Of Justification, Letter 8 – Letter 10
Sir,
UPON reading of the Poſtſcript in your late Book, I have ſent you theſe Animadverſions. You ſay Aphor. of Juſtification. …ag. 184. [All thoſe Scriptures which ſpeak of Juſtification as done in this life, I underſtand of Juſtification in Title of Law. So Rom. 5.1. and 4 2. and 5.9. Jam. 2.21, 25, &c.] I conceive Juſtification, being Gods Act, Rom. 3.30. Rom. 8.33. conſequent upon Faith, and calling, and importing a ſentence oppoſite to Condemnation; Rom. 8.30, 33, 34. and 5.1. terminated on particular perſons, Rom. 4.2, 3 Rom. 8.30. it muſt be more then the Vertual Juſtification in Law-Title; which is only an act of God preſcribing or promiſig a way of Juſtification, not the ſentence it ſelf, and is general, and indeterminate to particular perſons, and is performed before the perſon juſtified believes: Yea is the ſame, though none were actually juſtified: and therefore in my apprehenſion, that Act of Gods Covenanting or promiſing, in which I conceive you place the Juſtification by Law-Title. Theſ. 38. Is not the Juſtification by faith meant, Rom. 5.1, &c.
Beſides, to be juſtified notes a Paſſion, which preſuppoſeth an Action; an Act Tranſient, not Immanent; or only Gods purpoſe to juſtifie: nor can it be Gods Promiſe to juſtifie: For the Act, though it be Tranſient, yet it is only a Declaration what he will do; his promiſe to juſtifie upon condition, is not Juſtifying, and therefore a man is not by the Covenant, without a further Act, Denominated Juſtified, though he be made juſtifyable by it. I conceive Juſtification is a Court term, Importing an Act of God as Judge, whereas his promiſing is not his Act as Judge, but Rector, theſ. 42. you mention the Angels judging us Righteous, and Rejoycing therein; which whence it ſhould be, but by a ſentence paſſed in Heaven, I know not. Conſtitutive Juſtification, different from Declarative by ſentence, I do not find expreſſed under the term [Juſtification] It would be conſidered whether any other Act beſides the ſentence, doth make a man juſt, but giving of faith; notwithſtanding Chriſts Death, and the conditional Covenant before faith, a perſon is only juſtifyable; Conditionalis nihil ponit in eſſe. A perſon is upon giving of Faith juſtified; but not by giving of faith (thats an act of Sanctification) but by a ſentence of God, Theſ. 59. You make juſtification a continued act; now it being a tranſient act, I ſuppoſe it may not be well called a continued Act, which imports a ſucceſſive motion between the terminus a quo, and terminus ad quem; whereas the act, whether by ſentence, or Covenant, is not ſuch a Motion. Its not to be denyed, that the Benefit and Vertue of it is continued, but I think not the Act. If it be not ſ…mel, but ſaepe, yet it ſhould be rather called Actus Renovatus, Repetitus, Iteratus, then continued I incline to think there is but one Juſtification of a perſon in this life, though there be frequent remiſſions of ſin. Of this you may Conſider.
In the Saints Everlaſting Reſt, pag. 11. Doubtleſs the Goſpel takes faith for our obedience to All Goſpel Precepts. Believing doth not produce ſubjection to Chriſt as King, as a finite, but contains it as an Eſſential part, &c. Aphor. p. 25.5. Faith doth as Really and Immediately Receive Chriſt as King (as Saviour, or Prieſt) and ſo Juſtifie, Theſ. 65. Scripture doth not take the word [Faith] for any one ſingle Act; nor yet for various Acts of one only faculty; but for a compleat entire motion of the whole ſoul to Chriſt its Object, Theſ. 57. It is the Act of faith which juſtifies men at Age, and not the Habit.
Againſt this I object; 1. Faith worketh by Love, Gal. 5.16. If one be an eſſential part of the other, and faith a compleat entire motion of the ſoul, then when it is ſaid, Faith worketh by Love, it might be ſaid, it worketh by Faith.
2. Goſpel Precepts are many, if not all, the ſame with the Moral Law; if Juſtified then by obedience to them, are we not juſtified by the works of the Law? You conceive the Juſtification, Jam. 2. to be by works in a proper ſence, and that before God; and Rahabs act was a work of Hoſpitality, ver. 25. commanded in the Law; and Abrahams work was a ſacrificing, or offering a work of the Ceremonial Law, ver. 21.
3. Repentance is obedience to one Goſpel Precept, yet Faith and Repentance are diſtinguiſhed, Mar. 1.15.6, 1. Love, Faith, Hope, are three, 1 Cor. 13.13. 1. Tim. 1.5. 2 Theſ. 1.3. faith and Love have different Objects, Col. 1.4. Phil. 5. 1 Theſ. 1.…. Therefore not the ſame; nor one an Eſſential part of the other.
4. Obedience is a ſign to prove faith, Jam. 2.18. and therefore not an Eſſential part.
5. If Faith include obedience to all Goſpel Precepts as an Eſſential part, then actual faith includes actual obedience to all Goſpel Precepts as an eſſential part; and if the Act of faith Juſtifie men at Age, not the Habit; and receiving Chriſt as King, as immediatly Juſtifie, as believing in Chriſt as Saviour, then a perſon of Age is not Juſtified without actual obedience to all Goſpel Precepts, and this may be not till Death; if then, and ſo, no Juſtification in this Life.
6. If Faith juſtifie as immediatly by receiving Chriſt as King, as by receiving him as Saviour, then it juſtifies by receiving Chriſt as Judge, Matth. 25.34. as Law-giver, Avenger of his enemies, and ſo a man is juſtified By receiving Chriſts Judging, Puniſhing, Condemning, Commanding, Avenging, as well as ſaving by his Death; which is contrary to Rom. 3.25. & 5.9
7. The Scripture makes the object of juſtifying faith Chriſts Death, Reſurrection, Blood, Rom. 3.25. & 10.9. Gal. 2.20, 21. Nowhere Chriſts dominion. Ergo. Subjection to Chriſt as King is not an eſſential part.
8. The object of Faith is nowhere made to be a Goſpel Precept, ſuch as forgiving others, uſing Sacraments, &c. nor Chriſt as commanding; but the Declaration of the Accompliſhments of Chriſt, and the counſel of God in him, 1 Cor. 15.1. &c. Rom. 1 16, 17. Gal. 3.8. Ergo Obedience is not an Eſſential part.
9. If it be an eſſential part, then either Genus or Difference; for no other Eſſential parts belong to a quality or Action: not the Genus, that's Aſſent. Aph. p. 254.274. when the object is a Propoſition: when it is an Incomplex term, Truſt is the Genus: not the Difference, thats chiefly taken from the object. Keker. ſyſt. Logic. l. 1. ſect. 2. c. 2. can. Defin. Accid. 5.7. Obedience may make known Faith as a ſign, but not as a part, its at leaſt in order of Nature after; the cauſe is afore the effect: the Antecedent before the Conſequent; and faith is ſuch, Heb. 11.8. &c.
10. If Faith be a compleat entire motion of the whole ſoul to Chriſt, then it ſhould be Love, Joy, Hope, Underſtanding, Will, Memory, Fear; But this is not to be ſaid. Ergo.
It is alleadged, 1. Faith muſt be the Act of the whole ſoul; elſe part ſhould receive him, part not.
Anſw. Faith is expreſſed by the Metaphor of Receiving, Joh. 1.12. Col. 2.6. And he is Received by the Receiving of his Word, Joh. 12.48. 1 Theſ. 2.13. which is Received by Aſſent. 2. The whole ſoul receives Chriſt, though by other Graces beſides faith.
2. Acts 8.37 Rom. 10.10. Anſw. The term [Whole] notes not every inward faculty; but (as after) ſincerely, not feignedly, as Simon Magus. So Illyricus.
3. Faith is called Obeying the Goſpel, Rom. 10.16. 1 Pet. 1.22. & 4.17. 2 Theſ. 1.8. Gal. 3.1. & 5.7. Heb. 5.9. But the Goſpel commandeth All thus to obey Chriſt as Lord, forgive others, love his people, bear what ſufferings are Impoſed, diligently uſe his Means and Ordinances, confeſſing, bewailing ſins, praying for pardon ſincerely and to the end.
Anſw. Heb. 5.9. ſpeaks of obeyng Chriſt, but doth not call faith obeying Chriſt: but be it granted, Faith is called obeying of Chriſt, or the Goſpel; doth it follow that it is obedience in doing thoſe named Acts? It may be obedience by Aſſent to the Doctrine of Chriſt, that he is the Meſſiah, died for ſins, &c. commanded 1 Cor. 15.3. 1 Joh. 3.23. which the terms foreign and foreign do rather Import, then the other Acts mentioned. The Goſpel and Truth are reſtrained to the Doctrine of Chriſts coming, dying, &c, nowhere applyed, that I know, to the Precepts of forgiving others, ſuffering death, receiving the Lords Supper, &c.
4. The fulfilling the condition of the new Covenant is called faith, Gal. 3.12, 23, 25.
Anſwer. Neither of theſe places make faith the fulfilling of the Condition of the New Covenant, nor any place elſe In Gal. 3.12. Its ſaid, the Law, that is the Covenant of the Law, is not of Faith. i. e. doth not aſſign Life to Faith in Chriſt▪ Faith Gal. 3, 23, 25. is put, ſaith Piſcat. for the time of the Goſpel, or Chriſt, ſay others, or the Doctrine of Faith. By Faith only the condition of the Covenant concerning Juſtification in this life is fulfilled, not concerning every Benefit of the new Covenant. Repentance is the condition of Remiſſion of ſins; forgiving others, doing good to the Saints, of entering into Life.
5. The Goſpel reveals not Chriſts offices as ſeparate. Ergo. They mnſt be ſo believed.
Anſw. The concluſion is granted, but proves not faith to juſtifie in receiving Chriſt as King.
6. It offers Chriſt as King, and ſo muſt be received. Anſwer the ſame.
7. Scripture nowhere tieth Juſtification to the receit of him as prieſt only. Ar. The contrary is proved from Rom. 3.25. & 5.9.
8. Commonly Chriſt is called our Lord and Saviour. Anſw. True; But we are juſtified by his blood.
9. If we receive him not as a King, then not as an entire Saviour. Anſw. True; Yet Juſtification is by his death, 2 Cor. 5.21. Gal. 2.21. Rom. 3 25 and 59.
10. Chriſt is not received truly, if not entirely as King. Anſw. True; But this proves not that obedience is an eſſential part of faith; or that ſubjection to Chriſt as King, juſtifies as immediatety, as receiving him as Saviour.
11. The exalting of his proper Kingly office, is a Principal End of Chriſts dying. Pſal. 2. Rom. 14.9.
Anſw. True; But it follows not that either Obedience is an Eſſential part of faith▪ or ſubjection to Chriſt as King juſtifieth as immediately as receiving him as Saviour or Prieſt.
Yours in the Truth I.T.
Sir,
ITs to be conſidered, 1. Whether theſe words anſwer to Valedict▪ orat at B. pag. 191. [Nothing but the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, is that which our Divines call the matter of our Juſtification, or the Righteouſneſs which we muſt plead to Acquit us in Judgement.] And it is ſaid Rom. 3.25. through faith in his Blood, and Rom. 5.9. by his Blood, Do not prove Chriſts Death either the ſole or chief Object of faith as Juſtifying; and how this ſtands with Aphoriſm of Juſtification, Theſ. 66. and its Explication.
2. Whether the words, Luk. 12.14. import not a diſclaiming or denial of a Title to judge, and ſo your anſwer be not inſufficient, pag. 276. which ſeems to ſuppoſe a Title, and only a Suſpenſion of Exerciſe in that ſtate of Humiliation.
3. Whether if Magiſtrates be Officers of Chriſt as King, by Office they be not in his Kingdom, and ſo Infidel Magiſtrates in Chriſts Kingdom, contrary to Col. 1.14.
4. If it be maintained, That Chriſt died for every Child of Adam conditionally, It would be well proved from Scripture, that the procuring of ſuch a conditional Law or Covenant, was the End or Effect of Chriſts death; and whether the ſo Interpreting Texts that ſpeak of his dying for all, will not ſerve for Evaſions to put by the Arguments drawn from them to prove Chriſts Satisfaction aad Merit, proper to the Elect. For if they may be Interpreted ſo, He died to procure the conditional Covenant for every one, this may be alledged juſtly; then you can prove no more thence, for that is the ſenſe; and then we cannot prove thence, he died loco noſtro, &c. It is a matter of much moment, and needs great Circumſpection.
Yours.
Sir,
BEſides what hath been formerly ſuggeſted to you, theſe words in your Scripture proofs, pag. 323. And where he next ſaith, that in the aged ſeveral diſpoſitions are required to fit a man to receive pardon, (and ſo juſtification) viz Catholike faith, hope of pardon, fear of puniſhment, grief for ſin, a purpoſe againſt ſining hereafter, and a purpoſe of a new life, all which diſpoſe the Receiver; and I agree to him, though all do not] are ſo like the Doctrine of the Trent Council. ſeſſ. 6. c. 6. that it will be expected you declare, whether by avowing that ſpeech of Dr. Ward, you do not join with the Papiſts, contrary to Biſhop Downam of Juſtification. l. 6. c. 7. §. 1.2. Mr. Pemble vindict. fidei. §. 2. c. 3.
And when you make Juſtification a continued Act upon condition of obedience, its to be conſidered how you will avoid Tompſons opinion of the Intercifion of Juſtification, upon the committing of a ſin that waſts the conſcience, refuted by Dr. Rob. Abbot. but vented after by Moutague in his appeal, and oppoſed by Dr. Preſton, and others.
As for Juſtification by Law-Title, by the Covenant upon actual Believing, without any other act of God, conſequent on Faith; if it were ſo; 1. Then it ſhould be by neceſſary Reſultancy; But Juſtification is an Act of Will, and no act of Will is by neceſſary Reſultancy.
2. If the Covenant juſtifie without any other Act of God, then it Adops, Glorifies, Sanctifies, &c. without any other Act, which is not to be ſaid. The reaſon of the Sequel is, becauſe the Covenant of it ſelf doth in the ſame manner produce the one as well as the other.
3. The Juſtification of the Covenant is only conditional, therefore not Actual; Actual Juſtification is not till Faith be put: and then Poſit â conditione, it is Actual: A conditional, is only a poſſible Juſtification; its only in potentia, till the Condition be in act; Now the Covenant doth only aſſure it on condition, as a future thing, not therefore as actual, or preſent.
4 The Covenant is an Act paſt, Tit. 1.2. Gal. 3.7, 8. ſo not continued; and conſequently, the Juſtification barely by it, without any other Act, muſt be paſt long ſince, and not continued; and he neither Juſtification Actual, and in purpopſe; or virtual, will be confounded, or an effect ſhall be continued, without the cauſe.
Jan. 17, 1651. Yours. I.T.