Apology Against the Exceptions of Black and Kendall, Postscript
POSTSCRIPT.
HAving perceived by a friend that peruſed theſe Papers ſince the Printing of them, that the n. 5th §. 11. p. 25. againſt Mr. Blake, is through too great brevity like to be miſunderſtood, I thought meet to adde this Explication.
I diſtinguiſh between the Real Operations and Mutations on mans ſoul, by Objects; and the Conveyance of Right to ſeveral Benefits by the Covenant of God. It is not the former that I ſpeak of in that place. I confeſs that as the Apprehenſion of one of Gods Attributes, makes one effect on the ſoul, and the apprehenſion of another makes another effect, ſo the apprehenſion of Chriſts Kingdome, Righteouſneſs, Death, Obedience, Interceſsion, Judgement, &c. do make alſo their ſeveral Impreſsions according to the Nature of the thing apprehended. But I utterly deny that it is ſo in Conveying Right to theſe, as much as I deny that Juſtification is Sanctification, or a Real Change of our Qualities as it is. This therefore is my Argument: If the Apprehenſion of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, and no other Act, ſhould ſtrictly be the Justifying Act of Faith, and that eo nomine, becauſe it is the object of that apprehenſion which is the matter of our Juſtification, then it would follow, 1. That the Apprehenſion of nothing elſe is the Juſtifying Act. 2. And that we have Right to every other particular Mercy eo nomine, becauſe we apprehend that Mercy, and ſo our Right to every particular Benefit of Chriſt, were Received by a diſtinct Act of Faith, But the Conſequent is falſe. Therefore ſo is the Antecedent.
The minor only requires proof: which is proved by the tenour of the Covenant of Grace, which Giveth us Chriſt, and with him all things: He that hath the Son hath Life: He that believeth on him ſhall not periſh, nor come into Condemnation. As many as Received him, to them gave he power to become the ſons of God. So that one entire faith, which is the Receiving of Chriſt as he is offered, that is, as our Saviour and King, is the Condition of our Right to all particular Benefits. Godlineſs hath the promiſe of this life, and that to come. It is a womans taking ſuch a man for her Husband that Gives her firſt Intereſt in him, and then in all that he hath: It is not accepting this houſe, and that Land, and that Servant, &c. that gives her a distinct right in them. There is not a marrying to all theſe, and a particular Acceptance of every of his Goods and Chattel requiſite to a right in them, though there be to a uſe of them. 2. And the Opinion being utterly unproved is ſufficiently confuted. In what Book that ever was written have theſe nice diſtinguiſhers proved their Doctrine by Scripture or ſound reaſon? Lex non diſtinguit, ergo, &c. 3. And it diſcovers its own abſurdity: For if this be true, then to apprehend Chriſts death is the only act that gives right to that, and to apprehend his obedience to that; and to apprehend Adoption is the only act that gives right to that, and ſo of all other benefits: So that there ſhould be one act of Faith giving right to Chriſt himſelf, and another giving right to pardon, another to ſentential Juſtification, another to Adoption, another to the Spirit and Sanctification, another to Perſeverance, another to Glory: Yea one to every particular gift or part of Sanctification; and one to the pardon of every particular known ſin that is pardoned: One to the Goſpel written, another to the Miniſtry, one to health, another to life, and one to every bleſsing. And ſo that act of faith which Receives Adoption ſhould not Juſtifie, nor that which Receives Chriſt himſelf neither directly: but only that which receiveth Juſtification. Whereas it is one Reception, or Act of faith morally taken (Apprehending the entire object) that God hath made the Condition of his Promiſe. So that to apprehend Chriſt as the Donor of Glory, doth as much towards our Juſtification, as apprehending him as Juſtifier: And to Believe in him as our Sanctifier and King, doth as Really conduce to our Juſtification, and as much, as the apprehending him as one that will pardon our ſins. He that believeth ſhall be ſaved, is the ſimple Scripture doctrine. 4. And if all this were not ſo, yet it is the apprehending of Chriſt as King according to them then, that muſt be the Pardoning and Juſtifying act, more then as a Sacrifice: For as Satisfier and a Ranſome, he only meriteth our Pardon and Juſtification. But to pardon by Grant, is unqueſtionably an act of Soveraignty as ſuch: It being not the pardon of a private injury, but a publick Crime that we have to ſpeak of. And to Juſtifie by Plea is Chriſts act as an Advocate, and not as a Sacrifice. And to Juſtifie by ſentence is Chriſts act as Judge: So that if their own Doctrine did hold (of the diverſifying of our Right by the diverſity of the formal reaſon of the object apprehended) then would it but infallibly prove againſt them, that it is the Receiving of Chriſt as King and Judge that is the Act of Pardoning and Juſtifying faith, more then the Receiving him as a Sacrifice or Ranſome.
FINIS.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, Apology Against the Exceptions of Black and Kendall (1654)