Opposition to Errors of William Sherlock, Chapter 4 · Section 2 (1 of 3)

Opposition to Errors of William Sherlock · Chapter 4 · Section 2 (1 of 3)

p. 465SECT. 2. Of our Union to the Person of Christ.

THis Section may well be called, Our Author's Lamentations; wherein he most passionately bewails, how some men have obscured Plain things, to his no small trouble (I assure you) to vindicate them to their Primitive Clearness. We (who are not privy to his Nocturnal Elucubrations) do little think what pains it cost him to scowre off all that Rust, which (in so long a tract of time as Sixteen hundred years, through the Sleepin…ss of the Ancient Fathers, and the Sluttishness of all the Christian Churches) Religion had contracted, to the day of the date of his Reformation. But there are others too that whisper out their Complaints, How Christ in the beginning of his Gospel, bequeathed to us a Religion Decent, but not Gawdy; Plain, but yet Powerful; not courting Proselytes with Meretricious Gallantry; but Matron-like Modesty: Whose Attire was indeed more coarse, and home-spun, yet withall very warm, and fitted to its end: But nowa-days all is trim'd up with Ribbands and Lace, and set off with Fan and Feather. It was a Complaint as old as Austin, That men loaded Religion with servile Burdens, which God in mercy would have left free: So that the condition of the Jews was m…re tolrable, that were subject to Legal Sacraments, and n t to the Presumptions of men. Thus ev…ry one co… plains p. 466of faults, but very few that I can fee will mond ny.

I suppose our Author will be content, that the Reformation of Worship be committed to the Churches care; but for reducing the Doctrine, that's a Burden he has reserved for his own shoulders: And methinks I see him (like the sign of the Atlas, supporting the Globe) chearfully heaving at the weight, and yet never so much as once crinkle in the Hams.

God (says he) was pleas'd to institute a great many Ceremonies, and many of them of very obscure Signification, i… the Iewish Worship, to aw their Childish Minds into a greater Veneration of his Majesty. Now let the Reader substract A many, out of A great many, and the Remainder will inform him, just How many of God's Institutions, had Any light in them. Had this Divinity faln into some mens fingers, they would perhaps have made desperate work with it: For, 1. Some might say, Nay then, if God's own Ceremonies were invented to aw Childish Minds, we can never hope for better from Humane Ceremonies, but that they should fright the Churches Children out of their wits. 2. Others would censure it as guilty of horrid Prophaneness, to assign such a Reason for God's sacred Institutions, as must imply, That he was forced to go subtly to work with his people, and to use the Artifice of Mormo's and Scarce-crows to fright them into Reverence; as women terrifie their children with Robin—with the Raw-head and Bloody-bones. And 3. Some would not stick to say, That surely some prying pate or other would have discovered the design, and then instead of conciliating more Reverence, it would certainly have exposed his Ordinances, if not the Author of them, p. 467to contempt. But they who had seen Mount Sinai all on flame, and smoak; they who had heard the sound of that dreadful Trumpet, who felt the Earth-quake without, and a greater Heart-quake within at the presence of the Almighty God, were convinced that God needed not to have recourse to those little slights of Ceremonies to aw their Childish Minds into a Veneration of his Majesty. 4. Others expect when our Author should make God himself a Ceremony, contrived to manage this bulky and unruly World with more ease: For some it seems, have got it by the the end, that Primus in Orbe Deos fecit Timor. 5. But all agree in this, That this Doctrine argues our Authors gross ignorance in the true end of those Ceremonies: All which had a fair and clear Prospect towards a Redeemer, Col. 2. 17. They were a shadow of good things to come, but the body was of Christ. But men may speak their pleasure, our Author has determined against them, That God's Institutions were to fright Children: But now (says he) in these last days, God sent his Son to make a plain, easie, and perfect Revelation of his Will; to publish such a Religion as may approve it self to our Reason. Well! whatever we have gained, I am sure Religion has got no great matt…r by the Bargain: For then their Reason was to crowch to God's Religion, though in an obscure Ceremony; but now poor Religion must stoop to Reason, must appear before the Tribunal of Reason; and if it does not acquit it self well, and give a Rational and Satisfactory account of its Tendries, it must be bored through the Tongue with a red-…ot Iron, for an Heretick: And which is the worst on't, this Reason holds its Consistory in our Authors brain, so that p. 468if he be but … with a Rheumatism, the droppings of his Nose must be imposed upon us for Twice distilled Reason. Nor yet can I perceive, wherein Religion does more approve it self to our Reason, than formerly to theirs: For, 1. As to the Moral part of Religion, that was as agreeable to Natural Light then, as '…is now; Murder, Adultery, Stealing, were equally condemned by the Sentiments of all Mankind in all Ages. 2. For the Ceremonial part, which depends upon the mere Authority and Sovereign pleasure of the Legislator, they had as good Reason for their obedience, as we can claim for ours. There was as fair Reason pleadable for Circumcision, as for Baptism; for the Passover, as the Supper; the first Reason from which all instituted Worship springs, being the Will, and the last Reason into which all is resolved, being the Glory of the Supreme Law-giver. 3. The Perfection of Christ's Revelation, above that of God to the Iews, lies not in giving us a new Moral Law, or adding any thing to it; but in exhibiting Himself▪ as the Substance of their Ceremonial Law, who was revealed (though less clearly revealed) to them in Types and Figures.

And now Dr. Owen shall have a short truce and respite from Persecution, whilst the storm falls upon Dr. Iacomb. Some cavilling spirits have made a Q…estion, How the Air and Earth could afford sufficient Matter for Rain to make an Universal Deluge? But I more wonder, whence our Author could furnish himself with such a vast stock of s…olding Materials and Utensils, as might maintain such a constant Tenor of Fury and Rage against these men? What Cistern or Receptacle is able to hold such a body of Rancor, as may feed that stream p. 469which perpetually turns his Mill? Some thought, surely these Doctors had a great hand in burning the City; or have rob'd the Temple at Delphos; or however that of Tholouse. But I relieved my self against that Suspicion, by a seasonable Consideration, That it's not the custom to hear ill, but for doing well: And therefore my thoughts began to reel to the other side; Whether possibly they had not club'd together, to build, or endow some Hospital, or Colledg; or had bought in all the Impropriations, and laid them to the Church, because it must be some glorious Work, that could purchase our Author's Indignation; and at no lower rates could they entitle themselves to his severe displeasure. At last with much beating about, I found that they had both zealously and strongly engaged against the Socinians, for the Doctrine of the Church of England; and then no Penance shall ever expiate their Guilt, or procure an Indulgence for such Delinquen…y. But then the Difficulty recurred upon me, Why he should slip his Hold of the one, and fasten upon the other? Yet I considered, that Nature is much delighted with Variety: And I have heard some that pretend to know something in those matters, say, That it's not Policy to fight long with one Enemy; for in a while, they will understand▪ our manner of fighting, and become as good at our Weapon as our selves. But now attend!

When we enquire (says he) what this Union between Christ and Believers is? They answer, It's a Mystical Union through the Spirit and Faith. And truly they answer pretty well! For that it is a Mystical Union, they produce the Apostle Paul for their Voucher, Ephes. 5. 32. This is a great Mystery, but I p. 470speak concerning Christ and his Church. The Apostle is there discoursing of that intimous Oneness, (good Sir be not angry!) that is between the Husband and the Wife: That the Wife is the Husbands own self, vers. 28. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself. Now covertly, the Apostle, with one and the same labour, will shew us how mystical and intimous that Union is, which is between Christ and his Church, v. 29. No man ever hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church: For we are members of his body, and of his flesh, and of his bones. And for this cause (says the Apostle, vers. 31.) a man shall leave Father and Mother, and cleave to his Wife, and they two shall be one flesh: But now (says he) that which I have discoursed to you will seem very abstruse; and, as some will phrase it, mystical nonsense, and unintelligible Drollery; but, I speak concerning Christ and his Church: For however this be true, That the Husband and Wife are but one flesh, in the eye and consideration of the Law; yet it's more eminently true concerning Christ and his Church, who in the consideration and eye of God, are but one Spirit. All Metaphors and Similitudes taken from outward things, come infinitely short, and cannot decypher that mystical Union, which is between Christ, and all true Believers. Your Political Union, is but a new-invented Bawble; your Natural Union, is lean, and hungry; your Civil Union is low, and flat; it is a Mystical Union! Ay, but this Paul was an obscure Author and writes very darkly: But yet he may comfort himself the better under this hard Censure, since God himself cannot escape the Lash of Virulent Pe…s, emboldned with an Imprimatur; whose Institutions are reproached, to be of Obscure Signification, p. 471to aw the Childish Minds of men into Veneration. And then, that the internal Ligaments of this Union, are the Spirit and Faith; as the Scripture is free in affirming, so our Author is shy in denying; only he throws away a little scornful Drivel upon't. This Mystical is a hard word! Let it be so! Dr. Iacomb shall explain it, on Rom. 8. p. 42. And first (says the Doctor) There is an Union of three Persons in one Nature. 2. There's the Union of two Natures in one Person. 3. There's an Union of Persons, where yet Persons and Natures are distinct. Concerning which he observes, 1. Here's an Union, but no Transmutation, Commixtion, or Confusion. Here's an Union of Persons, but no Personal Union. Say you so Doctor? then I promise you, here's one has made bold with some of your names; for page 103. he tells his Reader, and me amongst the rest, That these men place all their hopes of Salvation in a personal Union with Christ. But pray Dr. go on! The Person of Christ is united to the Person of a Believer, and the Person of a Believer to the Person of Christ: But for this our Author has a dry flam; As it must needs be where the Person of Christ, is united to the Person of a Believer! Silly Man! the Doctor observes, that Christ is united to a Believer by the Spirit; and a Believer united to Christ by Faith. Though the Terms of the Relation are the same in Christ's Union with a Believer, and a Believer's Union with Christ, the Bond that unites them is Distinct. A Father is related to his Son, and a Son to his Father, yet Paternity is one thing, and Filiation another; and the Foundations of these Relations differ: The Foundation of the one, is to beget; of the other, to be begotten. But (says the Doctor) Faith is the uniting p. 472Grace; and this Faith receiving Christ, 1 John 13. it must also unite us to the Person of Christ: But of this our Author doubts, because men are not united to every thing they receive. Alas-a-day! yet when a Master receives any one to be his Servant, that Reception is the bottom of his Relation. If a Woman receives a person to be her Husband, that Reception creates an Union. But I had rather the Reader would give himself the satisfaction to peruse the Doctors Book, where he shall find these things laid down with Modesty, backed with strength of Reason; Scripture, and the suffrage of Learned Christians: And if our Author thinks, that a few Squirts and Flashes (which he is resolved to call Wit) be a sufficient Confutation, he shall enjoy the Contentment of admiring his own Excellencies, without any Rival. Again; This Union (says the Doctor) may be thus described, 'Tis that Supernatural, Spiritual, Intimous Oneness, and Conjunction between the Person of Christ, and the Persons of Believers, through the Bonds of the Spirit and Faith; upon which there follows mutual and reciprocal Communion each with other. I will not conceal from the Reader my thoughts; I really expected, that our Author should have highly commended the Doctors Modesty, who in a subject so Sublime, as might well exercise the Tongues of Angels, should draw his Description with a Peut estre, it [may be described:] And the rather, because by that means he has not excluded our Authors greater Abilities from travelling in the subject, but left room enough for his Defining Faculty: But instead of that, I s…e he's Angry still, though impotent. This Oneness and Conjunction are hard words! So they are indeed! It's hard to say, p. 473Whether they will prove Arabic, or Syriac, or Welsh or Wild-Irish: But to be sure, they came but lately into England, and are not yet made Denizons to purchase our Author's favour. The great danger is, lest we should mistake this Conjunction, for one of the Eight parts of Speech. Oh Sirs! what inextricable perplexities has this one lewd word involved the Nation in, since it landed? The old Shiboleth was an innocent Chrysom to it. Political Union and Machine, are sorry Sneaks to it: Indeed Tetrachymagogon, and Syncategorematical come pretty near: But Oh Conjunction! This Conjunction is not to be tolerated in a Land professing the Seven Liberal Sciences. And yet after all this, I dare venture an even Wager, That as many understand Conjunction, as Opposition, and more than know what to make of Antithesis; and yet that never choak'd our Author, but he could swallow it without making any Bones of it, or a Vespasian-face at it, p. 264. But if some small splinter should stick in his throat, the Doctor will be that charitable Crane to pluck it out; for he adds, Believers are said to be joyned to the Lord, 1 Cor. 6. 17. Now if no words will down with him but such as melt in the mouth, let him substitute Ioyning for Conjunction, and that will serve for a Vehicle, with a spoonful of Syrrup of Mulberries to supple the passage.

Our Author finding that the Doctor has bewildred himself, will endeavour to help him out. It's a plain case (says he) if Christ and Believers are united, their Persons are united too; for the Person of Christ, is Christ himself, and the Persons of Believers, are Believers themselves; and I cannot understand how they should be united without their Persons; p. 474but then they are united by mutual Relations, as the Person of a Prince and his Subjects, of a Husband and his Wife, are united by mutual affections. This I confess a surpassing kindness; and therefore that frequent reckonings may make us long Friends, I shall call some small Follies to account, ere they be forgotten. 1. I am more confirm'd in my old Observation, That our Author writes only from hand to month. He has told us, p. 157. That our Union to Christ, is not an Union to his Person, but confists in a sincere Union to his Church. And so again, p. 151. and yet now, If Christ and Believers are united, their Persons are united too; for he cannot understand (no not for his heart, I warrant you) how they should be united without their Persons. 2. He charges the Doctor with owning an Adhesion, nay a Natural Adhesion of Persons. I confess, I never admired any mans Confidence more; that in the face of the Doctors words, which he himself had quoted, directly affirming the contrary, should charge him with asserting, a Natural Adhesion of Persons: Thus he reports the Doctors words, The Person of Christ and Believers are united, and yet it's no Personal Union. Again, the Doctor thus, It's a Spiritual, and Supernatural Conjunction. Our Author had need tell nothing but Truth; for he is the poorliest qualified for a Lyar, that I have met withal: And now let it be referred to the Groom-Porter, Whether Adhesion be not as like to choak narrow throats, as Conjunction. 3. He says, Christ and Believers are united by mutual Relations: And then makes a Quaere upon't, Whether all the Absurdities he would fasten upon the Doctors words, will not recoyl upon his own: For it signifies no more, than if he had said, p. 475Christ and Believers are united by their Union, and related by their Relation; and thus Christ, is Christ; and Believers, are Believers; and Union, is Union.

The Truce is now expired, and he is once again falling upon Dr. Owen: For as the Serpents in Africa lay aside their Poyson whilest they drink, and then presently suck it up again; so I was pretty secure, our Author would lick up that vomit again, which he had cast in Dr. Iacomb's face, that he might serve the other with the same sawce. But whilst I am considering his Extravagances, there comes to my hand an Answer from the Doctor, wherein since he has condescended to chastise our Author in person, it may justly supersede any further attempt of mine in his Vindication.

At p. 243. I meet again with our Author, where he falls upon that weighty point of Justification: In his exposing of which Truth, he takes occasion from a passage in Dr. O. (I see I must mention him again) Com. p. 55. There is no man whatever, that hath any wants, in reference to the things of God, but Christ will be to him that which he wants: (I speak of those [N. B.] who are given him of the Father.) Is he Dead? Christ is Life! Is he weak? Christ is the Power of God! Hath he a Sense of Sin upon him? Christ is Compleat Righteousness! Jer. 23. 6. The Lord our Righteousness. Which words being fortified with express Scripture, it concerned our Author to take good advice, and to go gingerly to work in perverting of them. Two Artifices he uses, which like Fire and Water, will make the strongest Cloth shrink. And, 1. He lops off one whole Sentence, p. 214. and then exclaims. This sounds like Universal Redemption! What, down-right Arminianism? Really p. 476I am sorry for't! Is the Doctor sheer gone over to the Remoustrants? Come! come Sir! you have a Card in your Sleeve; pray produce it! I speak (says the Doctor) of those who are given him of the Father. Now where are your ears? Does this chink like Universal Redemption? But so true is the old Observation, He that is prepossest with an Opinion, finds it in all he reads. 2. If that way fails, another will hit: What Comfort is this to us (says he) that Christ was Righteous, if we continue wilful, and incorrigible sinners? Yes, says the Doctor, hast thou a sense of sin upon thee? Christ is Compleat Righteousness. Fie upon it! put on a Mask for shame! Is the Soul that labours under the sense of some particular sin, a wilful and incorrigible sinner? It's the repenting, the broken, and the sorrowful sinner, that the Doctor directs to Christ. Our blessed Saviour has invited those that labour, and are heavy-laden, to come unto him; promising, that he will give them rest. I wonder our Author could forbear twitting him, that he encouraged wilful and incorrigible sinners? But, pray, what would our Author say to a Soul that has the sense of sin upon him? without peradventure, Repent of thy sin, forsake thy sin, &c. And does he think that Repentance will save a wilful and incorrigible sinner? one that Repents and sins, and sins and Repents again, and goes on in a circle of sinning, and halfrepentance? Say but the same for the Doctor: He Counsels the Soul, under the sense of sin, to believe; but then it's only the Repenting sinner that will, that can, that ought to make his Address to Christ, that he may find rest to his Soul.

For our Author's Method in prosecuting this great Point, I dare not warrant it. Such as it is, p. 477Reader shall have it as cheap as I had it, my duty is to Follow, and not to Dispute.

[1.] His first enquiry will be, In what sense Christ is called our Righteousness? and what the Scripture intends by those Phrases of, The Righteousness of God; the Righteousness of Faith; or, The Righteousness of God by Faith? He begins with that famous place, Jer. 23. 6. where Christ is expresly called the Lord our Righteousness. To which our Author returns three things; A pitiful Scoff, a woful Evasion, and a wretched Answer, worse than both. 1. He begins with a Scoff: A very express place to prove that Christ is our Righteousness; that is, that the only Righteousness, wherewith we must appear before God, is the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us. Who these men should be that thus expound it, I cannot Divine, unless it be the first Reformers of this Church? and they do indeed tell us, Artic. 11. That we are accountted Righteous before God, only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ, and not for our own Works and Deservings: Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and full of comfort. And I believe our Author experienced it to be a most sweet and comfortable Doctrine, when he subscribed it for a fat Benefice: But in the mean time, these men (whoever they be) have a very hard task on▪t. For one while they must not draw one Conclusion from the Person of Christ, which his Gospel has not expresly taught; to use their own Reasons to deduce one single Inference from Gospelpremises, is present Death. But what now if they produce express Scripture, that Christ is our Righteousness? Why, that's as bad! for this is to interpret Scripture by the sound of words. 2. He retreats p. 478to a most woful Evasion, Is there no other possible sense to be made of this Phrase? If it be possible to procure another Sense for Love or Money, it shall never go thus: The Cause looks with a very desperate face, when once it comes to this; when men are ready to shoot the Pit, and only watch for the Creep-hole of a bare Possibility. If they intended honestly, they would lay things together as well as they can; labour to find out the meaning of God's Spirit, with Sobriety and Humility, and never strain their Wits, and vex and torture the Scripture with utmost Possibilities: The Text tells us, that the nam… whereby Christ shall be called, is the Lord our Righteousness. Now it's granted, that this was not designed to be his Praenomen, or Cognomen, that which should distinguish him in Common Discourse from other persons; and therefore, He shall be called, is no less than, He shall Really be our Righteousness: Thus, 1 Iohn 3. 1. Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called (that is, that we should become) the sons of God: Isa. 9. 6. His name shall be called (i. e. he shall Really be) Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. The true intent and meaning of which place, I know how some have attempted to elude, by this fine device of the Possibility of another meaning; and whether our Author sharpned his weapon at their forge, he knows best. But, 3. He returns an Answer worse than both the other: Righteousness in Scripture is a word of a very large sense, and sometimes signifies no more than Mercy, Kindness, Beneficence; and so the Lord our Righteousness, is the Lord who does us good. But, 1. Is it not vainly supposed, That for Christ to do us p. 479good, is inconsistent with being our Righteousness? 2. Though Christ be a Redeemer of Mercy, Kindness, and Beneficence; yet he is no-where called, The Lord our Mercy, The Lord our Kindness, The Lord our Beneficence: Which clearly proves, that when he is called, and really is, The Lord our Righteousness, the expression implies more than an Imparting, or Communication of good things to us. Hence some would say, That if our Author's Conscience were not larger than the sense of this word, he had never given so stretching an Answer. But (says he) Righteousness signifies that part of Iustice, which consists in relieving the oppressed. Isa. 54. 17. Their Righteousness is of me, saith the Lord, which is a parallel expression to, The Lord our Righteousness, and signifies no more, than that the Lord would avenge their Cause, and deliver them from all their Enemies: So that all the benefit we are to expect from Christ, is Temporal Salvation and Deliverance. To which I answer: 2. That the Reason of Christ's glorious Name, The Lord our Righteousness, assigned by the Prophet, that in his days Iudah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely, is interpreted by the Angel, Matth. 1. 21. to be this, He shall be called Iesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. And the end why God raised up his Son Jesus in the World, is expresly assigned to be, To bless his people, in turning away every one of them from their iniquities, Acts 3. 26. Thus Rom. 11. 26. Out of Zion shall come the Deliverer, and he shall turn away ungodliness from Iacob. To turn away iniquity from us; and to turn us away from iniquity, is I hope something of a more useful import, than to relieve the injured and oppressed, and deliver them from their Enemies. p. 480I do not at all envy our Author therefore the glory of his discovery, that for God to justifie good men, is to deliver them from the violence and injuries of their Enemies: And I would gladly hope, that all good men have something better wherein to glory. In Ier. 33. 16. the Church is called, The Lord our Righteousness; because she only glories in the Righteousness of Christ, her Head and Husband; to whom being so nearly related, and with whom being so closely united, his Righteousness, is her Righteousness; and therefore she, who upon the account of the imperfection of her Inherent Righteousness, can find, no, not the least, matter of boasting before God, yet has whereof to Triumph in Christ her Saviour; Isa. 45. 24. Surely, shall one say, In the Lord have I Righteousness: In the Lord shall all the seed of Iacob be justified, and shall glory. Now the Apostle, whom I take to be a competent Interpreter of Scripture, assures us, that God has taken special care, that in his dispensing of Grace to sinners, No flesh shall glory in his presence, 1 Cor. 1. 29. which he has well provided; for ver. 30. since Christ is made unto us of God for Righteousness; and therefore he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord: Which is exactly parallel to that of Isa. 45. 24. In the Lord shall all the seed of Iacob be justified, and shall glory. Come we now to our Author's Interpretation of Isa. 61. 11. which is of the same leaven with the former: I will greatly rejoyce in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God: For he hath clothed me with the garments of Salvation, and covered me with the robe of Righteousness, &c. This Text one may perceive struck cold to his heart, and he gives us as cold an Answer, that's ready to freeze between his lips. p. 481The Garments of Salvation (says he) and the Robe of Righteousness, signifie those great Deliverances God promised to Israel. Signifie! I would our Author would write a Dictionary of the Signification of words. We use to say, A bad Answer, is better than none: Reform the Proverb for shame; for such an one is worse than none. 1. It's evident, that the Triumph of the Church was upon the view of Jesus Christ, vers. 1. Anointed to preach Good-Tidings to the meek, to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the Captives, and the opening of the Prison to them that are bound: To proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord: Which our Saviour Christ applies to himself, Luk. 4. 18, 19. when he was far from working out for the Iews those great Deliverances by improbable means, which should make them glorious in the eyes of men. 2. The Virgin Mary quotes this very place, Luke 1. 46, 47. My soul doth magnifie the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoyced in God my Saviour; where the joy of her heart broke out at her lips, in Contemplation of that Eternal Redemption wrought out by him, in whom she could more seriously glory as her Saviour, than as her Son: And it's a wonder to me then, men can patter over their Magnificat every day, and not observe it. 3. It's observable, that the word foreign, which we render [Decketh] signifies to Adorn as a Priest; and implies, that Christ as our High-Priest, shall present us acceptable to God upon his Account. 4. There's nothing more familiar with the Spirit of God, than to clothe Evangelical Mercies, in a Mosaical Dress; and to express New-Testament Salvation, in OldTestament Phrase: Thus Gospel-Believers, are understood by Israel; the Church, by the Temple; Evangelical p. 482Ministers, by the Legal Priests; and the covering of Sin, by the covering of Nakedness; and by the decking with Ornaments, and a…dorning with Iewels, the representing true Believers, accepted with God through a better Righteousness than their own.

[2.] The Reader would admire to hear these glorious Gospel-Promises recorded in the Old-Testament, thus interpreted to bare skin and bone: But our Author confesses, he swarms with prejudices against the Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness. When Prejudice sits upon the Bench, it's like to go very ill with poor Truth that stands at the Bar. As a Bribed Fancy will admit the most feeble Appearances, for plain Demonstrations of what it longs should be True; so a mind fore-stalled with prejudice, will despise the clearest evidence, for what it desires to be false. And we need no other instance of all this, than our Author's great Indisposition and Averseness to receive the present Truth.

And, 1. I perceive he is very much stumbled at one thing; That in all our Sa…iour's Sermons, there's no mention of his Imputed Righteousness. Now because the same Charity that commands me, not to lay a stumbling-block in the way of my Neighbour, enjoyns me also to remo…e it out of his way, or however, to help him over it; the ensuing Considerations will afford him that Civility, if he please to accept it. 1. If our Saviour had mentioned the Imputation of his Righteousness a thousand times over, he could easily have evaded it at his rate of answering; for he might have said, This is but to interpret Scripture by the sound of words; or if that had been too frigid, that it's sufficient to say, The words may possibly have another meaning, though he could p. 483not tell what that should be; or, that by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, no more is meant, but the Accepting of our own Righteousness, which Christ has commanded in the Gospel. 2. It may be of good use to him to consider, Whether Christ's Silence raised his prejudice against the Doctrine; or his own prejudice against the Doctrine, raised the conceit that Christ was silent in it? Whether it was the want of an Object to be seen; or the want of eyes to see the Object? For most men are deaf, when they have no mind to hear; and blind, when they have no will to see. For, 3. Christ in his Sermons has plainly revealed the case to be such between God and man, that without a better Righteousness than their own, they are all lost for ever, Matth. 5. 19. He that breaks the least of these Commandments, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, that is, shall never come there. Now the universal Suffrage of all mens Consciences is, That there is no man that lives, and sins not; and therefore Christ has determined upon him, that he shall never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. I never yet heard, that God has dispenced with one jot or tittle of the Moral Law; but, Do this and live, is as strictly exacted as ever: So that unless a Surety be admitted, and the Righteousness of another owned, the case of all the Sons of Adam is deplorable and desperate. To deny then the Righteousness where in the believing sinner may stand before this Righteous and Holy God, is to affirm the Eternal Damnation of all the World. 4. Christ has plainly discovered to us such ends of his Death and Sufferings, as evidently prove the impossibility of being justified by our own Righteousness, Matth. 20. 28. He gave, foreign p. 484foreign, his Life, [or Soul,] a Ransome, [a Rede…ption-price,] for [instead of] many: Which is no whit less than that of the Apostle, 2 Cor. 5. 21. He was made sin for us (who knew no sin) that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him; And the same with Isa. 53. 10. It pleased the Lord to bruise him, when he shall make his Soul an Offering for sin, &c. Again, Matth. 26. 28. This is the Blood of the New-Testament, which is shed for the Remission of the sins of many. Whence it's plain, that God in pardoning sin, in justifying and accepting the sinner, has such a respect to the Satisfaction of Christ in our stead, as may properly be called, the Imputation thereof to us. 5. Though Christ mention not the Imputation of his Righteousness, foreign, yet has he mentioned that Righteousness, which it's certain from the Scriptures, must be imputed to Believers, or they can have none of that benefit by it, which they are said to have, Matth. 3. 15. Christ fulfilled all Righteousness; and vers. 17. In him (or upon his account) God is well pleased, comes to delight in Believers, whom he accepts in the Beloved, Ephes. 1. 6. 'foreign; He hath graciously accepted us in his Beloved one. Hence it is the Holy Ambition of all the Saints, 2 Cor. 5. 9. to be accepted of him, or in him, 'foreign: That regard then which God has to the Obedience of Christ, as the Reason for which he accounts a Believer righteous, we judg, may commodiously be called, the Imputing of Christ's Righteousness to them, without the Leave, License, or Faculty of our Author.

A second Prejudice that is deep-rooted in our Author's breast against this Doctrine, is, That Christ p. 485exacts from men a Righteousness of their own, if they would find mercy with God. A Righteousness of their own? Ay, but let them be sure they come honestly by it. The Righteousness of Christ must be made ours, or else we shall never find mercy with God: We must also have another Righteousness of our own, an Inherent Righteousness, if ever we expect to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, and find mercy with God in his great Day. But what is that Righteousness for which we are just and accepted with God? But for the removing of this small prejudice, may he please to consider: 1. How easie it is to vapour and make a flourish with those Texts that require an Inherent Righteousness, as a necessary Qualification for Eternal Salvation; and yet how hard to produce one place that mentions our own Inherent Righteousness, as that which answers God's holy Law, makes Reconciliation with God, and constistutes the sinner spotless and blameless before God, the Holy, Righteous Judg; yet such a Righteousness we want, and such a one we must have. 2. Our own Righteousness is very pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, being the fruit of Faith, and following after Iustification. So says the Church of England, Artic. 12. But (says She) Works done before the Grace of God, and the Inspiration of the Spirit, are not pleasing to God, for as much as they spring not out of Faith in Christ, Artic. 13. Which two Articles I shall leave to our Author to confute, at his best leisure.

A third Block which I perceive lies in his way is, That our Saviour should never once warn his Hearers, to beware of trusting to their own Righteousness. But, 1. Christ preach'd to the Iews, who had had warnings p. 486…now to beware of splitting upon that Rock: They might have taken warning from the Churches Confession, Isa. 64. 6. We are all as an unclean thing, and all our Righteousnesses are as filthy rags. All the warning in the World signifies nothing to them that are resolved to interpret, Our own Righteousness, by Ceremony and Hypocrisie. Had Christ inculcated the danger, even to Tautology, all may be evaded by that happy Gloss, which he keeps Leiger by him: True indeed, he warns us to beware of our own Righteousness, but he intends no more hereby, than the works of the Ceremonial, and external acts of the Moral Law. 3. Christ had indeed given them fair warning, but if they will not take it, the sin must lie at their own doors, and the Condemnation upon their own heads, Luke 18. 9. He spake a Parable to them that trusted in themselves, that they were righteous, and despised others, &c. Now it may seasonably be here remembred: 1. What was the design of this Parable? And that the Evangelist tells us, was to meet with them that trusted in themselves, foreign, men that presumed very highly upon their own Abilities, to answer the Law of God; and therefore despised others, who made such a stir about their own Impotency to keep it; and kept such a coyl about the shortness of their obedience to it; like the poor Publican, who being conscious to himself of both, makes his retreat to, and shelters himself in the free Grace, and rich Mercy of God to miserable sinners. 2. It will be seasonable to enquire, What that Righteousness was, upon which the Pharisee in the Parable so stiffly insisted, as that in which he durst adventure to appear before God? And that (as our Saviour puts the case) was a Righteousness made up p. 487of obedience to Gods Commands: And those both Prohibitory, he was no Extortioner, no Adulterer, no Unjust Person; and Affirmatively, he paid his Tythes exactly, (which will go a great way) and fasted twice a-week. 3. Let it be considered, that however many of the Pharisees of those days were Hypocrites, yet our Saviour frames his Parable of a Pharisee, not according to what many of them were, but what they seemed to be, and were reputed for amongst men, who admired their Sanctity, and reverenced their Devotions; and therefore he describes not a Person acting his part well upon the Stage, but living up to very high Attainments of Nature. For, 1. The duties instanced in, are only some particulars, in the name of all the rest: He instances in his praying to, and praising of God, which comprehend all the duties of the First Table: His freedom from Adultery, Extortion; and in a word, from Injustice, which is the whole of the Second Table. Again, He instances in duties of the Iudicial Law, paying Tythes; and of the Ceremonial, Fasting; with a little touch perhaps of Supereragation, [Twice in the week.] 2. When Christ introduces a person, saying, he was no Adulterer, we may reasonably suppose, he taught him to speak in the proper sense of the word which Christ himself allows. Now in Christ's Dialect, to be no Adulterer, is not to commit it with the heart, Mat. 5. still abating for Humane Frailties. And, 3. This is evident, because our Savióur describes not this Pharisee, as praying in the corners of the streets, or in the Synagogues, to be seen of men; but in obedience to God's Command, Going up to the Temple to pray; and there praying to God, foreign, in his own heart, between God, and his own Soul: p. 488All which evidently prove, that our Saviour puts not the case of a stinking Hypocrite, but of one who went as far as Natures legs would carry him. But, 4. The miscarriage of this Pharisee lay not in this, that he was, what he pretended he was not; or was not, what he pretended he was; but that he trusted to himself for a Righteousness, to be compounded out of all these Ingredients, wherein he would dare to stand before God, and in despising others, which is the natural Product of Self-Righteousness: And yet upon our Author's Principles, I see not why he might not trust to himself, that he was Righteous, if Righteousness be to be made out of Obedience; and despise others too, since his own free-will exerted, and natural strength improved, had made him differ from another, even from that Publican.

But yet, 4. There's one Prejudice more remaining, which perhaps may stick more with him than all the rest: He is apt to admire our Saviour's Sermons in the first place, before the Writings of the Apostles, though inspired men. I should be loth to weaken his Admiration of our Saviours Sermons: But he may do well to examine, Whether his Aptness to admire them before other Sermons given forth by the same Spirit, may not proceed from great Ignorance, or a worse Principle? For though our Saviour's Person had more Authority than the Persons of the Apostles; yet the Writings of the Apostles are of equal Authority with those of the Evangelists, to command our Faith and Obedience. The Epistles of S. Iohn are indited by the same Spirit by which hepenned the Gospel: 'Tis the Authority of Christ in both; the Infallible Spirit speaking in both, which are the Reason of our Belief of both: All Scripture is given p. 489by Divine Inspiration, 2 Tim. 3. 18. The same Spirit of Christ that spake in the Prophets of the Old-Testament, and the Apostles in the New, 1 Pet. 1. 11. And such Comparisons must needs be very odious, where the Spirit of God has made none.

But the total sum of all these Prejudices, we shall have in one Dilemma; Did not our Saviour instruct his Hearers in all things necessary to Salvation? or have the Evangelists given us an imperfect account of his Doctrine? If the first; then our Saviour was not faithful in the discharge of his Prophetical Office: If the latter; you overthrow the Credit of the Gospel. Well! I hope we may out-live this horned-Argument, for all the terrour of its looks: 1. Christ was faithful in his Prophetical Office; he instructed his Hearers in all things necessary to Salvation: But then there are some great and weighty Doctrines, which it was necessary to the Salvation of the Gentile World to know, wherein the Iewish Church had been sufficiently instructed already. The Doctrine of Atoning God, making Reconciliation for sin, expiating Transgressions, was abundantly clear from their Sacrifices: The Theory of God's justifying a sinner, was evident from thence; they knew what Imputation signified, by the transferring of the guilt of the sinner, upon the head of the Sacrifice: And therefore when Christ came, his main business with the Jews, was to convince them, that he was the Messiah promised of old, and typified in their Sacrifices: His Work they knew, all the Question was, Whether he was the Person? Matth. 11. 3. Art thou he that should come? or do we look for another? Joh. 10. 24. If thou beest the Christ, tell us plainly. Christ's Sermons therefore suppose them instructed in the p. 490Doctrine of Iustification: But when the Apostle Paul, who is called, The Apostle of the Uncircumcision, comes to preach and write to the Gentiles, he must be more express; they knew little of God, and nothing at all of a Redeemer, they must be taught their Catechism, and the first Rudiments of Christianity; and therefore do we find these great Points more explicitely handled in his Discourses, which are more sparingly and more covertly delivered by the Evangelists. 2. The Evangelists have given us a perfect account of Christ's Doctrine; but then the perfectness of that account, is not to be measured by what Christ preached, but by what they were commanded to record and transmit to Posterity. S. Iohn was faithful in giving us a perfect account of Christ's Sermons; but his faithfulness, and the entireness of the account he gives us thereof, is not to be taken from every Miracle Christ wrought, or every Sermon he preach'd; for he omits that whole famous Sermon preach'd by Christ in the Mount, recorded by Matthew. And S. Matthew was also faithful in his account, and yet he omits the excellent Prayer recorded by Iohn, Chap. 17. and yet both of them, and both the other, have conveyed down to us, whatsoever, was delivered to them, foreign, from above, Luke 1. What strange work would our Author's Dilemma make amongst the four Evangelists, if it were discharged at them? Did Christ instruct his Hearers in all things necessary to Salvation? or, Was the Evangelist John short in giving us a perfect account of his Doctrine? If the first; then Christ was not faithful in his Prophetical Office: If the latter; then you overthrow the credit of the Gospel. And therefore, unless you can prove every Article of the Christian p. 491Faith, from express words, in that one single Book of his Gospel; and particularly, The Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness, our Author will retain his inveterate prejudices against it. Nay, we may fly a great deal higher; Christ was faithful in the discharge of his Prophetical Office, and therefore no doubt, whenever he preach'd a single Sermon, he acquainted his Hearers with all things necessary to Salvation, and the Evangelists have delivered us a perfect account of every such Sermon; and therefore unless you can prove every Article of your Creed, from every single Sermon of Christ, our Author is like Thomas, he will not believe but upoń his own terms; but will justifie his prejudices against it, That the Doctrine is certainly to be found no-where, because he finds it not every-where. Christ preach'd so much of necessary Truth in every Sermon, as he judg'd necessary; the full account of his preaching must be gathered from the rest: And every Evangelist has registred so much of Christ's Miracles, Sermons, and the passages of his Life, as he had in charge; and what is omitted in one, must be supplied from others. And all the Evangelists have delivered so much of what Christ taught the Iews, as is needful for us to know; and what is further necessary for Gentiles to know, is abundantly, and explicitely made up from other holy Persons, divinely inspired for that very end. The whole will of God, necessary for us to know for salvation, is not so explicitely revealed in any one Book of the Sacred Oracles, but we have need to receive Information from the whole. Nor were the Writings of any one Prophet, Evangelist or Apostle, design'd to complete the Canon of our Faith, but the whole Scripture. I say not this, p. 492as if I at all questioned, much less denied, that the Doctrine of Christ's Righteousness imputed, is laid down by the Evangelists, though some mens prejudices will not permit them to see it, either there, or any-where else; but that it is there spoken to more implicitly, our Saviour doing another thing, & touching upon it by the way, as supposing them already instructed in it: And that the Writings of the Apostles, qualified to preach to the Gentiles, by the pouring forth of the Holy Spirit upon them, have more clearly commented upon that, and other important Doctrines, and beaten out that Gold which was before in the Lump; and though of equal weight, yet not so dilated: So that there remains no more just cause of Dispute about these matters, with them who believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God: And as for others, they can never want Objections, whilst their Corruptions and Unbelief continue in full force, strength and power.

But, 5. There is another Prejudice which extremely gravels him; That in all the New-Testament, there's no such expression as the Righteousness of Christ: And this (he says) is worth our observing. A Learned Observation it is! but I think the whole New-Testament is but one great expression of the Righteousness of Christ, or else it is but one great blot. However, I am glad that he will own, that the NewTestament mentions the Righteousness of God, the Righteousness of Faith, and the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Iesus Christ. For the Righteousness of Christ, is the Righteousness of that Person who is God. They who crucified Christ, are said to crucifie the Lord of Glory, 1 Cor. 2. 8. and that Blood by which the Church is purchased, is called, the Blood of God, p. 493Acts 20. 28. that is, the Blood of that Person who is God, though not as God: Thus the Righteousness of Christ, the Righteousness of God, the Righteousness of Faith, are expressions of the same import. They describe the same Righteousness, under various Considerations; being called the Righteousness of God, because it was the Righteousness of him that is God; the Righteousness of Christ, because it was fulfilled in his own Person; and the Righteousness of Faith, because Faith makes Him, and thereby his Righteousness, to become ours. However, we desire to plead for no more of Christ's Righteousness to be imputed to us, than we can evidently prove, was inherent in him, and fulfilled by him: And if after all, our Author be so passionately fond of his Prejudices, he may keep them to himself. But now he will examine these expressions more distinctly.

(1.) For the Righteousness of God: He confesses, That in the New-Testament, most commonly it signifies, that Righteousness which God approves, and commands, and which he will accept for the Iustification of a sinner. That was well jumbled! God approves, and commands a Righteousness in a Believer, which he will not accept for the Iustification of a sinner: That Righteousness which God will accept, he has commanded us to seek in Christ; but that Righteousness which he has commanded us to find in our selves, is not that Righteousness which he will accept for our Iustification. Inherent Righteousness, may be called the Righteousness of God, because he commands it, but especially, because he works and creates it: But the true Reason of the expression is, because it is the Righteousness of him who is God, and only discovered by the Wisdom of God, and accepted by p. 494God, in the Justification of a believing sinner. But though I agree not with him in the Reason of the Name, let him make the best of it: Now (says he) this Righteousness consists in a sincere and universal obedience to the Commands of God: That's Magisterially dictated however. But where may we find this Righteousness? It's contained (says he) in the Terms of the Gospel. We are as wise as we were before: Why then we are posted over to Rom. 1. 17. The Righteousness of God is revealed from Faith to Faith. Evident it is hence, That the Gospel reveals that Righteousness by which we are justified, and as evident, that the Righteousness of God, and of Faith, are the same thing, under divers Considerations; but that the Righteousness of God, consists in an universal obedience to Commands; or that these are the Terms of Iustification, it speaks not one syllable; only it speaks aloud that our Author had a very loving Inclination it should be so. Then we are turned over to Matth. 6. 33. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and his Righteousness. What then? Why; It is called the Righteousness of God. It is called! What is called? without all peradventure the Righteousness of God, is called the Righteousness of God, not only there, but where-ever else we meet with the Expression: But what are we the nearer? Why, this is the same with the Righteousness of his Kingdom? But what Kingdom? and upon what account? and in what place is the Righteousness of God, called the Righteousness of the Kingdom? But go on! Now the Kingdom of God signifies, the state of the Gospel. Well, proceed! And the Righteousness of God, or of his Kingdom (signifies) that that Righteousness which the Gospel prescribes, which is contained in the Sermons p. 495and Parables of Christ: Ergo, &c. Quod erat Demonstrandum! Round-about our Coal-fire! And now who can be so hard-hearted, as not to allow our Author rarely qualified, to Reform the Religion of Christendom? What man would not be content to be argued out of his Seven Senses, with such potent Demonstration?

(2.) We must observe farther (if at least it be farther) that this Righteousness of God (which he commands and rewards) …is the Righteousness of Faith, or Righteousness by the Faith of Christ. We have heard so: The Gospel commands us to believe in Christ for Justification; for he is our Righteousness. This will not undo us yet: But Faith is often taken objectively, for the Gospel of Christ. Faith is sometimes so used; but that [Faith in Christ] is so used, we wait for evidence. He produces it from Acts 24. 24. Felix sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the Faith of Christ, that is, concerning Righteousness, Temperance, and the Iudgment to come. But here our Author is taken napping. 1. He corrupts both the Original, and the Translation (unless he has other Bibles than are come to our hands) for neither the Greek nor the English say, He heard him concerning the Faith of Christ: (which words are more liable to a perverse insinuation,) but, foreign, concerning that Faith which is in, or upon Christ. 2. He prevaricates with his Reader most palpably, in making those words, [concerning Righteousness, Temperance, and Iudgment to come] to be an Exegesis of the foregoing words [The Faith that is in Christ:] Whereas the Apostle argued with Felix about the Nature of these things; wherein he knew he was Defective, to awaken his secure p. 496and sleepy Conscience, to consider what need he had by Faith to fly to Christ for a better Righteousness than his own. The Apostle took the true Method of Gods Spirit, to insist upon Righteousness, to convince him of his Injustice, Bribery; upon Temperance or Continence, to convince him of his Adultery; and upon Iudgment to come, to alarum him with the righteous Judgment of God; that so being terrified by the Law, he might more gladly entertain the Doctrine of Faith in Christ for Righteousness, wherein he might stand before God; which otherwise his proud unhumbled heart would never have brook'd, and submitted to.

[3.] His Next step is, towards the deciding the Controversie about the way of Abraham's being justified before God: And a great and weighty Question it is; for Abraham being called, The Father of the Faithful, it might seem strange, that the Father should be justified one way, and his Children another; when Believers are therefore, and only therefore, his Children, because they walk in the steps of his Faith, Rom. 4. 12. And seeing (as our Author Confesses) he was set forth as a Patern of our Iustification; It were to be admired, If the Exemplar, and the Copy; the Archetype, and Ectype, were of Divers kinds. It will be of good use therefore to enquire, What way Abraham was justified? Though the best way to resolve it, is to enquire, What way Believers under the Gospel are justified? Now the Apostle is very punctual herein, Rom. 4. 11. Abraham received the sign of Circumcision; a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith, which he had yet being uncircumcised, that he might be the Father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that Righteousness might be imputed to them p. 497also. Look what way Abraham was justified, the same way are all true Believers justified (for he is Father of the faithful; and they his Children only, because they tread in the steps of the same Faith:) but Abraham was justified by Faith, by the Righteousness of Faith, and in a way of Imputation (whatever these Expressions signifie;) therefore Believers under the Gospel are justified by Faith, by the Righteousness of Faith, and in a way of Imputation. Again, Gal. 3. 6. Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for Righteousness: v. 7. Know ye therefore, that they which are of Faith, are the Children of faithful Abraham: Where the Apostle demonstrates, that the sameness of a Christians Faith with Abrahams, is as able to denominate him one of Abraham's Children, as if he came out of his loyns. Ver. 9. So then, they which are of Faith, are blessed with faithful Abraham. If they have the same Faith with Abraham, they shall have the same Blessing with Abraham; for says he, v. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law, being made a Curse for us; that the Blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, through Iesus Christ. All the advantage the Gentiles receive by Christ (and they need no more to make them perfectly and eternally blessed) is, that Abraham's Blessing may come upon them: But if we have not Abraham's Faith, we must never expect a part in Abraham's Blessing: Nay (says the Apostle) v. 8. Abraham had the same Gospel preach'd to him, that we have. The Scripture foreseeing (that is, the Spirit of Christ which gave forth the Scripture) that God would justifie the Heathen through Faith, preached before the Gospel to Abraham. Now the preaching of the Gospel, is the p. 498Spirits Engine, for the begetting a true, saving, and lively Faith: If then Abraham had the same Gospel, the same Faith, the same Blessing with Christians, he was justified the same way; but so had our Father Abraham.

But what is our Author's judgment in the case? I confess that's hard to discover, p. 243. he gives us, The Righteousness of God, the Righteousness of Faith, and the Righteousness of God, which is by the Faith of Iesus Christ, as Synonima's. And again expresly, p. 245. he observes it to us for a choice discovery; That the Righteousness of God, is the Righteousness of Faith, or Righteousness by the Faith of Christ. And now p. 246. he is peremptory, That this Righteousness of Faith, and this alone, can recommend us▪ to God: Which (says he) the Apostle proves from the example of Abraham; and adds, That Abraham, who was the Father of the faithful, was set forth for a patern of our Iustification. Now scarce one of his Readers in a thousand, but would have been trying Conclusions out of his premises: Abraham's Righteousness, was the Righteousness of Faith: But the Righteousness of Faith, is the Righteousness of Faith in Christ; therefore Abraham's Righteousness was the Righteousness of Faith in Christ. Again (says he) the Apostle proves, that this Righteousness of Faith, and this alone, can recommend us to God. If then there be but one only Righteousness that can recommend us to God, either Abraham and Christians have one and the same Righteousness, or else one of them must needs want a Righteousness that can recommend them to God. But now from these premises, our Author concludes, that Abraham's Faith, was not a Faith in Christ. Then say I, His Righteousness p. 499was not the Righteousness by Faith in Christ: And then it was not neither the Righteousness of Faith, no, nor the Righteousness of God; for our Author has warranted us, p. 243, and 245. That the Righteousness of Faith, the Righteousness of God, and the Righteousness by the Faith of Christ, are but all one Righteousness. But here we have the Quintessence and Elixir of our Author's rational Abilities: To this purpose he argues, The Father of the faithful, and his believing Children, are justified both one way, But Abraham the Father of the faithful was justified one way, and therefore Believers, who are his Children, are justified another. Now I like our Author's Conclusions dearly, when they are together by the ears with their premises. Again, Thus he reasons; Abraham was set forth for a patern of our Iustification: But nothing ought to be like its patern; and therefore you may be sure if Abraham was justified one way, Believers are justified another. Again, The Apostle proves what way Believers are justified, from the example of Abraham: But now the Apostle you know, always argues from one sort of things to another, his way of concluding is by foreign: And therefore, if Abraham was justified by Faith, you may conclude from thence, then Christians are justified by Works; and if Believers are justified by Faith in Christ, then to be sure Abraham was justified some other way. The plain truth is, our Author is got into a Cramp, and has so hamper'd and bangled his matters, that I am very confident none of his Readers do understand him, and it were well, if he understood himself.

p. 500There are two Enquiries he will make to enlighten us in this Mystery.

1. What that Faith was whereby Abraham was justified? 2. What Agreement there is between the Faith of Abraham, and the Faith in Christ.

(1.) What that Faith was whereby Abraham was justified? To which he answers: 1. Negatively, It was not a Faith in Christ. Which Determination might have better become any mans mouth than hi…, whose hand has subscribed the Seventh Article of the Church of England: Both in the Old-Testament and the New, Everlasting Life is offered to Mankind by Iesus Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. And I do the rather urge him with this Article, because it speaks not only what respect God might have to Christ, in bestowing Eternal Life; but that there was an offer to Mankind of Eternal Life, through Christ, which speaks that respect which Believers had to a Mediator in their Faith▪ But perhaps these Articles are but matter of course and form, and therefore I shall press him with what has more weight than a sorry Subscription: The Righteousness of God (says he, p. 245.) is the Righteousness of Faith, or Righteousness by the Faith of Christ: But Abraham's Righteousness, was the Righteousness of God; and therefore it was the Righteousness of Faith, or the Righteousness by the Faith of Iesus Christ: Yea, (says our Author) Christ was the material Object of Abraham's Faith, that is, he believed the promise of God's sending Christ into the World, John 8. 56. Your Father Abraham rejoyced to see my day, and he saw it and was glad. Hence it's evident, that Abraham had a great and personal concern in Christ's coming p. 501into the World, which made his heart leap within him: The same which the Apostle expresseth, Rom. 5. 11. We joy in God through our Lord Iesus Christ, through whom we have received the Atonement: For what cause of all this triumph, all this joy, that Christ should come into the World, some thousands of years after he should be dead, and buried, and rotten in his grave, to preach a Gospel in which he had no concern, and for which he should not be one pin the better? But our Author will prove that Abraham's Faith was not a Faith in Christ, because no man could believe in Christ till he came. But I prosess my self otherwise perswaded, and that the actual exhibition of Christ in the flesh, was not at all times absolutely necessary to a believing in him. Abraham believed that testimony which God gave of his son, that in him all the Nations of the earth should be blessed: He believed that God would bless him for the sake of Christ. He saw Christ slain from the Foundation of the World in Sacrifices: He saw a Redeemer, as that way which God had chosen to bruise the head of the Serpent; which St. Iohn expounds, 1 Epist. 3. 8. by destroying the works of the Devil; and Paul, Heb. 2. 14. by destroying the Devil, that is, so far as he had got the power of Death into his hands by sin: and in that security which he received from the promise of God, and from Christ, who was the Reason of its being made good, Yea and Amen, His Soul did rejoyce with exceeding great joy; for so much foreign, and foreign do import. But our Author has a Notion of Believing that is worth two of this, and will do his work: To believe any thing upon the Authority of Christ, is the true Notion of believing in him. To which I answer, 1. Supposing this to be the true p. 502Notion of believing, yet might Abraham receive a Doctrine upon the Authority of Christ, before his Manifestation in the Flesh: Christ was Mediator before his Incarnation, nor was his Assumption of our Nature absolutely necessary to the discharge of his Prophetical, but of his Priestly Office. A Body was prepared him, that he might have what to offer in Sacrifice to God, Hebr. 10. 7, 8. It was the Spirit of Christ that spake in the Prophets, 1 Pet. 1. 11. and to deny this, is to deny something more than all the Thirty nine Articles, namely, the Nicene Creed, I believe in the Holy Ghost, who spake by the Prophets. But, 2. I deny that to receive a Doctrine upon the Authority of Christ, is the true and full Notion of believing on him: Faith in general implies an assent to a Truth upon the Authority of the Revealer; but to make this a saving, a justifying Faith, the assent of the Understanding must draw along with it the Consent of the Will. A true Faith is described by such terms as include the Concurrent Acts both of the Will and the Understanding; and therefore that which the Apostles Creed expresses, I believe the Resurrection of the Body; the Nicene Creed renders, I look for the Resurrection of the Dead: Taking in that Act of the Soul, whereby it waits and stedfastly hopes for the goodness of the thing promised; as well as credits the Veracity of God in the truth of the Proposition. And thus Abraham believed in Christ, he looked and waited for that rich Mercy wrap'd up in that promise of the Messiah, and all those spiritual Blessings that were to come through him. 3. The Reason of the Promise, is the Object of Faith, as well as the Truth of the Promiser. Abraham believed the Promise to be true, upon the Authority of him who gave it p. 503forth; but he saw also that it was upon the account of Christ, a Mediator, that God would communicate to him the Blessings of the Covenant opitomized in that, I will be thy God. And this was that Gospel or Gladtidings which was preached to Abraham, Gal. 3. 8. But our Author threatens we shall hear more of this presently: And I promise him when we do, it shall be fully considered. 2. He answers Affirmatively, Abraham believed God. To which I say, Subordinat a non pugnant: To believe God, and to believe in Christ, are very well consistent. That Abraham believed in God, and therefore he believed in Christ, seems to me to carry as fair Reason, as that other of his: Abraham believed God, and therefore he did not believe in Christ; for the Scripture represents them as well agreed, 1 Pet. 1. 21. Through Christ we believe in God.