Catholic Theology Plain Pure Peaceable, Section 7
SECT. VII. The Antecedent and conſequent Will of God, &c.
102. The diſtinction of Gods Antecedent and Conſequent Will, uſed by Damaſcene, is by many applyed to this controverſie, but by none that I have read ſufficiently explained, which is the cauſe that ſo many good men reject it, becauſe they miſunderſtand it. It's truly ſaid, that by his Antecedent Will, God would have all men to believe, repent and be ſaved, but by his Conſequent Will, he will have all condemned whom he doth condemn. But then it muſt be underſtood, that this diſtinction i… not applyed to the Will of God, as he is meerly an Abſolute Proprietary, or Benefactor, but as he is the King or Rector of the world; and ſo his Legiſlation is his Antecedent Will, and his Judgment is his Conſequent Will. And no man of Religion can deny, either that Gods Law is the ſignification of his Will, or his Will ſignifyed, or that his Judgment and … cution is his Will declared; or that Gods Law of Grace doth conditionally give pardon and ſalvation to all, antecedently to man's performance or rejection of the condition, or that God condemneth Infidels conſequently to their Infidelity. The Law Antecedently to Mans part acted, ſaith, He that believeth ſhall be ſaved; and the Sentence conſequently to his fact, ſaith, Judas an unbeliever or impenitent, ſhall periſh. And thus the diſtinction hath no doubt or difficulty.
103. God by commanding faith and repentance, and making the… neceſſary conditions of Juſtification, and by commanding perſeverance, and threatning the Juſtified and Sanctified with damnation if they f… away; and making perſeverance a condition of Salvation, doth thereby provide a convenient means for the performance of his own Decree, of giving Faith and Repentance and perſeverance to his Elect; For he effecteth his ends by ſuitable moral means; and ſuch is this Law and Covenant, to provoke man to due fear, and care and obedience, that he may be wrought on as a man.
104. To be juſtifyed by Faith in general, agreeth to the ages before Of Juſtification by Faith, &c.Chriſt's Incarnation, and thoſe ſince: But ſo doth not the ſpecial kind of faith by which they are juſtifyed. For much more is Eſſential to that faith which we muſt be juſtifyed by to them that are under the laſt edition of the Covenant of Grace, than was (or is) to them that were under the firſt alone. Abraham believed not all our eſſential Articles of faith.
105. To be juſtified by faith in Paul's ſence, is all one as to be juſtified What that Faith is.by becoming Chriſtians. To be a Believer, a Diſciple, and a Chriſtian are all one in the Goſpel ſence.
106. The faith by which we are juſtified, as is aforeſaid, is beſt underſtood The Controverſie between the Papiſts and us about Juſtification is agitated i… vain till we agree of the ſence of the words [Juſtification and Remiſſion]. As I ſaid elſewhere they take not only Juſtification for a qualitative change (ſuch as we call Sanctification) but Remiſſion of Sin) for, they know not what themſelves: moſt of them talk as if it were a putting away the Sin in its eſſence, which can be meant of nothing but the Habit; for the fact cannot be infectum: Others ſeem to take it for remitting the puniſhment alſo with that change. Malderus moſt plainly in 1. 2. q. 113. a. 1. and p. 567. ſaith that Remiſſion of Sin is, Ablatio Reatus culpae; At eſſe longe aliud quam Nolle illud punire; non enim tantum facit Hominem non puniri, ſed etiam non eſſe Poena dignum. Minus tamen eſt quam in amicitiam recipi, though yet no man is in a middle ſtate, neque D…i amicus ne que inimicus, yet cogitations poſſunt ſeterari, & Peccata Remittere idem eſt quod non imputare ſi hoc non accipias pro diſſimulare, ſed pro deſinere eſſe offenſum cum per Remiſſionem, Deo non imputante eſt quaſi non fuerit. By this you may ſee that theſe Papiſts hold the ſame with thoſe Proteſtants whom they ſeem moſt to reſiſt and cannot hide it: But, 1. It will be true to eternity that Peter ſinned. 2. To ſay ſo, is to blame him. 3 His ſin deſerv'd death. 4. The Law and the nature of ſin paſt are the ſame after pardon as before. 5. God doth not change his mind of ſin. 6. Gods offence or diſpleaſure is not a paſſion or mutable, but his eſſence as denomina ed from the object, to be [his Velle punire, and Juſtice that muſt puniſh] 7. For God to be appeaſed and no more offended, is but his Nolle punire peccatorem, and not to be obliged in Juſtice to puniſh him, but by his Covenant related to him as one that will not puniſh. 8. This change is in the ſinner becoming not puniſhable; 9. That is, not worthy of it in the Goſpel-ſence, though worthy by the Law of Innocency. 10. All this is but that the Reatus p…na & culpae quantum ad poenam is remitted, but not the Reatus culpae ſimpliciter in ſe—And thus we are all agreed.by the Baptiſmal Covenant, and is eſſentially a Believing Fiducial conſent to our Covenant relation to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt, as our Reconciled Creator and Father, our Saviour and our Sanctifyer, connoting the forſaking of all inconſiſtents. For it muſt needs be the ſame faith by which we have right to the benefits of that Covenant, and by which we are juſtified; becauſe we have our remiſſion and juſtification by the Inſtrumental donation of the Covenant, it being one of the benefits given by it: But Practical Faith, or Believing-conſent is our condition of receiving our Covenant right to all the benefits in general; therefore to Juſtification in particular.
107. The Phraſes of [Justifying faith] and [Faith juſtifying us] are humane and not Scriptural at all: And though they may be well uſed with explicatory caution, as being well meant, yet they are more lyable to miſlead men, than the Scripture phraſe, that [we are juſtified by Faith]; Becauſe the former phraſes are apter to inſinuate an Efficiency, than the other; whereas faith is no efficient cauſe of our Justification nor any other act of Man: And the Scripture that ſpeaketh of Juſtification by Faith ſometime uſeth the phraſe foreign which no more ſignifyeth any Inſtrumental efficiency of Juſtification, than foreign ex operibus: And though ſometime foreign be uſed, it is to ſignifie no more than that God hath appointed it to be the Medium of our Juſtification as a condition, but not as any efficient cauſe.
108. The Faith by which we are juſtified (as I touched before) hath God the Father for its object as eſſentially as Chriſt the Saviour; as the ſaid Baptiſmal Covenant ſheweth; and that not only ſecondarily as Chriſt being the Mediator and way to the Father, our faith in Chriſt connoteth the final object; but alſo directly and primarily as the Father is the firſt in Trinity, and as Creator firſt related to us, and as the end is firſt in our intention: Joh. 17. 3. This is life eternal to know thee the only true God, and Jeſus Chriſt whom thou baſt ſent. Joh. 13. 1. Let not your hearts be troubled, you believe in God, believe alſo in me.
109. And as eſſential is it to this Faith to believe in Chriſt as the Purchaſer of Holineſs and Heaven, as to believe in him as the purchaſer of pardon; and to believe in him as the Teacher and Ruler of the Church, as to believe in him as the juſtifyer of believers. The inſeparableneſs of theſe acts is commonly confeſſed.
110. Indeed it is eſſential to this faith, 1. To be the act of the three eſſential faculties of man's Soul, the Vital Power, the Intellect and the Will, 2. And to have for its object God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoſt; and that in Chriſt, all that is eſſential to him as a Saviour be its object: And therefore, 1. That it be an Aſſent, Conſent and practical Affiance, 2. That it be a believing in Chriſt as God and Man, and as the Teacher, Prieſt and King of the Church, revealing the Goſpel, reconciling us to God, and Ruling us in order▪ to Salvation.
111. To ſay that ſome one only of theſe parts of Chriſt's office, as they are Concept us inadaequati of a Saviour is the only object of juſtifying faith, and to ſay, that juſtifying faith is only one Act of the Soul, or many acts of one only faculty, or to ſay that we are juſtified only by ſuch a one, and that to expect to be juſtified by Aſſent, Conſent and Affiance, or by believing in Chriſt as our Teacher and Ruler as well as Prieſt, and as a juſtifying Judg, as well as a Juſtifying Sacrifice, and as a fulfiller of the Law, is to expect juſtification by Works, as Paul denyeth it; This is a vain diſtinguiſhing, a falſifying the Doctrine of faith and juſtification, a departing from the Scripture ſimplicity by corrupting ſeeming ſubtility, and one of thoſe humane inventions which have wronged the Church. And it is no wiſer than to ſay, that when we ſpeak of taking or receiving a Man to be a Husband, a Phyſician, a King, it is but one phyſical a… of the Soul, that is meant, or about one only phyſical conception in the object, which is inadequate. Whereas all ſuch Moral or Civil acts co… tain many phyſical acts, and are ſuited to all things in the object which are eſſential to it in its moral or civil nature or relation.
112. And it is but the ſame deluding ſubtility, and vain curioſity, … a playing with deceitful words, to ſay that we are juſtified by faith, Quatenus recipit Chriſti Juſtitiam, As it believeth in Chriſt's Sacrifice and perfect obedience only, and not, As it believeth in him as Teacher, Ruler, Sanctifier, Judg, or as he intercedeth for us in Heaven, &c. when the Scripture ſaith no ſuch thing at all, but ſimply maketh faith in Christ (ſuppoſing Faith in God the Father) to be that by which we muſt be juſtified▪
113. This diſtinction is founded in another falſhood ſuppoſed, which is that the effects of all Chriſt's ſaving works are as diſtinctly to be aſcribed to ſeveral Receiving Acts of faith, as they are to the ſeveral procuri… acts of Chriſt, the object of faith, which is another corrupting additio… to God's Word. One part of the work of our Salvation was done by Chriſt's humiliation, and another by him in his exaltation: one by his overcoming the Devil, and another by his overcoming the World; one by his Croſs, another by his Grave, another by his Reſurrection, another by his aſcenſion, another by his making the new Covenant, another by his ſending the Spirit, another by his ſending the Apoſtles, another by his interceſſion in Heaven, another will be done by our Reſurrection, and another by his laſt Judgment, and our Glorification; one by hi… as an obeying-ſubject, another as a Sacrifice for ſin, many by him as a Pr… phet, many as a Prieſt and many as a King and Judge: But to ſay therefore that our acts of faith as Receptive have as various reſpects to the effects or benefits, and that we are juſtified by him only as we believe i… him as Righteous, or a Juſtifyer, and that we are adopted as we believe in him in another reſpect, and ſanctifyed as we believe in hi… in another reſpect, &c. theſe are the dreams of corrupting curioſity. For that Chriſt who by all theſe ſeveral works, hath done all the office of a Redeemer to procure theſe ſeveral effects, is preached and offered to us to be entirely as ſuch a Redeemer, believed in and received, and upon the condition of ſuch an entire faith only, Chriſt and all theſe benefits conjunctly are by one Covenant given us, and no otherwiſe. And believing in Chriſt as Christ, who by all thoſe acts hath himſelf procured us this Covenant, and theſe gifts, is that by which we are juſtified as it is one undivided faith; And the quatenus here as to Chriſt's own procurement of the effects hath its place, but as to the Act of our faith, and Chriſt as the object conſtituting that faith, there is no ſuch diverſity or order to be feigned, as if the ſeveral effects were accordingly to be aſcribed to our ſeveral Believings or Receiving acts.
114. The ambiguity of the very word [Receiving] hath drawn many into this error: Receiving ſignifyeth ſometimes a Phyſical reception, which is meerly Paſſive, or the Relation of the Patient as ſuch to the Act and Agent. And this is twofold, 1. The Reception of a real being; and ſo to be ſanctified is to Receive Sanctification. 2. The Reception of a Relation, ſuch as all Jus, Right to a thing is; and ſo to be pardoned, justified and adopted, and to Receive pardon, juſtification and adoption, is all one.
2. Sometimes it ſignifyeth Moral or Civil receiving, which is nothing but 1. The conſent of the mind, called Acceptance. 2. And as to corporeal objects, ſometime, the voluntary act of the body; as the Hand, taking that which is offered. Now if the Receiving in queſtion were phyſical, (either rei vel juris ad rem) then indeed it would be ſo neerly related to the thing received, (which as received is no object, becauſe Receiving ſo is no act) as that this quatenus in queſtion might be applyed to it. For it may well be ſaid I receive Justification quatenus Juſtificatus ſum, as I By this you ſee the anſwer to what Mr. Lawſon in his excellent Theopolitica hath ſaid againſt me on this point. Of which ſee fullyer my anſwer to Mr. Warner in my Diſputes of Juſtification.am juſtified, and I receive Sanctification as I am ſanctified, and vice verſa, for they are but various words ſignifying the ſame thing. But of Moral Receiving the caſe is otherwiſe: For this is not phyſical Reception, but only a Moral Act, which is made a neceſſary medium, or Condition to Phyſical Reception, and thence is called Receiving; ſo Accepting or Conſenting is a moral means or condition of that Having or Poſſeſſing which is conſequential. And this Acceptance hath relation immediately to the thing as Given only, to be made ours, according to the Will of the Giver, and not made ours according to the order of the things given: That is, 1. The Ratio proprietatis, the Reaſon that they are ours is the will of the Donor, and the Collation is according to the order of his Will; though the Things Given have their intrinſick difference.
115. All men confeſs, that this Moral Reception, is an Act, and therefore hath an object (which Phyſical Reception is not). And that thus to Receive doth ſuppoſe a Moral Gift, which Gift maketh not the thing ours neceſſarily, as phyſical operation doth, but on ſuppoſition of our voluntary Reception or Conſent. And all confeſs that Gods Donation is by his Covenant, Teſtament or Promiſe; and this Covenant hath its proper nature and mode, that is, the Condition as impoſed, antecedent to our Receiving. Therefore as the thing Given is made ours by the Donation, ſo according to the order appointed by it: and our Conſent no otherwiſe maketh it ours than as the Condition of the Gift performed. But Gods Covenant doth Give us Chriſt and Life; that is, Juſtification, Sanctification and Glorification in tithe or right, in one Gift, to be Accepted by one entire faith as the Condition, not making at all the order of the Gifts and faiths reſpect to them in that order, to be any of the Ratio proprietatis.
116. This will be plainer by humane inſtances. A Servants Relation is founded in his conſent to be a Servant; a Wifes Relation is founded in her Marriage-conſent to be a Wife, and to take that man for her Husband ſimply without any more adoe. Now if the Maſter of that Servant, or the Husband of that Wife, be a noble man, a rich man, a wiſe man, a good man, and they knew all this, and by knowing it were induced to conſent, and are to have their proportionable benefits by his Nobility, Riches, Wiſdom, Goodneſs, yet their title to theſe benefits ariſeth not from the act of their conſent as it reſpected theſe benefits ſeverally and diſtinctly, but meerly by conſent to their Relation, as being his Condition of Collation. The Wife is made Noble by her Husbands Nobility, ſhe is made Rich by his Riches, ſhe is inſtructed by his Wiſdom, &c. But ſhe hath no more Right to his Riches for marrying him in the notion of Rich, or for conſenting to him for Riches, than for marrying him in the notion or thought of his wiſdom or goodneſs. On her part, it was not conſent to be Rich by him that gave her right to his Riches, and conſent to be Noble by him that gave her right to Nobility; but conſent ſimply to be his Wife that gave her right to all.
117. This is yet fullyer evident in that moſt uſually men make conſent to one thing to be the condition of their Receiving or Right to another. And uſually that which one is moſt backward to, is made the condition of their Right to that which they are moſt forward or willing to have. The Maſter doth not ſay, If thou wilt have thy wages, thou ſhalt have right to it: But if thou wilt do my work, thou ſhalt have thy wages. The condition of Marriage is conjugal Love and fidelity: q. d. I will be thy Husband, and give thee right to all that I have, if thou wilt be and do what is eſſential to a Wife] and not [if thou wilt have my Riches, &c.] If a Father give a Child a free gift on any condition, it will likely be [If thou wilt be a thankful and obedient Child] and not [If thou wilt have it.] Or if meer conſent to have it, be put, it is uſually when it is ſome gift which it is ſuppoſed that the perſon is not very willing to have: [As if a Sick man will have Phyſick, if an ungodly man will have Teaching, Books or Godlineſs it ſelf.] But to this uſually they are induced by the Promiſe of ſomewhat elſe which they are willing of: As to the Sick [If thou wilt take this Phyſick, thou ſhalt have health.] To the ungodly [If thou wilt have Chriſt and holineſs, thou ſhalt have pardon and happineſs.] Now in the ſence of Phyſical Receiving [He that receiveth Phyſick, hath Phyſick] and [He that receiveth health, hath health] &c. But in the moral ſence of Receiving, which is Accepting as it is the condition of a gift, ſo [He that receiveth the Phyſick ſhall have the health] and [He that receiveth Chriſt and his ſanctifying Spirit, ſhall have Pardon, Juſtification, and Salvation] Not that his willingneſs to have [pardon and happineſs] is the chief or only condition of his [pardon and happineſs.] But his Accepting Chriſt and his Spirit which men are naturally unwilling of, is the condition of that [pardon and happineſs] which men would have.
By all which it appeareth that to ſay, [Faith juſtifyeth me as it is the Receiving of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, and not as it is the Receiving of Chriſt as a Teacher, Ruler, &c.] is a confounding or ſeducing ſaying. For, 1. If it intimate that Faith Juſtifyeth us as an efficient cauſe [principal o… Inſtrumental] it is falſe. *Unleſs by Juſtifying they mean the acts of Love, Hope, Obedience called H…ineſs.2. If it mean that [Faith is the Condition of Juſtification quatenus, as it receiveth Chriſts Righteouſneſs only,] it hath either one or two falſhoods. 1. If it mean that Faiths receiving act, is the formalis ratio Conditionis, or that it juſtifyeth not qua conditio d…ationis, but quae Receptio Juſtitiae Chriſti, it is falſe. Therefore qua here can ſignifie nothing but the Aptitude of faith to be made the condition, and ſo Qua & Quae here are all one: 2. And then that [only the Accepting of Righteouſneſs juſtifyeth us, that is, Is the condition of our Justification] is a falſhood.
118. Therefore our conſent to be a Holy and obedient people, or to take Chriſt for our Teacher, Exemplar, Ruler, Sanctifier by his Word and Spirit, and Judge, hath at leaſt as great a hand in our juſtification, (being principally the Condition of the Promiſe) as our belief in our acceptance of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs hath.