Catholic Theology Plain Pure Peaceable

110. Indeed it is essential to this faith, 1. To be the act of the three essential faculties of man's Soul, the Vital Power, the Intellect and the Will, 2. And to have for its object God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; and that in Christ, all that is essential to him as a Savior be its object: And therefore, 1. That it be an Assent, Consent and practical Affiance, 2. That it be a believing in Christ as God and Man, and as the Teacher, Priest and King of the Church, revealing the Gospel, reconciling us to God, and Ruling us in order▪ to Salvation.

111. To say that someone only of these parts of Christ's office, as they are Concept us inadaequati of a Savior is the only object of justifying faith, and to say, that justifying faith is only one Act of the Soul, or many acts of one only faculty, or to say that we are justified only by such a one, and that to expect to be justified by Assent, Consent and Affiance, or by believing in Christ as our Teacher and Ruler as well as Priest, and as a justifying Judge, as well as a Justifying Sacrifice, and as a fulfiller of the Law, is to expect justification by Works, as Paul denieth it; This is a vain distinguishing, a falsifying the Doctrine of faith and justification, a departing from the Scripture simplicity by corrupting seeming subtility, and one of those human inventions which have wronged the Church. And it is no wiser than to say, that when we speak of taking or receiving a Man to be a Husband, a Physician, a King, it is but one physical a • of the Soul, that is meant, or about one only physical conception in the object, which is inadequate. Whereas all such Moral or Civil acts co • tain many physical acts, and are suited to all things in the object which are essential to it in its moral or civil nature or relation.

112. And it is but the same deluding subtility, and vain curiosity, •• a playing with deceitful words, to say that we are justified by faith, Quatenus recipit Christi Justitiam, As it believeth in Christ's Sacrifice and perfect obedience only, and not, As it believeth in him as Teacher, Ruler, Sanctifier, Judge, or as he intercedeth for us in Heaven, &c. when the Scripture saith no such thing at all, but simply maketh faith in Christ (supposing Faith in God the Father) to be that by which we must be justified▪

113. This distinction is founded in another falsehood supposed, which is that the effects of all Christ's saving works are as distinctly to be ascribed to several Receiving Acts of faith, as they are to the several procuri • acts of Christ, the object of faith, which is another corrupting additio • to God's Word. One part of the work of our Salvation was done by Christ's humiliation, and another by him in his exaltation: one by his overcoming the Devil, and another by his overcoming the World; one by his Cross, another by his Grave, another by his Resurrection, another by his ascension, another by his making the new Covenant, another by his sending the Spirit, another by his sending the Apostles, another by his intercession in Heaven, another will be done by our Resurrection, and another by his last Judgment, and our Glorification; one by hi • as an obeying-subject, another as a Sacrifice for sin, many by him as a Pr • phet, many as a Priest and many as a King and Judge: But to say therefore that our acts of faith as Receptive have as various respects to the effects or benefits, and that we are justified by him only as we believe i • him as Righteous, or a Justifyer, and that we are adopted as we believe in him in another respect, and sanctified as we believe in hi • in another respect, &c. these are the dreams of corrupting curiosity. For that Christ who by all these several works, hath done all the office of a Redeemer to procure these several effects, is preached and offered to us to be entirely as such a Redeemer, believed in and received, and upon the condition of such an entire faith only, Christ and all these benefits conjunctly are by one Covenant given us, and no otherwise. And believing in Christ as Christ, who by all those acts hath himself procured us this Covenant, and these gifts, is that by which we are justified as it is one undivided faith; And the quatenus here as to Christ's own procurement of the effects hath its place, but as to the Act of our faith, and Christ as the object constituting that faith, there is no such diversity or order to be feigned, as if the several effects were accordingly to be ascribed to our several Believings or Receiving acts.

114. The ambiguity of the very word [Receiving] hath drawn many into this error: Receiving signifieth sometimes a Physical reception, which is merely Passive, or the Relation of the Patient as such to the Act and Agent. And this is twofold, 1. The Reception of a real being; and so to be sanctified is to Receive Sanctification. 2. The Reception of a Relation, such as all Jus, Right to a thing is; and so to be pardoned, justified and adopted, and to Receive pardon, justification and adoption, is all one.

2. Sometimes it signifieth Moral or Civil receiving, which is nothing but 1. The consent of the mind, called Acceptance. 2. And as to corporeal objects, sometime, the voluntary act of the body; as the Hand, taking that which is offered. Now if the Receiving in question were physical, (either rei vel juris ad rem) then indeed it would be so nearly related to the thing received, (which as received is no object, because Receiving so is no act) as that this quatenus in question might be applied to it. For it may well be said I receive Justification quatenus Justificatus sum, as I am justified, and I receive Sanctification as I am sanctified, and vice versa, for they are but various words signifying the same thing. But of Moral Receiving the case is otherwise: For this is not physical Reception, but only a Moral Act, which is made a necessary medium, or Condition to Physical Reception, and thence is called Receiving; so Accepting or Consenting is a moral means or condition of that Having or Possessing which is consequential. And this Acceptance hath relation immediately to the thing as Given only, to be made ours, according to the Will of the Giver, and not made ours according to the order of the things given: That is, 1. The Ratio proprietatis, the Reason that they are ours is the will of the Donor, and the Collation is according to the order of his Will; though the Things Given have their intrinsic difference.

115. All men confess, that this Moral Reception, is an Act, and therefore hath an object (which Physical Reception is not). And that thus to Receive doth suppose a Moral Gift, which Gift maketh not the thing ours necessarily, as physical operation doth, but on supposition of our voluntary Reception or Consent. And all confess that God's Donation is by his Covenant, Testament or Promise; and this Covenant hath its proper nature and mode, that is, the Condition as imposed, antecedent to our Receiving. Therefore as the thing Given is made ours by the Donation, so according to the order appointed by it: and our Consent no otherwise maketh it ours than as the Condition of the Gift performed. But God's Covenant doth Give us Christ and Life; that is, Justification, Sanctification and Glorification in tithe or right, in one Gift, to be Accepted by one entire faith as the Condition, not making at all the order of the Gifts and faiths respect to them in that order, to be any of the Ratio proprietatis.

116. This will be plainer by human instances. A Servants Relation is founded in his consent to be a Servant; a Wifes Relation is founded in her Marriage-consent to be a Wife, and to take that man for her Husband simply without anymore ado. Now if the Master of that Servant, or the Husband of that Wife, be a noble man, a rich man, a wise man, a good man, and they knew all this, and by knowing it were induced to consent, and are to have their proportionable benefits by his Nobility, Riches, Wisdom, Goodness, yet their title to these benefits ariseth not from the act of their consent as it respected these benefits severally and distinctly, but merely by consent to their Relation, as being his Condition of Collation. The Wife is made Noble by her Husbands Nobility, she is made Rich by his Riches, she is instructed by his Wisdom, &c. But she hath no more Right to his Riches for marrying him in the notion of Rich, or for consenting to him for Riches, than for marrying him in the notion or thought of his wisdom or goodness. On her part, it was not consent to be Rich by him that gave her right to his Riches, and consent to be Noble by him that gave her right to Nobility; but consent simply to be his Wife that gave her right to all.

117. This is yet fullier evident in that most usually men make consent to one thing to be the condition of their Receiving or Right to another. And usually that which one is most backward to, is made the condition of their Right to that which they are most forward or willing to have. The Master doth not say, If thou wilt have thy wages, thou shalt have right to it: But if thou wilt do my work, thou shalt have thy wages. The condition of Marriage is conjugal Love and fidelity: q. d. I will be thy Husband, and give thee right to all that I have, if thou wilt be and do what is essential to a Wife] and not [if thou wilt have my Riches, &c.] If a Father give a Child a free gift on any condition, it will likely be [If thou wilt be a thankful and obedient Child] and not [If thou wilt have it.] Or if mere consent to have it, be put, it is usually when it is some gift which it is supposed that the person is not very willing to have: [As if a Sick man will have Physic, if an ungodly man will have Teaching, Books or Godliness itself.] But to this usually they are induced by the Promise of somewhat else which they are willing of: As to the Sick [If thou wilt take this Physic, thou shalt have health.] To the ungodly [If thou wilt have Christ and holiness, thou shalt have pardon and happiness.] Now in the sense of Physical Receiving [He that receiveth Physic, hath Physic] and [He that receiveth health, hath health] &c. But in the moral sense of Receiving, which is Accepting as it is the condition of a gift, so [He that receiveth the Physic shall have the health] and [He that receiveth Christ and his sanctifying Spirit, shall have Pardon, Justification, and Salvation] Not that his willingness to have [pardon and happiness] is the chief or only condition of his [pardon and happiness.] But his Accepting Christ and his Spirit which men are naturally unwilling of, is the condition of that [pardon and happiness] which men would have.

By all which it appeareth that to say, [Faith justifieth me as it is the Receiving of Christ's Righteousness, and not as it is the Receiving of Christ as a Teacher, Ruler, &c.] is a confounding or seducing saying. For, 1. If it intimate that Faith Justifyeth us as an efficient cause [principal o • Instrumental] it is false. 2. If it mean that [Faith is the Condition of Justification quatenus, as it receiveth Christ's Righteousness only,] it hath either one or two falsehoods. 1. If it mean that Faiths receiving act, is the formalis ratio Conditionis, or that it justifieth not qua conditio d •• ationis, but quae Receptio Justitiae Christi, it is false. Therefore qua here can signify nothing but the Aptitude of faith to be made the condition, and so Qua & Quae here are all one: 2. And then that [only the Accepting of Righteousness justifieth us, that is, Is the condition of our Justification] is a falsehood.

118. Therefore our consent to be a Holy and obedient people, or to take Christ for our Teacher, Exemplar, Ruler, Sanctifier by his Word and Spirit, and Judge, hath at least as great a hand in our justification, (being principally the Condition of the Promise) as our belief in our acceptance of Christ's Righteousness hath.

SECT. VIII. Of Justification by Christ's Righteousness, imputed.

119. Christ's personal Righteousness, Divine or Human, habitual, active or passive (as it's called) is not given us or made ours, truly and properly in the thing itself, but in the effects (as was aforesaid) for neither the same matter; nor the same form is strictly ours. 1. That neither of them is ours in a physical sense is undeniable. If the Divine Righteousness were so ours, we were God's. And a Habit, an Act, and a Passion (materially) cannot be removed from one subject to another, nor the same be in divers subjects: These are as palpable contradictions as Transubstantiation is. And the Relative form is founded in the matter or subject, and can no more be removed. The paternity of a Generator, and the paternity of an Adopter, are not the same, but two. And a Relation is an accident, also which perisheth when removed from the subject; and in another is another. 2. If it be said that both are ours Morally or Imputatively, I answer, It is true: But that phrase is of large and doubtful signification. 1. If the meaning be that [The Covenant of Grace doth as certainly pardon or justify us (in the way and degree promised by it) for the merit of Christ's Righteousness (in performing his Mediatorial Covenant with the Father) as our own merit (had it been possible) would have done; or our Innocency would have Justifyed us by the Covenant of Innocency] this is true.

2. But if the meaning be that [Christ's merit and satisfaction, by perfect holiness, and obedience, and suffering, are supposed or Reputed by God to have been inherent in us, or done by us in our civil person in Christ; or that in a sense natural or Legal we did all those things ourselves, or that God judgeth us so to have done, by Judging Christ and us to be the same civil person; or else that all the Benefits of Christ's Righteousness shall as fully and immediately be ours, as if we had been, and done, and suffered, merited and satisfied in and by Christ; All this is false.

120. For if this were so, we could need no pardon; for he that is reputed to be Innocent, by fulfilling all the Law, is reputed never to have sinned, by omission or commission: And he can have no pardon of sin, who hath no sin to be pardoned. Therefore such an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us, would make his satisfaction null or vain, or certainly neither imputable to us, nor useful for us.

121. Some to avoid this do divide the Time of our Lives, and suppose Christ's sufferings to have satisfied and purchased pardon of our sins, for all the Time before our Believing, and his Righteousness to be imputed to us for the Time since our Believing: But this is a human fiction: For our sins after believing must have pardon too, by Christ's satisfaction.

And some distinguish of our Time and State under the two Covenants, and say that Christ's satisfaction was for the pardon of our sins under the first Covenant, which continued but till the promise made to Adam, Gen. 3. 15. And so was for none but Adam 's sin imputed to us; and that after that all being under the new Covenant, it condemneth none but the finally impenitent (who scape not) and so that God's pardoning men since the new Covenant is but his preventing their need of pardon, or else pardoning temporal punishments only: But this is contrary to the Gospel, which tells us that Christ died for our sins, even all that ever are forgiven, and that all are forgiven to believers, (and not the necessity of forgiveness prevented) and not only Adam 's sin as ours: Nor only the temporal, but the perpetual punishment. And even temporal punishment is not due to the innocent.

122. Some distinguish only of Actions, and not of Time, and say Christ's Sacrifice satisfied for all our sins, that they may be forgiven, and his righteousness is imputed to us, that we may be also accounted just; But this is but either ambiguity, or the fore-detected gross contradiction. For if by Justice they mean Reputed sinlessness, or perfecti •• , then these two cannot stand together: For he that is supposed a Sinner, is supposed not sinless or perfect; And he that is supposed sinless cannot be supposed pardonable.

123. Some think to avoid the contradiction, by distinguishing only the moments of Nature, and double respect of the same man's actions: They say that we are first in order of Nature supposed to be Sinners, and pardoned, and then to be such as moreover need the reputation of Innocency or Righteousness which is added to pardon. But, 1. He that is pardoned all sins of omission and commission, is accounted Innocent and Righteous as to any Guilt of punishment, either of sense or Loss. 2. And he that is after accounted Innocent and Just from his first being to that hour, is judged never to have needed pardon: And so they make God come with an after act, and condemn his own foregoing act of error and injury; or at least to contradict it, and in the first instant to say [I pardon this Sinner] and in the second to say [I now repute him one that never sinned or needed pardon.]

124. But the commonest way of such Divines is, to say that Christ's Righteousness is first imputed; that is, we are reputed to have perfectly obeyed and been habitually holy in Christ, and then sin is next pardoned as a fruit of the merits of this. But this is still but the oft detected contradiction, that we are first accounted sinless, and therefore our sins are forgiven us.

125. Some say that the Law since the fall obligeth us both to obey and to suffer, and not to one only; else a Sinner bound to suffer, should not be bound to obey. Therefore Christ must do both for us: But this is too gross for any man to utter that ever knew what Law and Government is. Do they mean that as to the same Act and time, the Law bindeth us to obey and suffer? or for divers acts and instants of time? Do they mean that the Law bound man both to perfection and suffering for perfection, or to suffering for sin? No man doubts but when one sin is committed, and punishment deserved, the Law is still the Law, and bindeth men still to obey or suffer more the next moment, and again to obey or suffer more the next moment. But this concerneth not our question. Did the Law bind Adam to obey and to suffer before he sinned? Did it bind him both to obey and suffer for his new sin the next instant? It's true it bound him to suffer for his old sin? but not for the next before it is committed. And the obligation to duty goeth before the obligation to punishment for that same action; because the action cometh between; and the first is an act of God's antecedent Will, and the second of his consequent Will, that is, of the Retributive, and not the Preceptive part of the Law.

And they note not that the question is not, what obedience a man is bound to, but what he performeth or must be reputed to have performed. If they will speak so unaptly as to say that the Law commandeth Lapsed man, not to have sin, or imperfect man to have been perfect; that is, that the Command today bindeth Adam ad praeteritum not to have sinned yesterday, or bindeth to Impossibility in nature, that existent sin should not be existent, (in all which I leave them to their • iberty of words) yet it is certain that no man hath perfectly obeyed for one year or day. And therefore if Christ's perfect obedience and • oliness be imputed to them from their first being, then they are re • uted not-lapsed, nor-sinners from the beginning and, so not pardona • le. But if it be only for the time after sin that Christ's perfection is • theirs, after what sin must it be? If after Adam 's, then we need no pardon of any but Adam 's sin. If after conversion, then we need no pardon for sins after Conversion. If after our last sin, then Christ's per • ection is not imputed to us till after death.

126. Others would come nearer the matter, and say that we are • eputed Righteous as fulfillers of the Law, and yet reputed Sinners as Breakers of the Law: and that though there be no medium in naturals between light and darkness, life and death, yet there is between a • reaker of the Law, and a fulfiller of it, viz. a non-fulfiller; and be • ween just and unjust, that is not-just: But this is a mere darkness: There • s a medium negative, in a person as not obliged; but none between Posi • ive and Privative in one obliged as such. A stone is neither just nor • rivatively unjust: Nor a man about a thing never commanded or for • idden him: But what's this to the matter? God's Law is pre-supposed: we talk of nothing but Moral acts: The Law forbiddeth Omissions and Commissions: both are sin. Do these men think that he is not reputed Positively just, (and not only not-unjust) who is reputed never to have committed a sin, nor left undone a duty in his life. Can • he Law be fulfilled more than so? What is Righteousness if that be not?

Obj. Adam was neither just nor unjust in his first moment; no nor till he sinned say some, because till then he was not obliged to obey, or at least to any meritorious act, that is, to love God.

Ans. 1. Adam was in his first instant but Habitually just, and not by Act, because not obliged to impossibilities anymore than an Infant or a stone: But we speak only of obliged persons. 2. It is not true that Adam was not obliged to obey and Love God before he sinned, or that he never Loved God as God.

Obj. At least Adam merited not the Reward, though he sinned not till then.

Ans. 1. He merited what Reward he had, viz. the continuance o his blessings first freely given: but not an immutable state. 2. It is yet unresolved what that was by which Adam must merit Immutability and Glory? whether, 1. Once obeying or consent to his full Covenant. 2. Or once loving God. 3. Or conquering once. 4. Or eating of the tree of Life. 5. Or presevering in perfect obedience to the end; that is, till God should translate him, which is most likely. His not Meriting Immutability before the time, was no sin, we confess. 3. And we maintain as well as you, that Christ hath not only satisfied for sin, and merited pardon, but also Merited Imm • table Glory. But consider, 1. That Adam 's not doing that which was to merit Glory, was his sin of omission, and to pardon that omission, is to take him as a meriter of Glory. 2. Therefore it must be somewhat more than he forfeited by that omission and his commission, which cometh in by Christ's merit above forgiveness. 3. That Christ merited all this, both by his active, passive and habitual Righteousness, by which he merited pardon. 4. That it was not we that merited it in him, but he, to give it us only on the terms of a Law of Grace.

127. Yet some come nearer, and say that, To punish and not-Reward are not all one: And so the respect that Sin hath to the deserved punishment needed pardon and satisfaction: But our deserving the Reward needed Christ's perfect Obedience to be imputed. In this there is somewhat of truth. But you must avoid the errors that lie in the way, and a •• by most supposed truths. 1. Remember that man can have nothing from God, but what is a mere Gift as to the matter, though it be a Reward as to the order and ends of collation. And in this case, punishment is damni as well as sensus; And so the loss of the Reward is the principal part of Hell or Punishment. So that if Christ's death hath pardon • our sins of Omission, we are reputed to have done all our duty; And if so, we are reputed to have merited the Reward: And if he pardon our •••• as to all punishment of sense and loss, he pardoneth them as to th •• forfeiture of Heaven as a Gift, if not as a Reward.

128. But, say they, remission of sin is but part of Justification, because a man may be forgiven, and yet not reputed never to have broken the Law. To put away guilt, and to make one righteous are two thing. Ans. Still confusion. Guilt is either of the fault as such, or of the punishment, and of the fault only as the cause of punishment. If all g •• both culpae & poenae were done away, that person were reputed po •• righteous; that is, never to have omitted a Duty, or committed a •• But indeed when only the Reatus poenae (& culpae quoad poenam) is do • away, the Reatus culpae in se remaineth. And this Christ himself never taketh away, no not in Heaven, where forever we shall be judged, once to have sinned, and not to be such as never sinned.

129. And this seemeth the very core of their error, that they th •• we must be justified in Christ by the Law of Innocency, which justified Christ himself; and that we are quit or washed simply from all guilt of fault, as well as obligation to punishment: which is a great untruth, contrary to all the scope of the Gospel, which assureth us, that we are justified by the Law of Grace or Faith, and not by the Law of Works: That Christ freeth us from the curse and penalty of the Law: which he could not do, if we were reputed never to have deserved it, as never being Sinners. If we are reputed such as fulfilled the Law of Innocency (by another in our civil person, or as fully representing us,) all the Gospel is over-turned: There is no room for Repentance, none for the satisfaction of Christ, none for Faith in his blood, nor for Pardon, or prayer for Pardon, or any Grace, Act, Duty or Ordinance, Sacraments, Confession, or anything which supposeth Sin.

To say that Adam 's Law meant, [Do this, by thyself or by Christ, and thou shalt live,] is a Human fiction, not found in Scripture, confounding the Law of Innocency with the Gospel: And to say that the New Covenant maketh us one Person with Christ, and then the Law of Ad •• doth justify us, is a double error. We are not reputed one Person with Christ; nor doth the first Covenant justify any but the Person that performeth it. But we maintain as well as they, that the same Righteousness of God in himself, is manifested in both Covenants, and the same holy love of perfect Obedience, and the ends of the first Covenant are secured by the second. But the tenor and terms are not the same, nor the Righteousness of the subject as denominated from those terms. It is not the same Law which condemneth us and justifieth us, nor that justifieth Christ and us; nor is it the same Habits, or Acts, which are the immedi •• e fundamentum of the Relation of righteous in Christ and in us, • ough his Righteousness be the meritorious cause of ours. And there •• re not the same with the thing merited.

130. The Truth which they grope after, and must reconcile them •••• , is as followeth. Christ in his Sufferings did stand in the room of •• ners as their Sponsor, and satisfied Justice as was said before: And •• d had other ends yet to accomplish: It was meet that the perfection • his Law should be glorified by a perfect fulfilling of it by Christ, • en we had failed. Satan was hereby confounded: God pleased and • noured: Man shown what he should have been, and yet should do: • ns nature in Christ was thus actively and habitually perfected: By all • s Christ performed his Obedience to the mediatorial Law, and his • venant of Redemption; and so acquired a right first to himself of giving • t the purchased Benefits to Sinners, by a new Law or Covenant of Grace •• d according to it; By which Covenant, only as his Instrument, the • her and Son give us Right to them, in an Order there established. •••• that is there given to us, Christ purchased for us, by performing his • n Covenant first with the Father, by perfect Holiness, and Obedience, • en in his Sacrifice on the Cross, and by all that he undertook to do as Redeemer, antecedently. The Purchase was made for this Donation • its end, and is commensurate to it: just so much as Christ hath given •••• as to matter, manner, terms, degree, time, &c. he did purchase and • rit for us, and no more. Had he antecedently done all that he did •••• our person, and we in him, in Law sense, the thing itself, with its separable consequents and effects, had been all ours ipso facto, before and • thout the donation or conveyance of a new Law or Covenant; nor • d they been ever given us upon terms and conditions, when they were •••• own before, without those terms. But now what is given us by the • ew Covenant, we have title to on this account, because it was pur • ased by the perfect Merit and Saerifice of Christ, and so given us by • m, and by the Father. So that it is ours as sure as if we had merited it • r selves, but not ours in the same order, and measure, and time, and • ms, as if we had merited it ourselves (in our natural or legal per • ns). For then it would have been all ours at once ipso facto, even • e merit itself, and the fore-said effects. We deserved punishment, • nd Christ was punished in our stead, that we might be forgiven; not • mediately, but on Covenant-terms: we had forfeited Life by sin; And • hrist merited Life for us by his Perfection, (not in our persons, but in • e person of a Mediator,) which Life was to be given to us by the said • ovenant: The antecedent benefits (such as the Covenant itself) he • veth absolutely, and antecedently to any act of ours. God reputeth all his Satisfaction and Merit of Christ to be as meet and effectual to pro • ure us all these Benefits, to be thus given, as if we ourselves had done and • ffered: And in this sense Christ's Righteousness is given us, and made ours, •••• that it is given for us, and we have the said benefits of it: Not that God doth give us the very habits of Holiness which were in Christ, nor • he transient acts which he performed, nor the very Sufferings which he • nderwent, nor the Relation of righteous satisfactory and meritorious, as •••• was that numerical Relation which immediately resulted from Christ's • wn Habits, Acts and Sufferings; For such a translation of accidents is •••• contradiction. But God giving us all the effects, or Salvation merited, • n itself properly, is said also not unfitly to give us the Merit or Righteousness which procured them; that is, as it was paid to God for us, to procure them; even as he is said to give Christ himself (antecedently •• our Faith) to the World as a Savior. And thus Christ's Righteousness, Merit and satisfaction may be said to be imputed to us, in that it •• thus given us, and thus truly reputed ours.

131. But when the Text saith, Rom. 4. 24. Righteousness is imputed •• us, the meaning is no more, but that God reputeth or judgeth us righte ••• though we have not the Righteousness of Innocency, or of the Law •• Works; which indeed is done for Christ's meritorious Righteous •••• procuring it: But the Text speaketh not of Christ's personal Righteous •••• in matter or form, imputed to us as being itself our own. Impu •••• Righteousness to us, is a consequent Act (after Faith) of God as Jud •• and not an antecedent donation.

132. And it is true that formaliter, non-punire & praemiari, ••• punish, and to Reward are not all one: And in some cases a man may •• freed from punishment, who is not rewarded: But it is as true as is a ••• said, 1. That God's Salvation, and all his Benefits, are ever free Gifts •• to the matter and value first, and then the relation of a Reward is b • secondary as to the Order of collation, and the reason comparative, wh • one man hath them rather than another (as a thankful Child hath the Gift which the Contemner goeth without). 2. And that here, Not to have this Gift (forfeited by our sin) is to be punished: And so h ••• non-donari, is puniri materially though the relations differ. 3. And that it is the same Righteousness of Christ which meriteth our Impunity quoad damnum & sensum, and which meriteth our Right to the Gift of Life, both sub ration doni as a Gift, and sub ration condonationis as a forgiveness of the forfeiture, and of the poena damni: So that here •• no room for the conceit, that Christ's death was only to purchase Pardon, and his Righteousness to merit Life. That which confoundeth men here is, their taking the divers Respects, and Connotations, and Co • ceptions of one and the same thing, to be divers separable things: Th • same Law hath the Preceptive part (to do and not do) and the Retributing part (penal and rewarding). The same Obedience of Adam was •• doing what was commanded, and a deserving what was promised. •••• more was promised to persevering Perfection than to the first act of Obedience. One Sin deserved death; but one act of Obedience desern •• not immutable Glory. And as the same Act is formally Obedience related to the Command, and formally meritorious or praemiandus, •• related to the Promise. And the same Act is sin and punishable, as related to the Precept (or Prohibition) and Threatening; so the same Glory is a free Gift in one respect (as related ut bonum to God as Benefactor) and a Reward in another (as related quoad ordinem conferendi to God •• Rector.) And the same loss of Glory is poena related to the Threatening and it is the loss of a Reward as related to the Promise. And so the s ••• Merits of Christ's active, and passive, and habitual Righteousness, because our Glory, both by giving us pardon of our forfeiture, and by Covenant-Donation, and as a Reward to Christ, and to us when •• perform the conditions of his Gift.

133. And it is certain, that Christ's Sufferings are first satisfactory and then meritorious, being a part of his Active, that is, voluntary O • dience. And Christ's Holiness and Obedience are meritorious of pardon •• Sin, as well as of Salvation.

134. If there be (as there is) anything which is given us throug •• Christ, more than our own Innocency or Obedience would have m ••• ted, the Gift of that is more than remission of Sin; And is to be ascribe • accordingly to the Purchase of Christ's Merits. But yet both his Holiness and Sufferings (though not as sufferings) did merit it: And that was not a fulfilling of the Law in our stead.

135. This superadded Gift (whatever it is) seemeth in Scripture to be included in Adoption, and not in Justification: But yet it may in this sense be called Justification, in that when our Right to that Gift is questioned, that Right must be justified by the Covenant-Donation, and by Christ's meritorious Purchase of it. But this is only de nomine: We are agreed of the thing.

136. It is greatly to be noted, that as a Reward is in the formal notion more than not punishing (where materially they are the same) so Christ hath not at all merited that eternal Life should be ours, by way of Reward for our fulfilling the Law in him, but that it should ours by his free Gift, as a Reward to Christ for his own Merits. So that the Relation of a Reward for Perfection, belongeth only formally to Christ, (who taketh it as his benefit that we are saved through his love to Souls) but not at all to us. And to say (as too many hold) that Heaven is our Reward for our perfection of Holiness and Obedience in and by Christ, is a Human Invention, subverting Christ's Gospel; or unfit speech, if better meant.

137. Yet a Reward it is to us, to be glorified; but that is not for our fulfilling the Law of Innocency by Christ, but for our believing in Christ, and performing the conditions of the Covenant of Grace: which giveth us Life as a free Gift; but yet in the order of the condition it hath the relation, and name of a Reward to us, in the Scripture.

138. So that here are three rewarding Covenants before us: 1. The Covenant or Law of Innocency rewarding man for perfection to the end; And this rewarded none but Christ: And it is false that we are rewarded by that Covenant, or justified by it, for Christ's fulfilling it. But it justified Christ. 2. The Law or Covenant made only to and with Christ the Mediator: And this Covenant further rewarded Christ as Mediator, giving him all that it promised to himself and us, for his performing the mediatorial conditions. And so our Life is Christ's Reward. 3. The Covenant or Law of Grace (for it is the same thing in several respects that's called the Law and the Covenant), which giving Life on the condition of Faith, doth justify and reward Believers. And we are justified and rewarded by no other Law.

139. When Rom. 4. oft saith (and other Texts) that we are justified by Faith, it connoteth and includeth that we are justified by Christ and his Sacrifice, Merits and Covenant respectively, believed in: But yet it is not Christ, nor his Sacrifice, or Merits, or Promise that is meant by the word [Faith.] It was a gross abuse of the Text so to expound it: Faith connoteth the Object, but it is not Christ that is called Faith.

140. But the meaning is, that man having forfeited Life, Christ's Righteousness (habitual, active and passive,) hath merited, that it shall be given us as a free Gift, but yet regularly under a Law: But the Law maketh nothing but believing acceptance the condition of our Right, and he that doth that much, shall, without perfection, be esteemed and used as righteous for the sake of the said Righteousness of Christ. So that in point of Merit, as to the value of the thing, Christ's Righteousness • is instead of our Innocency: But as to the order of collation, something being still to be required of us as a condition of Right, so our Faith now is instead of our Innocency, as being all that is laid on us instead of •• , that we may have right to Justification. And to assign this condition o • our part, Paul saith, That Faith is imputed to us for righteousness. To deny this sense, is to use violence with the Text.

141. Christ's Righteousness is made ours, as our Sins were made his: which is not in themselves, as is aforesaid: God forbid we should think that Christ was ever reputed by God to be a Sinner, a Blasphemer, a Murderer, an Enemy to God and Goodness, one that had Satan's Image, and was his Servant, a Persecutor of himself, &c. But only our sin was imputed to him as to the punishment deserved: that is, he assumed the Reatum poenae, the punishment, and a dueness occasioned by our sin; but made his own by his voluntary sponsion; But never had he the rea • um culpae in its self, but merely as aforesaid respectively to the punishment. Even so we have the Righteousness of Christ, not in its self, as Proprietors of it, but in relation to the effects; that is, we have the effects, even our Justification, and other benefits as purchased by it, and for its sake: And as our guilt, or obligation to punishment, was not Christ's, till his voluntary sponsion or consent did make it so; Even so his Righteousness is not ours in the effects, till our voluntary consent accept it: Because i • is not a natural, but a contracted Relation that is between Christ and us. And as it is not a strict propriety in Christ's Righteousness that we have, so it is much less a plenary and absolute propriety: nor have we it in the Relation of a meritorious cause to all uses, as if it had been fully our own, but only limitedly to those uses which God accepted it for, and hath assigned to it in the Gospel; that is, it is but a certain sort and measure of mercies that are given us from it in God's time and way.

142. To the asserting of the rigid sense of Imputation, they are necessitated to say that, which supposeth God's repute of the matter to be false; that is, that he reputeth us to have done that in and by Christ, which we never did by him: But God judgeth nothing to be otherwise than it is? that he judgeth Christ to have been the Sponsor and Mediator, and in that person to have done and suffered as he did, is because it is true: But he judgeth him not to have been the legal Person of the Sinner, and as many persons as there be redeemed Sinners in the world, because that is not true.

143. They say that what the Surety doth, the Debtor doth in Law-sense, and to judge so is not to err. But there are several sorts of Sureties, much more of Instruments in paying a Debt. 1. There be free Sureties, who are not obliged to the Debtor as his Dependents; and these either by counter-security, or by right of the thing, may recover all of the Debtor again. And therefore the Law supposeth not the Debtor to have paid the Debt by them; but that the Creditor made them both Joynt-Debtors for his own security. 2. There are Sureties antecedently, and Sureties consequently: One that before the Debt doth conditionally make himself a Joynt-Debtor, in case the Principal pay it not; And there is a Surety more properly called an undertaking-Friend, who after payeth the Debt, being disobliged before. Christ was not a Surety of the first sort, in Law-sense; And if you call God's Decrees, which are his Essence, Suretyship, your liberty of words changeth not the case. 3. There is a Surety who payeth the Debt in the name and person of the principal Debtor; (And he is not properly called a Surety, but an Agent or Substitute:) And Christ was none such; nor is any proper Surety such. And there is a Surety which, by the Creditors consent, doth pay the Debt in his own name, agreeing that the chief Debtor shall have no benefit by it but from him, as he shall give it, on certain terms: And this was Christ's case. 4. There is a Surety that payeth the same debt that was due from the Principal: And there is a Surety or Friend that undertaketh only to make the Creditor satisfaction, because the Debtor cannot pay. And this is the case. 5. Lastly, There is a pay-master that is the Debtors Instrument, whether Servant, Delegate, or whoever at his command or request doth pay it in his name and person: And this is not the case. And there is a proper Surety, who is a third person and no Instrument, and payeth it in his own name though for another. This, as I said, is the case; and therefore it is not we that paid it.

Therefore to the Objection I say, that to judge Christ such an Instrument or Delegate of ours, or Surety that did all in our legal person; is to misjudge and err, as is proved, which God cannot do.

144. Christ did and suffered in the common nature of man, though not in the person of each Sinner. And man's nature is so far redeemed by him, that for the mere Original Sin of nature alone, no man shall perish, unless he add the rejection of Grace; (of which somewhat is said before.) But yet as Nature existeth only in persons, so it is all persons, who have this much benefit and more. But that he merited and satisfied in our Nature, is a proper speech, and truer than that he did it in our persons.

145. But all this similitude of a Creditor and Debtor, is to be limited in the application, according to the great difference of Sin and Debt, which will infer a great diversity in the consequents; which may easily be collected by the Reader.

146. As to the great and weighty question, whether Christ died for sins against the New Covenant, or only for those against the old: I answer, Distinction is here notoriously necessary. 1. If by the old Covenant, or first Covenant, you mean the conditional Promise, [Be perfect and live] no sin since Adam 's is against that conditional Promise, because it ceased through man's incapacity, upon the Fall; And Christ died not only for the first sin.

2. If by the first Covenant you mean, the bare command of perfect perpetual Obedience, Christ died for sins against that command which is still in force, but not as a Covenant of Life given on that condition.

3. If by the first Covenant, you mean the punitive part of the Law of Innocency, saying, [Thou shalt die if thou obey not perfectly.] So Christ died for all our Sins in the strictest sense, even as we are condemnable for them by that Law. And that part also of the Law continueth to make punishment our due in primo instanti, though with an adjoined remedy.

4. If by the New Covenant, you mean the mere preceptive part of Christ's supernaturally-revealed Law, or of the foresaid Law of Nature, as in the hands of Christ, so Christ died for sins against the Law of Christ. 2. If by the New Covenant or Law you mean, the Promise and Threatening of Christ's Law, or either; so Sin may be said to be against them in two senses: 1. Objectively, as they are neglected by us: And so that Sin formally is only against the Precept, and Christ died for it. 2. Or as the Sin hath punishment threatened by the Sanction, and no pardon given by the Promise: And so Sin is in two senses also against the said Sanction: that is, 1. When it is such a Sin as the Promise giveth no pardon to conditionally, And such as the commination peremptority condemneth the Sinner for to remediless misery. And this Sin is the final non-perf • rmance of the Gospel-Condition (Faith and Repentance). And such only are fully obliged to suffer Hell by the commination of the Law of Grace: And for such Sin Christ never died: not because he never died for the person as to any other sin, or for any benefit, as some teach: But because, 1. He resolved never to die for that sin itself, (of final Unbelief, Impenitence and Unholiness.) 2. And because he never died to satisfy his own Law of Grace, and to take off its proper full obligation to final punishment; but only to satisfy God instead of man's suffering what the Law of Works obliged him to.

2. But there is also a mediate or conditional dueness of punishment, according to the Law of Grace: which is when a man by not believing and not-repenting at the present, and by neglecting and resisting Grace, doth so far forfeit all Grace and Salvation, as that God may cut him off, and cast him into Hell if he will; not having peremptorily said, that he will do it; nor given men any assurance that he will not. This man is not immediately and fully under the dueness of Hell fire, but on supposition that God should first cut him off; and then his Impenitence would be final, which is the first case: But this person is under all this guilt. 1. Guilty of punishment not forgiven against the Law of Works. 2. He is so far guilty of punishment, according to the Law of Grace, as 1. That no pardon is given him, or due to him. 2. And God may justly take away his Spirit and forsake him. 3. And God may justly cut him •••• . 4. And if God should cut him off, Hell will be his full immediate due.

147. By this it further appeareth, that we cannot be justified as personally fulfilling all Righteousness in Christ: Because we are all our life time principally under those great Duties of the Law of Grace, which Christ neither did nor could do for us. We are bound all our days to accept a Savior, to accept pardon of Sin, and mortifying Grace, to confess our Sins, to repent of them, and sorrow for them; to labor in the use of all Means and Ordinances to mortify them; To do all our duties as Sinners, in that manner as those must do that are in a Physicians hands for Cure; To receive and apply Christ's Merits to that end; to beg his Intercession and daily pardon; To labor that imperfect Grace may be strengthened: In a word, Sin, and a desire of healing, so affect all that the Gospel commandeth us, that Christ was not capable of any of this. And if all this was undone till our Conversion, and much of it undone after our Conversion, and yet Christ never did it for us, not we in him; How can it be said that we are justified by fulfilling all the Law in and by Christ? yea the Law of Nature still commandeth us, to obey the Law of Grace, supposing it made and revealed to us.

148. The question whether Christ paid the Idem or the tantundem, is hence also more fully resolved: By payment is meant, either Holiness or Suffering. And 1. This showeth that Christ's Obedience was not materially the same with ours (as aforesaid). 2. And I before proved that a great, and the far greatest part of our punishment was such as Christ could never suffer; either permitted Sin itself, or desertion by the Spirit of Holiness, or divine displeasure and hatred, or accusations of Conscience, &c. 3. And the Law binding only the Sinner, and not any Surety to suffer, and every man personally to obey, most clearly it is not Idem qu • d debetur, were it but merely because it is not ejusdem or per eundem.

149. Indeed solution of the Debt, and satisfaction strictly taken thus • iffer, that satisfaction is solutio tantidem, vel aequivalentis alias indebi • i. And if Christ be said to have paid the very same duty and punishment which the Law required, he is denied to have satisfied for our non-pay • ent: For a Law that is fully performed can require no more, nor the Law-giver neither: And therefore both Satisfaction and Pardon are shut • ut.

150. It is not properly the Law which is satisfied, but the Law-giver • s above Law as is said: But yet improperly the Law may be said to be •• tisfied in that the ends of the Law-giver in it are obtained.

151. Though I owe much thanks to God for what, near thirty years go, I learned from Grotius de satisfact. yet I must say that in this great • uestion, whether Christ satisfied God for Sin as Domino absoluto, vel •• parti laesae, vel ut Rectori, which he asserteth alone, I take him to come •• ort of accurateness and soundness; And that this is the truth.

God is to man, 1. Dominus absolutus, that is, our Owner. 2. Rector • premus. 3. Amicus, Benefactor: vel Pater & finis. Sin is against God in all these three Relations: 1. As our Owner, it is a denying him and • lienating his own quoad usum. 2. As Rector, it breaketh his Law. 3. As •• r Lover and End, it is a departing from him. For 1. As our Owner, we we him total resignation and use as such. 2. As our Ruler, we owe him • ubjection and Obedience as such. 3. As our Friend (Benefactor & Ama •• lissimus) we owe him Gratitude and Love as such (which yet is part • f Obedience too.) Now Sin being the privation of all this, God is to • e satisfied for it as such, in all these three Relations; And is pars laesa •• all these three Relations, that is, he is injured, though not hurt. It is •• ue, that Government and punishing Justice, formally as such, belong to God only as Rector. And satisfaction is made him eminently in that Re • ation; yet also to compensate the injury done by sin to him in the other • woe Relations also.

SECT. IX. Of the nature and distinctions of Justification.

152. Justification is a word of many significations, the Scheme whereof should I give them all, would seem to most Readers a troublesome di • tinguishing. Therefore I take up with these three most notable senses. • . Justification constitutive: 2. Sentential: 3. Executive.

The first is to make a man righteous; The second is to judge him righte • us; The third is to use him as righteous. 1. By Impunity; 2. Reward.

153 God never judgeth a man righteous (either by secret esteem or open sentence) till he have made him such.

154. To be made righteous, is to be justified in Law-sense; which is, To be justifiable (or justificandus) by sentence.

155. A man is righteous, 1. Particularly, secundum quid, as to some particular cause that he is accusable of. 2. Or universally as to all causes▪ 3. Or eminently, as to all those causes that Heaven or Hell depend upon.

156. 1. No man is universally righteous, really or reputatively. God judgeth no Saint in Heaven to be one that never sinned: And he that hath once sinned, is unavoidably under the Relation of •••• that sinned, to eternity, ex necessitate existentiae: which Relation is the very Reatus ipsius peccati; though all the ill effects be remitted.

157. 2. Every man hath some particular righteousness. For the worst man may be falsely accused, and be righteous as to that false accusation But this will not save him.

158. 3. That eminent Righteousness necessary to our Salvation, though it be not universal or perfect (else we should never be afficted by chasti •• ments or denials of Grace, or permissions to sin); yet is it at least perfect as to its proper use, and to our glorious perfection; And may be called our universal Righteousness, because it is all that we have. And •• consisteth not of any one or two Causes, but of many: Of which no o •• must be excluded or set against the rest. As there are several Allegatio •• or Accusations against us, so there must be several parts of the matter of our Justification.

159. Not only an actual Accusation, but a possible or a virtual o •• , which we are liable to, sufficeth to denominate Justification as its contrary, in the first Law-sense of Justification.

160. It is our Right to Impunity, and to the heavenly Glory, which is to be justified finally in Judgment; and our persons as the Subjects of that Right: And our Actions but mediately in order to that end.

161. It is only at the Bar of Christ as Redeemer, that we are to be judged and justified, and not by God only as a Creator. Therefore it is by the Law of Grace that we must be judged to life or death, finally, and not by the sole Law of Innocency.

162. Therefore no man is justified by the Law of Innocency, either by the preceptive or retributive part: But we are justified only by the L •• or Covenant of Grace, against the Accusation which may be brought against us from the Law of Innocency: Against it; not by it.

163. We are liable to all these following Accusations, which will ope • to us the correlate Justifications, and the matter of each part.

1. It may be said by the Accuser of the Brethren, [Thou art a Si •••• , against the Precepts of Nature and Grace.] He that denieth this is a Lyar▪ Against this Charge there is no Justification forever. But we must •• Heaven confess that we have sinned: but Glory be to him that washed • s from our sins in his blood (by Pardon and Sanctifiation.)

164. 2. Next it may be said, that [We did deserve Hell by our Sin.] This also is to be confessed forever.

165. 3. It may be said, that by God's Law of Innocency Hell is ou • due, and therefore we are to be condemned to it. To this, we deny the consequence; because we have right to Impunity and to Glory, freely given us by God our Redeemer by a Covenant of Grace, merited for us, by the Obedience and Satisfaction given for us by Christ our Savior. Where note, that here in this first part of our Justification, there are all these conjunct necessary Causes. 1. God's Love and Mercy giving: 2. Christ's Righteousness and Satisfaction meriting. 3. The Covenant instrumentally giving. 4. Right to Impunity and Glory (by Justification and Adoption conjunct) the thing given: which Right is our very Righteousness against • his Accusation; that is, a relation, whence the other relation of just and • ustifiable resulteth: (For if you will not here see relations resulting from • elations, pretend not to true accurateness in your search.)

166. These four Causes now were enough to constitute, and so prove • s righteous against the Charge of being damnandi, if we were questiona • le no further. But the turning point of the day is yet behind; 1. Our • llegation of Justification by Christ and the Covenant may be denied. • t may be said by the Accuser, that the Covenant justifieth none but • enitent Believers, and giveth plenary Right to Glory to none but saints • nd persevering Conquerors, and that we are none such. Against this Ac • usation we must be justified or perish; else all the rest will be un • ffectual. And here to say, that it is true, I died an impeninent Person, • n Insidel, Hypocrite, or Ungodly, but Christ was a penitent Believer for • e, or sincere and holy for me, or that he died to pardon this,] all this will • e false and vain. Christ's Merits and Satisfaction is not the Righteousness itself which must justify us against this Accusation; But our own • ersonal Faith, Repentance, sincere Holiness and Perseverance,] purchased • y Christ, and wrought by the Spirit in us, but thence, our own acts. • e that cannot truly say, The Accusation is false. I am a true Penitent, • anctified persevering Believer must be condemned and perish. Thus • aith and Repentance are our Righteousness by which we must thus far • e justified.

167. But this is but a particular mediate subservient Righteousness, • nd part of our Justification, subordinate to Christ's Merits.

168. Yet this being the Condition on our part for our Participation • n all the free Gifts of the Covenant; Scripture useth to describe God's • udgment as enquiring after this. The great thing to be glorified in • udgment is God's Love, Wisdom, Justice and Truth, and Christ's great Merits and performance in our Redemption; But the great thing questio • ed, accused, tried and judged will be our performance of the Covenant of Grace as to our conditions. The day is not to try God whether he be • ust, or Christ, whether his Merits and Satisfaction were sufficient; and whether he have done his part: But to try man whether, 1. He have • rue Right to Impunity and Glory. 2. Whether he have performed the Condition on which the Covenant giveth that Right, and be indeed the • rue Receiver of it. The Devils hope cannot lie at all, in proving Christ or the Covenant faulty, or defective on their part; but in proving • s to be none of the persons that have Right. This therefore is the Righteousness mentioned, Matth. 25. and of Faith imputed, Rom. 4, &c. • nd else-where.

169. But if we will speak of Righteousness and Justification entirely, • s that which containeth all its Causes, we must set all the five forementioned together, giving each one its proper place, and no one the • lace or office of the rest. And give leave to the self-conceited, peevish, • gnorant, blindly to revile you, for saying that you join your Faith and Holiness to make one Righteousness with that of Christ, as if it were not sufficient. And tell him, that Christ's Righteousness is not ours absolutely in itself, but to and in the proper effects: And that it is perfect as to its • roper ends; And that he never intended it to this end, to be instead of Faith and Holiness in us, nor to make them needless to our Salvation.

170. No man must ascribe anything to his own Faith or Holiness i • the least degree, which is proper to, 1. God's Mercy or Grace. 2. To Christ, or his Righteousness or Merits. 3. Or to the Covenant: not anything but its proper part: And that must be granted it.

171. It is a vain Fiction in them that think our Right to Justificatio • or Impunity, and our Right to Salvation, have not the same causes and conditions, but that our own Repentance and Obedience is a condition of our Right to Salvation, but not to Impunity or forgiveness. Whereas ou • very Justification is a justifying of our Right to Salvation, and the same Covenant giveth them conjunctly on the same conditions.

172. But our Right to both as begun, hath less for the condition th •• our Right to them as continued and perfected. For our believing▪ consent to the Baptismal-Covenant putteth us into immediate Right to all the benefits of the Covenant which we are then capable of, but not to all that we shall be made further capable of hereafter; we are pardoned, and should be glorified, if we presently died: But as we have more Grace to receive, so we have more Duty to perform as a means, yea a condition, of obtaining it.

173. This (overlooked by many) is much to be considered, both as to the case of Infants baptized, and the Adult. Many wonder that the Children of godly Parents prove oft so bad, as if by the Baptismal-Covenant they had received nothing from God. But the Synod of Dort, Art. 1. §. 17. well concludeth that godly Parents have no cause to doubt of the Election or Salvation of their Children dying in Infancy, they being holy and in the same Covenant with their Parents. But the continuance of God's Grace hath a continued condition and means to be used on our part. The condition which the Covenant requireth to an Infants first Justification, is, [that he be the Child of a true Believer, by him dedicated to God]. And as the first Condition is to be found in the Parent (or Owner) so must the Condition of continued Grace as long as the Child continueth an Infant. And that is the continuance of the Parents Faith, and his faithful performance of his promise made to educate his Child in the way of God: But if the Parents should presently both turn Infidels, and so educate their Child, and give him up as the J •• izaries are, to an Infidel to educate, I know God may nevertheless give him Grace above his Promise if he please (for a Benefactor as such is free): but I know of no assurance of it by Promise. For in Baptism both Parties were obliged for the future, and not one only. And if when the Child cometh to the use of Reason he willfully reject and resist God's Grace, and break his Covenant, he forfeiteth God's further Grace. And I have noted, 1. That most Children which I have seen very early wicked, have been such whose Parents grossly neglected their Duty and Covenant as to a holy prudent careful Education of them; as if God must needs save their Children, because they were the Children of Believers, who thus betrayed them. 2. And those that were well educated by their Parents, usually show hopeful signs at first, till their own lusts grow up, and deceive, and overthrow them. The nature of the mutual Covenant, and the sad experience of the case of many baptized Children, maketh me incline to this Opinion; which I do not peremptorily assert, but humbly propose to better judgments with submission: • ut whatever we say of the Parents, I doubt not but to the person at age, future benefits have future conditions.

174. Though God's Decree is that his Elect shall persevere, yet I conceive (with submission to better information) that the Baptismal-Covenant as such doth not absolutely promise or give right to so much Grace as shall certainly cause the baptized to persevere; that is, all that are rightfully baptized (even coram Deo as well as coram Ecclesia) have not perseverance secured to them by baptism. But only the Holy Ghost is given to them by Covenant to be their Sanctifier, and carry on his work to their Salvation, if they will use those means which God hath appointed, and doth enable them to use, in attendance on his Spirit.

Though Election infer the certainty of perseverance, I never saw their assertions proved, who say, 1. That if Adam had once obeyed (say some) or overcome that one Temptation (say others) God promised confirmation to him and all his Posterity▪ 2. That the Baptismal-Covenant promiseth confirmation and certain perseverance to all the baptized, regenerate or justified. What God doth, I am not now questioning; but what in that Covenant he promiseth to do.

175. It is plain in the Scripture, that when men are converted and baptized, the particular helps of Grace are promised them upon further particular conditions: And that the continuance of Pardon and Right to Life, is promised them upon the continuance of their Faith, and use of means; And that actual Glorification is promised them on condition of overcoming and persevering: And therefore that we must use and take all these as conditions.

176. It is ordinary with some Writers and Preachers to tell men, that no part of their Righteousness is in themselves; and with others, that at least none which they are justified by in any part is in them; and that it is all in Christ only: And that nature is loath to yield to this, but thinketh it a fine thing to have some little part of the honor to itself: And as to the honor of a good Action, if it be but 999 parts that it ascribeth to God, and taketh one part of a thousand to ourselves, it is a dangerous arrogation: we must have none.] This well explained, may be made sound: But thus grossly delivered, it is but a popular cheat under the taking pretence of self-abasement and giving Christ all. The Devil is as willing as any one, that you should have nothing honorable or praise-worthy in you: and be as vile as he can make you. It is God who honoreth those that honor him, and praiseth his Saints as the excellent on Earth, and his Jewels and peculiar Treasure, adorned with his own lovely Image, and partakers of the Divine Nature, and members of Christ, as his own Flesh: And it is Satan and wicked men that vilify and dishonor them. And I have oft lamented it, that these very men that hold this kind of Doctrine of self-abasement, as having no part of Righteousness, nor share at all in any good work, are yet too oft so proudly conceited of their own goodness (even for holding that they have none for which they are praise-worthy) as that their pride is no small trouble to the Churches and all about them.

177. Whatever is of God is good: and whatever is good is laudable or praise-worthy, and meriteth to be esteemed as it is.

178. All the sanctified are inherently righteous: But with an imperfect righteousness, which will no further justify them in Judgment, save only against this Accusation, that they are unholy.

179. There is no Righteousness which will not justify him that hath it, in tantum, so far as he is righteous: For the contrary is a contradiction. For to be just is to be justifiable: He that gave but six pence to the poor is justifiable against this Accusation, that he did not give it.

181. All the Righteousness which formally justifieth us, is our own or on ourselves where it justifieth us: For to be made just or justified in the first sense constitutively, is nothing else but to be made such as are personally themselves just. Pardon of sin is made our own; Right to Christ and Glory is made our own; Though Christ's Righteousness was the only meritorious cause of all this; which therefore is and may be called our Material Righteousness, as that which meriteth it is the matter.

182. He that is no cause of any good work, is no Christian, but a damnable wretch, and worse than any wicked man I know in the world: And he that is a Cause of it, must not be denied falsely to be a cause of it: Nor a Saint denied to be a Saint, upon a false pretence of sel • denial.

183. As God is seen here in the Glass of his works, so he is to be loved and praised as so appearing: Therefore he that dishonoreth his work dishonoreth God, and hindereth his due love and praise; And his most lovely and honorable work on earth, is his holy Image on his Saints▪ And as Christ will come to be admired and glorified in them at last, so God must be seen and glorified in them here in some degree. And to deny the Glory of his Image is the malignants way of injuring him, and that in which the worst will serve you. He that will praise God as Creator and Redeemer must praise his works of Creation and Redemption: And is it the way of praising him as our Sanctifier to dispraise his work of Sanctification?

184. Those poor Sinners of my acquaintance who lived in the gross •• sins against Conscience (as Drunkenness, Whoredom, &c.) have been glad enough of such doctrine, and forward enough to believe, that there is nothing in man that in any part can justify him, or that i • any part of righteousness, but it is all out of us in Christ, and therefore they are as justifiable as any: But Conscience will not let them believe it as they desire.

185. It is arrogant folly to divide the praise of any good act between God and Man, and to say God is to have so many parts, and Man so many: For the whole is due to God, and yet some is due to Man: For man holdeth his honor only in subordination to God, and not dividedly in co-ordination: And therefore all is due to God: For that which is Mans is God's, because we have nothing but what we have received. But he that arrogateth any of the honor due to God or Christ, offendeth.

186. If all had been taken from God's honor which had been given to the Creature, God would have made nothing, or made nothing Good;- Heaven and Earth, and all the World would derrogate from his honor; and none of his Works should be praised: And the better any man is, the more he would dishonor God; and the wickeder the les • . But he made all Good, and is Glorious in the Glory, and honorable in the honor of all: And to justify the holiness of his Servants is to justify him.

187. If these Teachers mean that no man hath any power freely to specify the Acts of his own will, by any other help of God, besides necessitating predetermining premotion, and so that every man doth all that he can do, and no man can do more than he doth; They dishonor God by denying him to be the Creator of that Free-power, which is essential to man, and which God himself accounteth it his honor to create. And they feign God to damn and blame all that are damned and blamed, for as great Impossibilities, as if they were damned and blamed for not making a world, or for not being Angels.

188. Thus also such men, teach that Christ strippeth a Christian of two things, His Sins, and his Righteousness: Or that Two things must be cast away, for Christ; Sins and Righteousness: But they should speak better, if they would not deceive; nothing is to be cast away as evil but Sin. Righteousness, truly such, is Good, and never to be cast away. If it be no Righteousness, why do they falsely say that we must cast away our Righteousness. To cast away a false conceit of Righteousness, is not to cast away Righteousness, but Sin only. Indeed besides Sin, we are said justly to cast away that which would be the Object and Matter of Sin: And the phrase is fitlyer applied to a thing Indifferent, than to a thing necessary, least it seduce. There is nothing so Good, which may not be made the object of Sin, not Christ or his Righteousness, or God himself excepted; But we must not therefore say that we must cast away God or Christ, because we must not thus objectively abuse them: So Holiness and true Righteousness (Inherent or imputed) may be objects of sinful pride and boasting; But it is not edifying Doctrine therefore to say that we must cast away Inherent and Imputed Righteousness: But yet true self-denial requireth that we deny our Righteousness (Inherent or Imputed) to be that which indeed it is not. And so when men accounted the Jewish observations to be a Justifying Righteousness in competition with, and in opposition to Christ, Paul counteth it as loss, and dung, and nothing in that respect: when yet elsewhere he saith, I have lived in all good Conscience to this day. And Christ himself fulfilled that Law and Righteousness. So if a man will conceit, that his common Grace will justify him without Holiness, or his Holiness, without Pardon and the Righteousness of Christ, he must deny this Righteousness; that is, he must deny it to be what it is not, and must cast away (not it, but) the false conceits of it: And so if any Libertine will say that Christ's Righteousness imputed to him, will justify him, without faith, or be instead of Holiness to him, he must deny Imputed Righteousness thus, to be what indeed it is not.

189. When we tell them, that, If we had fulfilled all the Law reputatively by Christ as our Legal person, we could not be bound to further obedience to it, They answer, that we are not bound to obey to the same ends as Chhist, that is for Righteousness, or Justification or merit, but in Gratitude. But this is but to give us the cause, and ignorantly to destroy their own. For, 1. This is but to say, that when a man is reputed to have fulfilled all the Law, yet it is to be reputed unfulfilled as to certain ends. As if he fulfilled all the Law that fulfilled it not to all due ends: 2. Or as if the Law obliged one man to fulfill it twice over for the same life's time; once simply and in all its obligations, and another time for other ends. 3. Or as if the Law required anymore than absolute perfection. 4. Or that absolute perfection had not been in Christ's holy obedience. 5. Or as if there were any obedience whose end is not Righteousness and Justification, against the change of the contrary disobedience. Do not these men obey that they may be so far righteous? Or is not every man so far Righteous as he doth Righteousness? Is not every man that loveth God justifiable as a Lover of him for so far as he loveth him? 6. And is not Gratitude an end, and a thing commanded by the Law? If we obeyed perfectly in Christ, we were perfectly thankful in Christ. 7. But if they say that Christ fulfilled only the Law made to Adam for us, and not his own Law of Grace, and therefore that he obeyed for us, only to the ends of that Law; I answer, 1. If the ends and matter of that Law be fulfilled by us in him, our obedience to any other must be needless: For he that is supposed never to have sinned, need not use any means for pardon or remedy. 2. By this rule Christ only fulfilled the Law for Adam, and Eve, and for us only as we were in them, which is only Virtually and not Actually at all; but not at all for us according to any obligation that ever fell upon our persons. For, 1. We were never personally bound to perfect personal perpetual obedience as the Condition of life; For that Covenant as to the promise and condition ceased before any man was born. 2. And all the duty in the world which •• are bound to, is to be done for Evangelical ends; for recovering Grace, and unto Gratitude, &c. To say therefore that we are perfectly Righteous, as having perfectly obeyed all God's Law in Christ, and yet that we are bound to obey all that Law that ever we were under to another end; and that Christ obeyed for us only as to that which we were never under personally but virtually in Adam, this is to say and unsay. 8. Lastly, they see not that their own answer implieth the truth of what we assert; and is the same that we give; which their cause is uncapable of: •• We say,

190. And whereas they tell us that [We may as well say that man must not die because Christ died for us, as not obey because Christ obeyed for us,] They strangely use our reason against themselves and know it not. For we say that we must die because we did not perfectly either obey the Law or suffer all its penalty by Christ as our legal person: But he suffered only to satisfy Justice in tantum • to this end, that man himself suffering death and temporal afflictions, and obeying the Law of Grace, might be saved from all the rest of the punishment. But if we had so fulfilled the Law as aforesaid, by Doing or suffering, we could not have died nor suffered the least affliction as a penalty. For all punishment in the essence of the • elation is for sin.

191. And when they say that [It is no more inconvenient to say that Christ was perfect in our person, than that he satisfied in our person and we by him.] I answer, 1. Both are false and subvert the Gospel, as aforesaid. 2. But yet we may fitly say that Christ suffered in the person of a Sinner; but mark the sense. 1. Suffering as penal belongeth to a Sinner as such: But Satisfaction is an Effect of Christ's suffering, which resulteth not from the mere suffering, nor from the person of a Sinner: but from the Will and Covenant of God made to that excellent person who was God and perfect Man. So that it is not so aptly said, He satisfied, as it is that he suffered, in the person of a Sinner. 2. Note that it is not any other man's person that we mean that Christ suffered in, but his own. And we mean that he took upon him the person of a Sinner himself▪ in as much as he consented to suffer for Sin. And so personating here is not meant becoming any other man's person in Law sense, so as that other legally suffered what he did; But it is only his own persons becoming a sufferer in the stead of Sinners for their Sins: As the Apostle saith, He was made sin for us, so he might as truly have said, He was made a sinner for us; that is, so far by Imputation, as that he undertook to suffer as Sinners suffer, and for their sins.

But because wordy controversies seeming real, are the great trouble • s of the world, lest any should think that we differ more than indeed we do, I would fain bring the matter as far from under the ambiguity of words as possibly I can. To which end I further add, 1. That as we hold that Adam was the Natural Root or Parent of Mankind; so also that Christ was the Federal Root of all the saved, and in several respects (though not all) a second Adam.

2. Adam was but one single Natural person, nor did God (by error or arbitrary reputation) esteem or account him to be any other than he was. None of our persons were distinct persons in Adam, nor those persons that now they are: Therefore we were not so personally in him at his fall: But all our persons are in time and mediately by our Progenitors derived lineally from him (yet we deny not all Souls to be from God, and all Bodies an accretion of the common Elements); not as having been Persons existent in him, but being Persons caused remotely by him. Our present Persons were seminally or virtually in him; which is as much as to say, that not the Person, but the Semen Personae vel virtus causalis was in him: To be only Virtually, or Causally or Seminally in Adam, is in proper speech for that Person not really to have been in him: For Causa non est effectus, & Virtus generativa non est Persona generata: To be only Virtually in Adam is terminius diminuens as to personal inexistence, and denieth it. And as Dr. Twisse hath oft well asserted, It is our natural relation to Adam supposed in God's Law, which is the reason of our participation in his Sin, and not any Will or Judgment of God, without or beyond our Natural interest: For else it should be God most properly who by his arbitrary imputation should either make us Sinners, or repute us such when we are none. But yet when we become Persons, it is by Derivation from Adam, and so the effect can be no better than the cause, and as soon as we are Persons we are Guilty persons, having Guilt with personality from him, though we were not persons in him.

3. So Christ is, though not the Natural, yet the Federal Adam or Root of Believers: when he satisfied and merited, we were not in him either as in Adam seminally, as in a natural Generator, nor as existent Persons, nor did God falsely so repute us to be: But he was then the Cause (materially) or had that Virtus effectiva, which would Justify, and Sanctify, and Glorify us in due time. It was the Nature of Sinners, though not a sinful Nature which he assumed; But that Nature which he undertook was existent in his Individual person: and no other Individual person was existent in his existent personal Nature: So that when we say it was the common Nature of Man, we mean only specifice, that Nature which is of the same Species with all other men's, but not that which existed individually in any but himself; and a Species extra individuum is nothing but an ens rationis, or a notion. But it was individual Persons in whose stead or place Christ suffered, and whom he undertook to Justify, Sanctify, and Save, and gather into a holy Society to that end; and to that end he undertook and performed his office, and merited all this by his perfect righteousness: So that hereby he made Himself a Federal Head and Root of a holy Society (his Church): And whenever any person doth Believe and is united federally to him, he then receiveth the effects of that which was before in Christ as a Virtus effectiva.

The Law made to Adam or to us, did not assign Christ to this office, nor oblige him to suffer or merit for sinners according to it: Therefore by so doing he fulfilled not the Law as it obliged us; that is, by that obligation, nor suffered by that obligation which bound us to suffer; But by the obligation of his own Consent, and that Law which was peculiar to himself as to the formal obligation, though materially he was bound by it to fulfill the Law of Nature and of Moses.

The Law of Innocency then or Works, took not Christ for the Civil or Legal Person of such Sinner, or Believer, no more than it made him such.

4. As God's Law to the Mediator made him this office, so Christ's Law of Grace doth quod jus & Relationem give to every true believing Covenanter, first, Christ himself in union to be their federal Head, and with him title to his Grace, Spirit and Glory. And now they are Personally and actually his federal Subjects, Friends, and Members; and have right to all his conferred gifts.

5. But this right floweth not immediately to them, from what Christ did or suffered for them; but from his Law or Covenant of Grace, by which as his Donative and Ruling Instrument he conveyeth that title to them.

6. And therefore they have no right before the Time, nor any but on the Conditions and Measure specified in that Covenant or Law; so that Righteousness is not theirs because it is Christ's, nor in the manner or measure and to the ends of the donation.

7. This much containeth the matter of this Doctrine of the Collation and Imputation of Christ's righteousness, still remembering that as no one till he was a Person, could be a person-guilty of Adam 's sin; not when he was a person, any sooner than he was also guilty of his own inherent pravity, and none that had the use of Reason was guilty of either or both these only, without the guilt of his own Actual Sin, and all three together, (1. Adam 's sin justly imputed to us, 2. And our innate Pravity, 3. And our actual Sin) are the parts which constitute our plenary guilt; even so no one till he is a Believer is related as a Member of a Perfectly Righteous Savior; and that is done no sooner (in time) that he hath the Inherent Righteousness of his personal faith and federal consent; and that obligeth him to the further active righteousness of a holy life, and all these three conjunct (though not co-ordinate) make up the total Righteousness of a Saint, viz. 1. Our Relation to Christ in Union as to a perfectly Righteous Head, who fulfilled all righteousness for us to mer •• our Justification (which is called Christ's Righteousness Imputed to us, as being thus far reputed ours). 2. And our penitent believing consent to his Covenant, which is the condition of the foresaid Relation to Christ. 3. And our after Sanctification and obedience to Christ's Law.

8. And when we are commonly thus far agreed of the Matter, if any will contend for their self-coined phrases and words, and not being content to call Christ our Redeemer, Savior, Teacher, King, Priest, Head, Lord, Te •• ator, Sponsor or Surety, Ransom, Price, Sacrifice, &c. as the Scripture doth, will needs plead that he is or was our Person, or was holy, obedient, suffered in our Persons, Legal or Civil, or was our Substitute, Delegate, Instrument, &c. his contention will be both corrupting and dividing: And yet I will acknowledge that among Lawyers the word [Person] hath so many senses, that in some of them (were they our way of speech here) it might be said that Christ did in some things personate each Sinner, or each believer, limitedly, in tantum & ad hoc, & non simpliciter, aut ad omnia: And all verbal quarrel I would shun even with them that speak ineptly, and dangerously, and injuriously to • he truth and Church, so they will but by a sound and necessary explication vouchsafe us an Antidote against the hurtful tendency of their • hrases.

9. Obj. If Christ's person be given us, then his personal Righteousness is given us with it. Ans. Yes, as his Person is: He is not given us as Proprietors and Lord's to become our Own at our dispose: Nor is his Person made one Person with each or any of us: His Person is not turned • nto ours, nor ours into his: As the Husband is not the person of the Wife, nor the King of each Subject; But as one that hath a Great, Wise, Learned, Bountiful, Holy King or Husband, hath also his Greatness, Wisdom, Learning, Bounty and Holiness, as they have him; that is, As his perfections for their good as far as his Relation binds him, but not as • f his endowments, were removed from him to them, or falsely reputed to • e in them, or his person to be their persons; so here, as we have a Christ, • o we have a perfect Righteous Christ given us to be our federal Head when we believe; and the Righteousness which is not in us but in him is • urs, so far as to be for our Good, as far as his Office and Covenant do ob • ige him: So that a Righteous Christ, and therefore the Righteousness of Christ are ours, Relatively themselves, quoad jus beneficis, so as • hat we have right to these Benefits by them, which we shall possess: • nd for the merits of his Righteousness we are conditionally justified and saved before we believe, and actually after: But are not accounted to be Christ, nor the Legal Actors of what he did, nor Christ • ccounted to be each of us.

SECT. V. Merit.

192. The great Controversy about human Merits, which hath made • o great a noise in the world, is of so easy solution, that I can scarce • hink but almost all sober understanding Christians in the world are • greed in sense, while they abhor each others opinions as ill expressed or misunderstood. Distinguish but, 1. Of Commutative Justice, and Distributive Governing Justice. 2. And of Governing Justice according • o God's several Laws, of Innocency, Mosaical Works, and of Grace. • . And of Justifying and Meriting simply, and comparatively; And the case is so plain, that few things are more plain to us, that Christians con • rovert, Viz.

1. To dream of meriting from God by any Creature, Man, or Angel, in point of Commutative Justice, is blasphemy and madness; that is, That we can give him anything that shall profit him, or which is not absolutely his own, as a compensation for what he giveth us. He maketh himself a God that asserteth this of himself. 2. To say that any since Ad •• save Christ, doth merit of God in point of Governing Justice, according to the Law of Innocency, is a falsehood: And he that saith, He b ••• no sin, is a liar. 3. To say that we can merit pardon, or Justification, o • Salvation merely by observing Moses Law, was the Jews pernicious erro • . 4. To say that our faith and performance of the conditions of the new Covenant, doth merit by the retributive Sentence of the old Covenan • ; or that it is in whole or part any meritorious Cause that God gave the world a Savior, or that Christ freely pardoneth and justifieth us all conditionally by the new Covenant, or that it supposeth not Christ's Righ •• ousness to be the total sole meritorious Cause of that pardoning Covenant, and all the benefits as thereby conditionally given; All this is gross contradiction. 5. To deny subordinate Comparative Merit, or Rewardabl • ness, as from God's Governing distributive paternal Justice according to the Covenant of Grace, consisting in the performance of the condition of that Covenant, and presupposing Christ's total merits as aforesaid, i • to subvert all Religion and true Morality, and to deny the scope of all the Scriptures, and the express assertion of an Evangelical worthiness, which is all that this [Merit] signifieth: To say nothing of contradicting Catholic antiquity, and hardening the Papists against the truth.

193. This Comparative Merit, is but such, as a thankful Child hath towards his Father who giveth him a purse of Gold on condition th •• he put off his hat, and say, I thank you, who deserveth it in Comparison of his Brother, who disdainfully or neglectfully refuseth it. This last being absolutely said to Deserve to be without it; but the former only comparatively said to deserve to have it as a free gift.

194. And those that reject the saying of some Papists who in thi • sense, say that Christ merited that we might merit, placing our Evangelical merit in a mere subordination to Christ's, do but show what prejudice and partiality can do, and harden those who perceive their errors.

195. Some man may think that the high things required in the Gospel, self-denial, forsaking all, running, striving, working, loving, overcoming, &c. are more than the mere Receiving of a free Gift. But, 1. If it were so, yet our first faith would be no more, by which we are Justified from all the sins of our unregeneracy. 2. But upon consideration, it will all appear to be no more materially: For, 1. When we say that it is the Receiving of the free Gift, we must mean According to the Nature and to the use of that Gift. As if you be required to take food, the meaning is, to Eat it, and not to throw it away: If you be required to take such a man to be your King, your Master, your Tutor, your Husband, your Physician, &c. the meaning is, As such, to the use of his proper office. And so Accept of God as God, that is, our Absolute Owner, Ruler, and End, and Christ as our Savior, Prophet, Priest and King, and the Holy Ghost as our Sanctifier to Illuminate, quicken and renew us, is the su • of all the Positives of the Gospel. 2. For this very Acceptance of them in this Nature, and to this Use, includeth the using of them after accordingly: And if we do not so use them, we thereby reject them, and lose our own benefit of them; as he that eateth not his meat, refuseth and loseth it; and he that weareth not his Cloaths; and he that learneth not of his Teacher. 3. And then Self-denial, and forsaking contraries, and resisting impediments, is but the same motus ut a termino a quo; And he that refuseth to come out of his Prison and Chains, refuseth his Liberty; and he refuseth the Gold, that will not cast away his handful of dirt to take it. So that really all is but a Thankful Accepting of the mercy of the new Covenant according to its nature and use as it is offered.

196. It is a great question whether a man may Trust to his own Faith, Repentance or Holiness. But some men still trouble the world with unexplained words, where no sober men differ. No wise man can dream that we may Trust to these for more than their proper part; as that we may Trust them to do anything proper to God, to Christ, to the Spirit, to the Promise, &c. And to use the phrase of Trusting to our own faith or Holiness when it soundeth absolutely, or may tempt the hearers to think that they may Trust them for God's part, or Christ's part, and not only for their own, is a dangerous deceiving course. But that really they may be Trusted for their own part, and must be so, no sober person will deny: For so to believe, obey, pray to God, &c. and not to Trust to them in their place; that is, not to think that we shall be ever the better for them, is unbelief and indeed distrusting God, and saying, It is in vain to serve him, and what profit is it that we call upon him? And such diffidence and despair will end all endeavors: Let every man prove his own work, and so shall he have rejoicing in himself and not in another. This is our Rejoicing the testimony of our Consciences that in simplicity and Godly sincerity we have had our Conversation in the world. If we are Justified by faith, we may Trust to be Justifyed by it. But the rare use of such a phrase in Scripture, and the danger of it, must make us never use it without need. (As if we were disputing whether the Popish or Protestant Religion be that which a man may trust for his Salvation) or the like. And when ever it's used, it implieth our Trust in God and our Savior only for their part.

197. To conclude this great point of Imputed and Inherent Righteousness, it may be objected, that The same man may well be judged a Sinner deserving hell, never fulfilling the Law, nor satisfying Justice, nor deserving Heaven, in himself; that is, in his Natural person, and yet be Judged one that never sinned, but fulfilled the Law, is perfectly holy and righteous, and merited Heaven in his Legal or Civil person, in and by Christ; To which I answer, One man is but one, and hath but one person. But if you take the word [Person] equivocally, as signifying another that is made like him in some respects, or that hath his Nature, or doth somewhat in his stead and for his benefit, as a second person, say so, and we will strive with no man about words: If you will say we are now on earth in our Natural persons, and are in Heaven in Christ; or that we are Redeemed in our Natural persons, but Redeemed ourselves in Christ; or that you are sick in your Natural person, and well in your person in Christ, &c. I like not your language; but there are scarce any words so bad, which a man may not put a good sense on. But we would be understood, and plainly ask, whether Christ was properly every sinners or believers person in Law-sense, so that ipso facto God accounteth us to have been habitually and actively perfect in Him, and to have merited and satisfied in him? If so, the Law can look on one man but as one: And he that paid a debt by his Servant or any other as his Legal person, cannot be required to do it again in his Natural person, unless you will say that God loveth our Legal person, and will save it, and may hate our Natural person and damn it. The Scripture useth no such contradictory subtleties as these.

SECT. XI. How faith Justifieth.

198. The common saying that faith justifieth as an Instrument might pass as tolerable, if too many did not strain it to a wrong sense, and raise unwarrantable Doctrines from it, and harden the Papists by unwarantable Answers. A Justifying Instrument properly is an efficient Instr • mental cause of Justification, which I have elsewhere too largely proved that faith is not, either God's Instrument or ours, Physical or Moral, no • any way efficiently justifieth us. But justifying, is one thing; to Receive justification is another thing, and to be justified is a third. Faith i • no justifying act: But faith is in its Essence the Acceptance of an offered God, Christ, Spirit, for Life: This Acceptance is by the Covenant made the condition of our passive true Reception and Possession of Right (before opened): To be such a Condition performed, is to be a removens prohibe • s of the said Reception: which is strictly to be Dispositio materiae recipienti • ▪ And so it may be called, 1. A Receiving Cause. 2. And a medi •• or dispositive Cause of the effect, Justification as Received, but not as Given: (As I said Dr. Twisse chooseth to call it) But this causa Dispositiva is p •• of the causa Materialis, viz. Qua disposita: A cause, or more properly a condition why I receive Justification, and by receiving it am Justified; which is their meaning who call it A Passive Instrument, that is, A •• ceiving Instrument.

199. The plain easy truth is, that Faiths Nature which is to be [ •• lieving Acceptance of Christ, and Life offered on that Condition] being •• very essence is but its Aptitude to the office it hath to our Justification▪ by which the Question is answered, why did God promise us Christ and Life •• the Condition of faith rather than another? Because of the congruity of its Nature to that office. But the formal Reason of its office as to our Justification is Its Being the performed Condition of the Covenant. And if God had chosen another condition, a condition it would have been. Now the true notion in Law being a Condition, Logicians would call this improperly a Receiving cause, and more properly A Receptive Disposition of the matter, reducing it to Physical notions. But the most proper term is the plainest, [We are justified by that faith, which is the Believing Practical Acceptance of God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, as Given us on that condition in the Baptismal Covenant, because (or as) it is made by God the condition of his Gift thereby]. Understand this plain doctrine, and you have the plain truth.

200. They that say contrarily that Faith justifieth proximately as it is an Instrument, or a Receiving Accepting act, and not as a Condition of the Covenant, do evidently choose that which they vehemently oppose▪ viz. that the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 credere justifieth: For the very 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 credere or the •••• of Faith, is to be an Acceptance of Christ given. But if they will to avoid this, say that By Faith they mean [Christ believed in,] then they say that by Receiving Christ they mean not the receiving of him, but Christ himself: And why then do they not say so, but trouble the world with such unintelligible phrases: But to open the senselessness and co • sequents of that Doctrine would but offend. All know that Chri •• •• the object is connoted as essential to the act of Faith.

SECT. XII. How Repentance is joined with Faith.

201. Repentance is a Dispositio materiae recipientis too, and a part of the condition of the Covenant: And so far a Material or dispositive Receiving Cause: But not an Acceptance of the Gift formally, in its averting act.

202. Faith and Repentance are words used in Scripture in divers significations. As Faith is sometimes taken for bare Assent, as Jam. 2. and usually for Affiance or Trust, and always when it denominateth a Christian or Justified Believer as such, it essentially includeth all the three parts, Assent, Consent, and Affiance, but yet denominateth the whole by a word which principally signifieth One act (which commonly is Affiance as including the other two); so Repentance is sometime taken comprehensively for the whole Conversion of a Sinner to God, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; and so it includeth Faith in the narrower sense, and is the same thing as Faith in the larger sense, but expressed under another formal notion. Sometimes it is taken more narrowly, and that 1. As to the Act. 2. As to the Object.

1. As to the Act; and so the word Repentance signifieth only the Aversion of the Soul from evil, by sorrow and change of mind: And this is the strict formal notion of the word, though usually it be taken more largely, as including also the Conversion of the Soul to Good; which is the usual Scripture and Theological sense; though the word itself do chiefly signify the Averting act.

2. As to the Object, 1. Repentance sometime signifieth the Turning of the Soul from Sin and Idols to God as God; And so Repentance towards God, is distinguished from Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ. 2. And sometimes it signifieth only the turning of the Soul and life from some particular Sin.

203. Repentance as it is the turning of the Soul from sin and Idols to God, is the same with Faith in God in the large Covenant-sense, and includeth Faith in God in the narrower sense. Repentance as it is our Turning from Infidelity to Christianity is the same with Faith in Christ in the large Covenant-saving-sense, and includeth Faith in Christ in the narrower sense (as it is mere Assent). Repentance as it is a Turning from the Flesh to the Holy Ghost as our Sanctifier, is the same thing as our Faith in the Holy Ghost in the large Covenant sense, and includeth Faith in the Holy Ghost in the narrower sense. But when they are the same thing, the ratio nominis or formal notion is not the same. As man's mind is not so happy as to conceive of all things that are one by one entire single Conception; so we are not so happy in our language, as to have words enough to express things entirely by one name; but we must have several words to express our inadequate conceptions by. And so that is called Repentance as the Souls motion from the Terminus a quo, which is called sometimes Faith or Affiance, and sometimes Love, from the motion of the Soul to the Terminus ad quem, though the Motus be the same. But when Faith and Repentance are distinguished as several parts of the Condition of the new Covenant, the common sense is, that Repentance signifieth the Conversion of the Soul from Sin and Idols to God as God, which is, or includeth Faith in God: And Faith signifieth specially Faith in Christ as the Mediator and way to God; And so Faith is below Repentance, as a means of it.

204. By this the question whether Faith or Repentance be first, may partly be resolved, and partly cast out as founded in confusion. As they are both one thing, neither can be first, any otherwise than the same Motus ut a termino a quo, & ut ad terminum ad quem. But as they signify divers things, they have each of them div • r • acts, and in respect of each, are before each other. The Assenting act of Faith in general must needs be always before Repentance, as it is an Act of the Will. But the consenting Act of faith is also part of Repentance, and must follow that part of Repentance which is a change of the understanding. But whether the Repentance as towards God, or Faith in Christ be first, or Love to God, and Faith in Christ, I have discussed as accurately as I can, in my Christian Directory, Par, 1. cap. 3. pag. 182. and therefore thither refer the Reader.

205. And how Faith and Love differ I have there also opened, and therefore shall now only say, that Faith as it signifieth meet Assent, differeth from Love, as the act of the Intellect, from Volition: And Love formally taken presupposeth the Assent, and doth not contain it. But Faith taken largely in the sense of the Baptismal Covenant, containeth in it Consent, which is the Wills Volition, and therefore must needs have some initial Love in it as it acteth i • Desire. This Faith in God hath some Desire and Volition of God, and Faith in Christ, which is the Souls Practical Affiance in him, hath some Love to Christ in it. But the denomination is not from the same ratio formalis in each. It is eminently called Faith, when giving up our Souls to Christ to be saved in practical Affiance is the great work of the Soul, though it have something of Love essential to it. And it is eminently called Love (morally) when the Complacency of the Soul in Christ thus trusted, and in God our end, is the great work or business of the Soul.

206. This Holy Love as a fixed habit and employment of the Soul, and our Relation to the Holy Ghost to work it in us, is it that is promised and Given quoad jus in the Baptismal Covenant, of which Faith, though it have somewhat of actual Love or Volition in it, is the antecedent condition, which also I have so fully opened as afore cited, that I refer the Reader to it for this also. And somewhat was said of it before.

SECT. XIII. Of the degrees of Pardon or Justification.

207. Some men lest they should yield that Justification is not one perfect finished act done but once, do feign that it is only the first act of Faith by which a man is justified. Indeed it is only the first act by which he • s changed from an unrighteous to a righteous state: But to think that therefore we are never after justified by Faith, and so have no actually justifying Faith all our lives, but for one instant only, is fitter for a Dreamer than a theological Discourser.

208. Our first constitutive Justification, being in its nature a right to • mpunity, and to Life or Glory, is a Relation which must be continued to the end, and therefore must have the true causes and condition continued, and would cease if any of them ceased.

209. As to the question therefore whether Justification be lossable, and • ardon reversible, I answer, that the grant of them in the Covenant is unalterable; But man's will in itself is mutable, and if he should cease believing by Apostasy, and the condition fail, he would lose his Right, and be unjustified and unpardoned, without any change in God. But that a man doth not so de facto is to be ascribed to Election and special Grace, of which afterward.

210. Though all our past sins are pardoned at our first Faith or Conversion (or as the Ancients speak in Baptism) yet it is most certain that Pardon or Justification is not perfect at first, no nor on this side death: And the saying of many that Justification is perfect at first, and Sanctification only by degrees, is a palpable error, as I have else-where oft shown. For that is not perfect, 1. Which is not continued and brought on to its end, but upon continued conditions, and diligent use of means to the • ast. 2. Which leaveth many penalties unremoved, which have further means to be used for their removal, and further Right to it to be obtained: To have more and more Grace, and less and less Sin; and to have • earer communion with God, are blessings as to the degrees, which we must by degrees attain a further Right to, and the privation of them are • ore penalties to be removed. 3. We have new sins to be pardoned every day. 4. Our remaining Corruption is such as needeth a continued Pardon, till it be perfectly done away. 5. The Day of Judgment is not come, for which the most perfect Justification is reserved.

SECT. XIV. Of Justification by Sentence of the Judge.

211. The second sort of Justification, which is by Sentence, is done by Christ as Judge, and so is an act of his Kingly Office.

212. Therefore were it true (as it is not) that justifying Faith were only the receiving or believing in Christ as a Justifier of us, it would not be a believing in him in his Priestly Office only but in act: For he merited our Justification as a humbled Servant, and a Sacrifice: He giveth it us in Right by his Covenant or Law of Grace as King and Benefactor: He promulgateth it as Prophet; He passeth the Sentences as King and Judge; He executively taketh off the penalty, and glorifieth us as King and Benefactor. There is no Justification by a partial Faith.

213. Though the estimation of a man as just, called the Sententi • judicis concepta, as distinct from the sententia prolata, be said to be •• immanet act of God, and therefore from eternity, yet it is a mistake: For though it be not transient effective and do nihil efficere ad extra, ye • it is transient objective, and doth presuppose the existence of the qualified Object: For though God's Knowledge and Will in genere, or as such, are his eternal Essence, yet God's Knowledge and Love of John or Peter •• Believers, are terms which signify not his Essence as such, but as trans •• and terminated on those existent persons relatively: So that the extrin •• cal denomination from the existent Object is temporary as it is.

214. As the Angels rejoice at a Sinners Conversion, and therefo •• know it, so the notifying of God's acceptance and pardon to the Angel • , may be called some sort of sentential Justification.

215. And the notifying our constitutive Righteousness to our Consciences, is some kind of sentential Justification.

216. But this Justification called in foro conscientiae is not the Justification by Faith so much spoken of in Scripture: For that ever go •• before this. A man is ever made just, before he can be esteemed, judged, or known to be so. And this in conscience is an uncertain m ••• ble thing, according to the weakness of the man: And oft he that •• just before God, doth most doubt of it, and condemn himself: This justification may cease when we sleep or think of other things; and may rise and fall daily, if not be often lost. And it is not of that grand importance to our Salvation, as justification by Faith is.

SECT. XV. Of initial executive Pardon or Justification.

217. But the most notable justification by way of sentence is, 1. By God's initial Executions here. 2. By the public Sentence and Executi •• at the Day of Judgment.

218. God speaking not by Voice, that is called his Sentence which d • cisively declareth his Judgment. But the Execution most notably declareth that: Therefore though they be two things with men, and sometimes with God, yet Sentence being oft passed principally by Execution, they are then both one.

219. In this sense to sanctify a man, is to justify him executively, and so sententially. For executive Justification and Pardon is the actual Imp •• ity, removing of deserved Punishment, and actual giving possession of Life and Salvation, which constitutive Justification gave us Right to. And as our privation of the Spirit and Holiness, and to be left in sin, is a great punishment; so to have the Spirit and Holiness given us, is executive Pardon and Justification; And so will Glorification much more.

220. Executive Pardon and Justification therefore, though the last of three sorts is the noblest, as supposing both the other, and being their end and the perfecting of the whole work.

221. Non-punire is not always Pardon, because it may respect an inno • ent and uncapable Object. But the Rulers non-punire sontem is pardon, • what degree soever. But a non-punire as the execution of an Act of • blivion, or Gift of Right to Impunity, is the fullest executive •• rdon.

222. The same must be said of nolle punire; which is no pardon as •• the Innocent, nor to a foreseen Guilt not yet existent; no more than •• a stone: But when the person becometh guilty and obliged to suffer, •• en God's nolle punire becometh de novo a pardon denominatione extrin • ca, without any change in God.

223. For God perfectly to forgive sin, while any sin remaineth in the • oul (epecially habitual) is a contradiction: For sin itself, though not •• sin, nor as effected, yet as permitted and not healed, is the greatest • unishment as was said. And there is no perfect pardon of the punish • ent, while such punishment is continued. And Ockam 's great sub • lty failed, when Quodlib. 4. q. 1. he determined that per potentiam ab •• lutam Deus potest salvare hominem sine charitate creata, unless he meant that he can charitatem dare aliter quam creando: For to save a man with • ut Grace or Love is a contradiction.

His first Argument is, [God can do that immediately which he can do by •• y second Cause efficient or final: But Love or Grace given is an effici • t or final second Cause: Therefore God can save a man without it.]

Ans. The minor is your mistake: Love here is Salvation itself, begun •• this life and perfected in the next: And to give it, and not to give it • re contradictions. All the rest of his arguments go upon the same • istake, as if Love were but a meritorious cause of Salvation, and not • e thing itself.

And as erroneously, Q. 4. he determineth that per potentiam absolu • m, God can remittere peccanti culpam & poenam sine infusione gratiae • eatae, unless he had put the question only de modo conferendi gratiam, • n alio modo sine infusione Deus illam potest efficere? But who knoweth • hat infusion is distinct from other Divine efficience. Or unless he had • poken only of God's giving the jus ad rem, & non rem ipsam, viz. Ipsam • mpunitatem. For undoubtedly the poena damni (properly poena) is • he privation of the Souls rectitude, health and happiness, which all • onsist in the love of God: And to pardon a man's forfeiture of Happiness executively, without giving him the happiness which he forfeited, • r to give man happiness without giving him love to God, are both gross contradictions; unless equivocally you meant, making a man some other thing, and giving him the happiness of that other thing.

His first argument here is, [Whomsoever God can by his absolute power • ccept as worthy of life eternal without infused Grace, to him he can forgive • all sin without infused Grace: But, &c. For proof he referreth us to that which I now confuted, adding, That God could accept a man in his pure naturals to life eternal. I answer, It is a fiction that ever man had such naturals made by God, as were not endued with the principle and disposition of holy love, the same thing which infused Grace first restoreth; much more that Adam lived without the acting of this love. But if it were so, yet to accept man to life eternal, is to accept him to the love of God; so that if he did prove that a graceless man might be predestinated to Glory, he did but prove that he is predestinated to perfect holiness and the love of God; And though without this he may be predestinated, or might have had a promise, and right by promise, yet without it he could never have the thing promised, for that were to have God and not to have him; nor yet his necessary disposition for fruition; for without holiness he is not a capable disposed recipient of Salvation. The rest of his arguments run all upon this error, as i • love and holiness were only the means, and not the end and Salvation given.

SECT. XVI. Of assurance of Pardon, Justification and Salvation And whether it be Faith.

224. The Faith by which we are justified is not a believing that •• •• justified, but a believing that we may be justified: Not a believing t •• Christ is ours more than other men's, or that we shall be saved; but • believing in Christ that he may be ours, and we may be saved by him.

225. There is assurance in this Faith; not assurance that we are s • cere, or shall be saved: But assurance that God's Promises and all •• Words are true, and that he will perform them; and that Christ •• the Savior of the world, and that the love of God is our End •••• Happiness, and that all this is offered to us in Christ, even Pardon ••• Life, as well as others; which offer Faith accepteth truly; But the Believer is oft uncertain of the sincerity of his own belief, and so of •• Salvation.

226. How much certainty we have of Divine Revelation and Scripture verity, I have so fully opened in many Tractates, and lastly in o •• called [The certainty of Christianity without Popery] that I will not here repeat it, further than to say, that it is not a perfect apprehension which we call our certainty, nor yet an ineffectual doubtful one; But such • •• as will carry a man on confidence of God's Word to a holy life, and •• the forsaking of all other hopes, even life itself, for the hopes which •• given us by Christ: which yet may have several degrees in several persons. But objective certainty, which is the evidence of verity, is m ••• full than our subjective certainty (for want of our due receptivity •• us) and is still the same in itself, though not equally brought or revea •• to all.

227. Even doubting of the truth of the Scripture and Christianity may stand with saving Faith and Salvation, when it is not predominant, nor so great as to keep us from the said forsaking all for Christ and Heaven.

228. Doubting of man's own Salvation, is not always from weakness of Faith directly, much less is it the want of Faith itself. • o • sometime a man may doubt, merely as doubting of the sincerity of •• own Faith, and not at all doubting of the truth of the Word of God▪ But when it is the doubting whether the promises be sure, which make • a man doubt whether he shall be saved, this doubting is the debility •• Faith.

229. The same may be said of dispair: That dispair is from the weakness or want of Faith, which cometh from an unbelief of the truth of the Promise: And that also is pernicious dispair which (from what Cause soever) is so great as to take men off the use of necessary means, to attain Salvation. But that dispair which cometh from overmuch self-condemning, and a conceit that a man's heart is false, and not that God's Promise is false, may stand with true Faith and Salvation, if it be not so great, as to take him off the use of necessary means.

230. No man ordinarily can be assured of his Salvation or Justification without extraordinary Revelation, but by being assured first of the • ruth of God's Promise, and of his own sincerity in believing: For his assurance is of the conclusion of this argument, [Whosoever sincerely believeth and repenteth is justified: But I sincerely believe and repent; • herefore I am justified.] And the weakness of the apprehension of either of the premises is ever in the conclusion, which always followeth partem debiliorem.

231. There are therefore but two sorts of men who can believe that they are justified by a Faith properly called Divine, that is, which is a belief of God's Word herein; 1. Those that God revealeth it to by pro • hetical or extraordinary Revelation (if there be any such.) 2. Those who are more certain of their own sincere Faith, than they are that God's Word itself is true (if any such there be in the world.) For with all others the certainty of the sincerity of their own Faith being weakest, • he conclusion followeth it.

232. If any man can possibly doubt more of the truth of God's Word, • han of the soundness of his own Faith; though that man's Faith may be called Divine, it is no honor to it, because it hath so much doubting of God's Word mixed with belief: And it's like his greater assurance of his belief of it, is but his error, or infirmity.

233. Ordinarily therefore no Christians can believe fide Divina, that they are justified and shall be saved; that is, this is no Word of God, but a conclusion, of which one of the premises only, and that the stronger is God's Word.

234. To say that he that believeth shall be saved, is equivalent to this, [I shall be saved] is not true nor reasonable, seeing [I believe] is not God's Word, nor so certain as God's Word: And one of the premises is not equal to both.

245. When they say, That it's all one, when I am sure that I believe.] I grant it, if 1. This be in itself as evident. 2. And as certain to me as God's Word is; otherwise I deny it.

236. Obj. A man cannot believe, and not know that he believeth. Ans. But a man may sincerely believe, and yet through ignorance either of the Scripture or himself, be uncertain that indeed his Faith is sincere, and not such as is common to the justified.

237. Some Protestants by erring in this point, and saying that justifying Faith is a certain persuasion or belief that we are justified, and that it is God's own Word that I or you are actually justified, or are sincere Believers, and that the believing it is properly fides Divina, have greatly scandalized and hardened the Papists, to our disgrace.

238. And so have those that say that in the Creed, the meaning of [I believe the Remission of Sin] is, [I believe that my sins are remitted actually.] And that all must thus believe.

239. Some say that the Spirit within them saith, that they are sincere Believers, and the Word of the Spirit is the Word of God, and to believe • it is to believe God. Ans. This is the Enth • s • asts conceit: which if true, all such have prophetical Inspiration: For the Spirit to bring any new word from God is one thing, and to give us the Understanding, Love and Obedience to such a Word is another thing. The Spirit doth indeed assure us of our sincerity, but not by a new Word from God to tell us so; but 1. By giving us that sincere Faith itself. 2. By acting it and increasing it. 3. By helping us to know it. 4. By giving us the love of God, and other Graces. 5. By giving us the comfort of all. But the reception and perception of these internal Operations, is not properly called a Belief of the Word of God. Else when we make God's Word the adequate Object of Faith, we shall be still at an uncertainty what that Word is.

240. Yet this persuasion, that we are sincere and justified is divine, where the Spirit causeth it; but not a divine Faith. Yea it is participatively of divine Faith, because God's Word is one of the premises, though the weaker must denominate the conclusion.

241. Obj. A Reprobate or Devil may believe all the Articles of Faith without application: but justifying Faith applieth Christ and his benefits to ourselves. Ans. It's true: But this application is not a certainty, nor a persuasion, nor a believing that I am justified, no more than that I am glorified, no nor that I shall be so neither: But it is an accepting of Christ offered that I may be justified and saved. So that here are all these applying acts in it. 1. I believe that Christ as the Savior of the World, is my Savior as he is all other men's, and is not the Devils; that is, that he hath done that for me which he hath done for all mankind. 2. I believe that he is offered to me personally in the Promise or Covenant of Grace, on condition of believing-acceptance; and that with and for all his purchased benefits, and so for my Justification. 3. I believe that if I so accept him, I shall be justified. 4. By true consent I do accordingly accept him to justify, sanctify and save me. But when all this is done, 1. I do not believe that God hath said in his word that I am justified, nor that my Faith is sincere. 2. And my Faith is so weak, that I may long doubt of that sincerity which I have, and so of my Justification. 3. And when I come to be certain of my Faith, it is not by believing God, as saying, that I do certainly believe; but by experience of its sincerity, upon just trial, by the Spirits help.

242. No man can be sure that his Faith is sincere and saving, who is not assured that it will help him to love God as God above all (yea already doth so) and that it mortifieth selfishness, and will prevail with him to deny even life itself, and all the world, for Christ and Salvation. So far as a man doubteth of any of this, he must needs doubt of his own sincerity.

243. So weak is Faith in most that are sincere, and so little kept in exercise, and so strong is sense, and self, and flesh, and worldly b • its and interest, and Satan's temptations, that in my experience (who have conversed with as many that are careful of their Souls as most have done I think) it is a very small number that I could ever hear say, I am certain of my Justification and Salvation; But a great number who have lived in holy confidence, hope and peace, and some in great joy, but most in tolerable fears and doubting, and some few oppressed by those doubts. So that certainty of Salvation is very rare.

244. When Bellarmine saith, that our assurance more belongeth to Hope than Faith, and that it is but moral certainty by signs that we have of our Justification, Sincerity and Salvation, he so little differeth from the sense of almost all godly Protestants, that were it not through other distances, and partiality, we had never read in Luther 's days, that for this one point alone, we have cause enough of our alienation from the Romanists.

245. They err on one extreme, who say, that all are commanded to believe that they are justified; (or any as if it were God's Word): And they err on the other hand, who command doubting or commend it, as if it were a duty or a benefit. And they speak the truth who say, that our doubting of our own Sincerity and Justification if we are sincere, is a sin of Infirmity, and a Calamity, proceeding from weakness of Faith, Hope, Love and Self-acquaintance, which we should use all possible diligence to overcome. But they that are not sincere are bound to know it; And first to seek and get sincerity, and then discern it.

246. It is by the Spirit that all Christians must come to their assurance: But not by the Spirit as speaking this in us as a word from God, [Thou art justified or shalt be saved, or art sincere]. But by the aforesaid Acts: The Spirit in us is first Christ's Agent, Advocate and Witness, to assure us that he is the Savior of the World: And next he is our Witness to assure us that we are God's adopted Children; which he doth by being in us God's Mark, and the Pledge, First-Fruits, and earnest of our heavenly Inheritance, by effectual habituating our Souls to the predominant love of God, and Holiness and Heaven. Where-ever this Sanctification is, there is the Evidence and Witness of our Adoption. He that findeth by the Fruits that he hath the Spirit, findeth the certain proof of his Justification, and earnest of Glory.

SECT. XVII. Of Love as the end of Faith.

247. This predominant Love of God and Holiness, is so proper a fruit of the Spirit, that it is the very heart of the New Creature, the sum of Sanctification, as love is the sum of the Law. So that to give the Spirit of Adoption, to cry Abba, Father, and to sanctify, and to work in us the love of God and holiness, are three phrases of the same signification in the Word of God.

248. As Christ as Mediator is the summary means and way to the Father, to bring man home to his Creator; so Faith in Christ is a mediating Grace, to work in us the love of God: And as else-where I have oft said, The bellows of Faith kindling Love, and Love working by holy Obedience, Patience, Mortification, Gratitude and Praise, is the substance of all true Religion.

249. Love being the final Grace, and Faith in Christ, but a means to it, the end must needs be more excellent than the means as such. And thus Paul giveth the pre-eminence to Love.

250. And no wonder if he prefer it also for duration; For Love is Heaven or felicity itself, yea somewhat higher than felicity as such. For as God is our End for and in himself, above the ratio foelicitatis, so God is our End as he is to be loved: And God the Ultimate Object, and Love the Ultimate Act, and God's Love communicated perfectly to us, and God's Will pleased in all this, are the inadequate Conceptions which make up the Ultimate End, supposing the perfection of Nature, and of the Intellect in the sight of God, as subservient hereunto.

251. Man therefore hath a degree of fruition, or attainment of his Ultimate End in this life, so far as he hath a delightful love of God: Though this be but the foretaste and First-fruits.

252. Therefore it is not by Faith only that we know what Heaven is, and are drawn to seek it and hope for it: but also by this earnest and foretaste of love; which worketh by a spiritual gust and sweet inward experience. The Intellect first hath Faith, and the Will hath Love; And a promise and earnest is more a promise alone.

253. When Faith hath wrought this holy Love in the Soul, it doth as much if not more to keep us from Apostasy than Faith itself. Therefore many unlearned Christians, by the power of holy Love, stand fast, when subtle disputing Doctors may cleave to the world, and fall away.

254. Though it be an ill expression of those School-men that say, Love is the form of every Grace, that which I suppose they mean is true: that love being the final Grace, the rest as they are means to it, or the effects and expressions of it, are what they are partly in that Relation: The means is a means only by its Aptitude to the end; And is never loved (as such) for itself, but for the end: And what the effect hath, it hath from its efficient Cause. And it is true, that no Faith, no Fear, no Obedience, no Praise, no Suffering is further accepted of God, and a part of true Holiness, nor will prove our Salvation, than it participateth of predominant love to God. But this predominant Love is always an evidence of Life.

255. Qu. What if a man should by Faith in Christ be brought to the love of God, and after fall away from Faith in Christ, and yet retain his love to God, would that love save him? Ans. When you can prove that ever there was such a man, I will answer you. Till then such false suppositions are no otherwise to be answered, than by telling you, that if God should permit a man to fall from Christ, that man would lose the Spirit of Christ, and the sight and sense of all God's Love and Goodness manifested in Christ, and in all the Work of Redemption; And therefore he would lose the love of God.

256. How far Holiness is the design of Christianity, I have opened in a small Tractate on that Question; And how far Sanctification is to be preferred before Pardon as such, and yet Christ's Glory in pardoning us, I have shown there and in my Confession, and therefore will not here repeat it.

SECT. XVIII. Of Perseverance, and the certainty of it, in order to certainty of Salvation, and true Comfort.

257. No man can be further certain of his final Salvation, than he is certain of his perseverance in Faith and Love.

258. Therefore it is a small number of Christians comparatively that ever were certain of their Salvation. For 1. No one that is uncertain of his sincerity is certain of his Salvation. 2. No one that holdeth this Doctrine [That the Saints that are justified may fall away, and that we cannot be sure of perseverance,] can be sure of his own Salvation. It's hard to conceive how he can be certain, who holdeth that no man can be certain: Now those that hold this Doctrine are, almost all the Papists, the Arminians, the Lutherans, and as far as I can learn by their Writings, all the ancient Writers for a thousand years after Christ. And the Semi-Pelagians and Pelagians no man will put in as an exception, except Jovinian alone; against whom Jerome writing his second Book chargeth him as holding that a man truly baptized by the Spirit, could not sin: No doubt he meant, [to damnation or mortally]: But it's doubtful what his Opinion was. Augustine 's report of him is of no great moment, who as Erasmus noteth (in his Argum. in Hier. adv. Jovin.) neither had seen Jovinians Book or Hieorm 's but spake by report.

And Austin, Prosper and Fulgentius thought that all the Elect persevered as Elect, being chosen to perseverance; but that more were truly sanctified, justified, and in a state of Salvation had they so died than were elect: That all these fell away and perished. That no man could be certain whether or no he were elect, and should persevere. So that they denied all certainty of Salvation by ordinary means. And that none of all the Greek or Latin Fathers, then, or long after, went further from the Pelagians than Augustine did, I think I need not persuade any, that hath read them.

259. This historical Truth is useful to be known: From whence I infer, that it is possible for Christians to live in settled peace and comfort, in respect to their heavenly Felicity, without a certainty of perseverance and Salvation. For to think that no Papists, no Greeks, no Arminians, no Protestant Lutherans, nor any of the ancient holy Doctors, nor any of all the Martyrs or other Christians of their judgment, did attain to such holy peace and comfort, is unreasonable, and contrary to all Church-History, and to experience.

260. And though it were a far more joyful state to have proper certainty, yet reason and experience in other cases tell us, that without certainty a man may live a joyful and peaceable life, where probability is strong enough to remove all reasonable cause of fearfulness, though there be a possibility of the worst. As we see that men in youth and health, though they may possibly die, or fall into torments the next hour, yet do not therefore cast off comfort, and live in such trouble as they would do if they had probable cause to expect it. There is no wife living is certain that her own Husband will not murder her the next night; nor no Child certain that the Parents will not cast them off or kill them; nor no Friend certain that his dearest Friend will not do so; And yet few but melancholy people will therefore take up sorrow, and cast away all their comfort in life and peace, and in these Friends: Even these persons are their trust and joy. There is no man sure but he may be executed among Malefactors: And yet while there is no reason to expect it, a man may live a comfortable life. There is no man certain that he himself shall not fall into a particular crime of Murder, Theft, Perjury, or the like; And yet we live not therefore uncomfortably. For men's affections follow the powerfullest cause.

261. Hence also I conclude, that certainly the denial of certainty of persevering, and Salvation is not a thing that should break the love, peace or concord of the Christian Churches, or for which they should cast off or revile each other. For what sober man could do so by all those that I have instanced in.

262. It is a shameful self-delusion of some Disputers, who think when they have once believed that certainty of Salvation may be had, that they are then certain themselves, or next to certain of their own Salvation. But he that hath no more certainty to be rich, or healthful, tha • to believe that Health and Riches may be got, is far from having them.

263. Who was more full of confidence and joy than Luther, who speaketh more against the Papists, commanding men to doubt of the pardon of sin? who speaketh of a higher Faith than he on Galat. Yet he with Melancthon and all the first Protestants in the August. Confess. Art. 11. saith; [They damn the Anabaptists, who deny that those that are once justified can again lose the Holy Ghost.]

264. If Adam in Innocency had neither solid comfort, or cause of such, the state that we fell from was not so good as we commonly believe. But Adam had no assurance of his perseverance in that state: For he fell from it.

265. No man (as is said) is certain that he shall not fall into such a heinous sin, as Peter, David, &c. did.

266. The Synod of Dort saith, [By such enormous sins, they greatly offend God, they incur the guilt of death, they grieve the Holy Ghost, they interrupt the exercise of Faith, they most grievously wound Conscience, sometimes they lose the sense of Grace for a time; till by serious Repentance returning into the way, God's fatherly countenance again shine upon them.

And the British Divines in their Synodic. Explic. say, [They contract damnable guilt, and lose their present aptitude to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Adding, [So that while they remain in that state of Impenitence, they neither ought nor can persuade themselves otherwise, than that they art obnoxious to death. Rom. 8. 13. If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die. For they are bound in a capital Crime, by the desert whereof, according to God's Ordination, they are subject to death, though they be not yet delivered to death, nor shall be, if we respect God's fatherly love, but shall be plucked out of this sin, that so they may be plucked out of the guilt of death. Lastly, For their present condition, they lose their aptitude to enter into Heaven, &c. And Thes. 4. p. 193. [God's unmovable ordination requireth that a Believer thus exorbitant, do first return into the way by renovation of Faith and the act of Repentance, before he can be brought to the ways end, which is the heavenly Kingdom. By the Decree of Election, the faithful are so predestinated to the end, that they can no otherwise be brought to it, than by God's instituted means, as by the Kings high way. And God's Decrees of the means, and of the end and order of events, are as firm and certain, as those of the end, and of the events themselves. If any man therefore go on in a way contrary to God's Ordination, as the broad way of uncleanness and impenitence, which directly leadeth to Hell; he can never come that way to Heaven. Yea if death surprise him wandering in that out-way, he cannot but fall into everlasting death. This is the constant and clear voice of the Scripture.—As Paul said of those in the Ship, &c. Act. 27. 31. —It is certain that David and Peter, God's Elect Servants, were to come to Heaven; But it is as certain that if one had remained impenitent in his Adultery and Murder, and the other in his denial of Christ and perjury, neither of them could have been saved. Providence and Mercy untie this knot, by providing that no elect person die in that state, in which, according to any Ordination of God's Will, he should have been shut out of Heaven.

And Thes. 5. [In that interspace which is between the guilt of sin contracted by a grievous sin, and the renewed act of Faith and Repentance, such a Sinner standeth a person to be damned by his own desert, but by Christ's Merit and God's firm purpose a person to be saved; but not before by excited Faith and Repentance, he hath obtained pardon, is he actually absolved.—But in such guilt the condition of the Faithful and of the Wicked is not the same.—To the Unbelievers is wanting the inward principle of Faith, without which the remedy is as far off, and cannot be made their own and applied.—If any would know the very moment in which a man that had contracted guilt by a heinous sin, is actually absolved,