SECT. I. The Subject Matter proposed.

SEeing the apprehensions of Persons are so dif­ferent about the Doctrine and Nature of Justifi­cation, and so much depends upon the having a right notion hereof: At the intreaty of some of my Friends, for their satisfaction, and for the be­nefit of others, I shall (God assisting) with all possi­ble plainness declare my Sentiments in this particular.

1. I do believe that by and through the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of our Redeemer the Lord Jesus Christ, a Covenant of Grace hath been pur­chased for, and granted by God unto sinners, after they by their sin had violated or broken that Law which injoined perfect sinless works, and thereby made [Page 2] themselves incapable of performing obedience to that Law, which at the first it required as a condition of life, and so of having Justification thereby. Heb. 12. 24. Christ is called the Mediatour of the new Covenant, and that because he hath purchased by his death a grant of pardon and life by promise for sinners upon their sincere repentance and faith. There are pro­mises of pardon and everlasting life to sinners that re­pent and believe, Acts 3. 19. John 3. 16. Now for any to affirm that these promises are made, and the grace promised granted to sinners who repent and be­lieve, without regard had by God unto Christ, as the purchaser of them by his meritorious satisfactory righteousness; is for them to affirm, that God grants and gives saving grace to penitent sinners which Christ never purchased nor merited, and this is for none but the Socinian to hold.

2. This Law or Covenant of Grace thus purchased and granted, injoins sinners faith in Christ, which faith is never without repentance nor sincere obedience, if the believer be continued after the gift of faith; for undoubtedly if the believer live in this World after the gift of faith, so long as he doth live, through the grace of God he continues obedient, 1 John 3. 23. Matt. 21. 30. Heb. 5. 9.

3. Christ by his righteousness hath purchased and merited the Holy Spirit to work faith in the hearts of all those sinners who thereby are brought to believe, John 14. 26. John 15. 26. The Spirit is sent by the Fa­ther in Christ's name; and sent by Christ from the Father. Let any one now prove, that what the Fa­ther gives in Christ's name, and what Christ sends from the Father is not purchased and merited by him. And the Spirit is called the Spirit of Faith, i. e. the principal Efficient, or Author of it, 2 Corinth 4. 13.

4. I believe that all those who by the Grace and Spirit of Christ do sincerely believe, shall for and upon the account of Christ's satisfaction and meritorious [Page 3] righteousness be saved: but as for such as live and die in infidelity they shall be [...]amned, notwithstanding Christ's merits; and that because they have rejected the remedy through their unbelief; I speak of the Adult, John 3. 16. 18. 36.

5. I do believe that as the first Covenant did require sinless, perfect constant obedience, Galat. 3. 10: so this obedience performed by innocent Adam, would have been his justifying righteousness, or that righte­ousness upon which this Law or Covenant would have justified him, or given him a right to Life promised, which is all one with Justification, if confusion can but be removed, and this without any regard had to the righteousness of another, Rom. 10. 5.

6. I believe that as the second Covenant, i. e. the Covenant of Grace doth require true Faith; so where there is this true Faith, which is the righteousness this Covenant calls for on the Sinner's part; this Cove­nant doth as certainly justifie the sinner thereupon; i. e. give him a right to Pardon and Life, as the Cove­nant of works would have justified Adam, and given him a right to life, had he continued in the state of integrity. Though observe, That it is with regard had to the righteousness and satisfaction of Christ, that this Faith is accepted and accounted by God in the Covenant of Grace for a sinner's personal justifying righteousness, instead of that sinless perfect righteous­ness which the Covenant of Works injoined; And is not this wonderful Grace? I add, it is Faith in the sense of the Gospel giveth Sinners interest in Christ, and a right to all saving benefits he hath purchased and so merited; which right given by the Covenant of Grace is its justifying the Soul as God's moral Instru­ment. Though still I most firmly hold, that it is for the sake of Christ alone and his righteousness that the believing sinner hath this right; and that this his Faith, which is the gift of God, is accepted as a per­sonal righteousness, instead of sinless perfect obedience [Page 4] I do not say by the same Law; i. e. the Law of in­nocency or perfect works no, but by the Covenant of Grace which accepts of sincerity instead of strict le­gal perfection. I deny then with abhorrence, that Faith is any such thing, as a satisfactory and meritori­ous righteousness in whole or in part, such a righteous­ness being proper to our blessed Mediatour the Lord [...]: But then I do not deny, but affirm that a true and living Faith is by God in the Gospel constituted, that righteousness which giveth sinners right both to Christ and all the blessings of the Covenant of Grace. And grant me but according to Scripture, Rom. 3. 21, 22. Rom. 4. 13. Philipp. 3 9. that Faith is a righteous­ness, and such a righteousness as the Gospel calls for, and that it giveth right according to the Gospel pro­mise to Christ and his purchased benefits, and see then what ground there is to deny it the place of a justify­ing righteousness. I ask doth it give any interest in Christ, and right to the blessings he hath purchased? if not, then an Infidel must have as great an interest in Christ, and as much right to Pardon and Life as a believer. If you say, that Faith doth give interest in Christ and right to these blessings, then you say the same with me; i. e. that for the sake of Christ God by the Gospel hath constituted Faith to be our personal justifying righteousness, or that which gives us interest in Christ, and an actual right to the blessings purcha­sed by, and promised through him, and this is the justification by Faith I intend, and all that I know of in and by the Gospel.

Justification by all is acknowledged to be a Law term, if so then, the matter of Justification is jus se­cundum legem, a right in Law, and this right in Law results immediately from a conformity to that Law, and the conformity to that Law is the righteousness which that Law requires: And the Legislator or Law­maker justifying a person, is his judging, asserting, or accounting by this his Law a person upon his confor­mity [Page 5] thereunto, to have right to the priviledges con­tained in the premiant or rewarding [...]art thereof.

If the matter stand thus then in the nature of Justi­fication, as is clear, none can be justified by the Law of Innocency, or that Law which injoins sinless per­fect works, for we can have no right in or by that Law to Pardon and Life; and that because tha [...] [...]w relates to Man considered in the state of sinless [...]ntegri­ty, who as such having no need of Pardon, it makes no provision for it; And, 2 We cannot have right in or by that Law to Life, seeing none of the fallen race of Adam can yield conformity thereunto, and so cannot have that righteousness which answers this Law. And if so, as is plain, then God the Legislator or Author of this Law doth not, cannot judge, assert, or account that any have a right in or by this Law to Pardon and Life, and so doth not, nor cannot justifie us by it, and if not, doth not, nor cannot account a perfect legal righteousnes [...], such as Christ's is, to be our personal justifying righteousness, for if so, then we should be personally righteous in the sense of the Law of Innocency.

But are we? If it be said, not in our selves, but in Christ we are, I answer, if not in our selves, then we are not, nor cannot be personally righteous, or righ­teous in our own persons by a perfect legal righteous­ness, and so according to your grant, the righteous­ness of Christ is not nor cannot be our formal perso­nal righteousness, seeing that, that is a perfect legal righteousness. If it be said we are personally righteous in the sense of the Law of Innocency in Christ; then we must be righteous in our selves, and this contradicts the former, that we are not thus righteous in our selves; for how can a Man be righteous in his person, but he must be righteous in himself? Find me who can, the person of a Man without the nature of a Man? and further, to say we are perfectly legally righteous in another, suppose by imputation, or in [Page 6] God's account in our own Persons, is to say that God accounts us to he perfectly legally righteous in our selves [...] for so he must, if he account us thus righteous in our own Persons, and not to be perfectly legally righteous in our selves, because only so in another, and not in our selves, and does this become the infi­ni [...] wise God of Truth?

Now then if Justification be a Law act, or the act of God as Legislator by his Law, and it is not, nor cannot be the act of God by the Law of Innocency: then we must either have another Law, and such a righteousness as is a conformity to that Law, or else we must have no Justification. And look what Law it is, conformity to which gives us for the sake of Christ a right to Pardon and Life, that conformity must be our justifying righteousness, and God by this Law doth judge, assert, or account (which is all one with [...]mp [...]tation) that we have a right for Christ's Merits sake to the priviledges above mentioned; what Law now can this be, but the Law of Grace the Gosp [...] called the Law, of Faith; because it com­mands Faith, and threatens damnation in case of un­belief, and promises [...]or Christ's sake Pardon and Life upon believing: Joh [...] [...]. 16. This Faith is a practical Faith, and so includes the whole of what the Gospel commands and consequently repentance and sincere obedience to [...] of the Moral Law, (Isa. 55. 3.) for I am for from thinking that a notional Faith is a [...] [...]ne, manifest it is, that God by his Law [...] justifies us for the [...]isfaction and merits of Christ upon conformity hereunto, and this conformity in our personal righteousness, or that which gives us right by this Law to the benefits, respecting eternal Salvation which Christ hath purchased, and thus it must be, unless Persons will say and prove, that to justifie is not to have a right in Law; and then Justification must not be a Law act, if it be granted it is, then this right must be a righteousness, and the [Page 7] righteousness of our persons, as we through God's Grace in our own persons do yield conformity to it.

But some may say, it must [...] sinless perfect righteousness which must justifie us; but Faith is no such righteousness. This Objection speaks great Ig­norance in the Objectors; 1. Of the nature of the two Covenants, i. e. the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace; and, 2. Of the nature of Justifi­cation, or justifying righteousness as it is jus secundum legem, a right in Law: But to the Objection I Answer, If you speak of Justification by the Law of Works, I grant it must be such a righteousness; but what do you hope to be justified by that Law? if so, you must not be offended if I tell you in the words of the Apo­stle, you are fallen from grace, Galat. 5. 4. But if you speak of Justification by the Gospel, which is the Justification I plead for, and I hope shall ever stand by, then such a righteousness is not required, but faith is that righteousness, as hath been proved; though still this faith is neither accounted nor accept­ed for a justifying righteousness, but for the sake of a sinless perfect righteousness; that is to say, the righ­teousness of Christ God man Mediatour, Rom. 3. 24, 25, 26.

But it may be further said, faith is our own righte­ousness, and if we be justified by faith, we must be justified by our own righteousness.

I Answer, that we are justified by faith relatively, or as it respects Christ as the Object, the Scripture is express and full for it, Rom. 3. 30. Gal. 3. 8. Rom. 3. 28. Rom. 5. 1. Galat. 2. 16. Acts 13. 39. let any Man prove that in these Scriptures faith is not intend­ed, but only its object. But further for Answer, if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness, of which we are the Efficient Causes or Authors, or the purchasing meritorious Cause; I deny that faith is our own righteousness, but if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness as is the gift of God, [Page 8] and the fruit of Christ's Merits, and of which we as qualified Subjects are the performers, so I grant faith is our own righteousness, and though we are justified by it, yet we are justified freely by Grace. Rom. 4. 16. Ephes. 2. 8. But the Objection may be retorted, when it is said Christ's righteousness in its self, or in its own nature in our Justification is by God accounted our very [...]ormal personal righteousness; doth not God so far as he accounts it make it ours? if not, then we have no propriety at all in it, and if not, how can it then be our very formal personal justifying righte­ousness? if he do make it ours in this imputation, then it must be ours by gift, and what is ours by gift, must be our own. So that those who are for this strict im­putation of Christ's righteousness, must hold also Justi­fication by their own righteousness, or by a righteous­ness which by God is accounted their own.

But again it may be said, if we be justified by faith we must be justified by an inherent righteousness and we are not. I Answer, if God's imputing or account­ing by his Law or Covenant of Grace, faith for righ­teousness, which is the form of Justification, be Justi­fication by inherent righteousness, then God's impu­ting Christ's righteousness unto us for Justification, must be justifying us also by an inherent righteousness, for the form is the same in both; and if it be the form that makes the justifying righteousness inherent, then justifying righteousness must be inherent in the one as well as the other. But the form speaks that Justifica­tion is not by Faith absolutely inhering.

But if it be said further, that Christ is the subject of that righteousness, which is our formal personal justi­fying righteousness, but we are the subjects of Faith; I Answer, if the righteousness of Christ be our for­mal personal righteousness, then whatever Christ be, we must however be the subjects of this righteousness; and if so, it must be our inherent, as well as our im­puted righteousness. Thus then for the making this [Page 9] good, I proceed. To constitute Christ's satisfactory and meritorious righteousness according to Scripture, we must suppose,

1. That he was sinless, and perfectly Holy in his very Nature, Luke 1 35.

2. He must be sinless, and perfectly Holy in the whole tract of his Life, 1 Peter 2. 22.

3. That he was perfectly Holy in his suffering [...] Hebr. 9. 14.

4. That his righteousness might be a satisfactory and meritorious righteousness, the conjunction of his Divine righteousness was necessary, and this did result from the personal union of both natures, John 1. 14. I will grant then upon the matter, that this righteous­ness, the whole of it is the satisfactory and meritorious righteousness relating to my Person; i. e. that which satisfied offended Justice, removed the punishment due (mark my explication) for the violation of the Law of innocent Nature, and hath m [...]erited all good, and for which I and others have a right to, and interest in all saving good promised, upon true Repentance and unfeigned Faith, which Repentance and Faith, I and others have wrought in us (if we have it) for and upon the account of the merits of his righteousness: But then that this righteousness of Christ is the formal righteousness of mine or anothers Person, here is my stick, for (to me) if this righteousness of Christ (above described) be the sole formal righteousness of my Per­son then it is only this that must constitute my Per­son righteous, and by which I am denominated righ­teous; and if so, it must be my inherent as well as my imputed righteousness; for if it be the righteousness of the Person, it must be the righteousness of the Na­ture, and if it be the righteousness of the Nature than it must be inherent, seeing it is that which makes the very Nature righteous, and from whence it is so ac­counted. And can any Man that is well in his Wits think, that Christ's perfectly Holy habits, acts, spotless [Page 10] sufferings all in conjunction with his righteousness as God, is the righteousness, and the sole righteousness of every individual Believer and so inherent? if so, then every individual Believer must either be the proper subject of this righteousness, and so it must not be Christ's at all, or else the common, and so it must be attributed to Christ and them as a generical, or speci­fical Nature, let what part will be taken it is gross and irrational: therefore we must (until further light) stick to this, that if God do account the righteousness of Christ to be the very righteousness of our Persons, he must also account it to be the righteousness of our Nature; for to say that Thomas is personally righteous by such a righteousness, and yet not righteous by it in his Nature, is to say that Thomas is a Person without the specifical and individual Nature of Man, than which nothing can be more absurd, seeing that the Nature goes to the constituting of the Person. There may indeed (as in Christ) be the individual Nature without the personality; but there cannot be the Per­son without the Nature. So that if Persons will have the righteousness of Christ (above described) to be the only formal righteousness of their Persons, it must also be the righteousness of their Natures, and so in­herent. And thus that which is called sanctifying Grace, is taken away as needless; for if Persons be righteous in their very Natures subjectively by the righteousness of Christ, which (it is evident) they must be, if it be the formal righteousness of their Per­sons, it cannot be avoided, but in God's account, and so really and indeed they must be sinless and perfect­ly Holy, unless they imagin the righteousness of Christ to be imperfect: so that I have cleared this, that such as hold the righteousness of Christ in their Justification, is made by God, or accounted by him to be the very formal righteousness of their Persons, must also hold it to be the righteousnss of their Nature, and so in­herent, and as such themselves to be the subjects of it.

But to advance a little further upon this, thus then, agreeable to the righteousness of the Nature, such must be the acts which proceed from that Nature, so or after such a sort righteous: If therefore the righte­ousness of Christ be the righteousness of our Nature, which it must be if it be the formal righteousness of our Persons, (as hath been proved) then they [...]ust not only be sinless, but satisfactory and m [...]toriou [...] acts, of which that righteousness is the principle, which we in our own persons exert and put forth; yea such as do answer the infinite Justice of God, they being acts of which not only an Humane, but a Divine righteousness in conjunction is the principle, for such was Christ's righteousness.

Now it is no small matter of wonder that Men should be charging me and others with holding merit, and setting up our selves, and making Saviours of our own Duties, all which we deny: while they them­selves must hold merit and satisfaction in the strictest sense in their own persons, they expresly affirming, they have a righteousness to be the formal righteous­ness of their persons, which hath this efficacy; and if this be not more gross than ever any merit was that the Papists held, I will leave to any thinking un­prejudiced Person to determine. One would think Men professing the Knowledge of Christ above many, bearing the name of Christians, above all about them, should know and acknowledge the righteousness of Christ (above described) to be essential, and so pro­per to him as Mediatour; and how or after what man­ner then this same righteousness must be the personal righteousness, and that only, of every particular Be­liever, I profess is strange. But if it be said, they af­firm it to be the personal righteousness of a Believer by God's Imputation. I Answer, God in this Impu­tation they speak of, either communicates after some sort the righteousness of Christ, or he doth not, if he do, then it cannot be essential and proper to Christ; [Page 12] if he do not after any sort communicate it, then how can it be the formal righteousness of any Man's Per­son? Can a Man's Person be righteous, with a righte­ousness that is altogether incommunicable, except in its fruits and effects? Will God impute that same righteousness to me, so as to account me to be only righteous formally in my Person by it, which he knows [...] neither have nor can have in whole, or in part it self, it being essential and proper to his Son as Mediatour? Men that shall endeavour to perswade me this is so, or that it may be so, must deprive me of the free exercise of my Reason first.

I have made it appear, that if Christ's righteousness be the formal righteousness of our Persons, then it must be the righteousness of our Nature; if any con­tradict it they must know, they have this to prove; i. e. that God in justifying Peter, or any other doth account them to be formally righteous by Christ's righteousness as Persons, but not as they are Men, and if so, then they must prove the Person is justified, but not the Man; or the Person is formally righteous with Christ's righteousness, but not the Man: how this will be performed, if the proof of it be under­taken, I cannot tell.

But before I pass this, I further urge, if Christ's righteousness be the righteousness of our Nature, which it must be if it be our formal personal righteousness; then it must be a quality inhering, and if it be a quality inhering, then we are made the Subjects; and so we must have that which is proper unto, and in­separable from such a Subject; i. e. Christ, removed, and existing seperate from its own proper Subject, in this and the other Believer, which cannot be the Sub­jects thereof, no more than Christ's Body can be the Subject of the accidents of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper: Alas! alas, that Men should be ac­counting the Popish Transubstantiation such a Mon­ster, and yet cannot nor will not see what they them­selves [Page 13] are forming. And upon the matter, I would desire it might be considered, whether there be any such thing as a personal justifying righteousness, the matter of which is not inherent.

But it may be further objected, if Faith be our for­mal personal justifying righteousness, is not the dif­ference betwixt Justification and Sanctification hereby taken away, and so these two great priviledge which in Scripture are spoken of as really distinct confound­ed, and jumbled into one?

By what hath been said above, the Objectors if they will but consider, are strangely intanged in the briers of this Objection themselves; asserting Christ's righte­ousness to be their formal personal righteousness, and so the righteousness of their Natures, and so make the sanctifying Grace of the Spirit of no use. But how­ever for Answer to the Objection, I shall (I hope) make it appear, that although I affirm that Faith is our personal justifying Gospel Righteousness, and also own it to be a sanctifying Grace; that Justification and Sanctification are yet distinct, and by this Do­ctrine not con [...]ounded, but still keep the difference assigned unto them by God in his Word.

Faith then as sanctifying is that which purifies the Heart, Acts 15 9. it is a renewing by the Spirit of the moral Image of God, consisting in Knowledge, Righteousness and Holiness; Coloss. 3. 10. Ephes. 4. 24. so that the Soul which was only carnally disposed and inclined before, is having Spiritual Illumination, dis­posed and inclined principally to embrace Spiritual Objects; and here we consider Faith absolutely as a change of the Nature. Faith as justifying gives a right to Christ, and for his Merits sake to Pardon and Life, by virtue of God's gracious appointment in his Cove­nant of Grace, in his Imputation of it to give this right; and here I consider Faith relatively as a change of the state; i. e. the Sinner that before was a Child of Wrath, and an Heir of Hell, upon a sincere Faith [Page 14] hath that relation changed, and is accounted by God for Christ's Righteousness his Child by Adoption, and an Heir of Heaven and Eternal Life, John 1. 12. Galat. 3. 26. Faith as sanctifying relates to Christ, as Physitian healing by his Spirit of Grace the sinful distempered Soul: Faith as justifying relates to Christ as Rector and Judge, who by his Law of Grace here­u [...] doth declare that Soul who was as a Criminal, was condemned in Law before, now to be pardoned, and to have right to everlasting Life. There is as much difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies, and as it Justifies, as betwixt an healing Medicine, and a Title and Right in Law to Pardon and an Inheritance: So that as the same Person may have divers Offices, and may be distinguished according to his Offices; so is the same Faith distinguished as sanctifying and justifying: The same Man may be both a Physitian, and a Judge; Now will any Man that is right in his Head say, that the administring of Physick, and the dispensing and executing of Law are both one, be­cause both performed by the same Person? Those who accuse me and others of confounding Justification and Sanctification, when we say that Faith is our personal justifying Righteousness, according to God's gracious Constitution or Law, they themselves say, that Faith doth not only Sanctifie, but that it is the Instrument of Justification. Now give me leave upon the Point to ask these Men, whether they themselves do not make a difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies, and as it is an Instrument of Justification? if they say, yea they do; do not they then themselves according to their own notion, distinguish of the same Faith as sanctify­ing and as justifying in their Sense; and seeing they will not call this a confounding of Justification and Sanctification, What reason have they to call our No­tion so? when we consider Faith as absolute in Sancti­fication, and relative in Justification, as hath been cleared.

If this be so, then it may be said, Sanctification must be before Justification; I Answer, They that make the Objection, say this as much as we, in case they will have Faith to be the Instrument of Justifica­tion; for surely Faith must be had before it can be an Instrument, unless they can prove a Man may use Hands that hath none. But however, since this is cast in our way, we shall a little essay to clea [...]. If we take Sanctification then for the very first Seeds of Grace, which in their own Nature have a virtue to dispose and incline the Soul to a thankful acceptance of Christ; so that the real consent of the Will is gained, thus Sanctification is before Justification: But if we take it for a more fixed and rooted habit of Grace, so it is after Justification. The Heart must be first disposed and inclined to open to Christ, that so he may have it for his habitation before it will actu­ally open. Hence so soon as ever the Soul upon this disposition doth give its consent to accept of the Lord Jesus to be its only Propitiation, Head and Teacher; the Sinner hath interest in him, and by virtue of the Gospel promise hath an actual right unto the blessed benefits of Pardon and Life purchased by him. 'Tis said of Lydia, the Lord opened her Heart, and so, Revel. 3. 20. But it may be said, are not the first Seeds of Grace saving? I Answer, The Seeds of Grace considered as such, they have an healing or sa­ving virtue in their own Nature; but they are not actually healing or saving to me, until they prevail against the corrupt sinful disposition and inclination of my Will. I know in what Soul so ever God Sows the Seeds of true Grace, those Seeds shall prove healing and saving through Christ; they shall prevail against the sinful corrupt disposition of the Will, 1 Peter 1. 23. but they are not thus healing and saving to any Soul until they do so: Such a Medicine appointed for the recovering of Health, it hath an healing quality, but though it be taken, 'tis not actually healing to the [Page 16] Sick, until it prevail against the Distemper, and it is so with Grace. And thus it may be known in what Sense Sanctification is before Justification.

Touching the gift of the first Grace, know there is much good purchased by Christ, and given without respect to any condition on Man's part, and thus the gift of the first Grace, God ordinarily by his Word [...] Spirit, concurring doth convince, humble, and incline the Sinner to accept of Christ in all his Offices; i. e. to be Propitiation, Head and Teacher; and when the consent is gained, then hath the Soul an actual in­terest in, and right unto the Lord Jesus to be his Pro­pitiation, &c. to the sanctifying Spirit, to Reconcili­ation, Adoption, and Glorification. The former work was to prevail with the Soul for its consent, but when prevailed with, then hath it an actual interest in and right unto Christ, and the saving blessings of the Covenant promised upon consent. A Man that Courts a Woman for her Consent to be his Wife, un­till this be given by her, and she actually give up her self unto him to be his Wife; she hath no interest in him as her Husband, nor interest in nor right unto any of his Goods as one in that relation, and thus it is in the Case before us. If any Man, saith Christ, hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and sup with him, and he with me, Revel. 3. 20.

SECT. II. How the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is to be held, and how not.

AFter these things cleared, I proceed to tell the World how I do, and how I do not [...] [...] [...] the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. I do not deny, but affirm God's Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in these following Senses.

1. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it was for our Redemption and Salvation. Rom. 3. 24, 25.

2. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to be the sole or only Merit and Purchase of the New Covenant, and the benefits thereof, Heb. 7. 19. 2 Tim. 1. 10.

3. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to Merit the Blessed Spirit for us, to work Grace in our Hearts. John 1. 16. Ephes. 1. 3.

4. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it is for this that all the Grace and Duties of his People are accepted, Ephes. 1. 6.

5. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it is for this he pardons us, and receives us into his favour, and justifies us by his Covenant of Grace upon believing, and so accepts our Faith for Righteousness; it is not without Christ, but for him; Acts 13. 38, 39. Golos. 1. 21, 22, 23.

6. I do believe that what Christ did and suffered, he did and suffered for us in the Person of a Medi­atour; and God doth account what he did and suf­fered as Mediatour, doth and shall avail as much for the obtaining of Pardon and Life for us upon Faith, as though we had been able to have done and suf­fered the same in our own Persons 1 Pe [...]r 3. 18. Heb. 9. 15. 1 Tim. 2. 5, 6. Rom. 4. 23, 24, 25. John 3. 16.

Now I desire to know in what any Christian in his Practice can make further use of the Lord Jesus, than in those particulars forementioned; and if he cannot make any use of Christ by Faith, but what may be reduced to some of those particulars; Can it be thought that God doth make over Christ unto him after some sort wherein he shall be of no use? If not, then [...] desire to know what needs any further, or any Imputation of Christ's Righteousness of another sort than hath been expressed? I desire it may be taken notice of, that whereas I have been accused by some as an Adversary to all Imputation of Christ's Righte­ousness, they have misrepresented me, and so have wronged me. And I challenge any Man to shew in this Profession wherein I have detracted from the Grace of God, or Merits of Christ.

But now having shewn in what Sense I hold the Im­putation of Christ's Righteousness, I must plainly tell the World, that God doth not so impute the Righte­ousness of Christ unto us, as that he accounts it in it self to be our very formal Personal Righteousness, reckoning that what Christ did and suffered as our Mediatour, we did and suffered in our own Persons; i. e. obeyed in him, and suffered in him in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency. This is that I profess I dare not believe, and the reason is the many gross, and to be dreaded consequences with which such a Doctrine as this is loaded.

1. It chargeth God with an untruth, for God judg­eth of things as they are, and not as they are not; if we then affirm that God accounts that what Christ did and suffered for us, we did and suffered in our own Persons, in the Sense of his violated Law, (which he must do, if he account the very Righteousness of Christ to be ours in it self) then he must account us to have done and suffered that in our own Persons which he knows we neither did nor suffered, and if so, then let it be considered what must follow.

[Page 19]2. If Christ's Righteousness be imputed in it self, then the Law of perfect sinless Works must justifie us; for if God in our Justification do account the Righte­ousness of Christ in it self to be our formal personal justifying Righteousness, then he must account us to be such as have a sinless perfect habitual and active Righteousness: for such was the Righteousness of Christ, and if God do account us to have such a righ­teousness as this in our own Persons, then it must follow that the Law of Innocency must justifie us as well as it did Christ; for what should hinder if we have the very same righteousness which is Christs to be our formal personal righteousness? and have it we must, if God do impute it unto us in it self, and ac­count it in that Imputation to be such a righteousness as formal and personal. And from hence we must im­plicitly hold that God in our Justification doth account us to be as righteous as Christ, which some have had the Confidence to affirm, and all from this Doctrine; for I hope People are not to learn that Christ's righte­ousness habitual and active was a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency, and if we be such in the Sense of that, it accounting that what Christ was and did, we were and did in him, in point of conformity, then in this very account it justifies us.

3. God must account us such as are habitually and actively sinless and Holy, such as have neither Sin in our Nature and Life, for Christ was such, and if we have the very same righteousness personally which he had (which we must have if God account us, as they say, to have it) then how can we chuse but be such as have neither Sin in Nature nor Life.

4. That follows which hath been asserted, and is yet asserted by some, God neither seeth nor can see Sin in his People; and indeed how should it be, if he account them habitually, and actively sinless and Holy, for where it is thus, there can be no Sin in their Natures, and if so, then no Sin of Omission or Com­mission [Page 20] in the Life, and if no Sin neither in Nature nor Life, how should God see any?

5. If we be such as God accounts in our Justifica­tion to be both habitually and actively Holy and sin­less, then we need no Pardon, for there needs no Pardon where there is no Sin nor Fault, and if we who are justified have no Sin to Pardon, then there needs no Confession of Sin, nor Repentance, nor Faith in Christ for Pardon, and so no Gospel Obedi­ence; seeing we have the same legal Righteousness (as they say) in God's account which Christ had, and so we must be justified by the Law of Works as he was; and thus the Gospel and Covenant of Grace which offers Pardon to Sinners upon Confession, Repentance, and Faith, becomes a meer nothing, and the whole frame of Christianity is taken down. Well, but they may say we are not inherently righteous by Christ's Righteousness; I Answer, if they be perso­nally righteous with Christ's righteousness, they must be inherently righteous with the same, as I have be­fore manifested.

6. If God impute the righteousness of Christ unto us in it self, and so in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency reckon us to have done what Christ did, and to have suffered what Christ suffered in our own Persons, then he must reckon us such as have per­formed the very acts of Mediation and Redemption; for wherein did Christ's Mediation and Redemption consist, but in his Obedience and Sufferings (I speak of this his work upon Earth) which constituted his Active and Passive Righteousness: And if so be that God in justifying of us do account us to have the very same righteousness which Christ had for our formal personal righteousness, then he must account us to have that which is and was a mediating and redeem­ing righteousness, and so to have that of our own by his gift, as our very personal righteousness whereby we may be Mediatours and Redeemers for our selves and others.

[Page 21]7. If God impute the righteousness of Christ in it self, and account it our formal personal righteousness, then it is only the righteousness of Christ he imputes as Man: or the righteousness of Christ as God man. If the former, then they must hold that the righteous­ness of Christ as Man only is efficacious, and he need­ed not be God; if the righteousness of Christ as God­man, then God must account them such as have a Di­vine righteousness as well as an Humane to be their formal personal righteousness, and if so, then that opinion hereby is established of being Godded with God, and Christed with Christ, and what I dread to say, they must implicitly affirm themselves to be par­takers of the very Essence of God, and so God's Es­sence must be divided into so many parts as there are justified Believers, and these Believers must be made partakers of the incommunicable Attributes of God.

Now upon the matter, to hint it again; when I say that Faith is our Gospel Righteousness, and that God by the Gospel doth account it our personal justi­fying Righteousness, it is manifest from what I have already said, I do not intend only the [...]NR [...] credere, or the very act of Faith without relation to its Object Christ and his righteousness: though some for all I have said have been bold to affirm I do; for that would be no true Faith at all, and far then from justifying, for Faith justifies as it unites unto, and gives the Soul in­terest in Christ, and this it doth as it is the Souls free consent to take Christ (as it is to be said) in all his Offices, upon which the Soul hath an actual right unto him, and the benefits of the Covenant purchased by him, and this is plain Gospel Justification; as for instance, Be­lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, Acts 16. 31. When therefore any Soul believes this his Faith is his Obedience and Conformity unto the Gospel command, and so his Gospel Righteousness, and as such his actual right through and for Christ, to the Salvation promised. Would the Jaylor have had [Page 22] a right unto the promised Salvation had he not be­lieved, I mean an actual right, must it not be said no? Upon his Faith then he had a right, and this his Faith was his obedience to the Gospel command; therefore it was his obedience to the command which was his Gospel Righteousness, and so his right by Christ (ac­cording to God's own fixed Law of Grace) unto Sal­vation. Hath any Man an actual right to Heaven but a Believer? if he have, let it be proved from Scripture; if none have but such an one, then the Believer only (I speak of the Adult) hath the actual right, and is it not plain then, 'tis his Faith that gives him this right. To illustrate this, such a Man makes a Purchase of an Inheritance: After Purchase, bequeaths it by Testa­ment or Will, to this or the other Person, upon the performance of such or such conditions specified in the Testament or Will; if the conditions be per­formed according to the Testament of the Donor, then he hath an actual right in Law unto the In­heritance, if not, he hath no right of claim: if he perform the conditions, the Law will vindicate his right, and the Judge by Law, if he do Justice, if he do not perform the conditions, the Law cannot nor will not give him a right to the Inheritance, nor the Judge by Law; 'tis just thus in the matter before us, and the application is easie.

SECT. III. Scripture to prove the Imputation of Faith, and an Answer to such Texts as are alledged for Impu­tation of Christ's Righteousness.

IF I should pass on further to prove from Scripture that not Christ's Righteousness in it self, but Faith as it accepts of Christ, as offered in the Gospel, is now a Sinners formal justifying Righteousness before God, I should have a large Field, and might multiply express Scripture Texts for the Imputation of such a Faith, but not one express Text in all the Bible can be found for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self, nay nor implicit. Let us consider a few Texts among many, Rom. 4. 3. Abraham believed God, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness. What was ac­counted unto him for Righteousness? Well, say they, not Faith, but its Object; i. e. the Righteousness of Christ. But pray where have we any such word in the Text? and besides here is the object of his faith ex­press, and that is God, Abraham believed God, now if they will have not Faith but its Object to be counted for Righteousness, then the words must be read thus, Abraham believed God, and God was counted unto him for Righteousness, and if they will have Christ's Righteousness brought in here, then we must read the words thus, Abraham believed God, and God was count­ed unto him Christ's Righteousness for Righteousness. I would desire them to tell us what Sense they can make of either reading? So Verse 5th. But to him that worketh not but believeth in him that justifieth the un­godly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness. And Verse 9th, For we say that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness. The Scripture saith expresly, Faith was counted, and Faith was reckoned for Righteousness; they [Page 24] say nay, but by Faith is meant Christ's Righteousness; now let any Man judge whether we are to believe the Scripture or them. Though let it ever be marked when I according to Scripture say Faith is counted, imputed or reckoned for Righteousness. I do not (as I have said) exclude the object Christ, or God in Christ, but say it is not Christ's Righteousness in it self that is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness, but that Faith which doth accept of the Lord Jesus as offered in the Gospel, this Faith gives me interest in him, and right to Pardon and Life, and as such is my justifying righteousness in the Sense of the Gospel, and that because God by the Gospel doth declare unto me, and assure me, that if I thus believe in Christ, I shall both be pardoned and ever­lastingly saved. I must still urge that Text, John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only be­gotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting Life, and let it I pray be well considered, for what can God's declaring and assuring by the Gospel be, that I shall have these great benefits upon such a Faith, but his justifying me thereupon, or his accounting by this his express word my right to these blessings upon such a believing.

But it will be said, do you not bring Faith into the very matter of Justification?

I Answer, I shall distinguish of matter of right,

1. There is the meriting purchasing matter of right, and this is solely or only Christ's Righteousness.

2. There is the qualifying matter of right, and this is Evangelical Obedience included in Faith, seeing that without Faith it is impossible to please God, now if Persons judge, when I say Evangelical obedience is the matter of right, that I intend the purchasing merit­ing matter of right, here they mistake me. But if they judge when I affirm Evangelical Obedience to be the matter of right, that I only intend the qualifying matter, in this they bit right. As thus now, Persons [Page 25] will grant me there are such gracious benefits as these; i. e. Pardon, Reconciliation, Adoption, Acceptation of the services of a real Christian, &c. The purcha­sing and meriting Righteousness then of all these bene­fits is only the righteousness of Christ. But now con­sider me or any other Person as an Impenitent Infidel; the Question will be whether as such an one, I have an actual personal right unto, or interest in these bles­sings? I think it will not be said, as such an one I have, for then I should be in a saving state, while in a state of Impenitency and Infideli [...]y, which is mani­festly repugnant to the Scripture. If not, then I must be a Person or Subject qualified with something, that according to God's appointment must give me interest in and right unto, I mean an actual right unto these benefits which I had not while an Impenitent Infidel: And what must this be? not the Righteousness of Christ, for that cannot be a qualification in me; and if not, then Faith and Repentance, by which of an impenitent Infidel, I come to be a penitent Believer. And this I would have observed, that those which are against my notion; yet if they be true practical Chri­stians, their practice must and doth agree with my notion. To instance in one thing, I offer up Prayer and Supplication to God, they do the same, I know my Prayers will not be accepted in themselves without a Mediatour, they know the same, I say here, I must have right to Christ as my Mediatour, by accepting of him and trusting unto him as such, and pleading the promises of grace in his Name, they say the same. I say further, I may hope for acceptation of my Pray­ers for his meritorious intercession, if I have the quali­fication requisite, and that is Faith. Whatsoever, saith Christ, you shall ask in my name, believing ye shall receive; so that this Faith is not the merit of my acceptation, but the gracious qualification of my Per­son, without which I cannot have an interest in, or right unto (in this particular) Christ's intercession, [Page 26] seeing that is offered up with the Prayers of Saints, and these most certainly must be Believers. Now are not they of the same mind? see then if their practice do not agree with my notion more than their own. And it look's odd on't, that Men should contend against that which must be found in their own Practice if they be true Believers.

Having proceeded thus far, my next undertaking shall be to examine a little their gloss upon some of the main Texts they bring for the proof of this their rigid Imputation of Christ's Righteousness.

1. One is Psalm 37. 1. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Here is the Pardon of Sin express, but not a word of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self; it is said indeed whose sin is covered. But what can the meaning be, but that God for the sake of Christ's Merits and Satisfaction so pardons Sin to a Penitent Believer, as that it shall ne­ver be brought in against him, or laid to his charge in judgment to his condemnation and everlasting shame, and thus it is said to be covered, and thus covered for Christ's Righteousness.

But seeing that Christ's Righteousness is the cover, How is it so in their Sense? well, they say, as a Gar­ment or Robe; if it cover then as a Garment or Robe, Will they say that properly, or that it is really, and in it self a Garment or Robe; i. e. Physically so? surely no, for this would be gross, to conceive it to be a Coat or Gown, &c. if not properly a Garment or Robe, then improperly they must say it is so, and so comparatively in respect of it's use. A Robe or Garment then it may have these uses, to cover our nakedness, to defend from cold and storms, to keep our bodies warm, and to adorn: We will grant then that Christ's Righteousness may be compared to a Robe or Garment in regard of these uses, considered as satisfactory and meritorious. It is for this that a true penitent Believer having his Sins pardoned, shall be [Page 27] delivered from everlasting shame; it is for this he shall be secured from the storm of God's eternal wrath and displeasure; it is for this he is adorned and beautified with the Graces and Gifts of the most Holy Spirit; it is for this that he hath all the Heart quickning influ­ences of the blessed Spirit. But then if I be a Believer, that I have it in it self, and that it is of all these uses to me, as it is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness, this I must deny; for if so, it must not be the Righteousness which is Christs, and proper to him as Mediatour, for which a Believer shall be delivered from everlasting shame, and secured from God's wrath, but the Righteousness of Christ as it is a Christian's formal personal Righteousness, and so as a quality in himself; and it must not be the Graces of the Spirit, and so not God's moral Image wherewith the Soul of a true Christian is adorned, nor the Holy Spirits influences whereby it is quickned; but only the Righteousness of Christ imputed in it self, and so accounted to be his formal personal Righteousness: And if it be thus, then the Righteousness of Christ as Mediatour, and the qu [...]ckning and sanctifying operations of the Holy Spirit must be needless. For whatever is a Believer's formal personal Righ­teousness, it must not only be imputed unto him, but be a quality in him, as I have cleared above, that whatever is the formal Righteousness of the Person, must be the Righteousness of the Nature; if therefore the Righteousness of Christ (as they say) be the formal Righteousness of the Person, then that Person who is formally righteous by it, must be perfectly righteous, seeing Christ's Righteousness in it self, which they say, they have to be their personal Righteousness is such: And if so, what need of the Righteousness of a Mediatour, or the graces and in­fluences of the Holy Spirit for a Christian, he being perfectly righteous in his very Nature with Christ's [Page 28] Righteousness? Now they will say this they will not own, and if not, then why do they own and stick by such a Doctrine, which hath such natural and unavoid­able consequences as these?

I would gladly have these Persons consider, whether they dare trust to this Righteousness of Christ for their Justification and Acceptation, as it is their formal per­sonal Righteousness without any further regard had to Christ as Mediatour without them: if so, then what need of Christ's Mediation without them? if not, then they must have Christ's Mediation without them for the acceptation of Christ's Righteousness up­on them, and doth Christ's own Righteousness stand in need of Christ's Mediation for its Acceptation? I know not how they can come off here, without ei­ther denying that a Person considered as justified needs Christ's Mediation, or accounting the Righteousness of Christ upon them in the Sense of the Law of In­nocency to be imperfect. Take the former, and they exclude Christ from being a Mediatour for a justified Person as such: take the later, and they destroy their own Assertion, that there is no Justification but by a perfect legal Righteousness, but I shall leave them in their own sna [...]e, and pass on, and I am like, for they will not suffer me or any Man to help them.

2. Another Text alledged to prove that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to Believers in it self, and so is their formal personal Righteousness, and so account­ed by God, is Jer. 23. 6. And this is his Name, where­by he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness. That Christ is the Lord our Righteousness I grant, but where is it said in this Scripture, that his Righteous­ness is accounted ours, as to be the formal Righteous­ness of our Persons? And if it be said, Although it be not expressed, yet it is intended, I Answer, it can­not be, for Christ's Righteousness being a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness, it must be proper [...]o him as Mediatour, and what is proper to him as Me­diatour [Page 29] cannot be in it self the formal personal Righ­teousness of another, nor so accounted by God; for God doth not look upon any Believer to have a satis­factory and meritorious Righteousness (which he must have if he have the Righteousness of Christ to be his personal Righteousness) for his personal formal Righ­teousness: But God doth account every true Believer to have that Righteousness, or to be so personally Righteous by the Righteousness of Faith, as that he hath right by virtue of the promise of grace to those blessed and glorious benefits purchased by Christ, by whose satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness this his Faith is accepted for Righteousness, upon which Christ is the Lord of this Righteousness, this Gospel Righteousness, as the Purchaser, Lord-Treasurer and dispenser of all Grace, and may well then be called the Lord our Righteousness: but then it doth not follow that the Righteousness of Christ which is proper to him as Mediatour (and so for us) is ours in it self, and our very formal personal Righteousness.

3. Another Text is in Isa. 45. 24. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness and strength. We may from this Scripture groundedly conclude, that a satis­factory and meritorious Righteousness is to be found only in Christ, and that this is sufficient to satisfie of­fended Justice, and merit all good for us: but what is this to prove that God accounts this his righteousness to be our personal formal Righteousness: The Text saith no such thing: and if it mean Christ's Righteousness as Mediatour, the Text saith expresly it is in him, and the Believer doth acknowledge it so to be, and therefore not in himself, which yet it must be if it be the Righteousness of his Person, as hath been already shewn.

4. A fourth Text is in Isa. 61. 10. I will greatly re­joyce in the Lord, my Soul shall be joyful in my God: for he hath clothed me with the Garments of Salvation, he hath covered me with the Robe of Righteousness, as a Bride. [Page 30] groom decketh himself with Ornaments, and as a Bride adorneth her self with her Jewels. That this Text can­not be meant of a Believer's being clothed with Christ's Righteousness, as a Robe in a proper Sense hath been made manifest, and if it be so improperly; i. e. a Robe, then only in a comparative Sense as to its use, and that it may fitly be compared unto a Garment or Robe, as to its use as satisfactory and meritorious, with respect unto a Believer; I grant, but that it hath the use of a Garment, so as to be any Person's formal Righteousness; this I deny, and that upon the Rea­sons above given, which Reasons are sufficient to ma­nifest that whatever Text of Scripture be brought for proof that Christ's Righteousness is a Robe in their Sense is mistaken by them.

And whereas they alledge among the rest, that in Revel. 19. 8. speaking of the Church, And to her was granted, that she should be arrayed in fine linnen, clean and white: for the fine linnen is the righteousness of Saints. 'Tis not said this fine linnen is the Righteousness of Christ, though the Righteousness of Christ (we ac­knowledge) did purchase and merit it: But the Righ­teousness of the Saints; i. e. the purity and holiness of the Saints, and that it is so, let the Psalmist determine, Psalm 45. 13, 14. The King's daughter is all glorious with­in; her cloathing is of wrought gold. She shall be brought unto the King in raiment of Needle-work: the Virgins, her companions that follow her, shall be brought unto thee: And so the Apostle Paul, Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. Hus­bands, love your Wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it: That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water, by the word: That he might present it to himself, a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing.

5. A Fifth Text is in Rom. 3. 22. Even the righte­ousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference. This Righteousness of God, say they, is the Righte­ousness [Page 31] of Christ imputed and accounted to be a Be­liever's formal personal Righteousness; but that by the Righteousness of God in this Scripture, and others cannot be meant the Righteousness of Christ is mani­fest.

1. Because this righteousness which is called the righ­teousness of God is opposed unto the righteousness of the Law, and is said, ver. 21. to be without the Law: But the righteousness of Christ is not opposed to the righ­teousness of the Law, he being conformed unto the Law both in habit and act.

2. By the righteousness of God cannot be meant God's righteousness it self, I hope they will grant, and if not, then from it they cannot gather that the righte­ousness of Christ in it self is imputed, seeing it is a di­vine as well as an humane righteousness: unless they will say it is the humane righteousness of Christ only which is imputed in it self, and if so it could nothing avail them, for though it be true the humane righte­ousness of Christ would have availed himself, as the Law of Innocency justified him thereupon as a righ­teous Man. Yet it would have availed us nothing at all without the conjunction of his divine righteous­ness, seeing without this it would not have been for others satisfactory and meritorious: therefore I con­clude, that Faith in Jesus Christ is the righteousness which is here called the righteousness of God, and that because God by the Gospel hath constituted and appointed this to be that which he will accept instead of legal perfect righteousness, and for the sake of Christ's satisfactory and meritorious righteousness will justifie us by his Law of Grace, and thereby give right to Pardon and Life. What hath been said to this Text, may be sufficient to give light to understand the meaning of that Text so much urged, Phil. 3. 9. And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. And so Rom. [Page 32] 1. 17. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. Rom. 10. 3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 2 Cor. 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

6. The sixth Text is, Rom. 4. 6. Even as David also describeth the bless [...]dness of the Man unto whom God im­puteth righteousness without works. This righteousness say they, which God in this Text is said to impute, can be no other but the righteousness of Christ. There hath been enough said to shew it cannot be righteous­ness of Christ in it self which is imputed. I would gladly have Men to consider, what the Apostle in this his dispute undertakes to prove; can any thing be more clear than that it is Justification by Faith, in opposition unto the works of the Law, both of Inno­cency and Moses. But here is the grand mistake of these Men, when the Apostle is only excluding works with relation to the Law of Innocency, or the Law of Moses from Justification; they understand him univer­sally, as excluding also Gospel works, such as Faith, &c. which yet nothing can be more express and plain the Apostle is pleading for Justification by; Verse 9. For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. And this Apostle at the fifth ver. of this Chapter affirms, that faith is accounted for righteousness. And if so, which is express, then faith must be the righteousness of which the fifth Verse speaks. Well but say they it is not faith that is this righteousness, but the object Christ's righteousness, if they mean it is not faith abstracted, or seperate from its object that is this righteousness, I say the same, for it is no true faith which hath not Christ for its object. But if they mean that it is the object it self that justifies, and not faith with relation unto the object, here I must [Page 33] leave them, and that because I must believe the Apo­stle before them, and there is nothing in all the Scrip­ture more manifest, than that though there be neither conformity to the Law of Innocency, nor the Law of Moses, though a Man neither can nor shall be ac­counted by God righteous in the sense of these Laws; yet where there is a consormity to the Gospel Law, we have David's testimony, saith the Apostle, that Man shall be blessed, and this his conformity shall be by God accounted for righteousness. And what won­derful grace is it that God will accept for the sake of Christ, the sincere obedience of faith instead of a sinless perfect obedience.

But say these Men if you are justified by faith, you are justified by works, and so exclude the grace of God. The Apostle saith the contrary, Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace, Verse 16. But this I suppose they cannot or will not understand, but think that if it be by faith, it must be by a work exclusive of grace. They consider not that faith is the free gift of God through Christ, and that it is by grace that God saves through faith. Ephes. 2. 8. For by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God. A Soul being by the Holy Spirit convinced of its own sinful and lost condition, and its own inability and insufficiency to save it self out of this condition; by the light of the Gospel it hath a discovery there is a sufficiency of Satisfaction, Merit, Power, and Spirit in Christ for its Pardon and Life; beside a free offer herein of this grace unto it immediately as it is really burdened with Sin, and under the fears of eternal perishing, and so truly will­ing of Christ and his Grace above all the World; upon which the Soul penitentially renouncing the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, gives its actual con­sent to accept of Christ for its Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, and so to be subject to God in him by the Holy Spirit. Here now is the union of the Soul [Page 34] with Christ by Faith, and so its actual right hereupon through Christ to Pardon and Life; and this [...]aith as it is the matter of right, is the Souls personal justify­ing Righteousness, and the Gospels afferting such a Soul; i. e. a Believer to have this right is God's me­diate justifying act. Consider still, John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. See then upon the matter if it be not of Faith that it might be by Grace, and pre­tend not to exclude Faith for fear you should exclude Grace, but fear to exclude Faith, seeing that if you do, you most certainly exclude Grace, for the more of the Obedience of Faith, and the more is the crea­ture depressed, and God in Christ exalted. Rom. 4. 20. He staggered not at the promise of God through unbe­lief: but was strong in faith, giving glory to God.

7. A Seventh Text they would have speak for them is, Rom. 5. 19. For as by one Man's disobedience many were made sinners: so by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous. If they mean, by what this Scripture saith, that God did account Adam's act of his disobe­dience in violating the Laws to be ours: so he ac­counts Christ's obedience in fulfilling the Law to be ours in it self, and that we fullfiled the Law in him, I Answer, God did not account Adam's act in eating the forbidden Fruit so to be ours, as though we had eaten our selves; for God knows we neither took, re­ceived, nor did eat of the Fruit in our own Persons, our Persons then having no Existence or actual Being: And God is true, and will not account that to be done by us which he knows we did not. Indeed we par­take of the sad Fruits of that disobedience, having derived from Adam originally by natural Generation, a nature sadly corrupted and violated: and so are guilty before God, and are accounted both by him and his Law really to be so: And so God doth not account the Obedience of Christ in his fulf [...]ing the [Page 35] Law to be ours, as though we had performed it in our own Persons, for he knows, and we may know our selves we did not. But this God doth for and upon the account of Christ's sinless perfect meritorious righ­teousness, constitute us righteous by his Gospel Law upon true Faith, and accounts us as we are Believers for Christ to have an actual right to Pardon and Life.

8. Another Text is, Rom. 8. 4. That the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit. I take the meaning of this Text to be this; i. e. Christ Jesus having answer­ed the ends of the violated Law by his perfect Obe­dience and Suffering, hath obtained hereby that a Christian's sincere Obedience, which consists in con­formity to the Law of Grace, shall be accepted for Christ's sake as really by God, as though he had ful­filled or perfectly obeyed the Law of Innocency in his own Person, which now as a fallen Creature he is incapable of doing. The ground of this my appre­hension are the words that follow; who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit. Now though every true Christian, as to the bent of his Heart and Life doth walk after the Spirit, and not according to the Flesh or corrupt Nature; yet it cannot be that by this the Law of Innocency is fulfilled in him, seeing that it must be a sinless conformity that must be a fulfilling of that Law; now mark the Text speaks of a personal fulfilling, and this by a walking according to the Spi­rit; therefore this Law which is fulfilled in them or by them must be the Law of Grace, and not the Law of Innocency. And let not Man say still that God accounts that a true Believer doth fulfil the Law of Innocency in Christ, for if so that Law must justifie and the Covenant of Grace be made void. Christ fulfilled that Law for us, but we did not fulfill it in our own Persons in his fulfilling of it.

[Page 36]9. The Ninth Text is in Psalm 71. 16. I will make mention of thy righteousness, even of thine only. What is there in this Text to prove that God accounts the righteousness of Christ to be the formal personal righ­teousness of every Believer? Plain it is the Text speaks of God's righteousness in keeping and fulfilling his gracious Promises, which righteousness is no other but his truth and faithfulness. But suppose we this Scripture to speak of the righteousness of Christ as Men would have it, what will it still be to their pur­pose; all that they can gather from it upon any likely ground upon this supposition, is only that David would make mention of Christ's righteousness as the merit of all the good which he both had and did ex­pect, and the ground of his acceptance, which is a great truth in it self: but I do not say it is that which by the Holy Spirit is intended chiefly in the Text.

10. Another Text is in Ezech. 16. 14. And thy re­nown went forth among the Heathen for thy beauty, for it was perfect through my comliness which I had put upon thee, saith the Lord God. This comliness, say they, which God put upon this People, and from whence they had their beauty, was the righteousness of Christ imputed in it self. Now if the People would but a little consider what follows, they might see this com­liness God put upon them spoken of here was a civil comliness; i. e. the Peace, Plenty, fulnses of all tem­poral good things; the Honour, Greatness, Dignity, &c. that God had advanced them unto, especially in David's and Solomon's times above their Neighbours. But come on, if so be they will have the righteous­ness of Christ meant, then belike it must follow.

1. Believers how mean or contemptible soever they be in this World, must be renowned and very famous among the very Heathen for Christ's imputed righte­ousness. And yet alas! the poor Heathen are meer strangers to it, knowing nothing of it, and here is the wonder indeed.

[Page 37]2. Believers they may trust too much to Christ's righteousness; now I ever thought these Men that are for this strict Imputation, had been of a mind that a Person could not trust too much to Christ's righteous­ness, but its like Persons may, if by this comliness be meant Christ's righteousness, as they will see ver. 15. But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot, because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy forni­cations on every one that passed by; his it was.

3. Persons valuing Christ's righteousness too much, and trusting too much unto it, may thereby be drawn to commit Spiritual Whoredom, to break their Cove­nant with God, and become Apostates from God by falling into Idolatry, &c. If they will have the righte­ousness of Christ meant by this comliness, and the beauty that was upon this People, then they must have these consequences, as is plain from the 15th and 16th Verses. This may be enough to convince any Person that hath not drunk in a fixed prejudice, that their cause must be very weak, who are put for the vindication of it so manifestly to pervert the Sense of Scripture, as that a Child of an indifferent capa­city who can but read may with a very little ado un­derstand it.

11. Another Text is in Matt. 22. 11, 12, 13. con­cerning the Man which had not on the wedding gar­ment. This Wedding garment, say they, is the righ­teousness of Christ. I shall give here the Sense of the Reverend Dr. Manton upon this. In a Sermon upon this Text he puts the Question, what this Wed­ding garment is? To find out this, let me tell you, saith he, First, That it is usual in Scripture to set forth Sin by nakedness, and Grace by a garment, that one place which we have in Revel. 3. 17, 18. sheweth both thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. Therefore I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich, and white rai­ment that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy [Page 38] nakedness do not appear. Graces are a beautiful ornament to the Soul, as garments are to the Body, therefore we are said to put on the new Man, which is created in holiness and righteousness. Ephes. 4. 24. And again, to put on, as the elect of God holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long suf­fering. Coloss. 3. 12. It is such a garment as becometh the solemnity of the Marriage feast of the King's Son; Christ's Gospel-feast is a Royal feast, and a Spiritual feast, becoming the nature of God's Kingdom; There­fore the [...]NR [...], the Wedding garment is that new array which becometh such a solemaity. As 'tis a Royal feast, it must be something more than ordi­nary excellency that is required of us at a Spiritual feast, a Spiritual excellency. Therefore the Wedding garment is holiness, habitual and actual, which is the glory of God and the beauty of God and his People. Habitual holiness, Revel. 19. 8. And to her was granted, that she should be arrayed in fine linnen, clean and white: for the fine linnen is the righteousness of Saints. [...]NR [...], the righteousness of Saints; these are those graces which constitute us Saints.

By the way Observe, how far this Reverend Author was from thinking that, which is here called the righteousness of Saints to be the righ­teousness of Christ, as some have taken it, and Mr. Hildersham among the rest. And then saith he, actual holiness is an holy conversation. Philip. 1. 27. Only let your conversation be as it becometh the Gospel of Christ. Ephes. 4. 1. I therefore beseech you, that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called. We put on the Wedding garment to honour the Marriage; Therefore those that come to the Wedding feast without a Wed­ding garment, who take up a bare profession of the Gospel, without newness of Heart and Life, which may be an honour and ornament to it, are a dishonour and disgrace rather unto it. Thus far this Pious and Learned Author. And let me add Christ and his righ­teousness [Page 39] together, with the gracious priviledges of the Gospel are the feast; now certainly the Wedding garment must not be the same thing with the feast.

12. A Twelfth Text is in 2 Corinth. 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. The meaning is, God made him who was an Innocent Person to be a Sin-offering, or a Sacrifice for Sin, that we for his satisfactory and meritorious righteousness might be made and accounted righteous according to the Covenant of Grace by Faith in him. For ob­serve, that which is the meritorious cause of a thing, the thing of which it is the meritorious cause, cannot be the same thing with that which merits it, but the effect of it: therefore plain it is the righteousness of God here spoken of must be the effect of the merito­rious righteousness of Christ, or the thing merited by it, and so cannot be the righteousness of Christ it self, but a righteousness appointed by God hereupon, which he will accept as the righteousness of our Per­sons, for the righteousness sake of Christ, instead of sinless perfect righteousness, and that righteousness is no other but the righteousness of Faith, which is a conformity to the Gospel Law, which Faith as it is the Souls free consent to accept, and take the Lord Jesus not only to be its Propitiation; but also its head and teacher, includes a real engagement sincerely to be obedient to all his commands, and so to trust only, and depend upon him in faithful Obedience for the gift of all necessary and saving good he hath purchased, and God for his sake hath promised. Hence we read of the obedience of Faith, Rom. 16. 26. Rom. 4. 20, 21.

13. Another Text is in 1 Corinth. 1. 30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. Be­cause, say they, it is said, that Christ is made righte­ousness unto us of God, therefore Christ's righteous­ness [Page 40] in it self is imputed unto us by God. I Answer, if so be that it will follow that Christ's righteousness in it self is imputed unto us by God, because he is made righteousness unto us of God, then it must also follow that the Wisdom of Christ, and the Holiness of Christ in themselves must be imputed unto us, be­cause he is said to be made of God unto us Wisdom, and Sanctification, for after what manner he is said to be made of God righteousness unto us, after the same manner is he said to be made Wisdom and Sanctifica­tion, &c. Now if he be not made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification by this strict Imputation, then neither righteousness in that Sense. As Christ then by God is made over to all his People to be the Purchaser and Author of their Spiritual Wisdom and Holiness, so is he also made over to them to be the Meriter and Efficient cause of that Gospel righteous­ness; i. e. a practical Faith, which God for his sake accepts instead of a legal perfect righteousness, which the Law of sinless works injoins.

SECT. IV. Reasons against the Imputation of Faith, and for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness answered.

HAving spoken something to the principal Texts urged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righ­teousness, and shewed that they can be no proof that Christ's righteousness is our formal personal righ­teousness; let us now hear what in reason may yet be said against the Imputation of Faith.

1. Say they, Faith is no Righteousness, and there­fore cannot be imputed for righteousness. I Answer, If the Antecedent can be proved in that Sense in which faith is called righteousness, the Consequent must be granted. But know, Conformity to the Law of Innocency that is a righteousness, but faith is no such righteous­ness: Conformity to the Gospel or Law of Grace that is a righteousness, and faith is this righteousness, it is a conformity unto the Gospel command. John 3. 23. And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave commandment. And it is expresly said to be counted for righteousness, in the 4th of the Romans. Therefore if there be no righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of Innocency, so indeed faith is no righteousness, seeing it is not a conformity to that Law, and thus the Antecedent would be true but know there is a righteousness which is a confor­mity to the Gospel Law, and faith is this righteousness, seeing it is a conformity to this Law. And thus the Antecedent appears to be false, and so the Consequent.

2. Say they, Faith is not our personal justifying righteousness because it is a work. I Answer, This Argument supposeth that there is no Justification by a personal righteousness, and if no Justification by a personal righteousness, then there must be no such [Page 42] thing as a Justification of any Person at all; for if there be a Justification by a personal righteousness, then there must be Justification by a work: for to tell of Justification by a personal righteousness, and yet also to tell that there is no such thing as Justification by any work, is to say that there is a Justification by a personal righteousness, and there is not a Justifica­tion by a personal righteousness, because no Justifica­tion by any work; than which nothing can be more absurd. But it may be said there is no such thing as Justification by a personal righteousness of our own. I Answer, To tell of a personal righteousness, and yet say it is not mine after any sort, is as much as to say a personal righteousness and not a personal righte­ousness, which still is a manifest contradiction, for how can I be personally righteous with a righteousness that is not mine after some sort? Yes, it may be it will be said Christ's righteousness whereby we are justified is our own by Imputation: If so, then God accounts it to be the righteousness of your Persons, or how can your Persons be justified by it? And if God account it to be the righteousness of your Persons, then he must account you in your own Persons to be con­formed to some Law hereby, (or else how should Justification, as all that call themselves Protestants con­fess, be a juridical or Law act) And can you be con­formed in your own Persons to a Law without a work? We are, you may say, conformed to the Law in our own Persons by the work and obedience of another; i. e. Christ, to that Law. This now is as much as to say, that you are conformed to the Law in your own Persons, without any personal conformity, still contra­diction. Well, but Christ's personal conformity to the Law is reckoned by God in our Justification to be our personal conformity; if so, then God must account you to be perfect fulfillers of the Law, and if God do this, he must account you also to be performers of the obedience that Law calls for, or he cannot account you [Page 43] fulfillers. After all this, now here is the mistery, still you will deny that you are justified by a Covenant of Works, or by any work accounted by God to be your own. Here is the Riddle, look who can unfold it; so that plain it is, some Persons will not have Faith to be a justifying righteousness, because it is a work, and yet they themselves according to their own notion must and do hold Justification by perfect legal works, which are excluded from Justification by the Holy Scripture, while it speaks expresly of Justificati­on by Faith, as hath been shewn above.

Well, but we are not justified by any works sub­jectively in us, or done by us. I Answer, you say they are yours by Imputation, and if so, God must account them not only to be done by you, but to be subjectively in you, for if God do account me to have personally done this or the other (which he must do if he impute what Christ hath done to me, and so ac­count his obedience to be my formal personal righte­ousness) he must account me to be or to have been the subject of that work. Actiones sunt suppositorum, but this I have cleared above.

But why will they not admit of Faith as justifying righteousness because it is a work? I suppose they think it would occasion boasting, now the Scripture speaks far otherwise. The Holy Spirit in it saith, where all is received of free gift, there is no ground for boasting, and sure I am nothing is more express than Faith to be freely given. And the Apostle is ex­press, that boasting is excluded by the Law of Faith, or that Law which commands Faith in Christ, and if by the Law of Faith, then by Faith it self where it is: for true Faith where it is, 'tis of that nature as to set the Crown wholly upon Christ's Head, and keep the Soul that hath it low and humble. But now as to the other Law; i. e. the Law of perfect sinless works, such works as have no Sin attends them, if we seek for Justification by a righteousness which is a confor­mity [Page 44] thereunto, here is a foundation for boasting, and that because if I be justified by it, I must merit and deserve in my own Person Life by my conformity thereunto, and so the merit of another must be wholly excluded, this is that now which some Persons do not take heed unto, when they say that Gospel works such as Faith in the matter of Justification, I mean the qualifying matter; lays a foundation for boasting, they should prove, before they can have ground for their Assertion; that Faith hath a purchasing meritorious efficacy, but this they do not, nor cannot. For though Adam had what he had both of Moral and Natural integrity by the grace of Creation; yet had he continued to have yielded conformity to the Law of Innocency, he might have boasted in this, and de­pended upon it as a righteousness which would have merited and deserved the continuance of Life for him. Persons may be high pretenders to exalt Christ and his righteousness; but if they will have a righteousness which is a conformity to the Law of Innocency to be their personal justifying righteousness, they must have a personal meritorious righteousness, and these must open a wide door for boasting. But if Persons will have Justification by Faith, as a personal Gospel righ­teousness to give them right, which is for this consti­tuted by God for Christ's Merits, this wholly excludes all boasting as to the having a personal righteousness that is in it self, or in its own nature satisfying and meriting, and thus Christ and the grace of God in him in a Sinner's Justification and Salvation is exalted. This Law of Faith is that which the Apostle opposeth to that Law he speaks of in Philip. 3. 9. the righteous­ness or observation of which [...]e disclaims in point of Justification, or as that which gives any right to Christ, Pardon and Life. And therefore the righteousness of this Law; i. e. the Law of Faith is called by the Apo­stle in this Verse, the righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ, and the righteousness of God by [Page 45] Faith, this, this is the righteousness which hath Christ for its Object, and is appointed by God in his Cove­nant of Grace to be our personal justifying righteous­ness. This was the righteousness the Apostle would have that he might be found in him; i. e. united unto him. Very few of our Divines but they hold we are united to Christ by Faith, and this was that the Apo­stle valued above all union with him; seeing then the Apostle opposeth that which gives interest in Christ, and union with him unto his own righteousness in this Verse, that which gives interest then and unites must be Faith, and so he must be far from disclaiming it as dung. Now if so Persons will have the righteousness of Christ meant by this righteousness through Faith and by Faith, then it must be the righteousness of Christ which unites to Christ, and so the same thingmust unite unto, and give interest in it self; But whoever said this?

But to proceed no further in this, let us hear what they have to say for the vindication of this strict Im­putation of Christ's righteousness.

1. Christ's righteousness (say they) must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because there will be no standing in judgment before God, unless we be cloathed with a perfect righteousness, and there is no such righteous­ness, but that of Christ's.

I Answer, if the process in judgment should be ac­cording to the terms of the Law of Innocency; i. e. that Sentence must pass upon Persons according to conformity or non-conformity to this Law, then the reason would be cogent: But seeing it shall not there is no force in it at all. That it shall not, See Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Christ Jesus according to my Gospel. 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8. And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven, with his mighty An­gels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: which Scriptures with others make it manifest, [Page 44] [...] [Page 45] [...] [Page 46] the Gospel shall be the rule of judgment. Hence there­fore as Persons in judgment shall be found, such as have been obedient or disobedient to the Gospel, so shall the Sentence pass to Life or Condemnation, John 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting LIfe; and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him. Though know it shall be for the sake of Christ's perfect righteousness, that such as are found true penitent Believers shall be adjudged to eternal Life at that day; seeing had it not been for this his meritorious righteousness, there had been no Covenant of Grace, and so no accepting of any to Life upon such terms as the Gospel requires; so that the whole glory of Believers Salvation must redound to him, I speak here of the Adult, unless Persons have an interest in and a right unto a perfect righteousness, and so unto the righteousness of Christ, they shall not be cleared and adjudged to Life in judgment. But the Question is, Whether all have an interest in, and a right unto his righteousness? If not, Who are they that have? Will you say any, speaking of the Adult, that live under the sound of the Gospel, but such as are found obedient thereunto? And are not true peni­tent Believers the Persons which are obedient? if so then, they are the Persons who shall be cleared and adjudged to eternal Life in judgment. But it may be said not for their Repentance and Faith. I Answer, still not for these as the purchasing meriting causes: but upon these as the qualifying matter of right, which qualifying matter of right, though it be not as is acknow­ledged a righteousness answerable to the Law of Inno­cency, and so can be no justifying righteousness in the account of that Law, yet is a righteousness agree­able to the Gospel; and so is a justifying righteousness in the judgment of that Law.

2. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only per­sonal justifying righteousness, because all that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another, and this other [Page 47] by whose righteousness they must be justified can be none but Christs.

I Answer, I do not deny but affirm that those that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another, and that by Christs, and his only as the purchase and merit of Justification: But then that this is the qualify­ing righteousness of mine or another's Person, which gives interest in Christ, and a right to Pardon and Life according to the Gospel, this I deny. For though it be for Christ we are justified; yet it is by Faith in him as imputed by God we are formally justified and made righteous, which Faith though it be our own, and so our own righteousness by free gift and possession, yet is none of our own, but Christ's in point of Merit, and thus we are justified by a righteousness Christ hath merited, and God's in point of Efficiency, as he by his Spirit is the Author of it. And there is this I would ask by the way; i. e. Whether Justification be not a Gospel priviledge? if it be, as I hope it will not be denied, Then are not all Gospel priviledges purchased and merited by Christ? if so, then certainly Justifica­tion among the rest. And if Justification, give me leave further to ask, Did Christ purchase and merit his own righteousness? you grant he purchased and merit­ed the priviledge of Justification, and you say that Christ's righteousness is the only formal justifying righ­teousness of our Persons; must you not then also say that he purchased and merited his own righteousness, certainly, yes. Now pray! When, or how, or by what did Christ this? if you say that Christ did not pur­chase and merit his own righteousness; then I ask, How did he purchase and merit Justification? And how is Justification then in your Sense a Gospel privi­ledge purchased and merited by Christ? It may be you will say that Christ purchased and merited that his righteousness might be imputed by God unto us for our Justification; grant this, still you must say that he purchased and merited not that which you [Page 48] call the matter of your Justification, and so what you say must come to this that Christ did not merit and purchase that which justifies you, and if so, then that which justifies you must not be that which is purchased and merited by Christ. See then however in this, if the charge of Socinianism do not fall foul upon your selves, as to the material part of your Justification. Whereas the Scripture saith we are justified by his blood; i. e. his Blood must purchase and merit that which justifies, as well as God's Imputation of it; but will you say that Christ's Blood purchased and merited Christ's righteousness, which you say is the very matter of Justification.

3. Christ's righteousness only, say they, must be our justi­fying righteousness, because Believers have union and com­munion with him.

This is no Argument; we grant that all true Belie­vers have union and communion with Christ; but then it is affirmed generally this union is by Faith, and communion of his part not by the communication of his righteousness, which is proper to himself as Medi­atour, but by the communication of his Grace the fruit of his purchase, by virtue of his righteousness the merit hereof.

4. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justi­fying righteousness, because this was the end of his fulfilling the Law.

I Answer, if they speak of Christ's Obedience to the Law of Innocency, I grant he yielded perfect confor­mity to that Law both in habit and act: But then that this was the end that his righteousness should be imputed unto us as our very formal personal righte­ousness remains to be proved; for if they speak of Christ's active Obedience here, it was an ingredient into the meritorious cause of our Redemption, Re­conciliation, and Acceptation; Galat. 4. 4, 5. For when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a Woman, made under the Law. To redeem [Page 49] them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of Sons. Heb. 7. 26. For such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, seperate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. And as such it cannot be imputed unto us as our personal righteous­ness as is manifest. And there is this upon the matter I would have considered; i. e. in God's justifying you doth he account the righteousness which you say is the very matter of y [...]r Justification, to be Christs, and his only, or does he account it to be the righteousness of another; if he account it to be his only, then how doth he account it to be your personal righteousness? If he account it to be the personal righteousness of ano­ther, suppose of a Believer, then how doth he account it to be Christs, and his only? That which is Christs, and his only cannot be mine in it self, that which is mine and the very formal righteousness of my Person cannot be Christs, and his only, because God must account it to be mine as well as Christs. True in­deed, Grace is Christs, and his only both as the pur­chaser, Lord Treasurer, and the great mean of con­veyance; but then Christ's righteousness which is pro­per to him, is nor cannot be for communication to us as grace is, seeing it is for satisfaction, and so respects God immediately, and for merit and so the grace of Justification, Adoption, &c. must be the blessed fruits hereof. We have upon Repentance and Faith, Re­conciliation and Peace with God, for the satisfaction given to God; but we have not that which made sa­tisfaction; we have likewise Justification, Pardon, and Life for his Merits, if true penitent Believers; but we have not that in it self which merited this Grace. It is very strange that Persons should so much as think that that which was the satisfaction and merit should be given to them in it self, and that God should ac­count them such as satisfied God's Justice in Christ, and merited Pardon and Life in Christ. These Men they condemn the Papists, for saying Christ merited [Page 50] that we might merit, and yet cannot nor will not see that they are holding the same themselves in the strict­est Sense. True it is, for Christ's satisfaction we have Peace, and for his Merits, we have Spirit and Grace: But then to tell of our satisfying in Christ, and merit­ing in Christ, as though we might have Peace for our satisfying in him, and Grace for our meriting in him, 'tis mighty gross. I know here they will say, they hold no such thing; I Answer, If [...]en will hold that they either do not, or will not understand, what, or who can help them? But it would do well if they would consider that so long as they hold Christ and themselves to be one legal Person, 'tis not possible what­ever their practice be, they should hold any less in the notion.

5. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justi­fying righteousness, because we are debtors to the Law, both to perform perfect obedience, and also to suffer punishment for the violation of it. Now seeing, say they, we can do neither so as to make satisfaction, and have Justification; the righteousness of Christ in it self must be our personal justifying righteousness, and so accounted by God.

I Answer, Though we can neither by our Obedience nor suffering make Satisfaction and have Justification by the Law; yet for Christ's Satisfaction and Obe­dience whereby the Justice of God is answered, and the repute and credit of God's violated Law is kept up, and the ends of God's governing Justice secured: there is no obligation lying upon any Believer, seeing a new Covenant is purchased, to perform perfect Obedience; nor can any true Believer be under obligation to suffer the punishment threatned by the violated Law, seeing that such an one is actually delivered from the execu­tion of the Curse by Christ's satisfactory righteousness. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ [Page 51] Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit, true soul uniting Faith to Christ, giving him a right hereunto for Christ's sake, and this God imputes un­to them for righteousness, according to the Law of Grace.

6. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justi­fying righteousness, because Do this i. e. perfectly obey the Law and live, is a fixed Rule; but no Man can perfectly fulfill the Law of Innocency, therefore Christ's righteousness must be so imputed by God, that so in his account believers may be said to have done this, i. e. perfectly fulfilled the Law that they may live.

It is manifest by this Argument the Objectors will have Justification by that Law which requires perfect sinless works. But let them know do this according to that Law and live or be justified, is not a fixed stated Rule to any Man upon Earth, but believe and live for the sake of Christ, John 3. 26. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that who­soever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlast­ing life. Mark 26. 26. He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not, shall be damned. Acts 26. 31. And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thine House. There­fore the Reason given is of no force, for the strict Im­putation of Christ's righteousness.

7. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only per­sonal justifying righteousness, because it is that which God accepts on our behalf.

I Answer, If they mean that God accepts the righ­teousness of Christ on the behalf of Believers, so as to account it a sufficient satisfaction for them, and the merit of all good, which they partake of, and that for which he accepts all their sincere duties, I grant them the whole: But if they mean, God so accepts it on their behalf, as to account it to be the very righteous­ness of their Persons, by which their Persons are righ­teous according to the Law of Innocency; this I deny, [Page 50] and they can never shew any solid proof for what they affirm.

8. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only per­sonal justifying righteousness, because Christ was a publick Person standing in the place, and stead of all those that should believe in him, so that all that he did and suffered are to be looked upon, and are reputed by God as done and suffered by them, and consequently are imputed to them.

I Answer, That Christ did sustain the Person of a Mediatour, for the making atonement, and purcha­sing reconciliation; I grant, but that he sustained the Person of all those (as a sinner) that should after be­lieve in him; this I deny, seeing then he should have been accounted the offending party, and so as such had been incapable of purchasing and making peace betwixt the offending and offended. For he that is accounted guilty, and so an offender should have need­ed a Mediatour and reconciler for himself; but this Christ did not, therefore to tell of Christ's being a publick Person in this Sense is false, and not only so, but destructive of his Office as Mediatour, and so also of his Satisfaction and Merit, as is manifest. And whereas it may be said, How could he have suffered, if by the Law he was not accounted guilty, and an offender? I Answer, The Law did not account Christ as guilty, or an offender, nor did it ever condemn him; but on the contrary it accounted him a righte­ous Person (not considering him at all as a Mediatour or Surety) and justified him as a fulfiller of it both in Nature and Life, and therefore he was under no ob­ligation at all by the Law of Innocency to Suffer, but the obligation was from the Law of Redemption or Mediation, by his own free and voluntary susception, according to the paction betwixt him and the Father. The just suffered for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. If just, then by what Law was he just? He that is just in Law, by that Law that accounts him just, as such he cannot be accounted guilty or an [Page 51] offender, but Christ was just in the account of the Law of Innocency. Hence therefore that which they would gather from Christ's being a publick Person must fall with its foundation, for neither the Law, nor God by the Law did account that Christ did so personate Sinners, as to reckon what he did and suf­fered, they did and suffered. What Christ did and suffered, it was accounted to be done and suffered for us, but not accounted to be done and suffered by us; for if so, then God should accept satisfaction immedi­ately from us, and not from Christ, and God must account us immediately to have merited, and not Christ; i. e. Christ should only be accounted by God as the means whereby we satisfied his Justice, and merited Life for our selves; for if all that Christ did and suffered be by God reputed as done and suffered by us, then I ask for what end? for that which was done and suffered by Christ was satisfactory and meri­torious; now if Christ obeyed and suffered for this end, that God might account what he did and suffered to be done and suffered by us, then Christ must have obeyed and suffered for this end, that God might have satisfaction from us, and that we by his means might merit a right to Life. Can they prove this, thinkest thou, Reader?

9. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only per­sonal justifying righteousness, because we cannot be justified by it any other way, than by God's imputing it to us as such.

I Answer, If this be so, there must be no Justifica­tion of a Sinner at all, for no Sinner is nor can be formally, personally, righteous with Christ's righte­ousness, and therefore God doth not account him to be so, as hath been proved above.

10. If we may truly be said to be dead, and crucified with Christ, to be quickned with Christ, to have risen again with Christ, to sit in heavenly places in or with Christ, &c. then may we be said to have fulfilled the Law with Christ [Page 54] also, and consequently the fulfilling of the Law by Christ is imputed to us, and accounted ours.

I Answer, The Scripture it is granted saith con­cerning true Believers that they are dead, and cruci­fied with Christ, &c. But what are they said to be so properly and personally? Did they lay down their natural lives with Christ, and a [...]ise in his rising again, unto a corporal and glorified Life? Or did God ac­count them so to have done in Christ, when he knows they did not? If not, as is plain, then the meaning is by way of efficacy and likeness. Christ indeed hath merited the Holy Spirit, and this Spirit is given for the sake of his Merits unto his People, by the power and efficacy of which Spirit sin is mortified, the Heart crucified to the World, and the Soul made alive to God, raised from a Death in Sin to a Life of Grace and Holiness, and the affections are set upon things above, where Christ sits at the right hand of God; from whence results a Christian, assimulation, or like­ness to Christ, in his Death, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascention and Exaltation. But what ground from hence to draw such an inference; i. e. that we have fulfilled the Law in Christ's fulfilling of it. Plain it is no ground at all; but the consequence leans to that false supposition, that what Christ did and suffered, God accounted us to have done and suffered, which beside what hath been said already, if true, then God must account us if Believers, to have been born of a Virgin in a Stable, to have been circumcised, to have disputed with the Doctors in the Temple at Twelve years of Age, and to have been subject to Joseph and Mary as our Parents, to have been baptized by John the Baptist, to have wrought Miracles, &c. in Christ. But who will say this? if none, then all must hold the thing supposed formerly by many, must be false, and if they will let the notion go, the consequences are none of theirs.

[Page 55]11. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justifying righteousness, because all are and continue Sinners while they live, and therefore cannot be personally righteous, but by God's accounting Christ's righteousness in it self to be theirs, or accounting them righteous in their persons with Christ's righteousness.

I Answer, This Argument supposeth that Persons may be formally personally righteous with a sinless perfect righteousness, for such is Christ's, and so ac­counted by God, and so sinless and perfectly righte­ous in their nature, as hath been shewn before, and yet for all this are and remain Sinners, which is a con­tradiction. Now I grant that all Men that are justi­fied are and do remain Sinners in the account of the Law of Innocency, but as justified they are accounted though not sinless, yet righteous by the Law of Grace, being true penitent Believers, for Repentance and Faith, &c. are a Conformity to what it commands, upon which Conformity it asserts and maintains their interest in Christ, and right to Pardon and Life. There is no satisfaction for a Sinner, nor merit to procure him any good, but in and by a sinless perfect righteousness, which is Christs, but then that God accounts the sin­ner whom he justifies to have such a righteousness to be the very righteousness of his Person, so as to be for­mally righteous by it, this I deny.

12. Believers, say they, are righteous with Christ's righ­teousness, seeing they are members of that mistical body of which he is the head.

I Answer, I do not deny but Believers are members of that mistical body of which Christ is the head; but though it be so, yet it doth not follow, that they are righteous with his righteousness, and have it to be their formal personal righteousness; indeed they are righteous for it but not with it, for though Christ be the head of his Church, and his Church and each member hath benefit from him as such; yet I hope none will say that each member of Christ's mistical [Page 54] body is accounted by God to perform the very functi­on and office of Christ as head, which they must say and prove too, or else this they bring for an Argument bears no proportion, and so is of no force; Christ is a governing head, Will they say that God accounts each of his members to be so? He as head communi­cates spiritual Life, Sense and Motion to his members, Will they say God accounts each member to do so?

13. Say they, Believers are married to Christ; now as a Woman's debts in Law account when married are her Husbands, and all that he is possest of is hers: so it is be­twixt Christ and those that are united unto him by a spiri­tual Marriage Covenant, he hath in Law sense their debts, and they have his righteousness.

I Answer, Similitudes illustrate, but they are no proof, neither do the things compared in all points bear an equal proportion; We grant then that Christ and true Believers are really, though mistically united in a Marriage Covenant, and that as Believers they have forgiveness of Sin for the sake of his meritorious and satisfactory righteousness; and all that he hath done and suffered, and hereby purchased is for them in special, and their benefit; but then it doth not follow hereupon, that the Law of God violated by them doth account that they have fulfilled it in Christ, and suffered the penalty for their violation in him, for if so the Law should adjudge them first to be perfect­ly righteous, and then after that apply forgiveness un­to them as Sinners, which is a manifest contradiction; for he that the Law doth account to be perfectly righ­teous (I speak of the Law of Innocency) cannot be a Sinner, and if so must need no forgiveness. If it be said the Law first acquits from guilt, and so forgives, this is no other but to make it a Covenant of Mercy and Life, and if it account a Person after the first for­giveness perfectly righteous in Christ, then he must not after that be a Sinner, and so need no Pardon. Christ cannot in a sound Sense be said to have taken [Page 55] our debts upon him any otherwise than he voluntarily and freely undertook to satisfie for our offences as Me­diatour, neither was he under obligation hereunto by any Law, but that of mediation. And further as to Believers having his righteousness, this can be no fur­ther than it may be of use and benefit unto them; and the use and benefit Christ's righteousness is of un­to Believers, What is it? sure, 'tis for the satisfaction of an infinite God offended; and what doth God ac­count it to be their personal righteousness as to this use? If so, then God must account he hath satisfacti­on from them in their own Persons. And as to its fur­ther use and benefit unto Believers; What is it? cer­tainly, to merit all the good of Grace and Glory. And what now doth God account it to be their per­sonal righteousness as to this use? If so, then God must account them to be righteous in their Persons with such a righteousness as merits all the good of Grace and Glory. Now true it is Believers have Christ's righteousness, or interest in it, or right unto it, as that for which God is reconciled unto them, and for which they shall have Grace and Glory, but they have it not so, nor are interested in it so as to be personally righteous with it, neither doth God account them so to have it. If they say God doth not account it the righteousness of their Persons, or that their Persons are righteous with it, as it is satisfactory and meritorious, it cannot be the righteousness of their Persons under that formality. If they grant this, then I say they cannot have it all, so as to be personally righteous with it, for a righteousness divested and stripped of satisfaction and merit can be none of Christ's, for it is essential to his righteousness, as Mediatour to be satisfactory and meritorious; and if it be none of Christ's which is accounted by God to be their per­sonal righteousness, or the righteousness their Persons are righteous withal for Justification; pray, What or whose can this righteousness be which they say is ac­counted [Page 56] by God to be their personal justifying righte­ousness, beside that of the righteousness of Faith? let them exclude Faith and tell us.

14. Say they, the Gospel is nothing but a Revelation or Declaration of what Christ hath done and suffered, and that by his obedience and suffering he hath fulfilled the Law and satisfied God's justice; So that Christ having thus an­swered for us, upon believing neither the Law, nor Justice of God hath any thing against us, because the righteousness of Christ whereby he hath fulfilled the Law and satisfied Justice is made over to us by God's Imputation, as though we had wrought it out in our own Persons.

I Answer, it is granted the Gospel doth repeat what Christ hath done and suffered, &c. But then that it is nothing but a revelation of this sort, this I deny, for besides this, it injoins us Repentance towards God and Faith in Jesus Christ, Acts 20. 21. Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, Repentance toward God, and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ; and it threatens the Impenitent Unbelievers with God's eternal wrath, Mark 16. 16. He that believeth, and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not, shall be damned. Luke 13. 3. I tell you, nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all like­wise perish. Now to say that Christ having satisfied Justice, and fulfilled the Law, neither the Law nor Justice hath any thing against us, what is it but to say the Law accounts us righteous, and so indeed the Justice of God can find no fault in us; and if so, then we must have no Sin, and if no Sin, then no need of forgiveness, and if no Sin, and so no need of forgive­ness, then no place for Repentance and Faith. I have granted and do grant that Christ hath satisfied the Justice of God, and fulfilled the Law for us, that we for and through this his righteousness might have Par­don and Life, upon our Conformity to the commands of the Gospel: but then if he have satisfied and ful­filled the Law for this end that neither the Law nor God's infinite strict Justice may have any thing against [Page 57] us, how comes David to pray, Psalm 143. 2. Enter not into judgment with thy Servant: for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified. And how come the best of God's People many times to be under desertion and temporal Afflictions? If it be said, it is not for Sin, I Answer, let the Scripture determine, Psalm 51. 12. Restore unto me the joy of thy Salvation: and uphold me with thy free Spirit Psalm 89. 30, 31, 32. If his Children forsake my Law, and walk not in my judgments: If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments: Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their ini­quity with stripes. If it be said to this, it is not in pure Justice God Afflicts, grant this: yet I hope they will not deny, but that Afflictions are from God, and he is just in what he doth. They are castigatory, yet none of them are satisfactory, nor are they exercised with them for that end. But there is this I would take notice of, whereas they say the Gospel reveals what Christ hath done and suffered, they destroy this by another assertion, and so confound Law and Gos­pel, in making the very threatning of the Law of I [...] ­nocency to reveal Christ and Salvation by him. In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die; i. e. say they, either thou or thy surety, so that here they make the very penal sanction of the Law to be their Gospel. And as a learned Person observes, If this was the mean­ing of the penal sanction or threat, then it must follow that a Mediatour was promised before the fall: for this Covenant; i. e. of Works was struck with Man in In­nocency. And that either Adam understood not his Covenant that was made with him, or else knew of a Surety and Redeemer before his fall, at least being in a readiness for him, in case he should fall. And I add, if this be the meaning of the threatning, that either thou, or thy surety shall die, then upon the sureties undertaking and suffering Sinners must be immedi­ately cleared, seeing the penal sanction or threat had all that which it required, and so there can be no [Page 58] punishment due unto them at all in the Sense of that Law; neither must they be under the curse of it, nor in danger at all of condemnation by it, and so how­ever the Elect cannot be Children of wrath by nature, though the Scripture saith they are. Ephes. 2. 3. Among whom also we all had our conversation in time past, in the lusts of our fl [...]sh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind, and were by nature the Children of wrath, even as others.

15. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be accounted a Believer's personal justifying righteousness, because it cannot be consistent with the Justice of God, to justifie without such a righteousness.

I grant, according to the Revelation of God's plea­sure it cannot be consistent with the Justice of God to justifie without such a righteousness as Christs: but it doth not follow that therefore he must account it a Believer's personal formal righteousness, indeed if there had not been satisfaction given to the justice of God for the securing the honour hereof, there had been no such thing as the Justification of a Sinner; but now God having received satisfaction from Christ, it is very consistent with his Justice and Honour thereof, to justifie a penitent Believer, for the sake of his satis­factory righteousness by virtue of his Gospel consti [...]u­tion, Rom. 3. 25, 26. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righ­teousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God. To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. The Reason above al­ledged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteous­ness, supposeth that Christ's righteousness is not satis­factory for any Sinner, until it be made over by God to be the Sinner's personal formal righteousness; but so soon as it is the Sinner's personal righteousness then it hath the actual virtue, or is actually Efficacious to be satisfactory for that Sinner, but not before, and [Page 59] thus it is further evident from this their Doctrine, that a justified Soul hath a righteousness to be its formal righteousness which is satisfactory to God's infinite strict Justice, and so (as hath been said before) God must immediately receive satisfaction from the Soul, accounted by him to be personally righteous with the very righteousness of Christ, and thus God must not look upon the Soul in and through Christ, and ac­cept it immediately for him, but through the righte­ousness of Christ, as it is upon it self, and as (accord­ing to them) the Soul is cloathed with it.

But here I shall take notice of an Exception made, Although say they, we affirm Christ's righteousness and obe­dience unto the Law is made ours, and so in him as our Surety we fulfill the Law; yet doth it not follow that we are justified by the Law, and that because it is not the righ­teousness which we in Person have wrought.

I Answer, This Reason will not invalidate the con­sequence; for if so be that Christ's righteousness and obedience unto the Law be so made ours, as that we are counted by God to have fulfilled the Law in him as our Surety; then God must account us to have obeyed the Law in his obeying of it, for how can he other­wise account us to have fulfilled it in him? and [...] God do account us to have performed in Christ that obedience the Law requires, then certainly he must account us to be righteous in the Sense of that Law; and if so, How then can that Law chuse but justifie us? Can any Man account me in truth to have obey­ed such a Law in anothers obeying of it, and yet at the same time account me a Transgressor of it? so that plain it is, if God do account us to be the ful­fillers of the Law in Christ, he must account us as such to be righteous according to that Law, and if righteous then justified by it.

SECT. V. The Nature of Gospel Justification farther opened.

HAving briefly dispatched the Objections which are most material; I shall proceed a little further to open the Nature of Gospel Justification.

1. God endued Man at the first not only with Na­tural but Moral perfection; having adorned him with his own Image. Gen. 1. 26, 27. So God created Man in his own Image, Male and Female created he them: and this Image of God which we call Moral, consisted in Knowledge, Righteousness, and Holiness, Coloss. 3. 10. And have put on the new Man, which is renewed in know­ledge, after the Image of him that created him. Ephes. 4. 24. And that ye put on the new Man, which after God is created in righteousness, and true holiness. He had Light for his Understanding, Holy Love for his Will, Righ­teousness for his Life and Conversation.

2. Man being such a Creature must be capable of Moral Government; i. e. of being ruled by Law; for that Creature which is capable of knowing, loving, and obeying God, must also be capable of being ruled by the Law of a Wise, Holy, and Righteous God.

3. God therefore from the first put Man under a Law. To say that God did not, is to affirm. That the capacity which Man had of knowing, loving, and obeying God resulting from his Moral perfections was in vain: but God gave Man nothing in vain. And it would be to affirm that God did not stand in rela­tion to Man as his Rector and Governour, nor Man in [...]elation to God as his Subject by right.

4. God ever suited his legal Constitutions or Laws to the state and condition of Man; in the state of in­tegrity God suited that his state with a Law requiring personal perfect Obedience. Man considered as fallen from that integrity into a state of Sin and Misery, [Page 61] God suited this his state with a Law injoining sincere Obedience, and this not only initial, or upon his first subjection, but continued, and constant to the end of his Life: the one for giving him right through Christ to Pardon and Life, the other for continuing that right.

5. Both these Laws, i. e. that of Innocency and that of Grace, have their sanction both premiant and penal; i. e. a promise of reward in case of Obedience, and the threatning of punishment in case of Disobe­dience.

6. These things being so, I put the Question, whe­ther Innocent Adam's Obedience to the first Law, would not have given him right unto the Life pro­mised? And whether this same Law of Innocency would not have maintained this his right? The first we must grant, or else say, that the promise gives no right to the benefits promised, though the condition be performed, which to say is against the rule of com­mon equity: we must grant the latter also, or else say that the very Instrument God hath appointed for the conveying of right to Life to Innocent Adam, should not be regarded by him in point of claim for all Adam's perfect Obedience, suppose his right should have been called into Question, which to say must needs be to charge God with unfaithfulness and in­justice.

Now if so be (as is clear) Adam's Obedience to the Law of Innocency would have given him right to the Life promised, and also maintained this his right; then will not our Obedience to the second Law; i. e. to the Law of Grace give us right unto the reward promised, and secure us through Christ from the punishment threatned? And secondly, Will not this same Law of Grace also maintain our right? It must, or else we must say, that the promise gives no right unto the benefits promised, though the con­dition required be performed by the Grace of God, [Page 62] also that the very instrument God hath appointed for the conveying of right unto us should by him not be regarded, or not be at all of any benefit unto us, not­withstanding our performance of the condition, if our right should be called into question.

To illustrate what I have said, suppose that we should have a deed of gift of such an inheritance up­on the due performance of such or such conditions therein expressed; Will not the performance of these conditions give us right according to the deed unto the inheritance? and if so be our right be called into question, what must vindicate our right but the deed whereby it was given and granted unto us upon the performance of the conditions expressed. If then these things be so (as is evident) then I gather from hence that which I intended; i. e. that there must be such a thing as Justification by constitution or Law, and seeing there can be no Justification by the Law of Innocency, or Covenant of Works; then there must be another Law which we must have Justification by, and what can this be but a Law of Grace and Mercy, which is the same with that we call the Gospel; now if Persons will not grant such a Law, then Justificati­on must either be by the Law of perfect Works; i. e. by the Covenant of Works, or that Justification we now have must be no Law act, and if so they who contend against us to destroy their own declared O­pinion, asserting that Justification is a juridical or Law term: those therefore that deny the Gospel to be a Law, they must either deny Justification by it, and so account we are justified by the Law of Works, or else they must contradict themselves in affirming Justi­fication not to be by Law.

But because some Persons do not only deny but ri­dicule such a thing as a Law of Grace, calling it an humane invention; it will not be amiss a little to clear this that there is a Law of Grace distinct from that of Works.

Observe then, I hope those that oppose us will grant that God required of Man while in the state of in­tegrity a sinless Obedience; Now the Question will be, seeing Man is a fallen Creature, whether God doth require any Obedience of him? If not, then Man must be at his own will to do what he listeth; and is he so? If God doth require Obedience, what is it? Is it sinless Obedience? If so, then all Mankind must be lost, for none of the fallen race of Adam can per­form it. If they say that Obedience is performed by Christ for us. I ask, Hath Christ performed this Obe­dience that we might be exempted and obey none at all? If so, then he obeyed to set us free from all sub­jection to God, if not, then it remains, for all Christ perfectly obeyed that, yet still we are under obliga­tion to obey in our own Persons. Seeing then we cannot yield sinless Obedience, or Obedience without Sin attending it; Are not we through the assisting Grace of God to perform sincere Obedience? If not, then none at all; if we are, then it will either be ac­cepted of God, or it will not: If it will not, Then to what purpose is it performed? If it will, Then is it of Grace that God accepts it. And if of Grace, must it not be accepted in and through Christ's Satis­factory and Meritorious Righteousness? If so, then it must be revealed by God in his word to be his will that we should thus obey; i. e. sincerely, and that we shall be accepted through Christ hereupon: this will of God commanding is either a Law or it is not? If not, then there is no Transgression if we do not obey; if it be, then they must grant us a Law of Grace which for the sake of Christ will accept of sincere obe­dience instead of perfect; and also they must grant that Christ hath purchased this, or else they and all Mankind (upon a supposition that God had continued Man) should still have been obliged to sinless obedi­ [...]ce, as a condition or qualification of Life; and so for want of obedience of this sort, we should all have [Page 64] been left to the execution of the Curse, and been damned for ever. And observe this Law of Grace of which we speak doth not destroy the Moral Law sum­marily contained in the Ten Commands, for we say still we are under obligation to have respect unto, and obey all its commands in avoiding Sins which are for­bidden, and performing the duties which are com­manded therein. But this is that, we say that we cannot nor do not perfectly obey, though we have a principle of Grace wrought in us by the Holy Spirit; but yet we sincerely obey, and have respect unto its commands, this shall be pleasing and acceptable to God for the sake of our blessed Mediatour. And see­ing such obedience would not have been accepted of God (upon a supposition that fallen Man could have performed it of himself, which I am sure he could not) had not the Lord Jesus Christ by his Satisfaction and Merit procured it should; is not here a plain dif­ferent constitution, and so a new Law purchased by Christ distinct from that which Adam in the state of Innocency was under.

But upon the matter some say the obedience injoin­ed Adam, and the obedience commanded us now is the same specifically or in its own nature, and differs only gradually, and therefore the Law must be the same, and there is no necessity of a new one; I An­swer, grant we that the obedience doth only differ gradually considered materially, yet the obedience in­joined us formally differs from that of Innocent Adam's, and therefore cannot be of the same nature with his, for our obedience is to be performed by us as penitent Subjects, not so innocent Adam's, and also in Faith of acceptation through a Redeemer and Mediatour, but not so innocent Adam's, so that our obedience now formally differs from that of Adam's in Innocency, and therefore differs from it specifically, and not only gra­dually, and hence there must be a new constitution or Law injoining it, Or else what warrant have we for [Page 65] it? But suppose there should be only a gradual dif­ference, when indeed there is more as is manifest, yet it doth not follow that the Law commanding is the same; for it is sinless obedience the Law of Innocency requires, and it will accept of no less; now if less be accepted we must have a new Revelation, and so a new warrant for it from a command, or else what foundation for it, or incouragement unto it, and see­ing we have a new Revelation, and so a new warrant from God's command of this obedience, then we must have a Law to which it relates distinct from that given to Innocent Man; but in the very matter of obedi­ence, we shall find that injoined us, which was not commanded Adam in the Law of Innocency, nor in­deed did suit at all with the nature of such a Law; which will make it further evident we must have a new Law as fallen Creatures distinct from that. Isa. 1. 16, 17, 18. Wash ye, make you clean: put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes, cease to do evil, Learn to do well, seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow: though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wooll. Isa. 55. 7. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abun­dantly pardon. Ezech. 18. 21, 22. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done, he shall live. Acts 3. 19. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord, &c. What is required in these Texts, is the revealed will of God which Sin­ners through his Grace are to be subject unto; And [Page 66] is not subjection where it is yielded obedience? Can this will of God then thus commanding be any other than a Law, seeing that non-performance must be a manifest transgression and disobedience?? Let it be considered then if what we find commanded in these Texts, was injoyned Adam before his fall; had he needed to wash him and make him clean, and put away the evil of his doings? was he then wicked, and called upon to forsake his wicked ways and sinful thoughts, and turn unto the Lord, be­fore he was guilty of any transgression, was he called upon before his fall to repent and be converted that his Sins might be blotted out, before he had any Sin? and to believe in a Redeemer that he might be saved? or are these the commands of the Law requiring sinless works? One would think those that oppose us should not affirm it and if not, is not all this required of Sinners? and must not that be a distinct Law by which it is required? and is not God's own constitution? how dare some Men then call it an humane invention? It shall come to pass in the last days that the Mountain of the Lord's house shall be establish­ed, and many People shall go and sup, come ye, and let us go up to the house of God, and he will mark us his ways, and we will walk in his paths; for out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of the Law from Jerusalem.

SECT. VI. Justification described, and made good, partly in this, and partly in the Sections ensuing.

HAving proved that there is a Law of Grace di­stinct from that which requires sinless works, and that God justifies by this Law, you may take this definition or description: of Justification; i. e. Justification is God's asserting and maintaining act by his Law of Grace of our right to Pardon and Life for the sake of Christ upon our believing.

1. It is an act, and that ad extra, an act which makes a relative change, and the subject upon whom this relative change is made is Man, a guilty and condemned Sinner, one upon whom the sentence of condemnation is passed by the Law, and he under obligation thereby to suffer eternal punishment, this is Man's condition antecedent to God's act of justi­fying, Rom. 3. 19. Now we know that what things so­ever the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the World may become guilty before God. Galat. 3. 22. But the Scrip­ture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. John 3. 18. He that believeth on him, is not condemned: but he that believeth not, is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Ephes. 2. 3. Among whom, also we all had our conver­sation in times past, in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind, and were by nature the Children of wrath, even as others.

2. In this act of justifying there is the term from which, or the state from which Man a Sinner is brought upon his Justification, and that is from an obligation to punishment, and the omission or loss of right to Life and Happiness. Every poor Soul before [Page 68] Faith is under an obligation to Eternal Punishment, and must lose Heaven and Eternal Happiness if he leave the World in this condition. How much then should it be our concern to see that we have true Faith, that we have thankfully accepted of, and are sincerely subject unto Christ, that so we may have through him a right to Pardon and Life. John 5. 24. Verily, verily I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation: but is passed from death unto life. Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the Flesh, but after Spirit.

3. In justifying there is the term to which or the state a poor Sinner is brought into, and that is a right to this Pardon and Life spoken of before. No sooner is a Sinner justified, but Pardon and Life are his; they are by Gospel or Covenant right his. John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son: that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life; and Verse 36. He that believ­eth on the Son, hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him.

4. There is the agent or he that justifies, and that is God, we are before Repentance and Faith guilty and condemned, and until God do justifie us we re­main in that guilty and condemned state; therefore if ever we have a right to Pardon and Life God gives it, Rom. 3. 26. To declare, I say, at this time his righte­ousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Rom 4. 5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the un­godly: his faith is counted for righteousness. Rom. 8. 30. 33. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? it is God that justifieth. 1. Hence [Page 69] learn first, how much we should adore and admire the riches of mercy in Christ, that after we had great­ly offended him, and exposed our selves to his wrath and displeasure everlastingly; having involved our selves in a state of guilt and condemnation, having forfeited all right to Life; I say, that after this, all this, yet he should be willing to become our justifier the forgiver of our Sins, and the Donor of a right to Happiness, and this upon honourable terms with re­lation to himself, and reasonable with respect to us; How much doth this call for our Admiration and Ado­ration, certainly it will be the work of Heaven. 2. How great folly are poor impenitent Sinners guilty of, for though God be willing to justifie, ready to par­don, and receive into his favour, and make over unto them a sure title to Erernal Life, if they will but now humbly come in upon his call, and thankfully accept his Son to be their Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, and be subject to him in Christ; yet they refuse, they hold fast deceit, and will not return; they set no value upon this great good offered, they prefer their Soul damning Lusts, and the Profits and Pleasures of a vain transitory World, they content themselves to live unforgiven, at enmity to God, Heirs of Hell, destitute of right to Life and Salvation. O what folly How much is the condition of such to be lamented, who chuse death before Life, guilt before Pardon, ex­ecution in Hell before the fruition of a glorious rest in Heaven. God calls them to incline their ear and come unto him, hear, and their Souls shall live, and he will make an everlasting Covenant with them, even the sure mercies of David, Isa. 55. 3. he assures them by his promise that if they will forsake their wicked ways, and sinful thoughts, he will have mercy, and abundantly pardon; Verse 7, but alas! all this moves them not, they are still as unconcerned as before. 3. That Justification is not from Eternity. For any to affirm this is to affirm a contradiction; i. e. that we [Page 70] were both guilty, condemned, and justified from Eternity; for who now are justified but such as before were guilty and condemned: so that first God con­demns us from Eternity as guilty, and then justifies us from Eternity according to these Men; touching what they alledge; i. e. God's purpose and decree, they may as groundedly gather from it that Persons are effectually called from Eternity, conformed to the Image of Christ, and glorified from Eternity.

5. In the description, I say, it is God's act by his Law of Grace, it is not by an immediate, but a me­diate act that God justifies, seeing it is God's act by this his Law; and that it is will appear further, if we consider that we can neither be justified by the Law of innocent Nature, nor by the Law of Moses. And if not, then by some other Law, for as condemnation is by Law, so Justification. As disobedience then to the Law of Grace brings upon us condemnation; so obedience to the same Law gives right to Pardon and Life which is Justification: If so be that Sinners re­main impenitent unbelieving Rebels against Christ, by this Law they are condemned; but on the contrary, if they through Grace become Penitent, Obedient Believers, then this Law intitles them to impunity and Life. Prov. 17. 15. He that justifieth the wicked, and be that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomi­nation to the Lord. Now then if both these be an abo­mination to the Lord; he can neither do the one, nor the other; i. e. he will neither justifie the wicked, nor condemn the just; but on the contrary he will justifie the just. The Judge of all the Earth will do right. Gen. 18. 25. He will undoubtedly act according to his Prescription. Deut. 25. 1. The Judges were to justifie the righteous, and condemn the wicked; so then, as a Man must be wicked before God condemn him; and just before God justifie him; then he that is wick­ed must be so accounted from his disobedience to some Law; to say a Man is wicked, and yet he is not dis­obedient [Page 71] to some Law, is to say there is no transgres­sion where there is no Law; and seeing those are only wicked who go on in the practice of Sin unrepented of, and will not believe, nor give their consent to be subject to God in Christ, then such must be accounted wicked from their rebellion and disobedience to the Law of Grace, seeing it is this Law only that requires Repentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ: But then on the contrary a Man must be accounted just also by his Conformity to some Law; to say a Man is just and righteous, and say he is not in Heart and Life conformed to some Law, is to frame a righteousness without relation to a Rule, which cannot be. Now seeing those are righteous who are penitent Sinners, obedient Believers; they must be ac­counted such by the Law of Grace, seeing this is the righteousness which it doth require; and whoever they are that have this righteousness the Law of Grace will for the sake of Christ justifie them hereupon; i. e. they have a right hereupon to Impunity and Life, both which are promised by the Covenant of Grace to all Penitent and believing Sinners. And further both Justification and Condemnation are accounted to be acts of a Judge, and a Judge he both justifies and condemns according to Law; so that in Law a Person is either justified or condemned before the Judge by publick Sentence do justifie or condemn. Thus then, as God hath constituted a Law, accord­ing to which he will both justifie and condemn, it is manifest that this Law of God, which is his Instru­ment, doth it self condemn or justifie before God's publick Sentence as Judge either of Condemnation or Justification; hence it is ordinary for Persons to say, they think such an one is guilty in Law, or clear in Law before they come upon their Trial before the Judge, or he pronounce them either clear or guilty. Seeing then that, Christ is the great Legislator, Law­giver, and Judge; Isa. 33. 22. For the Lord is our Judge, [Page 72] the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King, he will save us. Then he must have Laws from whence he hath this Title and Office, and if he have Laws, he must rule by Law, and so by Law he must justifie and condemn: so that manifest it is before Christ do pass the Sentence either of Justification or Condemnation, Persons are justified or condemned by that Law which he hath appointed to be the Rule of Judgment, and this Law is no other but the Law of Grace, called the Gospel. Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel. As the Gospel or Law of Grace is the Instrument whereby Christ doth justifie or condemn Sinners now; so it is the Rule according to which he as the righteous Judge will pass Sentence at the great day to everlasting Happiness or eternal Damnation. To illustrate the matter, suppose a Person hath committed a capital Crime, i. e. a Crime for which he is to die, the King draws up, and sends unto him a conditional Act of Grace, in which he offers Pardon; and not only so but his favour and great advancement, in case he will perform such or such conditions expressed in that Act; if the Criminal consent, he is pardoned ipso facto, im­mediately by virtue of the Act, and also hath right unto the favour and advancement promised, and this before the Judges acquitment according to the Act, and this right thus to be acquitted did result from his consent: this is just the case with us, we all deserve Death, and that Eternal; now the great King of Hea­ven as it were hath drawn up and sent unto us a con­ditional Grant or Act of Grace, in which he offers Pardon, and not only so, but his favour, and the greatest advancement, in case he will perform those conditions, offering us his Grace that we may, now if we perform, then we immediately for Christ's sake have right to his favour, and this high advancement, before the Judges publick Sentence.

Seeing further that there is the Preceptive and Retri­butive part of the Law of Grace; i. e. that part which commands duty, and that part in which God doth di­stribute rewards or punishments: The Question will be what part it is whereby God doth justifie? I An­swer, The command it self when obeyed, doth im­plicitely justifie, sincere obedience to the commands of the Gospel implies our right, in that we cannot hereupon but beactually justified: But then directly and actually I take it to be the Gospel promise which doth justifie; for obedience to the command which is the performance of the condition, hath resulting from it a right to the promise both of Pardon and everlasting Life, and it is by the promise that God doth assert us to have this right, which is his justifying of us, and will maintain this our right if called into question. A little for the proof of this, He that confesseth and forsakes, shall find mercy, confessing and forsaking of Sin is that which God commands, now this being obeved; i. e. if there be an unfeigned confessing and forsaking of Sin; then saving mercy is by God through Christ conveyed in the promise, and this same pro­mise asserts, and vindicates in this conveyance the Souls right, which is its justifying act. That also, Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts, and turn unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, and he will abundantly pardon; Now upon the wickeds forsaking his ways, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts, the promise annexed makes over his right (which consists in his obedience to the preceding command) to the Pardon and Mercy promised; and will maintain and vindicate this his right in case it be called into question. Now those Persons that will not admit of a Justification of this sort, they will urge (that if we be Penitent returners) to flee to the Promise, and plead the promise, and will tell us that we have right unto the good promised, for­asmuch as God by his Spirit hath wrought the quali­fications [Page 74] which gives right, and if we must flee to the Promise and plead the Promise, as having a right through Christ upon such qualifications which are of Grace; Doth not this speak that the Promise doth both assert our right, and also will maintain our right to Pardon and Life? And what is it but justifying? Saith a Reverend Divine, you shall hear a Prote­stant in his Prayer appealing from the Tribunal of God's Justice, to the Throne of his Grace, and yet in his Sermon be telling the People, that it is nothing else but the perfect Obedience and Satisfacti­on of Christ imputed to them (you must know, to be accounted by God as their personal righteousness) that saves them; which is to bring them back from the Throne of his Grace, to the Bar of his Justice to be judged.

6. When I say that Justification is God's asserting act by his Promise of Grace our right to Pardon and Life for the sake of Christ upon our believing, I do not think that Pardon is any part constituting our Justification, but a benefit which doth immediately follow thereupon. For consider we Justification first, Actively, so it consists in God's giving us a right through Christ by his Promise upon our obedience to the preceptive part of the Law of Grace; or if you will, upon our performance through his Grace of the conditions of the new Covenant, I mean such upon which we have a right at the first, or at the first an interest, or our first acceptance into favour through Christ, Ephes. 1. 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. Or 2ly, Consider we Justification passively, so it is our having this right. Now observe, Pardon is that which God gives right to by his promise, and which we have right to, considered as subjects qualified; i. e. as true penitent Believers, and so must be a precious benefit devolved upon us as Persons who have right. But seeing that many worthy Divines have affirmed, and under­taken [Page 75] taken to prove that our very justifying righteousness consists in Pardon of Sin, I shall here give my thoughts and the grounds of them upon the point, and shall not impose upon any, but leave Persons to take or leave as they shall have light and evidence.

SECT. VII. Wherein Pardon and Justification agree, and wherein they disagree.

I Shall then first shew wherein Justification and Pardon agree.

1. They agree in the principal Efficient, which is God, 'tis God that Justifies, and 'tis God that Pardons. Rom. 8. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? it is God that justifieth. Ephes. 4. 32. And be ye kind to one another, tender hearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. 1 John 1. 9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to for­give us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighte­ousness.

2. They agree in the Meritorious Cause, Christ hath purchased the one and the other, it is for his Merits we are Justified, and for his Merits we are Pardoned. Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. Rom. 5. 9. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Matth. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins. Acts 13. 38. Be it known unto you therefore, Men and Brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.

3. They agree in the Subject, both Justification and Forgiveness relates to a Penitent Believer, and such an one only (I speak of the Adult) that is Justified, and [Page 76] 'tis a Penitent Believer, and such an one that is Par­doned. Acts 10. 43. To him give all the Prophets wit­ness, that through his Name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. Acts 3. 19. Repent ye there­fore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

4. They agree in the Instrumental Cause, and that is the Covenant of Grace, or God's gracious Promise, for this is God's Instrument whereby he doth convey a right to Pardon, not only Pardon, but a right unto it. Isa. 43. 25. I, even I am he, that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Isa. 44. 22. I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and as a cloud, thy sins return unto me, for I have redeemed thee.

5. They agree in time, when a Person is Justified, he is Pardoned, there is no time wherein a Person is Justified, but he is Pardoned, nor wherein he is Par­doned, but he is Justified.

I proceed Secondly, To shew wherein they dif­fer.

1. And First, They differ as Justification hath the priority of Nature; i. e. Justification is in order of Nature before Pardon, a Man must in order of Na­ture have a right to Pardon before he have it, he must Repent and Believe, and so be conformed to the Gos­pel Law, before he be righteous in the Sense of that Law, and so have right to Pardon.

2. They differ in their habitude or relation, Justi­fication properly relates to a false Accusation, Pardon of Sin to a true and just one, he that is accused falsly (when his Innocency is cleared as to the Crime of which he is accused) may be said to be justified. Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controversie between Men, and they, come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justifie the righteous, and condemn the wicked. But now he that is truly and justly accused, he may have [Page 77] Pardon of the Crime committed, but he cannot by that Law whereby he was Convict be justified, or ac­counted as righteous, with respect to the Crime of which he hath been truly and justly accused. He that is accused of Impenitency and Unbelief, if the Accu­sation be false, the Law of Grace accounts him righ­teous, and so justifies him against that Accusation; But if a Person accused of Impenitency and Unbelief, and the Accusation be true and just, this Law will Pardon upon Repentance and Faith through Christ, but it will not justifie upon Repentance and Faith, as a Person that hath been falsly accused, for he was truly and justly accused before he did Repent and Believe, though not when he believed.

3. They differ in their Essence or Nature, that which constitutes Justification is our Conformity to the Law of Grace, upon which God in his gracious Promise through Christ accounts us righteous, but that which constitutes Pardon is not a Conformity or Obe­dience of this sort; but our acquittance and discharge from obligation to Punishment due, true it is upon this Gospel Righteousness for Christ's Satisfaction and Merits we are pardoned, but yet Pardon is not nor cannot be that Righteousness which the Gospel calls for to our Justification; for if so, we should first have forgiveness, and then forgiveness upon the account of that forgiveness, and so Pardon of Sin should be a con­dition of it self, and be in order of Nature before it self, which I know not how to free from a contra­diction.

4. They differ in the different formality of the Subject to which they do relate, for the Law of Grace in justifying considers Persons as conformed to its commands, and upon that accounts them through and for Christ righteous; but in pardoning it considers them previously as transgressors, though yet as those who have right to Pardon by reason of their Conformity through Grace unto its Precepts; and therefore for [Page 78] Christ's sake assures them of Pardon hereupon, for upon Confession and forsaking of Sin, and turning unto the Lord, God by his gracious Promise assures us of Pardon. And that the Gospel Law in pardoning doth previously consider the Person as a transgressor, appears, for asmuch as it Pardons not only such as have right to Pardon, but those who have need of it, and who have need but such as before Pardon are altoge­ther in a special sort unpardoned transgressors.

5. There is a difference betwixt Justification and Par­don, as touching the Moral Efficiency of the Law of Grace justifying and pardoning; for in the one it asserts a Person's right, but in the other it conveys that which it asserted his right unto. These things be­ing laid together, and duly considered, to me 'tis evi­dent that Justification and Pardon cannot be the same, nor yet that Pardon can be our justifying Righteous­ness, but a special benefit immediately following our Justification.

But it may be said Condemnation and Justification are opposed, and therefore as Condemnation consists in the Laws Sentence of a Sinner to punishment: so Justification must consist in acquitting the Sinner by Law Sentence from punishment; and if so, Is not here Pardon? and if Pardon, Then must not Justifi­fication consist in Pardon?

1. I Answer; First, Justification and Condemna­tion are opposed materially, for as the matter of Justi­fication must be a Righteousness: so the merit of Con­demnation must be Unrighteousness; or thus, the matter of Justification must be Conformity to a Law: the merit of Condemnation must be the violation of that Law.

2. They are opposed in the different account of the Law, for whom the Law Condemns, them it accounts. Guilty: But whom it Justifies, those it accounts Righ­teous. But now though Justification and Condemna­tion be thus opposed, yet it doth not follow that [Page 79] what is the form of the one, the contrary to that is the form of the other; or it doth not follow that as Condemnation consists in bearing the Laws Sentence to Punishment, so Justification in acquitting from Pun­ishment. (Indeed all justified Persons are most cer­tainly acquitted, but Justification in its own nature is not an acquitment). Pardon and Condemnation are thus formally opposed, but not Justification and Con­demnation. But it may be said further, must he not be innocent, who is acquitted? and is not every in­nocent Person righteous? I Answer, an acquitment implies the Person who is now acquitted was once guilty of that from which he is now acquitted; and so by Innocent, here can only be meant one that is dis­charged from deserved punishment, and such an one is clear indeed, but then this his clearing doth imply a right by some pardoning act, or act of Grace. Every justified person is discharged from the Condemnation of the Law, or the Execution of the Law's Sentence, but then this discharge implies a previous Righteous­ness, not for which, but upon which he is accounted to have right to that discharge, and without which he might not have it, for he that believes not is con­demned, and the wrath of God abides upon him, so then a Person is righteous formally by this previous Righteousness, and not by his discharge, for that is only, as is plain, the immediate fruit of his Righte­ousness.

SECT. VIII. How our right to Pardon and Life is through Christ, and how he is our Surety, and hath pro­cured the New Covenant for us.

I Come now to shew that it is through Christ that Sinners have right to Pardon and Life upon be­lieving; and it is through Christ in a double regard. In regard to a Ransom paid, and Covenant ob­tained.

It is through Christ in the first place, as having paid the Ransom for Sinners Redemption. Matth. 20. 28. Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministred unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. 1 Tim. 2. 5, 6. For there is one God, and one Mediatour between God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus. Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. We are all by Nature Sin's Slaves, Satan's Captives, loving the World, and the things of the World, cursed and condemned by the Law, being Transgressors, liable to the intollerable wrath of an Almighty God; Christ paid a sufficient Ransom by his Obedience and Sufferings, From the power and dominion of Sin. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might re­deem us from all iniquity, and purifie unto himself a pecu­liar People, zealous of good works. From the thraldom of Satan. Coloss. 2. 15. And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them, openly triumphing over them in it. Heb. 2. 14. Forasmuch then as the Chil­dren are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death; that is, the Devil. From this present evil World. Galat. 1. 4. Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this pre­sent evil world, according to the will of God and our Fa­ther. [Page 81] From the Curse of the violated Law. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. From the wrath of an offend­ed God. This ransom paid by Christ gave such satis­faction to an offended God as that he deals with none of the Sons and Daughters of Men, now upon terms of the violated Law of works: but is so far through this satisfaction given reconciled, as that he grants them a reprieve from Hell, and much riches of goodness and mercy to lead them to repentance; yea, and re­veals himself further willing in a saving manner to be at peace with, and reconciled unto Sinners, upon their subjection to the Gospel Law, who have the explicit offer. And this satisfaction given by Christ's sufferings was no strict fulfilling of the Law threat, but a ful­filling the Law of Mediation or Redemption, for the Soul that sinned was to die; though for the satisfacti­on given by Christ a stop was put to the execution of the Law threat. When Persons say that the satisfacti­on Christ gave by his sufferings was a fulfilling of the threatning, part of the Law of Innocency which Man had broken, 'tis a great mistake, for in what was threatned by the Law, was included corporal dis­tempers, and spiritual and eternal death and damnati­on. But Christ though he suffered did not suffer after this sort, or in this kind, and therefore as is plain his sufferings could not be a strict fulfilling of the threat­ning part of this Law; though yet observe his suffer­ings were for us and in our place and stead: But yet so as God did mercifully accept of these sufferings of Christ, as a sufficient satisfaction instead of that which we deserved to suffer for ever.

Satisfaction is not the giving or paying the same which was due in Law; but it is the giving or paying something to the offended party which is equivalent, or that doth amount to as much as though that same had been given or paid which was due in Law; 'tis [Page 82] granted by the most of Divines that Christ, though he did not, nor could not suffer the Idem, or that same which was due to us, yet as his sufferings were a satis­faction, they were the Tantundem; they were equiva­lent, yea, infinitely more in value, than the sufferings of Mankind in Hell, for these could never have paci­fied an offended God, made atonement, nor procured new terms of Peace, being only the sufferings of finite Beings; but the sufferings of Christ were the sufferings of an infinite Being; i. e. the sufferings of that Person who is God as well as Man, and therefore must have an infinite virtue and efficacy in their own nature. Acts 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which he hath pur­chased with his own blood.

But did not Christ fulfill the Law by his Passive Obedience?

I Answer, First, There is a strict fulfilling of the Law by Passive Obedience, and that is when the very same in kind is suffered which was threatned, this Christ neither did nor could suffer, as hath been shew­ed above. Secondly, There is a virtual fulfilling of the Law, by Passive Obedience, and that is when satisfaction is given hereby to the Lawgiver, who hath left himself a liberty to accept of such satisfaction, and so dispence with the threat as to its chief and main execution, and thus Christ by his sufferings may be said to have fulfilled the Laws threat.

But Christ was our Surety, and as such he must be under the same obligation with us.

For Answer to this, let us enquire in what Sense Christ cannot be said to be our Surety, and then in what Sense he may.

1. Then Christ in undertaking for Sinners was not such a Surety, as bound himself to pay or discharge their Debt in case of non payment, upon good Se­curity from them: There are such Sureties as these, [Page 83] as oblige and bind themselves to a Creditor for others, upon good Security from them, so that if the Creditor come upon these Sureties in case of the real Debtor's non-payment, they again may come to save them­selves harmless upon the Debtor, or such as were bound for him. But Christ was no such Surety for us, he did not engage to pay our Debts upon good Security from us, that we would pay them our selves, or if we did not, he might by virtue of our Security recover his own of us. I think none will say Christ was such a Surety as this.

2. Christ was not such a Surety as put himself into the same bond with us, and obliged himself to pay the same in kind which was due unto us; for let us put the Question, Whether he was immediately upon Man's transgressions bound over to suffer by the Laws threat, or did voluntarily engage himself to make satis­faction for Man's offence? If the former, then he must have been bound for Man's performance of the condition of the first Covenant; for if he was not, How could he have been immediately bound over to suffer by the Laws threat? Immediately to fall under the penalty for the non-performance of another, suppo­seth he that doth was bound for that other he should perform; and if it be thus, then Christ must have been a Surety for Innocent Man that he should per­form personal, perfect, and perpetual Obedience, and so the first Covenant must have Christ a Mediatour and Surety, and yet Man fell too. If he did volun­tarily engage himself to suffer for Man's offence, then I ask by what Law? If it be said by the Law of Works, in putting himself under it as Man's Surety, I grant under the preceptive part of this Law Christ put himself voluntarily, and therefore is said to be made under the Law. But that he was under the penal part, so as that the Law did account him Man's Surety, that had bound himself in the same bond with him to suffer for him in case he did transgress, this could not [Page 84] be; for this runs us upon the former, i. e. that Christ must be bound for Man as his Surety upon the draw­ing up of the first Covenant, while Man was yet in his integrity, to suffer the punishment threatned in case he did transgress: or else how could the Law as they say immediately proceed against him in binding him over to punishment upon Man's offence? and if it be said, he voluntarily put himself into our bond upon the breach of the Covenant, then it must be proved, that the Law did make provision for and ac­cept such a Surety for fallen Man, and his sufferings for his discharge from the penalty due; and if it be so then this Law must immediately without any more to do acquit Man from guilt, and so be a pardoning Law, which yet curseth and condemns all Mankind as transgressor; for observe if a Law do accept of the sufferings of another in my stead who have violated the Law, it must acquit and discharge me from pun­ishment which was due hereupon.

It may be said were not the sufferings of Christ in our stead and place? I Answer, yes, though not ac­cepted by the Law as such but by the Lawgiver: for as I have said, so I say again if they be accepted by the Law of Works in our place and stead, then it can­not chuse but be a pardoning Law, and if so it must be the same with the Gospel. Hence then

1. Christ is such a Surety as interposed for us, and obliged himself freely to make satisfaction for us poor offenders, who were altogether insufficient.

2. Christ is such a Surety, as by the consent of his Father did make satisfaction, or give a valuable con­sideration for our acquitment and discharge from the Curse and Condemnation of the Law, upon condition that we offenders should have no benefit by this his satisfaction but in and through and from him, and that upon his own appointed terms.

Seeing I have above put the Question by what Law Christ was bound to suffer, I shall a little more fully [Page 85] and distinctly resolve it, before I pass further. Di­stinguish we of Laws.

1. There is the Law or Covenant of Works made with Innocent Man; that Law which promised the continuance of Life and Happiness upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, and threat­ned Man with everlasting death upon his disobedience. Now this Law first, did not only bind us to obey God our Creator, and Rector, but Christ also as Man, for Christ considered as God Creator and Rector, he cannot be under a law given to his Creatures; but then as Man partaking of the same Nature with us, he must be under this law as binding him to obedience, I mean, as to the preceptive part. But then Secondly, This Law transgressed by us, doth only bind us to suffer punishment, not Christ; and the reason is because the Law doth not bind any to suffer the penalty it threatens, before it by them be violated and broken; now we have violated and broken the Law, and it binds us over immediately to suffer the punishment threatned, but not Christ, and that because Christ considered as Man was ever Innocent, and never in the least violated or broke the Law of Works, and therefore could not be bound by this Law to suffer the penalty, not for himself, it may be said, but yet for us as our Surety; I Answer, No, he was not bound for us by the Law of Works to suffer as our Surety, and that because the Law of Works reveals nothing of, nor makes any provision for a Surety.

2. There is a Covenant or Law of Grace, and by this Christ was neither bound to Obedience, nor suf­fering; for the Covenant or Law of Grace, it com­mands Faith and Repentance, and threatens damna­tion to the unbelieving and impenitent: But Christ is not by this Law or Covenant to believe or repent: indeed he hath bound himself in the promissory part of this Covenant to give the saving blessings thereof to all believing and penitent Sinners; but he is not bound [Page 86] by the preceptive part to repent and believe, or by the threatning part to suffer in case he do not.

3. There is the Law of Mediation, that which Di­vines call the Covenant of Redemption, in which he freely engaged to purchase our Redemption, and this is the Law by which Christ was bound to suffer for us, to satisfie, and make atonement, and this both by his Father's appointment, and his own free consent. John 10. 17, 18. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No Man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my self, I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. It is plain from this Scripture that Christ was obliged by no Law, but his Father's command, and his own con­sent, and in what Law shall we find the Father's com­mand to Christ to lay down his Life, and Christ's free consent thereunto, but in the Law of Mediation? As thus, such a Man hath committed a capital Crime; i. e. a Crime that deserves Death, another freely con­sents and engageth to suffer in his stead; now this Man that thus freely consents and engageth himself, no Law previous to his own consent and engagement doth bind him thus to suffer for the other, seeing he is Innocent as to the Crime, and so cannot be charged with the Crime the other is guilty of, and this was the case in Christ's suffering for us; so that from what hath been said, it is granted that Christ as our Surety hath suffered in our place and stead; but that this was according to the intention or direction of the Cove­nant of Works, this I deny. I will grant that if the Covenant of Works had not been broken, Christ had not been our Surety, nor suffered to satisfie Justice, and make our atonement; but then that eventually, Christ actually became our Surety, was from the purpose of an all-wise, just, holy, and merciful God above and besides either the intention or direction of the Law of Works. Him hath God set forth to be a Propitiation for Sin. Rom. 3. 25.

As it is said before, he became actually Surety by his own free offer to make satisfaction to the justice of God by his Death, for Man's breach of the Law of Works, and God he accepted the offer, and this not according to any thing intended of this nature in the Law of Works; but of his meer grace and good plea­sure towards us, and yet with a design both to secure the glory of his own justice and holiness, and to de­clare the glory of his own Wisdom and Mercy, and to keep up the repute of his Law which Man had willfully violated.

These things are clear from Scripture.

1. That God accepted of the offer of Christ's Me­diatourship, or Suretiship of his meer good pleasure. Having predestinated us unto the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will.

2. That God accepted of this offer with a design to advance the glory of his Justice. Rom. 3. 26. To declare, I say at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

3. That he might advance the glory of his Wisdom and Mercy. Ephes. 1. 6, 7, 8. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the be­loved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. Wherein he hath abounded towards us in all wisdom and prudence.

4. That he might keep up in the World the repute of his Holy Law, in that he would not dispense with the breach thereof without satisfaction. Isa. 42. 21. The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness sake, he will magnifie the Law, and make it honourable.

2. It is through Christ, in the second place by his meritorious and satisfactory righteousness, procuring the grant of a remedying Covenant or Law of Grace, a Covenant or Law of Grace suited to Man in his [Page 88] lapsed or fallen state; for whereas it was become na­turally impossible for fallen Man to have Justification or right to Life by the Law of Innocent Nature. Christ he purchaseth a new Law, that should be a remedy to fallen Man, notwithstanding his violation of the first Law: So that now if Man do perform the conditions of the Covenant of Grace, his Sin shall be pardoned, and he shall have right to Life; so that it is Christ who hath purchased the new Covenant, and it is upon the account of Christ's Merits that God will mercifully accept the obedience which this Covenant requires (instead of that Innocency which the Law of perfect Works called for, I mean works without any Sin attending them, or works performed by an In­nocent Creature) and justifie, and give right to Pardon and Life thereupon. When I say that God upon the account of Christ's Merits will mercifully accept the obedience which the Covenant of Grace injoins in­stead of that Innocency the Law of sinless perfect Works called for; the meaning is not, as some are prone to imagine, that our Evangelical or Gospel O­bedience will answer that law, or be accepted by that law, or that that law will justifie us upon that Obe­dience, No, no, for it is only the obedience of Christ that answers that law, removes the Curse of it, and merits Pardon for our breach of it; but the meaning is, that whereas God might in justice after Man's wilful fall, have insisted upon the very terms of that law which was violated, he was pleased in his abun­dant free grace and rich mercy for the sake of Christ, to declare by the new Covenant, that now he would accept of the sincere Obedience of poor Sinners, and account them Subjects united to Christ, and as such having right through him to Pardon and Life, which is his justifying of them. Now because not only such as profess themselves Socinians; but also those that pre­tend to be Enemies unto them do deny the Covenant of Grace to be purchased by Christ, exclaiming against [Page 89] me at a great rate, and saying, O, he is wrong in the very foundation, he holds Christ hath merited the Co­venant of Grace, when it is only the free gift of the Father. I judge it a fit place under this head a little more fully to correct the Socinian Spirit in these Men, who yet know not it is any such thing that they are in the least possest with; and this by clear proof from Scripture, that Christ hath purchased this Covenant.

That then which constitutes the Covenant of Grace betwixt God and Man is God's gracious promise on his part of the gift of saving benefits to Man, and Man's engagement on his part through the grace of God to perform all that which may give him right unto and interest in the promised benefits. Now if I prove from Scripture, that there is no saving benefit which God promiseth to give unto Man, nor yet any grace which is required of Man to give him right unto and interest in these benefits: but Christ hath purchased them, I hope I shall sufficiently have discharged my province in proving the Covenant of Grace to be pur­chased by Christ.

1. In the first place let us consider the benefits that by God are promised, or offered in the Promise to Man, and as we go along prove that they are pur­chased by Christ.

1. God promiseth Justification. Isa. 45. 25. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory. Christ hath purchased Justification, Rom. 5. 8. 9. But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us: Much more then being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

2. God promiseth reconciliation and peace, Isa. 27. 5. Or let him take hold of my strength that he may make peace with me, and he shall make peace with me. Christ hath purchased this, Rom. 5. 10. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by life. Colos. 1. [Page 90] 21, 22. And you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy, and unblameable, and unreproveable in his sight.

3. God promiseth remission of Sin. Isa. 43. 25. I, even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. And this is purcha­sed by Christ. Matth. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Ephes. 1. 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, according to the riches of his grace.

4. God promiseth Redemption, Psalm 34. 22. The Lord redeemeth the Soul of his servants, and none of them that trust in him, shall be desolate. Christ hath purcha­sed this Redemption from Sin. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purifie unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good works. From Hell and wrath. 1 Thes. 1. 10. And to wait for his Son from Heaven, whom he raised from the dead even Jesus, who delivered us from the wrath to come. From the Curse and Condemnation of the violated Law. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. From the power of the Devil. Heb. 2. 14. Forasmuch then as the Children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the Devil.

5. God promiseth Adoption, 2 Corinth. 6. 17, 18. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord: and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. And this is by Christ merited. Galat. 4. 5. To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adopti­on of Sons.

[Page 91]6. God promiseth Eternal Life. John 3. 16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have ever­lasting life. Christ hath purchased this. Ephes. 1. 14. Which is the earnest of our Inheritance, until the redempti­on of the purchased possession unto the praise of his glory. Rom. 5. 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord.

This I have proved that the rich benefits promised by God, which are his part of the Covenant, are pur­chased by Christ.

I will proceed to prove also that what Grace is re­quired of Man to give him right to and interest in these benefits of the Covenant is purchased by Christ.

1. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without Repentance, for without Repentance we must perish. Luke 13. 3. I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Christ hath purchased this. Acts 5. 31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And for certain Christ gives nothing but what he hath purchased, or the Spirit for this end to work it.

2. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without Faith, he that believes not, the wrath of God abideth on him. Now Christ hath purchased this. Philip. 1. 29. For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake.

3. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without sincere Obedi­ence, which is virtually included in our first consent to be the Lord's. Heb. 5. 9. And being made perfect, he became the Author of eternal Salvation, unto all them that obey him. And this Christ hath purchased. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all [Page 92] iniquity, and purifie unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good Works.

This I have also proved, that what is required on our part Christ hath also purchased; and if Christ have purchased all that which constitutes the Cove­nant; i. e. God's gracious promises, and grace to en­able us to perform the duties required to give us a right to and interest in the above mentioned benefits, then let the Reader judge, whether he be of the foundati­on that holds Christ hath purchased the Covenant, or he that denies it.

It is through Christ furthermore, that Souls have right to Pardon and Life upon true Faith, as God upon the account of his Meritorious Righteousness, and all prevailing Intercession, communicates still fur­ther and further aids of Grace for Believers perseve­rance. As Faith and Repentance are required by the Gospel to our initial Justification or right to Christ, and the benefits of Pardon and Life through him, so perseverance in Grace is required to our continued and final Justification. He that endureth to the end the same shall be saved. And Christ hath merited perseve­ring Grace. John 10. 10. The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have Life, and that they might have it more abun­dantly. Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. Husbands, love your Wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. That he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing: but that it should be holy, and without blemish. Heb. 2. 19. For it became him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things in bringing many Sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their Salvation perfect through sufferings.

From what hath been said we shall Observe, That none of Mankind now can be accounted righteous, and so have Justification by the Law that injoins sin­less [Page 93] perfect Works, for if so, we must in the account of the Law be sinless and perfectly righteous: And if so, it must either be by having such a Righteousness of our own; but this cannot be, there being no meer Man that hath such a sinless perfect Righteousness of his own as this Law requires; or Secondly, It must be by having such a Righteousness of anothers; but this cannot be, for there is no Righteousness of ano­ther that can answer the Law of Innocent Nature, but Christ's; and this Law neither doth nor can ac­count us sinless and perfectly righteous with Christ's Righteousness; for if it should or could account us perfectly righteous, by accounting the Righteousness of Christ in it self to be ours; or accounting us per­fectly to have obeyed and fulfilled it in Christ's Obe­dience: It must account us to be thus righteous, ei­ther absolutely, or upon performance of some condi­tion by it required. If upon the performance of some condition, it must either be the condition it required of sinless Man, which is personal, perfect, and per­petual Obedience; and if we could perform this we should not need Christ's Righteousness at all; for there had been no necessity of Christ's Righteousness, if Man had continued to have performed a personal perfect Righteousness: or it must be upon the performance of the condition of a sincere Repentance and Faith: But the Law of Innocent Nature reveals not, and there­fore cannot prescribe such a condition, upon the per­formance of which it will account us perfectly righte­ous through or by Christ's Righteousness; for if it did, 'tis evident there would have been no need of God's publishing the new Covenant, or of promul­gating the Gospel. If it account us to be thus righte­ous, absolutely without any condition at all, then it either accounts all Mankind to be perfectly righteous by Christ's perfect Obedience; or only some part of Mankind: if it account all Mankind to be perfectly righteous through Christ's Righteousness, then all must [Page 94] have Justification, or a right to Life, and none of Mankind must perish, and if so, then we must have universal Salvation. If it account only some to be perfectly righteous with Christ's Righteousness, then it must consider them either as Elect, or non-elect; if it do not consider them as Elect, then the fore­mentioned consequence is established. If it consider them as Elect, then the Law of Works must consider them as Sinners, and so make provision for the Salva­tion of some, and none for the Salvation of others, that which I do not know, any that will undertake to prove. But if it should be granted that the Law of In­nocent Nature absolutely, without requiring any con­dition of them should account the Elect righteous up­on Christ's perfect Obedience or fulfilling of it; then it must follow that Christ's sufferings are a meer nul­lity, and there is no need of them: for if upon Christ's active Obedience the Law do account all the Elect sinless and perfectly righteous (which it must do if it account them righteous personally with Christ's Righ­teousness) and justifie them as such who have perfect­ly obeyed Christ's perfect Obedience, then it cannot require suffering too, seeing that it only calls for suf­fering in case it have not the actual Obedience it re­quires. And it must follow further that there is no need of a Covenant of Grace, nor Repentance and Faith commanded therein, if the Law of sinless Works do account us perfectly righteous in Christ's perfect obeying it for us. But none of these things can be, as is plain if Persons will lay aside prejudice and con­sider. And if so, that cannot be sound and true which some have affirmed, that Christ and we are one Legal Person, or that Christ and Believers are one Person in Law Sense, the Law accounting that what Christ did they did

But it may be said, when Persons become true Be­lievers then the Law of Works [...] them righte­ous with the Righteousness of Christ, this is as much [Page 95] as to say, the Law of Works justifies upon Persons performing of the condition of the Gospel, and it knows nothing of, nor doth it prescribe any such con­dition, and so if it justifie, it must justifie upon terms unknown, and therefore unprescribed in it self, and thus it is made a sort of a blind justifying Instru­ment.

SECT. IX. Faith described and explicated, in order to our Justification by it.

HAving shewn how it is through Jesus Christ that God doth assert and will maintain our right to Pardon and Life: I shall proceed to shew what Faith is, which is the thing required to give us right. John 3. 16. Acts 13. 39. Acts 16. 31.

An acute Author gives us this Description of it, 'tis a believing acceptance of Christ a Saviour, it is a short one, but yet a full one; for it implies First, Assent, Secondly, Consent, and Thirdly, our resolved fol­lowing of Christ in his way, trusting and relying up­on him whatever we meet withal.

First, It implies Assent, to these following things.

1. That by Nature we are all lost perishing Crea­tures, for how should a Man look after, or be con­cerned about Salvation by Christ, if he be not con­vinced of, and give his assent unto this, i. e. that in himself he is in a lost helpless condition. Luke 19. 10.

2. That Sin hath brought Mankind into this con­dition, Man was not in a perishing case, as he came forth of God's hands; but Sin hath made him miser­able; a Subject liable to all the Miseries of this Life, and to the Pains of Hell for ever. Rom. 5. 12. 18. and 6. 23.

[Page 96]3. That God made Man sinless and upright, Man came not out of God's hands a crooked, but a straight piece of Work: He had not only the Natural but Moral Perfections which he was capable of, God saw all that he had made, and it was good; i. e. had the Perfections which were suitable and agreeable unto its Nature. Eccles. 7. 29.

4. That as God made Man a sinless upright Crea­ture, and capable of Moral Government, so sinless and perfect Obedience from Man became due unto God.

5. That God gave Man a Law as the Rule of his Obedience, and this Law did require of Man personal, perfect, and sinless constant Obedience, promising Life upon his Obedience, and threatning Death up­on his Disobedience.

6. That this Obedience the Law required was due unto God from Man, as his absolute Owner, rightful Governour, and great Benefactor: for whom should Man obey, but him who made him, hath the abso­lute dispose of him, the absolute Authority over him, and from whom he hath all his good.

7. That we have by our Sin violated the righteous Law of an Holy God, alienated and estranged our selves from him, cast off his Government, and made our selves voluntarily Vassals and Slaves to Satan, and thus have cast off our best good and last end, and are turned to the Creature, and so have forsaken God the Fountain. Jer. 2. 13.

8. That by this our Sin we have brought upon our selves the doleful Curse and Condemnation which the Law threatned against the Transgressors.

9. That we cannot deliver or save our selves from this cursed condemned state; seeing that 'tis impossi­ble that he who hath once sinned should be accounted by the Law an Innocent Person, or one that never sinned; and so also it is impossible that finite Crea­tures who are Transgressors, should ever pay a suffici­ent [Page 97] Ransom, or the full price of Redemption to offend­ed Justice.

10. That there is need of a Saviour or a Redeemer for such poor lost undone Creatures, one that may be an Innocent Person, and able to make full satisfacti­on to God for Man's offence.

11. It implies an assent that there is a Saviour, and this Saviour is appointed by God, and that he is able to save, yea, mighty to save.

12. That this Saviour is the only begotten Son of God given and sent by God for this purpose. John 3. 16.

13. That God by the Gospel did reveal and pro­mise this Saviour to our first Parents upon their Apo­stacy. Gen. 3. 15. And so also to us. 2 Tim. 1. 9. 10.

14. That this Gospel in which Christ a Saviour is revealed is true, the very truth of God. Coloss. 1. 5.

15. That it was the meer love and mercy of God that moved him to give and send his Son to be a Sa­viour, no previous deserts in Man could be the mo­tive. 1 John 4. 9, 10.

16. That Christ our Saviour is true God, of the same Essence with the Father, equal in Power and Glory. Rom. 9. 5.

17. That Christ that he might be a fit Saviour though he was God yet became Man, not that he ceased to be God, but by becoming what he was not, God and Man in one Person for ever. It was fit he should be Man that he might obey, and God that his obedience might be meritorious: it was fit that he should be Man that he might suffer, and God that his sufferings might be satisfactory. Heb. 2. 14. 16. Philip. 2. 6, 7, 8. John 1. 14. Galat. 4. 4.

18. That he was conceived by the Holy Ghost in the Womb of the Virgin Mary; and born of her, and that without Sin. Matt. 1. 20. Luke 2. 6, 7.

19. That his Name was given him according to his Office, and the great work appointed for him by the [Page 98] Father; i. e. Jesus, because he should save his People from their Sins. Matt. 1. 21.

20. That this Lord Jesus having lived upon Earth, in perfect constant Obedience without the least Sin, teaching and preaching the way of Salvation, work­ing many Miracles for the testimony and confirmation of the Divinity of his Person, and the truth of his Doctrine and Office; he freely gave himself to be a Sacrifice for our Sins to pay our Ransom, and make our Atonement in suffering the shameful and painful Death of the Cross, and also to free us from the Curse of the Law. Heb. 4. 15. Heb. 7. 26. Heb. 2. 3, 4. Titus 2. 14. Heb. 9. 26. Matt. 20. 28.

21. That he expired, died, or gave up the Ghost upon the Cross. Luke 23. 46.

22. That he was taken from the Cross and laid in the Grave. Luke 23. 53.

23. That he rose again the third day; though he did really die, and was laid in the Grave, yet he saw no corruption, he could not be holden by the bonds of Death, but arose by his own Power. Luke 24. 46. Acts. 10. 40.

24. That he about Forty days space after his Re­surrection ascended triumphantly into Heaven, in the sight of many Witnesses. Luke 24. 50, 51. Acts 1. 3. 9, &c.

25. That he is advanced Lord over all in Dignity, Honour, Power, and Glory with the Father. Acts 10. 36. Acts 2. 36.

26. That he hath by the Gospel purchased a Cove­nant or Law of Grace, and appointed that those in and among the Adult shall be saved, who do unfeign­edly repent, believe in him, and love him above all things, and persevere in the following of him in the ways of Holiness unto the death. Acts 2. 38. Ephes. 6. 24. Heb. 5. 9. Revel. 22. 14.

27. It doth imply on the contrary, that such as do not sincerely repent, believe, and obey the Gospel, [Page 99] and persevere in the ways of Holiness, they shall lose Salvation, and have Damnation for their everlasting portion. Luke 13. 3. John 3. 18.

28. That Christ hath appointed and set up a Gospel Ministry, and injoined them to cry aloud, to give Sin­ners warning, to offer them terms of Peace, and be­seech them to be reconciled.

29. That though Christ be ascended and exalted in Heavenly Glory, yet he is appointed by the Father to be the judge both of the quick and dead, and will render to every one according to their Works. Acts 10. 42.

30. That though he be now exalted on the right hand of the Majesty on high in Heaven, yet he will descend from thence with Angels and glorified Spirits, and will by his glorious and mighty Power raise all the bodies that now are, and shall be then found sleeping in the dust, in order to judgment and a final sentence. Acts 1. 11. 2 Thess. 1. 7. John 5. 28, 29.

31. That all both good and bad, that ever have been, now are, or shall be in this World, shall be ga­thered before him; the good shall as Sheep be set up­on his right hand, and the bad as Goats upon his left. Matt. 25. 31, 32, 33.

32. That he will sentence those upon his right hand to everlasting Happiness, but those upon his left to eternal Punishment. Matt. 25. 34, to 41.

33. That according to the sentence given by Christ the righteous and impartial Judge, so must execution be done both upon the good and bad; there shall be no appealing from his sentence, nor no repealing of it. Matt. 25. 46. Matt. 3. 12.

Let Persons consider upon the matter, that there are none that assent to the truth of this aright, that Christ is a Saviour, but they do and must assent unto the truth of all these things which are above mentioned. And seeing that Christ a Saviour will save and do [...]h save by the Spirit proceeding both from the Father and [Page 100] the Son; it will be necessary to know what truths we must assent unto with relation to the Spirit.

1. An assent, That he is true God of the same Essence with the Father and the Son, and that ap­pears, seeing those who are baptized are to be baptized into the Name of the Holy Ghost, as well as into the Name of the Father and Son. Matt. 28. 19. Go ye therefore, and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He is expresly said to be one; i. e. one God with the Father and the Son. 1 John 5. 7. For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Those that lie or act hypocritically they lie or deal hypocritically to God; and this God is the Holy Spirit as well as the Father and the Son. Acts 5. 3, 4. But Peter said, Ananias why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whilst it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto Men, but unto God. We find Omnisciency and Omnipotency attributed unto him. Isaiah 40. 13, and so on, Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? &c. 1 Corinth. 2. 10. But God hath revealed them unto us by the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea the deep things of God. He is both the Author of Gifts and Grace, 1 Corinth. 12. 11. But all these work­eth that one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every Man severally: as he will. We find the work of Crea­tion ascribed unto him. Psalm 104. 30. Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth. Immensity or Infiniteness is attributed unto him, he is omnipresent. Psalm 139. 7. 8. Whither shall I go from the Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into Heaven, thou art there: if I make my Bed in Hell, behold, thou art there.

The Power of the Highest or Almighty God is as­cribed unto him, Luke 1. 35. And the Angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. We find the fitting and furnish­ing of Christ for the Office of Mediatour or Redeemer is attributed unto him, Isa. 61. 1, 2. The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek, he hath sent me to bind up the broken hearted to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all that mourn. The Miraculous work of casting out Devils is ascribed unto him. Matt. 12. 28. But if I cast out Devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. He may be sinned against unpardonably. Matt. 12. 32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

2. An assent that this Spirit as to its personality pro­ceedeth both from the Father and the Son: Hence we find him sometimes called the Spirit of the Father. Matt. 10. 20. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. Sometimes the Spi­rit of the Son. Galat. 4. 6. And because ye are Sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba, Father.

3. An assent that he hath his mission, or is sent both from the Father and the Son. John 14. 16, 17. 26. John 15. 26.

4. An assent that this Spirit was sent both from the Father and the Son for these ends and purposes. 1. To move and infallibly guide those who were Prophets and Apostles, that they might perfectly declare the Doctrine of Christ respecting our Salvation. 1 Peter [Page 102] 1. 10, 11, 12. 2. By many and plain Miracles and wonderful gifts this Holy Spirit might be the great witness of Christ, and of the certainty of his blessed and holy word. Heb. 2. 3, 4. 3. To take up the Hearts of all true Believers for his habitation, and ope­rate powerfully and savingly in them. 2 Corinth. 6. 16. Philip. 2. 13.

5. An assent that this Spirit doth unite such as by the Father are drawn to Christ as their head. Ephes. 4. 15. 1 Corinth. 6. 17. Into one Church, which is the body of Christ. 1 Corinth. 12. 12, 13. That so these being pardoned, and made the Children of God, they may be a peculiar People sanctified to Christ. Acts 10. 43. John 1. 12. Titus 2. 14. That they may morti [...]ie the Flesh with the Affections and Lusts, ob­tain Conquests over the World, and vanquish the De­vil according to their Covenant in Baptism. Galat. 5. 24. 1 John 5 [...] 4, 5. James 4. 7. That they might serve God with an Holy Heart in Righteousness of Conversation. Luke 1. 74, 75. That they may live in love unto, and communion with the People of God John 13. 34. Acts 2. 42. That they may live in hope of Christ's coming and eternal Life. 1 Thess. 1. 10. 2 Thess. 3. 5.

The summ of these things may be found in the Wor­cestershire Agreement. Now I shall put the Question, Whether is not the belief of all these above-mention­ed Articles included in a Person's believing in Christ a Saviour, and if they be, whether can any one (I speak of the Adult) have Salvation by Christ who de­nies these, and refuse to give their assent unto them? If they cannot, how can they be justified without such an assent? Being thus, it may be said, you will have many assenting acts of Faith unto Justification, or in that Faith which justifies. I Answer, implicit I will grant, explicit I deny. As thus, Suppose I pro­pound the above-mentioned Articles to any in order to his assent, as I read these Articles, if he give cre­dence, [Page 103] he implicitely gives his assent to each Article, as I go along: But then after that I have read them, I ask him whether he doth assent to the truth of the whole, if he say, yea, 'tis manifest his explicit assent is but one, or one explicit act, which we call assent.

But besides assent, our consent is requisite to the constituting of true Faith, and this consists best in a cordial accepting this one only God to be our God, giving him the preheminence in our affections. Exod. 20. 2, 3. An accepting of him to be our chief or best good, that God who is essentially good, the fountain of all good­ness. Hence he is the principal object of our love, desire, and delight. Psalm 73. 25. Whom have I in Heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth I desire besides thee. And besides it implies a free consent to be disposed of by him according to his good pleasure, and a being free­ly willing to be ruled and governed by him accord­ing to his Law and holy Commands.

2. A consent to take Christ Jesus to be our only Propitiation, all prevailing Intercessour, and also as our head and Teacher; i. e. Christ in all his Of­fices.

3. An accepting of the Holy Spirit to be our Sancti­fier, to mortifie Sin, to bring our hearts in love with holiness, to assist us in duty, and excite grace in the performance, to alienate our Hearts from this World, and fix them upon Heaven and heavenly things.

4. A sincere consent to perform our Baptismal Vow or Covenant, renouncing the World, the Flesh and the Devil, resolving through God's grace for the fu­ture to be his obedient Children and faithful Servants, fighting against all his and our spiritual Enemies. Those who are our Opposites, I would gladly know of them, or rather I desire them to know of them­selves, whether any less than such a sincere consent as this above spoken of can bring or put them into a sa­ving justified state, or give them (which is all one) a saving interest in Christ, and a right to Pardon and [Page 104] Life through him? If they say, less will, let it be made appear from Scripture; if not, then why do they make any opposition? upon this consent sincerely given follows practical trust; i. e. a well grounded confidence upon God in and through the Lord Jesus by the Holy Spirit, that God for the sake of Christ will be faithful to his promises, and make them good unto such who reduce their former consent into per­severing practice, such who by patient continuance in well doing seek for Glory, and Honour, and Immor­tality, Eternal Life. Rom. 2. 7. Though many times under dark and afflicting providences and dispensations. Thus Abraham against hope believed in hope, he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strong in Faith, giving glory to God: And being fully perswaded that what he had promised, he was able also to perform, upon our first assent and consent we have an initial right to Christ and Life: upon our practical trust we have this right continued, which practical trust doth include sincere Obedience, and when a Believer is incapacitated for the act and exercise, the principle or habit is accepted. The heart of Asa was perfect all his days. 2 Chron. 15. 17.

This practical trust is our adherence to God in Christ by the blessed Spirit, in the ways of holiness notwithstanding opposition. Acts 11. 23. Who when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and ex­horted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.

Having shewed what a Faith it is which is requisite both to our initial and continued Justification, or what Faith it is which is requisite both to our initial and and continued right to Christ, and to Pardon and Life purchased by him. Let us now consider what this Faith includes, as it gives the initial right, and so I consider it especially as consisting in consent, assent being previous.

[Page 105]1. Repentance is included, for in our sincere con­sent to take God to be our God, Christ to be our Redeemer, which includes an accepting him in all his Offices, and the Holy Spirit to be our Sanctifier, there is implied a cordial confessing and forsaking of all Sin, and this with self loathing, self judging, enmity, and opposition in the Heart against it.

2. Love to God and the ways of holiness is inclu­ded; for it cannot be that ever any should sincerely consent to be the Lord's, and make choice of the ways of holiness to walk in, unless there be such a sight of their excellency and amiableness as draws their Love from Sin and the World, and fixeth it principally here­upon.

3. This consent includes Obedience radically, for there can be no real consent to be Christ's, unless there be a full resolution to do and suffer whatsoever he calls us unto, this consent we speak of brings Christ and Souls into the Relation of Master and Servants; and there cannot be a real consent to be Christ's Servants, unless there be a willingness to do the work which he commands us, and a resolution through Grace to con­tinue in it, so that it is manifest that Faith which justi­fies or gives right to Pardon and Life, it includes Re­pentance, Love to God, and radically new Obedi­ence; and though it is like upon the matter, I may procure to my self the name of a Papist, I must not for that be affrighted from owning a truth that bears its own evidence before it: But by the way, I would have such Persons who are so ready to fix such names upon others as they judge may render them odious to consider, what our Divines mean when they say that where there is one Grace, there is every Grace; and tell me where there is the act and exercise of that Faith which unites to Christ, whether there can be this without the exercise of Repentance and Love inclusive? what hath been said may give sufficient light to know how to answer the Question, to such as [Page 106] desire to learn, and think not themselves wise enough already. Though seeing I am upon this, I shall take leave further to offer this to consideration, and let it be under correction, that where there is the exercise in truth of Grace, the exercise of that one Grace, (I speak of the sensible exercise) doth include the exercise of the most, if not the exercise of all Grace. As thus, Suppose we the exercise of true Repentance, there must be a real willingness in the Soul that sincerely repents, to deliver over himself to be taught and ruled by Christ: and to trust to God's ability and faith­fulness by virtue of his promise to Pardon, and save him through and for Christ's satisfaction and Merits, which is Faith. And where there is this Faith, such a Soul must hate Sin, and love God in Christ, and his grace and favour above the best of this World; and where there is such a love there must be self denial, the Soul must be free to let all go for its part in God and Christ, and the things above. And where there is this self denial, there must be an heart actu­ally disposed patiently to bear and endure all the trials and troubles the Soul may meet with, and thus the affections must be heavenly and the Souls greatest hopes must be there. Though some may quarrel at this, as they are ready to do at all things which have not their sentiments to be their measure and Rule: yet I do think this much may be a great help unto a Soul under darkness and casting down, and so in the exercise of true humiliation, for if it can but clear up this, it may have ground to conclude the rest of the graces are in­cluded or are exercised implicitely. I look upon one grace drawn forth into exercise, to be as the Wheel in a Clock, which set upon motion, the rest move together with it.

But to offer further light upon the matter, I am in­clined to think that one grand occasion of Persons mistakes at this day about the great Article of Justifi­cation, is their looking at and insisting upon the [Page 107] Priestly Office of Christ, so as that they regard little, or very much overlook his Prophetick and Kingly Office, not that we exclude the Priestly Office: But let us see to it in our believing that we have such a Faith as accepts of whole Christ, Christ in all his Of­fices, and not such a Faith as pitcheth upon his Priest­ly Office only, for this is no other but a dividing of Christ; therefore whoever they are that do not look at whole Christ, and embrace him in all his Offices as the object of that Faith which justifies they are un­der a mistake. The Apostle counsels the distressed Jaylor, when he seriously enquired what he might do to be saved to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, was not the Faith here spoken of such a Faith as gave right to and interest in Christ and Covenant benefits? And what as such did it only respect Christ as Priest? If so, then my consent to take Christ in part, or to take Christ as Priest will give me a right and interest in him as divided from my consent to take him as a Prophet and King, and will it so? no surely, for know that we can have no right to Christ nor benefit by him as a Priest, unless we consent to take him as Prophet to teach, and King to rule us, is evident from Scripture, Acts 3. 22, 23. For Moses truly said unto the Fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your Brethren like unto me, him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every Soul which will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the People. Luke 19. 27. But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

There are these few things which I would gladly have Persons understand, which if they do, and make a Christian use of them, they need not much to trouble themselves with disputes upon the matter, though they should by degrees endeavour to increase in knowledge.

1. Christ hath merited all saving blessings.

[Page 108]2. Persons so long as impenitent and unbelieving have no right to nor interest in Christ, or any of his purchased benefits. But

3. So soon as God gives Souls the Grace to turn from Sin, and give their unfeigned consent. 1. To take Christ as the meriter of all saving good. 2. As the satisfier of offended Justice. And, 3. Become sincerely willing to be taught and ruled by him as Prophet and King.

4. Resolve through his Grace to walk in all Holy Obedience before him.

5. Depend upon his Mediatour and intercession alone for the acceptation of all their services and duties, then they have a right unto him, and interest in all his benefits, and are most certainly in a justified state.

Now whereas some Persons affirm that all our Righteousness is as filthy rags; If they mean by our Righteousness a meer external hypocritical Righteous­ness where there is neither the Truth nor exercise of Grace, I grant them this as filthy rags, 'tis an abomi­nation to God: But if they mean by our Righteous­ness true Repentance, Faith, sincere Love, and Gospel Obedience, that this is as filthy rags, an abomination to God, this I deny, and the Scripture that is brought to prove the contrary, doth not intend it; i. e. Isa. 64. 6. but only an hypocritical Righteousness for the Prophet in the Verse foregoing saith, Thou meetest him that rejoyceth, and worketh righteousness, those that remem­ber thee in thy ways. And if so then that Righteousness here spoken of, cannot be an abomination to God; for God will not meet, own, or grant such his graci­ous presence who work an abomination, neither will he account such to remember him in his ways. The Sacrifice of the wicked indeed is an abomination to the Lord; but the Prayer of the upright is his delight, And the Righteous Lord loves Righteousness, and his countenance beholds the upright. But now saith the Prophet implicitely confessing Sin in the person of the [Page 109] People, They are but few that are such as rejoyce and work Righteousness, &c. for take us generally and we are so degenerate and hypocritical, that we are but as an unclean thing, and all our Righteousness are as fil­thy rags, and what is added, Verse 7th. is a further proof of this Exposition. And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee, which cannot certainly be meant of the sincere, or those spoken of at the 5th Verse. But if this Exposi­tion will not give content, let Persons read the Assem­blies Annotations, and Pool's English Annotations upon the place, and those that can may consult Pool's Criticks in locum, and see wherein I and they differ. And there are such as are for having our sincere Christian Righ­teousness to be no better than filthy rags will find three of the Romish Church to be of their mind. Not that I think this to be any argument, suppose what they hold to be a truth, but I alledge it because these Men profess themselves such Antipapists, as that they judge it a sufficient Argument (so far as I find by some of them) against what others hold, that is con­tradictory to them, if a Papist do but hold it, or seem so to do.

But say they again, Did not Paul account his Chri­stian Righteousness, the best of his grace dung? I An­swer, no, if we may believe his own express words, for he saith Philip. 3. 8. that he counted all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord; and was his knowledge of Christ no part of his Christian Righteousness? or was it no Grace? or did it not include Faith? if so, then how could he ac­count it dung? or how did he so? But it may be said, Suppose that a Person be sincere, and a true Be­liever, Doth not Sin attend the best of his Graces and Duties? I Answer, Yes, for certain. But then is Grace and sincere Obedience in it self or in its own nature Sin? Surely no. Persons would do well if they would distinguish betwixt Grace and Sin, I am sure [Page 110] God doth, and that both those that are in Heaven and Hell know; Sin, I grant, is dung and filth wherever it is, but so is not Grace, true Grace. Indeed I must say to such as are sincere Christians, you have cause and occasion to bewail and beg Pardon for the want of the free exercise of Grace; i. e. of Repentance, Faith, love to God, &c. in duty. But then do you, or ever did you mourn and grieve and sorrow because you have Grace? I trow not. And what is it which hinders the free exercise of Grace but Sin; this you are to bewail, and crave pardon for, and believe as­suredly that your duties cannot be accepted without the Mediation and Intercession of Christ.

Well, but it may be said further, our Repentance and Faith we account them only dung in point of Justification, I Answer, they are so I grant, if either you or I set them in Christ's place, or make them that which they neither are, nor can be; i. e. the merit of our Justification, or a meritorious Righteousness; but they are not so, as they are appointed by God in the Gospel to give right unto, and interest in Christ.

For let me ask Persons whether they think that God doth ever accept any of the services and duties of his People? Must they not say yes, through Christ and his Mediation? And so say I, I do not expect the best of my duties should be accepted any other way. Well then, if God accept the services of his People, I ask again, whether God will accept of Sin or no? must it not be said no; if so, that God will accept of his Peoples duties, and yet neither can nor will accept of Sin, then how can their duties be Sin? But it may be said again, our best services are no better than Sin till they be offered up by Christ, I Answer, still I grant that Sin attends our best services, and so we need pardon in our best performances, and the Mediation of Christ for their acceptation: But now if our best services in themselves be no better than Sin, until Christ offer them up; then Christ doth either [Page 111] tender to God that which is no better than Sin in it self; or else he makes our Christian duties another thing than they were, and so offers them up to God: And if so, it is not the very service he tenders, but another thing; a thing of another nature: and if so, the consequence must be, that Christ doth not at all offer up a Believers service to God. This then is that which I believe upon the matter.

1. That God for Christ's sake pardons the Sins that attend the sincere services of his People.

2. So far as they are sincere he is well pleased with them, and accepts them for Christ's sake.

3. Whoever they are who are not sensible of, and lament the Sins of their best duties: Look not unto, and rest not upon the Merit of Christ for Pardon: And do not rest alone upon Christ's Mediation and In­tercession for their Acceptation, their duties cannot be pleasing to God. And I shall take leave here to tell such as make Conscience of the performance of Chri­stian duties, if you have true Faith and the exercise of it in a duty, it will direct you to trust to, and rest in Christ alone and his Mediation for your acceptation. It is of the very nature of true Faith exercised in a duty to lead the Soul to rest upon and trust unto a blessed Mediator for its acceptance: and whoever they are who pretend to Faith, and yet do not make this use of Christ, I must tell such their Faith is not true; for I say, it is of the nature of true Faith not to lead Persons to rest in themselves, nor to rest in their duties; but to rest in a Mediatour alone for the acceptation both of their Persons and duties, and there­fore I conclude, that if Persons be such as have true Faith, and the exercise of Faith in a duty, it is not possible for them to rest in that duty, or in themselves as performers of it.

SECT. X. Concerning resting in Duty, Pride, of Grace, and an unopperative Faith, with some sensible concluding Instructions thereupon.

MUCH hath been said to caution Persons against resting in their Duties and Graces, and I am satisfied was well meant, and I do not deny but that Persons may rest, yea, and I am afraid too many do rest in their Duties, but that any Person doth rest in the performance of Duty, where Grace is in exercise, this I deny. For when a Person in the performance of Duty doth rest upon Christ and his Mediation for Acceptation; 'tis either one that hath Faith, and the exercise of it; or it is as he who is destitute of Faith and so of the exercise of it; If the former, manifest it is, that where there is true Faith in its exercise, that Soul cannot but rest upon Christ; if the latter, then the consequence must be supposing that a Person per­form Duty, that is destitute of true Faith, and so with­out the exercise of it; he is a Person that rests upon Christ, and whose duties shall be accepted when yet the Scripture saith, that without Faith it is impossible to please God.

Touching Persons trusting in their Graces, and making Saviours of their Graces, I affirm in like man­ner, that where there is the truth and exercise of Grace, it is impossible for that Person to rest in his Grace, or make a Saviour of it, and that because (as before) it is of the very nature of Grace to lead thither from whence it came; i. e. to God in Christ as the Souls rest and Center, whatsoever is from our selves, leads us into our selves; but whatsoever is from God, as a moral good, tends towards God. Well, but say some, though Grace be from God, and so be good; yet it no sooner passeth through us, but it is defile [...]. I [Page 113] wonder for my part what notion Men have of this Allusive term passing through, or when they say that grace passeth through us: but I shall let that pass, as a thing I understand not, neither I think they that use the Phrase. But if Grace be defiled so soon as we are the subjects of it, or so soon as it is given unto us or wrought in us, then how comes it by this defilement, it must either be from some change, or it remains what it was; if it be from some change that it is defiled, seeing that this defilement must be moral, then it must partake of the nature of Sin, and if so, it must cease to be Grace, and if it do, and become Sin, as it must if it partake of moral pollution, then in whom will mortifying and sanctifying Grace be found? If Grace remain what it was, and it was pure and good, as granted, as it had the Spirit as its Au­thor, then how comes it to be defiled? I do not deny, but there is Sin, and much Sin, where Grace is, but then that this Sin pollutes Grace, so soon as it is given, and so it becomes morally defiled, and partakes of the nature of Sin, this I cannot reach, for I think that what is morally evil must be sin, and what is morally polluted, must either be sin or sinful; and to say, sinful Grace and Holiness sounds harsh.

But (it may be said) doth not a true Christian exalt and set up his grace above Christ in a time of tempta­tion to spiritual pride, because of his grace, if the temptation prevail? I Answer, in a time of tempta­tion to pride, if the temptation prevail, a Person that is a Christian, doth exalt and set up himself; but he cannot be said to set up and exalt his grace above Christ hereby, nor indeed doth he exalt grace at all, because this exalting and high esteem of himself, is a depressing of his grace, and a putting a stop unto its exercise, whereby he should exalt Christ: so that grace cannot be the cause of this his pride, for it is against its nature; but the suppressing of grace, or a putting a stop to its exercise, by the prevalency of the contrary corruption.

So then, you I say, a Man cannot be proud of his grace; I answer, he cannot be proud of his grace, that hath his grace in exercise, because a Person is never more humble, nor is God in Christ ever more exalted by him, than when grace in him is most ex­ercised: for it is of the very nature of true grace to depress self, lay low the Creature, and exalt God and Christ, so that the more of grace and the exercise of grace, and the more of this.

But may not a Christian be proud of the exercise of grace? I Answer, he may be lift up in himself, and proud of himself after the exercise of grace, not that this exercise is the cause hereof, it may be an acciden­tal occasion, but then it is the abuse both of grace and the exercise of it. The truth is, Christians, if you would be secured from spiritual pride, be kept hum­ble, labour to be much in the exercise of grace, fear not that the exercise of grace should lead you to rest either in it, or in your self, for it is against the very nature of it, the more of the exercise of grace, the more doth the Soul take up its rest in God through Christ.

It is very strange in some Men, O, say they, you must cast away all your graces and sincere duties, and account them as dung, and rest wholly upon Christ and his Righteousness, just as though there was such an inconsistency and opposition betwixt Christ and the graces of his Spirit, and Holy Obedience, as that Christ and his Righteousness could not be relied upon and trusted to for acceptation, except we laid by grace and sincere duty as useless here, when for my part it is a matter quite beyond my reach, to know how, or with what, or in what to rely upon Christ and his Righteousness for my acceptation without grace and the exercise of it in holy duties, for think I, if I rely upon Christ and his Righteousness, I must have some way in which, and something by which I must thus rely, or how can I? But it is like som [...] [Page 115] Men will have neither, if both grace and sincere duty must be accounted and cast away as dung here: O, but say they, you must beware of resting upon your grace, and sincere duties for your acceptation, and so of making a Christ of them; I Answer, for my part I do not fear this, if I have but the truth and exercise of grace, for God hath given grace, and draws forth grace into exercise for this very end, that Persons should rest upon and trust unto Christ's M diation for their acceptation; and sure I am, grace where it is in act, will act according to its nature, and this is to lead the Soul that hath it towards God in Christ, as its center and rest, and therefore if some Persons will amuse themselves and others unnecessarily, I can­not help them: but I shall pray the Lord to measure my Faith, and quicken Grace, and grant me the free exercise of it in every duty, and then I know I shall be humble, advance Christ, and rest upon him as my only Mediator to obtain for me the grant of all saving good, both Grace and Glory. For in whose Hearts soever the Lord is pleased to suppress Pride, Hypocrisie, and Formality; and keep them humble, sincere, and lively in the practice of Piety; it is not possible but such should depend upon Christ both for pardon for the iniquities which attend their best duties, and also for their acceptation: for whose Hearts so ever are kept humble, sincere, and lively in grace, and so in obedience, such Persons cannot chuse but see and know their own sinfulness, nothingness, spiritual emp­tiness, as considered morally in themselves; and so on the contrary admire and adore the grace of God in Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit, for any thing of di­stinguishing grace and love towards their Souls, and is this some resting in themselves, and in their own graces and duties? The grace and love of God in Christ Jesus, certainly is the most highly advanced in Hea­ven, and what is the rea [...]on? but because their grace is perfected in the Spirits of just Men: hence therefore [Page 116] the nearer any Soul upon Earth comes towards this Heavenly perfection, by the growth and exercise of grace, the more humble that Soul will be, and the more God in Christ will be adored and glorified in and by that Soul. John 15. 8 Herein is my Father glo­rified, that ye bear much fruit: so shall ye be my disciples. So that while some Persons caution others against rest­ing in their grace: I say, beware of Pride, Hypocrisie, and formality; and endeavour after the growth and exercise of grace, and then no danger, while grace is in its growth and exercise. I wish it be not the case of many Professors, that while they are pretending highly to advance the Lord Jesus, and to rest in him, and trust solely unto him, they do not content them­selves much with formality, and take little care to see they have that grace in truth and the exercise of it by which the glory of Christ is exalted, and he rested in as the only Saviour and Mediatour; for sure I am, how high soever their pretences may be without true grace and fruitfulness in it, they neither do nor can do that which they themselves pretend unto.

What some Men have been doing, and what their thoughts are as to matters of this nature, I shall leave, only they seem strange to me; for after I have af­firmed that such as have the exercise of true Faith and other graces, it is not possible while it is thus for them either to rest in Grace or Duty: they in opposition have asserted that such Doctrine is the high way to make formalists and hypocrites, but then you must know it was without proof, and it was like to be so; for sure I am that such as perform duties without true Faith, and the exercise of Grace, they have nothing wherewith to rest upon Christ or his Mediation, and so must content themselves with the work done, and these are and can be no other while it is thus but for­malists and hypocrites. What it is to some Persons I know not, but to me it is a Paradox, that true grace and sincere obedience should lead off from Christ and [Page 117] God in him, and that Men should be in danger there­by, while it is prevalent, to degrade Christ and set up themselves: it is just as if a Man should say, such a Servant as is faithful, diligent in his Master's service, and very obedient, his Master is in danger so long as he is such to be robbed of his due honour by him, while yet the Master accounts it a credit and honour unto him to have such a Servant, and loves him en­tirely, and intrusts him with those secrets that he will not intrust with the rest, though know the Servant doth but what he ought to do in all this. And thus the best and most faithful of God's Servants, after all they have done in God's service, must account them­selves unprofitable to God, because they make no re­turn of any thing unto him, but what they first have received from him through Christ by the Holy good Spirit, though observe where there is faithfulness they shall reap the profit, for God will for Christ reward his own work in them, and that which is done faithfully by them. He that comes to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of such as diligently seek him. Eliphaz. intimates, Job 22. 2. that though no Man can be profitable to God, yet a wise Man, one that is spiri­tually wise, saith Mr. Caryl, may be profitable to him­self. And he hath this Observation upon the words, He that is truly Wise, Godly, and Holy shall find fruit and benefit by it, we car, saith he, never want fruit our selves, while we are bringing forth fruit unto God, all obedience, i. e. which is sincere, is attended with a blessing. For my part with relation to what hath been said, I do not think that any thing is accounted by God morally unclean and filthy but Sin; and there­fore must be yet to learn that sincere obedience to the commands of the Gospel is Sin: if it be said (as usu­al) it is so, as it is in us. I Answer, as it is in us so Sin attends it, I grant as we are sinful and unclean in our selves, and this Sin must needs be filthy and abomin­able but then that obedience which is the obedience [Page 118] of Faith and Love considered in it self as abstracted from our Sin, that this, I say, is filthy and abominable, I dare not affirm, but indeed must deny: for the principle must needs be the work of the Spirit, and the performance must be by the Spirit's assistance, and as such then the obedience must be accepted of God. Now how that which is a work of the Spirit, and per­formed by the assistance of the Spirit, and offered up to God by Christ through his intercession can be fil­thy and abominable in it self, I shall leave under con­sideration, whether is it rational to think that Christ will offer up to God by his intercession that which is filthy? or suppose he should, whether will God ac­cept it. But it will be said (as before) it is only fil­thy in point of Justification; I Answer, if it be not filthy in point of acceptation through Christ and for his sake, it cannot be filthy in point of Justification so far as it hath its use and office there, for will God ac­cept that for the sake of Christ, which he will not so far as he accepts it, justifie us upon? God accepts of a Soul's sincere obedience, which is the obedience of Faith through Christ, as it his Spirit's work, and a Conformity to the Gospel Law; now what is Gods acceptation but his being pleased with the Soul and its service through Christ, which well pleasedness im­plies his judging that Soul to be one that hath right, (as it is a sincere obedient Soul still for Christ's merits) to the blessings promised unto such, and what is God's judging a Soul to have right but his justifying of that Soul? It is very odd to hear some Persons in their confessions casting away all that is in them, and all that is done by them in the special service of God though sincere as dung, and yet profess they will rest and depend upon Christ's Intercession for the accepta­tion of that which they called and accounted dung; as though Christ would offer up to God on their ac­count by his intercession, or that God would accept that which is as dung, and so filthy and abominable in [Page 119] a moral sense. And then further these very Persons in the same duty will thank God for any ground of hope he hath given of the truth of a work of Grace in their Hearts, and the exercise of Grace in the Duty, and the hopes they have had of the Spirits assistance, and yet all this before in their confessions they cast away as dung. I do believe many have meant well in all this, and were for the main good Christians; but plain it is matters were not so well considered as they should have been here. Think of it, we have all Sin to bewail which attends us in our best services, and to crave pardon for through Christ; but then so far as our Hearts are sound and sincere, and we find the ex­ercise of humiliation, Faith, and love to God in the performance of that service; we have ground to be­lieve it shall be accepted of God in Christ, and there­fore may depend upon his Mediation for this very thing, being incouraged by God's gracious promise, and if so, we neither may, nor ought to look upon such a service in it self to be dung, and so an abomi­nation to God.

Now the reason that some give for accounting our Gospel holiness dung is this; i. e. because of its in­firmity and imperfection. This reason implies that all that Grace and Holiness which is not a perfect con­formity to the Law of Innocency is as dung, and so abominable to God, and sure I am this looks odd on't; for is not this Grace and Holiness a work of God? and is not every work of God perfect in its kind? hath not a perfection of parts been all along granted? and is there not an Evangelical perfection consisting in sincerity, which hath been and is acknowledged by Divines? was it a strict legal perfection, or a perfecti­on consisting in sincerity that David intended when he gave Solomon his Son the charge to serve God with a perfect heart? and so when it is said of the Peo­ple they offered with a perfect heart. 1 Chron. 29. 9. Was that a strict legal perfection in Heart and Life [Page 120] that was so sweet to Hezekiah in the reflection, after he had received the sentence of Death in himself. Isa 38. 3. And said, Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth, and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight: and Hezekiah wept sore. Mr. Caryl from that part of Job's description. This Man was perfect, saith, not that he had a legal perfection, such a perfection as the Papists now contend for, and assert to be possibly attainable, yea, actually attained by many in this Life: But, saith he, the perfection here spoken of is the perfection of sincerity, and he observes from the words after his explication. First, It is sincerity that especially commends us to God. Secondly, Saith he, sincere and sound hearted Persons are in God's esteem perfect Persons. It is not all that you can do, or all that you can say, or all that you can suffer, or all that you can lose that can make you perfect in the esteem of God without sincerity; add sincerity but to the least, and it gives you the denomination of perfect. Thus far this Reverend Author, which Doctrine some Men call Popish, so well are they acquainted what Popish Doctrine is.

Some Men seperate Faith and good Works, and speak of them so, as though there might be good Works without Faith. Now for my part, I know no good Works formally in a Theological sense, but such as are done in Faith, and I know nothing done in Faith that leads not to Christ and God in him, and therefore for Persons to speak of good Works as such seperate from Faith, and to speak of Faith leading the Soul off from Christ, is manifestly vain. Some Men will not grant that Faith is a qualification of right to Christ, and his benefits, and [...]et they say to justifie is to make one legally just, or just in Law; so say I, and can a Man be legally just without a legal righteousness? and is not that which is a Righteousness a quality? [Page 121] how then can a Man be just legally and not qualita­tively? Find me a Man that ever was legally just, and yet not personally just in the sense of that Law which accounted him just, and if personally just, then primarily inherently just, and if personally just, just in his nature. As I have said above, so I must here say again, let it be proved that Thomas is a Person without the nature of a Man, or that the nature doth not go to constitute the Person; when I speak of Faith as the qualifying matter in a Gospel sense, some Persons have inferred from hence, that this is all I in­tend in Justification, whereas there is the form (as I have said) i. e. God's imputation by his Law of Grace, his accounting such a Faith as accepts of Christ as our great Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, by this his Law for the sake of Christ's satisfaction and Merit, for Righteousness and forma dat esse. Hence their in­ference is a meer fallacy, à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter. Will the Gospel assert a Person's right to Christ and his benefits before conformity thereunto? and when through grace any Person yields Conformi­ty, is it not a Gospel Righteousness? and is not a Gospel Righteousness jus quoad eam legem, a right in that Law to Christ, Pardon, and Life promised? and is jus ad rem, a right to a thing no qualification in a legal sense? if not, then the consequence must be, that a penitent Believer as such subjectively hath no more actual right to Christ and Life according to the Gospel promise then an impenitent Infidel; I speak not of a right by merit, but both by qualification unto him that hath merited, and unto Pardon and Life merited by him for us.

Faith it self as it is the Soul's first consent to ac­cept of Christ to be its Propitiation, Head, and Teacher is really Gospel Obedience; Rom. 16. 26. But now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the Prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations, for the obedience of faith, [Page 122] and that because it is the Soul's conformity to the Gospel command. 1 John 3. 23. And this is his com­mandment, That we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, love one another, as he gave us com­mandment. And Faith thus considered is that which unites to Christ, and the qualifying matter which first gives the right. John 1. 12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his Name. And as Faith is the Soul's consent to accept of Christ, &c. this con­sent includes the Soul's free ingagement sincerely to be subject to what Christ commands, so long as he con­tinues it in the World, in a dependance upon his power and faithfulness. And this sincere obedience performed according to the Soul's first Covenant con­sent during its abode in this World, is that whereby its right to Christ, and saving blessings is continued. Revel. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the City. And this is agreeable to the mind of a Reverend and Judicious Divine, as he Illustrates it by a Marriage Covenant including constant fidelity. And this Faith with him is a con­dition as it relates to the Covenant, and a Righteous­ness in the sense of the Gospel as it is the performance of the condition. And when he speaks of Christ's Righteousness being the cause and matter of Justifica­tion, his declared sense is the meriting matter, not that we might merit, but have that by virtue of his merit, which the Gospel requires to give us right to Pardon and Life, and what is this but our sincere con­sent, which is Faith?

Our Divines excluding good Works from the mat­ter of Justification, spoke of good Works with rela­tion to the Law of Innocency, (and indeed Evangeli­cal Obedience will be no qualifying matter of right in the sense of that Law) and that they did so is plain, forasmuch as their argument is, because they are im­perfect, [Page 123] perfect, therefore, (say they) it must be a perfect sin­less Righteousness, even the Righteousness of Christ that must justifie, because no other Righteousness can be adaequate to the Law, and we say the same with them, that if we are justified by the Law of In­nocency, no less than a perfect sinless Righteousness would avail us here; but we are not, (as hath been made appear) but by the Gospel: and though I affirm that Faith is our personal justifying Righteousness ac­cording to the Gospel Law, yet it doth not follow from hence, that Believers shall stand upon their points with God in judgment according to his strict Justice; no, they must say with David Psalm. 143. 2. And enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified. But I say upon con­formity to the Law of Grace, they have interest in Christ the Mediatour, and a right to his Righteous­ness, upon which they do depend and trust for the satisfaction of God's offended Justice, and the answer­ing the violated Law, for the procuring of their ac­ceptation with God, and a grant of all saving promised good: so that as to process in judgment, my thoughts are that Believers shall not personally plead at all, but Christ as their blessed Advocate for them: But then this he will do for them as such who have been, and are found recti in curia Evangelica, right in the Gospel Law, which still I say is and shall be the Rule of Judg­ment, Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel, and so justified by this his fixed constitution. The ground I have is Matth. 25. from Verse 34 to 41. Whereas some that they may hold their ungrounded and unscriptural notions do confidently affirm that our Faith, Repentance, and sincere Obedience hath only the place of an Evidence; I do not deny the Obe­dience of Faith to be an Evidence, but then I must not confound but distinguish of its primary and secon­dary use and office, and the result of both, Christ [Page 124] saith, John 15. 14. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatso­ever I command you. Dare any Man say they were friends actually, before any subjection to Christ? if not, was not this their subjection a conformity to the Gospel so far as revealed? And is there any confor­mity to the Gospel without Obedience to its com­mands? And is there any Obedience to the com­mands of the Gospel in truth, which is not the obedi­ence of faith? Those who will contradict, let them prove, and then take the cause. If they cannot, then they must give us leave, and if they will not, we must make bold to take it, it being allowed by one that is greater than they to distinguish of the Obedience of Faith, as it constitutes us friends through Christ's Me­diation, continues us friends, and as it is an evidence resulting from both, where God is pleased to give the light.

Say some, Job when accused by his friends for be­ing an hypocrite, pleads his own Righteousness as much as any; But as to Justification thereby before God he speaks otherwise, Job 9. 20, 21. If I justified my self, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse, Though I were perfect, yet would I not know my Soul: I would despise my life. Now will this, or the other really and in it self justifie a Person from the charge of hypocrisie before Men, that will not so far justifie him from the charge or accusation in God's account? when a Person is falsly accused of hypocrisie as Job, must not he so far as he hath a discovery of his sincerity, plead this to justifie him against that accusation, and if he be sin­cere is he not so in God's account? and so clear of that predominant hypocrisie of which he is accused; and doth not God so far as he accounts a Person clear of a false accusation justifie him? Let Persons who contradict prove if they can, That sincerity will only justifie a Person from the charge or accusation of hy­pocrisie before Men, while yet the accusation stand [...] [Page 125] in full force before God, and he accounts the Person who is in himself sincere to be a downright hypocrite. The meaning then of the above quoted Text in Job seems to be this; If I justifie my self as one unjustly afflicted by God this very Justification of my self and charge uttered against God would be sufficient to con­demn me; if I say I am in a strict sense legally per­fect, and so have no Sin, for which God may correct me, this very boasting would prove me perverse and sinful: yea, though I were perfect, yet would I not know or look upon my self as such an one whom God might not deal withal as he pleased considered as ab­solute Lord and owner. Now to argue from this Text according to this clear Exposition that Faith is no qualifying matter of right to Christ, Pardon and Life, is no better than to argue à bacculo ad angulum, ut patet attendenti. From what I have affirmed above, i. e. That there is no danger of a Soul's resting in duties, where true Faith is in exercise, seeing the exercise of Faith will lead that Soul to rest in Christ and God in and through him for acceptation; it hath been infer­red, that such as have throughly imbibed this opinion, are if unregenerate in the snare of Satan almost secure from conviction. And if this be so, then these Men who draw up such a conclusion from the Doctrine have this to prove, look where they will find a proof, that whoever holds that there is no danger of a Soul's rest­ing in duty where true Faith is in exercise, &c. he is in the snare of the Devil if he be unregenerate, and like to be, for this Doctrine will keep him there. And if this Doctrine be it that will keep an unregenerate Person in the snare of the Devil, how can any one be out of his snare that holds it; for if it be the Devil's snare, he that holds it must needs be in it: If then a Person have been regenerate before, yet according to this assertion, if he imbibe this Doctrine, it brings him back into the snare of the Devil, so that he must fall from grace, falling from a regenerate state, and I for [Page 126] my part, by these Men sentenced to the black Pit, and in their account there is no hope for me; but by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, I do not dread their Sentence. This intus existens prohibens alienum is very much to be lamented at this day, seeing it opposeth manifest truth.

I suppose the consequences that I have deduced from the common Doctrine of Justification are very offen­sive to some, and they call them absurd. But I say again, whosoever they be that holds Christ's Righte­ousness in it self to be their very personal formal justi­fying Righteousness, the inferences are natural from the Notion, and whereas they are called absurd, the contradiction betwixt the abovesaid Doctrine and the inferences must be shewn, or else when Persons call them absurd they understand not what they say, Dans formam dat consequentia formam. And hath it not been generally affirmed, That the Righteousness of Christ considered as Mediatour, is made the Believers by Im­putation as really as if it had been wrought and per­formed by them: and it being the sole matter of their Justification, they are made formally righteous here­upon by God's Imputation? who knows not that hath read any thing almost, that the active and passive obe­dience of Christ by the most that have been accounted Orthodox hath been made the material, and God's Imputation the formal cause of our Justification. And yet some have made a challenge, saying, Where did any of our Orthodox Writers ever assert or intend that we were justified by the very formal, personal, numerical, intrinsick Righteousness of Christ? Who­ever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Im­putation is made ours according to its universal value, but according to our particular necessity? I Answer, Certainly tell I cannot, who these Persons mean by Orthodox Writers; but this I know, that many of those Holy Men of God whose works are extant, and who were very Orthodox in their Lives, and in the [Page 127] most of things in their judgment also, yet held as much in this point of Justification as what is in the challenge comes to Mary, saith Mr. Norton in his Or­thodox Evangelist, under the Cross was more just imputa­tively than Christ, which was also true of every believer then living. If Adam's peace had been perfect in case of his fulfilling all Righteousness, then the Believer's Peace is perfect, who hath fulfilled all Righteousness in his surety; Page 324. In Justification, saith Mr. Tho. Vincent, we are not only acquitted from guilt, but accepted as per­fectly righteous in God's sight through the Imputation of Christ's perfect righteousness. Supplement to the Morn­ing Exercise. Page 716.

Having spoken of Pardon, the other part of our Justi­fication (saith Downham) is that whereby God imputeth unto every believer the righteousness of the Mediatour Jesus Christ, as if it were properly their own, and performed by them, that being clothed therewith they may be perfectly righteous in God's sight, and so obtain right unto everlasting life and happiness. Christian Warfare. Lib. 2. Cap. 50. Pag. 271. But it is needless to take up time or fill up Paper in quoting Authors, Dr. Manton might have served for all, whom I account as moderate a Man as any that dissent, yet hear what he saith upon Hebr. 11. 4. Being united to Christ, we are interested in all his actions, as if they were ours, for when we are one with him in the Spirit, we are considered by God to be one with him in Law; therefore by union we are said to put on Christ with all his personal merits and righteousness, upon this God looks upon us as righteous, and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteousness, and this righteous­ness must be in justification, and is such a righteousness as sa­tisfies God's justice, and the Law. Now upon the mat­ter I ask, can God look upon us as righteous, and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteous­ness, which is such a Righteousness as satisfies God's justice, and the Law; and put us on, upon union with Christ, with all his personal Merits and Righte­ousness, [Page 128] and yet we not have the very formal, personal, numerical, intrinsick Righteousness of Christ? What is not a satisfactory and meritorious Righteonsness the very essential, formal, and numerical Righteousness of Christ's Person as Mediator? And is not this affirmed to be imputed in it self in our Justification, and to be in it self our personal justifying Righteousness? If not, why am I and some others so much opposed for the denying of it, and holding that it is only imputed unto us in its fruit and effects? If they affirm it is imputed or accounted by God to be in it self our per­sonal justifying Righteousness; then I ask, how can it be accounted ours in it self for our Justification, and not be one and the same essential, formal, and personal Righteousness of Christ as Mediator? can that be the Righteousness of Christ in it self, that is not one and the same essential formal Righteousness which is Christ? If so, then we may say idem non idem, the self same and not the self same, which is manifest­ly absured and contradictory.

And whereas it is said further, whoever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Imputation is made ours according to its universal value? I Answer, he that says the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in it self, and not only in its blessed effects; how can it be it self, and want its full value? let any Man find me that can, a Righteousness of Christ as Mediatour that is not satisfactory to infinite justice, and merito­rious of all good, and is not here its full value? take away, as I have said above, it's satisfactory and meri­torious property from Christ's Righteousness as Medi­atour, which is its value, and see then if that which remains can be the Righteousness of Christ. I am afraid if some men were left to act according to their own notions, it would be an odd sort of a Righteous­ness they would make at last to be their justifying Righteousness, for according to what they say it can­not be Christ's, and Faith it must not be, and what [Page 129] then must it be, it is well if they know themselves, for sure I am I do not. And what can a Man think of that which remains? which is, that the Righteous­ness of Christ is made ours by Imputation according to our particular necessities. But that in the opinion of these Persons God doth divide and parcel out Christ's Righteousness one part to this, and another part to that Believer; and that some have need of more, and some of less, of it: and is this God's man­ner of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness? Ac­cording to these Men it is, but I say it is not; and for any to assert such a thing is grosly absurd. Indeed I had like to have said this is a notion but of yester­days coining, but I find the substance both of this latter, and the former part of that I have now spoken to by Mr. Burgess, in his Book called, Vindiciae Legis, Pag. 135.

As for me, I say, I must either have interest in and a right unto the whole of Christ's Righteousness, or I am undone; for no less than the whole will satisfie God's justice for any Soul, or merit Pardon and Life for it: And when I plead with God for Pardon, Life, and Acceptation, I plead the whole, and not a part only of Christ's meritorious and satisfactory Righte­ousness; but then observe, I plead it as it is proper­ly Christ's as Mediatour, and so in it self incommuni­cable, though some Persons speak of its communica­tion to us, which in its blessed fruits I grant, but in it self I deny. For the Imputation of Christ's Righ­teousness in it self, and against the Imputation of Faith as it unites to Christ, the greatest Argument is Authority, what Orthodox Divines as they call them say; In Answer to which I shall say as the Divines did at the late Portsmouth Disputation, My Religion is in the Bible, I own my self a Protestant, and with such it is a fundamental or Principle, that the greatest and best of Men are fallible, and therefore our assent is not concluded by meer words of one or other name [Page 130] how great soever; we pay a very just deference to the Worthies these our Adversaries intend, but we cannot think our selves obliged to believe every thing they have said: we must not turn Papists yet, and satisfie our selves with a meer implicit Faith, a judg­ment of discretion, whether some will allow us or not, we must make bold to take; It is not very ratio­nal for Men to be angry, because we will not shut our own Eves, and see altogether with other Mens. He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him.