Neonomianism Unmasked, Part 3 · Debate 19

Neonomianism Unmasked · Part 3 · Debate 19

p. 52DEBATE XIX. Of the Beauty of Sincere Holineſs.

Neonom.

I Am now come with a Charge of a Monſtrous Error upon Mr. Antimonian; I believe it will ſtink in your Noſtrils as ſoon as I name it; it is this, That the greatest Holineſs in Believers, tho' wrought in them by the Holy Ghost, is meer dung, rottenneſs and filthineſs, as in them. D. W. p. 196.

Calv.

I pray let us hear his own words, for the Apoſtle Paul ſpeaks to that purpoſe, Phil. 3.9.

Neonom.

Aye, but the Apoſtle Paul doth not mean as he doth, he hath perverted the Apoſtle's words to a wrong ſenſe:

He ſaith, Know, that the Motions and Aſſiſtance of the Spirit, be Pure, Holy and without Scum in the Spring, to wit, itſelf; yet by that time theſe Motions and Aſſiſtances have paſſed the Channels of our Hearts, and been mixed with manifold Corruptions, even the whole Work becomes polluted and filthy, and filthineſs alters the property of the pure Motions of Christ's Spirit, &c. Dr. C. p. 232.

Calv.

Do you charge this for Error?

Antinom.

If you pleaſe, Sir, you ſhall have my whole ſenſe, the ſum briefly of what I ſpake.

I was preaching from Phil. 3.8, 9. I opened that Text according to the ſenſe of the beſt Interpreters; and I ſhewed, that the Apoſtle, 1. demoliſheth all glittering and rotten Materials, wherewith he had, and others ſtill do, erect a fortreſs of ſecurity and a place of delight, Dr. C. p. 226. 2. He declares his end in ſo doing, that he might lay a ſure Foundation, and build upon it with other Materials than Hay and Stubble, p. 227. Now I ſhewed, that which he caſt away, was all things, not only what he was or could do before he received Chriſt, but even all things whatever alſo he hath been able to do ſince he received Chriſt, tho' aſſiſted thereto by the Spirit of Chriſt, as Beza well obſerves. As concerning the Apoſtle's end, for ſtripping himſelf naked of his moſt ſpecious Works in general, it is to be cloathed with white Robes, even the Garment of Salvation; but more eſpecially he declares his end, 1. It's for the Excellency of the Knowledge of Chriſt, i. e. of Chriſt's Excellencies known; to the knowledge of which I could never come, till all I was, and am, plainly appeared loſs and dung; my own Righteouſneſs was a thick Film over my Eyes, that I could not ſee Chriſt's Worth. 2. A gaining and winning Chriſt, is a ſecond end, foreign, as long as his own Obedience was in requeſt with him, and ſeemed any thing better than dung in his eye, he p. 53could never get Chriſt. 3. That he might be found in him, i. e. at the great day of appearance. That this is the meaning, is plain by the Apoſtle's own expounding himſelf, not having mine own Righteouſneſs, and my Doctrin.

That things, even the moſt blameleſs walking according to God's Law, not only before, but after converſion, or receiving Chriſt, is truly counted loſs and dung, by a Paul's Eye; and ſuch an one will be willing to ſuffer the loſs thereof as dung.

Thoſe places were brought in proof, Iſai. 64.6. Luke 17.10.

And I ſhew'd this determination was not to be of ſome things only, but of all; not only things directly againſt the Precept, but all Civility, Morality, the exacteſt obedience, with the higheſt aſſiſtance of the Spirit, and ſtraighteſt aim at a right end, &c. muſt be counted and ſentenced but as loſs and dung.

But let me not he miſtaken; here I do not ſay, that the Motions themſelves of the Spirit, as his, nor the Ends and Enlargements of the Heart, as his, or the Ends aimed at, as preſcribed, muſt be thus accounted or ſentenced; but the whole Work as done, and when done by a ſanctified perſon thus aſſiſted and qualified: when ſuch a perſon looks at the Work ſo done by him, he muſt ſee nothing but meer loſs▪ and dung. 1. Loſs, becauſe that he forfeits Life and Bliſs on Earth and Heaven; there is ſin enough in it, if God had nothing elſe but what he could pick out of the beſt Work to lay to his charge; I mean, in regard of the deſert of ſuch a Work in itſelf conſidered; under the notion of ſuch loſs muſt it be lookt on: And as Dung alſo, which comprehends the cauſality of ſuch loſs in theſe Works. All things of ours, even the beſt, are of this nature; I ſay, therefore all our Righteouſneſs, at beſt, is ſuch a menſtruous Cloath in Go…'s eye, and ſo certainly in it ſelf.

Let us conſider what it is to ſuffer the loſs of all things:

1. There is a Paſſive Suffering, the loſs of all things, when a perſon is violently bereft of all. 2. There is an Active or Voluntary Suffering, the loſs of all, i. e. he was contented to take ſhame to himſelf for his beſt Actions, and account himſelf worthy to be caſt out and deſtroyed, and to be his own Judge, to paſs not only the Sentence of Confiſcation of all, but of Condemnation on his Perſon, ſaying, O wretched Man, that I am, &c. and ſo to ſtand ſtripp'd ſtark naked of all things, and all Pleas they can afford him, ſo that not to have a word to ſpeak for himſelf, that his Mouth ſhould be ſtopped, except it be in impleading all that ever he had done, as making againſt him far more than for him. And I came to the third thing, to ſhew how all things, even the moſt blameleſs Works after renovation, are loſs and dung: For illuſtration ſake, You muſt diſtinguiſh between that which is the Spirits in Works after renovation, and the whole Work after we have done it; and now followed what he rehears'd, &c. Where I ſhewed, that tho' the Motions and Aſſiſtances of the Spirit be pure and holy without Scum in the Spring, yet by that time they are mixed with our manifold Corruptions in doing, and have paſſed through the Channels of our corrupt Hearts, the whole Work becomes polluted and filthy, as pure Water paſſing through a Dunghil, &c.

And this I evinced from James, who ſaith, that whoſoever fulfills the whole Law of God, and yet offends in one point, is guilty of all: And Paul ſaith, Rom. 7. When I would do good, evil is preſent with me; and complains thus, O wretched Man, that I am, who ſhall deliver me from this body of death? and he doth not fly to his good Works, but to Chriſt, a Refuge againſt all, I thank God, through Jeſus Chriſt.

p. 54Object. But ought we to refrain therefore from doing righteouſneſs? Anſw. It follows not; but therefore we muſt refrain from glorying in it, or ſtroaking ourſelves for our righteous doings; rather take ſhame to ourſelves when done, and ſo glory only in the Lord: And tho' good Works, as done by us, are but dung in themſelves and in God's eye, yet muſt we be careful to maintain them, Tit. 3.6. and David, Pſal. 16.2, 3. confeſſeth, that his goodneſs extendeth not to God, but to the Saints. It's no good plea, that becauſe a Man cannot be wholly clean, therefore he will be more filthy than needs; becauſe your Child will be dirty, do what you can, yet ſhall be therefore go and …owl in the Gutter like a Swine.

Calv.

I perceive the ſenſe of Mr. Antinomian fully, for he ſaith, 1. That the Graces of the Spirit come clean from the Fountain. 2. That when they come into the Channels of our corrupt Hearts, they become mixt with the dirt and filth of them. 3. That thence our beſt Duties and Services become polluted. 4. That thereby they are not pleadable for righteouſneſs before God. 5. We have no cauſe to boaſt ourſelves, after Duties to ſtroak and commend ourſelves as if we had done a great matter, but to go off from Duty with humiliation and ſhame. 6. That all or any compared with the Holineſs and Purity of God, in reſpect of our coming ſhort of what is required, the mixture of ſin working in us, makes this Duty and Work done, as it is in it ſelf conſidered, to be but dung.

Now, Mr. Neonomian, what do you think or ſay of your Duties when they are done? when you have ſpent a day in Faſting and Prayer, would you not at the end of the day, deſire the Lord to pardon the Iniquity of your Holy Things, your Wanderings, Vain Thoughts ſtirring of manifold Corruptions, would you not ſay as Daniel, ch. 9.18. We do not preſent our Supplications before thee for our Righteouſneſs, but for thy great Mercies? Ought we not to abhor Ourſelves and Duties in Duſt and Aſhes, and ſay, Lord, if thou mark the Iniquities of our beſt Duties, they are enough to condemn us for ever to Eternal Wrath? How often is this ſpoken and thought by the beſt of God's Children? Or would you go off the Duty like the proud Phariſee, commending and ſtroaking yourſelf for what you had done, ſaying at laſt in your Heart, I have Pray'd well this day, Preach'd well; tho' there was ſome Imperfections, yet there was as much as God requires of me to the fulfilling the New Law; I have performed the Condition, and God muſt accept it for the ſake of my Evangelical Righteouſneſs?

Antinom.

I anſwer an Objection. Some will ſay, That God often ſhews his Approbation of good Works, which he could not do if they were all Dung. Dr. C. p. 232.

p. 55Sol.

I Anſwer, whatſoever is not of Faith is Sin, but to a Believer all things are clean: So thro' this Faith in Chriſt, the whole Filth and Dung of our Works is extracted by Chriſt, and he preſenting the ſame purged by himſelf alone, they become accepted with God, Rev. 3.4. but ſimply the Works themſelves as done, tho' never ſo well, are abhorred of God, and Chriſt never takes them to purge them, till we our ſelves wholly renounce them, by counting them Loſs and Dung; and that Acceptance procured by Chriſt, imports only a liking that God takes to them, no Efficacy in themſelves.

Calvin.

You ſee Mr. Antinom. ſaith, That tho' ſimply and in themſelves as works performed by us, they are by reaſon of Imperfection, and mixture of Corruption, to be accounted Loſs and Dung; but yet as we are in Chriſt, and perform them in Chriſt by Faith, they have acceptance with God thro' his Merits, Satisfaction, and Interceſſion; it is in him alone that both our Perſons and Services are accepted with God; our Spiritual Sacrifices, which are our Duties, we be here ſpeaking of, are ſaid to be acceptable to God, but how? By Jeſus Chriſt, 1 Pet. 2.5. and certainly in themſelves, and out of Chriſt, they are no better than Dung; we are made accepted both to Perſons and Services only in Jeſus Chriſt.

Antinom.

Object. Its granted Originally and per ſe, the beſt Righteouſneſs obtains nothing, but rather charges with a new account, yet Inſtrumentally it obtains what is deſired, being well qualified as before mentioned. Anſw. If it be no more, then I heartily deſire that we ſhould heartily ſay and expreſs as much, that the people may clearly underſtand and remember ſo much, and be guided Explicitely to the Fountain it ſelf Chriſt alone, for certainly whilſt Chriſt is ſuppreſt, and theſe Inſtruments are reached out, without relation to Chriſt, who only fills them with all that runs thro' them, they are but mere empty Pipes, and dry Channels, tho' never ſo curiouſly cut out. Dr. C. p 236.

Calvin.

And is not this great Truth, and Goſpel, Mr. Neonom? Your carping at this Doctrin plainly ſhews, that you ſet forth for another Goſpel. I perceive, wherever any thing exalts the grace of God, and the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, you ſtrike at it as ſtanding in your way, and this under a pretence of advancing Holineſs in the way of Legal Worthineſs.

You alſo deal moſt unjuſtly and diſingenuouſly with this good Man, in falſly repreſenting him, and in not acquainting us with theſe things, whereby he fully declares his meaning, and adjuſts it agreeable to the Analogy of Faith.

Now becauſe you Expoſe the Doctor ſo much for what he ſaith of the graces of the Spirit of God being once mixed with our Corruptions in a Duty; This Duty in it ſelf at beſt is as Dung, ceaſeth to be the Spirits, and becomes our own, our Fleſh being like the Viper's Stomach, that turns the wholſomeſt Food into Poiſon.

p. 56See what Excellent Mr. Beza ſaith in his Confeſſ. Chap. 4. Art. 19. It is not to be allowed, that Works are a cauſe of Salvation, in the whole, or any part, for if it were ſo, certainly there would be but a Crazy Foundation of our Salvation. We muſt of neceſſity acknowledg; that the Water and Foundation from which it flows are akin, becauſe the moſt thick Darkneſs yet remains in our Underſtandings; it would come to paſs, if God ſhould in his ſtrict Juſtice enquire into the beſt Works of a Man, there could be no other thing determined of them, but that they be the mere pollutions of God's gifts; as it often falls out, that a River, otherwiſe clear and limpid, is infected with the Filth of a Jaques thro' which it runs, Rom. 7.15, 23. Pſal. 142.2.

Now what think you of this? For my part I verily believe, that Doctor C. took his very way of Expreſſing and Illuſtrating theſe things from this very place of Mr. Beza. Now unleſs you will condemn this Learned and Approved Divine for Errour in this point, I ſee not that you can accuſe this Antinomian, as you call him.

I will ſhew you the Opinions of a Divine, who I hope you dare not call unſtudied and unlearned, it's of the famous Doctor Tuckney in his Sermons upon this Text of Phil. 3.8.

He ſaith, foreign, all things, which includes more than all, that was before mentioned. If you ask what I Anſwer, according to our Divines, whom I am not aſhamed of, or of their Judgment, All his own Inherent Righteouſneſs, and beſt Works, after Converſion, his labouring more abundantly than they all, his Converſion of many Souls, his holy and unblameable Converſation, Omnia quae & hunc Chriſtianus & Apoſtolus ago & habeo, as Zanchy upon the Text, which he ſufficiently makes out to be here included, both from the Univerſal foreign, as being intended to Expreſs more than was before Expreſſes of his Morals and Zeal before Converſion, and from the Preſent Tenſe, foreign, now that he is Converted, he Judges ſo of all that he was and is, foreign, as Chryſoſtom, and by what he ſaith, Verſ. 9. &c.

And to throw you quite on your Back, I will ſhew you a paſſage in the Aſſembly's Confeſſion, which you would not ſee, Chap. XVI. of Good Works, Sect. V.

When we have done all we can, we have done but our Duty, and are unprofitable Servants; and becauſe as they are good, they proceed from the Spirit, and as they are wrought by us, they are defiled and mixed with ſo much Weakneſs and Imperfection, that they cannot endure the Severity of God's Judgment. Yet notwithſtanding the Perſons of Believers are accepted thro' Chriſt, and their Good Works alſo are accepted in him, &c.

Now, Sir, Seeing the Doctrin which you ſo Peremptorily call Errour, is ſo clearly proved to be Truth, let us hear what you have to ſay, in ſtating and defending your Judgment; and I pray Mr. Antinom. do you Whip the Top with him.

Neonom.

Truth, Tho' the preſent ſincere Holineſs of Believers be not perfect, according to the Precepts of the Word; nor valuable by the Sanction of the Law of Innocency, nor any Attonement for our defects; and …e ſtill need Forgiveneſs, and the Merits of Chriſt, for acceptance thereof, p. 57yet as far as it prevails, it's Lovely in it ſelf, and pleaſing to God, and is not Dung or Filth.

Antinom.

We ſhall divide your Canon into Two parts, the Negative and Poſitive; you tell us what it is not, and firſt Note, That you change the Terms; for the Doctor ſpeaks of Works performed by us, when a Duty is performed, and becomes a Compoſitum of the pure Graces of the Spirit mixed with the Corrupt indwelling Motions of our own Hearts; and hence he diſtinguiſheth between Grace flowing from the Spirit, which is purely Holy, and Grace acted and performed by us through the aſſiſtance of the Spirit, therefore we muſt keep you to the Doctor's Terms, viz. to our ſincere Works, or ſincere Holineſs, taken in that ſenſe. This being premiſed,

1. You tell us theſe Works are imperfect, and not according to the Word, therefore ſo far ſinful; for whoſoever keeps the whole Law, and offendeth in one point, is guilty of all, James 2.10. And ſo I ſay of any Duty, if it fail in one point, it's chargeable with breach of the whole Law, ſo the Duty is foreign, and all foreign is Dung and Filth.

2. You ſay it's not valuable by the Law of Innocency; that's ſaid before, for what is not according to God's Precept, is Condemned by God's Law, by every Law of God; it's ſo far from Valuableneſs, it ſtands under a Sentence of Condemnation: God never accepted or owned Imperfect Obedience as ſu…h, and in it ſelf; neither is it conſiſtent with his pure Nature ſo to do.

3. You ſay it cannot make Attonement; If it ſtand for Acceptable Righteouſeneſs and Holineſs, it muſt make Attonement for its Defects and ſinful Pollutions; the High Prieſt was to make Attonement for his own Sins before he could be accepted, ſo in this Caſe, that Righteouſneſs that cannot Attone for its own Sins, if there be any, cannot be Acceptable to God; but you ſay, this Righteouſneſs cannot make Attonement for its Sins, therefore in it ſelf can never be Acceptable to God.

Poſit.

1. You ſay, we ſtill need Forgiveneſs, and the Merits of Chriſt, for Acceptance of theſe Works. 1. Then I ſay they are Sinful, or elſe would not need Forgiveneſs. 2. They need the Merits of Chriſt, and therefore not Acceptable Righteouſneſs in themſelves, they are as Dung and Stink in the Noſtrils of God, the beſt Works in themſelves are ſuch; whatever is not capable in it ſelf, to make it ſelf Acceptable in the ſight of God, if it have p. 58no relation to another Righteouſneſs, it Stinks, and is Abominable in the Noſtrils of God.

3. You ſay, ſo far as it prevails its lovely, i. e. not at all of it ſelf. Obſerve ſtill what we ſay, No good Work of a Believer prevails to Acceptation of us; and if not, it prevails not at all, and that which prevails not to Acceptation, is not lovely in it ſelf, for nothing is lovely to God but what he Accepts; and hence you conclude, it is not Dung or Filth; but from what you your ſelf have ſaid, it can be no other than Dung; whatever cannot be Accepted of God without Forgiveneſs, and the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, to make it Acceptable, is in it ſelf and out of Chriſt Dung. But I perceive what you aim at, that it is a Righteouſneſs that comes in for a ſhare with Chriſt, and in part it prevails to Acceptation, tho' not altogether, and here you fall in with the Council of Trent, as in all your Doctrin, That the Grace of Juſtification and Acceptance is not only the favour of God, and by the Merit of Chriſt, but that our Works prevail in ſome degree.

Neonom.

I will tell you wherein the difference lies, 1. It is not whether Holineſs, or the beſt Acts of a Saint, be ſuch, or ſo perfect, as to Attone for his Sin, or procure a State of Pardon.

Antinom.

This is a ſtrange kind of talking about a Saint's good Works, Attoning or Procuring a State of Pardon, as if there could be a Saint before he is in a State of Pardon. And as for thoſe Works that need Attonement, and cannot make Attonement for themſelves, they are in themſelves but pitiful Menſtruous Rags, Droſs, and Dung, for Non Acceptation with God makes all Works ſuch, tho' ſeemingly never ſo good.

Neonom.

Nor whether our Holineſs can make us Accepted with God without Chriſt.

Antinom.

Then it is not worth a Pin in it ſelf without Chriſt.

Neonom.

Nor whether the Holieſt Action of the Holieſt Saint is ſuch, as not to need Forgiveneſs.

Antinom.

That which needs Forgiveneſs is Sin, and therefore Filth, but according to you, The Holieſt Action of a Holieſt Saint is ſuch, according to your ſelf: Ergo.

Neonom.

Nor whether by the Sanction of the Law of Innocency, Sincere Holineſs could be accounted Holineſs. All this I deny.

Antinom.

There could be no other Holineſs counted Holineſs by the old Law, but Sincere Holineſs; but imperfect Sincere Holineſs was not accepted there, nor in and by it ſelf, in any other Law, or Goſpel; as ſuch.

p. 59Neonom.

Nothing under that Law but perfect Conformity to the Precept was Holineſs, whereas Goſpel Grace makes a great difference between true Holineſs, tho' imperfect, and wha't formally Wickedneſs, between Sincere Love and Enmity, Sincere Faith and Ʋtter Ʋnbelief.

Antinom.

If perfect Conformity was the Holineſs of the old Law required, it's an Argument that nothing will ſerve the grace of the Goſpel but a Holineſs anſwerable to it in perfection; and whatever difference you make to be between imperfect true Holineſs, and formal Wickedneſs, I tell you, the formal difference between perfect Holineſs and imperfect, is Sin, for this Imperfection lieth in Sin, a coming ſhort of Moral Perfection can lie in nothing but in ſome degree or other of Sin. But is it the Goſpel makes the difference between Virtue and Vice? Sure its the Law doth that.

Neonom.

The real difference lieth here, whether the ſincere Holineſs of a Believer's Heart and Actions be really Dung and Rotteneſs? This the Doctor affirms, and I deny, D. W. p. 198.

Antinom.

The Doctor affirms, That the Works, Services, or Performances of a Believer being full of Imperfection, and mingled with Sin, are not acceptable to God, but thro' Faith in Jeſus Chriſt, and compared with the pure Holineſs and Juſtice of God, and the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt and his Holineſs in which he ſtands, are and ought to be accounted by him as Loſs and Dung.

Neonom.

Whether ſincere Holineſs, ſo far as it prevails in our Hearts and Actings, be truly lovely in it ſelf, and pleaſing to God, according to the grace of the Goſpel, and is not Dung. This I affirm, and the Doctor denies.

Antinom.

The Queſtion is, Whether Holy Works performed by the beſt Men, be not Polluted with Sin, and whether they can be truly lovely, and pleaſing to God in themſelves out of Chriſt, according to any grace of the Goſpel, and therefore are not as Dung? This I deny, tho' you affirm, and a Thouſand more.

Neonom.

What is ſpoken of Holineſs of any meer Man on Earth ſince the fall, is ſpoken of ſincere Holineſs for perfect Holineſs none had.

Antinom.

What hath been ſpoken of Holineſs that God hath accepted, is of true Holineſs, i. e. Sanctification in Chriſt Jeſus. Sincerity may be where there's no true Holineſs; Paul had Sincerity in his ſuppoſed Holineſs, he verily thought he did God good Service in perſecuting the Churches; good ends and meanings which a Carnal Man may have in his Mind, are not enough to make an Action good.

p. 60Neonom.

I have room but to Expoſtulate.

Antinom.

Becauſe you cannot find a good Argument to bring in; you might have had more room if you would, and it would have been more for your Honour, ſo as you had ſerved Truth in it; but go on with your Expoſtulation.

Neonom.

Is that Dung which is the effect of Regeneration in the Soul and Actings?

Antinom.

You ſhould have ſaid, the Effect of the Spirit; for Regeneration it ſelf is not an Efficient, but an Effect, and that which is the Efficient of Regeneration is ſo alſo of all the Vital Acts in a Regenerate Perſon; now we have told you before, that the pure graces of the Spirit paſſing thro' the Corrupt Channel of Man's Heart, becomes in a Duty like defiled Pudled Water, and ſuch Duty in it ſelf only conſidered, is as Dung in the ſight of God, and ought to be accounted ſo by us.

Neonom.

Is that Dung which is ſo often honoured with the Name of the Spirit it ſelf, and called the Spirit of Love, Prayer, &c.

Antinom.

You ſhould have named the places where our Works are called by the Name of the Holy Spirit of God; as for the Spirit of Love, that is the diſpoſition of Love, and as to the Spirit of Prayer, where it's taken for the Spirit's helping our Infirmities, it is ſpoken of as diſtinct from our Prayers themſelves.

Neonom.

Is not that more Lovely which is called the Divine Nature, 2 Pet. 1.4.

Antinom.

The Divine Nature there, is the Spirit of Chriſt received by Faith, for it's given in many great and precious Promiſes, and whatever of Divine Nature we receive, it is of God, and in conformity to and participation of Chriſt, all which is pure, as flowing from the Spring, but when it comes to be Exerted and put forth by us in our Duties, becomes impure, and mixed with the Corruptions, ſo the whole Duty in it ſelf is but an Unclean thing.

Neonom.

How Amiable muſt that be which is the New Man after God's Image, Eph. 4.24.

Antinom.

Take the New Man Created after God, diſtinctly conſidered, as it comes from God, it's a pure Creature; but this hinders not, but the Regenerat Man is made up of the Old and New Man, and all his Actions and Duties partake of both, and therefore polluted; for Paul ſaid, the Old Man hindred him from doing good when he would, for then Evil was preſent with him; the ſame may be ſaid of the New Heart, Ezek. 18.31. The Law in p. 61the Members is warring againſt the Law of the Mind in every part and faculty of Soul and Body.

Neonom.

Are thoſe Works Dung to which we are Created in Chriſt Jeſus, Eph. 2.10.

Antinom.

We are created in Chriſt Jeſus unto good Works, to be performed in Chriſt Jeſus; ſo far as we are in Chriſt Jeſus, and our Works in Chriſt Jeſus, they are not Dung; neither doth the Doctor ſay they be, but when performed out of Chriſt in ourſelves, and in themſelves, they are but as Dung: Chriſt is made our Sanctification, and all that Holineſs in us that is accepted, it's not only in and for his Righteouſneſs, but it's performed in the Life and Power of Chriſt our Sanctification; therefore he ſaith, 1 Cor. 1.30. that what we are we are in Chriſt Jeſus, who of God is made unto us Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, Sanctification, &c.

Neonom.

Or is that filthineſs which renders Saints the excellent of the Earth, Pſal. 16 2.

Antinom.

Doth not David ſay, ver. 2. My goodneſs extendeth not to thee? the original words (if you underſtood them) is fuller, as to the ſenſe intended, tho' ſhorter than the Tranſlation, foreign My Goodneſs is not to thee, or nothing to thee, and the LXX have it, foreign, thou haſt no need of my Goodneſs. Do you ſay, Is that Filthineſs which renders the Saints Excellent? I had thought it was the Grace of God, Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and the Inbeing in Chriſt, that had rendred them Excellent, not their own Works.

Neonom.

The Imitators of Chriſt?

Antinom.

Scholars that Write after another, may make very ſorry work mere Scribling, that the Maſter, tho' he finds reaſon in himſelf to accept, would, if he did not, tear it all to pieces.

Neonom.

Was not this it for which Caleb was ſaid to have another Spirit, and upon account whereof we muſt love the Godly, as begotten of God?

Antinom.

Was Caleb's Works his Spirit, or his Works flow from his ſingular Spirit; his Spirit was a Spirit of Faith, thro' which he did ſo great things in Chriſt Jeſus, and ſo the Works were accepted, Heb. 11. The Foundation Reaſon of our Love to the Saints, is Chriſt loving them, and their Relation to Chriſt; every one that loveth him that begat, loveth him that is begotten of him, and by this we know we love the Children of God, when we love God, 1 John 5.1, 2.

p. 62Neonom.

Is it not pleaſing to God, to which he hath made ſo many promiſes, and for which he commends Moſes, David, &c.

Antinom.

As God is not pleaſed with any Perſons, ſo with no Works, out of Chriſt, neither hath made any promiſes to any ſuch out of Chriſt, all the beſt Works are caſt forth as Filth, and Odious, if done out of Chriſt.

Neonom.

Calling them a peculiar People, its no ſmall thing that Chriſt is ſo pleaſed with his Spouſe.

Antinom.

They are peculiar, becauſe purchaſed, and have peculiar Bleſſings and Privileges, and bring forth peculiar Fruits, in Chriſt Jeſus, John 15.5, 6. without me ye can do nothing, and if a Man abide not in me he is caſt forth as a Branch that is withered, and any Work that is done out of Chriſt, is but Dung, as 1 Cor. 3.12, 13. If a Man in Chriſt build Hay, Stubble, his Works will be burnt, and he ſuffer loſs, tho' he may be ſaved. Chriſt is pleaſed with his Spouſe his Church, becauſe he hath loved it, and waſhed it in his own Blood, and therefore ſhe is Comely; but as for what ſhe is in her ſelf, and as to her Works in themſelves, and done out of Chriſt, ſhe is but Black, as the Tents of Kedar, &c. Sol. 1.5.

Neonom.

Can that be Dung which is a Meetneſs for Glory, an Honour to God, and Credit to Religion?

Antinom.

Our Meetneſs for Glory is all from Grace, there's nothing that flows from our ſelves, no Work done out of Chriſt, can contribute to any Meetneſs, all our Meetneſs is in Chriſt Jeſus as made unto us Righteouſneſs, and Sanctification, and we grow up in him in all things; as for our relation unto Men, we ſay with the Apoſtle, they are profitable to Men, and be a means that they Glorifie God on our behalf, but God hath no direct Honour by them, if not performed by Faith in Chriſt.

Neonom.

How can that be Acceptable to God in Chriſt, if it be Filthineſs?

Antinom.

Good Works are good in their kind, but comparatively, and in themſelves, becauſe of the mixture of Sin and Corruption, they are in the ſenſe of the Spirit of God but Filth; you may as well ſay, how can Paul be Acceptable to God thro' Chriſt, who ſaith, In me dwelleth no good thing? Muſt Perſons and Actions be free from all adhering Corruption, by reaſon whereof they in themſelves are Abominable to the pure Eye of God, before they be made Acceptable to God thro' Jeſus Chriſt? This is like your p. 63conſtant Doctrins; Perſons, and Actions, muſt be good firſt, before they have benefit by Jeſus Chriſt.

Neonom.

Wickedneſs will never be Accepted with God for Chriſt ſake, tho' imperfect Goodneſs ſhall.

Antinom.

No imperfect Goodneſs can be Accepted as Righteouſneſs with God for Chriſt ſake: Chriſt never ſo much as purchaſed, that any of our beſt Graces or Works ſhould be Accepted as our Righteouſneſs, and it cannot be Accepted unto Holineſs out of Chriſt; and the Doctor never ſaid, our good Works wrought by Faith in Chriſt are Dung, ſo as not thro' Chriſt to be Accepted unto Holineſs; but imperfect Works are no more our Righteouſneſs for Acceptation with God, than Wickedneſs, neither in their Nature, for Chriſt's ſake.

Neonom.

Read what is ſpoken of Sincerity and Ʋprightneſs, will it agree with what's Mortal Poiſon?

Antinom.

Moral Sincerity and Uprightneſs may, and ſo is all out of Chriſt.

Neonom.

What a Reproach is it to Chriſt, to call his Life in us, and the beginning of Glory by this Title?

Antinom.

The Life of Chriſt in us, is by the Faith of the Son of God, and we are Crucified with Chriſt to all that's done by us, and therefore account it Dung and Droſs in compariſon of all done by us; and Works give us not Title to Glory, tho' Grace begins it.

Neonom.

Nay, to make his Triumphs in us ſo low, as that all he hath improved his Members to, is mere Filthineſs.

Antinom.

The Triumph of Chriſt in us, is the caſting down Imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth it ſelf againſt the knowledg of God, and bringing into Captivity every Thought to the Obedience of Chriſt.

Neonom.

It's well if the Scriptures can eſcape clean, if all the Works of the Spirit are thus debaſed when they paſs thro' Men.

Antinom.

The Scriptures are clean in themſelves as from the Spirit, but the Works done by us are not Scripture, tho' they be in ſome meaſure conformed thereto.

Neonom.

But I leſs wonder that Doctor Criſp ſhould ſpeak thus of the Righteouſneſs of the Saints, as in them, when he ſaith, the Enemies of Chriſt may have Sincerity and ſingleneſs of Heart towards God, P. 450, 451, 452.

Antinom.

Doth not he prove that Paul in his Unregenerate Eſtate was blameleſs as to the Law's Righteouſneſs, Phil. 3.6. and p. 64what Paul did againſt the Churches, he verily thought that he ought to do it, Acts 26.9. Was not this Sincerity at leaſt in his apprehenſion, had he not an Eye in what he did to the Glory of God? The Jews alſo had a Zeal for God, Rom. 10. but you wrong him in charging him for ſaying, That ſingleneſs of Heart may be in the Enemies of Chriſt; for he acquaints us what it is from Eph. 5, 6. Singleneſs of Heart is a doing what he doth as unto Chriſt, and for the Lord's ſake. And he ſaith, The beſt ſhall find it difficult to find it in all they do.

Neonom.

I will ſhew you the grounds of the miſtake, becauſe our Goodneſs extends not to God for his profit, therefore he regards it not no more than Dung and Filthineſs.

Antinom.

Notably hit, you ſhould have ſaid, becauſe he chargeeth his Angels with Folly, therefore he will admire the Righteouſneſs of them that dwell in Houſes of Clay, Job 4.18, 19. An Holier Man than you could ſay, If I Juſtifie my ſelf, mine own Mouth ſhall Condemn me, Verſ. 21. If I were perfect, yet would I not know my Soul, I would deſpiſe my Life, Job 9.21. Prov. 20.9. Who can ſay, I have made my Heart clean, I am pure from my Sin? And who can ſay, this or that Duty is or will commend him to God?

Neonom.

Object. Doth not Iſrael ſay, Iſa. 64.6. All our Righteouſneſs is as Filthy Rags? Anſw. But that is ſpoken of Perſons, and not of real Holineſs; it's the ſame as Micah 7.4. and Iſa. 1.6. Corruption had invaded the very Prieſts, and the generality of the beſt Profeſſors, &c.

Antinom.

But where have you this Notion upon the place? I'le tell you where you had it, viz. in the Aſſembly's Annotations on the place.

The Annotator takes notice of variety of Opinions about the meaning of this place, and to encreaſe the number, he brings in his ſingular Opinion that hath leſs ground than all the reſt. He tells us, By Righteouſneſs ſome underſtand Legal Rites and Sacrifices, but ſo performed by them, that they found no Grace or Acceptance, but were abominable in God's ſight; and the Jews extend it further to their Good Works, which were ſo ill done out of Vain-glory, or by Corrupt Grounds and Ends, that they were as Filthy Rags in God's ſight, ſuch were the Phariſees, &c. Laſtly, Many of ours draw it in further, and take in all the beſt Works and Actions even of the beſt performed, in the beſt manner, as not free from ſome default or defilement. And thus both divers of the Ancients, and very many not Proteſtants only, but Popiſh Writers alſo, and not a few, do both expound and apply the place, and theſe latter, [viz. the Popiſh Writers] with thoſe Ancients, giving Teſtimony thereby unto the Truth herein maintained by us againſt thoſe of their ſide, that do herein Controul and Oppoſe us.

p. 65Is this Interpretation ſo generally received by Learned Interpreters, Ancient and Latter, both Papiſts and Proteſtants, by the Annotator's own Confeſſion, and ſo Eminent a Truth which the Papiſts oppoſe, maintained againſt them by it? And ſhall we deſert ſo plain, natural, and uſeful an Interpretation, and one ſo generally agreed on by Learned Proteſtant Interpreters, to embrace one ſingle Man's Opinion that ſets by the Text as altogether uſeleſs to thoſe great purpoſes for which the Proteſtants have uſed and refuted the Papiſts by their own Authorities, as the Annotator himſelf acknowledgeth? And for what Senſe and Interpretation muſt we part with it? the received Senſe. Our Annotator's deſign is to wave that received Senſe upon any terms, tho' he will not flatly deny it, but tells us of a more Genuine Senſe, and what's that? 1. It's that which is not commonly received, and therefore he is ſingle in it. 2. It's a Tropical Senſe, he makes the Abſtract put for the Concrete, and what need of ſuch a Senſe, when there's no reaſon to ſuppoſe ſuch a Trope in the Words? And that's againſt the general Rules of Interpretation.

He ſaith, That which induced thoſe both Ancienter and later Writers to bring within compaſs of this Doom, in this place, thoſe defects and defaults adhering to, and alloying the pureſt Practices of the moſt Sincere, ſeems to have been, becauſe the Prophet ſaith, Our Righteouſneſſes, as ſpeaking in his own Perſon, &c. He ſaith, The Words may well be underſtood, with thoſe Jewiſh Doctors, for thoſe Semblances of Holineſs and Righteouſneſs that was among them, [ſo that by our Righteouſneſs may well be underſtood, our Hypocriſies,] but he rather recommends his Genuine Senſe, and what's that? The Prophet hath a very remote meaning, viz. He ſpeaks of our Righteouſneſſes, and he means Righteous Men, and not Righteous Men neither, but Wicked and Corrupt Men, Bryars and Thorns, ſuch as the Prophet Micah ſpeaks of, Mic. 7.4. plain Bryars and Thorns; and now here's a plain Text of Scripture merely ſham'd off, and delivered up into the hands of the Papiſts, and ſo we ſhall trick off one Text after another, till they have got them all.

I acknowledg that which the Jewiſh Interpreters ſay, the Prophet Perſonates the Church in this Prayer; but then he Perſonates the very beſt of them, as well as the very corrupt and degenerate part, for after the Churches deſire, that God would wonderfully appear for her Deliverance and Reformation, as formerly he had done, Ch. 64.1, 2, 3. ſhe lays the Caſe of Two ſorts that were among them before the Lord; the Holy and Sincere, and the Corrupt p. 66and Apoſtate part, the Basket of Good Figs, and of Rotten Figs; for the beſt part, (they were not Prophane, nor Hypocrites,) but are Characterized, as waiters upon God, partakers of ſpecial Grace, as appears by the Application the Apoſtle makes of Verſ. 4. 1 Cor. 2.9. The Prophet inſiſts upon the deſcription of them, that we might not be miſtaken; and ſuppoſe that he meant the Prophane or Hypocritical part, they are ſuch as work Righteouſneſs, and God meets, that Rejoice in God's ways; and tho' they are under the National Wrathful Calamities, yet ſuch as ſhould be ſaved; which muſt be underſtood of Spiritual Salvation, for they were to take their ſhare with others in the Captivity, and External Calamities in them were continuance; hence the Holieſt and Beſt proſtrate themſelves, and acknowledg their Faith of Salvation was not built upon any Righteouſneſs or Worthineſs of their own. For the Nation had not only ſinned, but they had ſinned and fallen ſhort of their Duty in their beſt performances, and we are ſo far from pleading or rejoicing in our own Righteouſneſs, or Holineſs, (for in the Old Teſtament Dialect, Perſonal Holineſs is often called Righteouſneſs,) that we are all as an Unclean Thing, we are Polluted with ſo much Sin and Corruption, and our very Righteouſneſs and Holineſs are as Filthy Rags, our Goodneſs is as the Morning-Dew, we fade as a Leaf towards Autumn, and our Iniquities have withered us. We ſee, the whole Nation, under the Bliting Winds of thy Diſpleaſure for its Iniquities: And then he proceeds to ſhew how great a ſcarcity there was of thoſe that were Sincere, for there's few that call upon God, there's none, i. e. but a very few comparatively, [there was never ſo an Apoſtate time but there's ſome, as in Elijah's time,] that calleth upon thy Name, i. e. ſincerely and earneſtly, ſo as to ſtir up themſelves to call upon God; then ſhe proceeds to confeſs Sin, and bemoan her ſelf in regard of deſolating Calamities, acknowledging God's Juſtice and Soveraignty, but Appealing to his Mercy, and their Intereſt in God as a Father, O Lord thou art our Father. Its moſt evident then the Prophet moſtly perſonates the choiſeſt, tho' the leaſt part of the Church, who is ſet forth here, flying to the Throne of Grace, and renouncing her own Righteouſneſs, even her beſt Duties, accounting them as Filthy Rags. We are, ſaith ſhe, all of us, even the holieſt among us, foreign i. e. foreign, he doth not ſay, we are abſolutely an unclean thing, as all Wicked Men and Hypocrites are, but that we are, as if it were ſo, in reſpect of the prevalency of Corruption, p. 67and preſent decay, and thy dealing with us as if thou wouldſt caſt us off, and all our Righteouſneſs as a Filthy Garment, foreign i. e. foreign all our Righteouſneſs, of what ſort ſoever it is, as Pannus ſedentis, the Peraphraſis of the Syriac and Arabic calls it, Panniculus menſtruata, and the Chaldeac Paraphraſe, foreign Sicut Veſtamentum Abjectum, foreign ſignifies things removed as unclean and polluted, Res Inquinatae & Abominabiles quae removentur & abjiciuntur; The Import is, that God's Children ſee ſo much Corruption and Pollution in their beſt Duties, that they dare not plead them for acceptance before the Lord. And how many Ten Thouſand times hath this place of Scripture been thus applied by the Saints and Churches of the New Teſtament? What Expreſſion is more frequent in their Prayers, and more Eminently Exalting the Grace of God, and the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt? It's not only the Goſpel Spirit of Miniſters, but of all true Chriſtians, that leads them to the Practical Improvement of this portion of Scripture; and ſhall the Univerſal Spirit and Senſe of all Believers in all Ages be Condemned by One or Two ſingular Men, that are for crying up their own Righteouſneſs, and will not have it to be Filthy Rags, or Dung? I apprehend, there's not a little alſo in putting the Plural Number, which the Seventy Two Explain univerſally with foreign, there's no Righteouſneſs of ours, inward, or outward, before Regeneration, or after, that hold the Teſt before God in it ſelf for Acceptance, much leſs render us Acceptable to God. I'le ſet againſt your Annotator the Dutch Annotations, who upon this place ſay, All our Righteouſneſs, all our beſt Works, or whatever Good we might have done, are as a caſt Garment, if they ſhould be examined according to their own Nature, according to the Rigour of the Law, out of Chriſt, Phil. 3.8. See on the contrary what we are in Chriſt Jeſus, Rev. 19.8.

Neonom.

Object. The Apoſtle ſaith, Phil. 3.8.

Anſw. If this place ſpeaks of Goſpel Righteouſneſs, as his own things which he counted Dung, it doth not prove that Holineſs is Dung.

Antinom.

Did I not ſpeak of Holineſs abſtractly conſidered, and of Duties and Services performed by us, and mingled with Sin, are reckoned Dung becauſe they cannot render us Acceptable to God, for Imperfect Righteouſneſs cannot. Holineſs entire without defect and failure is one thing, and Holineſs mixed with ſo much Sin and Corruption, as is in our Hearts and Duties, is another.

p. 68Neonom.

All that it can infer, is, that in compariſon with winning Chriſt, it was eſteemed as Dung.

Antinom.

That is as much as to ſay, that your own Righteouſneſs is but as Dung in compariſon of what you ſhall gain by it; your Bargain will be ſo good, your Mony bears not proportion to the Eſtate that you have bought with your Mony.

Neonom.

And who muſt not own, that compared with gaining Chriſt, the beſt thing in us is Vile, compared with his Righteouſneſs, yet it muſt not be Vile in it ſelf?

Antinom.

So far as any thing is Sinful its Vile, and ſo far its unprofitable to the end that I employ it; its Vile in both thoſe caſes; our Duties are Vile, becauſe its impoſſible they ſhould be a Juſtifying Righteouſneſs, or recommend us to God, therefore a Chriſtian looks upon them Vile upon this account; we ſpeak not againſt Duties, but for them, but they muſt not preſume to be our Righteouſneſs for Juſtification: Upon this account they muſt be reckoned Dung, it is not enough to ſay, compared with Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, as if Chriſt's Righteouſneſs were better, and had a preheminence in Juſtification, and ours next to it, but that our Righteouſneſs hath no ſhare at all in that matter, for God never intended that the moſt Eminent Graces and Virtues of God's People ſhould ever be a Righteouſneſs to Juſtifie them, becauſe they are upon this account Rejectamenta, as Bricks are to the making a Braſs Kettle, Ex quovis ligno non fit Mercurius, a Man cannot cut out the Wheels of a Watch with a Broad Ax out of a Rock.

Neonom.

As Rivals with Chriſt we muſt hate Father and Mother.

Antinom.

Yea, and if they go to ſet themſelves inſtead of Chriſt, or to claim an inferiour degree of ſhare in being a Righteouſneſs, or patching up a Righteouſneſs for us.

Neonom.

Tho' I own the Imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt for our Juſtification, yet I think to ground it on this place, is a damage to the Truth, and therefore I add, 2. A Goſpel Holineſs, or Righteouſneſs, is not here intended by Dung.

Antinom.

How you own Imputed Righteouſneſs, hath been already made manifeſt, and that you do not own it in other ſenſe than in that which is no owning of it, but denying of it, hath appeared: But it ſeems you are now ſuch a Friend to that Doctrin, that you would not have Scripture to damage it, and that grounding it here on this place hath been a damage to it. The Aſſembly at Weſtminſter hath done damage to the Doctrin of Imputation, in grounding it on this place, Large Catechiſm, Queſt. 72. p. 69Shorter Catechiſm, Queſt. 33. and Dr. Ameſ. in his Medulla, C. 27. S. 12. And Dr. Owen you alſo have done damage to this Doctrin of Imputation, by grounding it on this Text, Treat. of Juſtific. p. 526. Mr. Calvin, Mr. Beza, Mr. Zanchy, and all you Reformed Proteſtants, you have thought you had a mighty place to ground the Doctrin of Imputation upon, and now our Divines, eſpecially this Gentleman, and a great Train at his Heels, bear Witneſs againſt you, and ſay, you have done a great damage to the Doctrin of Imputation, by making uſe of this place of Scripture to prove it. Now I ſee others are miſtaken as well as I.

Calvin.

I Obſerve Gentlemen, That you all ſit Aſtoniſhed to ſee that at ſuch a time of Day, here ſhould be ſo bold an Aſſertion made, to overthrow the Doctrin of the Goſpel, and to make this Text of Scripture no better than Dung, becauſe it aſſerts all our own Righteouſneſs to be Dung in the point of Juſtification. I think Bellarmine, or Socinus, could not have made a more groſs Aſſertion.

There is a Gentleman, whoſe Face I think I ſee among you, whom I would requeſt to undertake Mr. Neonom. in the Oppoſition that he makes againſt this Portion of Scripture; I think I remember where and againſt whom he once made a Strenuous Defence of it. Gentlemen its Mr. Antiſozzo I ſpeak to, I pray, Mr. Antiſozzo be pleaſed to appear in this great Debate that lies before us.

Antiſozzo.

I pray Sir Excuſe me, here are more Ancient Divines, Mr. Zuinglius, and Mr. Muſculus, &c. and later Dr. Owen, whoſe Judgment Mr. Neonomian aſcribes much to.

Calvin.

Indeed Sir you cannot be Excuſed; at which all Cried, Mr. Antiſozzo.

Antiſozzo.

Gentlemen, I'le aſſure you, it is not convenient by any means that I ſhould appear in this Cauſe now againſt Mr. Neonom. he is my ſpecial Friend, one whoſe Learning and Judgment I will as ſoon ſubſcribe to, by an Implicite Faith, as any Man I know, beſides there's a particular reaſon that is not convenient to Publiſh.

Calv.

Sir, thoſe things are but your Modeſt Evaſions, the Society will not be ſatisfied, unleſs you undertake Mr. Neonom. in this point.

Antiſozzo.

If it muſt be ſo, it muſt be ſo, Mr. Neonomian look to your hits, for I'le aſſure you I will not ſpare you; I will have none of your ſhifts and tricks, none of your whethers nor neithers; p. 70I'le have the Queſtion fairly ſtated; the main Queſtion will be, What was that Righteouſneſs which the Apoſtle renounces, from having any place in his Juſtification before God? Upon this one hinge turns all the Controverſie betwixt us, Antiſozzo. P. 547.

Neonom.

I anſwer, the things which he renounceth were Jewiſh Priviledges, and that conceited Chriſtleſs Righteouſneſs which he once valued as thoſe Dogs at preſent did, but it was not that Goſpel Holineſs which by the Grace of Christ he was now Partaker of. There's an Objection I know lies against this Aſſertion, and it is this; how doth both theſe appear? I anſwer, from the whole Scope of the Chapter, D. W. p. 203

Antiſozzo.

I ſuppoſe then we ſhall join iſſue, and your Objection which you make was but a Queſtion, which you ask your ſelf and anſwer.

We ſay and affirm, That the Righteouſneſs which the Apoſtle renounces, is whatever inherent Righteouſneſs he had attained or could attain, whatever Obedience he hath performed or could perform to the Commands of God.

That which he calls his own Righteouſneſs, he tells in the next words, foreign.

Neonom.

Thereby he intends not ſinleſs Obedience nor Goſpel Sincerity, but a Life not to be blamed by the rule of the Jewiſh Pedagogy, that's his Righteouſneſs foreign. D. W. p. 204.

Antiſozzo.

It was that which is from Law, from a Law, from any Law indefinitely; now a Righteouſneſs which is from a Law, is ſuch an one as the Law urgeth, and preſſes upon and preſcribes to the Conſcience; but that, without queſtion, is an internal Conformity of the Soul to the Holineſs of the Law; but this the Apoſtle rejects, therefore he rejects internal and inherent Righteouſneſs. 2. Who doubts but when he ſaith his own Righteouſneſs, it is his own Righteouſneſs; and this is not to be fetcht from ſome ſorry Conjectures which Men (when they are in ſtreights) invent to avoid preſent ruin, but from ſtable, fixed, conſtant uſe in Scripture; my own Righteouſneſs is as my own or your own Works taken for real ſincere conformity of Heart and Life to a Law; and this is the fixed uſe in Scripture, Gen. 30.33. My Righteouſneſs ſhall anſwer for me. You Mr. Neonomian would Paraphraſe upon it thus, My Roguery ſhall anſwer for me, Job 27.6. My Righteouſneſs I hold faſt, i. e. you would ſay, My Hypocriſie I hold faſt, Mat. 5.16. That Men may ſee your good Works, i. e. in the new Gloſſary. Your Complement, Dan. 9.18. we preſent not our Supplications before thee for our Righteouſneſs; the Church muſt not mean real Righteouſneſs, but the Sceleton of Obedience. Now if the Apoſtle deſigned only to reject his own Hypocriſie, he was not ſo barren in Expreſſion, but he could have fitted it with its proper Name. 3. The Apoſtle expreſly renounceth whatever he had attained before and after his Converſion, v. 7. The things that were Gain, theſe I accounted Loſs for Chriſt; but is that all? No! Yea, doubtleſs, I do account all things but Loſs, foreign, I do now account, I have accounted, foreign, all things in Judaiſm Loſs when I was firſt convinced; and I do now account all things, even mine own Righteouſneſs, Loſs and Dung for Chriſt; and there n. b. the Apoſtle riſeth higher in his earneſtneſs, v. 8. Yea, doubtleſs, q. d. did I ſay that I once looked upon all as Loſs for Chriſt? I will p. 71ſpeak a bolder word than that, I count all but Loſs, Dung and Filth, that I may win Chriſt, and be found in him, not having mine own Righteouſneſs; and the little value he had for his own Righteouſneſs further appears, that it was in reference to the day of Judgment, Antiſ. p. 550.

Neonom.

My own Righteouſneſs can ſignifie no more than my Phariſaical Righteouſneſs, or that wherein I placed my Righteouſneſs.

Antiſozzo.

I beg your pardon, Sir, it ſignifies more than that wherein he placed his Righteouſneſs, whilſt a Phariſee; and a great deal leſs than that wherein he placed his Righteouſneſs after Converſion, in order to Juſtification; but if the Apoſtle renounced whatever he placed his Righteouſneſs in, then either he placed it in inherent Righteouſneſs, or not; if not, how dare you place it where he durſt not? If he ever did place his Righteouſneſs in it, then he here openly declares to the World that he renounces it.

Neonom.

But there's no neceſſity to underſtand this of inherent Goſpel-Holineſs, for that is not his own Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, which is oppoſed to that which is by the Faith of Christ; an external Righteouſneſs ſerves moſt Men's turns very well; and this is that whereby the Phariſees expected to be juſtifyed.

Antiſozzo.

The Phariſees were generally bad enough, and you need not make them worſe: It's a Sin, we ſay, to belie the Devil; it doth not appear that the Phariſees expected to be juſtified before God by an external Obedience only, without Sincerity. — As to Paul, whilſt he was a Phariſee he was no Hypocrite, he every where vindicates himſelf, Act. 25.8, 9. 1 Tim. 1.13. Act. 23.1. and others of the Phariſees were ſober, conſcientious Men. And the Diſcourſe of Paul's Maſter Gamaliel, Act 5. ſhews, he had a great deal more Religion in him, than moſt of thoſe who carry on a deſign to rail at them for Hypocriſie.

Neonom.

But I'll tell you what his Righteouſneſs was, Circumciſed the eighth day, of the Seed of Abraham, and it conſiſted only in ſome external Rites, Sacrifices, Priviledges, &c.

Antiſozzo.

This proceeds upon a double falſe Suppoſition. 1. That the Apoſtle renounceth nothing but what he retained while a Phariſee. 2. Whatever he renounced did conſtitute his Phariſaical Righteouſneſs. 1. I muſt cut him off from Circumciſion, that was no part of his own Righteouſneſs, unleſs you have a ſpice of the Doctrin of imputing the Righteouſneſs of another Perſon for Juſtification. 2. For Sacrifices, the Apoſtle mentions them not, knowing they were the viſible Goſpel of the Jewiſh Church, and did lead to Chriſt. As to his being of the Stock of Iſrael, of the Seed of Abraham, &c. they might expect ſome favours thence; but that any were ſo far bewitched as to believe, that all the Stock of Iſrael and the Nation of Abraham ſhould be juſtified, cannot be proved. 4. For civility and blameleſneſs of Converſation, it may be it may go a great way in your Account.

But I find you take but little notice of it here, but place Paul's Righteouſneſs, which he renounced, with that of Baal's Prieſts, the Conciſion, his rejection of Chriſt, Opinion of Jewiſh Obſervation, and abuſe of the Moſaick frame, a fine Parcel of Righteouſneſs; he ſurely miſnamed it; he ſhould have called that his Wickedneſs and Villany.

p. 72But whatever Paul was or was not, whilſt a Phariſee, it makes no great matter to the Buſineſs in Hand, ſeeing he hath ſo freely and openly diſown'd whatever was his own Righteouſneſs after Converſion, in the matter of Juſtification before God, Antiſozzo. p. 554.

Neonom.

But Righteouſneſs by the Faith of Chriſt is internal Righteouſneſs, Goſpel-Holineſs, this is not Dung; and this was not of the Law oppoſed to the Faith of Christ; nay, this is by the Faith of Chriſt, Act 15.9. And we are created in Christ to this Holineſs, &c.

Antiſezzo.

Ay, but Proof, Proof, is wanting; it's called being born again, riſing again with Chriſt, &c. but Proof, Proof, is wanting; for we think that thoſe Expreſſions do not denote that Righteouſneſs whereby we are conſtituted juſt in the ſight of God, but Holineſs and Sanctification of Nature, which the Goſpel evidently diſtinguiſhes from that Righteouſneſs whereby we are juſtifyed, p. 559. Paul who rejects the Righteouſneſs of the Law in the matter of Juſtification, before God, rejects alſo inward Purity and Holineſs of Mind for that purpoſe. Does the Righteouſneſs of the Law, ſignifie one thing in the New Teſtament, and another in the old? Doth it ſignifie real, ſubſtantial, internal Righteouſneſs in the old, and external ritual Righteouſneſs in the new? Sincerity in the one, and Hipocriſy and Ceremony in the other? This is very unaccountable.

Neonom.

But the Apoſtle tells us, That by his own Righteouſneſs, he means the Righteouſneſs of the Law; and by the Righteouſneſs of God, the Righteouſneſs of Faith.

Antiſozzo.

I ſee you are for finding out Antitheſes in the words, as ſome Body elſe was.

The Apoſtle's words are very clear, but you find it neceſſary to obſcure them, and deprave the Truth.— But thus far we are ſecure, that the Apoſtle hath repuditated his own Righteouſneſs from Juſtification; and that we may not doubt what that was, he tells us, it was that of the Law; the Righteouſneſs of the Law is what it commands and preſcribes, viz. an exact conformity to the Law of God, in Spirit, Soul and Body, ſo far as is attainable. He aſſures us in the next place what he owns and adheres to, viz. the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, which is called the Righteouſneſs of God. He further acquaints us how we come to be intereſted in this Righteouſneſs, it is by Faith; and that we do not wilfully and ignorantly miſtake this Faith, for the Doctrin of Faith he aſſures us, it is believing, by which we obtain this Righteouſneſs, Rom. 3.24. See more, 563, 564, 565, &c.

Neonom.

I will ſet a Croſs upon you the next time I Print my Book, Mr. Antiſozzo; and, if you pleaſe, let us hear what Dr. Owen ſaith; I wiſh he had undertaken the point in Mr. Antiſozzo's room, he would have been more favourable to my Opinion; for I prove my whole Scheme out of him, eſpecially my Conceptions about the Doctrin of Imputation.

Calvin,

I pray Dr. Owen let us bear your Sentiments in this great Point, and with as much ſoftneſs as may be; for Mr. Neonom. thinks Mr. Antiſozzo. was too hard and ſharp upon him.

Dr. Owen,

I ſhall reduce what I have to ſay to that admirable Text, Phil. 3.8, 9. to the enſuing Heads, which deſerves to be wrote in every p. 73Bible in Letters of Gold, though Mr. Neonom. with ſome others, lay it ſo low.

1. That which the Apoſtle deſigns in this Chapter is to declare what it is on the account whereof we are accepted with God, and have cauſe to rejoyce; and this he fixeth on in general, viz. an intereſt in and participation of Chriſt by Faith, in oppoſition to all legal Priviledges and Advantages wherein the Jews boaſted, verſ. 3.

2. He ſuppoſeth that unto our acceptance before God, wherein we are to rejoyce, there is a Righteouſneſs neceſſary, and whatever it be, is the ſole ground of that Acceptance.

3. He declares, There is a twofold Righteouſneſs that may be pleaded and truſted unto to this purpoſe. 1. Our own Righteouſneſs, which is of the Law. 2. That which is through the Faith of Chriſt, the Righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith, theſe he aſſerts as oppoſite and inconſiſtent, as unto the end of our Juſtification before God.

4. Placing the Inſtance in himſelf, he declares which of them it was he adhered unto, and placed his confidence in. And in handling this Subject, ſome things engaged his holy Mind into an earneſtneſs of Expreſſion in the exaltation of one of theſe, viz. the Righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith. 1. This was the turning Point whereon he and others had forſaken their Judaiſm; this therefore was to be ſecured: See Gal. 2.15, 16. 2. Hereupon there was a great oppoſition made to this Doctrin in all places by the Jews. 3. The weight of the Doctrin itſelf.

5. Hence in many other places of his Writings, but eſpecially in this he treats of theſe things with a greater earneſtneſs and vehemency of Spirit than ordinary; thus. 1. He ſpeaks of the foreign, the Excellency of the Knowledge of Chriſt. 2. In his Expreſſion of all other things that are our own, that are not Chriſt's, whether Priviledges or Duties, however good, uſeful, excellent, they may be in themſelves; yet in compariſon of Chriſt and his Righteouſneſs, and with reſpect unto the end of our ſtanding before God and Acceptance with him, with the ſame vehemence of Spirit he caſts Contempt upon them, calling them foreign, Dog's Meat.

Neonom.

Pray, Sir, doth the Apoſtle with vehemency renounce Works wrought in Faith, Evangelical Works?

Dr. O. Anſw. In the Matter of Juſtification, the Apoſtle oppoſeth Evangelical Works, not only unto the Grace of God, but unto the Faith of Believers. 2. He makes no diſtinction that Works are of two ſorts, ſome excluded from Juſtification, and not others; but he expreſly rejects his own Righteouſneſs, i. e. his perſonal inherent Righteouſneſs, whatever it be and however it be wrought. 3. He makes a plain diſtinction of his twofold Eſtate: 1. That of Judaiſm before Converſion. 2. He proceeds to give an account of himſelf and Eſtate after Converſion. The words of Davenant on this Paſſage, in my Judgment, are ſober and weighty. The Apoſtle here teacheth what that Righteouſneſs is whereby we are accepted before God, viz. which is apprehended by Faith: He ſhews the cauſe why it is ours by right, (i. e. the Apoſtle ſhews it in this place) becauſe we are inſerted into his Body, and coaleſce with him into one Perſon; therefore his Righteouſneſs is reputed ours, De Juſtiſic. hab. c. 38. For whereas ſome begin to interpret our being in Chriſt, and being found in him, ſo as to intend no more but our Profeſſion of the Faith of the Goſpel; the Faith of the Catholick Church in all Ages, concerning the Myſtical Union of Chriſt and Believers, is not to be blown away with a few empty Words and unproved Aſſertions.

p. 74The Anſwer then is full and clear unto the general Exception, viz. That the Apoſtle rejects our Legal, but not our Evangelical Righteouſneſs; For, 1. The Apoſtle rejects neither abſolutely, but in compariſon of Chriſt, and with reſpect to the ſpecial end of Juſtification before God or a Righteouſneſs in his ſight. 2. In that ſenſe he rejects all our own Righteouſneſs, but our Evangelical Righteouſneſs, in the ſenſe pleaded for, is our own inherent in us, performed by us. 3. Our Legal and Evangelical, in the ſenſe pleaded for, is the ſame— 4. The Apoſtle rejects, in this caſe, all the Works of Righteouſneſs that we have done, Tit. 3.5. but our Evangelical Righteouſneſs conſiſts in the Works of Righteouſneſs, which we do. 5. He diſclaims all that is our own.—

See more in the Treatiſe of Juſtification, 535.

Here the Society was adjourning, but that a worthy Divine acquaints Mr. Calvinist, that he ſaw the Reverend Mr. Richard Vines in a corner, whereupon Mr. Calvinist return'd. There is none here but hath a venerable Eſteem for that famous Divine, unleſs Mr. Neonomian, who will however (if he finds he is againſt him) be ſo ingenuous as to knock under the Table.

Sir, we beſeech you lend us your help here againſt this confident Neonomian, and New Divinity, and in defence of the Apoſtle Paul, whoſe Doctrin he is making Dung of, trampling it down as Mire in the Streets.

Mr. Rich. Vines, Phil. 3.7, 8, 9, 10.

After the Apoſtle had in the beginning of this Church fortified the Chriſtian Philippians with a Caveat againſt ſuch as did yet ſtand upon and pretend their Circumciſion,Chriſt a Chriſtian's only Gain, by Rich. Vines, ſometime Maſter of Pembrook-hall, Cambridge. and their Jewiſh Prerogatives, in oppoſition to Chriſt: after this, he gives a threefold account of himſelf, 1. He ſheweth what account he had of himſelf in reſpect of thoſe Priviledges that others did inſiſt upon, &c. V. 4. p. 1. 2. He ſhews what account he had of himſelf, when Chriſt was diſcovered to him, &c. 3. He ſheweth what account he had of himſelf, in reſpect of perfection, V. 12, &c. p. 4, 5, 6.

V. 8. p. 19. You have heard what reckoning the Apoſtle had of his own Righteouſneſs in his unregenerate ſtate, and upon the diſcovery of Chriſt unto him, he came to a loſs of all that which before he counted gain: Now, in this Verſe, he goes on to ſhew you what account he had ſtill of Chriſt, and of all things beſides Chriſt, after ſome ſtrength, and experience he had of Chriſt; yea, doubtleſs, any more than ſo? Yea, and more than that, I account them ſtill; it is a rhetorical Speech, wherein the Apoſtle riſeth higher in his expreſſion with greater overflow of affection, verifying all things beſides Chriſt as loſs and dung; he repeats it three times over, (a note of affection) I count all things loſs, I have ſuffered the loſs, I account them but dung, and then it is for Chriſt, and that Chriſt who is my Lord. Suppoſe the Apoſtle had been thus ſpoken to; 'tis true, you forſook all your former Gains, and you profeſſed all ſhould go for Chriſt; your ſelf, your Wealth, your Zeal, your Righteouſneſs in the Law, you valued all as nothing, while Chriſt was new and freſh in your memory, and before you had taſted of his Yoak and Croſs. But what ſay you now, Paul? now you have been beaten with Rods, ſtoned, Shipwrackt, &c. 2 Cor. 11.15. What now Paul, are you p. 75of the ſame mind ſtill? is not your Courage cooled? Nay, doubleſs, (ſaith Paul) I did, and I do, I am not changed, I do account all things, I reſerve not one thing to lye between me and Chriſt; not my good Works, not any thing within me, nor without me, that I value or eſteem; my Righteouſneſs, my Obedience to the Law, my Faſting, my Scourging, I count them but Loſs and Dung for Chriſt, &c.— p. 19, 20.

Doct. 4. That gracious Duties and Performances of a Man in the ſtate of Grace, are to be diſclaimed in the matter of his Juſtification, or his Righteouſneſs before God— p. 44. —

V. 1. The Papiſts will not hear this Doctrin; for tho', with much ado, they will quit their good Works, that are done in an unregenerate ſtate without and before Faith; yet thoſe Works of a regenerate Man, that are beſprinkled with the Blood of Chriſt, [Here's your Doctrin, Mr. Neonomian] they will have them come in for their Juſtification: for thus they ſay Chriſt merits for us, that we may merit for ourſelves; that Chriſt is our Saviour, by making us our own Saviours; Chriſt is our juſtifier, by making us juſtifie ourſelves; he giveth us Mony, and we lay it down, what is this? It is to keep up good Duties, (ſay they and you) which otherwiſe would fall to the ground; whereas the true Spring and Whetſtone of Obedience to God, is Faith and Love, and Thankfulneſs upon the apprehenſion of the Pardon of our Sins: let a Man have Chriſt for his Righteouſneſs, and let a Man be ungodly if he can; the love of Chriſt conſtraineth us, &c. — p. 44, 45, 46.

— This Phraſe of Speech, All things Loſs and but Dung; mine own Righteouſneſs both before and after Grace; I count all to be but Dung, that I may win Chriſt — There is the Faith of Adventure, and the Faith of Aſſurance — p. 129.

Proof of Doctrin. 'Tis for the gaining of Chriſt, that a Chriſtian counteth all things in the World as Dung, and ſuffereth the loſs of all things.

It's a ſtrange trade, that a Man muſt loſe to gain; he muſt be a Beggar and Bankrupt, that he may be rich; he muſt be nothing, that he may have Chriſt— Yea, his Works after Grace received; all that I did know, and all that I do know ſtill, I do count them but as Dung, that I may win Chriſt — p. 126.

— There is nothing can be done in a Man, that proveth him to be out of Wrath any farther than it proveth him to be in Chriſt. In this Argument lyes all the ſtrength that Chriſt is yours, and that you are Chriſts; what other Arguments otherwiſe you have, that will not prove this Point, are all but Fallacies, and your Hopes are but Ropes of Sand. Dreſs up yourſelves in the beſt Attire you have— Vertue, Civility, Learning, Excellent Parts, let them paint over the rotten Face of corrupt Nature never ſo curiouſly, will all this prove, that you ſhall be ſaved? — The Apoſtle counteth all this but Stuff and Lumber, Traſh, Loſs and Dung for Chriſt: Can you climb Heaven by any Ladder of Nature's erecting? What Ladder reacheth to Heaven, but Jacob's Ladder? which was a Type of Chriſt? p. 147.

Let me come to the Graces of God's Spirit: They prove, that you are out of the ſtate of Wrath, that you ſhall be ſaved; but how do they prove it? Not as the cauſes thereof: doth your Grace, that is in you, ſatisfie the Juſtice of God, and redeem you from the Curſe, and pay the Ranſom? Is it your Title for Salvation? Do you pretend to have him upon the Worth of your Graces? Like a Man that's queſtioned about his Land, goes about to prove the worth of the Land by the wax with which [his Deeds] are ſealed,— the Seal is more than the Wax— therefore the Apoſtle ſaith, not only we are tranſlated, but hereby we know we p. 76are tranſlated. Now how doth Grace ſignifie to you, that you are out of Wrath? As it evidences you to be in Chriſt, and ſo the Sign bringeth you to the Cauſe. —If they prove but unto you the Work of Grace in your Heart, and that you are in Chriſt, you need ask them no more, they have done enough, they have ſetled you upon a ſure ground — The leaſt Dram of Grace is worth a 1000 Tun of ſuch kind of ſtuff of Moral Righteouſneſs, which may be in you and not prove you to be in Chriſt: A little Seal is worth a Cart-load of Wax, becauſe it ſealeth more to me than the Wax is worth; ſo the leaſt Dram of Grace, wrought in a Man that is in Jeſus Chriſt, is worth a World of Moral Duties, becauſe it ſealeth Evidences, Pardon of Sin, Favour with God; therefore examine yourſelves that you take not a Human-Faith for a Saving-Faith, &c. — p. 148, 149, 150.

V. 8, 9. That I may be ſ…und in him, that I may know him. In theſe two Expreſſions is comprized that which he calls the gaining of Chriſt: To be found in Chriſt, that he referreth to Juſtification, or the making a Sinner righteous before God; therefore he ſaith, not having mine own Righteouſneſs, but the Righteouſneſs of God, which is the Faith of Christ. To know Chriſt, referreth to Sanctification, as it is expreſſed in three things; The Power of his Reſurrection, the Fellowſhip of his Sufferings, Conformity to his Death,— p. 151, 152.

—That I may be found in him, &c.

In this Verſe you have two great things expreſſed; Union with Chriſt, that I may be found in him; Righteouſneſs with God, having the Righteouſneſs of God. There is a diſtribution of Righteouſneſs into two ſorts, Legal, Evangelical.

Theſe two ſorts are firſt deſcribed what they are; Legal, mine own Righteouſneſs, which is of the Law; Evangelical, the Righteouſneſs of God, which is by the Faith of Chriſt. 2. Being deſcribed, they are oppoſed the one to the other; the one is of the Law, the other is by the Faith of Chriſt; they are ſet contrary, becauſe they cannot be had together. 3. There is a diſclaim of the one, not having my own righteouſneſs, which is of the Law; and an adherence to the other, the righteouſneſs of God by Faith in Chriſt.

Doct. 1. In the gaining or having of Chriſt, the firſt thing is Union; this word in Chriſt notes Union, as 2 Pet. 3.14. Be diligent, that ye may be found in him, p. 156, 157. — Union muſt be before Communion; Chriſt is a great Myſtery; Chriſt and his People are all like one great Tree, he is the Stock and Root, and they are the Twigs, planted in that great Stock; and they two live like one great Body, as the Head and Members; they are alike, as Man and Wife are one fleſh, ſo Chriſt and his People are one Spirit; as Man and Wife are one Perſon in Law, ſo are Chriſt and all that are in him; they cannot be caſt into Hell, becauſe the Sentence muſt light upon Chriſt, before it falleth upon them.

Antinom.

How doth this agree with your Doctrin, That the ſtate of Men in this Life is not eternally decided, but they are in a State-Tryal, as Subjects in Tryal for Eternity? p. 55. of your Firſt Book. The groſſeſt Divinity that ever Proteſtant delivered; before which both the true Proteſtant Doctrin of Election and Redemption and Union to Chriſt muſt fall to the ground, if it be true.

R. Vines, I come to the 2d thing in the words, the diſtribution of Righteouſneſs into Legal and Evangelical.

Doct. There are two ſorts of Righteouſneſs, Legal and Evangelical, the one of the Law, the other of the Goſpel; for that which we call Righteouſneſs with p. 77God, is the ſame which we call Goſpel or Evangelical Righteouſneſs, which is plain, Rom. 1.17.

Now do not ſtumble at this, do not think I mean (as you do Mr. Neonom.) that there are two ſorts of Righteouſneſſes which a Sinner may be juſtified by, For by one Righteouſneſs we are juſtified with God, Rom. 5.18. But when I ſay there are two ſorts, it is to be underſtood thus; there are but two ſorts of Righteouſneſſes by which Life at any time hath been attained, there never was a third Righteouſneſs whereby a Man ſhould be Righteous with God, ever propounded to Man ſtanding or falling: (Where's your ſubordinate Righteouſneſs now?) There are, there have been, there can be no more; the own is his own, the other is that which is called the Righteouſneſs of God.

Now to deſcribe theſe two ſorts of Righteouſneſs, ſee Rom. 1.17. Rom. 10.10, 11.

Theſe two, doing and believing, are the Characteriſtical Words that deſcribe theſe two ſorts of Righteouſneſſes, of the Law and of the Goſpel. The Righteouſneſs of the Law is only for the perfect Man that never ſinned, becauſe it muſt be doing.

Neonom.

I could ſhew there's no one ſaving Benefit granted to a Sinner, but upon Suppoſition of his doing, D. W. p. 230.

Mr. R. Vines, But I tell you, the Righteouſneſs of the Goſpel is for a Sinner, a Sinner overwhelmed and overſpread with Sins.

Neonom.

But I ſay throughout my Divinity, That the Goſpel excludes Sinners; and that the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt belongs to none but thoſe that are firſt meet for it.

Mr. R. V. The Righteouſneſs of the Law is an exact compliance with the Law of God in every Tittle; the Righteouſneſs of the Goſpel, is the Righteouſneſs of another, the Righteouſneſs of God in him; of another, in another, 2 Cor. 5. laſt.

Now take this for a Rule, What Righteouſneſs ſoever it be that juſtifieth a Man with God it muſt be perfect, whether it be a Righteouſneſs of the Law or the Goſpel: Again, it muſt be his own. Now that it is our own, it is not meant as if the Goſpel Righteouſneſs was not ours; tho' it be not our own originally, yet it muſt be ours derivatively from Chriſt; it is not our own, being in us, but it is ours by Imputation, imputed or accounted to us; it is not our own by Works, but it is ours by Faith; it is not our own of our ſelves, but its ours of God.

Neonom.

Hold, not too much of that Doctrin; you make us to be as Righteous as Chriſt: This Doctrin of imputing the very Righteouſneſs of Christ to us, I cannot down with; it's Christ's Righteouſneſs, but it cannot become ours but in the effect.

Mr. R. V. But I ſay the Righteouſneſs we ſtand upon muſt be perfect, and it muſt be ours; legal Righteouſneſs is perfect, if a Man fall by one Sin, whether in doing or miſdoing the Ladder is broken.—On the other ſide, the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, it is perfect; if it be not perfect, it cannot be Righteouſneſs; 'tis made a Sinners by Imputation, by Faith in Chriſt, p. 162, 163.

Neonom.

My whole Book is to prove this Man's Doctrin to be falſe.

p. 78Mr. R. V. Come on then Mr. Reonom. I will come to the Demonſtration, That there are but two ſorts of Righteouſneſſes, and by this Point I muſt drive you and every Man up into a corner; for a Man muſt be brought to a choice of one of them, and if he ſtandeth upon one of them, which is by the Law he falleth, the Point will drive you to a neceſſity of Chriſt and Faith. Now that there are but two, will appear thus; The Righteouſneſs of the Law, and the Righteouſneſs of God, are deſcribed, named, diſtinguiſhed, Rom. 10.6, 7, 8, 9. and Chap. 11.3. Now, mark, in Scripture you find theſe Phraſes and Expreſſions; Grace, free Grace, Chriſt or Redemption of Chriſt, the Promiſe or the Goſpel, Faith, the Righteouſneſs of God: you may find all theſe upon one File ranked together.

Neonom.

Ay, but I value one, if joined with a Duty and Benefit, before all thoſe, according to my Logick.

Mr. R. V. On the other ſide you ſhall find the Law, Works, our own Righteouſneſs, Debt, our Wages by Debt, Boaſting and Glorying; theſe make another File. There's no third, all muſt come under one of theſe Files; if it be one, it's the Righteouſneſs of God by Faith of Chriſt; if it be the other, it's the Righteouſneſs of the Law by our own Works: By this 'tis plain that there are but two ſorts of Righteouſneſs. And, conſider, the two Adams were certainly but two common Roots, and the foundation of two Covenants, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace.

Neonom.

Stay there, I deny all that Doctrin.

Mr. R. Vines, But I'll go on; The Adams being two, conſequently the Covenants are two, and conſequently the Righteouſneſſes are of two ſorts, and no more, p. 164, 165, 166. You confound Law and Goſpel; learn the difference between Law and Goſpel (it is of the greateſt Conſequence) moſt uſeful to the Conſcience of Man in the World, to the ſettlement of an Eſtate in regard of Life and Salvation to his Soul; Law promiſeth Life and Salvation to the Doer, upon condition of perfect and perpetual Obedience.—The Goſpel freely promiſeth Juſtification to every one that believeth in Chriſt.

Neonom.

But this believing is doing.

Mr. R. V. This Goſpel Righteouſneſs excludeth Works as any cauſe in the World, by which you ſhould be juſtified with God. — Many will be looking for good Tidings from the Law, which is only brought to you, as the Olive-leaf in the Mouth of the Goſpel, p. 167, 168.

Doct. Theſe two ſorts of Righteouſneſſes are inconſiſtent and oppoſite the one to the other, not having mine own, but having the Righteouſneſs of God. —The Scripture is full of their Oppoſitions and Contrarieties; for if you mark, it's ſaid to be of the obedience of one by which we are made Righteous, not the obedience of two, viz. mine own and Chriſt's together, but one directly; ſee Rom. 5.21. And do you ſee every where a plain Oppoſition between Faith and Works, the Law and Faith, Works and Grace? Doth there not come a But, Rom. 10.5. Gal. 3.12, 16. chap. 5.4. Rom. 9.31, 32. See how they are oppoſed.

1. It is excluded as Matter of our Righteouſneſs with God; for that which is the Matter of our Righteouſneſs with God is the Obedience of Chriſt: Now to bring your own Righteouſneſs into this place, as the Matter of your Righteouſneſs with God, is to mingle your Obedience with Chriſt's: So it's not the Obedience of one but the Obedience of two.

2. It's excluded as the Motive to move God; if you bring your own Righteouſneſs into this place, you mingle it with free Grace, Rom. 3.24. if you make it any Motive you muſt bring it into the place of Jeſus Chriſt.

p. 793. It's excluded as the Inſtrument which ſhould receive the Righteouſneſs of God; if you bring it into this, then you bring it into the place of Faith; for Faith is only the Hand that taketh hold of the Goſpel Righteouſneſs; therefore, he ſaith, the Righteouſneſs of God which is by the Faith of Jeſus Chriſt: Now if there be no room for theſe three, it followeth 'tis thruſt out a Doors, pag. 171, 172.

Neonom.

Then you may thruſt me and my Book both out of Doors, for it hath been my Deſign wholly throughout my Book to eſtabliſh this Righteouſneſs of our own theſe three ways.

1. To join it with the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt in Juſtification, under the Name of ſubordinate Righteouſneſs, and a Condition, &c.

2. To foiſt it into the Grace of God as a Motive under the Name of Meetneſs.

3. To give it the ſame place and nature in Juſtification, as Faith, in that I make Faith to juſtifie as its doing, and as a working Condition.

Mr. R. V. Out of this Deſcription we ſhall take up four Points.

1. They that are in Chriſt have Righteouſneſs with God; there's an Emphaſis in the words, they that are in Chriſt have the Righteouſneſs, the only Righteouſneſs, &c. The Papiſts ſay, We have Righteouſneſs by Works; we ſay we have it by Imputation, yet they that have this Righteouſneſs by Imputation, have it truly, and they are made Righteous by it, pag. 176. They have this Righteouſneſs with God; mark, they have that which ſets them right with God, into a ſtate of favour and acceptation, that which diſchargeth all Guilt and Condemnation: They have that which freeth them from every Charge, every Endictment, every Sentence of the Law of God; they have that which ſetteth them into Friendſhip and Peace with God, that which entitleth them to Eternal Life and Heaven: They have that, which altho' it doth not take away the being of Sin, yet it ſetteth them as free from Hell as Adam in Innocency, and ſetteth them upon a ſure Centre; that Faith wherein we ſtand, outſpeaks Adam, even Adam in his firſt Integrity, p. 176.

2dly, This Righteouſneſs which they have in Chriſt is the Righteouſneſs of God; this is a Phraſe frequent with the Apoſtle Paul, and is almoſt peculiar to him. Now, mark, that Righteouſneſs whereby a poor Sinner is made Righteous with God is the Righteouſneſs of God, i. e. of a Perſon who is God, Jer. 33.16. Not his eſſential Righteouſneſs, it's only that Righteouſneſs which is from God; that which God imputeth to us, that which he hath provided, appointed and approved to be a ſatisfaction to his Juſtice; that's the Righteouſneſs of God which God hath made to be ſo to us, and that is Chriſt, 1 Cor. 1.30. p. 180

3dly, This Righteouſneſs of God is by Faith; God hath appointed this humble Grace of Faith to be in the hand of the Receiver, which taketh hold of this Righteouſneſs of God. But now you muſt conſider this Faith not [as Mr. Neonomian doth] as a Habit or Quality, but conſider it in the Office it hath, as it is an Inſtrument taking hold of Jeſus Chriſt: Not, I ſay, as a habit for the worthineſs of Faith it ſelf; for tho' it be ſaid, by Faith, it is not ſaid, for Faith; by it as an Inſtrument of God, for hereby you come to the Promiſes, and to Chriſt; cloſing with Chriſt by Faith you are made the Righteouſneſs of God in him. It is a ſelfdenying Faith that caſteth out Pride, and Self, and Works, and cometh naked and p. 80poor to the rich Promiſes of Chriſt, and there hanged, taketh hold and claſpeth faſt.

4. This Faith by which you have the Righteouſneſs of God is the Faith of Chriſt, or (which is all one) of the which Promiſes hold forth Chriſt, they are the object of this Faith by which you have the Righteouſneſs of God; it's true, the object of Faith is the whole Word of God, and that doth not juſtifie becauſe it works Faith: the Eye ſeeth other things beſides the brazen Serpent, but as it healeth it looketh to the brazen Serpent only, &c. p. 185.

Now I come to the deſcription of the other ſort of Righteouſneſs.

1. There is a Righteouſneſs called our own, which is of the Law. 2. Our own Righteouſneſs which is of the Law is to be utterly diſclaimed, our own in oppoſition to the Righteouſneſs of God which is by Faith in Chriſt: As the Righteouſneſs of God is the very ſame with that which is by the Faith of Chriſt, for they are all one; ſo our own Righteouſneſs is that which is of the Law. Now that there is a Righteouſneſs which is called our own, is evident from Rom. 10.3. to open the Righteouſneſs of the Law.

1. The Righteouſneſs of the Law is nothing elſe but a conformity to the Law. See Ezek. 18.5. Gal. 3.12. Rom. 2.17. the Duties which is the Matter muſt be done with all the Mind and Strength, and all the Soul. —

2. What is meant by our own Righteouſneſs? It is that whereby we walk in ſome conformity to the Law of God; and if you will have Works done from a natural Principle or Power by the ſtrength of moral Vertues, by Men out of Chriſt, this is indeed within ourſelves, and this is our own Righteouſneſs, like that the Apoſtle calleth his Gain before he knew Chriſt.

But then for holy Duties or Works that are performed, which flow from a Principle of renewing Grace, this (ſay the Papiſts) is not our own Righteouſneſs. For the clearing this Point: All your Works that flow from ſanctifying Graces, in conformity to the Law of God, all theſe come under the Name of our own Righteouſneſs, not becauſe it is of our ſelves efficiently, but it is ours ſubjectively inherent in us. As Adam's Righteouſneſs, his own, though it came from an inward Holineſs and Righteouſneſs given him of God. — Are not the Fruits of the Spirit, as Love, Joy, Temperance, are they not our own? They are our own or Gods; if our own, then I have the Point; if the Righteouſneſs of God, then you are juſtified by the Fruits of the Spirit, and not by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed, which is the greateſt Error in Divinity. If the Apoſtle in this Text had ſaid, Not my own Righteouſneſs, but the Righteouſneſs of God which is by Repentance, Love, Hope, the fear of God, holy Duties, then the Apoſtle had carried it clear againſt us; but he brings nothing that we have to join in concurrence to the Righteouſneſs of God and Chriſt, but only Faith; therefore, the Apoſtle leaves all our inherent Graces and the Works that iſſued from them in this Text, to come under the Name of our own Righteouſneſs. As the Sin of the firſt Adam that was perſonally in Guilt was likewiſe ours, ſo the Righteouſneſs of God is ſubjectively in Chriſt, and by Imputation ours. Conſider, then, all thoſe Works that proceed from ſanctifying Grace in you in order to conformity to the Law of God, they may all come under this Name and Notion of my own Righteouſneſs, p. 190, 191, 192.

Doct. 2. Our own Righteouſneſs is utterly to be diſclaimed, that we may be juſtified by the Righteouſneſs of God. Mark the Scripture, Rom. 3.21. ch. 4.6. Chriſt pulleth down the Righteouſneſs of your ſelves, which had the Chair before; the Servant muſt not ſit in the King's Chair: So Grace, tho' it be that whereby you may walk ſerviceable to God, yet you muſt not ſet it in the place of p. 81Jeſus Chriſt. — Yet the Apoſtle would not be without Holineſs, Sanctification and Obedience. One in Chriſt hath Vertue, Holineſs, &c. but how? as ſerviceable Graces to walk with God, not as his Righteouſneſs with God; when the Sun ſhineth the Moon is put out, not out of her Orb or Courſe, but (as I may ſay) from her Rul. So the Righteouſneſs of God when you come to be juſtified by Faith, doth not aboliſh Holineſs and Sanctification (for they are and muſt be there together) but the ſetting up Obedience in the place of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, as a Cypher, is pull'd down from the place of Pounds. How doth that Apoſtle ſay, Not having mine own Righteouſneſs? I anſwer, not having it as my Righteouſneſs with God, then I ſhould put mine own in the place of Chriſt, not having it as concurrent with Chriſt.—That would make my Righteouſneſs Co-partner with him, not having it as a Motive to move him, then I ſhould put my Righteouſneſs in the place of free Grace; not having it as the Inſtrument whereby I take Chriſt; no, for then I ſhould put other Graces in the place of Faith.—Well then, in a word, having Holineſs or Righteouſneſs as a ſtock to trade with in the way of ſervice to God, not having it as a means to buy my Soul out of Hell: So you ſee the difference, that ſtill we have it, and yet we have it not.

But why is our own Righteouſneſs, that is inherent in us, to be diſclaimed?

1. Becauſe it is a way impoſſible for a Sinner to go to Heaven by, or to be Righteous by; that Ladder is too ſhort, tho' it ſeem long enough to you that have ſome Fragments of the Law.

2. Not having it, why? Becauſe there is another Righteouſneſs (and not this) which is called the Righteouſneſs of God: There is another Adam, and that Adam hath another Righteouſneſs for all to believe in, a Goſpel Righteouſneſs which is not of the Law. There is another Covenant God hath appointed whereby a Sinner muſt be juſt; now becauſe there is another, not this.

3. Becauſe one of theſe voids the other; if I have the Righteouſneſs of God, then mine own is void; if mine own, then the Righteouſneſs of God is void: As the Apoſtle ſaith of Grace, if Works, not Grace; and if Grace, not Works p. 192, 193, 194, 195.

Calvin.

Reverend Sir, we muſt from the bottom of Hearts moſt ſincerely acknowledge, That it is a great piece of Service that you have done to Chriſt, his Goſpel, Church, and poor loſt Sinners, in this ample and diſtinct Teſtimony which you have born to the Truth; not only in plainly diſcovering Mr. Neonomian's corrupt and illiterate Interpretation of this great Portion of Scripture, and vindicating of it, but alſo in that you have ſubverted his whole Scheme, laid open the rottenneſs of the Principles he hath ſo boldly aſſerted in his Book, and ſhew'd the dangerous tendency of them.

Neonom.

This Gentleman is much miſtaken, and I could ſhew where his Miſtakes lies.

Antinom.

You ſhew his Miſtakes!

— Quid? Rectum dignoſcere curbo?

p. 82Neonom.

I believe him an able Man, and that ſometimes he was of my Judgment, becauſe Mr. B. dedicated his Aphoriſms to him, and acknowledged that he was a fit Cenſor of his Doctrin.

Antinom.

It's true, one would think that piece of Flattery and many others, had been enough to engage Mr. R. Vines to ſubſcribe to Mr. B.'s Opinion; but it was ſufficiently known that inſtead of ſo doing, Mr. Vines ſeldom preached a Sermon, wherein he did not make a ſtrict Inquiſition after the Neonomianiſm that lay in his way, and crackt it as a Man will crack a Louſe.