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

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

p. 682We are all agreed then in the meaning of the simple Terms, and it's well if we do not fall out again about the Propositions that result from them: Let us now hear his Comment upon the words. The meaning of the words (says he) is this: That as God was so highly displeased with Adams sin, that he entail'd a great many evils, and miseries, and death it self, upon his Posterity, for his sake: So God was so well pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christs Life and Death, that he bestows the Rewards of Righteousness on those who according to the strictness and rigour of the Law are not Righteous; that for Christs sake he he hath made a New Covenant of Grace, which pardons our past sins and follies, and rewards a sincere, though imperfect Obedience.

There are two Questions which he here undertakes to Answer. First, What Influence Adams sin hath upon his Posterity? and Secondly, it is to be hoped that from thence we may at last know, What Influence Christs Righteousness and Obedience have upon our acceptance with God?

1 Quest. What Influence hath Adams sin upon his Posterity? To this he returns. God was so highly displeased with Adams sin, that he entailed a great many evils, and miseries, and death it self, upon his Posterity, for his sake: Now, all this is true, very true; but whether it be the whole Truth, that which will satisfie the design of the Text I shall examine by and by. At present I shall onelyonly make some short Notes upon it.

1. God (says he) was so highly displeased with Adams sin, that for his sake he entailed a great many evils. Now, had it not been fair to have p. 683shewn the Iustice, as well as the Highness of Gods Displeasure in such a proceeding with his Posterity? That God was justly, as well as highly displeased with Adams Sin, never created a Doubt to any man; but that he should be so highly displeased with the Sin of one single Man, to entail Evils upon Millions, upon all his Posterity, this would invite us to examine the Righteousness of the Entail. The Posterity of Adam knew nothing of Adams Sin, were not conscious nor consenting to it, and yet God involves them in the Consequences of Adams Sin.

2. God (says he) entail'd those Evils upon his Posterity for Adams sake: Now here's the old Blind again: For to say, that God did it for Adams sake, implies, that Adams sin had an influence, and it had this influence, but how it could righteously or indeed possibly have that influence, is still a Question; and till that be resolved, we shall never have the advantage from hence to know, How the Righteousness of Christ could have an Influence upon God, to shew us any kindness for Christs sake.

3. God (says he) entail'd a great many Evils and miseries upon his Posterity, for his sake. Now seeing there are but a Many (though a great many) evils entailed upon them, and not all Evils, it's very much our Interest to understand which are the Entailed evils, and which our own Personal evils; which are hereditary, and which of our own procurement; that so having found out which are entailed upon us, we may search if there be not a way found to cut off the Entail, by the Recovery wrought out by Christ. And the rather, because the Text mentions not only Evils, many Evils, but seems to include p. 684all Evils; As Life and Absolution, comprehend all spiritual Mercies; so Death and Condemnation comprehend all spiritual Curses: And by these comprehensive words, the Apostle expresses those Evils which God upon the Account of Adam's Sin, has entailed upon Posterity. I know how easily our Author presumes to dock the Entail, by pleading, that Death signifies onelyonly Temporal Death; but the Apostle has obviated that Cavil, v. 11. As by one Man Sin entred into the world, and Death by S…n, and so Death passed upon all Men, for that all have sinned. By one man, by Adam, that Sin whose wages is Death, and that Death which is the wages of Sin, enter'd into the world, even upon all his Posterity, for that all have sinned. And what that Death is, which is the Wages of Sin, he assures, by opposing it to Eternal Life, v. 21. As Sin reigned unto Death, so might Grace reign through Righteousness unto Eternal Life, by Iesus Christ our Lord. So again Chap. 6. v. 23. The Wages of Sin is Death, but the Gift of God is Eternal Life.

2 Qu. What Influence has Christs Righteousness and Obedience upon our Acceptation with God? And had our Author answered the former question to purpose, he had answered this in it, and saved himself a great deal of needless pains in a New prosecution of it. But he answers: God was so well pleased with the Righteousness of Christ Life and Death, that he bestowes the Rewards of Righteousness on those, who according to the strictness and rigour of the Law are not righteous: That for Christs sake, he hath made a New Covenant of Grace, which pardons our past sins and follies, and rewards a sincere though imperfect p. 685Obedience. A few notes also I shall make upon this, and so dismiss it at present.

And, First, here is certainly a great Iuggle in these words: God (says he) was so well pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christs Life and Death, that he bestows the rewards of Righteousness upon us. Now these rewards of Righteousness (be they what they will or can) are either the proper and immediate effects of the Life and Death of Christ, or not: If they be, then I am sure he was tardy p. 323. The Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel Covenant: And what that is in his Dialect, I hope we are not to seek at this time of day. But if they be not the proper and immediate Effects of the Life and Death of Christ, then, 1. He has juggled here with his Reader, placing the rewards of Righteousness as bestow'd for Christs sake, before any Consideration of the Covenant. 2. If not, then he has not drawn a fair Parallel between the Influence of Adams Sin, and that of Christs Obedience: For he tells us, that God for Adams sake entailed a great many Evils, Miseries, nay Death it self, upon his Posterity; there are particular evils entailed upon Individuals for the sake of Another, without any intervention of their own personal Transgressions: Ay, but there our Author will perhaps tell me, That the truth is, he means all this while, (by a secret reserve,) that Adams Posterity, when they commit Adams sin, or and other, they then render themselves obnoxious to those miseries, evils, and death it self: But then this is not to the purpose; for then 'tis not for Adams sake, but for their own: Not for that One Mans Offence, but for p. 686every mans own Offence, that judgement came upon them to condemnation: Which is not to interpret the Apostle, but dictate to him, and indite his Epistles for him. Miseries then, and a great many miseries, none knows how many, are entail'd upon Adams Posterity for his sake, without any intervention of their own sin: But now here's no Blessing, not one single Blessing, entailed upon such spiritual Posterity of Christ, that they shall receive any one the least Favour, without the Intervention of their own Obedience: And so things are where they were at first.

Secondly, I must note also, That he says, God bestows the rewards of Righteousness on those who according to the strictness and rigour of the Law are not righteous: That is, as he explains himself, they shall be justified or treated like righteous Persons:

Now, 1. If God can treat them like Righteous Persons, who are not really so; because he is so well pleased with Christs Obedience, why may not God conceive me to have done that which I have not done, as well as to be what I am not? Why not to have obeyed in Christ, to have suffer'd in Christs sufferings, as to be a righteous Person in my self, when there is no such matter? Andthus our Author has laid a block in our way, at which a well-meaning man, (though against our Authors meaning) may stumble upon the Notion of the Imputation of Christs Righteousness: It's altogether unintelligible, how God should punish me for Adams fault with Justice, if Adams fault were not some wayes or other my own; and fully as unaccouutable, How God should deal with me as righteous who am not so, for the sake of Christs Obedience, if Christs Obedience some way p. 687or other become not mine: I can easier satisfie my Reason how the Righteousness of the second Adam may make me righteous, and accepted of God; than how the unrighteousness of the first should make me a sinner; and yet Faith believes both, though it conclude stronglier for Christ, Rom. 5. 17. For if by one mans Offence Death reigned by one, much more they, &c.

2. God (he says) bestows the rewards of Righteousness on those who in strictness are not righteous, Let some enquire at his house, as they go by, What he means by the Rewards of righteousness: Is it Inherent Righteousness? Then it's Non sence▪ or worse: God gives them inherent righteousness who have not inherent Righteousness, which in sensu composito is Non-sence, and in sensu diviso not agreeable to our Authors Principles: But if he mean, the rewards of Acceptation as righteous when they are not righteous, and this for Christs sake; then either there will be some immediate proper effect found ou… for the Obedience of Christs Life and Death, or else all comes to no more than this, That God will Accept us righteous or unrighteous, that is, right or wrong.

3. I would observe also, That he supposes God to have dispensed with the Moral Law: Which is News to me, and I confess I doe not believe it, nor shall I, till I hear it confirmed: Some Errors though speculative are da…ble, and such may this prove: For if we like Fools goggled in with the Rhetorical Divinity of this Age, should Trust to Gods Abatements of his Law; and at last it should prove, that God loved Righteousness, and hated Iniquity as such, we were in a most wretched, miserable, and undone Condition, merely by Trusting to Indulgence. I demand p. 688therefore good Counter security of our Author, That God will deal with me as righteous, though I be not so in the Account of his Law; unless I be considered, as found in Christ, not having my own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is by the Faith of Christ, the righteousness of God by Faith. The Moral Law is the Image of Gods Mind, his Nature transcribed into his Law; and one jot nor tittle of this Law shall ever pass away: How much of this Law God will dispense with, what part of it, or what degrees of the violation of it, is to me unknown; and if with any, whether he may not possibly dispense with the whole by the same Reason, is more than our Authors Principles can inform me; he that may dispense with one part of it, may with another, and so of the rest: For where to stop, or put bounds to such a Dispensation as comes from the Grace of God, is very impossible to determine, unless we knew the true bounds of Gods Grace. And whereas our Author talks of the rigour of the Law, there's nothing of it rigorous in its own Nature, and the least particle of it would be impossible to be observed according to its exact demands, if it were made the Law of our Iustification: He that breaks the Law in one point, is guilty of all; and the Curse is denounced against him that confirms not all that is written therein to doe it.

4. The Difficulty remains to this day, Why God should be so pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christ, that he should allow the Disobedience of Another. And it will remain for ever a Difficulty, both why God should inflict Evils upon the Posterity of Adam for his sake, or deal with them as righteous, who in the Account of his Holy p. 689Law are not righteous, for Christs: till we understand the true Nature of the Two Covenants, the one made with Adam and all his Natural seed; the other with Christ, and all his spiritual seed; both which Seeds were to stand or fall, according as their respective Heads and Representatives, should acquit themselves in point of Obedience and Disobedience towards God, and his most holy and righteous Law.

The same liberty that he has taken, I question not but he will give, and I shall be very modest in a few Enquiries.

(1.) May we enquire, Whether what he allows of Influence to Adams Sin upon his Posterity, will satisfie the Apostles Intendment? The Apostle asserts v. 18. That by the offence of one, judgement came upon all to Condemnation: v. 19. That by one mans Offence, many were made Sinners. And there are these things considerable:

1. That Adams Sin had this Influence upon Posterity, that they were made Sinners also, foreign, Transgressors of a Law; for foreign, is foreign, to deviate from a Rule, to come short of a Mark that is set us to aim at, as Suidas observes.

2. That the Posterity of Adam were so made sinners, that they were lyable to condemnation; Iudgment came upon them to Condemnation: This I Observe, because some talk as if they were Sinners in jest; but God lets the Sons of men know, that they are obnoxious to Condemnation for the Offence of that one Man.

3. The Apostle shews how they were made sinners, and how they were liable to Condemnation; p. 690foreign; they were so by a Constitution: God did not infuse sin into them, and make them sinners Inherently; but they were made so by a Law-constitution: And it was needful that the Apostle should clear that Point, because the Vindication of Gods Iustice called for it: For how could God deal with them as sinners in respect of Condemnation, who were not first sinners in respect of Guilt? Guilt and Condemnation do Reciprocally prove each other. To assert them to be sinners, proves them liable to Condemnation; and to assert them liable to Condemnation, presupposes them to be sinners; for what is Condemnation but the evil of Punishment inflicted, for the evil of sin committed. Nor can it consist with the Righteousness of the Iudge of the whole Earth, to treat them as sinners as to Punishment, who were not first so, as to Guilt contracted: To clear therefore the Righteousness of God, that he may be Iust when he Condemns; we must understand, that the sin of Adam is one way or other made the sin of his Posterity: Several ways there are Contrived to Salve this Difficulty; some say (as was noted before) that Adams sin being Imitated by his Posterity, they become sinners, and so liable to Condemnation. A dull Contrivance, which our Author himself will not allow, who asserts, that God was so displeased with Adams Disobedience, that for his sake he Entailed many Evils upon his Posterity; but if there be nothing more but the Infection and Contagion of his Example, then it's not for Adams Sin, Fault, or Offence, that they are made sinners, but for their own: In Defiance of the Apostle, and his way of Reasoning: the very truth is, God made a Covenant with Adam, and p. 691in him with all his▪ Natural Posterity: Adam was not only the Natural Parent, but the Moral Head and Representative of all his Seed, and therefore according to this Righteous Law of God, his Offence was theirs; what he forfeited, they forfeited; what he lost, they lost; he sinned, they sinned; he came under the Condemnation, they came under it also: And this does fully satisfie the Apostles Reasoning; By one Mans offence, many were made sinners; by one Mans offence, Iudgment came upon all to Condemnation. And God has given us pregnant Instances of his Righteous procedure in Punishing the Members of Political Bodies, for the Offences of their Political Heads, 2 Sam. 24. Thus he Punisht Davids sin in Numbering the People, upon the People, who were Innocent in his Transgression personally; and to say (as some have ventured to say,) That the People had sins of their own, for which God might Righteously punish them; is to say a great Impertinent truth: For whatever sins they had of their own, for which God might justly have dealt thus with them, yet God Declares that this was the Impulsive cause of their Punishment, even the sin of David, with whom the People having a Political Union (as our Author phrases it) they made but one Body in the sight of Vengeance: And when others say, That this was but a temporal Punishment, and therefore it will not hold, that God should punish the Posterity of Adam spiritually for his Transgression, they say they know not what: For God will not be Unrighteous and Unjust, in Punishing the Sons of Men for that sin which is none of their own, in the smallest thing, from a Thread to a Shooe-latchet; and the Rule of▪ Justice p. 692in this Case, is the Law; for if the Law was back'd by a Sanction of Spiritual and Eternal threatnings, then 'tis Just with the Law-giver to Inflict the Punishment upon all that are under the Law; our Union with Adam was another, a stricter Union, than the Israelites had with David; it was Spiritual, the other Civil, External only: And therefore according to the Law of Union and Relation, though the Israelites could only suffer for Davids sin temporally, yet the Posterity of Adam may by Righteous Judgment of God, for Adams sin suffer Eternally. And now let us briefly see, whether our Author comes up to any thing of the Apostle, or no? God (says he) was so highly displeased with Adams sin, that for his sake he Entailed a great many Evils, Miseries, nay Death it self, upon his Posterity. Nay, but says the Apostle, they were constituted sinners, Iudgment and Condemnation came upon them, though they had not sinned after the Similitude of Adams transgression; the same Iudgment which in the Sanction of the Law, was threatned against Adams sin; and now to Fob and Flam off this with Evils, Miseries, and never tell us what they were, not how it could be Just with God to Entail the least Evil upon them, or touch a Hair of their Heads for the sin of another, with whom they had no privity of Interest; is to Reduce the sin of Adam as near to Nothing, as he has Reduced Christs Righteousness.

(2.) May we enquire also, VVhether that Influence which he allows to Christs Obedience, reach the Mind of the Apostle? The Apostle affirms, that By the Obedience of one, many were made Righteous; and that by the Righteousness of one, the Freegift p. 693came upon all to Iustification of Life, v. 18, 19. foreign. Many, or the many (of whom he Treats) shall be constituted Righteous. For as all that were in the first Adam, all his Natural Seed, were by vertue of a Legal Constitution, Ordinance, and Appointment of God, made sinners in the Transgression of their common Head and Representative; so all the Spiritual Seed and Posterity of Christ, (which the Father had promised to give him as the Reward of his Death and Sufferings) are by vertue of a New, a better Lawconstitution made Righteous, by the Righteousness of their spiritual Head, and Representative: And therefore the Apostle, v. 14. tells us expresly, That Adam was the Figure of Christ: He did exactly represent the Headship of Christ towards all his spiritual Posterity, in that Headship which he bore towards his own Posterity: But the Apostle has said enough in this Chapter, to stomack the Pride and Restifness of humane Wisdom; nothing more grating upon the Spirit of a Gallant, than that he should be made a sinner by the sin, or owe his Righteousness to the Righteousness of another. This is the summe of the Apostles Discourse: As the Posterity of Adam were made sinners, constituted such by a Law, and dealt with as such by God; so are the Posterity of Christ made Righteous, by such another way of Justification. But then I assume, The Posterity of Adam could not be made sinners by▪ the sin of Adam, otherwise than by the Imputation of Adams sin; therefore the Posterity of Christ could not be made Righteous otherwise in the sight of God, than by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness: The Posterity of Adam could not possibly be made sinners p. 694by Adams first sin, any other way than by charging it upon them, according to the Terms of that Law under which he and they stood; nor are the Seed of Christ capable of being made Righteous in Gods sight, by the Obedience of Christ, otherwise than by Imputing it to them, according to that New Covenant-constitution, called the Law of Faith and Righteousness, under which Christ and Believers do now stand. But if the word Imputation do Disgust our Authors delicate Ears, let him call it what he pleases, provided the Apostles Argument be satisfied, and his main Design secured; let us now see how our Author comes up to the Apostle. God (says he) was so well pleased with the Obedience and Righteousness of Christs Life, and Death, that for his sake he bestows the rewards of Righteousness on those, who according to the Rigour of the Law are not Righteous: Wherein our Author and our Apostle come not near one another by many Leagues. 1. Our Author says, God bestows the reward of Righteousness on them that are not Righteous. But our Apostle says, we are made Righteous by the Obedience of Christ, before we can be accounted Righteous by God: The Holy God will not account half Righteousness for a whole one; sinners may mock themselves, but they cannot mock God: That which the Law requires, must be had; the Apostle tells us, 'tis to be had in Christ: By his Obedience, through the Intervention of the Law-constitution of Faith and Righteousness, Believers are made Righteous. 2. Whatever is Lurking under the darkness of these Expressions, The Rewards of Righteousness; the Rigour of the Law; yet this we may be sure of, that all come to this in p. 695the Up shot: That God for Christs sake has made a New Covenant of Grace, which Pardons our past Sins and Follies, and rewards a Sincere, though Imperfect Obedience. I can compare our Authors Copia Verborum, his Variegated Equipollent Phrases and Expressions, to nothing so well as that of the Chymists, when they endeavour to bind Hermes, or in plain English, their fixing of Quicksilver; they can Model it into many accidental Forms and Shapes, and yet the Cunning versute Creature will be Mercury again, do what they can; unless some will compare it to the Youngmans Mistress in the Fable, that Brided it for a day, or so, but yet upon the sight of her old Game, put off her Personated self, and reassumed her real self again. Such Feats of Activity have we shown us, ever and anon by our Author, he can turn his words into more Shapes than Proteus; tell us of this and that, but when he comes to himself, All the Influence that Christs Obedience has upon our acceptance with God, is, that we owe such a Covenant to it as he has described to us, and Contrived for us: Tells us, That God for Christs sake has entered into a Covenant, made a Covenant; his Righteousness and Obedience have procured a Covenant; are the Meritorious cause of a Covenant; when the total Summe of all is no more than this, That God has promised to Pardon and Save us if we Believe, and Obey the Gospel, though we Obey not perfectly. So that at last, it's our own Obedience that Recommends us to God, our own Righteousness for which we are Iustified: Whereas the Apostle is Peremptory, That by the Obedience of Christ we are constituted Righteous.

p. 696His Conclusion is therefore this: That the Righteousness of Christ, is not the formal Cause of our Iustification; but the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous, and rewarded as Righteous. I perceive the Righteousness of Christs Life, and the Obedience of his Death, are like to prove something ere long: One while they Confirm and Seal, another while they Procure, and at last they Merit a Covenant: I cannot but Examine particulars, though I have often done it. 1. The Righteousness of Christ, is not the Formal cause of our Iustification. Indeed, I think it is not: Never any Man in his Wits affirmed it so: Give but us leave to call it the Material cause, or the Meritorious cause immediately and properly of Justification▪ and he shall take Formal cause, and deal with it at his pleasure. I think I have a Commission from all the Systematical Divines of Germany, the Voluminous Tigurines, and Bulky Low-Dutch, with those few that are left in England, to make a Bargain with him, Hard and Fast; That the Righteousness of Christ is not the Formal cause of our Iustification. 2. Says he, It is the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous: A Meritorious cause sounds very high, if it had an honest Meaning: But what has it Merited? Iustification? By no means: What then? Any particular Mercy, or Priviledge, or Blessing? By no means, for then it would be a proper cause of it; there's an Exact and Severe proportion betwixt the Reward and the Work, in all Merit: What is it then the Meritorious cause of? Why of a Covenant: But are we made Righteous by the Covenant? Not at all; only we are declared Righteous: p. 697But how does the Righteousness of Christs Life, and the Obedience of his Death, Merit such a Covenant at Gods Hands? Nay, That he will not tell us. God was well pleased with them, but why he should be so, is a Secret which must be reserved for the coming of Elias.

(3.) The last thing I shall Exmine, is his Exceptions against our Interpretation of the Apostle. 1. foreign, Shall▪ be made Righteous (says he) is the same with foreign, Shall be Iustified. Well, I agree to him: But then I say, the former Expression explains the way of our being Iustified; that it is by Vertue of a Gospel-Law-Constitution, or Appointment of God; who considering all Believers as one with their Redeemer, does Constitute them Just, and Righteous, (there's the Formal Cause) in the Righteousness of Christ, (there's the Material Cause of Justification) as all the Posterity of Adam are constituted Sinners, and liable to Condemnation by the Constitution of the old Law, as Represented by him their Common Head. 2. He excepts: That the Apostle tells us, ver. 17. Who they are that are Iustified by Christ, and shall Reign with him in Life; not those who are Righteous by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness to them. But I do not hear the Apostle telling me one such word, whatever he has told our Author privately by way of Cabala: I hear him saying plainly, That as by one Mans offence many were made sinners, so by one Mans Obedience many were made Righteous: And because I cannot devise how possibly one Man should be made a sinner, dealt with as a sinner, Condemned and Judged as, and for a sinner, by another mans sin, unless he be some ways or other p. 698guilty of sin; and because it is not the making of that one mans sin their own by Immitation and Example, that the Apostle speaks of, but by a constitution of a Covenant or Law: Therefore till I can find a better Term to express the Doctrine by, I shall call, Gods charging Adams sin upon his Posterity to their Condemnation, his Imputing it to them: And then because I cannot neither devise with my self, how one man should possibly be made Righteous by the Obedience of another, but that others Obedience must some way or other become his own; and because to say Christs Obedience is ours by Imitation of his Example, is to cross the Apostles paralel, and to cross the Truth, for we Imitate it but in part and very Imperfectly; therefore I shall take the Freedom also to call Gods constituting Believers righteous by the Obedience of Christ, his Imputing that Obedience to them for their Justification: provided always, that when more convenient and expressive Terms shall be found out, to satisfie the Apostle, this of Imputation be left indifferent: Well, but if not these, who are then? Why those who have received the abundance of Grace, and of the Gift of Righteousness; these are justified by Christ, these shall Reign with him in Life: It's very true, the Apostle does tell us no less: And I cannot imagine how he should more fitly describe a justified person, that others may know him, and he should know himself, than by the Fruits and Effects of Justification, such as abundance of Grace are: For whatever our Author thinks of the Apostle, he does not use to describe a thing by it self, or something equally obscure, but by that which is more known and Obvious than the thing described: and therefore p. 699the Apostle seems not to describe Justification, but a justified Person by Sanctification: They that have received abundance of Grace, and the Gift of Righteousness, these are justified Persons; not that Justification is from any Inherent work, but that the justified Person is only known to himself to be such, by an Inherent work, and to others by the fruits of it.

This answer, I will deal truly with my Reader, came next to hand, I had it from our Author, and I presumed he would accept a bad one of his own, before a better of another mans: The Apostle (says he) tells who those are that are thus justified by Christ; Nay then, thought I, that will kill no body; for a justified Person may be described by his Qualifications, and yet his Righteousness, wherein he stands accepted before God, not consist in those Qualifications: But to deal plainly with him, I do humbly conceive, that the Apostle describes an Imputed Righteousness by that expression; They which receive the abundance of Grace, and the Gift of Righteousness: foreign It was the over-flowing and Redundancy of Divine Love, to accept a Surety to fulfill all Righteousness, and Suffer for us; and abundance of Grace too, to let us in by Faith into the Righteousness of Christ's Life, and the Sacrifice of Christs Death: God might have held us close, and tyed us up to the Terms of the Old Covenant, and righteously have exacted of us a Personal compleat Obedience to every jot and tittle of the Law, as the Condition of Justification; but though he has not abated of his Law, yet he has admitted a Surety, called therefore the Surety of the Covenant; not only because p. 700he has undertaken for God, but for us also; for a Mediator is not of one, Gal. 3. 19. And our receiving this abundance of Grace, is not the Receiving of inherent Grace into us, but our accepting by Faith this New Gospel-Law or Constitution of God, with the whole Man, closing with this gracious way of Justifying a Believer by Christ.

But here our Author unhappily crosses me the way with one of his id est's. That is (says he) Those who by the Gospel of Christ, which is called Grace, the abundant Grace of God, are made Holy and Righteous. To which I say as I have sometimes said, That the Gospel (as he describes it) is not the Grace of God, but a real Doctrine of Justification by Works blanch'd a little to make it vendible. 2. The Gospel as it is a Revelation of Grace, is not the whole of the Grace of God; the Gospel reveals more Grace to be in God, in Christ, in the Holy Spirit for us, than the Revelation of it: There is an Operation of Grace upon us, a Constitution of Grace with us, as well as a Revelation of Grace to us; but this he will grant us, That Righteousness is called a Gift: so far good. But is it really a gift, or onelyonly called so; as Christs is called a Redeemer, called a High-Priest, called a Sacrifice? I doubt this will prove nothing but Phraseology at last: He answers, 1. Negatively: It's called a gift, because it is not owing solely to Humane Endeavours. Not solely? But then it may be almost, and very near altogether owing to Humane Endeavours: The Grace of God may come in for a share, though a poor pitiful share: as he would not exclude the Righteousness of Christ wholly, totally, from having any concernment in our Iustification; so out of his generosity p. 701he will not shut out Grace wholly, from interposing in our Sanctification. Haerebit in aliquâ saltem parte: Well, commend me to the memory of honest I. G. who, though a high trotting Arminian, would allow Free-grace ninety nine parts in the Conversion of a sinner, provided always, and upon Condition nevertheless, that Free-will might have one in a hundred: But what a Company of Rigid Bigots are these Calvinists, that will not abate one ace, not forgo a single Unite in a Hundred? but they pretend they have no Commission to compound between Freegrace, and Free-will, and that God will not put his Right to arbitration: and indeed it were hazardous, for what sad terms had our Author made for the Rich effectual Grace of God, had the determination been put into his hands? Righteousness is not owing solely to Humane endeavours: Natural strength, freewill, humane ability, shall have ninety nine parts in the Dividend; and Grace that deserves all, must be content with one single lot, and perhaps a smaller pittance. And now what if this will not denominate it a gift? just so much as you add to these Humane Endeavours, you substract from free-grace; and whether that little, that very little concern, that grace has in this work, shall denominate it a Gift; or that much, that very much which Humane Endeavours have in it, No gift; must stand to the Courtesie of the Criticks, and great Masters of Language. 2. Affirmatively: It is wrought in us (says he) by supernatural means, by those powerful arguments and motives, and Divine assistances, which God in infinite Love hath afforded the World by Iesus Christ. I cannot express the transport of my mind at the first sound of these words; supernatural means, powerful p. 702arguments, Divine assistances; I began to suspect our Author was turn'd Calvinist, as he suspected Dr. Owen was turned Arminian, and with equal Reason; for I presently found my Errour. The word Grace has a Considerable Name, and carries a good repute in the Scriptures, and therefore our Author will behave himself as decently towards it, as he can afford. But what is the meaning of these supernatural means? Why, to speak liquidly, Means of Supernatural Revelation at best, but of no supernatural Operation: Some arguments suggested, which the light of Nature could not discover; and some institutions, which depend meerly on the will and pleasure of God: for his powerful arguments, and Divine assistances, they are such Motives as being given by God externally, are left to the self-determining power of that great Idol, Free will: For when all is done, 'tis the man who Converts himself: but this, and a great deal more, will not satisfie the claim of effectual Grace in the Conversion of a Soul to God: Who by the same power whereby Christ was raised from the dead, works Faith in the Soul, Eph. 1. 19; 20. Who works in us both to will and to do, of his own good pleasure, Phil. 2. 13. Who gives us the new Heart, and causes us to walk in his Statutes, Ezek. 36. 26. Who takes away the resistibility of the Soul, the stony heart, and Circumcises the Hearts of his People to Love the Lord their God with all their heart, Deut. 30. 6. But with such Cantings did Pelagius cover his abominations, talking of ineffable grace, wonderful grace, when all was but Revelation, or Grace the Name, suborned to destroy Free and effectual Grace the thing it self.

After all these windings and turnings, our Author p. 703will give us a fair account, How we may be said to b… made Righteous by the Righteousness of Christ: I hope it shall be an honest account, as well as a fair one, and then it's welcome; but whose hopes could have been so vain as to flatter him, he should live to see an account, and a fair account too, given by our Author, of such a Paradox? But we attend; Not that his Actual Obedience is reckoned as done by us, which is impossible. There's the Negative: And this seems to go a great way in the Account, How we may be said to be made Righteous by anothers Righteousness? Because it's impossible we should be righteous by anothers righteousness: But why is this so impossible? There's no more impossibility in it, than that Adams Disobedience should be reckoned as mine; which if it be not, let men shift, and evade, with all their cunning, they shall never be able to justifie Gods procedure with his Posterity, in entailing evils, many evils, and Death it self upon them, for Adams sake, if they be not guilty of the Crime. Suppose we had been in Adams place, had committed his sin, eaten the forbidden Fruit, in his stead, in our own Persons, what had the penalty been in our Authors Judgment, but evils, a great many evils, Death it self? And what in the Apostles account but Iudgment unto Condemnation? If then the penalty of sin may be inflicted, there's a necessity that the guilt of the sin be imputed: It's impossible indeed, that we should Personally have committed Adams sin, or performed that very Obedience which Christ perfor med, but not impossible (according to the Constitution of the Law of the two Covenants, made with the first and second Adam) that the Disobedience of the one, or Obedience of the other, should be p. 704…eckoned as committed, or performed by us: And when the Apostle shall expressely tell us, That by one mans Offence we are made Sinners; Death is passed upon us, judgement come upon all to condemnation; and therefore, and in the same way, by the Obedience of one, many are made righteous; I shall see very good Reason before I quit my Faith, and renounce the Apostle, upon an idle Tale of I know not what impossibilities.

Secondly, Affirmatively: Because we are made righteous both in a proper, and a Forensick sence, by the Gospel Covenant, which is wholly owing to the Grace of God, and to the Merits and Righteousness of Christ. I see now how hard it is to get our Authors Mind out of him: P. 320. The Covenant of Grace was then Owing to the Sacrifice of Christs Death, and the Righteousness of his Life: And p. 334. God for Christs sake made a New Covenant of Grace: But now it's Wholly owing to the Grace of God, and the Merits and Righteousness of Christ: So that,

1. If the Grace of God, and the Righteousness of Christ, be Con-causes of the Covenant, and yet their proper concerns are not distinctly meted and bounded out; he may allow as small a share to the Righteousness of Chhrist in procuring the Covenant, as he allows the Power of God in Conversion: Righteousness is not owing solely to Humane Endeavours; well, it may not be wholly and solely owing, and yet within a very small trifle it may be wholly and solely owing to them; so here: This Covenant is wholly owing to Gods Grace, and the Merits and Righteousness of Christ, but how small a little singer p. 705Christ may have in it, is a Secret, and till an admeasurement be made, will be so.

2. This Covenant is wholly owing to the Grace of God, &c. Now what he understands by the Grace of God, he has often told us: Pag. 322. The Grace of God is the Gospel: And pag. 334. The Gospel is the Grace, and abundant Grace of God: And the summe of this Gospel in words at length, and not in Figures, is, A Promise of Pardon and Life to them that believe, and obey the Gospel; and then the short and long of this Business is, That the Covenant is owing to the Covenant, or the Gospel is owing to the Gospel, or the Grace of God is owing to the Grace of God.

3. The Grace of God, and the Merits of Christ are here assigned as Con-causes of this Covenant; Now if it be of Merit, how is it of Grace? if of Grace, how is it of Merit? I can easily understand how Christ should merit Pardon and Life for me, and yet that this should be of mere Grace from God, to admit anothers Merits to procure those Blessings for me, which I cannot procure to my self: But I acknowledge my own weakness, I cannot understand, How this Covenant of his should be owing both to Merit, and Free-grace; that is, How God should make a Promise to pardon freely, without any Consideration of making the Promise, and yet Christ should merit it at Gods hands, which implies a valuable consideration. But thus it must be, when men to save the Lives of two or three sorry Crotchets, will forsake the Conduct of the Scriptures, and lean to their own Understandings; for the Scripture assures us, that Free-grace is the only Foundation of the Covenant of Grace, and that Christ himself p. 706is the Gift of God, Joh. 4. 10. who by the Righteousness of his Life, the Sacrifice of his Death, the Power and Prevalency of his Intercession, admits us into all the Grace, and Mercy, and Benefits of that Covenant, with Security to Gods Honour, and the Repute of all his Attributes. But▪

4. This is no fair or tolerable Account, How we may be said to be made righteous by the righteousness of Christ, because the Covenant is owing to his Righteousness, (if it had been owing to it;) for, as fair an Account may be given, How we may be said to be made righteous by the Virgin Mary. If we may be said to be made righteous by any thing, to which that thing is owing by which we are really made righteous, then we may be said to be made righteous by the Virgin Mary: We are properly made righteous (according to our Author) by our own Obedience; that this Obedience makes us so, is owing to the Covenant; that Covenant is owing to the Obedience of Christ; his Obedience is owing to his Nativity; his Nativity to his Mother; and that may be run up in the Genealogical Scale as high as Adam; and thus at this rate, we may be said to be justified by Adam. And for this he has wisely made a reserve: A fair Account how we may be said; that's All. Not that we are so, but that we may be said to be so; and the Mystery of it lyes here. The Scripture has said, that we are made righteous by Christs Obedience; and we take it for granted, that the Scripture had not said it, unless it had been really true: but there are some, who doe not believe it to be really true; and therefore they must set their wits awork, to find out how it may possibly be said to be true, and yet not really be so; that so they p. 707may neither throw the Lye directly in the face of the Apostles, nor yet be compelled to wave their own Unbelief.

But it seems there is a two-fold sence in which we may be said to be made righteous by the GospelCovenant.

1. Sect. A Proper Sence; which is this. The great Arguments, and Motives, and powerfull Assistances of the Gospel, form our Minds to the love and practice of Holiness, and so make us inherently righteous. What needed all this pother and stir to no purpose? The Righteousness of Christ contributes something, (though he cannot tell what) to the Gospel-Covenant; this Gospel-Covenant contains, Promises and Duties, or Motives, Arguments, Reasons to Obedience; now when these Promises prevail with us to love and practise those Duties, to perform that Obedience, then we become inherently righteous in a proper sence; and so that none may take it ill, they shall have liberty to say, that we are made righteous by the righteousness of Christ: His Righteousness or Obedience was an excellent Pattern of, a strong Motive to our being righteous. Two things I shall oppose to this.

(1.) That to be made inherently righteous, is not the proper sence of being made righteous: This was indeed the proper sence of being Righteous under the Covenant of Works; when a perfect, exact, compleat inherent Holiness, was the Matter of Justification before God; and when it was attainable; and it shall be once more the proper sence of being made righteous in Heaven, where the spirits of just men are made perfectly perfect; but to us, in the way, it's not the proper sence of being made righteous, but p. 708a Figurative sence, as we may call an Aethiopian white, because his teeth are so; and it must be a stretching Synechdoche that will denominate a Christian Righteous by inherent Righteousness, if he shall compare the Attainments of a Pilgrim with the perfect Law of God; but the proper sence of being made righteous, is that of the Apostle, Rom. 5. 20. By the Obedience of one Man many shall be made righteous; made so perfectly and compleatly by the Constitution of the Law of Righteousness and Faith: for thus we are compleat in Christ, Coloss. 2. 10. through whom we are presented to God, foreign; unblameable, and unreproveable in Gods sight: so pure, that there is not a spot or blemish to be found in a Believer in the sight of God himself; which upon the Account of inherent Righteousness, is impossible. Inherent Righteousness is properly Righteousness (for so much as there is of it,) but it is so imperfect, that it will not denominate any man properly righteous in the sight of God.

(2) There is another thing which mightily discomposes this kind of Argumentation: We may be said to be made righteous by the Righteousness of Christ in a proper sence. Why so? Oh! Because the Righteousness of Christ is one of those great Arguments of the Gospel that forms our Minds to the Love and practice of Holiness, and so makes us inherently righteous. Which is this; The Righteousness of Christ, and our Righteousness, hang so loosely and contingently together, that it seems very absurd, to ascribe the Effect of the latter to the former: If indeed the Righteousness of Christ did properly, necessarily, and infallibly produce an inherent Righteousness in us, it p. 709were warrantable to say, we were made righteous by it; but when the Connexion is so accidental, so uncertain, that the Effect depends upon our own Free-will (as in the New Theology it does) we cannot properly be said to be made righteous in this sence by his Righteousness: For when all these Arguments and Motives have done their best, That which does the work, is, Free-will and Humane Endeavour; and therefore properly are we said to be made Righteous by them.

2. Sect. A Forensick sence; which is this. The Grace of the Gospel accepts and rewards that sincere and Evangelical Obedience, which according to the Rigour and Severity of the Law, could deserve no reward. This Forensick, is a hard word; and if I might presume to soften it a little with Interpretation, it should be thus: A Forensick sence of Justification, is a sence borrowed from Courts of Judicature, where the Judge absolving or acquitting a Prisoner of those Crimes wherewith he stood charged, does not doe it by making him innocent or honest, by infusing into him the Habits of Vertue; but onelyonly declares, That according to the Evidence he is found Innocent, Righteous, Just, and therefore, as the Law acquits him, so the Judge as the Minister of the Law declares him to be acquitted. Now the Question is, Whether our Author has given us a true Forensick sence of Iustification, or no? His Sence is this: The Grace of the Gospel accepts, and rewards that sincere and Evangelical Obedience, which according to the Severity and Rigour of the Law, deserves no reward: which seems to me so far from a Forensick sence, that it's the Forensick Non-sence of Justification; for does a p. 710Judge pronounce and declare him righteous, whom the Law says, is unrighteous? Can he justifie him whom the Law condemns? The Judge sits not there as a good Natur'd Man, with a Chancery of Charity in his own breast, but as a Righteous Governour, to render to every man according to his works, weighed in the Ballance of that Law by which he is to judge: And shall we dare to fancy, that the Grace of the Gospel will pronounce that Man righteous, reward that Man as righteous, who is not righteous by the Law of God, if that be the Law by which he must be Condemned or Acquitted? I will grant, that in a Criminal Cause, which by the Law deserves Bodily Punishment, if the Constitution of the Law will Allow it, the Judge may lay the Punishment of the Guilty Person upon another who will freely undergoe it, or that which is equivalent in the eye of the Law to it; and acquit him, that in the first Consideration of the Law was not innocent: Let us apply it. God is the righteous Iudge of all the World, and by his Eternal Holy Law he will Judge the Sons of Men; so true is God to his own Law, that he will not acquit and justifie him whom the Law condemns, nor Condemn him whom his Law Acquits, nor is it possible he should: To say the Sinner is righteous by the Verdict of his Law, when by the Verdict of the Law he is not righteous, is not consistent with the Veracity of that God who cannot lye: But there is another Law, the Law of Righteousnesse and Faith, which Sovereign Grace has set up, and this admits the satisfaction of Another, admits a Sacrifice, a Surety, even Jesus Christ the righteous, whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood, to p. 711declare his Righteousness, that he may be just, and the Iustifier of him that believes in Iesus: If now according to the Terms of this New Law of Grace, the Righteousness and Sufferings of this Jesus may be accepted for the Delinquents, then will there a genuine sence of a Forensick Iustification be found out. Yet let us examine these things further:

[1] The Grace of the Gospel (says he) accepts and rewards that sincere Obedience. Let it be supposed he means the Grace of God, declared in the Gospel; yet this is so far from being Grace, that it is not good Moral Vertue: Is that Grace, or something that deserves Another Name, to declare an Offender to be righteous when he is not so? to pronounce he has kept the Law, when he has broken it? and yet thus must the Grace of the Gospel speak, if it declares him righteous in a Forensick sence, who is a Violator of the Law, and yet has no Substitute to keep it for him: Here is some Provision made for an Imaginary Grace, to the destruction of real Iustice; whereas, in the true Covenant of Grace there is a blessed Accord of all Gods Attributes, Mercy and Truth have met together, Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other.

[2] If it be the Grace of God, or the Gospel, that accepts this sincere Obedience, then how do we owe this to the Righteousness of Christ? what Influence has that upon God, to move him to accept and reward that sincere, yet imperfect Obedience, which his Law will not accept? This is the thing that remains in the Clouds still, and upon our Authors Hypothesis must lodge there Eternally.

[3] Our Author fancies a Rigour and Severity p. 712in the Law; now what that should be, is not easily conceivable: Is it any of the Ten Commandements which is so rigorous above the rest? which is it? or how many are there of them? and where has God dispensed with them, or it? or what part of the Law is it, the external or the internal part, wherein the Rigour of the Law lies? or is it no certain thing, but left to Discretion? such as hath a latitude, in some greater, in some less? or rather, is not this Rigour of the Law (as 'tis here applyed) a great Name of Blasphemy, and reproach against the Law, and therein the Law-giver, all whose Commands, and every part and parcel thereof, are holy, just, and good? And in a word, if God can dispence with his Law, and indulge the Violation of it, what Reason can be given, why he may not dispense with all the rest? Why so he may, if our Author say true, p. 45. That part of Justice which consists in Punishing Offenders, was alwayes look'd on as an Instrument of Government, and therefore the exacting, or remitting Punishment, was referred to the Wisdom of Governours, who might Spare or Punish as they saw Reason, without being unjust in either. And therefore he concludes, There was no Necessity for such a Sacrifice as the Death of Christ, for the Expiation of Sin.

He is now drawing his Conclusion, and I hope will draw to a Conclusion. So that our Righteousness is wholly owing to the Righteousness of Christ. I am in hope it will be owing to something before he has done. A little before, it was owing (not solely indeed, but almost) to humane Endeavours, and now the Debt is transferred, wholly to the Righteousness p. 713of Christ. And yet he flies higher in his Complements, to the Righteousness of Christ: Which (says he) in this sence may be said to be Imputed to us, because without this Covenant which is founded on the Righteousness of Christ, the best man Living could lay no claim to Righteousness or future Glory. And is it come to this? Is there a sence, wherein the Righteousness of Christ may be said to be Imputed to us? And must all men be Reviled and Persecuted with Scurrility, because they cannot Jump just into his Sence? And yet the sence of this way of Imputation is Invisible: VVas it not possible for God to pardon without respect to Christ? O yes! Could he not reward sincere Obedience without regard to Christ? O yes! Could he not accept him that walkt uprightly before him, without any consideration had of Christs Righteousness? Oh yes! Could not God have promised to do all this, as well as do it without a promise? No doubt of that: VVhy then might not the best man Living lay claim to that which God promised, upon performance of the condition of which he promised it? Yes, indeed he might, had God promised it; but before the appearance of Christ in the Flesh, he made no such promise: VVell then, all we have got by the Bargain is a promise that God will do that now, which he always would have done, and did do (though not promise that he would do) before the appearance of Christ, and if he never had appeared. If then this be the only sence in which Christs Righteousness may be said to be imputed to us; it may be said to be imputed in no sence at all; for it gives us no right upon which we may make a claim, only an evidence of right, whereby we may lay claim to Righteousness p. 714and future Glory: But why might not the best man living lay claim to Righteousness and future Glory? Why, he supposes there was no such Covenant in the World before the appearance of Christ; and he supposes that this Covenant was founded upon the Obedience, and Sacrifice of Christ. Here must needs be a great mistake.

1. Upon his own Principles. For pag. 252. he asserts, That Natural Religion is founded upon Natural Demonstrations, that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him: And that upon this Foundation, Abel and Enoch, proceeded in their serving of God, pag. 253. And that they pleased God by their Obedience, the Apostle assures us, Heb. 11. 4, 5. And that Abel obtained witness that he was Righteous: And that Enoch before his Translation had this Testimony, that he pleased God. Now that which God Spoke by Natural Demonstration, to that, upon their diligent seeking of Him, they might lay claim; but God Spoke by Natural Demonstration, that he was a Rewarder of them that diligently seek Him, therefore to that Reward they might lay claim: Yes, no doubt, a claim to that Reward, But what was that? A meer Temporal transitory Reward. And was that all the Reward that righteous Abel was to have for his Sacrifice, for his serving of God? Doubtless, for he was presently Murder'd for it. And was that all the reward that holy Enoch might claim? Doubtless, for Good took him, Ttranslated him to a better Life, for before his Translation, he received this Testimony that he pleased God.

2. There's a mistake upon better Principles: That which God Spoke by Revelation, to that they p. 715might lay claim; but God Spoke to Abraham by Revelation, that upon his walking uprightly before him, He would be his God; therefore Abraham upon his walking uprightly before God, might lay claim to it, that God should be his God. Ay, (says our Author) Be his God: No doubt of …: But what does that signifie? This was one of the great difficulties that lay in his way, to believe that Abraham was justified by Christ. For then, We must be well assured, that the Blessings promised to Abraham were Spiritual Blessings, pardon of Sin, and Eternal Life: And therefore this is Ignoratio Elenchi: But I profess my Name on the other side. And that the Promise that God would be Abrahams God, comprehended all that ever God Promised, or could promise to any of the Sons of Men: When God could Swear by no greater, he Swore by Himself; and when he could promise no thing greater, he promised Himself: I will be thy God, is the Abstract and Epitome of the whole Covenant of Grace: 'Tis that Gold in the Lump, which was afterwards beaten out into greater breadth, but still of the same weight. Summe up all the particular Promises in the Gospel, and the total Summe is no more than this, I will be thy God. And therefore when the Apostle gives us the Covenant of Grace, Heb. 8. 10, 11, 12. He describes it thus, I will be their God, and they shall be my People: That he will Write his Laws in their Hearts, that he will pardon their Iniquities, are some of the particulars included in that comprehensive Promise, I will be their God.

3. That which the Saints guided by the Infallible Spirit laid claim to, that they might justly lay claim to; but the Saints guided by the Infallible Spirit, p. 716laid claim to an Eternal Reward, therefore to that Reward they might justly lay claim, Psal. 73. 24. Thou shalt guide me with thy Counsel, (here below in my Passage and Pilgrimage) and afterwards (when I have run my Race, and finisht my Course) receive me to Glory.

The Epilogue to the whole is this: The Righteousness of Christ is our Righteousness, when we speak of the Foundation of the Covenant, by which we are accepted; but if we speak of the Termes of the Covenant, then we must have a Righteousness of our own: The Righteousness of Christ will not serve the turn; Christs Righteousness and our own are both necessary to Salvation: The first as the Foundation of the Covenant, the other as the Condition of it.

Two things are here asserted: First, that Christs Righteousness is the Foundation of the Covenant: Secondly, that our Righteousness is the Condition of the Covenant. A brief Examination of which things, shall ease the Reader of any further attendance upon these Discourses.

[1.] The Righteousness of Christ is the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace: Let us hear his Proofs; not a word: Peracta est haec Fabula Spectatores valete & plaudite. We have heard of Procuring, Meriting, Founding a Covenant, but not a syllable of Evidence: Methinks I see the Reader filled with shame and wonder; wonder, that he who could so pleasantly scoff at the Scripture Expressions of building upon Christ as on a Foundation, p. 105. and so merrily inveigh against Dr. Owen for asserting Christ to be the only Foundation of our Communion with God, should now so zealously talk for p. 717Christs being the Foundation of the Covenant; and shame, that after such expectations of Proof, he should find himself bilk'd in the stock. That the Reader may not wholly therefore lose his pains, I shall entertain him with my own apprehensions in this matter.

The Covenant of Grace may be considered either in i…'s Constitution, or Execution: The Constitution of the Covenant is Gods firm and unchangeable purpose of saving his Elect, to the praise of his glorious Grace: For the word Covenant, which in the English Notion has seduced our Understandings, in the Hebrew foreign and the Greek foreign, by which the Spirit of God expresses those things to us, signifie a disposition, appointment, or ordering of Matters; whether there be restipulation or no: Thus the fixed purpose, the determinate Counsel of God in Scripture is called a Covenant, though the things about which that foreign, or Counsel of God is conversant be not capable of re-promising any thing, and have onelyonly an Obediental Capacity in them answering the absolute extraordinary Power of God. Thus Ier. 33. 20. If you can break my Covenant of the day, and my Covenant of the night, that there should not be day and night in their Season, ver. 25. Thus saith the Lord, If my Covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the Ordinances of Heaven; where Gods fixed Law concerning the Succession of Day and Night to the period of all time, is called his Covenant; and which is still more to our purpose, by the stability of this grand Law of Nature, he is pleased to instruct us in the fixedness of his better Covenant, that of Grace, ver. 21. Then may also my Covenant be broken with David p. 719my Servant, ver. 26. Then will I cast away the Seed of Jacob, and David my Servant. This purpose of God, this disposition of Grace is immutable, Rom. 9. 11. That the purpose of God according to Election might stand. The Execution of this fixed Constitution follows: which is Gods wise and gracious managing of all things for the accomplishment of that glorious design, which he had in the prospect of his Eternal Counsel, which he steddily and regularly pursues through all the vicissitudes that his mutable Creature was obnoxious to, whilst man stood, God pursued his Counsel in giving him a Holy Law to guide him, Seconded and back'd with promises and threatnings; when Man with drew from God, yet God could not deny himself, but devolves this great Affair into the hand of a Mediator, who with equal readiness and satisfaction in that Seed that should be given him as the purchase of his undertaking, addresses himself to this glorious work of Recovering them back again to God; and when the fulness of time was come, took upon him our Nature, partook of our Flesh and Blood, because the Children whom God had committed to him were partakers of it: This Redeeming Mediator undertakes with God as a Righteous Iudge, that he may not lose the glory of any of his Attributes, and unto God as a Father, that he shall not lose any of the Children that he had given him; and therefore he becomes a Priest, a Sacrifice; a price of Ransom, a Curse, to satisfie the Judge and his Law; and a Prophet and King to recover us Actually in our state to God. Thus is he the onelyonly Foundation, 1 Cor. 3. 12. The Foundation, not of the Constitution, but of the Execution of the Covenant.

p. 7181. On Gods part; whatever grace and mercy was in his eternal purpose, that is given out to us by Jesus Christ: The Promises are made by free-grace as their Reason, but made good by Jesus Christ, as the means of procuring the promised Mercy, which had been forfeited; for all the promises of God in him are yea, and Amen, 2 Cor. 1. 20. He accepts us in the beloved, Eph. 1. 6. Forgives us through him, ver. 7. Iustifies us by Christ, Rom. 3. 24. Sanctifies, and saves us by Christ, Tit. 3. 4, 5, 6. And,

2. On our part; through him we approach to God, John 14. 6. Heb. 10. 19, 20. By him we believe in God, 1 Pet. 1. 21. He is our hope of Glory, Col. 1. 27. He is the ground of our Faith, the Foundation upon which our Souls are laid, 1 Pet. 2. 5. To whom coming as to a living stone, we also as lively stones are built up a Spiritual house: Thus is he the Foundation of conveying all the blessings of the Covenant to us, Eph. 1. God blesseth us with all Spiritual blessings in Christ: but that Christ is the Foundation of the Covenant it self, that I crave leave to deny, and to render the Reasons of my denial.

1. Sect. Christ cannot be the Foundation of the Covenant, because Christ himself is promised in the Covenant, as the great Comprehensive Blessing of the Covenant, Isa. 49. 8, 9. I will give thee for a Covenant, that thou maist say to the Prisoners, go forth, to them that are in darkness, shew your selves. Whence it's evident, first, that the free-love of the Father is the Reason of his giving his Son to be our Deliverer; Secondly, that Christ is the great undertaker to Execute that Counsel of God in our actual p. 720Deliverance, Luke 1. 68. Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who hath Visited, and Redeemed his People, and hath raised up a Horn of Salvation in the House of his Servant David, as he spake by the mouth of his Holy Prophets which have been since the world began,—ver. 72. To perform the Mercy promised to our Fathers, and to remember his holy Covenant, the Oath which he sware to our Father Abraham; where the firm Oath and Covenant of God to Redeem his People is assigned as the Reason of his giving Christ to be a Redeemer. The places are too many to be insisted on that confirm this Truth. Iohn 3. 16. 1 Iohn 4. 9, 10.

2. Sect. Free grace is given as the true Reason of the Covenant of Grace, Heb. 8. 8. For finding fault with them, he saith, behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a New Covenant with the House of Israel, &c. They were a faulty, an undeserving, an ill-deserving People, yet Free grace will make a Covenant with them: Nor is there any opposition between Free-grace and Christs Merits in this Case: if we consider that Free-grace is the Original Reason of Gods designation, and purpose to bestow the good things of the Covenant; and the Righteousness of Christs Life, and the Sacrifice of his Death the way of recovering these Mercies, which by sin had been forfeited and lost.

3. Sect. The Scriptures give us no intimation that Christ is the Foundation of Gods making this Covenant, or the Original Reason of Gods design to bestow the Mercies of the Covenant, though it abounds with Testimonies that Christ is the way of procuring p. 721for us, and conveying to us these intended mercies; and in those things which depend upon mere good pleasure, Revelation must be our onelyonly guide: In this case we may conclude Negatively, Non credimus quia non legimus: And we may shrewdly conjecture that there is no pretence from Scripture for this Figment of our Authors, because it's the Foundation of all his mistakes, and yet he has not so much as attempted the perverting of one Scripture to give colour to it, which may be reckoned amongst the Admiranda Nili.

[2.] His other Assertion is this, Our own Righteousness is the condition of the Covenant, which with his former Assertion is obtruded upon us without proof, and therefore I suppose he intends they must both be maintained at the Charges of the Parish: Now,

1, It is agreed, for ought I know, that an inherent righteousness is a necessary condition of eternal Salvation, Heb. 12. 14. Without Holiness no man shall see God. It is a Condition in the Covenant, though not of the Covenant; such a Condition, as is due to every Person in a Covenant-state; it doth necessarily attend that state, though it be not allowed as antecedent to a Covenant-state.

2. As to the Constitution of the Covenant in Gods purpose and Counsel, I know no condition at all. They that talk of the right use of free-will, future Faith, or good works fore-seen as the Reason of that purpose, talk without book, and onelyonly intimate what a rare Covenant they would have made for us, had they had the modelling, and Contrivance of it; like him that boasted, that if he had stood by God when he formed Man, he could have told him, how to have p. 722made him more commodiously, Rom. 9. 11. The Children being not yet born, neither having done any good, or evil. Where those words [neither having done any good, or evil,] must necessarily exclude all respect to the future good or evil they should do, (as the Reason of the purpose of God according to Election:) because it's evident by the form of speech. That they deny something more concerning the Children, than the former words, [being not yet born] and yet even they exclude, Having done good or evil Actually.

3. The Question then is, whether An inherent Righteousness be the Condition required of us and in us, antecedent to our first Covenant-state? And I durst leave this Matter to be determined by the Church of England, if our Author would do so too: Art. 17. Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby before the Foundation of the World was laid, he hath constantly decreed by his Counsel secret to us, to deliver from Curse and Damnation, those whom he hath chosen out of Mankind in Christ, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting Salvation; whence we are taught,

1. That Election is not of all Mankind, but of some out of Mankind.

2. That this purpose of God was from everlasting.

3. That it is a fixed constant decree.

4. That the Design of it is to deliver those chosen out of Mankind, from the curse, under which Mankind was fallen: and to bring them to everlasting Salvation.

5. That the Reason of this eternal Election was his own counsel.

p. 7236. That the Execution of this Decree is in and by Iesus Christ; and the manner of it follows. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit, be called according to the purpose of God; working in due season by his Spirit. They through Grace obey the calling, they be justified freely, they be made the Sons of God by Adoption, they be made like the Image of his onelyonly begotten Son, they walk Religiously in good works, and at length by Gods mercy, they attain everlasting felicity. Whence we are Instructed,

1. That the calling of the Elect to a Covenantstate is from Grace as the reason, and by Grace as it's efficient.

2. Their obeying that call of God is by Grace.

3. Good works necessarily follow effectual calling: See also Art. 10. 12, 13.

4. Religious walking with God in good works is a necessary condition of eternal Felicity.

5. That there is such a firm connexion in this golden chain of Salvation, that no one linck can possibly be broken: They are Elected freely, called effectually, justified freely, Adopted graciously, Sanctified gradually, walk Religiously, and at length by the mercy of God are saved eternally, which the Apostle gives us more concisely, Rom. 8. 30. Moreover whom he did Predestinate, them he a so called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also Glorified: I conclude then that our own righteousness is not the condition of the Covenant of Grace, neither of the designment of the Father, nor the procurement of the Son, nor of the effectual Operation of the Holy Spirit, nor of our Covenant-state, nor of our Covenant-right, nor of p. 724the first Covenant-mercy; but of many after-mercies, and of Eternal Salvation it is the condition.

1. Sect. That is not the Condition of the Covenant required of us on our part, which God promises to work in us on His part; but God has promised to work in us Inherent-righteousness, both Root and Fruit, Ezek. 36. 26, 27. A new Heart also will I give you, and I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my Statutes, and ye shall keep my Iudgments, and do them.

2. Sect. That which God in Covenant bestows, cannot be the Condition of a Covenant-state, but God in Covenant bestows the new Heart, for new Obedience, Deut. 30. 6. The Lord thy God will Circumcise thy Heart, to love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul.

3. Sect. That which presupposes other Covenantmercies antecedent to it, cannot be the condition of the first Covenant-Blessing, and therefore not the condition of a Covenant-state: but our own righteousness presupposes other Covenant-blessings antecedent to it; Ezek. 36. 26. I will take away the Heart of stone out of your Flesh, and give you an Heart of Flesh: the Natural Heart must be Circumcised, the hard heart removed, a soft heart bestowed before we can perform new Obedience, out of which our own righteousness results. When therefore our Author says, That Christs righteousness and our own are both necessary to Salvation: He says true, and (which is necessary to all Truth) that which overthrows his main design. For if Christs righteousness be necessary to our Salvation, (not onelyonly to the promise p. 725of it) then no Salvation can be had without that righteousness: but if it be onelyonly necessary to a promise of that Salvation, then it is not necessary to Salvation; for Salvation (according to his Principles) has been obtained without a promise of Salvation, (otherwise the Patriarchs before Christ could not be eternally saved, whom he supposes to have had no such promise) and so it may still; for Obedience performed will save, though it want that great promise for it's encouragement. And whereas he says, That Christs Righteousness is the Foundation, but not the Condition of the Covenant; what policy there may be in using the Metaphor of a Foundation I cannot tell; but this I know: A Foundation is a necessary Condition to the superstructure raised upon it.

I have now attended him through all the Labyrinths of this tedious Discourse, whence the Reader will learn at least how impossible it is for Error to be Consonant to it self: As the two Milstones grind one another, as well as the grain; and as the extreme Vices oppose each other as well as the intermediate vertue that lies between them: So have all Errors this fate (and 'tis the best quality they are guilty of) that they Duel one another with the same heat that they oppose the Truth. The Remainder of his Book is so full of falshoods in matter of fact, reproaches of the Truth, and immerited bitterness against the Living, and the Dead, that I could not perswade my self to give the Reader any further trouble with them at present; but a small invitation will draw out the second Part: In the mean time I do solemnly protest, that as I have no Personal Quarrel with this Gentleman, so I have not willingly wronged his Discourse in the smallest instance: The worst I wish p. 726him is, that he may seasonably repent of his injurious dealing with the Scriptures, and his unworthy treatment of those Persons who have deserved well of Religion, and the Common-wealth of Learning, and not ill of himself: I cannot deny but that his provoking way of writing, his unjust censures of the Innocent, and above all, his Drolling faculty, exercised upon sacred things, have sometimes tempted me to a return, not so agreeable to my Natural inclinations. I hope the Reader will consider not onelyonly how, but what I have written; nor onelyonly what, but upon what provocations it has been written: Let Cause be compared with Cause, the moments of Reasons with Reasons; let the little Vagaries, and impertinces be brusht off; and then let the indifferent, and impartial Reader moderate between us: And if he shall meet with any Truth of the Gospel cleared or vindicated, let him give God the more praise, who by such improbable means, as Clay and Spittle, can open his Eyes to the acknowledgment of the Truth; and secure him against the Impostures and Apostacy of these latter times: and what ever of Vanity and Folly he meets with in these Papers, let him be assured that's my own; and that it may not prejudice the concerns of Christ, let him freely trample it under his Feet.

FINIS.