Apology Against the Exceptions of Black and Kendall, Section Baxter 27 – Section Blake 28
§. 27.
R. B. BUt do you take officium and conditio to be all one? I eaſily yield that we may do our duty in beleeving, though it were an inſtrument: But a condition is more then a duty: yea then a duty to be performed for the obtaining of a benefit▪ Cujacius ſaith, Conditio eſt Lex addita negotio qua do…ec praeſtetur eventum ſuſpendit, Vel eſt modus vel cauſa quae ſuſpendit id quod agitur, donec ex poſt-facto confirmetur. Or as Mynfinger, Cum quid in caſum incertum (i. e. contingens) qui potest tendere ad eſſe vel non eſſe conferiur And they are divided into Poteſtativas, Caſuales, Mixtas ▪ Ours is of the former ſort, and I define it, viz. the condition of the Covenant to be, Actio voluntaria de fu…ro, a Deo Legiſlatore & Chriſto Teſtatore in neva Leg…, Federe, Teſtamento requiſita, ut ex ejus praeſta…ione constituatur jus actuale ad beneficium: vel, ut obligationem & eventum ſuſpendat don… praeſtetur. For ex ſtipulatione conditionali neque obligatio …eque actio ulla eſt, an…equam conditio eveniat: Quia quod eſt in conditione, non eſt in obligatione. Ʋt My…ſing▪ in Iuſt…. Schol. pag▪ 5 …)
…. You muſt conſider that it is not de conditione contractus venditionis & emptionis, vel … ▪ vel …ationis, or any the like, that is propter pre…ium: but it is the condition …, but ſomewhat partaking naturae Feudi, as to ſ…me of the Benefits. This being premiſed, it is evident that faith cannot juſtifie both as a condition, and as an inſtrument of Juſtification. For 1. Either of them importeth the proximam & cauſalem rationem of faith, as to the effect: But it is utterly inconſiſtent with its nature to have two ſuch different neareſt cauſal intereſts. To be an inſtrument of juſtifying, is to ef…ect it per modum inſtrumenti: To be the condition, is to be the cauſa ſine quâ non, which doth not effect, but ſuſpend the effect till performed: It hath the name of a cauſe, (and ſometime is ex materia a moral impulſive, and ſometime not) but it hath the tru… nature of ſuch a medium ad finem, as is no cauſe. As faith cannot be both efficiens effecti, & effectum ejuſdem …ficientis, nor be both the efficient and conſtitutive cauſe (material or formal,) no more can it produce one and the ſame effect of Juſtification per modum inſtrumenti efficientis, and per modum conditionis ſine quâ non. 2. Elſe you muſt feign the pardoning act to run thus [I will pardon thee on condition thou wilt pardon thy ſelf by beleeving, as the inſtrument] and not only [on condition thou accept Chriſt.] 3. It belongeth to the pardoning inſtrument to conferre the right to the thing, that is, to diſſolve the obligation to puniſhment, and to conſtitute the condition of this Right or Pardon: For Dona…tis eſt conſtituere conditionem etiam in ipſa inſtrumentali Donatione. But faith doth not conferre Right; for your ſelf ſay, It doth but receive it: It doth not diſſolve the obligation, but accept a Saviour to diſſolve it: It doth not conſtitute the condition of right; for you acknowledge it is the condition it ſelf.
To conclude this Point, for the compromiſing or ſhortening this difference between you and me, I will take your fairer offer, pag. 75. or elſe give you as fair an offer of my own. Yours is this: [Faith is conſidered under a double notion. Firſt as an inſtrument (or if that word will not be allowed) as the way of our intereſt in Chriſt, and priviledges by Chriſt.] In this general I eaſily agree with you.
If that ſatisfie not, I propound this, Call you it an inſtrument of receiving Chriſt, and conſequently righteouſneſs; and give me leave to call it preciſely a condition, or a moral diſpoſition of the ſubject to be juſtified; and I will not contend with you: So be it, you will 1. not lay too great a ſtreſs on your own notion, nor make it of flat neceſſity, nor joyn with them that have made the Papiſts believe that its a great part of the Proteſtant Religion, and conſequently that in confuting it, they refell the Proteſtants. 2. Nor ſay any more that it gives efficacy and power to the Goſpel to juſtifie us, and is more fitly then the Goſpel called an inſtrument. 3. Yea, I muſt deſire that you will forbear calling it at all an inſtrument of Juſtification, and be content to call it an inſtrument of receiving Juſtification: and I would you would confeſs that too to be an improper ſpeech. If you reſolve to go further, let me deſire you hereafter 1. To remember that its you that have the Affirmative, that faith is the inſtrument of juſtifying us: and I ſay, It is not written, you adde to Scripture: Therefore ſhew where it is written, expreſſely or by conſequence. 2. Do not blame me for making ſincere obedience part of the meer condition (wherein I think you ſay as much as I) and ſo as giving too much to man, when you give intollerably ſo much more as to make him the inſtrumental efficient cauſe of forgiving and juſtifying himſelf. 3. Above that I have yet ſaid, I pray forget not one thing: to prove faith to be the inſtrumental efficient of ſentential Juſtification (which is moſt properly and fully ſo called) as well as of Legal conſtitutive Juſtification. For thats the great point of which you have juſt nothing (pace tui ſi ita dicam) of which you ſhould have ſaid much. And ſo much for the Controverſie.
§ 28. Of Evangelical Perſonal Righteouſneſs. Mr Bl. Pag. 110, &c.
THere is yet a third opinion, which I may well doubt whether I underſtand, but ſo far as I do underſtand, I am as far from aſsent to it as either of the former: and that is of thoſe, who do not only aſſert a perſonal inherent Righteouſneſs, as well as imputed, against the Antinomians; but alſo affirm that this Righteouſneſs is compleat and perfect: which if it were meant only of the perfection of the ſubject, as oppoſed to hypocriſie, diſſimulation, or doubleneſs, implying that they do not only pretend for God, but are really for him; that they do not turn to him feignedly (as Iſrael was ſometime charged, Jer. 3.10.) but with an upright heart: Or of the perfection or entireneſs of the object: (reſpecting not one, or only ſome, but all Commandments) which is called a perfection of parts; we might readily aſſent to it. The Covenant cals for ſuch perfection, Gen. 17.1. Walk before me and be thou perfect: and many have their witneſs in Scripture that they have attained to it, as Noah, Gen. 7.9. Job 1.1. Hezekiah, Iſa. 38.3. But a perfection above theſe is maintained; a perfection compleat and full. [Righteouſneſs ſignifies (as is ſaid) a conformity to the Rule, and a conformity with a quat…nus or an imperfect rectitude is not a true conformity or rectitude at all: Imperfect Righteouſneſs is not Righteouſneſs but▪ unrighteouſneſs. It is a contradiction in adjecto…; Though holineſs be acknowledged to be imperfect in all reſpects, where perfection is expected, in reference to the degree that it ſhould obtain, or the degree which it ſhall obtain, or in reference to the excellent object, about which it is exerciſed, or in reference to the old Covenant, or the directive, and in ſome ſenſe the preceptive part of the new Covenant; In all theſe reſpects it is imperfect; and Righteouſneſs materially conſidered is holineſs, and therefore thus imperfect: but formally conſidered, it is perfect Righteouſneſs or none; this not in relation to the old Rule, but the new Covenant.] Upon this account they are charged with groſs ignorance, that uſe and underſtand the word Righteous and Righteouſneſs as they relate to the old Rule; as if the godly were called Righteous (beſides their imputed Righteouſneſs) only becauſe their ſanctification and good works have ſome imperfect agreement with the Law of works. This and much more to aſſert a perſonal perfect inherent Righteouſneſs, as is ſaid: all which as it is here held out, is new to me, and I muſt confeſs my ſelf in ignorance all over. I never took imperfect Righteouſneſs to imply any ſuch contradiction, any more then imperfect holineſs.