Neonomianism Unmasked, Part 2 · Debate 7

Neonomianism Unmasked · Part 2 · Debate 7

p. 83DEBATE VII. Of the Change of Perſon between Chriſt and the Elect, and their being as Righteous as he.

Neonom.

HAving ſtated, and finiſhed the Doctrine of Imputation of Sin, let us, if you pleaſe, in the next place examine the Doctrine of Imputation of Righteouſneſs, I have in this Point, as I ſhall ſtate it, great Errours to Charge upon Mr. Antinomian.

Antinom.

I pray Sir proceed, I ſhall be very attentive to your Charge.

Neonom.

You hold that every Believer (or Elect Perſon) is as Righteous as Chriſt; and there is a perfect Change of Perſon and Condition betwixt Chriſt and the Elect; he was what we are, and we are what he was, viz. Perfectly Holy, without Spot or Blemiſh.

Calvin.

If I miſtake not, this is the 22th Errour Mr. B. chargeth upon the Antinomian, but that he ſtateth it truer than you.

Errour 22. They feign Chriſt to have made ſuch an Exchange with the Elect, as that having taken all their Sins, he hath given them all his Righteouſneſs; not only the Fruit of it, but the thing it ſelf: So that they are as perfectly Righteous as Chriſt himſelf, and ſo eſteemed of God; and this Doctrine ſubverts all the Goſpel; viz. That God makes an effectual Grant and Donation of a true, real and perfect Righteouſneſs, even that of Chriſt himſelf, to all that believe, accounting it as theirs. Scripture Goſpel Defended, B. Err. deſcr. p. 11. Err. 22. and p. 108.

Antinom.

Let the Queſtion go in his own Terms; I chuſe to hold him to them, becauſe he reckons no Man ſtates a Queſtion better than himſelf; pray Sir make proof in Matter and Form as charged by you.

Neonom.

That I can eaſily; you ſay, D. C. p. 270, 271.Mark it well, Chriſt himſelf is not ſo compleatly Righteous, but we are as Righteous as he; nor we ſo compleatly ſinful, but Chriſt became p. 84ſo, being made Sin, as compleatly ſinful as we. Nay more, we are the ſame Righteouſneſs, for we are made the Righteouſneſs of God; the very ſinfulneſs that we were, Chriſt is made that very ſinfulneſs before God. So that here is a direct Change; Chriſt takes our Perſon and Condition, and ſtands in our ſtead; we take Chriſt's Perſon and Condition, and ſtand in his ſtead — So that if you reckon well, you muſt always reckon your ſelves in another's Perſon, and that other in your Perſon: God gives Chriſt, i. e. God gives the Perſon of Chriſt to Men, as much as to ſay, God gives Chriſt to ſtand in the Room of Men, and Men to ſtand in the Room of Chriſt; ſo that in giving Christ it is as it were to make a change, &c. Dr. C. p. 180.

Antinom.

When I ſpeak of compleatly ſinful and righteous, you muſt know that I ſtill underſtand by way of Imputation, that which was not originally in the Subject; and ſo the Perfection is a Perfection of Imputation, which is as real and compleat in its kind as any Relative Perfections. A Man may be a weak ſickly Man but a perfect Father; a Poor Man, but as perfect a Son as the Son of the Richeſt; a Man may be free from Debts, and yet make himſelf as perfect a Debtor for the Debts of others as any Man for his own; and a Man may be a poor, wretched, miſerable Creature, but made as Righteous in reſpect of the Law as the Richeſt Man on Earth, by the Money of another Man; that which denominates a Man perfectly Righteous is this, that he oweth nothing to the Law; and if a Man be worth but Forty Shillings, and owe nothing, he is as Righteous in a Legal Righteouſneſs, as he that hath a Thouſand Pound; therefore it's no Hyperbolical Expreſſion for one that owes nothing to the Law, to ſay, I am as Righteous as the King, meaning ſuch a Righteouſneſs which the Law requireth of him, reſpecting the Precept or Sanction, Active and Paſſive Obedience; I mean not the Righteouſneſs of Legiſlation or Execution of Juſtice in a way of diſtribution, but ſuch a Righteouſneſs that I am capable of. So when I ſay, we are as Righteous as Chriſt, I mean not Chriſt's Mediatorial Righteouſneſs as you ſuggeſt; I do not mean Juſtitia Mediatoria, ſed Juſtitia Mediatoris; not Mediatorial Righteouſneſs, but the Righteouſneſs of the Mediator.

When I ſay I am as Righteous now (after my Debt of Five Pound is paid, and owe no more in all the World,) in the Eye of the Law, as my Friend that paid my Debt, and fetched me out of Priſon: I do not thereby ſay that I have as good an Eſtate as he, or that I have ſo many Thouſand Pounds as he; or as able to pay the Debts of others as he is; and as for the other part of your Charge about our commutation of Perſon, I juſtifie my ſelf p. 85in it, that as Chriſt bore my Sins by Imputation, ſo I have his Righteouſneſs, and am Righteous in his Righteouſneſs, by Imputation, 2 Cor. 5.21.

Calvin.

What do you, Mr. Neonomian, reckon to be Truth in this Point?

Neonom.

The Truth is this. D. W. p. 37.

The Mediatorial Righteouſneſs of Jeſus Chriſt is ſo Imputed to true Believers, as that for the ſake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life Eternal; it being reckoned to them, and pleadable by them for theſe uſes, as if they had perſonally done and ſuffered what Chriſt did as Mediator for them, whereby they are delivered from the Curſe, and no other Atonement or Meriting Price of Saving Benefits can be demanded from them?

Antinom.

Your Doctrine of Imputed Righteouſneſs neceſſarily inferrs the Conſequents that you would draw upon us; for if the Mediatorial Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be Imputed (as you explain it your ſelf, Diff. 1. To be Habitual as well as Active and Paſſive;) then we muſt be reckoned Mediators; for we muſt be reckoned ſuch as Chriſt is, in Perſon, and in Office; but we deny that the Mediatorial Righteouſneſs was Imputed, but Juſtitia Mediatoris not Juſtitia Mediatoria.

2. You ſay this Righteouſneſs is ſo Imputed to a true Believer, as for the ſake thereof he is pardoned; I am ſure by your ſo, you mean another ſence than we mean; that we are only pardoned effective, and that's no more than we are ſanctified and glorified for it's ſake; and this appears by your ſecond Difference, p. 39. where you ſay the difference is not, Whether our Juſtification, and all other Benefits, when we are partakers of them, be the Fruits of this Righteouſneſs as the only Meritorious Cauſe. So that you have no reaſon to quarrel with me for ſaying, That through Chriſt's bearing of Sin we appear in perfect Holineſs, (ſpeaking there of Glory;) for you ſay, Juſtification and all other Benefits flow from it; therefore in the ſame manner as we are Juſtified by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, in the ſame manner we are ſanctified and glorified, i. e. effective, in your ſence.

3. You ſay alſo pleadable for theſe Uſes, i. e. for all Uſes in a like manner.

4. As if they had perſonally done and ſuffered what Chriſt did as Mediator for them; your meaning is, That it's as well done as if they had done it themſelves. A Man may do a thing as well as another, that he doth not for another in his ſtead; yea, a Man may do a thing for another, and not do it in his ſtead; as a Taylor makes a Miniſter a Suit of Cloaths, but doth not do it in his p. 86ſtead; becauſe it's not his Buſineſs to make his Cloaths; but it's another thing for a Man to come and preach for him, that is, to do it in his ſtead; becauſe it's his proper Work, Profeſſion and Buſineſs.

5. And hereby you ſay they are delivered from the Curſe. What mean you by the Curſe? We ſhall find this Curſe is not the whole Vindicative Wrath of God, only Eternal Curſe. And for our Comfort you tell us, this is all the Attonenement or meriting Price of ſaving Benefits that God can demand of us. It's ſo in our ſtead, as that God can exact no other Atonement, and ſo a Security from God's hurting us.

In a Word, the Deſcription of Imputation here that you have given, is but a meer piece of Sophiſtry; that Imputed Righteouſneſs may be any thing for all this, and we ſhall ſee by and by what you will have it be.

Neonom.

Nevertheleſs this Mediatorial Righteouſneſs is not ſubjectively in them; nor is there a Change of Perſon betwixt them and Chriſt, neither are they as righteous as he, but there remain Spots and Blemiſhes in them, until Chriſt by his Spirit perfect that Holineſs begun in all true Believers, which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven.

Antinom.

Now you come to the Negative part of your Deſcription, which ſhould have been firſt; and having ſaid nothing of the thing at firſt, you tell us it's nothing at laſt. 1. You ſay this Mediatorial Righteouſceſs, Sir, is not ſubjectively in us. I know no Judicious Divine ever talked ſo, nor would you, if you underſtood mediatorial Righteouſneſs, as it's apparent you do not. 2. You ſay there's no change of Perſon betwixt Chriſt and them. You mean, that the Believer becomes not Chriſt, nor Chriſt the Believer: We mean ſo too. 3. You ſay too, that Believers are not as righteous as he, you mean ſuch a Righteouſneſs Mediatorial. 4. You baſely inſinuate, that their Righteouſneſs in Juſtification is imperfect; for the Spots and Blemiſhes we ſpeak of is in reſpect of Righteouſneſs.

Neonom.

I question not whether Christ by his Righteouſneſs merited for all the Elect, that they ſhould in his time and way be certainly Partakers of it's ſaving Effects; and did not only purchaſe a conditional Grant of thoſe Effects, viz. That Propoſition, He that believeth ſhall be ſaved. P. 39.

Antinom.

It ſeems Chriſt then merited a certainty of Salvation only of the Elect; I thought their Salvation was made certain by Election; the Foundation of God ſtands ſure, 2 Tim. 2.19. Your meaning is, Chriſt's Merits made our Salvation certain, which in p. 87reſpect of Election was uncertain. 2. And but certain in another way, viz. Of a Conditional Grant that is not yet performed, and belongs to the Non-elect as well as to the Elect; and there's yet an Uncertainty remaining, notwithſtanding the Certainty purchaſed. 3. It's very odd to ſay, Chriſt purchaſed a Propoſition, and a conditional one too, the Condition whereof muſt be ſomething not purchaſed to be performed by us, that we may have the Gift promiſed: For if the Certainty depend upon the Merit and Purchaſe, then both the Condition and Promiſe is purchaſed, and then the Purchaſe is abſolute. I would know whether the certainty of the Salvation of the Elect be purchaſed conditionally or abſolutely; if purchaſed conditionally, then this Propoſition, The Elect ſhall be ſaved, is yet uncertain in reſpect of the Purchaſe of Chriſt, and is but a contingent Propoſition, and not certain, which is a Contradiction. If you ſay Chriſt purchaſed abſolutely the Salvation of the Elect, all your contingent Purchaſe falls to the Ground: But Chriſt purchaſed Perſons abſolutely, not conditional Propoſitions; and is he that believes ſhall be ſaved, a conditional Propoſition indeed?

Neonom.

Nor whether beſides theſe Effects being made ours, the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be imputed to true Believers, as what was always undertaken and deſigned for their Salvation, and is now effectual to the actual Pardon and Acceptance to Life; yea, is pleadable by them for their Security, and is as uſeful to their Happineſs, as if themſelves had done and ſuffered what Chriſt did.

Antinom.

Gentlemen, you would think that Mr. Neonomian had here owned the Doctrine of Imputation; but it is nothing ſo, he doth but ſham it ſtill. Mark, he ſays, Beſides the Effects of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is imputed as to Effects, or Effectualneſs, i. e. Pardon and Acceptance is the Effects; but he tells you not that it is the proper and immediate Righteouſneſs, he will have the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt to have ſome Effects, and is imputed as to ſuch: So that Sanctification and Glorification being Effects, are as much the Imputation of the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt. It's a ſtrange thing to confound the Cauſe and Effects; to tell us the very Cauſe is imputed, and preſently to tell us he means the Effects: This is to talk Daggers; for Cauſe and Effect are oppoſita. But he ſaith, the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is what was undertaken and deſigned for their Salvation, and is effectual, and in that Senſe imputed. Very good; ſo that it was a ſubordinate means to accompliſh that end, as was alſo Creation, (which was by Chriſt, Col. 1.) preaching the Goſpel, their Calling, Sanctification; hence the Imputation of Chriſt's p. 88Righteouſneſs is but to give it a place in the order of means for our Salvation, and in that order of means hath it's Effects. But he ſaith, there is a Priviledge by it as well as a proper Effect, it's pleadable for their Security. I would know how it comes to be pleadable; is it from its own certainty to us, and our Salvation by it, or from our performance of the condition of the Grant? if a Conditional Grant he purchaſed, we cannot plead the certainty of our ſtate from the purchaſe, but very remotely after another plea firſt; if the condition of the Grant be never ſo ſmall, we muſt firſt plead it, before we can plead the purchaſe; we muſt have a plea for the right to the purchaſe before we can have any plea to the Grant by the purchaſe. Laſtly, he ſaith, The Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is as uſeful this way as any, as if Chriſt had ſuffered in their ſtead he means; i. e. a New Goſpel will do your buſineſs as well as the Old and True.

Neonom.

I queſtion not whether Christ by his Righteouſneſs merited — that Believers ſhall be perfectly Holy, even without Spot and Blemiſh.

Antinom.

But you ſay, Chriſt's Merits are Imputed only as to their Effects; and in that ſence the Merits of Chriſt are Imputed for Sanctification in the ſame manner as to Juſtification.

Neonom.

I doubt not but Spots and Blemiſhes may conſiſt with his Juſtified State, &c.

Antinom.

Nor I, Spots as to Inherent Holineſs, but by vertue of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs Imputed unto Juſtification, he is without Spot before God; this Righteouſneſs hath no Spot in it, but you charge it for Errour to ſay they are ſo Righteous that they have no Spot in them.

Neonom.

The difference lyes in theſe Points.

1. Whether there be a change of Perſon between Chriſt and the Elect, this you affirm, and I deny.

Antinom.

I affirm there is in the true Goſpel Sence, not in ſuch a forced inviduous Senſe that you would put upon us.

Neonom.

2. Whether the Mediatorial Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be ſubjectively in us? This you affirm, and I deny.

Antinom.

It's falſe, I affirm it not.

Neonom.

Whether we be as Righteous as Chriſt, be a proper and ſafe Speech? This you affirm, I deny; though I yield that we are for the ſake of his Righteouſneſs, delivered from the Guilt of Sin, and entitled to Life; yea, accepted with God againſt all Excluding Bars.

Antinom.

We deny a Believer is as Righteous as Chriſt in reſpect of Juſtitia Meditoria; the Righteouſneſs Imputed is not that Righteouſneſs; p. 89neither is it communicable by Imputation; but it's the Juſtitia Mediatoris, that is quaſi, the Material Cauſe of our Juſtification, materia ex quâ, you make it Imputed but in the Effect; and in the beſt ſenſe you make it but a cujus gratia res eſt; and ſo we are Sanctified and Glorified: but we ſay the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is the Material Righteouſneſs of our Juſtification, no other Righteouſneſs or Condition coming in with it in the Imputation, and that thereby Believers are as free from the Condemnation of the Law, and in the Eye of Juſtice, as Chriſt himſelf; if his Righteouſneſs had not been ſuch, he could not have aroſe from the Dead. You ſay you yield that for the ſake of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs we are delivered from Guilt; How? Is it not becauſe he bore the Guilt, and ſatisfied for it? It's this bearing Guilt, and ſatisfying God's Juſtice, that we by Faith ſtand in, and all our Guilt covered by, it's this very Satisfaction in the full Nature of it, is Imputed to us. —You ſay, accepted of God againſt all Excluding Bars. This is little better than Nonſence; however your meaning lyes very fair in it, that our acceptance to God's poſitive Favour and Love is not here, but elſewhere; and Acceptance as to Excluding Bars, is only a Negative acceptance, an Acceptance and no Acceptance; the removing the Bars and Obſtacles to acceptance, ſuppoſeth there may be an acceptance upon ſome other Terms. It is a miſerable thing that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs ſhould do no more than remove a Bar. The Apoſtle ſaith, We are accepted in the Beloved, Eph. 1. he ſhould have ſaid, The Bars of acceptance are removed by the Beloved: now provide for your Acceptance as well as you can.

Neonom.

Whether becauſe Chriſt is perfectly Holy, can we be ſaid to be perfect in Holineſs upon the account of any Imputation of his Holineſs to us, or we ſo Eſteemed by God? This I affirm, you deny.

Antinom.

You ſhould affirm it upon your Principles, allowing no Imputation, but as to the Effects of his Righteouſneſs; and I tell you, in a perfect Perſon, ſuch as Adam in Innocence, and Chriſt the Second Adam, there is no difference between Perſonal Righteouſneſs and Holineſs.

Neonom.

The Queſtion is, Whether the Elect Believer before he is perfectly Holy, is wholly without Spot, Filth and Blemiſh? This you affirm, and I deny; though I grant that thoſe Spots, Blemiſhes, and Filth ſhall not ſubject them to the Curſe and Wrath of God, nor forfeit Saving Benefits.

Antinom.

We ſay in reſpect of the perfect Righteouſneſs of Jeſus Chriſt, that is Imputed unto a Believer, he is perfect and without Spot in the Eye of God's Juſtice, and that in Chriſt this p. 90Righteouſneſs is perfect Holineſs, and as ſuch, is theirs as in their Head, Col. 1.19, 21, 22. Chap. 2.10. And in your Divinity you ſay theſe Spots, &c. ſhall not ſubject them to Curſe and Wrath: If ſo, it hath perfectly freed them from the Charge of Sin in the Eye of God's Juſtice, all their Iniquities are forgiven, and their Sin covered with the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, that they ſtand foreign, before the Throne, Rev. 14. For if Juſtice charge them with Sin, i. e. lay it to their Charge, it muſt condemn them to the Curſe and Wrath due; but foreign Who ſhall lay any thing to the Charge of God's Elect? it is God that Juſtifieth, Rom. 8.33. And then follows, foreign, Who ſhall Condemn? Therefore where there's juſt Accuſing before God, there's alſo Condemning; and hence though there be remaining Sins and Corruptions in the holieſt Believer, yet God mark… them not ſo as to lay them to their Charge in the way of Vindicative Juſtice; they are not (ſay you) ſubjected to Curſe and Wrath.

Neonom.

I ſhall confirm my Poſitions.

1. There is no Change of Perſon between Chriſt and the Elect. D. W. p. 41.

Antinom.

I pray what do you mean by that Poſition?

Neonom.

Chriſt was the Saviour, and never ceaſed to be ſo, we are ſaved; Chriſt was the Redeemer, and we the Redeemed; Chriſt forgives, we forgiven.

Antinom.

Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs in Redemption, for Juſtification or Forgiveneſs, doth not denominate us Saviours, or Redeemers; Relata ſunt contraria negantia, and as they ſtand mutually affected, cannot be converted into each other; you are now upon a ſure ſide. A Father cannot be the Son in that reſpect as he is the Father, and yet he may be a Son too; and therefore, relata ſunt contraria, quia referuntur ad idem ſubjectum attributionis; and though they are contraries, yet do conſiſt ex mutua alterius affectione; and hence, omnis integra relatio conſtat ex duabus partibus; in reſpect of one, the relatum is cauſa, and correlatum the Effect. In the reſpect of the other, the relatum is effectum, and the correlatum cauſa. Redeemer and Redeemed are Mutual Cauſes and Effects, and yet Contraries; and the Contraries yet do Exiſt by the Mutual Affection that they have to each others.

Neonom.

What is all this to the purpoſe?

Antinom.

I would hereby give you to know that I underſtand the Logical Difference between Redeemer and Redeemed and if you knew it your ſelf, you would be aſhamed to uſe this Argument to any Men of Learning; but ſuch ſtudyed Divines p. 91take themſelves to have ſuch puzzling Pates, that they can be dictators to all Men.

Neonom.

It's prophane Arrogance for us to pretend to his Prerogatives; and it's Blaſphemy to debaſe him among their number, who were Enemies, and without Strength.

Antinom.

Logick failing, it's not amiſs to betake your ſelf to ſome high ſtrains of Rhetorick; ſome great words may make a Man look big, but never affright Wiſe Men from the Truth.

Neonom.

My ſec…nd Argument is, The Meditorial Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is not ſubjectively in us.

Antsnom.

No, nor by Imputation neither, i. e. Juſtitia Mediatoria, but Juſtitia Mediatoris is both ſubjectively in Chriſt and us; Originalitèr in Chriſt, Imputativè in or upon us; we are the Subjects by your leave of Imputed Righteouſneſs, and Chriſt of Imputed Sin; and this very ſubjectiveneſs cuts off both your Arguments at once, becauſe the very propoſition that we are the Subjects of Imputed Righteouſneſs, denies our ſelves to be the Authors of that Righteouſneſs, and affirms another to be ſo; my very ſaying that the Creditor took another's Bond for my Debt, and delivered up my Bond to me upon his Payment, doth ſufficiently acquaint all rational Men that I not only aſcribe the Payment to another Man, but do affirm that his Money was accepted on my Account; and if any ſhould hear me ſay that I became a Surety, becauſe he paid my Debt, they would think I were Mad; but if I ſay, that the Creditor took ſuch an one as Pay-maſter in ſtead of me, and his Money paid was reckoned to me, no Man but would judge it very good ſence beſides Mr. Neonomian.

Neonom.

I do not ſpeak of Inherent Righteouſneſs, of which he is not only the Pattern, but alſo is the Cauſe and Worker, Phil. 3.9.

Antinom.

We would not miſtake you, you would be underſtood that we are the Subjects of Inherent Righteouſneſs; and I tell you, ſo are we of Imputed Righteouſneſs, genere Imputationis, Chriſt is not; as Chriſt is the ſubject of our Sins, genere Imputationis. That which God Imputes to us, and Faith Applies to us, we are the Subjects of it, for ſubjectum is cui aliquid adjungitur; and here is a note of Conjugate Arguments, wherein is Abſtractum, concretum & modus Agendi, Juſtus is ſubjectum Juſtitiae Imputatae; and in this pair of Relates, the adjunct is alſo the cauſe of the Subject, which is a Logical Myſtery that every unſtudied Divine doth not underſtand. As for Phil. 3.9. which you pervert and underſtand of our Inherent p. 92Righteouſneſs, we ſhall examine that anon. I ſee you are very fond of your firſt Argument, and every Argument muſt run into it like a Mathematical Principle, that muſt clinch every demonſtrat…on; ſuch as this, Three Angles of a Triangle are equal to two ſquare Angles; or that any two Lines not Parallel protracted will at laſt cut, &c. Now ſay you, if Chriſt's Righteouſneſs be Imputed to us who was a Saviour, then we are Saviours; and it runs thus; if a Surety pays my Debt, then I am a Surety; if my Father pays my Debt, I am thereby made a Father, whether I have Children or no. If a Rich Merchant pay the Debt of a Poor Cobler, and fetch him out of Ludgate, the Cobler hereby becomes a Merchant. A Juſtice of Peace takes off the Penalty from a Conſtable for ſome Fault, whereby he hath forfeited his Office, and therefore the Conſtable muſt become a Juſtice of Peace. The abſurdity of your Inference hence eaſily appears, Imputation of the Action of one Party to another, no way inferrs Phyſical Change, or Individual Identity, but ſignifies a Relative Change, not of one into another, but of both to the Law; the Law takes the Surety for the Debtor, and the Original Debtor to be a Pay-maſter in the Surety. As the Sponſor becomes a reputed Debtor, and the principal Debtor becomes the reputed Pay-maſter; and note, when we ſpeak of the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, we underſtand not the Imputation of his Offices, as you would have us: is not that the Commutation here meant by you?

Neonom.

It's Inconſiſtent with the Nature of Goſpel Imputation.

Antinom.

It is Inconſiſtent with our Doctrine of Imputation, but muſt neceſſarily follow from your Notion of Mediatorial Righteouſneſs; and all your Inferences upon this Hypotheſis is but Fighting with your own Shadow; and therefore we ſhall leave you therein, Canere tuis Muſis, your Arguing affects us not in the leaſt.

Calviniſt.

The Doctrine of Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us to Juſtification, and a ſweet permutation of Perſons in a Law ſence and relation, we muſt aſſent and ſtand by, notwithſtanding all your Cavils againſt it; the Scriptures are plain and expreſs for it, and will ſtand as Bulwarks to defend this Doctrine againſt all Papiſts, Socinians and Neonomians; and becauſe you Mr. Neonomian quote Dr. Owen, would have us to believe that he is a Patron to your Notions, and Men that read him not may think ſo from your Authority, I would diſabuſe them, and ſhew you now p. 93naked, how diametrically oppoſite to you that Learned Doctor is? he ſaith,

There is in Scripture repreſented to us a Commutation between Chriſt and Believers,Dr. Owen of Juſtific. p. 39. as unto Sin and Righteouſnes, i. e. in the Imputation of their Sins unto him, and of his Righteouſneſs unto them. In the Improvement and Application hereof unto our Souls, no ſmall part of the Life and Exerciſe of Faith doth conſiſt. This was taught the Church in the Offering of the Scape-Goat, Levit. 16.21, 22. This Goat was ſent away with this Burden upon him; and whether he did Live, and was a Type of the Life of Chriſt in his Reſurrection, or whether he periſhed in the Wilderneſs, being caſt down the Precipice of a Rock, &c. its generally acknowledged what was done to him, and with him, was only a Repreſentation of what was done really in the Perſon of Chriſt — He did not tranſfuſe Sin from one Subject to another, but transferred the Guilt of it; and to evidence this tranſlation of Sin from the people unto the Sacrifice. Aaron in his Confeſſion, put and fixed both his Hands on his Head. Thence the Jews ſay, That all Iſrael was made as Innocent on the day of Expiation as they were in the day of Creation; from v. 30. wherein they came ſhort of Perfection or Conſummation, Heb. 10. But this is the Language of every Expiatory Sacrifice; quod in ejus caput ſit, let the Guilt be upon him; hence the Sacrifice was called foreign Sin and Guilt, Lev. 4.29.7. 2, 10, 17.

And ſo God laid on Chriſt the Iniquities of us all, that by his ſtripes we might be healed, Iſa. 53.5, 6. Our Iniquity was laid on him, and he bear is, v. 11. and through his bearing it we were freed from it. His Stripes were our Healing, our Sin was his, Imputed to him; his Merit ours, Imputed unto us. He was made Sin for us, &c. that we might become the Righteouſneſs of God in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. This is that Commutation I mentioned, he was made Sin for us; we are made the Righteouſneſs of God in him, God not Imputing Sin to us but Righteouſneſs.— The ſame is expreſſed by the ſame Apoſtle, Rom. 8.3, 4. The Sin was made his, he anſwered for it, and the Righteouſneſs which God requireth by the Law is made ours, the Righteouſneſs of the Law is fulfilled in us, not by our doing it, but by his. This is that Bleſſed Change and Commutation, wherein alone the Soul of a Convinced Sinner can find reſt and peace. So he hath redeemed us from the Curſe of the Law, being made a Curſe for us, that the Bleſſing of Abraham might ocme upon us, Gal. 3.13, 14. He was made a Curſe, whereof his p. 94Hanging on a Tree was a Sign and Token; hence ſaid to bear our Sins in his Body on a Tree, 1 Pet. 1.24. compare Deut. 21.23. And in the Bleſſing of Faithful Abraham all Righteouſneſs and Acceptation with God is included.

And to take off Impertinent Clamours of ſome againſt this Doctrine, he quotes the original words of Juſtin Martyr, foreign, &c. He gave his Son a Ranſom for us; the Holy for Tranſgreſſors; the Innocent for the Nocent, the Juſt for the Unjuſt, the Incorruptible for the Corrupt, the Immortal for Mortals. For what elſe could hide or cover our Sins but his Righteouſneſs? In whom elſe could we Wicked and Ungodly ones be juſtified or eſteemed Righteous, but in the Son of God alone? O ſweet Permutation, or Change! O Unſearchable Work! — That the Iniquity of many ſhould be hid in one Juſt One, and the Righteouſneſs of One ſhould juſtifie many Tranſgreſſors. Gregory Nyſſon ſpeaks thus, He hath tranſferred unto himſelf the Filth of my Sins, [obſerve the Expreſſion Mr. Neonom. foreign,] and communicated to me his Purity. So Auguſtin, He was Sin that we might be Righteouſneſs, not our own, but the Righteouſneſs of God, not in our ſelves, but in him, as he was Sin, not his own, but ours, not in himſelf, but in us. And he thus Comments on, Pſal. 22.1. How ſaith he of my Sins, becauſe he prayeth for our Sins, he made our Sins to be his, (mark Mr. Neonomian) that he might make his Righteouſneſs to be ours; O ſweet Commutation and Change. And he quotes Chryſoſtom on 2 Cor. 5. Hom. 11. What Word, what Speech is this? What Mind can comprehend or expreſs it? for he ſaith, He made him who was Righteous to be made a Sinner, that he might make Sinners Righteous — And he ſpeaks not of an Inclination, but expreſſeth the quality it ſelf. He faith not, He made him a Sinner, but Sin; that we might be made not meerly Righteous but Righteouſneſs; and that the Righteouſneſs of God; when we are Juſtifified, not by Works, (for if we ſhould there muſt be no Spot found in them,) but by Grace, whereby all Sin is blotted out. And how far is this from your Divinity, Mr. Neonomian? See more, p. 43, 44, &c.

Calvin.

He quotes alſo Bernard and Luther, and divers others, which you may read, Mr. Neonomian, at your leiſure, I find you have the Book, eſpecially that Excellent Diſcourſe of Albertus Pighius.

He addeth, Nor are we to be moved that Men who are unacquainted with theſe things in Reality and Power, do reject the p. 95whole Work of Faith herein, as an eaſie Effort of Fancy and Imagination. For the Preaching of the Croſs is Fooliſhneſs unto the beſt of the Natural Wiſdom of Men. P. 49.

Dr. Owen gives the Original of your Argument againſt Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us, P. 509. viz. That if the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be Imputed to us ſo as to be made ours, then are we as Righteous as Chriſt himſelf, becauſe we are Righteous with his Righteouſneſs. Dr. Owen ſhews this to be Bellarmine's Argument againſt the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, Lib. 2. C. 7. Si verè nobis Imputatus Juſtitia Chriſti, &c. If the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be Imputed to us ſo as to be made ours thereby, then are we as Righteous as Chriſt himſelf, becauſe we are Righteous with his Righteouſneſs.

A. Theſe things are plainly affirmed in Scripture, that as unto our ſelves, we are all as an unclean thing, and all our Righteouſneſs is as filthy Rags, Iſa. 64.6. on the one hand, and that in the Lord we have Righteouſneſs and Strength, Iſa. 45.24, 25. on the other. That if we ſay we have no Sin we deceive our ſelves; and yet that we are the Righteouſneſs of God in Chriſt; wherefore theſe things are conſiſtent whatever Cavils the Will of Man makes againſt them; unleſs we take Socinius's his Rule of Interpretation, namely, where any thing ſeems repugnant to our Reaſon though never ſo expreſs in Scripture, not to admit of it, &c. 2. Notwithſtanding the Imputation of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and our being made Righteous thereby, we are Sinners in our ſelves, and ſo cannot be ſaid to be as Righteous as Chriſt, but only made Righteous in him, who are Sinners in our ſelves. 3. We muſt diſtinguiſh between the Perſonal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and our Perſonal Righteouſneſs, and between Righteouſneſs of Inheſion and Imputation, being of divers kinds. 4. The Righteouſneſs of Chriſt was the Righteouſneſs, perſonally of the Son of God, in which reſpect of Infinite Perfection, and not to be compared to, &c.

And as to that place which you boaſt of, it's wholly againſt you;Page 242, 243. Here you prevaricated with your Reader in rehearſing Dr. O. for having ſhewed what Imputation is, he tells us, That Righteouſneſs it ſelf is Imputed, and not any of the Effects, but the Effects of it are made ours by vertue of that Imputation. To ſay the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, i. e. his Obedience and Sufferings are Imputed to us only as unto Effects, is to ſay, We have the Benefit of them, and no more, but Imputation it ſelf is denied; ſo ſay the Socinians, but they knew well, and ingeniouſly grant that they overthrew all true, real Imputation thereby, p. 96and quotes Schlictingius, ſaying, We concede Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is ours, as it redounds to our Good and Righteouſneſs, &c. And is it not pleaſing to ſee ſome among our ſelves with ſo great Confidence take up the ſenſe and words of theſe Men.

Neonom.

But Dr. Owen ſaith, That Imputation is not the Tranſmiſſion or Transfuſion of the Righteouſneſs of another into them that are juſtified, that they ſhould become perfectly and inherently righteous thereby, &c. p. 242. D. W. p. 51.

Antinom.

We ſay ſo too; but Dr. Owen doth not ſay, We are juſtify'd by the Imputation of the Effects of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, he oppoſeth that Imputation as a Socinian Notion.

Neonom.

He doth not: For he ſaith, That the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is imputed to us as to it's Effects, hath this ſound Sence, namely, The Effects of it are made ours by reaſon of that Imputation. It is imputed, ſo reckoned unto us of God, as that he really communicates all the Effects of it unto us.

Antinom.

But what immediately follows in the next Sentence? Dr. O. p. 243.

Why did you not quote all the Dr. ſaid? Is not this baſe falſe dealing? You would only quote as much as ſhould ſerve your turn. But to ſay the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is not imputed unto us, only its Effects are ſo, is really to overthrow all Imputation: For (as we ſhall ſee) the effects of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt can't be ſaid properly to be imputed to us; and if his Righteouſneſs it ſelf be not ſo, Imputation hath no place herein: nor can it be underſtood why the Apoſtle ſhould ſo frequently aſſert it as he doth, Rom. 4. Therefore the Socinians, who do expreſly oppoſe the Imputation of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and plead for a Participation of it's Effects and Benefits only, do wiſely deny any ſuch kind of Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, i. e. of Satisfaction and Merit, as alone may be imputed to us. Here's matter of Fact, to ſhew your double-dealing.

Neonom.

But the Aſſembly is of my mind. Q. 69. What is the Communion in Grace which the Members of the Inviſible Church have with Chriſt. A. In their partaking of the Vertue of his Mediation in their Juſtification, Adoption, Sanctification, and whatever in this Life manifests their Ʋnion with him; ſo that in their Judgment it's the vertue of Chriſt's Mediation operates on us, and not the Mediatorial Righteouſneſs in us.

Antinom.

This is ſtrange Language, to talk of Imputing the Mediation of Chriſt to us; and this is that you now plainly tell us, is the Mediatorial Righteouſneſs that you mean all along; or that p. 97partaking of the Vertues of Mediation and Imputation are convertible Terms? Thoſe Reverend Divines do not ſay, the Mediation of Chriſt was imputed to us, no more than his Kingſhip, Prieſtſhip, Prophetical Office; yet we are in a Sence made Kings, Prieſts and Prophets, but not by Imputation: They tell you only of the Effects of his Mediation, of which Juſtification is one. If you would have told us what they ſay of Imputed Righteouſneſs, you ſhould have rehearſt the next, Q. 70. What is Juſtification?

A. Juſtification is an Act of God's Free Grace unto Sinners, in which he pardoneth all their Sins, accepteth and accounteth their Perſons righteous in his ſight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect Obedience and full Satisfaction of Chriſt by God imputed to them, and received by Faith alone.

See the Shorter Catechiſm, Q. 33. See alſo the Confeſſion, directly condemning all your Scheme of Divinity at once, C. 9. Of Juſtification.

Thoſe whom God effectually calleth, he alſo freely juſtifyeth, not by infuſing Righteouſneſs into them, but by pardoning their Sins, and by accounting and accepting their Perſons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Chriſt's ſake alone; not by imputing Faith it ſelf, the Act of believing, nor any other Evangelical Obedience to them as their Rigteouſneſs, but by imputing the Obedience and Satisfaction of Chriſt unto them, they receiving and reſting on him and his Righteouſneſs by Faith. The Savoy Conf. ch. 11. is the ſame verbatim.

Now, Gentlemen, I appeal to all Men of Sence and Honeſty, whether Mr. Neonomian hath dealt fairly, thus to repreſent the Judgment of Dr. Owen and the Reverend Divines of the Aſſembly, or thus to impoſe upon the weak, and ſuch as have not Will or Leiſure to ſearch into the Truth of what he ſaith.

Neonom.

I tell you what the Savoy ſays, which is the ſame Articles with the Aſſemblies.

Antinom.

But you tell us, or would have us to underſtand, that the meaning of the Aſſembly about Imputation, is, that the Vertue of Chriſt's Mediation (i. e. in your declared Sence) the Effects only operates upon us; and then after rehearſal of the Words of the Savoy, you add, Thou ſeeſt it's Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed for Pardon, and not infuſed. You'll oppoſe imputation to Infuſion, which none of us plead for: But this Imputation is in p. 98your Sence only as to the Effect, which you would have us to believe is the Judgment of Dr. Owen and the two Aſſemblies: And I find you lamely rehearſe the Article of your Confeſſion, as being aſhamed to behold your Erroneous Doctrine ſo fully condemned by them.

Do not think ſuch pitiful little Sophiſms as theſe, are ſuch as do become a profeſſed Miniſter of the Goſpel, or that your Reverend Vouchers have not prejudiced their Honour by aſſerting ſo publickly to the World, That in all material things you have fully and rightly ſtated the Truths and Errors in this Treatiſe; and look upon this as a Work of conſiderable Service to the Church of Chriſt, &c. when your manifeſt Deſign is to hide Truth by Equivocations, falſe Repreſentations, and odious forced Conſequences; and to impoſe old palpable decried Errours. Veritas non querit angulos.

Now, Sir, that you may ſee we have more than Authority for this great Doctrine of Imputation of Chriſt's very Righteouſneſs:

1. I prove, that to ſay Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed only as to Effects, is to deny the Doctrine of Imputation.

Conſider, from the Nature of Imputation it ſelf. Imputation is the reckoning and eſteeming that unto one man, which is done by another: As in caſe of Debt or Wrong done by one Man to another, a third comes and does, or promiſeth that thing whereby the Offended Perſon becomes ſatisfied with the Offender, previous to which Satisfaction in Nature is his reckoning the Payment made, or to be made, unto the Offender; it's not the taking of this or that Payment in any kind that is Satisfactory for the Offender, unleſs it be by the offended Perſon reckoned to him.

Paul to Philemon, v. 18. gives the clear Notion of Imputation both as to Wrong and Righteouſneſs, foreign, If he hath criminally or unrighteouſly done thee wrong in filching or ſtealing, impute this to me, or put it upon my Account: Take me as Paymaſter, and put my Payment on his Account, i. e. In reſpect of any wrong that he hath done thee, or Debt that he owes thee; Here's my hand for it, foreign, I will repay it to thee. Now Paul ſtood bound for Oneſimus to Philemon; and unleſs Philemon had accounted Paul's Payment or Obligation to Oneſimus in reſpect of any Wrong ſuſtained by him, Oneſimus is ſtill peccant, and an unreconciled Offender in the Eve of Philemon.

Now the Effects of Righteouſneſs is the Benefits received by Imputation, not Imputation it ſelf. Suppoſe the neareſt Effects of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, as Satisfaction, Reconciliation, Juſtification, p. 99Adoption, Imputation, is cauſe of thoſe Effects. God is ſatisfied, and reconciled, and juſtifies the Sinner, becauſe he imputes and reckons to him the payment or appeaſing Act of the Surety. I argue then,

1. That which is a Benefit received by vertue of Imputed Righteouſneſs, is not imputed Righteouſneſs it ſelf, but God's being ſatisfied, reconciled, and Juſtifying us, is the Benefit only of Imputed Righteouſneſs, Ergo. As to the Major, That thi…g which is received by vertue of ſomething elſe, is not the ſame with it; nay, they are contraria affirmantia. Now God's giving us the Benefit of Imputed Righteouſneſs, is that which doth in a way of Juſtice reſult from the ſaid Righteouſneſs imputed: The Imputation is the Gift of Grace, therefore Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is firſt imputed, and graciouſly reckoned ours to all intents and purpoſes. Hence reſults in a way of Juſtice God's Satisfaction, Reconciliation, and the Sinners Juſtification. Hence it will needs follow, if there be no more in Imputation than God's being ſatisfyed, reconciled, Juſtifying, I will ſay, how comes it to paſs? You'll ſay, Through Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, it's an Effect of it. I ſay ſo too. But how come we to have theſe Effects, if God never reckoned and accounted Chriſt's Righteouſneſs unto us? either we are righteous ſome way or other before God declares us righteous, or we are not: If not, it's not a true Sentence: If we are righteous, we are ſo by our own Righteouſneſs, or anothers: if by anothers, it muſt be ſome way or other ours either by Communication of it eſſentially, or by reckoning and eſteeming it unto us as if it were ours; but to reckon the Effect only, is not Imputing of it at all.

Arg. 2. To ſay the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is only the beſtowing of the Effects, is to aſcribe Juſtification to the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt in no other ſence than we do Sanctification and Glorification; for it is to ſay that Juſtification is but a Meritorious Benefit, and ſo is Sanctification and Glorification; for all thoſe are purchaſed and procured by him. Now there's a vaſt difference between payment of a Debt owing, and making a purchaſe of a new Eſtate: it's true Chriſt did both, he ſatisfied and he purchaſed; as for the purchaſe Money there's no need it ſhould be Imputed to us; if the Eſtate being purchaſed be beſtowed freely, it is enough, but as for Satisfaction made for our Wrong or Debt, this muſt be reckoned and accounted to us before we can come at a Legal Diſcharge, or procured Riches.

p. 100Arg. 3. To ſay Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is Imputed to us only as to Effects, is to ſay, That there is ſome other Righteouſneſs beſides this for us to be Juſtified by, for it implies that we are become Righteous by another Righteouſneſs; the Priviledge of having whereof is only procured by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs; and the plain truth of it, the Original Riſe of this Notion is only to open way for another Righteouſneſs to come in to our Juſtification, which is another Goſpel; yea, not only contrary to Sound Doctrine, but Radically Deſtructive to the true Grace and Goſpel of Jeſus Chriſt.

Arg. 4. If we cannot have the Effects of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, unleſs the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be Imputed to us, then the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is Imputed otherwiſe than in Effects; but we cannot have the Effects of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, &c.

The Conſequence of the Major is ſo clear it needs no proof.

I prove the Minor; we cannot have the Effects of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, unleſs his very Righteouſneſs be Imputed. The Reaſons are, 1. Becauſe our Offences will ſtand in the Eye of Juſtice, and we ſhall remain unrighteous, having no Righteouſneſs of our own, nor any of another reckoned to us. For we can be Righteous no other way but by our own, or by anothers; and Chriſt's Righteouſneſs ſignifies nothing as to us, if it be not placed to our account; and hence being not made Righteous by it, can never be Sanctified, &c. 2. We can have none of the Effects, becauſe they all proceed from Love of Reconciliation unto Sinners; now the Enmity being not taken away by Satisfaction, there is no Reconciliation, and therefore we cannot poſſibly partake of the Effects of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs.

Arg. 5. To ſay we have only the Effects Imputed, is to deny Imputation, for the Effects are not ours by Imputation, but Perſonally and Really; as ſuppoſe Juſtification, God doth not Juſtifie us by Imputing Juſtification, but really upon Imputed Righteouſneſs. 2. If Chriſts very Righteouſneſs be not Imputed or Accounted to us in Juſtification, ſome other Righteouſneſs muſt, for God cannot Juſtifie a Sinner without accounting him Righteous by ſome very Righteouſneſs either of his own or of anothers.

2. I prove that the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is Imputed.

Arg. 1. That Righteouſneſs that ſatisfied the Juſtice of God for our Offences, is Imputed unto us; but the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt ſatisfied the Juſtice; Ergo, The Major is very evident; for if A do pay Money for B, and D to whom it is due accepts it in p. 101diſcharge of B's Debt; then D doth place it to B's Account, and gives a Receipt accordingly to A, as having paid him ſo much for the uſe of B.

As for the Minor, that the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt ſatisfied the Juſtice of God for us; it appears, 1. By his Intention in giving himſelf for us, and God's accepting of us in him as his Beloved. 2. Becauſe if God be ſatisfied for our Breach of the Law, it can be no other Righteouſneſs that could do it; it muſt alſo be the very Righteouſneſs, and not the Effects; now that which God was ſatisfied with upon our account, is accounted to us; for if it be not accounted to us, it is not accepted for us, our Debt ſtands ſtill, and the Hand-writing againſt us. 3. If the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt do not ſatisfie, no Effects of Righteouſneſs can; for nihil dat quod non habet.

Arg. 2. That Righteouſneſs which Chriſt our Advocate pleads for us, is Imputed to us. But Chriſt our Advocate pleads his very Righteouſneſs; for he entred in with his own Blood, and pleads thoſe very Sufferings, and that payment upon our very account, Heb. 9.14. C. 10.19, 20. C. 7.25.

Arg. 3. That Righteouſneſs which anſwers all the demands of the Law on behalf of a Sinner, is Imputed to Juſtification; but it was Chriſt's very Righteouſneſs anſwered all the demands of the Law, in Active and Paſſive Obedience, Rom. 10. Ergo, Minor, there's nothing that the Law expects expreſly as to Active or Paſſive Obedience, but Chriſt hath performed it in his very Righteouſneſs when he was in his ſtate of Humiliation, what was done was done then, the Effects were afterwards in his Exaltation.

Arg. 4. That which is pleaded in Prayer by us for Forgiveneſs, and ought to be, is Imputed to us; but the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is pleaded by us, this is the ſake of Chriſt for which we ask of God pardon of Sin, we have nothing to do to plead that Righteouſneſs which is not accounted to us. There's none of us pleads our own Righteouſneſs, but the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt.

Arg. 5. That Righteouſneſs upon which a Sinner hath peace with God, is the Righteouſneſs reckoned to us for Juſtification; but Chriſts very Righteouſneſs is that by which we have peace with God, Eph. 2.13, 15. and Peace of Conſcience, Heb. 9.14. c. 1. beg. Rev. 1.5.

Arg. 6. Chriſt could not be ſaid to be Jehovah our Righteouſneſs, if his very Righteouſneſs were not Imputed to us, but only the Effects, Jer. 23.6. And upon what is it grounded that the Church is named as it is in Chap. 33.16. but upon Chriſt's Imputed Righteouſneſs?

p. 102Arg. 7. I might add that Argument which others have urged, that as the Sin of the firſt Adam was Imputed to his Seed, ſo the Righteouſneſs of the ſecond to his Seed. See Rom. 5. But it's eaſie to prove the Sin of Adam was Imputed to all his Poſterity, he being a publick Perſon, and all we in his Loins; if Mr. Neonomian deny this, we will go upon the proof of it another time.

It behoveth him to bear the Puniſhment and Wrath of God, not for his own Perſon, but for our Perſons, and ſo making a happy Change with us, he took upon him our ſinful Perſon, and gave unto us his Innocent and Victorious Perſon, wherewith we being now cloathed are freed from the Curſe of the Law. Luth. on Gal. 3.14.

Chriſt's Mediation was a Redeeming Mediation, he muſt give himſelf for a Ranſom or Counterprize. 1. The price is a ſtanding price that the Law requires, without the leaſt Variation or Abatement. 2. There muſt be an Exchange betwixt the Mediator and us; he muſt be a Counterpane ſtanding in our room or ſtead, 1 Tim. 2.6. 3. There muſt be an Exchange of Perſon for Perſon, which is the ſureſt Exchange in War or Captivity, when nothing but one Perſon will be taken in the room of another; no Gifts or Rewards could unbind the Infinite Juſtice of God, 1 Tim. 2.6. Tit. 2.14.4. There muſt not only be Perſon for Perſon, but like for like. 1. In Nature; one of an Inferiour or Superiour Nature would not do, Heb. 2.16. Phil. 2.7. 2. There muſt be an Exchange of State for State, Phil. 2.7. 2 Cor. 8.9. Iſa. 53. 3, 4. Mat. 20.28. Gal. 3.13. Mr. Stone of New Eng.

Neonom.

You ſeem to ſpeak as if Chriſt's Holineſs were Imputed to us, and that we are perfectly Holy.

Antinom.

You know I told you, it may follow from your Doctrine, viz. Imputation of Sanctification, as well as Juſtifying Righteouſneſs; becauſe Sanctification is an Effect and Vertue of Chriſt's Mediation. I ſhall now ſpeak but a word to this Point; viz. That our Life of Sanctification is in Chriſt, we are ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus; and he is made of God to us Sanctification: As we are Created in him, ſo we live in him as to Holineſs, and we have a compleatneſs of Sanctification in him; and though that fulneſs of Sanctification is not properly ſaid to be communicated by Imputation, as by derivation of Grace; yet this Infuſed Grace ariſing into Duty, and our Duties mingled with much Corruption, muſt be covered by the Imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, that they may be accepted as well as our Perſons. Dr. Horton on Rom. 8.3. underſtands the Law of the Spirit of Life that is in Chriſt, to be p. 103all that Holineſs wherewith the living and quickning Spirit of God, hath filled the Humane Nature of Jeſus Chriſt, which is the fulneſs of Sanctification in all Grace and Holineſs.

Neonom.

Though Chriſt be perfectly holy, yet his Holineſs is not ſo imputed to us, as that we are perfectly holy, p. 46. You ſay we appear before God perfect in Holineſs, p. 428.

Antinom.

You ſeem to imply, as if Chriſt's Holineſs were ours by Imputation, ſo much as it is ours; and therefore you inſinuate as if there were ſuch a thing as partial Imputation: But we ſpeak not any thing either of Chriſt's Holineſs, as ſo Sanctification by way of Imputation, but of real Communication from him to us; of which perfect Fulneſs we do receive, by the new Creation in him, and Grace received from him, as Members from the Head, in our meaſures, by vertue of our myſtical Union to him.

2. I ſaid, Let me tell you, if God had not laid the Iniquities of Men on Chriſt,Dr. Cr. p. 428. there's never a Soul had entred into Heaven: For there's no Refuge to fly to, there's no hope of drawing near to the everlaſting Kingdom of Bleſſedneſs, till the Lord Jeſus cleanſe you thoroughly from all Sinfulneſs and Filthineſs; and ſo you appear before God perfect in Holineſs. It is his white Rayment makes us worthy to walk with the Lamb in White; he counſels the Church of Laodicea to buy of him White Rayment. Now ſee now we are abuſed by you. The Words you refer your Proof to, doth relate to, and is intended of the ſtate of Glory, that the Saints muſt be perſonally and perfectly holy before they can draw near to God in that full Fruition of him in the ſtate of Bleſſedneſs in Heaven. If there is any thing underſtood of the Saints Perfection in this Life, it is not denyed but that their Graces and Duties are imperfect here, as they come from and are acted by them, and are mingled with much Sin and Pollution; but their acceptation with God muſt be in a way of Perfection. 1. In that Chriſt, of whom we are Members, and who is made unto us Sanctification, as the Head of the Body, the Ro… and Fountain is perfect in Sanctification, and we in him, Col. 1.19. ch. 2.10. 2. That all the beſt Duties and Services as coming from us, and performed by us, being mingled with Sin and Corruption, muſt be accepted in and through Chriſt, and covered in his righteouſneſs; ſo that as they are preſented unto God by our Advocate, they come before him waſhed white in the Blood of the Lamb, and perſumed in his Incenſe.

Neonom.

God cannot account a ſincere Chriſtian perfectly holy: The Ʋnion in Marriage doth not transferr habitual Qualifications from Huſband p. 104to Wife. Is a fooliſh Wife perfectly wiſe becauſe her Husband is ſo? It's abſurd: Our reſtored Holineſs is through the Operations of the Spirit, and not by transfuſion. If the very Holineſs of Chriſt's Perſons be in us, if increated, then we are God's; if created Holineſs of Chriſt's Humane Nature be in us, it muſt depart from him, and ceaſe to be in him. P. 47.

Antinom.

It would take up deſervedly ſome Paper to ſhew the Error and Sophiſtry of what you have ſpoken: The Summ is, that you deny Chriſt to be a publick Perſon, and that all that Grace and Fulneſs that is in him by reaſon of the Hypoſtatical Union of both Natures, and that Unction without meaſure which he received, was only to qualify him ſingly and for himſelf, as an Individual Perſon, and not to be conveyed and communicated unto us; and therefore none of his Fulneſs is received by us; that the Spirit, not his Spirit: Neither do we live by vertue of our Union to him, as a Root, Head, Fountain; but if we partake of the Divine Nature, as the Apoſtle Peter, Eph. 2. ch. 1. ſaith, We are made Gods. If we partake of the Vertues of Chriſt, we rob him, and they are no more in him. You abuſe the Similitude of Husband and Wife uſed by the Apoſtle, Eph. 5. and would make it run on Four Feet. You conſider not that Adam and Eve at firſt was the true Type the Apoſtle aims at to repreſent Chriſt and his Church by: Eve being taken out of Adam, had her Nature in him firſt, and was created out of him, and ſo was Fleſh of his Fleſh, and Bone of his Bone. You muſt diſtinguiſh between the Individual Perſon and Qualification of the firſt Adam, and his publick Capacity, Headſhip and common Nature; he had a peculiar diſtinct Perſon and Habits belonging to it as ſuch, but he had alſo a common Nature communicable to his Wife and to his Poſterity by Propagation, not only Eve's Nature, but ours was in him radically. And therefore the Prophet Malachy ſaith, that God made but one at firſt, Mal. 2.15. though he had the reſidue of the Spirit, and could have made more, as he did in the Creation of Angels; but therefore one, that he might ſeek a Seed of God, foreign. Now this Seed of God was found in the Seed of the Woman that was made out of Man, and was but one; as Adam was made but one common Perſon, ſo Chriſt, and the Church his Wife is made out of him, created in him as Eve was, and have a Nature common in Chriſt. And doth it follow, that becauſe Adam had the common Nature to Eve and his Poſterity, 1. That his Individual Qualities were communicated, taken from him, and given to Eve? Was Adam turned into Eve? Was Adam's Wiſdom, Holineſs, p. 105his Natural or Moral Vertues taken from Adam, and given to her or them? The common Nature of a Genus is communicated and propagated by Individuals, without robbing the Individual. Mankind is propagated daily by Individuals, yet thoſe Individuals loſe nothing of their proper Adjuncts. If Men were not Strangers to Logick and Natural Philoſophy, and ordinary Terms of Law, they would not make ſo much ado about this common Nature of Chriſt, which in him is Myſtical and Tranſcendent.

I ſhall not here enlarge, but enquire what is the Opinion of the Proteſtant Divines.

Calv.

Dr. Davenant, I pray ſpeak in this matter what your Senſe is. Dr. Davenant on Col. 1.19. 1. There was in Chriſt a fulneſs of habitual Grace; neither take we this to be Infinite, ſeeing it was a created Qualitas, and inhered in the mind of Chriſt, which alſo was a Creature, it could not be infinite; but by fulneſs of Grace we underſtand all thoſe Perfections to which the Nature of Grace doth extend it ſelf. 2. We conſider why Chriſt ought to have a fulneſs of Grace: 1. E Debito congruitatis, it was due to him in a way of meetneſs, by reaſon of his Union to the Word. 2. It was meet that which was neareſt to the influencing Cauſe, ſhould partake moſt of the Influx. 3. There was Debitum neceſſitatis, It was neceſſarily due, from the Suppoſition of the End, by reaſon of the Habitude [or relation of Chriſt himſelf to the Humane Nature; for Grace was conferred upon him, not as a private Perſon, but as an univerſal Principle,] from whom it is transfuſed into other Men, [you ſay it's not by Transfuſion, p. 47.] All things ought to be full, and in an oneneſs. The Evangeliſt ſhews, that Grace is diffuſed to us, Eph. 4.7.

And on Coloſ. 2.10. (1.) To be compleat in Chriſt, 1. Is ſpoken from the Effect. Chriſt is not only perfect, in whom dwells all the Fulneſs of the Godhead, but he makes us perfect and compleat, we having all things in him and his Doctrine neceſſary to Salvation. 2. The Second Reaſon is taken from his Office; Chriſt is the Head. As to the firſt, We have perfect Wiſdom, right Knowledge of the Doctrine of the Goſpel, John 17.13. 1 Cor. 2.2. 2. We have compleat Righteouſneſs, for Satisfaction to the Law of God, and for our Sins. 3. In Chriſt we have Sanctification or inherent Righteouſneſs: For what is Sanctification other than the waſhing away of our Errours and Vices, whereby we are ſet at a diſtance from God, and the Suſception of Gifts and Graces, whereby we may draw nigh to God in his Service— And this is done as we ſtand united to Chriſt by his Spirit, Rom. 1.4. ch. 8. 9.

p. 106In eo] non ex eo aut per eum ſolummodo. In him, not from him, or by him only; but he ſaith, We are compleat in him, to give us to underſtand, that we have that foreſaid Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs and Holineſs, not as we behold Chriſt as exiſting far from us, but as we are incorporated in Chriſt, as we have Chriſt abiding and dwelling in us; and we have this Grace from Chriſt, not the Stream from the head Fountain; for it's not needful that he that will drink of a Fountain, ſhould go into the Fountain— But it's otherwiſe here; for we cannot receive of Chriſt's Fulneſs, unleſs we are in him. As the Old Adam is in us, as the cauſe of Corruption and Death, ſo the New Adam dwells in us as the Cauſe of Righteouſneſs and Salvation. So we are ſaid to be in Chriſt, to dwell in him, to abide in him, John 15.4, 5. Whatever therefore Men hope or pleaſe themſelves with of Grace, Righteouſneſs, Sanctification or Glorification, it will prove a meer Mock and Dream, if they be not in Chriſt, and Chriſt in them. And now Chriſt is in us, and we in him, when we are united to our Head, and grafted as Branches into the Vine, by the Bond of the Spirit, and Faith wrought by the Spirit in our Hearts, Rom. 8.9. John 3.36.

Calv.

Speak to this Point, Dr. Horton.

In that Text, Rom. 8.2. There are three Terms before us; There's Life, the Spirit of Life, there's the Law of the Spirit of Life. 1. By Life we are to underſtand, the Grace of Holineſs and Sanctification; not that which is inherent in our Nature being regenerate, but the full and perfect Holineſs which is in the Humane Nature of Chriſt as the proper Subject of it; this is the Fountain from which there is a continual flowing of Grace to all that are truly united unto Chriſt. 2. By the word Spirit we underſtand the Spirit of God, the Original from whence it flows, the Activity and Intention of it. This Life; for Spirit is a Word of Emphaſis— 3. The Law is the Prevalency and Force of this Spirit of Life— All Holineſs wherewith the living and quickning Spirit of God hath filled the Humane Nature of Chriſt, and it hath freed thee and me, and all others that are in Chriſt from the Power of the ſinful and deadly Corruption of our Nature; and there is a Fulneſs and Sufficiency of all Grace and Holineſs in Chriſt conſidered as Man. Col. 1.19.2.3, 9. John. 1.14. Pſal. 45.7. John 3.34.