne- ver the m^re be perfwadedtj embrJice your Delufions , though yo'a fjottld fay that the Kingdom ofC^ol doth confifi in them. Tour fourth Argument is that , [] There is a difference in Nature,EScacy, Energy, and Opera :ion ; therefore the Acts arc not the fame. "] Anfw. i . 1 maintained the conclufon ( th^e faith hath different A^ls ) before ever 1 heard of your name -y and have no reafon notv to denie it. l. The difference of Natter (^ I grant you between many AHs of faith ; but '^hatyoH mean by the Efficacy, Energy , and Operation , he th^t ho'A's can tell ; for I cannot. But flilll deflre youto k.no)v that I aeny faith to have any efficient operation in Jttfiifyng ^^s^or that it id an efficient eaufe cf our JuJl>fication j efptciaUy its no Phyfical efficient ; jou add a grange proof of your Affertion^ [_ viz. For faith as Juftifying makes a myftical Union and relative change on the perfon ; but faith as working and fandifying proJuceth a moral union withChrift.(^f^.]/i«l/w. i. Faith as juflifjing doth only fujli- Sf 3 fi^ (319) fie^atui produce KoVniav I tLe fame faith at uniting u the me4fi/ ofyrjo^. 2. T/;e<^vr/?/'5; tiift cr Q lor % fie at ion ^ andcoytfHntrnatt Jujitfi^afiort. B-it ftt ds lio in the T)e^nuion incUie C jn snc CO Cbrith Lordfbip , tbot*£h not Obedience ( th^ts orAi implyed to ht a. nscel'A^y con- fequent^ ) p ^ (i^li f*J th^t much <^f J'ftr fufii cMitrt ii jit to (Ofte * And if joHr R.eliTi7*t learhytistJ jaj^slcat you w.ll he beholding to C^r'fifor no mors JujiificAUon , fo doth n-A mint. And vthtre^sjoM c$tti9me th-it /^y, th.i: all ottr (iris ifepir. doned in ourfirf} believing^at if I had cjutflicntd Anif^ch thifif, I mufi tell you that I eafilj grAnt it^ thit every fin id then far- given^andfafar m thut Jit^ificaiim ii ptrfe^\bnt wh-it nAvejou yetfiidtoprove^ l. That -ve ^re never y4fl'fitil>jfa:th^ but in that one infant. 2. Thtt ^e nted ro parttcmUr Juiiificjti^a ^rom particteU'^ finstkit after jhMlb- cummtteu g. Nor po fentential J HJi if' c - tlon at '^adgemtnr^ rrhich 'J^tr Burgcfs rpill tell yotty is thechiif. Ton uni others ufe to fay, thtt^thjtae Judgement , t; bnt Dedaracive. "Sut i. I: u «• common DeclaritiOnj bttt a Dedanttim by the Judge. 2. And the Sentence doth more then meerly decUre ^ f^r it d-th f.nally dtciie^ ac<\u%t and ad]fidge to Glory . 3. Andmethink^i thiiY>ZQ\iit(\K^ [honld be no term of T) iminution ., but of Aggravation^ vtith thafe that /lill ufe to fay that ]\ii{\ficil\on if a judiciary Term. (lA Ui iTIoAt thefe matters anung che friends ofChf-i/faid Truth ^ fhonld needfo many words. Some more I had to fay to you^ but joumii findit tntict Pre- fa:e to thefe Difputadons. I only ^dd^ that if indeed it be true rvhich you Xtrite to that Honourablt perfon, to vfhom you dedtcatt your Labors J viz. That the Sub je^ cf your 1) ife our fe n fo ex- cellent and nece(fary to be k^oivn ; and th*t He who is Ignc- rancof theObjed and Office of Fai:h. doch neither know whac he bclievcth , nor how he is joftified ; / {homli th-.nk it is high time , that you call your Vnderfianding once more to an account.^ and review the Tabrick^ that y§u have built an aqai juftificans waf underfiood^ or upot a i'^idticcitive qaa:e- nuf, "^here there id Hofuchthiog-. Andifjouthtnl^me unfit ty be hearkned to in th-s^ ( as betngone e^ the men of perverlc mmds that there you mention , ) its more 'Worthy your indujiry^ to/eek^the advice cf the liMrntd Oxford Divtnet herein , thtn that C?io) that they pjcul^ be [on^ht to approve and mU'^'ife fuch a Book, »«r totitt world '■ and tts ikc'-i thai their Chiritj rvilL provoke them to htferv'ceableto j on in this ; tho'igh 1 hear that thtir Difere- tioft forbad them tkectker. For all men are net [o t.-fily'^htfi', led into a ChiJ}j- Church ccntet^tion a^air.J} tht Trttth and, (^hurch of dirij}, a4 'Dr. K. ard oneortvoConfidsnts^ that lixing in a cold a>id fleril (^ouKtry^ are lef} fubfiantivt^and more adjtSlive,(h(n Innocents and Independents ttfe to be. None's here To fruitfull as the Leaning Vine : And what though fome be drunken with the Wine ? Thcv'l fight the better, if they can but hie : And lay about them without fear or • ) But ftay 1 See\>phat Example ii ! As the name of Dr.]\.ay.dth^ remem- ^^, fides qua juftificans eft fides, as if it were juftifying in order of Nature before it fo* Faith : you mil be pleafed to tell ui , fub qua ratione fides juftificat ( vel fide joftificaraur ? ) vyhethtr you rvilljay , that fides qua juftifi- canj , juftificat , cr fides qua fides juftificat , ( vhich j think.yon difoXVn^) or fides qua lefpicit, apprehendit , rccipit Chriftum, "^hich is all one, as fides qua fides, or fides qua Inftrumentum apprehendens , which Mit^pboricAl cxprtjlon [iill ftgnifeth no more then [_ qua credit in Chriftum, cr qua fi- des? ] OrvphetheryoM ^illfiandto what you have afirmed.chap. 9' P^g' ^7* f^*** *^' ^ods adSgnation of it to the oftice, who therefore Oil) therefore doth if, becaufe he wills it ; andto'^hat youfaU^ pag.304. The ireercft formal reafon of a Believers Intereft to pardon, is a Believers fulfilling the condition. And if jou Kvillfiandto this that you have f aid-, and underhand that the DcElrine of us ^hcmjcu affault k the fame ( more carefullj exprtfftd, ) be intreated then to let your next bolt be fhot at the ri^ht mark^ : ^hich is all thats nor* re<}tiefied ofyvu^ by Your Cbriftian Brother ( whether you will or no ) Richard Baxter. l>ecemhJi'^, 1657. T t Richard Baxters DISCVSSION OF M' fohn Tombes his Friendly, Acceptable ANIMADVERSIONS ONHIS Aphorifms, and other Writings. About the Nature oi fuflifi- cation^^Xid of Juftifying Faith' kit V 9 ^r '5* LONDON^ Printed by R.h^. for Nevil Simmons , Book- feller in Ke- 'dtrminfttr^ and are to be fold by him there , and by Natba- niel EkinSf at the Gun in !p4*/j Church-yird, 1 658. ?x H biB Mf n o vf'IT^n C}^i:) 5;>, .>^r^v pON reading ef the Poftfcript in your X, .^2-.v,i late Book, I have fent you thefe Ani- fnadveifion«. You fay Aphor. of Ju- ftification, pa^. 184. [_ All thofe Scriptures i»hi(h fpe^k^of jHJiification 04 done in this life, / under fl and if f'*fttfi- cation in Title of La^, So Rom.^.i. and4 2.and 5.9. fam. z.tiii'^^CTc'^ I conceiv: Juftification , being God« Aft, Rom. "i.^o. /?«. 8. 33. confequent upon Faich , and calling, and importing a fentence oppoficc to Condemnation ; ^<»w.8.50,3 3,^4. and 5.1. terminated on particular perfons, Rom. 4.2,3. /?ow.8.30. it muft be more then the Vertual Juftification in Law-Title ; which is only an ad of God prc- fcriblng or proraifig a way of Juftification, not the fentence ic felf, and is general, and indeterminate to particular perfons, -and is performed before the perfon juftified believes : Yea is the fame, though none were adually juftified ; and therefore inmyapprchenfion, that Ad of Gods Covenanting or pro- raifing, in which I conceive you place the Juftification by Law-Title. Thef.i%, Is not the Juftification by faith meant, -Rom.'^.\.(^c. Befides, to be juftified notes a Paflion , which prefuppofeth anAdion^ an Ad Tranfient, not Immanent; or only Gods purpofe to jaftifie : nor can it be Gods Promife toju^ifie; Tc3 Fob (3^*^) ■for the A(fl, though it be Tranfient, yet it is only a Declarati- on what he v;iH do; hispromifeto juftifie upon condition, is not Juflifyiig, and therefore a man is not by the Covenant, w-ihout a further Ad, Denominated Juftificd, though he be made juftifyable by it. I conceive Juftification is a Court term, Importing an AA of God as Judge, whereas his promifing is not his Act as Judg3,but ReEior,tbef.^2. you mcnt:-on the An- gtls judging us Righteous, and Rejoycing therein ; which whence it fliould be, but by a fentencc pafTed in Heaven.I know not Conftitutive Juftification, different from Declarative by fentence, I do not find cxpreffed under the term [_}uflificAtion\ It would be confidered whether any other A(5lbefides the fen- tence, doth make a man juft,but giving of faithj notwithftand- iogChrifts Death.and the conditional Covenant before faiths perfon is only juftifyable ; ConditionulU nihil fonit in ejfe. A per- fon is upon giving ofFaithjuftified; but not by giving of faith Cthats ana^ ofSan(3ificacion)but by a fentence ofijodjThtf. 5 9. You make juftification a continued adjnow itbeinga tran- iient ad,I fappofe it may not be well called a continued Ad, which imports a fucceffive motion between the ttrm'mtu a qtto^ and ternfi)iH6Ai^uemi whereas the ad,whethcr by fentence,oc Covenantjis not fuch a Motion. Its not to be denyed,that the Benefit and Vertue of it if continued, but I think not the Ad. If it be dot fentel, bttC fepe^ytt it Qiould be ratbf r cilkd Atltu RenovAtits.RepetitwJteratfu^lhtn continued -I iocHriC tO think there is but one Juftification of a perfoflinthislife^ thoogh fftere be frequent remiffions of fin. Of this you may Confidcr. \tnht^i\nX.9Everlajiiy}aReJ}^pag.ii. Doubtlefs the Gdi^ pel takes faith for our obedience to All Gofpel Precepts. Be- lieving doth not produce fubjediontoChtiftas KFng, as a fi- nite, but contains it as an fiflfential part , e^r. Aphor. p. 25.5. Faith doth as Really and Immediately Receive Chrift as King fasSaviour^OT Prieft) and foJuftifie,7'*f/:<55. Scripture doih rtot take the wdrd [ F^tiih ] for any one fingle Ad ,• nor yet for various Ads of one only faculty ^ but for a compleat en- fire motion of tlJc whole foul to Chfift its Object, Tbef.^7. It is the Act of faith which juftifies itien ac Age , and AOt the Habir, Againft Againft this I object ; i . F^ith V^orketh hj Love, Gal. j. 16. if one bean cflential part of the other, and faith acorn - pJtAt entire motion of the foul,then when it is faid,Faith work- eth by Love, it might be faid,it worketh by Faith. 2. Gofpcl PrcceptJ are many, if not all , the fame with the Moral Law ; if Juftificd then by obedience to them, are we not juftificd by the works of the Law ? You conceive the Juftifi- cation, fMm.z. to be by works in a proper fence , aad that be- fore God ^ and/?4/(?4^/act wasaworkof Hofpitalicy,z'rr,25. commandedin the Law; and ^hr^himt work was a facr»rt- cingjor offering a work of the Ceremonial La v, ver.zi. 3. Repentance is obedience to one Gofpel Precept, yet Faith and Repentance arcdiftingui(bed,/^4r. 1. 15. 6, 1. Lovf^ Faith^ Hope^ are three^ l Cor. 13.13. I Ttm. 15.2 Thef. 1.5. faith and Lovchavc different Ob ject5,Co/. 1. 4 -"P^'/S- i 7^*"/- I . ? . Therefore not the fame j nor one an ElTential part of the other. 4. Obedience is a fiijn to prove faith, 74W. 2. 1 8. and there- fore not an Effentia! parr. 5. If Faith include obedknce to all Gofpel Precepts as an Eifential part,then actual faith includes actual obedience to all Gofpel Preccprs as an effcnrial partjand if the Ace of faith Ju- .ftific men at Age, not the Hibit ;, and receiving Chrift as King, as immediatly J uftific, as believing in Chrift as Saviour, then a per fon of Age is notjuftified without actual obedience to all Gofpel Precepts, and this may be not till Dea:h ^if the n , and fo, no Jufti^cation in this Life. 6.1f Faith juftifie as immediatly by receiving Chrift as King, as by receiving him as Saviour , then it juftifies by receiving Chrift as Judge, A^atth.1%,^4.- as Law-g. The tCTm[fVhc/e 2 notes not every inward faculty ; but ( as after) fincerely , not feign - cdly, as Simon Alagpu. So llljrktu. 3. Faith is called Obeying the Cofpel,/?*w. J 0.1 6- i /**?. 1.22.^4.77. ■2.Thtf,\^*GaL'^.\.& %.'j.Heb.%.9* Butthe Gofpel commandeth All thus to obey Chrift as Lord, forgive others,love his people, bear what fuffcrings arc Impofed, dili- gently ufc his Means and Ordinances.confefting^bewailing lins, praying for pardon fincerely and to the end . y^w/ft*. Hf^.5.9. fpeaks of obeyng Chrift,but doth not call faith obeying Chrift : but be it granted.Faith is called obeyinjg of Chrift] or the Gofpel ; doth it follow that it is obedience in doing thole named Ads } Ic may be obedience by AfTent to the the Dodlrinc of Chrift, that he is the AUffmh^^x^d, for fins, &c. commanded i Cor. 15.3. i J^lo. 3. 23. which the terras ?7t'/-?i<3K/ and vsraii^fiv do rather Import, then the other Ads mentioned. The Gofpel and Truth are reftrained to the Doc- trine of Chrifts coming, dying,c^<:, nowhere applyed, that I know, to the Precepts of forgiving others ,fuffcrirg death, re- ceiving the Lords Supper,(^f . 4. The fulfilhng the condition of the new Covenant is called faithjG'rf/.s. 1 2,2^,25. t^nfVi^er. Neither of thefc places make faith the fulfilling of the Condition of the New Covenant, nor any place elfe. In ^fitioKS are required to jit a man to receive f;irdon^{and [0 j»fiification)\\z Catholike faith ^ hope offardoti^feAr ofpunip}mentygriefforft}i,a furpft agai»(i fin- ing hereafter^ axd a pftrpofe cfa new life^all which difpofe the de- ceiver ; nnd I agree- to him^ though all do riot ] are fb like the Dodrine of the Trent Council. U{{.6.c.6. that it will be cxpcded you declare , whether by avowing that fpeech of Dr. f^ard, you do not join with the Papifts, contrary to Bi- fhop Z)(?W«iem talem accedit fignum volendijsit proprium alteri conferre, e^UA fimiltm habet effetlum <\Hxleni alienatiy Domin.i. Ejl enim ant via ad alitnA- tton£m rei^ aut alien atio partictiU cujufdam nojira libertatts. SLcVtd, ultra grot.dejure Belli li.zc. II. §.2. ';,^. 2. This Promife or Covenant of God,is alfo his Teflament : and who knoweth not that a Teftament is an I'nJirBment of proper Donatio^Ji and not only a Predi5lion ? 3. Moreover this fame which in one refpcd is a Covenant and Promi??, aud !nanotheraTcftaracnt,is alfo truly'part of Gods Law, even the New confiitmioH of Chrift, the Law-giver and King. Buc mdoubnedly a Law which conferrcth Right cither abfolutely C 335) or conditionally, is the true and proper Inftraraent of that Effect, and not only [ the frefenting or prom'tftHg a wjiy thereto ] The proper Efted ©r Product of every Law, is DebitHnt all- quod; Et de hoc debito cL:termln4re \%\is proper Ad. Now therefore this Promife being part of Chrifts Law, dorhdettr- mine of and confer on us , the Debitum, or Right to fententi- al Juftification, having firft given us an Intcreft in Cbrift, and fo to the Benefit of his fatisfaction ; and this is fufttficatio conftittiHVA. You know a Deed of Gift ( though but con- ditional j is a moft proper Inftrumcnt of conferring the Bene- fits therein contained. And is not the Promife undoubtedly Gods Deed of Gift ? And doth he net thereby make over, as it were under his hand, the Lord Jefus, and all his Benefits to them that will receive him? So that when you fay, that[[/7fx Promife to jfi/ii^euf 3ft condltiony tj not ufiifjing 3 You may fee it is Otherwise by all the forementioned confiderations of the nature of the Promife. You may as well fay, a Teflament^ or deed of Gift conditional^ doth not give, or z La"^ doth not confer Right ani Title. And in thefc Relative benefits, to give Right to the thing, and to give the thing it felf, or right in it, is all one : ( ftill allowing the diftance of time limited for both in the Inftrumcnt ) It is all one to give full right to fon-(hip, and to make one a Son : or at leaft they areinfepa- rible. Yea, f which weigheth moft of all with me ^ it being the proper work of Gods Laws to ^i:'^ '!)««?/} of, or Right to'Benefiti, it cannot be any other way accomplifhed that is within our Knowledge (^ I think ) For Decree, Parpofe^ and' lb Prcdellination cannot do it, they being Determinations \de eventH ^ and not dedebito, asfuch: And the fententialdecla- rr, Pr<f r^, ^c. as to this man before. A pardon from a Prince to a fraytor, on condition, doth not perform the moral act of his difcharge^till he perform the condition, though it were in being before. The like I may fay ef a Teftaracnt or Deed of Gift : But what need many words in a cafe where the Truth is fo obvi- ous ? If forae moral caufes may be canfes, and Agtre mora- liter, or produce their effects, even before they are naturally in Being, much more may they fufpend it, and fo produce ic long after they are in Being : Caftf^e mim moralis ea ratio efi, ut (tiam cttm non ejl aElu^ fit ejficax^ moio habe at ( ut lotftiMM' tur itffcholiiyejfe c.o^nitMm:inqmt Rivetus Difput.i^, de fdtif- fa^.Chrifii. pag.282. Next you fay, ^Teaitistke fame, though mrie^ere aSiu- allj jtiftified. ] Anfwer. This requires no other anfwer, then what is given to the former. It is the fame Pbjftce co»ftder^ta , vel in Entitate nAtHrali : But the moral adion of pardoning and juftifying is not the fame, nor is at ail : A conditional ^Ardon, Deed of Gift, Tcftament, ^c. doth not at all />4r- don, or Qive^ till you perform the condition. For it is the proper nature of a condition to fufpend the aA of the Grant : fo that till it be abfolute or equal to Abfolute, it is not^^«- al Rcmifiion.Juftification, c$^c. ) The reafon of alhhis is,be- caufc thefe Laws, Teftaments or Promifes, are but the Law- makers, TeRators or Donors Inftruments , and therefore ad when and how he pleafes ; and it is his pleafure that they (hould ad no otherwife then as is aforefaid , and as in the Te- nor of them he (hall exprefs. Next you add [_Tobej»^i^ed, notes afjijfi(fn~ "^hlch pre- fu^pjfeth an ACiion tranfient^ not iwmarent^or onlj Gods purpofe tojnftifie : ~] Anfwer i. So far as the Reception of a Rela- tion may be called a PalTion, this is true: And no doubt you are in therighti that it is not AUus immmens. But now , fVhat tranfient Ati it i?, I remember very few Divines that once tell as ; but only in general fay, ft is a Tmnfitnt A^. Xx Now cm Now you artd I that have adventured to enquire, do happen to be both fingular from others, and differing between our felves, ( only Mr. Rnthtrforti, and fome few others I find faying oft, that we arc pardoned and juftified by the Gofpel ; by whiih they fecm to mean as I )But for your way of Juftificati- on by a fentence before the Angels , as I never mcc with any that judged thit to be our Juftificacion by Faith, fo as 1 have faid, itfeemsco coevery groaadlefsand {Grange. And then, if yours ftandnot, mine only rauft, for anything that is yet difcovered^tbat I have feen/or I know of none that cells us of any third, Your nexr Objedion is the fame before anfwered , that f Gods Tromift to j«/?>7»f , « only a di^larAtion what he ^tlldo^ unci therefore a man is not by Covenant '^ithont a fnrther Act juflifted, but'jMJitfiable. ] Anfwer. Grotitts defatiifaSi. will tell you, thatPromifes give right to him to whom they arc made; and that therefore they cannot be reclaimed, though threatnings may. But if tbefe were only Promifes that God will by another Ad do this or that for us, then it were to the purpofc that you fay : but that you cannot prove. Nor needs there any other Ad, but the moral Adion of the Inftruraent it felf to change our Relations here ; Etfruftrafit pro p/ura^ C^c. Indeed an Ad of ouvs^'Believing^]mu^ come in before the effed : but you ind i are agreed, that this is but conditi- onal, and not eflfedive. Thcfe Promifes therefore being alfo Gods Law, Teftament ( of Chrift ; Deed of Gift, Cove- nant, OC' they do not only foretell an Event to come to pafs by foroe other Action; but they do confer a Right or make due the benefit or relation, and fo effei^it; only the Author is picafed to fufpend the effed of his Inftrument, till we perform the Condition. As if by a Leafe, or Deed of Sale, there be feme Office or Dignity made over to you; or fome command in Army or Court, or Country : or by a Law a Foraigncr be Naturalized or Enfranchized, onfuchorfuch a ConditionjThis Leafe or Dced,or Lawdoch not only foretel, but effed the thing. y You add that [_^fnfification is 4 C^urt-ternfy importing an A^ of Cja^as Jttdge^ rviatreai hit ^romifir.g is r,ot his A El as Oa9) ^udgt^ Ifut ReFlor.] Anfwer i. If by a Court-term, you alfo mean a Law-term^ ( verhu^forotfe ox JHcHciArium in the full fenfe) I agree wich you. But if you confine it to the fcn- tcncc as pronounced, I require Prdof; as alfo proof of any fuch fentence before Judgement, particular or general. A Redor is either Suprtmftt or SHbalternus : A Judge is either fftpreme af>ave all'Larvs, a^bcing the Law-givcr, or fub lege. God is both Rellor and Jftdge^ only in the firft fenfcs : and ^yji*<^ging, he Ru/etb ; and Re[hr is but the Genus, whereof ftidexisdifpecits. As Re^orfi4premt*s, God hthc Legi^ator, and fo acteth (and juftifieth by his Laws, Grants, c^c. ) as Judge he fenterceth and abfolvcch thofe that were firft made juft. A man is accufed for killing another in fight, at the command of the Sovcraign Power. Is it not as fit and proper 2 fiying, to fay ^ The LaVo doth jujli fie thu nt4» forfo doing agiinf} all Accufers^ ] as to fay, Q The Judge vfilljufitfie himT} J Nay, Is it no: mor-j ordinary ? And in a fort, the Suprcam or Sovcraign may be faid to be ( though in a diffe- rent fenfe ) juftitlcd , ai well as an Inferior •, when yet the faid perfon in iupremacy hathno Judge, nor isto have any by Lavv,and fo cannot be juftified by fentence. God will be;»y?/- fied in his fayings,ertgeds fhould jtidqe us righteous, and rejoice therein^ but by a fentence p^Jfedin Heaver).^ Anfwcr. If you think ( and prove) that Ahgels cannot know us to be righteous, then I will not affirm that they judge us fo. For I prefappofc that that the; know oi to hz fo made by Tome Act before.and therefore they judge us to be 39 we are. And if they may know that we are Believers, and know that the New Law jufliiiechall fuch, then they may jud^e us to be juftihed without any fentence in Heaven, even as they know when a finner is converted, and rejoice in it ^ which doubtlefs they may know without a fcntjrce in Xx 2 Heaven (ho Hcaren pronouncing us converted; and Gods making them Inftruments in conferring his Mercies may make them know. You fay that [ Confitmlvt Juflificdtion , (liferent from Dt- cjarativeby fenttnce^Idonot find ex pre J[td undtr the term (JvL* ftification : ) it would he confidered » whether any other ASl he- fide the fentence^ doth makj! a man juft , but. giving of faith, ] Anfver, Thefe two things Khali prove to convince you : (be- caulfe this is of fome moment.) i- That fomeAufnefs which it of the La^ ] And if the Old Law had a power of making Righteous , if man could, have performed the condition, fo alfo hath the New. 2. And that the fentence doth not conflitute us Juft , needs no proof; It is the work of a Judge by fentence to clear xht . Guiltlef$,and not to make them Guiltlefs. Pardon indeed may do fomewhac to it .- but that is not the adion of a Judge as a judge, but ( as you before diftinguiflicd j of a RtEior ( in cafe of tranfgrefling Lawes J A Judge pronounceth men to be what they firft are according to Law ; and not makes them to be righteous who are not. He that faith to the wicked jhou art Righteous. C340 RighttoHi^NaUont fhall cnrfe him ; pcflepjallbhorhim t Pro.' 24.24. Ht that jafifieth the Vificked , A»d he that con Moralit eraser t cj HO d Ante Anon a^Hm er at y becaufe of their new Capacity, neceflity and Relation. As if your Fa- thers Teftament do give you a thoufand pound at his Death, and twenty (hillings a week as long as you live afrer , andfo much at your marriage, e^c. here this Teftament giveth you ihefe new fums (after the firft) without any change in it.- and yet by a new moral Ad ; for it was not a proper Uift, till the TermcxprcffedjOr the condition performed .-and if that rerm had never come, nor the condition been performed , you had uever had right ro it ; fo I conceive, Gods Gofpel Grant or Teftament doth renew both our Rcmifiif>n and particular Ju- (lificaiion. If Satan fay, Thu man huthdefervtd death by fin- Cm) ing ftnce he Belitved (as David) muft we not bc juftified from that Accufation? And here let me ask you oneQucftion , which I forgot be- fore about the firft Point. Seeing you think (truly) that Par- don is iterated as oft as ive fin.by what Tranfient Ad of God IS this done ? Doth God every moment at a Court of Angels Declare each finner in the world,remitted of his particular fin? (fov every moment we commit them. ) If you once fee a ne- cefficy of judging the New Covenantor Promife Gods Par' doning Inflrfwttnt, I doubt not but you will foon acknowledge as much about JuJ}ifcatio». And fure a Legal or written In- ftrument is fo proper for this work, that we ufe to call it [ A pMrdon,] which a Prince writes for the acquitting of an offen- dor. Befides.the Gofpel daily juftificth by continuing our Juftifi- cition, as your Leafe ftill giveth you Title to your Land. {Mat. 1 2. 37. is of more then the continuance of Juftificaii- on, evenof J uftification at Judgement.) THe next Point you come to about the Nature and Object of Faith,you are larger upon , through a miftake of my word? and meaning. I know not therefore how to Anfwer your Arguments till I have firft cold you my fence , and better ftacedtheQueftion. Indeed that in pag, 1 1 . of Reft ,1 apprehended my felf,fo ob- vio us to mifconftruSion, that 1 have correded it in the fccond Ed'f jOn (which is now printed.^ Yet i. I fpoke not of faith as Jf*J^if)wg, but as the condition ofSalvation, which contains more then that which is the condition of our firlt juftification. 2' I neuer termed thofe GoffeJ-Precepts;whkh are not in forac way proper to the Gofpel. And for the next words [ That fuhjtfiion toChri(i U an EJfentiai part of faith. ] I confefs I do not only take it for a certain Truth, but alfo of fo great mo- ment, that I am glad you have bent your ftrength againft iz , and thereby occationed me to fearch more throughly. But then, if you think (as you fcem to do j that by [_Sui>je&wtt] I mean [^ A^ftal Obtditnct ] yon quite miftake mc ; for I have fully (HO fully opened my mind to you about this in myAphcri/! tha^ fpcak only of the fubjeaion of the Heart ; and not of the j^^HdObedteacty/hiQh is the pradifc of it. I fpeak but of the Acceptation of Chrifl for our Lord, or the Confent thereto, and fo giving upourfclves to be his Difciples, Servants or Subjefts. This I maintain to be an EHential part of juftifying Faichjin the rtrict and proper fcnfe of that word. Its true that dejurc Ghrift is King of U ibelicvers, and fo of them that acknowledge him not to be their King. But in or- der of nature, the acknowledging of his Dominion, and eonfent thereto, and fo receiving him to be our King, doth go before our obeying him as our King. As a woman in marri- age-Covenant , takethher Husband, as one whom (he muft obey add be faithfuil to : But that taking or confenting, goes before the faid Obedience, as every Covenant before the performance of it. Yea though the fame act fhould be both an acknowledgement of, and confent to the Authority, and alfo an obeying of it ; yet it is Qttatenus a confent and accep- tance of that Authority, and not as it is an oheying of ic, chat I fpeak of it when I afcrtbe JuRification to it : as faith in the cow»»fl«/f«/f is certainly an act of Obedience to God : and yet Divines fay , it juftifies not as it is Oheiienct, but as an jnjirHment. So that by Heart-fuhjetlion to ^hrij}^ I mean that act by which we give up our felves to Chrift as his Sub- jects to be ruled by him •, and by which we take him for our Soveraign on his Redemption- title. But when I judge the word Faitb to be taken yet in a larger fenfe, comprehend- ing obed;ence,I never faid or thought that fo it is the condition of oar firfl Juftifica: ion,nor will I contend with any thai thinks the word is never taken fo largely , it being to me a matter of fmal moment. Now to your Objections. I. "WOU fay, £ Faith 'di'ork.eth^y Love^ ^e. ] Anfwr. I I. Faith is fometime taken ftrictly for a Belief of Gods word, or an Affent toits Truth. 2. Sometime more largely for the wills embracing alfo of the objcc as an offered good, befides the uDderfl»ndings AlTcnt to the Tiuth of the Y y word (540 word which ofFcreth it.The former it by the A poftle oft diftin- gui(hed from Love, and is ftid to work by LOve ; as the live- ly acts of the underftanding produce anfwcrablc motions in the will. But the later is chat fiiith which juft.fieth ; to wit. The Rtceiving^f anojfertdChrijl. And thiscomprixeth both the Act of tht Uidcrftanding and Will ( as almoft all Prote- ftant Divines affirm. ) But bo:h thefe acts together are called . Ttiith from the former, which is moftftrictly fo called : be- ca-ife the great difficulty then lay in Helievmg the Tr«th of the Gofpel, C and would do ftill, if it were not for the ad- vantages of Credit, Education, Cuftom, (^c» ^ therefore the whole work is thence denominated : though yet the com* pleating of the work be in the Will, and the Underftanding* Act but preparatory thereto. 2. You muft alfo diftinguilh between hove to Chrifi the Midiator, and the Grace of CbA' rity i-taertera/^^s it is extended alfo to God as Creator, to Saint?, to all men, &c. And between that firftact of Love, which is in our firft receiving of Chrift, and the love which wc afterwards exercife on him : and fo I anfwer yeu. i.That as the Apoftle diftingui(heth between Faith, Hope and L6ve, fodol. 2. Faith taken ftrictly foraffent ro Divine Tefti- roony , ^roduceth love in every one of the forementioned fenfes ( of the word Love : ) 3. Juftifying fiiith (com, riziog the wills icccptance ) produceth both the g-^ace of Charity, as it is exercifed on other objects, and alfo the following acts of it towards Chrift the Mediator: And fol acknowledge that Faith worketh by Love, and that Love is not faith. But yet whether Love be not in fome fenfe eifential to juftifying faith, ifyoufpeakonlyof Love to Chrift, and that not as a diftinct grace, but as it is comprized in our Acceftunce of him at firft^ 1 dial! leave to your conlideration, when you have fitH refolr Ycd thefe things, i. Whether juftifying faith be not an act of the Will as well as the Underftanding } Few but Papifts de- ny it, and not all of them. 2. Whether CAr»^^«wy^/f be nee the object of it? Few Proteftancs will deny it. 3, Whethec QoodhQ not the e^jfS of the Will, and fo Chrrftbenot wil- led as Good? None doubts of it. 4. Whether this willing b« not the fame as Loving, as love is found in the rational ap- petite ? petite ? Sure Aquinas faith To, ro man that I know contra- dicting it. 5. Whether ^cu can call ex^J^4«fr, or any other act of the vuiW jfi/!if)i*i^ ffiih^ excluding this w»//>»^, or not principaliy including it? For i. This is the WilU fir ft act to- wards it object ; and will ycu fay that Love goes before ju&'t- fying faith, and fo before Juftification ? ard luch a Love as is diftinct from juftifying faith as being ro part of it ? How then is Love the fruit of faith, and as Divines fay, a confequcncof Juftification? Yet it is be j end all doubt, that this F^(?//r or Levi to Chrift goc$ before /Jffiarct on him, or any other act ofibcWin.We^f*f>. 1.2. ^2S.f)i»g faith : nor will contend with any man that thinks it unmeet .- if we agree in the things of moment I hate to quarrel about words. Nor do 1 think it a meet phrafe to fay, wr 4re juJUfied^j l^vt^ (though in the fenfe before mentioned, I think it true,^ becaufeitk but a part , or affedion as it were of that rtctf^ titm, by which we are juftified, and ftands not in fo full a rela- tion to the objed received- And yet, if I had faid none of all this, I fee not that I need apymore then to deny your confequence, as being wholly ungrounded: For it foiloweth not , that if it be an # ffeq- tial part , that therefore it muft have the Denomination of the whole : yea , though the whole be faid to work by that parr. The Brain and Heart arc effcntial parts of the Y y 2 Body : C?+8) Body ; and yet not to be called the Bod^ ; and it is more pro- per to fay that the body works by the Brain or Heart ; or chat the vegetative foul doth work by the natural heat and Spirits; then cofay* the Body worketh by the Body, or the vegetative foul by it felf. I will explain all together in my ufual Similicude, wl ich is Dr. Prefions ( or rather Pauls ) A condemned Beggar is offered a Pardon, and alfo to be made a Queen, if (he will but take the Prince for her Hus* band. Now here put your Qjieftions. i . Js Love any psrt vf the Condi' ijn of her Pardon and Di^nit) ? Anfwer, Yes: An cflcntial parcjfor Confent is of the Effence of it ; and Love is tiTential to true confent, to receive any offered good : Not love Hi ic is a fajjion, but as it is an a<^ of the rattoBal Appe-* tlte ; which ii but Felle-^ And Sltgere,Confent$re^Acceptare are nothing eUe but a reffthivt yf^ilHng* 2. But it is not Love as. a Vertue in general, or as exercifed on any other objed, which is. this effential part of the Condition : but only love to him- whom (be marrieth. And fo her firft loveisneceffary to her- Pardon and Dignity as begun ,• and her continued love ( and roarriage-faithfulnefs ) is neceffary to them ^s they are to be continued : (Juppofingthc Prince to knowthe heart as Gbrift* dolh. ) Qu.2.Isitthe»ameetph'a/etofayythatfheijpardoM- ed and digmfiedy) loving ftfch a Prince } Anfw. It hathTomev Xtuth in it, but itis notafitfpeech ; but rather that it is ^7 mArtjtng him, bccaufe Love is but a par t* or as it were an Af^' fedion of that CMarriage Covenant or confent , which indeed ' doth dignifie her. Love may be without marriage, but not Marriage ( cordiaiiy ) without Love. So in our prefent cafe* }uflifying faith is the very Marriage Confent or Covenant withChrift j Itistherforcfictertoray, we arejuftilied by it, thenby love ; becauTex he former expreffeth the full conditi- on : the latter nor. ^«. 3. ^f love bean ejfentialpMft of tht' MarTiagi^confent ^thtn may vfe not oi rrelljaj, Jidarriage canf- (ttiy Marriage^ as tofnj^ C^larriagecaufeth Love, Anfwer No. • For I. That Loye which it caufeth, is the following ads of ^ Love. 2. And the. name of Love ismolt ufually given only- so the Pifiion which is in the fenfitive ; but not ufually to the- iiBsei r/w*/. 7.Willyouanfwer your own objeSion, «nd you tell me what to anfiver : Faith is a duty of the moral Law: if we are juftified by faith, then we • are juftified by a work of the Law. I know you wil! not cvadc^ asthofe that fay,Faith is not a work.bat a PaiTion nor as thofc thatfay, weare juftified by it not asawork butasanlnftrU'- mcnt : for I have heard you difclaim that.Ifyou fay it is not as a^work, but as a condition by the free Lawgiver a p ;o'rnted to this end, thenyoufayas Ido,both offaich.aiidfeconuanlyof works. > Eor what Divine denyeth works to be a condition- of' Salvatioo.oFof the final Juftification ^orofour-prefentjufti- !ftcation as continued , velnon amittendi fi^jiificsttontm jamrf uftAm, asConr. 'Sergius faith ; I know but one other cvafibn itifc in the world; which I once thought none would have-ad-- Yy 3, Tetter (550) ventured on ; but lately an acute Difputant (with me) 'main- tains , that faith it not conditio mortUs , velex volnntate canfH- tHtr.tis^Mt Conditio f hyftc A viltxnatMT a r«»,ButI tbiok I (hall eafily and quickly difprove this opinion. RAloabs and v/^brahams works were works of the New Law of Grace, and not of the eld Law of works. In a word, As there is a twofold Law , fo there is a twofold Accuation and Juftification : when we are accufed as breakers of the Law of works, that is, asyiff^rr^ in common fort, and fo ts lyablc to the penalty thereof , then we plead only Chrifts fatisfadion as our Rigbteoufnefs , and no work of oar own t But when we are Accufed of final non- performance of the con- ditions of the New Law, that is of being Reji^ltrj ofChriftkt ^Mediator, we are juftified by producing our faith and iincere obedience to him. The former Paul fpeaks of ^ and Jumts of the latter. You may fee Divines of great Name faying as i in fhis, zsC^tad^Deodate on James the 2. bucmoft fiilly T/4< catu inThf. Salmuritnf.Thefde Jufiificicc. To your third Objedion, That Faith, Reftntsmeiy Hcfe uni Love {as before explained) are difiinguified, I caHly yield ytMi^ But where you fay (Faith and Lave have different Object /her f fore one U no ejfential part of the ether ) I anfwer, That htith in Chrift, and Love to the Saints ( which your Texts mention ) have different Objeds, I foon confefs. But faith in Chrift (as it is the firft Ad of the Will) and love to Chrift) have one and the fame Objed^beyond all doubt. Your fourth I wholly yield, if you fpcak of faith ftridly, or as it Juftifieth, and not in a large improper fence. Your fifth is grounded on the forementioned miftakc of my meaning. And there needs no further anfwer, but only to tdl you, that though (incerc obedience to all Chrifts Lawes be a part of the condition of our Juftification Zi continued ztA con- jummate at Judgement ; yet tt follows not that every particu^ lar duty muit be done.no more then that ^^am muft obey eve- ry particular Law before he were adually ju(^. It is fufficient chat there be no other defed in our Obedience, but what may ftand with fincerity. The fame Precept may command , or make Duty to one, and noc co another, and fo be no Precept as OTO as to him. A man that lives but an hour after his converfiort," . is bound fincerely to obey Chrift according to his Law : but he is not bound to build Churches, nor to do the work of twenty years. Chrift may be received as K(ng, (and is) in the fame moment in which he is received as Juftihcr j and in that recep- tion we covenant to obey him, and take him for our Lord to the death ; but nor to obey him on earch when we are dead j for we are then freed from thefe Lawes, and come under the Lawes of the Glorified. To your fixth I anfwer , The Tests alledged have no Ihew of contradif^ingthePomt you oppofe. One {Akb^wt are ju- Jpified hj h:4 Blood : But doth it thence follow/ rW^/or^ ntt by Btlnving in him or rtceiving him as Kiffg , are rve MAde parta- kfrsoftt.) His 2?/oa<^isthe Purchafrngcaufe , butweenquirc afcer the condition on our part. The other Text faith, {thrcugb faith in hi4 'Blood.) But i. it faich uoionly in his Blood. 2, And bis blood is the Ground of his Dominion as well as of his Ju/ii- fying us : for by his blood he bought all into his own hands : For> to thii end he Died., Rofe anA Revived^ that he might be Lord ofDeadandLiving.Kom.r^.g. It may be therefore thrcu^h faith in his Bloody as the chief part of the fitisfadion, and yet neceflarily alfo through faith in kimfelf , or the Reception of ^iw/r/y^as the Chrift. 5. YecdoththeApoftlemoft convent- (Mtly fay, [through faith in hu blood) rather then (thrcttgh faith in ht4 Dominion or Government^) becaufe when he fpeaks of Faith, he fpeaks Relatively .- nor ( as fome underftand it ) by Faith meaning Chrift , butufingthe name of that Ad which fklieft and fulliett relates to its Objed J and fo intending the Object more principally then the Ad. And as it is fitter to fay, that {iveare fujlifieelbj Chrifis blcod^) then thlt (j»e are fftfltfiidbji hia Kiitgly Power J therefore the Apoftle ra:her fpeaks of faith in hid bloody as neerlieft relaring to the Objed. Ylet, as he excludes not Chrifts obedience, ffor by hit obedience manyarem»de Righteotu) norf^ith in hu (btdience^ and in his whole humiliation as well as his blood ; and in his RefnyreUi- ont^nd Irterceffion and Exaltation ^ fo not in his Kingly Office. Look back on the former Example to make this plain. -A poor condemned woman is delivered and Dignified by marrjing a Prince .' C?5i) Prince that hath redeemed her on that condition. When fhc fpeaks of her DtliverA>tct^(hQ will fay, [_I am delivtred by the bounty, Goodntji or Rt demotion fmj Trinct^ and foby marry. >W kim that in mercy Redeemed me,"^ rather then [I^m deliver- ed by marrying a Prince to Rule me.\ Bccaufe in the former (he more fitly & fully exprclTeth more of the caufe of her Delive- rance : Much Itfs will (be think it a fit fpeecb to hy^^ am deli- vered by marrying an ^vengtr of his enemies^ a Condtmntr^ a Tunijher.&cc. ) as you are plcafed to fpeak in this our cafe. And yet who doubts, but her marrying or taking him for her Huf- band hereafter to Rule her, as well as prefently to Deliver her, is the very true Condition on her part of her Deliverance ? Yea, and if you fpeak not only of her T>eliverancet but of her Dig- nity (being enriched. Honoured and made a Queen. ) it is the fitteft phrafe to fay ( it vsoi by her marrying 4 'Trince. ) And fo if you fpeak not only of Pardon and Juftification ( which import our Deliverance inftatum qteo fWwJbut alfo of our A- doption to be fons,andKings,and Heirs with Chrift,itisno un- fit phrafe to fay, Thu it by our marrying King Jefw ; ri/? is.the proper ObjeA of juftifying Faith (as I (hall anon prove.) But the name Chrifi figntficth asdiredly and fully his Kingly OflSce as his Juftify. ing. If you include not his being King, you Receive him nor tsChrift. 2. To OtO 2. To Receive him as Redeemer is to Receive him as King • Forhis very Redeeming was a Purchafing them inco his owa hands, (Joh.ii.i.Afatth.zS.iS.1okiy.2.5ci.i^. Luk* lO. 22. Efhtf.i,20,U. fob. $.16,27. RiM. 1^.9. &c,) ihoughno^ only fo. ^. Tfaim ». K^fs the Sort left Joe be artgry^ScQ. Kifling, or fiibmitting to^and Receiving the Son as King(for fo the whole Pfalra expounds ic) is the condition of cfcaping wrath ; there* fore of Pardon ^for Toe»4 & Veniajunt advtrfk : ) therefore ofour Juftitication. 4. Matth. II. ZJ. Come unto me all ye that labour and art heavy Ucten, (Guilt is the great load : ) But under what Notir on will Chrilt become to? Jake my joke and bftrthen^&cc.Ledrn ofme^icc. and ye fltaU find reft to jonr fouls. Reft ! from what ? from that they were burdened with; and tha was Guilt,among other things .- and to remove the burden of the Guilt of fin , oc curfe of the Law, is to Pardon and Juftifie. ( I hope you will not fay, that the only Burden that Chrift offers here to eafe them of, was the Pharifes rigorous Interpretation of the Law, as I was cold you expound ir. ) 5. Luke ig.ij. T he fe mint enemies that would not I J^ottld Reign over them^Scc. If Rejeding Chrift as King be the con- demning fin according to the tenor of the New Law ; then Ac- cepting him as King is part of the condition of Juftification. The Gonfequence is plain, becaufe the faid Rejedion con- demneth, as it is the non- performance of that condition which muft be performed to the avoiding of condemnation. More Scriptures might be brought ; but the firft Argument alone is fnfficient, if there were no more. To your eighch Objedion I anfwer. TheObjedof juftify- ing Faith is Chrift himfelf principally •, and the word as both Revealing, Offering him.PromifingjThreatnirg : but it is not Chrijf covumandivg^ firft, but Chrift as King to Command. This is anfwered in the former. T.o your ninth Objedion I anfwer; when I fiy ih«t |[^#tf«- ting (^hrlji-if Lord.ia one part of Juflifying Faith f] I fpcak not of the Act morally, asif ir had two partfr where i: is entir« : It is but one moral Act to Accept of whole Chrift ('if you fpeak Z z fimply Oh fimply of Accepanf^, asdilimct from preceding AfTent and fub- fcquent Affiance. ) But I call it (p^rt) in reterence to the Ob- ject, whence you fay arifeththe Difference: Though Chrifts Office of Mcdiacor be but one ; yet from the work? of t'^at of- fice we look on liis '^overning,and Pardoning or Juftifying as diftinct parts : and thence I call this act of faith ( a part.) ]ror that you f.s eligere^ Pfal. 119.30,31. Where you fee alfo that by Affiance and Adhafton, Amefus principally means the very Elicit act of the fVill as Election is. And indeed he that obferveth but how the Scripture throughout doth hang mans falvation or damna- tion on his Will mainly, Cfo far as it may be faid to depend on our own acts, ) rather then on any acts of the underlianding C but only as they refer and lead to thofe of the Will } might well wonder,that juftifying favingfaith,the great needfull ad, fliould be only intellectual, and not chiefly in or by the Wiil.as well as all the reft. Te ^ill not come to me thst je may have life : Hovf oft would I, and ye would y.ot ? Tht/e mine enetuiej that vrouU not I jhould reign over them, &c. PVhoevsr Will Jet him ta^e or huj freely ^tLC. Still al noft all is laid on the Will : and yet is not faith in the Will ? AQent may be compelled by evi- dence of Truth, and fo be unvoluntary. And fo a man may be a Believer thus againft his WiJ).- and if this ivill fcrvc,men may be faved againft their WilU* I know fome think it enough that the Will commands the undcrftanding to believe. But even thusfiiith tyfmeftM^ l^fednl. 1.2. c. they place the firft principle iothe ^\\\>^ui fidem collocantw fntellectUtHecejfariam tamen fatentnr (5T7) JMtntur efe aVi^uam matiantm voluntatis aci ajfeft/um ilium prtf bendum : qHemadmodMm in fide bumana voIftnta>-ium tjfe did' tur adhihtre fidem altCui-^fiz-erc a voiuntati pendeat fides, ftecejfe ejint primuprinciptHmfdei Jit involuKtate,^. 20 But this ij on- ly commanding the performance,& fo it is thus no elicit act(for Aejuinas and Others conclude, that VdurtAt eji Principium de- terrainans nUnt huntanos tjuoadexercitium actus; intellectus aa- tem (jniiid actus fpeciUcAiionem. ) But it is moreover the Wills Elicite Ad that 1 aflerc. And as I faid, this imperlum volun- tatis may poflibly be wanting, and belief he involuntary for the main. Let me add but one more confideration, ( for I perceive ray tedioafncfs ) If InjideUtj as it is a Privation of favin^ faith, and fo is the condemning fin ,be in the Will as well asin the Intellect, then faith muft be in the Will too : But In- fidelity is in both. Erg^o. ^c. That Infidelity which is the Privation of meer afTent, is rather faid to be willing, then in the Wtll-^ but that which is oppofite to juftifying faith, ia in the Will. Zwi^ip.ly. Tioojtmine enemies tUn^ouldnot I pjould raignoverthem^ bringthem hither-, ^Q.h\l\\ Amefiui MedulA- 2.cap.5.<5.48. OpponunturiJia{^nfidelitas,SiQ.fidei^ non tantnmtiua toUunt y^jfenfum itlum Intellectus ejuleji" ad fidtm necejfariui : fed el i am and the teal Pardon thereby fignified : or of the Oath of Allegiance , and of the Prince to whom we fwear. But becaufe of the Relation between the ei^e and the other , Faich may be called a receiving of Chrift, ora receiving of the Gofpel. Yet fo, as ftill the proper principal Object is Chrift, and the Gofpel but mediate, as to him. Thefe are my thoughts. Now ftf I am able to underftand you)your words import.that in your J udge- roent, Chrift ii received two wayes ; i. by Faith, and that is only by Affcnt : and this is only by receiving his Word : that Is,in Believing it to be True. 2. By other Grates ; aqd thofe I think,you refer to the Wills receiving. Againfttliif opinion I further alledge, i. Almoft all Pj^oteftant D^y'rties acknow- ledge faith to be the Act ( or rather Acts ) of both faculties , even Dr Di>jif«4i»rnot excepted jiadCantirp hlmfd^ fpeafcs fometime daj^kly) infomuch that AhlanSllion, fo^n.>Cr gitu and many more make it the judgement of ProtJftants inoppo- ■fition to Popery. And fo doth tdi4 fundamiKtM»- mimme tdomutK : Idem ibid. 2 Affcnt is ro? any full moral Receiving of Chiift : But faith whi(;h Juftifieth) isaful! moral Receiving of Chrift, (f'^b I.I2.J therefore rfTcnt alone is not the faith that jufti- fieth. ' know there is a Metonymie in the word Reciive (be- caufe jn ftrict fpeech in Phyficks, Rectpere tfl patij But it is fo ufual and near, that in morality it is taken for a proper fpcecb,' to C2II the Acceptation of an offered good [^ A Receiving. ] 3 .There ji fuch a thing as the proper accepting ofGbrift,rcqui- red as of flat necefiity tojuftificationand Salvation : But this acceptation is not in Scripture called by the name of any othec Grace-.thereforeit istakenforan Actoffalth.The Maj*,I hope noChriftian willdeny. For when Chrift is offered to the world- as their Saviour, Redeemer,Teacher,King Husband j who can^ chink that the accepting of him is not required, yea even in the^ offer? Not a phyfical Reception which fomc abfurdly anddan- gercufly dream of , but a moral ; as when a people take a; man for their King or Teacher ; or a woman takes a man for her Husband. And for the Minor : Receiving Cbrift offered ir not ufually eipreffed in the terra, Hope, Joy, Charity, Repcn* tance ; therefore it is included in the word Faith ( unlefs* you can namefome other Grace which it is ufually expreffed; by.; 4. The Grace by which we are united to Chrift is Faith .•• But it is receiving Chrift by which we are fo united to him.;; therefore it is faith which is the receiving of Chrift. I fupt-- pofe none will deny that it is Chrift himfelf that we maftbe* united to by believing, and not the Word or Promife ; and' that it fs receiving Chrift which unites us to him, is obvious^ iboth from the language of Scripture, and the nature of the shing. A People is united Co their Prince, as the head of the Repub- C?<55) Rcpubliqae, and a Church to their Teacher, and a woman to her Husband, by the Wills confent or acceptancc,and not pro- perly ( but only initially, preparatorily, imperfectly and im- properly, and if it be alone, not at all)by believing the Truth of their word«. cx/w/yiw faith , cJTffittts veritati ^ua ejl de Deo. 5. By faith it is that we give upour felvcs to be Chrifts Di- iciples.SubjectSjMembers ; ( For Scripture afcribes not this to other viraces ufually orcbiefly. And to take him for our Sa- viour and Head, and give upour felves as his redeemed and Member?, is all one work. ) But it is not by Aflcnt only,chief- ly or fully at all, that we give up our felves to Chrift as Difci- ples, Members, &c. Therefore it is not by Affenc properly or fully that we receive Chriit. So Amtfitis ubi Juprd^ ^. 19. Crr- diturfts etiitm forro cum ex tniferU fenfu , G^ ommmoca Lherati- onisy cunt »«/f, turn inaliU defeHH^ ntce^e h^beat fedederc Deo in (^hri/lc tan^uam Servatori fnftcicnii c^ fideli y Deetiti' anem ifiam facere non potefi ullo tnodo per y^jfetifum Intelle^HS, fed per Confenfum VoluntAtls. And indeed I think this Dediti- oniirfelf 'delivery to be part of Faith : and that the covenant- ing in heart with God in Chrift , is the very juftif^ing faith, taking him for ours and giving up our felves to him as his .- and the external Covenanting is the profeflion of Fa th .- and that Baptifm is the marriagc-Tolemnization, and cngeg ngfign and mean?. 6. That Ad which cannot be difcerned in a Saint (in it fclf ) from what msy be in the wicked, is not the receiving of Chrift ( fully or properly ) which juftifies; But the Ad of AfTcnC to the Truth of the Gofpel, as it is in a Saint, cannot in it felf be difcerned from what may be in the wicked. Thcefo^e the Ad of Affent is not the Receiving of Chrift whch ,'ufti- fics. The Major is hence evident ; In that )uftif\ing faith be'ng the condition of our Juft fication, muft n:cds b? the great Mark to know by, whether we are jul>ified or no : Bu': if t could not be known to be fincere it felf, in vain is it mnde a A a a 2 M«!k 06^') liixk to know our ftatc by : yea or a Conditloit, almoft ^ when a man can never tell when he performeth ir. The Minor I have endeavoured CO prove in an Additional Chap, to the third part of m Book of Reft, to which for brevity, I refer yovi'DcStoMibtorj^^ have there (hewed you,faith as I; Amtfins faith, 4/f^«/.I. I.e. .^.^. , that receiving Chrift juftifics net properly f AT »4/«r4 aHpu^fe^ex volttntateOr^ivan' tu\ and if I get that,I get the main part of the caufe in contro^ verfie . 8. Affiance is judged by Divines to be an Ad of the Will ; Bat Affiance is judged by the fame Divines to be. the juftifying Ad : Therefore they judge that the juftifying KSl ( and con» fcquently the Reception of Chrift ) belongs to the Will. 9. The Velle or Elicite ad of the Will which I infift on, I'c iht very iirft Act, and goes before Affiance ( as it denotes any other Act of the Will : ; Therefore either this T///* muft be the juftifying Faith and Reception of Chrift, or elfe they muft fay. that there is a fiving reception of Chrift that goes be- fore the juftifying faith or Reception : which fure they will not grantjthat raak« that Faith the aBxf primus viufpirituaiif, xo^Ufijy, G^D iG.laftly.The opinion fcems to me Co Improbablcwitbout and ag»inft reafon, and fo dangerous [ that God doth afljgn one only Act of the foul to the Office of juftifying , efpecially the aft ofafifentjthat I dare not entertain it without proof It is im- probibie that in a Moral, Political, Theological Matter, the Moly Ghoft fliould fpeak,as if it were in the ftrictcft difcourfeof Phyficks.lt is improbable that God fhould fpeak to man in fuch a Moral difcourfe, fo as no men ufc to fpeak, and t|ieretorc fo as men could not, without a further explication underftand. Doth he that fpeaks of receiving a man to be our Husband, rf KingMafter, efr. mean it of one only Act ? ( though I know Confcnt is the chief. ) Or he that gives any great matter on Condition of fuch Receiving, Doth he mean that any one fingle Act is that Condition ? Much lefs Affcnt. Or is there any likelyhood, that when other Acts do receive the fame Object, Chrift, in a way of as high honouring him, that yet God ftiould confine Juftification to one Act, fitting by all the reft ? Yea when the reft are acknowledged to be part of the Condition ? ( and Receiving as Lord , to be the f^es »J (peak^clmgeroujlj in over-TKAgnifji'.g their own J^iih^ nkenthty Jhould magmpe Chrijl whom it relates to. I know the great thing that i^icks with fome , is that the Scrip- ture oft feems to defcribe faith by the Act of A^enting. But confider,fo it doth in other places by Trttftirtg-^Refling^Taking^ Receitin^, Comings Sating and Drinking^ ( which CMetafhors nmft needs lignifie acts of the fVi/l,)&c. which fhew that it is not any fingle Ad. Again, as I faid, the WW^ is denomina- ted from the firft leading and moft difficult Ad; the Language of Scripture is much fitted to the times and temper of the per- fons to whom it was fpoken. Now the Jews did generally and gladly acknowledge that the Me0ias or Mediator muft be Re- ceived^ fVelccmed, Honoured^ Lcved^ ftthmittedto : but they could not Believe that Chrif fftu he j And this was foolifhncfs to the Gentiles alfo, as well as a ftumbling-blcck to the Jews ; that one that lived and walked among them > and feemed a poor contemptible man, and at laft was crucified, (hould be God and the great Redeemer and Lord of the world. I tremble fometimes to think, if we had lived our felves in thofe times, how bard it would have been even to us to believe • fo that when the great D fficult act is named, the other ( Confent and Affiance; arc ftill implyed.and included. I will end with ^Ime- fiHi true obfcrvation to this ^wx^Q^z^Mednl. I. i.e. 3. ^Imm- visinfcrifturis aliquando Afcenfni veritatiqna ejl d? Do & Chrijfo, J oh. 1.50. habetHr pro vera fide ; includitur tamen femper fpecialu fiducia : at^ adeo omnbpu in locii uhi fermo efl de faint art fide ^ vel fraJtipponitHr fiduclx in Mtffiam^ & indica- tur t ant urn determination vel applicatto ejus adperfona^ Chrifii ; vt/ per A^enfnm ilium deftgnatur^ tanquam effcElnm pn fuam cau/am Job^l 1.25,26,27. ( §. 20. J ' The fccond Argument which you anfwer, lyeth thus. If Faith be the work of the Heart and ihe whole Heart, then it is not only in the Underftanding , but in the Will alfo. But the former is the words of Sofipiure , JliJ. 8. 37. R^m. 10. 10, £r£0^^c, ' Here (3<^7) ' Hcr€ you anfwer that £the whole heart notes not every intvard faculty, but (at often) ftnceritj. ^ To which I Reply ^ i. The word \yiihole\l yield to llljricui fignifies the Jincerit^^ which is ufually exprefTcd by Integrity , but the word ^Heart'] figni- fies the [HhjtH • and is commonly taken for the ^yt/l^ and oft for the whole foul , Under jlandhg and ivi/l, ( as moft Fathers, Schoolmen and Divines judge in the Point , though the two former placed too much of tt in the AlTent : ) but where and how oft do you find the word [_Heart'] ufed for the fole Intel- lect? I pray fticw the place. 2. The proverbial fpecch [.rvith all the Heart] is not ufed in Rem, 10. lO. but only the fubjecc barely cxpreffsd : vcth the HcArt mAn believethto Rtghteouf- Mtfs. r My third Argument (as you place it) was to another ufe, ' which is of lefi moment. As I judge Faith to be taken, 1 .foriic- timcs more ftrictly for meer Aflent to a Teftimony : (fo f,imet takcsit when he faith, the Devils believe J 2. And fometimes more fully for Aflent and Acceptance, or Confent : (fo PauI cakesit; and foitjuftifieth.) So 3. Ifuppofeit isfometimc taken moft largely and improperly, for the full performance of the conditions of the New Covenant. If any deny this,! have no mind to contend for it, becaufc it is but about a word, and not the thing- Your anfwer is twofold ; i. //;4/ Heb. 5. 9. ffeakj of obeying Chrift-, but doth not call faith obeying Chrifi. r Reply. That Obedience which conraineth the Condit on of falvation by Chrift Cwhercof Juftification is a party/ muft needs include Faith : But the word Obedience Heb.$ 9 concaineth theconditionoffalvationbyChrill; thcr foreit irciuJes fa.th, H^ is become the Author of Eternal falvation to alt them that obey him. Your fecond anfwer is, "^It may be obedience by ^ffent^ that Chrift is t he As^«' import in their firft flgnificati- on, is notcoourbufiners io much as in what fcnfe theyace commonly ufcd : Nodoubc they may fignifie properly our yielding to pcrfwafion, improperly called Obeying: but that they arc put for proper Obeying ufually in Scripture, moft In- terpreters affirm. You may therefore as well draw to your purpofe the Latin Ohedire, becaufe it is but (JuaJI oh-aHdire. Indeed the Obedience to a Teacher ( as to Chrift and his Mir nifters, and of Scholars to tlieiv Matter j who ufech both Ar- gument and Authority, is fully and fitly expreflcd in thofe words. The word [] Gofpel j if principally fpoken of the Doc- trine of Good tidirigs or Mercy by Chrift( but furc not only of the Hiftorical or DecUracory part, but alib^ yea principally of ths Fromifeor Off-T : ) but the whole New Covenant or Zbfervs tdl things ^hat ever I command. And not to ftrive abour words, you know that New Law of Chrift, which is called his Teftament, Cov?nar.t,Gofpel,(^c. hath all the Precepts in it which you mention. I sit not Precepts as well as Narrations which Murl^ c^Wi \}\& Qofpl, Mar.i.i. ? Was it not the Gofpel which Chrift and the Apoftles preach- ed ? And they preached Eepentance and Fath, and fo com- manded Duty : If a man loofe his Life for publifliing or obeyS Bbb ing (57o) ing Chrifts Prectpts, doth not the Promife belong to him, M-ir,^.-^$. and 1029? Oristhat Promife to them onlythar foffer f>r the D/c/./r^rjz;^ part only ? IscheCiJy'/?^/ thatmuft bf p'jb'i^vj 2mcn^ all Ni\tions, the Hifiorj only ? cJ^/dr.i 3 . 10 Was the Precept of Accept' ngChrif} gloving himinfin- cerity and obeying him c^c, no part of that Gofpelito which Paul Ma's (eparar'jd ? /?<> w. r .i.in which hefcrvedm iy/^/WfjVer. 9 of which he was not afliimed, ^'>'/-. 16. and which be was fut in t> «? \V/j'/r I T^Jcjf 2 2,4. Was it only the 1)ecUration of Chrifts Death, Refurrection.d'-. which is the Gofpel ac- cording to which wens fecrets ntufi be judged } Rom.z. l6. Of according to which the ^^w/ are enemin, Rom»ii. 28. com- pared with Z,«i^.i 9.27. Isnotitlat^lycr takep,"iCflr.8 18? And fubjection to the Gofpel implies it preceptive, 2 Cor. g, I?. *Pff^n withdrawing and feparating from the uncircum- ciHor}, and fearing the Jews,and diffembling, and Sarndbas with himV was A not w^ik'"g according to the Truth of the Qof- pel, Gal.z.i^- The felfeApoftlcs preached another Gofpel, and the GaUthidns turned to another Gofpei^ when the former preached, and the later received theDoftrine of the Neceffi- ty ofbiing circftmcifed^ and kjephg Moks Z«then the works of the Law do. I would many other Divines that go your way ( for it is com- mon as to the difpatching of Juftification by tneAd) would think of this foul abfurdicy. ( You may add this aifo to wbac is faid before, againft your opinion herein, ) Where then is the Old Dodrine of the jetfi living b) faith^ ^ to ^uJitficA' tion ? J may bear with thefe men ( or at Jcaft, need not won- der, ) for not adinicting Obedience or ocher Graces to be conditions of Juttification as continued, when they will not admit faith i t felf. Who fpeaks more againft faith,they or I ? V/hen I admit as necefTary that firft ad, and maintain the ne- cefsicy of repeated ads, to our continued Juftification^ and they exclude all fave one Inftantancous ad? 2. And what rea- fon can any mm give, why Repentance (hould be admitted as a condition of our firft Juftification, and yet be no condi- tion of the continuance of it ? or what proof is therefrom Scripture for this 1 1 (hall prove chat the continuance of our Jaftf- (373) Juftification hath more to its condition then the beginning-, ( though learned men, I know gain-fay it : ) but farcly lefs ic cannot have. 4. But why do you fay only of Repentance that ^it U the ccndttion of Remiffion'2 and of forgiving othtrs, that {^it is the condition ofentring into life? ~\ Have you not Chr?fts exprefs words, \.\\2X forgiving ethers is a condition of our Rem^ffion ? if ye forgive men their trefpajfes^ your heavenly Father vill forgive jou; but if you forgive not men^tiQ. Nay, is not Reformation and Obedience ordinarily made a condition ct forgivenep ? I refer you to the Texts cited in my Aphorifms : iVaflijou^ wake jof* clean, put away the evil of jour doings ^Siz then if your fins be M crimf'^n^Sic. He that conftjfeth andforf^ktth hUfin^fhaU htvt mercy . And I would have ic confidered, if Remiftion and ] u- ftification be either the fame, or fo neer as all Divines make them, whether it be poflible, that forgiving others , and Re- format on or new Obedience (hould be a condition of the con- tinuance or renewal of a pardoning A6t, and not of Juftifica- tion ? DoubtlefSjthe general Juftibcation muft be continued, as well as the general pardon : and a particular Juftification I think after particular fins, is needfullaswell as particular par- don : orifchenameiliould bethought improper, the thing cannot be denyed. Judicious 5^y7 faith as much as 1 (yet men were not fo angry with him,) Treat, of Covenant, pag. 20.21. [^A difpojition to good ^rks u necejfary to fpt^i^cation^ being the (qualification of ana^ive lively faith. Good worlds of all fotts art neceffary to our cor,tinunnce in the fiate of fu^ifcation , and fo to ourdml AhfoluiionJfGod^iveopportriyiity : bu'they are not theciufe of^ but only a precedent ejtiJilification or condition to final forgivenefs aid Eternal blifs.'^ And pag. 21 • \This rvalh^- ing in the light as he u inth light, is that qualiflrAticn whereby we become, tmmectiat/y capable ef Chrifls Righteoufnefs^or aSlual participants of his propitiation^ X^hich a the fcle immediate aufe of our Juftificatio?*^ taken for Remi/Jlon of fins or adtial Appro- bAiioH with God. ] And pag. 73. [ fVorkjthen, or apurpofe to walk with Qod, jnfli\ie oitke pajfive (jttaJification cfthefubjeH capable ofjufiification, or as the qualficationofthiit faith which y^/lifittb.^ So he, Bbb 3 5. How C374-) 5- How will you ever prove,tiiac o\itEntering into Lift^mi our continued remijfion or Juftification htva not che famecon- dicions?chat chofe Graces are excluded from one which belong to theother.lndced the men that are for Faiths Inftrumcnta- lity, fay fomewhac to it ^ but what you can lay , I know not. And for them, if they could prove Faith Inftruraental in juHi- fying to nomine^ becaufe it receives Chrift by whom we are ju- ftified ; they would alfo prove it the Inftrumenc of Glorify- ing, becaufe it Receives Chrift by and for whom we are faved and Glorined. And fo if the Inftrumentality of Faith muft exclude obedience from juftifying us , it muft alfo exclude ic from Glorifying us. And I marvel that they are fj loofe and ealie in admitting obedience into the work of faving, and yen not of continuing or confumraating Juftiftcation.when the A- poftle faith, "S; Grace je are faved, by Faith^ Sec ; and fo ex- cludes obedience from Salvation in tkQ general as much as he any where doth from Juftification in particular. 6. But laftly, I take what you grant me in this Sedion, and profefs that I think in effe^ you grant me the main of the caufe that I ftand upon. For, as you grant, i. That faith is not the whole condition of the Covenant. 2. That Repentance alfo U the condition of Remiffion (which is near the fame with Juftifica- tion.) 3 . That obedience u the condition of glorification (which hath the fame conditions with final and continued Juftificati- on.^ 4. So you feem to yield all this , as to our fall jt*flifi- cation at Judgement, For you purpofely limit the conditiona- •!ity of meet faith to our Juflification in this Life. Hut if you yield all that I defirc ('as you do, if I underftand you.) as to the laft juftification at Judgement , then we are not much dif- fering in this bull nef . For I take ( as Mr . Burges doth, Lett. ofJufiificuttoH zpjourcomplcateftand moftpcrf^d Juftifica- tion to be that at Judgement. Yea, and that it is fo eminent andconfiderablehcre, thati think all other Juftification is fo called chiefly as referring to that. And me thinks above all men, you fliould fay fo too, who make Juftification to lie only in fententitJHdicid^ and not in fententia Legu \ And foall that go your way (as many that I meet with do.) If ihen we are jufti- ficd at Cjods great Tribunal at Judgement, by obedience as the 07 T) the feconderypsrt of the condition of the CoYfinant (\\hu:ifi youfcemto yicldj i. We are agreed in the main. 2. I can- not y^t believe rhat our J uPiiHcaticn at that i3ar hath one con- dition, and our Juftification in Law (or in this Life , as conti- iiued)anothcr. He thatdyeth juftiHed,wa$ro)ufttfied inchc hour of "tiying, on the fame conditions as he muft be at f udge- ment. For i . 1 here are no conditions to be performed after death. 2. Stntentia Ltfii tfr (t-UrAia jueliciado juftitie on the fame terms. Add to all this what I grant to you, [that our fu/iificationVfJsen firfi begun here, is by faith {fuppofni Repev fance) before und ■K'ithoHt tht praUict ofobtdience^] and then fee 4iownear we are. The fifth Argument which you mention, is grounded on the common Maxim, T^n eji dtfJinguenoiHm uhi Lex tion Mflinguitt and runs thus: If the Scripture in propounding to man the adacquate Ob jed of jufltfying Faith, (thrift) do not divide Chnft, and fay, | /» believing him to be a Pritji , your faith « juflifjingybut not inbelifvifighim to be King, or Prophet^ cr Head^ but propoundeth Chrift undivided as this Objed ^ then muft not we diftinguifh or divide, but take Chrift entire- ly for the objVd: of juftifying Faith. But the Scripture doth not divide or diftinguifh in this cafe:, therefore we muft not. It is Chrift that muft be Received,ancl believed in : but a Saviour and not a King,is not Chrift. It is Chriil as Chrift. His very Name fignifieth as diredly bis Kingly office ac leaft , as his Prieftly. And if you confcfs that the fame ad of Faith ac the fame inftant Receives Chrift both as Prieft and King , then I ihall ftay my aflent to your opinion till you bring me the Scri- pture that faith, it is faith in this notion ; a ui not in that rphch jufiifies. God fpeaks plainly that "^hofotvtrbilieveth p^all be jttftified from allthings^^Q. / nd you confcfs this 'Bilitving is the Receiving Chrift for King and Priefi ; and that it juftifies as a condition ; and doth not your (unproved j diftindion over- throw this again } Thcfixth Argument which you mention, runs thus -. if Scripture particularly propound Chrift as King, as the Objed of juftifying Faith, then Chrift as King is the objed of it: But Scripture doth fo : Ergo ^c. I have named you fomc places where it fo doth , a little before. The (3^^) Thefcventhis to the fame purpofe with the fifth. You nimetwo icxtsas proving thac Scripture cyeth juftification to the Receipt of Chrift as Pricft only : But there is not a word intheTexcstoihatend. /?o»»3.25. fpeaks of Faith in Chrifts blood, but not a word for excluding Faith in his Obedience, Refurredion, Interccilion, or Power, much lefs excluding our confent CO his full Authority or Office. The word [Only'^ is not in the Text- You may as well fay,that it is ^onlj] by faith inhisiVn, the taking him only under the Notion of a Pardoner or Deliverer ? And is the condition of her D;gnify, only the Taking li im as a Pi ince who is Rich and Hon uurabic e No ; The condition on her part , is the Taking him entirely to all thcfe ul'cs, or in all thcfe RefpeSs.and more ; even the marry- ing him, and covenanting to be his, as a faithfull fpoufe and Subjed ; and firft acknowledging what he bath done for her freedom and advancement, then co take him for her Husband and Lord, that hath done this to advance and free her. And while (he is faithfull .to this marriage covenant, in the perform- ance, (he (hall enjoy thefe Benefits : but if (he forfake hiirj and choofc another, as with him (he received her Dignity, (o with him (he (hall lofe them all. So that ex parte aHiu here is no room for your ^ttateniu and S^inguifhing, But now if the Queftion be intended not ex furte ^Qus,ov, what is the condition on her part, but only what is it in him that (he re- ceives for her Huiband,which doth deliver her ? Why then we fay, ic is his Ranfom , his love and free mercy, ^r And if the Qaeftionbe,whac iskinhimthacdignifiethher ? Why I fay, it IS his Dignity and Riches of which fhc participateth j toge- ther with the fame his free mercy as the JropuHivecaufe, And fo (he is Dignified by Receiving or marrying him qtiattnui a Prince,rich and Honourable, and not quatenm a Redeemer on- ly : and (he IS delivered by taking him as a Deliverer or Re- deemer, and not as an honourable Prince. The meaning of all thfs IS no more,but that he doth not redeem her as a r'rince, nor dignifieher under the notion of a Redeemer .- and fo on biS parr you may Aifttngnfl). But yet as to the conditicnality on her part,, there is no room for dtflirgm fixing at all. For is not this all that Paul ayms at in fpcaking fo oft of Faith in Relation to Cbnfts death and Righteoufnefs, rather then to his Government? to note {jekai i» Cy^fi^f'^^^^'^^^'^^^ i^fti', f,e~] rather then [ychatriffuClofoHraEloffnth is the ccvditi' 0*} .<' JAnd may not this tend to an sccomm )darion between us in thiS Point ? efpecially with thofe Divines chat fay , Faith U taken Relad vcly,when we arc faid to be J uftified by it j and ic (37P) icisfaid,tobc Imputed to us for Righteot^fncfs ? The Lord enlighten our dark underftandings , and give us love to the Truth and one another. HAving done with this, I proceed to your Additional Pa- per, whith I lately received , and for which I am alfo really ihank^H to you. But the Anfwer needs not be long. I . You think the 66.Tkef. hardly reconcilable with the words cited out of prf^, 19 1, of that of Baptifm,/?ow.3.2 5 &5.9But I fee not the leaft appearance of a contradidion Chi ift whom jaflifying Faith receives,doth Redeem us by bis blood,and not chiefly by his Principality J and he favcsus asaSaviour , and rulcth us as a Ruler.crc-. But that faith which on our part is the condition of our intcreft in him & his Benefits,!? the Belie- ving in, or receiving Chrift as Chr ft , or as he is offered to us in ibe Gofpcl/'as theAff. mbiy in their Carechifm well exprefs it. Davepiiin,t^ CHlver^el'^ Throgmot tm^ Mr. T^rton cSNew England {Catech.p^g. J 9.) and many more fay as I in this : but I will not weary you with citarions having been fo tedious al- ready. But I am glad to fee! you yielding to the Truth, (for it is a weighty Point) as you feem in the next words, where you fay, that Chrijis Death is the file or chief oi?j ell of Faith as Ju' flifjing. If you vield once that it and his Prieftly Office is not the fole Objeft, I will never contend wich you about their Precedency, ^hkh U chief. I have confeffed to you, that it is a ifuller (and ordinarily fi'ter) phrafe , to fay , vee arejufiified by faithinh'i hlood^ then to fay, ^e arejffHfiedby fiith in hs Goverrjrney.t, becaufe it pointeth out Relatively the caufality in the ObjcA, and not only the conditionality in the AS. But I think when you refpeft the faid condition cfpeciaily, that then it is the fr.teft fpeech to fay , ^e are ja^iHgd by faith in Chriji. 2. yjOav nex: are all of other Subjei^ts. The fecond is, whe- 1 ther Luke i 2,24 import not 4 denial of Title in Chrifi to Judge. The anfwer is obvious, i. He had not jtbat deri- Ccc 2 ved (380) ved Title from men, which was neccflfary to him thatfliould exercifc the place of a Magillrace. 2. Chriil fpeaks not of Saver Aigntj (that he had: ) but MagiflrAcy (which is diftinft from Soveraignty, as being the Executioner of Lawcs, which SoTcraignry makes, and being under the Law, when the So» veraign <5»^f«/ij is above them.) 3. His Interrogation may perhaps b &C. ] Anfwer, I. Though I do not doubt much of the point, yet I have no mind to meddle with the qaeftion,as it concerns thofe Pagans that never heard of Chrift. Not for fear of any difadvantage thence to the caufe, but i. Becaufe I find God fpeaks fpahngly of thofe to whom he fpeaks not : it concerns not us fo much to know nil Counfcl concerning o:hers. i. Bcciafe it is an ill way of arguing to lay the ftrefs of all on the moll obfcure point ; ( as men do, that ftudy morehow to filence anadverfary, then to fee the Truth ) and to prove chfcarum per cbfcurias. ?.. This is a point that I cannot give you my thoughts of in a few words ; there needs fo much for Explication ; and therefore Ccc 3 be- C380 being but here touched, I (hall forbear. 3. I doubt no' but 10 prove abundantly frono Scripture with much evidencc,what 1 afT.TC in this. 4. It was not the only, nor the firft effeft of hii D;aLh, that Chrift was [ Satisfa^.ion to Godi Jajf c^ for ihi Violuion of the Li^, j 5. That fuch a conditional Lawoc Covenant is g'-an:ed , and exftant in Scripture, is as pUin as moft poiais in the Gofpel : and fure no Cuch thing can be but upon Chrifts death as the meritorious eaufc. 6. So interpret- ing thcfe Texts which are fo to be interpreted, is noevafion : And no Text will prove Chrifts fatisfadion and Merit wholly proper to the Eled. Much lefs thofe which fay. He dulfor all men^ That God intcndeth only the Eled to be certainly faved by Chrifts death, I can eafily prove from many other Texts : But if I (hould prove it by thefe, it were ftrange. It is an ill confequence Q CA^-i/? ^/>^ /cr oilmen ^ therefore his ftttijfa^ian 16 proper to the EleB. J 7. In point of Law the Eled have no more Title to Chrift and his Benefits, then any others ( as Eled before they believe. ) But Gods Decree hath from Eternity appropriated Salvation by Chrift only to the Eled in point of Event. He that determined de eventu^ that only the Eled (hould be faved by Chrift , did yet :hinkit the fitteft way to his glorious ends to make Chrifts Death ^fuffici' ent fatisf^Uionfor all^Sc to make in his new Law a ft ce deed of Gift of Chrift, and alibis Benefits to all that will receive him as he is offered ; yet not engiging himfelf to publilh this Law to every particular man ^ though it be of univerfal extent in the Tenor. The Prornifc names none as included; nor ex- cludeth any.but who do wilfully exclude themfclves. But thefe things require fuller opening. S.Laftly, [Chrifl d)i^g /o:ofiof}ro'^gsyo\2 {ay, is a term that needs as great caution for the true undcrftanding ic , as moft that we mi»kcufeof.The riohtunderftandingofit,isthe main Ground of our fafety and comfort .• The wrong under. ftanding it, is the vety turning point to Antinoraianifm, and the very Primam vivent & u'.t'tmHm moriens, the Heart of the whole Syftem of their Doitrinc. That Chrift in th*; per- fon of Mediator , did fuffer upon his voluntary undertakinc; what wc (hould haveelfe fuffercd,and thereby made fatisfadi- on C383) on to Gods Juftice for the breach of his Law, both Father and Son C whofe Willis one^ agreeing or refo.'ving, that yet ro man ftiould have adual Remiffion or Salvarion hereby ,buc on condition of receiving the Redeemer fort heic Lot d and Saviour ; and thus ChrKtdied loco omy.ium'. this is found Doctrine. That at the fame time it was the fe crct Will or Eternal Decree of the Father • ard the Will of the Mediator dt eventu, to give effedualiy Grace to believe to his Chofen only-, and confrquently that tbey only fliculd be afually faved, and thus he died oiAyloco EltUcrum is alfo found Doc- trine. But that ( hrift in dying did ftridly reprefcnt the per- fon of the finner, fo as either naturally, or morally in Law- fenfe we may be faid to have fatisfi«:d then, in or by him,as the Law calls that the aSionof the Principal, which is done /"fr 'Dclegatum^ Dtpatatftm ^Vicarium (frc. this is the foul of Antinomianfm; and ciredly and ueavoidably infroducerh Juftifica". before Faith, or before we are born-,the nonneceflj- ty of any other Juftification,but irtforoconfcitntiaM certainly overthiowrth all pardon of fin at all , and fo all Petition for Pardon, and all tlanksgivingforic,with thereftof their errors: yea makes man his own Redeemer* But I have been too long already. 1 fenfibly acknowledge the truth of what you fay That this is a matter of great moment, and needi- great confi- dcration. I have bcflowed more confideration about it, then about any other point in Divinity. YOUR UKJe'gned Friend And Brother ( vrho dottht not ere long to meet you in our Center and Reft^ rebe^e ull our Difference in Judgement and K^ ffection will be healed.) Richard Baxter. Kederminfter, June 9. 1651. Sir, T^he multitude of my EnploymenU caufed me to delay the returning you 7ny thoughts of your favourable Ani^ madyer/ionSytil I received your Addi^ tional paper , ivhich made me fo very fenfthle of your I^indnefs^ that I could not but [hatch the next opportunity^ thus truly to' give you my further T^houghtSy as an account of the accept tance andfuccejs of your ^Tatns. fme ao. Sir, 'Y Efterday I received your third Paper dated fu»e 17.' to \ which I thought beft to give you this (Viort Anfwer tqgc- ther, feeing the former were not gone out of my hands. You here touch ( very eafily } on two Subjcft?. I will begin with the later, vU. Your four Arguments againft my Doc- trine of Juftification by the Gofpel Grant or New Law. Your firft is , thai Thii u per refultatttiam ; but fajlification U an aB of Wdl I htit no AEl of Will ii bj neceffary Refultancy ] Anfwer. As it proccedeth from the Inftrument or Foundati- on, it is by Refult.incy : As by that Inftrument it is the Ad of the Legi(lator ot T'rincifal Agent , fo it is an Ad of Will. U 08O was hi* W»l^ at the cnading of the C'ratjf, and ftill is his «^;//, that this his (]ranty or Deed of f?f/>{liould moraUter a^ere & tffeciuf hot vel illos prodticere , at fuch a diftance upon fuch and fuch conditions. The Aft and Effect ot the Law, or Tetta- menr, is the Act and Effcft of the Legiflator and Teliator, whofe Inftrumentit is: But thefaidl.^w orTeftament do:h not egicacittr a£tre, or produce thefccffcccs, till the time that the conditions are performed: ('for it is the Nature of a Morai condition to be added for the fufpenfion of the Effect or event of the Grant, f^c till it be perfornjed. ) Therefore the Rector, Donor or Teftator doth notrficaciter ageretiW then. And therefore he acteth by that his Inftrument then, or not at ail. If you give by Deed or by Will, fuch and fuch porti- ons to forae Children at fuch a term of Age, and toothers when they marry •, The full actual Right is by a meer Reful- tancy, as from the ^n/irumtnt. but by tn Act of f^»7/, as from you; but really from neither before the Term, or conditi- on performed.This is a moft obvious Truth. 2. And as eafie is the Anfwcrto yourfecond. [ // the Covenant jujiifie without Any other jlEi , then it ttdoftr, fanffifieth^Q lorifieth, withcMt anj other. ] Anfwer. In the Propofitions againft Mr. B eel ford, yoaroight have feen this difpelled. For v^rx^ ? Ycukncw by 5'/i*^i^<:4/><7w they mean principally Sandification? ''ut the Dr. faith not that thefe are preparatives to Juftifica ion. Sure you cou'd not fcrioLfly fufpect me to joi.n with the Papifts when thev fpeak of one Subje A, and I of another. The ads of that Seffion will tel you more diff.rerces between them and me, then is worth the while to repeat: and you know bow largely C/^f»w>w<>/>/;< endeavours to prove that by Dfpofjn'cKS 4ind PrepnAtms, The CouriCiU mean U^^mj • and th:^c Ddd - thev (388) ihey would fubdoloufly introduce the Thing, {Merita Ji com* gruo ) by changing the name ; as out of OftM words and others he gathers. 2. And know you not that ChemKuitu pro- fedeth to yield to the foundnefj of thit very fixeh Chapter, whichyou alledge, were it not for thefe guiles thattheyufe, and their evil fenieto advance Merit ? For faith he, Om>nno certus eji' five *nodiu five or do in vtrbo Dei nobid defignatpu e^ pralcripttir, (jpto Dens utltftr cjUAndo vult hominem ad Jufiifica- tiommdedHCtre^ &c. Et (jma^modum ftve ordi^^em iflumdi' vin tfis pr.f^criptum, nonvoluyt ft ditctu fplritus accontmodare, fedntgltgunt & concttlcant ilium , hi dd ff*fiificatio»tm non fro- veaiunt. Fftlt enm Oeut k T^titra & t^^enfu verbi ftti ms erdiri : & •^nte f i^ifiationem optrtet pr^cedere contritionim^ hoe efti [eritm Agmtronem peceatornm^ pavores confcientix ag- nofcentis iram Dei adverfns mjira peccata , (^ dolertiii propttr ptccatum '• irKjuactntritronenonretinetur^fedabpcitHrpr^pO' fitum perfeverandi (fr ptrgtndi infceltrihus. ^Ad hot vero ter- rorti necejfe efi accederefidem, tjHt agnitione ^ flducin miferi' cordid Deipromi^t propter filinm rued atortm^ rurfus erigat & confoletur animum-i ne efpre^ffi differ AfionerHamtis in ^tttrnum txltium. Std fides accedat ad Dtum^ t^uarat^ defideret^petat, npprdhtndat (^ accipiat Remijjionem peccatorurn. Et hoc modo feu crdine in vtrbo Dei defignatt 'viam pxrari DominOiPtfin ipfo, per (^prdpt trip ffim fide confet^uamur <^ accipiamut Jufiifica-' ticnemt ipfa fcrifttira tradit, &c. this alfo he thews Lnthtr ap- proved of. Now I pray you teli me whether hpre be not full as much as Dt« Waxd or I fay ? And do you think Chtmnitistj did join with the Papifts of Trent ^ u.'hcn be confuted them ? I. And if Dr. f^. hadfpoak of Sandification, arethefc not multitudes of our own beft approved Divines, that make all thefe ads to be found in men by way of preparation before Stnftification ? Mr. Rogers of Dedham in his Treat, of faith; Mr. Hcokfr in his Epift. before that book, and oft in his own book, affirmeth not only a common preparatory contrition, Hungring and thirfting, Hope.LoveJoy, but even effedual fpecial Vocation it felf,and fo faith to go before Sandification md JuiliBcation. And indeed what man denyecb it? except Mr. C389) Mr. Ptmhlt and a very few that with hhn make Sandification and Vocation to be all one ? which how far I approve my fcif, I have (hewed m Treat, of Reft, Part. i. Chap. 8. fccr. 2. g.4. 4. But look into the words, and find out what error you can I Which of thofc acc« do you tlink goes not before Julti- ficacion ? And if they go before, fure you will not denv but they do forae way or other difpofe or fit a man for pardon •• orelfe God would not have prefcribed them before it. i. Ca- tholjck faith is the Belief oftheCatholickDoftnne. I am fure you take that to go before Juftification. 2. I f Hope of par- don go not before, then Affiance fto whxh Hope iseffeittial ) goes not before ; Yea, then Believers do dcfpair iu the Aft of iielieving to juftification, 3. I never knew the man that doubted whether fearof Punifliroent went before. 4. The fame I may fay of grief for fin. jf. And if all the doubt be • ofTurpo/e agmnfifin, a»d for Amcndmtnt^ I . Sure they that fay Repentance is pre-rcquifite to juftification, will not exclude ^ Pu*poje of Amcndmtrt. 2. And fure thofe that faySancti- ficaiion and Vocation are ail one, and go before Juftification will hardly exclude ic. 3 . They that take a turning fom Ido!§ to the true God, as the end, robe in order before a Turning from Infidelity to the Mediator as the way , which is by Faith • thcfc muft needs think that fo much of A^u^l Amendment goes before Juftifica ion (je believe tn God, believe alfo in mt.) 4. They that fay, Fjnth alone jufl'jitth^ but not the faith ^hich it alene^ will furely include this Ptirpofe as Antecedent. Dave- »<»Hf,Mr.!34//.&c,;exprefsit,andinfiftonir. Dr. Twifs cal- leth works OMedia ^icaufadifpofuiva : But it were cndlefs to^ cite Authors in this Point. 5. ButT tell you my mind. 1 take this Purpofe of obeying Chrift de futuro to be very Faith it *felf For faith is a Covenant- reception of Chrift, and to take him for Chrift and King- Redeemer, and to Pur p fe,yca Cove- nant to obey him, are but one thing. And therefore a Giving up our felves as Redeemed* fubjects, and fo a purpofe of b' ing actually fubject, are faith it feif. And then they muft needs be prerequifite to Juftification. So that whethr you take thefc Acts for common or fpecial, fuely they go before J uftification • Ddd 3 as *sDr. fVard hkh. Dare you tell any man of yout Hearers that though he have not (o much as a Purpofe to mend, yec he is juitihed by Faith ? Truly I'uch paffages bauc emhitcercd the minds of Papifts, and many weak ones againft our Doctrine of JuUification .- and given great advantage to the ^ntino- mijis. Forwhatyou fay of contrsdiding Dr. DoVcttame and Mr. I^emhlci lanfwer, i. Though they dff r between them- felvcs in the point of j unification, and one hath wrote a con- futation of the others Dodrinc, yet you will never lliew rac wherein this fpeech of Dr. fVard doth con;radid citjiet of them. Indeed if Dr. i^ard had determined whether he meant common Difpofitionsor fpecial, perhaps he migh: have con- tradidedoncof them.they dofo far differ themfelvcs. For you know Mr. T<'»^^/* not only in his Vindic. (7r.it. but even in the place you cite (!:4^,42.43.) takes thofe Ads to be of fpecial Grace, or a part of Sanflification, which moft Divines do judge to be preparatory thereto. And for my part, I judge at Mr. /'^w^/f,;f you take but that pointintoquahheit.which I have aHlrtcd Treat, of Reft, fecond Edit, fart 3. cap.il.thAZ the finccrity of G ace as faving, lyeth not inihe bare nature of the Ad, but in the prevailing degree which Morality may fpecifie.then [ fay asMr. T«'w^/^ pag.45. that thefe Vertues which are (many of them by our Divmes) reckoned as Difpo- fitions to RegenerBfion, are if they betrue,the main parts and fruits of Reg'-^neration. 2. But I admrehowyourtiould think that fpeech of Dr. IVArdj (linuld be a j >ining with the Papifts againft Dr. Dow- name and Mr. TembU, when Dctvna'ne tells you that the Pa- pifts difpuce of another fubjed then we do^ while they mean one thing by it, vsl Sandificationjand we another : (upon which ground Mr. i^^otton is ready to throw out the Difpute, as being al>out one Term, but dtfferent fubjects. ) And Mr. Pemhle anfwers (~/^<«f the Jyj^umtnt o/Bellarmine from ehae chapter of the CoukcHs fixth fejf. ii framed on the Error ^hich pfitJ otitoffyame the v>ho/e Di/ptite^ viz. that Regeneration a:*!l SrinUificitfoyjis a'lono th'n^w-th ^ufii^cation^ and that to JMj( fie a finner is nothi»g eife but to do aVeaj inherent corrup- tion C39I) tionby infttfion of inherent RighteoHfntfs. J And ^o Mr. Fem- ale difputcs againft it only as thus meant : And Calvin alfo in his Ar.tfdot. on this 6, Sr^. 6. chap, never once finds faulc with them here, but only for afcribing that to free Will which they (hould afcribe to effcAual Grace j and for making Jufti- fication to be Sanctification, but not a word for making thefe Acts to be pracparatory to Juftification , ( TraElat. Thtologic, fagl^J 388.) /^^»V. et^am iy^rttculo: facfthat. Parifienf. Ayt. /^.defeniM pAj>i(ii'o. Every man that makes Faith tO contain many ads(moft Divines fay , Notitiam, Ajfer.fpim & fdnci- am, Arttcftus names five J muft needs make all thofe Ads to be prerequifice to Juftificnion, befides Repentance,and befides preparatory ads of common Grate. Neman that I know doth feeni to come nearer youthen Dr. Dorvn.tme in placing jullifying faith in Affcnt, and fo not taking it to contain io many ads : And yet even he tells you, that [jhe a[} of the fVi/i (iothcc^icur to Fai'h ami that fahh vehich ij a (jjifit of the windy is featedM vrell in the fViIl oi in the ZJ nderfl anding : and this 14 Confe^ed bi Fathers ^ Schoolmen ^ and themcdirn Dehors of the IRomipj Church.'] Treat, oflttflf. pag. 358. 359. Yea for ought I can underftand he extended faith as far as I, and meant as I do herein, p*i^. 348349 352»hefaith, ^^'By the former vohich is a bare Affent, \tf ^0 afttr a fort Credere Chriftum, rfr- hnorpledge him to bt the Saviour of thofe that believe in him -' By the letter, vrhxh if the lively and (Retinal A^tnt rvori^JKg on the Heart .^ Xve do credere in Chriftum, and receive him to be our Sa^ vioHr^ \}rhere!^pon necfjfarily fo/lofveth Affa^^ce in Chrtjl ^ and love of him 04 a Sav ot^^. Thus then by a true Belief ^e receive and Embrace (fhr'-fh , in our judgement by a lively /iffent : in our Hearts, de(iring earnefilj to be partakers of him ( rrhich De- (ire rve exprefs by our Prajtr^ ) and in our tf^illt rtfolvm^^ ro ac- knowledge and Profefs him to be our only Saviour , a«V to refl upon him alone for Salvation. So that a true lively and tjftilu- al faith is the \\"}rl^ of the rvkole foul ; thst is to faj^ oa XYell of theHrartatoftheMiy.^^K'ym lO.lO Ad 16. 14. Ad. 8. 37."] fo far Dr. T)ovename. Is not this as much as I fay ? and the very fame ? I only mention him (having m:\nv more at hand ) bccaufc I. you urge him, and 2. Iconjcdure, youthinkyou go CJpi) go his way about the nature of Faith. If this be not as much as I fay do but add what he faitb,^4^. 1 5 . and I think you have as much ; (in this particular. ) Q The true meamng (faith he^ of the Oue[iion, [rvhether vte are jHJlifielb} Faith or hy iVorkj?'^ is not as oppofitg the inward Grace of Faith to the onf^a^-d alls of obedience^ ^hlch indeed a e tht f^^ hit 1 of Faith : But at of' fo fl'g the Right eofifnefs of Chrifi apprehended by Faith , to the righteoujnejs ^hichk Imhtrtftt in our jehes^ and performed by cttr felves. And truly Sir,T ufe to charge my confcience to enquire what ' may be the plain ineining of a Text, and co embrace tha^and not againft Light to be carrycd by prejudice : and this confci- ence tells me that this Rcfolution of Dr. Dotvname being fo plainly agreeable to Taui^ is not to be reJeAed. When 1 im- partially con(ider what Pan/ dviycih at, my Judgement tells me that ic was never his intent to advance any one Hmple A^ of the foul into the office of juftifying,excluding all the reft ; but to advance Chiift againft mens own works which ftood up then in competition with him : And that Paul never meant that Af- fent Juftifics, but not yeffet/icceptare,Cofifentire, Eligere^Fidu' ciam habere^ &fc. Suppofe chere be a mortal Difeafe that hath feized on a Ci- ty, which no ma n can cure but one only Phydtian : nor he but by a Medicine that will coft him as^uch as the lives of the Ci- tizens are worth : This Phyfitian comes and fends to them,and offers them all without exception , that if they will but take him for their Phyfitian and truft him with their lives , he will not only man feft his skill, that he is able to cure them, but he will do ic, and pay for the Phyfick, and not put them to pay a penny. Hereupon Tome th it are his enemies, and fome that are miftakenin the man oponfalfe reports, and fome that judge of h«m by' his ou;ward appearance,do all concludejfthis is fome Deceiver, he is not able to do any fuch matter ; none but fools will truft hiro,and venture their lives in his hand ; let a^ ftir about and labour and we (hall overcome it, and do well enough.] Ontbecontrary the Phyfitian, having great com- paiiion on he poor deluded people, knowing their cafe better (hen (b&mf<£ivcs, and having already bought the remedy for them Cm) tbem, doth fend to them again, to cell thero alf,that thofcthat will believe him and rrofi him, he WiUcerrarnly cure , and the reft fliall dye every man of them, for all they think to labour ic away. I pray you now put our Queftions here impartially : I . Is believing and trufting the Phyfitian fome one fingle a6^, excluding all others ? Or was it ever his intent to advance fome one aft of theirs? 2. Would it not be a learned madncfs to dilute whether the Phyfitian make the aA of Affent.or the a A of Willing only : ©r Accepting, ^t. or Affiance, or Recum- bency to be the Healing aft ; and of what faculty th«t ad was which muft heal them ? 3. Isic the Trufting and Receiving him only i . as one that hath brought a Remedy : 2. Or as one that cao and will cure us by it: or g. Alfoasone that muft be obeyed in the ufe of that remedy for the effeding the cure ; which of thefe is it that he intends muft be the Objcd of their Act? 4. Doth QTrufting him and Believing him exclude a Kefolution to obey his Diredions and the future actual obe- dience? Surely no; it includetb both : But it excludeth both their trufting any other Phyfitian, and their thinking to work away the Difeafe and cure themltlvcs. 5. Doth Trufting or Believing him cure thefe men as the Inftrument ? or is it only a condition without which he will not cure them? But thif QueftioB with you I may fpare. Uftly, You qutiion, {Ho^lwiBsvoU Tompfons fffimtn eftbe httnifioncf Juftifcalicn Ufontheecmmitting a fm that ^4fiitheccnfci$nci^ ffleftJmak^ JujiififaUtn 4 contintttd A^ HtincoMditionofoh^i^crf'^ jiftfW, j. Doyou notdifccrtl tliat the QueftioD coiivernetb you and every man, as much as mc? and that it i^ of a^ijodl di^cutiy upon your own an4 others opinion, 81 upon mirie ? Pr VownMmtwiW tell you as well as I, that Juftificatioh if a contioaed Act. So will Dr. Tmfj, and all tha^ with him do take it for an Immanent Act. Your felf, who take it for a tranHem act but once performed, do yet Judge (^ doubt not J that our Juftified eftate which w thetffccsof i^J? permanent : and A«rflaUon$ of Reconciled, Pardoned, Adoptcd.art (ontinoed . Alfo you and they,I hopc^ will confefs; chat Juftificadon piflivc li cpntinetd on the cott- dirion of continocd fijih. Now | weold ktiow how ycu will E c c ; svoiii dff(?i^ of a C(irj|>jaqj Uiip r\mea unbelief gives him ,a ,forf, whkb istoocojumoA? as you anfw.er^fo (^/illl! Ifyb^uftynis faith tf not overcome lubicvi ally, when unbelief is prevalent in the prefent A^ , I will Tiy fo of his obeJience. 2. , You know raoft Divines fay i^ ramcji ^s^^thac obedience tti condi- tion of the con;inu^ticQof Ja^iicacion, (o^^V ^^cy fty th^ faith. only it t[)ft.Inftr;iaieci oif^J^ftii'yin^, ) and how will ibcy anfweryou? ?. Youki\p;wtl^a tall fay, that obedience Hg condifion o£ Salvation, and fp of oqr prefent Title toSal- vation. N^w how will they avoiii Tompfom Doctrine of Inter- cifiooof that Title, to Sal^wioa, upon the committing of fDcb fins ? 4. It i^ m>Cp,Qrfcd ol^edience which I fty is the conditiofi^but tincere .V Aq4by ^nccre \ mean fo mucq as mvf cxprefsthat weunfeignedly tatuChrift ftill for bur Lord ana Saviour: And fo it is not ev?ry fin that I fay will forfeit or interrupt our Juftifjcation and qmfeitto difcontinuc,(that is, lofe our Title, oj; change ourKelationinLaw: ) hobot every gfofs fin : bac only that fin which is ihconfiU'eht with lheconcin«ed Accepting Chriljt for our' Soveraign : that'fih which brcjks the main C.overi^ni, ("of wl)'ch fee Dr. fttfiomi large,) as Adultery or Dclerticwi doth in naarrJage : A deny- ing God to be our ^^^^ or Chrift t<^ be Qfjr Chrift, by our woirks, while we confefs him in word : An adualexpliciteor implicite Renunciation of Chri0, and tai^tn^chefleni foronr Qiaffrer , and the pleafingof it for ourhappinefs; or astbc cPW^iifow^Mw/ following a falfe Chrift. .'Wow, I hope that no jllftified perfon doth evr comn»5f,.7ii»»s fin , mych lefs any elca and juftified man, of whon) fct^pfct* fpeaks.You may fee tferfugh his ninth chap. pArtz, that 7'owf/cw erred through aiifnnderftanding wherein the fincerity of Faith as juftifying doShcQIifift: (I wifti many, more do not fo. ) He thought Xhn Jaftificition did follow every actof undi/ftrabled Faith j bDconlyrootcdFajtb would; certainly perfevere; and tbere^- ^ore the unrooted (Though true Believers.) might lofe their jl^iHcatioD,, if they were Reprobates ( Prdfciti as he calls ibcfl))) or have it i^tcrr^pted, if they were elect. But if he M kaoWD^what I baveajOferted ifttbe aforelaid esf»i i.part $. of % (3PT) of Refit Eitt.2') that the very fincerity of faith as juflifying, lyeth not in the natural being of the act CQcerly, but the pre- valent Degree and Hioral Tpeciiication, then he would have known,chathis Murootedoviti were nev«r juftified, & therefore never loft it. Andif inaffertingjuftification by the only act of Fiith, he had not over- looked the ufe of the habx.hehad not fpokc fo much of Incercifionof Juftification, through in- terruption of the acts, where the Habits remain. ( Of this I rauft further eiplainroy felf, where it is morefeafonable.) His Objections p^, 2.1. c*^.5.p^^f. I. I have anfwered in the place before cited. Yet even Tew/j/tfw deayeth that ever (ins once pardoned do return, orJuJiificauontmAptccaUs fcmelremiffit Mmitti. ^ pag.ii.part..i.cap.2.) yi/i f,irjonaw qna Mliquandf JHJia fuit, pefe contrahert^ & aliquando M^lu centrahert ftr nc Vi^ftccata^ novMm rtatnm irt Divtn€ (^ mortis dterne ' S&tbfC it if nor t6e lofs of the firft juiiification thajt .he aderteth. I corKJude then that as you and others apfwer Tempfon^ juftfo wiiU, Cif you do it well : ) for it conceroeth my caufe no more then yours,or other m^ ns. But Sir, you have drawn me fo neer the difficulty which per- plexech me, that I will now open it to you. How to avoid the InterciHon of juftificatfon, is a queftion that bath longtrou- ^bled me : not on any of thefc terms proper to my own judge- jnem : but how on your Grounds,or any Orthodoi Divines it will be avoided. I would know i. whether we are GuHty . (not only/4£?», ftdfana) of every fin we commit? or of fucb fins as Dav«Vj, before Repentance ? if not guilty : then what need of Pardon, of daily praying Forgive us our Debts, or of a Cbrift to procure our Pardon ? If we are Guilty , how can that confift with a juAified ftate } Reams efi obllgatie di ?#• ; nam. The leaft fin unpardoned.makes obnoxious to condem- nation and Hell : He that is obnoxious to then;i, is not at pre- fent juftified. Here I am much puzled, and in the dark. In «my y^pW. I have flightly touched it , but foas doth not ^WMr tart iAt.eUeQ,H0>» | deny the Inrercifion of univerfal Juftificatr- on. Yet I dare not fay but that a Believers fins may be un- pardoned till he Repent, Believe and fcek pardpn. And I d&rf not thinki that Cbrift tcach^tb ns to pray only for pardon 1f» Eee a " -^ ' fcr» /or# c6nffitHtU^ or only of the tempowl puniihment, nor only forcontinuanceof what wehad before. Buc how to make pcrfonal un verfal uninterruprcd Juftification confift with the Guilt of one fin, or with one fin unpardoned, here is the knot. Our tiritifli Divines in Dohfjm^.Atl.'ie Per fever. Thf.^.paj^: 166. fay, that believers hjfMchfinsRtAtum moriir inCHrrHnt. PrUeaux LeCl.6 de pfr/iv.'pj^.Sofaich, they to riatum f^. t\i^ytht7 certainly incur Gods diffleafure And credteA merit ofDratIo , And deferve DamnAtion/bftt de hc-O bring it not. Now/ all this opeperfi rot mine underftandmg to lee. How a man is Rem ntortU, and yet perfectly juftified (and fo,non'condemnandids etitm in fen- UntiaLegii) at the fame moment of time. And were it a thing that (hould te futurutp, ("which we may fuppofc ) that he (hould dye in that ftate, whether he fhouM be jaftiHed at Judgement, and fo be faved,or not ? Sir, though 1 refufe not to accept your further Animadverfions on the former pointf, yet (being indeed fatisfied pretty well in them)I chiefly intreat that you would communica te to me your thoughts of this one Point as foon as you can, if you have any clear way to dntyc the knot : and if your Grounds conduce to it more then mine, I (hall like them better. Sir^ pardon the prolixity here, aud Acrimony elfwhere of TcHr unfeigned well- ^iltt r, Richard BaxteRp 091) H E Reader wnfi undtrjiand that finct thi H^riting $f this , / havt entitavcurtd to clear thu point inmy^irt^ions for Ptace ofConfcienct. T» which now J add hnt thu^ that hfidts a Plenary Guilt or Remifflon^ there feems to In a Guilt and Rgmiffion that art both i>ut imperfefl and of a middle f^rt : that u , that m in Pctcri ati of jiu^ the hahit of faith remaineJ, ' fo wtth hu Guilty a ftarc of fufisfieation remained : At none of bis old /ins returned on him, ft the Covenant of Grace upon hif Habitual Faith did hinder the Guilt from being Plenary or fixe ei, by beginning a Remiffion • / fear not to call it an imferfeU Rf mi/fion : The Law doth pronounce Death on a man for every fin ^ f^ itii fofar in farce at to determine that Death is both deferved and due to this man fof this fin. But at the fame injlant, though after in order of nature, the Gofpel that ^iveth pardon to 'Belit- verss doth give an /mperfefl pardon to D^y\d, ?etcr and fueh Habitual Believers as foon as they fin^ before Faith and Repen-' taucefor that fin be aEiuall ; and their Pardon will become pie- nary whfn they aHually Repent and Believe. Their Sin is like the fault of a Kings Son or SubjeB^tbat in a P ajjton psould firikc the King^ ^htn jet Habitually he hath a loving Loyal heart to him. He deferveth Death ^ and bj Law it may he his dm ; but he 14 a Sonfti&t and the King wiU not take this advantage Mgainfi him, though he wtU not fully pardon k'm^ till he fubmit and ia- ment hu Fault. We are fiill the Children of God.notwithfiand- ing thofefins that go agtinji the Habitual bent of our Heart f( for thats the Tryal ; ) but muji havi actual Faith and Repentance before we /hall have full pardon : fVhetheryou will call that Par- don Which the Proutife giveth upon metr habitual Repentance, A vertual Pardon, and that ^hich it givethon actual Repentance » an adual Pardon ; or What name you will give it^ Cleave to eonfideration j but compleat it is not in a cafe of hey nous ftn , till tA^ual RepentoMCt : Though it may be in a cafe of fame *#»- Ece 3 kffown^ Op8) Iftiown^ unobftrvti »r forgotten infirmitiet. For thi fttll c$ni> HoH is Mtccftwy to a fttll T*4rdo)t. 1:1 1 is nt4r the ttift of 4 mtn that hath a Patd^n iranted him for Afterder, bm far ^nMvf fome action to be performed, he hath not yet poffeJJloH oftt^And cmh* '^^nvtjet plead it. If jon ask. ♦»' *''^ (+oi) Queftioru Whether the Faith which Taul oppofeth to JJ^orJ^ in the Point of fujlijjcatmj be one only Phyfical Adl of the Soull^g. OR^ Whether all Humane Ads, except one Phyfical A(5l of Faith, be the Works which arc excluded by Taul in the Point of Ju- ftification < Ncg, 1 PUT tbefe two Queftions together for brevity and Elucidation of the Matter in doubt ; for fo in eifcdl they are but One. avoiding all unneceffary Ex- plication of terms concerning which we are agreed^it is but litde that I have need to fay for your undcrftanding of the fenfe of the Queftion. i.It isherefuppofed that Pig Faith af- ter his irfi jHi}i\ic4tion^ even as long as he liveth^ then the Faith Vehicb Paul cpp -feth to rvorkj ii «»' only one numerical AH ( be- caufe that firft Numerical Aft doth not continue with us. ) But the AvtecedcKt u true i as appeareth i. from the fore- mentioned In^srce of Abraham. 2, f rom the necelLty of a continued ABtfe juftification: For the Pa/Jlve elfe would ceafe, and we fhould be unjuftified. if God did not continue tofoigive us, and ftill aftively repute us juft,and accept us as juft and impute Righteoufnefs to us, and his ^ Jofpel-Grant did not continually juftifie us, ( as every f«W<«wff»r//w conti- nually cauleth the Relation J wefhould ceafe to be juitifiad : And Gods aftive Juftification continueth not without the con- Fff 2 tinuancc C404-) tinuance of mans Aftual or Habitual Faith .- Otberwlfc he (hould juftifiean Infidel , and he fhould juftifie afterwards in another way,and on other terms then he did at firft.3.Froni the continued Efficacy of Chrifts Merits, Inrerceflion and Co- venant, which daily juftitie us. So that he that faich, that he was never juftified but once at one raomcnt,and by one nume- merical Ad of Faith, rauft fay that Cbrift was his Juftificr adu- ally but for a raoment,and that he will not be beholden to hint to juftifie him any more. And yet that no man may have a pretence of quarrelling about meer words, that hath a mind to it,let it ftill be remem- bred, that as the word f Juftification ] is ufcd ro fignifie the firft making a man juft that was unjuft (relatively or qualita- tively,) So I confefs that God, that Chrift, that the Covenant do juftifie us Univerfally but once ^though particularly from particular fins often i And thus It is but one Ad of Faich by which we are juftified Relatively, and not the Habit at all. But as Juftification is taken for the fame Ad continued ( though the mutation onus be not aheodem ttrmim ) fo wc are juftified every moment, and have a juftifyin^ faith conti- nually, and are juftified by the Habit, at leaft as much as by the Act, and in fome refped more. The Sun doth as truly Illumintre our part of the world all day after ,as at Sun rifing, and by the fame Action or Emanation in kind : But as Hlumi- Tjating is taken for turning night into day , or illuminating the dark world from its darknefs,fo it doth only illuminate it from break of day to Sun rifing. Your Leafe of your houfe or Land dot hfirft make you a Tenant of no-Tenant at the firftfealing and delivering : but it may by thelhme fort ofadion conti- nue your Right tiii it expire, and fo continue you a Tenant ; And thus we arc continually juftified by God, by Chrift, by the Covenant and by Faith. Now as to the fecond kind or matter of Unity ( of an Infe- rior Genus and Superior [pedes ; ) this is two- fold. i. As the Acts of mans foul are fpecified and denominated from the Fa'-fthiesOY PoWers : or ( if any deny that realdiftinction of faculties) from the Objects of Intellection, VolitroD, c^f.ge- nsrflly confidered. 2- As the acts of the foul are fpecified by by x\\i\tfpeclalOhjtUs ( though not fpecisi fpecUii£im£. ) As to che former, the queftion is one of thefe two ( which you will in terms, for they are one in fenre ) pvhethtr the ah of Faith which Paul opfofeth to ^orks in fttfiijication^he only an aii of the Inte/Ieci,or only an aU of the Will / Or, iVhtther it have, only Entity and Verity, or only Goodnefsfor its Objert ? And m the fccond cafe the Queftion is this, whether God alont^ or Chriji Alone, or the'TrotfiifealonC', or Pardon or RighteoHJntfi alone ^ cr Heaven alone, &c. be the Oi>']e^ of that Faith ^'hich Paul oppofeth to workj in fullific.ition. But the thing intended in our Queftion is de fptcie fpecialif- fima, tPhethir it be but one fpeci.il aSi which Paul oppcfth to Workj in JuffifiC'ition, i^erc are three more Propofitions that I fliall handle in order, though the laft only beneceLfary to me. Propofition 2. The Faith nhichViu\ oppofeth t9 rvorkj in fuJiific.itioK , id not «nly an Act of the Inteilfettnor only of the Will. • ^ I fhall fay but little of this, bccaufc I have among Prote- ftants but few Adverfaries. The Papifts indeed feat it in the Ir.tcllciS only : and fo doth CAmcro (calling it a Perfwafion } and fome few Pioreftants : fome few ochers ( as Amtfuis ■■ fomenmes) pliceiconly in the Will, and take Aflent to be but a prefuppofed AA : and they call it Affiance, or fas y^wf/t'^jalfo Elt^im, Acceptance^ or Co»/fKf,orembracing,or Recumbency, orfuchlike. P^w/'/ftaking i luth and Good- ncfsto be all one,and thcUnderftanding and Will for all one, takes alfo Affent and Affiance for all one ^ but I fliall go on the fuppoftcion that his fingular opinion is commonly difallawed ; however the iVof/y?]f, and many others deny the realDiftttv- dion of Faculties, The common Vote of PfoceftdtTt Dk- vinesis,that Faith is in both Faculties, the Intdled and Will,, and hath foricsobjrA the Entity of Chrifts perl'an, and che Verity of the Gofpcl,and the goodnefs of Chrift and hts bene- fi'sciVred, which Faith accepteth. Divennnts -xVortis arc plain and true, Decer-m. Qu.38.pag.174. Jnactu fi^'eijujiifi" eantis totaa>nma fe convertit ad caufattt ittjlificanttnt : And qu. 37, pag. 1^6. Fides ilU ^uim Scriptnra agnofcit ha- F f f J '" lit bet infe complicatum aClnm Voluntatis & IntelleSlut'—-^ A'f ^ nobis Abftirdnm/ed valde confeKt^meum vUetur aClnm ilium , & Tn^i c* T^ uifMriy which .'igni- fie Affiance, and fuch an Affiance as is the act of the Will a« well as of the Intellect. 2. becaufe the Scripture ofcen putteth [jVilling (4-07) []fr»/A'»^] as equipollent to Believing- in Revel. 12.17. ivhofoe' i/^r Will> let him tal^e the vff^teref Life freeh"] whet e fVt//inir and Talking are both acts of che Will, and the faith in quefti- on-, fo m other places. 3. The Scripcure callcth it by the name of I\e€eivi»iChi'\i\^foh.i.i2. Col. 2.6. whch is che Accep- tance or confent of the Will. 4- The Scripture ofcen makes Faith to be the Internal covenanting and clofureof the heart with Chrift, which is the ace of the Will ; an J therefore ic per- fwddeth wi:h the Will to this end ; and accufeth men as un- willing, and calleth them llefurers,lSIeglecters,Slighters,llejec- tf.'rs, Dcfpifersof Chrift, that are Unbelievers ( privutively. ) I trouble you not to cite che Texts as beinp needlefs, and done by many. Beiides that f as in the former Argument ) the l-'ro- mife,Chrilt,Pardon,Life, and other good things, as gt»od, are ficquentlymide the Object of Faith. Argumeac ^. The Veracity of God is the forma! Olfjfct of Fiurh. 'But the Vtracit) of G}d U hU Goodnsfs ( or partia- pHethat leafl Aimachof h^s Goodnefi as of hisfVifdom ani hn PoWer : ) therefore the G^odnefs of God 14 the formal Object of Faith: and coyjjeqnentlj it ii dnactof thetVill. God cannot Ije^ htCAHfe he u perfectly good^xvife and ro\}ffr full. Obje^- But(fiy fome Papirts) AH theft acts thdt you mention here^ are Love and not Faiih'.Fatth doth but affent-,and Love con- fentethor accepteth. Anfuf. 1. Do you not your felves call it fides formata cbaritate ? And why then may not we call it faith ? 2. The Scrip:ure callech itFaichinthephrafes formentioned, Tngii Iv 7u al'JM.-n rn^c-liiv liiy^i^iv, (^c. and therefore it is Faith. 3. Though fometimes in other cafes the Apoflle diftinguifh Faith, Hope and Love 5 yet when he fpeaketh of Faith as ju- ftifying, aad*s the form of a Chriftian, lie comprehendeth Love to Ghrirt as Saviour in it, and a confidence in him , fuch as in com.nfion Language we call Hope. As Love (Igmrteth the PalHonof the foul, ic may be a confequent ; but as it is but t\itvelleChrifium^C^ heneficiaobUta , fo it is faith it felf, as Aiaccoviui and Chamier have truly told the Papifts. It W4s a fiiihin Chrift (though beginning to finkjchats cxprefled Luk. 24.3.1,. (4o8) I^e^ji'^. 1 [ ^«f ^* truftdthat'u had bten he that/honld hive redeemed I [rAel.'\ Our Iranflators have put We Trujied tor ^e Hoped^ becaufe they thought the figniftcation the fame, or elfe chcy would not (urc have done in. And when the Apoftlc faitbjthat: E"?7^';-7j ik-ni^ouiva" J^px^iJ, Heh. 1 1. i. If we may denominate rhe a(f\ from the Objed , we may fee thac he there makes Faith and Hope to be co-eiTential. And when Chrift is called Xf;st\ » 'fc/^> ii/^f, Chrift our Hope,iZ feems hope there is but an aS of Faith. And fo 2 Cor, 1 .10. i Tim. 4. 10. To H? ^fijiification. Argument \.\{ many or all thefe art fo linked together, thac. to believe one of them as revealed in Scripture , is to believe more or all, then it is not any one of them alone that is the objed of that Faith which Paul oppofeth to works. But the ey^ntecgdent IS true,a$ is evident, e. g. To believe in Chrift ^\s to believe the promife of the Gafpel concerning Chri^. For there is no ^f//f/without a "^ord of revelation to believe.So that here Chrift and the Promife are neceffarily conjunct, and Chrift and the Gofpcl Hiftory. And to believe the Go ffiel with a Divine Faith, is to 'Selisve.godt veracity , and to believe the *.jofpcl becaufe of Gods Veracity : For this is the Ohji^um formate without which there is no faith. So that Believing in God is effential C4-°?) elTentiai to all Divine faith. Alfo materUS; ^ to 'Stiievi U Chrif}, is to Bttieve in him at 9ur Saviour , to fave m from the ^uUe of fin, even as to hlitvc in a I'hjfitittn is to Truft on him to cure us oi our Difeafes. So forf^tveneft of fin, being an end cdential CO Chrifts Office, ic is efiencul to our Faith in Chrift. So aifo to believe in Chnft as a Saviour, is to be! eve m him m one thjit ii able anJ mlling to reconcile f^,and bring US to the/tf- vour of God : And fo C^o^ and his favour and Reconciliation with him are ends eflential to the office of a Saviour fas health is to the Phyficiansjand therefore they areeffencial to our Be- lief m A Saviour . The fame may be faid of eternal Life ; ^o thHtyoumay fee that thefe haveertcncial refpcds to one ano- ther, and Chrift cannot be believed in alone without the reft as co-efTcntiais refpedively in the obj : d of our f.«»ith Nor cao ihcPromife be believed without believing in the Promifer and Promifed. Argumenr 2. The Scripture rffft txf^fflr ntaketh m4ny fucft Ob'leS^s ofthj-tf^ith which ]^i\l\oppgfetb to vfork^s in fnfltficatttn j therefore fo mufi v>e, Rom. ^.22,24,25^26. There are exprefl mentioned all thefe Oojccts of juftifying faith, i. The Righuoufmfs of God, 2, The Perfon offifiu Chrift^ % . Redemption by Chrift , anJ hii fro'si iatory blood. 4. Remfiion of fins faft, y. God at 4 fuftifiir of Believer t -, fee the Text. Rom 4 3,5.6,7,8,17 20,21,24,25 There arc all thefe ob- jects of Juftifying faith expreffed, even when the work of Ju- ftification is defcribed. i . God as Revealtr and true : 2. Goi Oi fufiifier. 3 . Righteoufnefs -, impntation of tt\ fergivenefs of fin^not tmputir,gie. 4. Godas Omnifcent. 5. Uod as Omnipo' tenf. 6. Jeffts our Lord, 7. The death of Chrtf for onr offences. 8. The Refurre^ionofChriji forourjM(tification. 9. God at tkeraifer ofChriji from the Deal Read the words, and you (hall find them all exprefly mentioned. I think it fuperfluous to cite more Texts. Prop.4. Thefatih rvhich Paul oppofeth to rvorkj fi the bttftnefs of Jttfitficat.on, i-s not any one fif}gle Physical a^ in Specie fpe- cialilfima: Nor ^at tt ever the mea^'t'^g of Paul to exclude aH M^t exeept fomc fmh one, from fulUfcation , nnder the name of ^crkt, G g g ^Qt f<[^?l'6) for the proof of this, it is done already, if any one of the three former Propofitions be proved. To wh;ch I add Argu- ment I. from An injlance of fame other fa^'ticulars. If any or all the following particular Acts be fuch as are not to be recko- ned with works-, then i:: is no otic act alone that Paul oppofeth to works, Bat all Of fome of the following aces are (ucli as are not to be reckoned with works excluded. Ergo^c^c. Eg. I . An AfTcnt to the truth of the Gofpcl in general as the Word of God. 2. A belief on Gods Veracity in this expreft. :^. An AfTent to the Truth or the Word that tellethus that Chrift is God. 4. An Aflentto the truth of the Article ofChrifts Manhood. 5. An Aflentto the Truth of the Article of his conception by the Holy Ghoft, and being born of a Virgin. 6. And to the Article of his being born without original fin in himfelf. 7. And to the Article of his finlefs holy life. 8. And to the Arcicle of his adual death. p.And that this death wasTor our fins. 10. And that God hath accepted it as a fufficicnt ilanfom/acrificeor Attonement. 11. And that he adujlly rofe again from the dead,and overcame death, i 2. And that he is the Lord and King of the Church, i;;. And that he is the Prophet and Teacher of the Church. 14. And that he is a- kenied into Heaven and Glorilicd>God and n]4in.i5. Andthar he.isnowour Interceflor & Mediator with the Facher..i6.;And ihac he hath purchafed by his Ranfom and given or offered in the Gofpel,the free pardon of fin. 17. And that he hath aUb purchafeJ & offered us eternal life in Glory with God. 18. And LhaL its !he members of Chiift, and of the Holy Catholick Church,that fhall partake of pardon and life by Chiift. 1 9 And that he will give us the Refurredion of life at Iaft.20.And that iK will judge the world. I have omitted our fpecial I^elief in God the Father as Creator.and in the Holy Ghoft , and have given yoj in thefe twenty Afl:s,no more then what is contained in this one word, \_J believe in Chr[ft en Cior:fl'] I. think there rs if any, bm few that arc not effi;ncial to Faith in Jefus Chrift a:s the Saviour. And all thefe ads of affent are pares of the faith t!)at is the means ofourjuftification; and none of them part of the excluded works. And bcfides all thefe there ate as many adj of the Will as of the Intelled concurring in or to this vc- (4^0 ry affent, fo that there's twenty more. For its plain, that feeing the obj'eds of all thefe are Good as weJi as True , they being all Truchs concerning our bcneficand Salvation, the Will 'C felf in the Intelleds aflfenting, doth command it to aflVnr, and alfo doth pisce a certain Affiance in the Revealer, which we call in Englifti crediting or Giving credit to oncy we rffi our felves' upon his Truth. As I fa id bsforc,Fcracity is Gods Goodnefs^ind Veracity is the formal Objft in every one of the other Acts aboutthe material Obj cc ; and thereforethe Will muftact upon FeracujAnd io have a part in aflent it felf ; not as affent, but as a Volttntar-jj ajfest, and as an ajfent to Pr»mifes or Reve- lations of good to pu. There is goudncfs in the word of Revela- tion fubordinate, or in order to the good Revealed. And fo there is an ace of the fVillupon the good in the Word, compli- cated with che Intellects Affcn ..bcfidesthetollowing fuller act ofthe Will,uponChriltandthe benefits themf Ives. And there- fore there is a twofold Affiance I. An ASi^ncc'^n Gods Ttrx' city a6the Revealtr. 2. An A^aucq in Chrifi the C^Udtator, as the be^ovftr ^ accomp/if^jcr and a6lfial Saviour or Deliverer according CO his Office aud Covenant. Thefirftis an act of the Will concurring with Aflent. And of this Frw^/^y opinion is neer Truth,though not fully it- For here A ftiance is as clofe- ly joyned with Aftent as Heat in the Sun with Light, though they are noc the fame. But then the fecond fort of Affiance followethAfi'ent, and hath another act of the Will inrcrce- ding,whichis Confentor accepranceof the Benefit offered; which alfo is clofely conjunct with the firfl act ofthe Will. And then followetb. laft of all affiance in Chrift for the performance ofthe undertaken acts. And thefe latter arc alfo many parti- cular Phyficalicts, as the objects f« fpecie fpecUliJJifftaarerai' ny. And yet ail thefe make but one object in a moral fenfe,ind fo but one acr,and are done in a few moments of time of which after. Would it not be too tedious, I (hould ftay to cite feve- ral Texts, to prove that never a one of all thefe acts is exclu- ded as works by Pattl. But of divers of them its before proved from /?«»». ".and 4. and of more in Hr^. 11, and in (7/{/. 3. 1,5^ 7,8,9,i3,i4vM,i6,i8,2o,ti,2». There arc at leaft thefe Objects of Judifying faith cxpreffed. i.Ckrijis Per/on ,z, that Ggg 2 he \Vyi/ the feeipr9mlfed. 3 . That he ft?4^ crucifieJ. 4.That this Vfit for our fins. 5. That hi Vf>as made a eurft for tu in thu his death. 6 . That herehj he Redeemed us from the curfe. 7. That he is the MedtAtor. S.^odoi the Party With Whom he is Afedia' tor. 9. Codas Believed in hit Promife. 10. God off tsjiifier. 1 1 . The Cj off} elf reached ^and the Promife made. 12. "Bleffedneft hyChrifl. 1^. The confirmed Covenant. l^The IniofritaKce, l<^. Righteoptfnefs. 1 6. Adoption. 17. Th^t Belief is the means, and betieverf the rubje6t5 of thefe benefits. All thcfe objeds of Faith you will find in the Text. Argumcnc 2. Ex natura ret. If other acts of faith in Chrift Are no more works then that one (whatfoever it be) which you will fay Paul oppofeth to works, then Paul doth not call tbem works or number them with works. But the ^y^ntecedent is true, therefore fo is the Confeejuent. Doubtlefs the Scripture calls them as they are : and therefore if they arc not works, it calls them not works. And for the ^«rr«^f «f , i.liby tvorf^t you mean the Keeping of the firft Covenant by finlefs obedi- ence.fo neither the one or the other are works. 2. If you mean the keeping of Aiofes Law, fo neither of them are vcork^s. 3. If you mean the performance of an act of obedience to any Prs- ceptofGod, fo the feveral acts are worj^j , but juftifie not as acts of obedience to the command ( thats but their matter ) but as the condition of the Promife. 4. If you mean that they are A^s of the foul of man , fo every act of Faith is a work, though it juftifie not as fuch, fo that here is no difference to be found. E,g. If you make the Believing in Chrift as Dying, (though you take in both affent and affiincc) tobethe only juftifyingact ; what reafon can you give why our Believing in Chrift incarnate, in Chrift obeying the Law , in Chrift rifing sgain, and Glorified and Interceding, in Chrift actually now i giving out the pardon of fin snd ^doption, e^r. fliould be called rvorks any more then our Believing in Chrift as crucifi- ed ? No reafon at all, nor any Scripture can be brought for it. Yea what reafon have you that our Believing in Ciirift as the r^yfitian of our fouls, to cure us of our fins , and clcmfe cur hearts, and fanctific our Natures, and in Chrift as the Teacher and Guide of our fouls to life eternal, (liould be called works any (+iO any mor« then the other ? Or that believing in Chrifts biood for everlafting Life and happinefs, fliould be any more called works then believing in his blood for Juftificaton ? Yea that Believing in him as the King, and Head , and Captain of his Church to fubdue their enemies, and by his Governraenc con- duft them to perfeverancc and to Glory, fliould any more be . called wori^ then believing on him as crucified in order to for- r givenefs? Argnmetit 3. All ads Effcntial to faith in Chrift ai Chrift, are oppofed to works by Panl in the point of Juftification.and arc not the works oppofed to Faith. But many acts are erten- tial to faith in Chrift as Chrift ^ therefore they are many ads that are oppofed to works; and no one ofthofe acts is the works excluded. The ALjor is proved thus : If faith in Chrift as fuch, be it that Prfw/oppofeth to works, then every eflential part of it m by'T'rfw/oppofed to works (for it is not faith in Chrift if it want any effcntial part j But the Antecedent is true. 6rgo. • The 'JMir.ar I have proved in the firft Difputation : Though fometime it is faid to be {J>j faith in his hlood~\ that we have remiffion of fin ; and fometime that we are juftified if yce h- iteve in him that raifed Chrifl from the dead , &c. Yet moft frequently it is faid to be by faith in (^hrifi ; 6j belteving in the Lord lefuj, receiving Chrifl Jefm the Lord &c. Beltve in the Lord Jefui^ And thou, (halt be faved , was the Gofpel preached to the Jaylor,-'i in chrift as Tia- cher,Ki»g^^c. ftff^f fides quae Juftificat, ami the condition of JufltficatioH^ as Repentance atfo is , though it be not the InftrH' mental caufe, as they think^fome other AEi is* Paul doth not ex- clude that which he makes neceflary. Argument $. That which makes not the Reward to be of Debt and not of Grace, is none of the works that T<««/ fets faith againft. But ether aicts of faith in Chrift do not make the reward to be of Debt and not of Grace any more then tbe one • act which you will choofe (E.g. Believing in Chrift as King and Teacher, any more then believing in him as a Ranfom : ) therefore they arc not the works that Tanls fets faith againft. The CM:ajor is proved from the DeTcription of the excluded works, /Jew. 4. 4. The -^/«or is evident. Argument 6. All ads of Faith in Chrift as our fftfiifer, are fuch asareoppofed to works by ?<«»/, and are none of the works which faith is oppofed to. But they are more then one or two thai are Ads of faith in Chrift as |uftifier:£r^<;.— ^ The Major I think will be granted; the Minor is platn : For I. Chrift i.Ctfcift ji#tfi€diB$ raeritorioufly as a Sacrifice. 2. And as Os beyingftnd fulfilling th« Law. 3. -As thccoraplcmenc of hi fatijfa(Sion,,and the entrflticc upon his tollowing execution* his Rejection juftifiecb (lis. 4. As the Heavenly Prieft a*^ Gods right hand, he juftifiet-ti-as^b^btsIftCsrceflion. 5 A^ King and Head, he juftirierh us by his Covenant orLawo^ Grace. < 6. As King and judge he juitiffeth us byfentence* 7, As Prophet he.ccacheih us the Do(Srine of Juftification* and how to attain to Jult^fication by fexitencc. So that«c I ieaft,.rK>ne of thcfe ate the e»cl*jded work? . ^ ArgHms ji \i the whole Encncc oLChriftian faith be o|>- pofed to work?, and fo be none of thfe oppofed Works in the matter of Salvation, then its fo alfo in the matter of Jaftifica- twn. But the Antecedent ii-tcue ; therefore fo is the Confe- quent. • ■ y* ^ ' , ■ . .; . > . The Mrnoc is confefled hy my Opponents. ., The ,confe- quence of the Mlajor I prove, i. Becaufe Salvation is; as free as Juftification)and ho more of works which P<««/ exclu Judge, Teacher, &c.) is it by which he rr^H be iulHHcd,thcn he falls upon Juftification by Works, and fo falls ftiort of Grace ; for if it be of Works, then it is no more of Grace : elfc Works were no Works. And fo no man can tell but be deftroyeth Gracc,and expccteth Juftification by works : much iefscan weak Chriftians tell. I never yet f^wor heard from any Divine a juft Nomination ( with proof) of the one Ju- Itifying act , or a juft Enumeration of the many acts, if all muft not be taken in that are EfTential. Some fay Affiance is the only act: but as thats confuted by the moft that take in Affentalfo » fo there are many and many acts of Affiance in Chrift chat are neceHary-.and they (hould tell us which of thefe it is. Object. jinAdojou thinks that ^e cmt an) htter ttUwhtn we have all t/rat Art Bjftntinl f Or doth tvtrj vtak. C^rifiian he itevt all tht t^inty ArticUs thatjoH mtntioKcd atfirft ? ^nf^. I, We can better know what is Revealed then whats inrcvealcd. The Scripture tells us what faith in Chrift is ^ but not what one or two ad)s do Juftifie , excluding all other as Works. Divines have often defined Faith j but I know not that any hath defined any fuch one act, as thus exalted above tb« reft of the Effence of Faith. If we covld not tell what is cfTcntial to Faith, we could not tell what faith is. 2. The twen- ty Objects of Aflent before mentioned are not all Articles or material Objects; the fccondisthc formal Object. And of the rel^, unlefs the fifth [ Belitving thu Chrijl ^41 concei- vedhy tht Holy Gloojl ^andborM tf a Vt^girt [] may be txceplcd (wbich I dare not affirm ) I know not of one thats not effen- tialtoChriftianity. And I thmk if we had Herecicks among i7f that denyed Chiit to be conceived by the Holy Ghoft, we (hould fcarce take them for Chrirtiafl*. But that roan that fliill deny or not believe that Chrift is God, that he is Man, that he was no finner, that he dyed, and that for our fins,and that he was a Sacrifice or Ranfom' for us , and that he Rofe Hhh 3gain, (4-1 8) again.ij Glorified, and will judge us: that he'hath offered us ^ a pardon of fin ^ that there will be a Refurrection of the bo- dy, anihfeEverlaftingby this our Redeemer, I cannot fee- how he can be a Chnftian. And for the number of Ar» tides, i left out much of the ancient Creed i: felf, (che Belief in God the Father, Creator, ^^. in the HolyGhoft : the Ar- ticle of the Cathoiick Church , the Communion of Saints^ of Chrifts burial , Defcenc into- Hell , and more. ) And vet do you thin'< this coo b'g to be eftendal to Chriftian Faich ? 1 f fo, tcil nor any Heretick that denycth any one of thefc, that he d^nyeth an Effential Article of our faith. But for the ignorant weak Chriftian, I fay, i. He know- - eth all thefc Articles that I have named ; but 2. perhaps noC> with fo ripe a manner of apprehenfion asis formed into men- tal words, or which he can exprcfs in words to others : I find my ielf in my ftudies, that I have fomtimes an apprehenfion of a Truth before I have ripened that coneeption for an ex- prefli:)n, ^, And perhaps they are not Mechodical and I>i-> ilmct in their conceptions, and cannot fay that there are juft fo many Articles. Every fick man can underftand what it 't% to defire and accept of fuch a man to be his Phyfitian ^ and- herein he firft verily defireth health, and fecondly , deiiretti Phyfick as a means to Health, and thirdly, defireth the Phy- fitian in order to the ufe of that means, and fourthly , there- in doth take him to be a Phyfician, and fifthly, to have com- petent sk lU and fixchly, to be in fome meafure faiihful,to be irufted,and fevcnthly, doth place fome confidence in hiro,^r., all this and more is truly in his mind ; and yet perhaps they are not ripened and meafured into fuch diftinct conceptions^ as that he can di^incMy tell you all this in tolerable Language^ or doih obferve then as diftinct CorKCptions in bimfelf ( anil whether unointuitH the eye and the Intellect may not fee ma* ny Objects , though ahobjeSlit^ the acts muft be called ms-> ny and dtvers, is a Controverfie among Philofophers ^ and as I remember Pet. HttrtaJ, de Menio^a aflSrmeth it. ) But if you your felveswlll form ali thefe into diftinct concepei* oq;, and ask your Catechift hit jadgemene of them , its like c+ IP) * he can raak yoa perceive at leaft by a Tta or Nay \ that he underftands them all. The new formed body of the Infant in the Womb hath all the Integral parts of a man ^ and yet fo fmallthat you cannot foeafily diicern them as you may t.4.3. Anfwer. But that Ont faith hath many Phyfical Ads or Articles. There is but one true Religion, but it hath many parts. There is but one Gofpel, but that one contanieth many particular Truths. Hhh 3 Confcct. C42-i) COnfeft. I. loht ]t*fl>fied hj Faith, is to be juftified by Fsitk in Chri^ as Chrifl^ and not by any one part of that Faith, excluding any of its Effencial parts. 2. To be juftified by Faiih in Chrift as Chrifi^ and (o as RifiBg, Teaching; Pardoning, Ruling, Judging, as well as faiisfying, i.r.as the Saviour that hath undei taken aii this, is not in l^anli fenfe to be juftified by works : therefore it is the true Juflification by Faith. 5. It is therefore unfound to make any one Act or pare of Faith the fidts qna Juflificam , and the other Eflen- tial parts fo be the fidet \ m I • . ,-^' 1 ^>% ^ / '\ •"mti^m^p^^!^. ,4 !i