A Rejoinder to Daniel Williams, Part 1
1. The ſtating of the Queſtion.
SIR, you tell us, 1. In what Senſe you hold the Goſpel not a Law; and from thence it follows, That in a Senſe it is not a Law, and therefore in mine it may not be a Law.
1. You ſay, You do not hold that the Goſpel includes nothing beſides this Law.
R. Here is your old Tricking again: The Queſtion is about the Goſpel being a Law, and you ſay it includes ſom…thing that is not a Law; it includes the Covenant of Redemption and abſolute Promiſes, as if the Qu…ſtion were, Whether a Scabbard were a Sword? And you ſay, The Scabbard includes a Sword: But, by your Favour, a Law, as ſuch, can…ot include an abſolute Promiſe, for there's no Promiſe but conditional in a Law; but yet an abſolute Promiſe may include a Law, as that, I will write my Laws in your Hearts. There may be (you ſay) Prophecies, Hiſtories, Doctrinals, &c. yet theſe may be called Adjuncts. Of what? You ſhould have told us whether of Law or Goſpel, or of the Goſpel as a Law. The Hiſtories of Chriſt are Goſpel, and the Prophecies of him, and whatever in Doctrinals brings good News to Sinners, belongs to the Promiſe and Exemplification thereof.
2. You ſay, p 19. Nor do I judge it a Law, in that Senſe our Divines ſix on S…cinians and Arminians.
R. No, you apprehend our Divines abuſe them, but yet it hinders not but that you may judge it a Law, in the Senſe of the Socinians and Arminians: I have told what yours is, let the Reader judge whether it be ſo or no; for they hold Juſtification by Acts of Obedience to this Law but as you do: Nor do they hold that we are juſtified thereby, as Adam ſhould have been by perfect Obedience.
3. You ſay, Nor do I tak… it in the Popiſh Senſe, which the Socinians and Arminians eſpouſe.
R. The Popiſh Senſe of Merit is renounced by the Socinians and Arminians, as well as by you, and as much, for ought I can ſee. The Popiſh Senſe is very plain from the Council of Trent, Anath. 20. Curſed is he that ſaith the Goſpel is a Promiſe, without a Condition of obſerving the Command: And this, I am ſure, is your Senſe. You proceed,
4. "It is not a Law that ſuppoſeth a moral ability in Sinners to perform its Precepts, &c.
R. Its an unreaſonable Law that requires Duty of thoſe that have no ability to perform; and that Law that makes a Condition, and promiſeth Ability, concludes not the Subject till the Power is given; and, when all comes to all, 'tis but a comprehenſive Promiſe both of the Duty and Benefit to be received by it. You ſay,
5. Its not a Law that extinguiſheth the Law of Nature, which hath its ſpecial Precepts.
R. If the Law of Nature be the Law of Adam, you ſay it vacates it: for if it ſtrip it of its Sanction it ceaſeth to be a Law, for Sanction is the Law's Ratification as ſuch. Again,
6. Neither doth this Law require any thing of us as a Condition of Chriſt's coming into the World, nor of the firſt Grace to the Elect. This the Covenant of Redemption ſecures to the Catholick Church by Promiſe.
R. Whoever talked of our doing any thing, as a Condition of Chriſt's coming into the World as our Redeemer, but believe it (as weak as you ſay Mr. C. is … Ile preſume to tell you, that you are bold to attempt to prove the Goſpel to be a Law with Sanction: If you allow that the firſt Grace is abſolutely given, and what is given by electing Grace is ſecured by Election to the Elect; its an inconſiſtent Principle that Redemption ſecures nothing but conditionally, for where the abſoluteneſs of any thing is ſecured, it is ſecured ſo as to ceaſe to be conditional.
6. Nor is it a Law of Obedience, whereto it renders any promiſed Bleſſing a Debt; all is free though ſure; its free as to procurement or Price, yet it is as ſure by Promiſe as if it were by Debt: The Price was Chriſt's Obedience and Sufferings, all comes of Gift, yet in that way which God appoints to give it.
R. This amounts to thus much, That now you have dwindled your Law quite away; for that Obedience that renders not the Promiſe a Debt, can be no Law with Sanction: for by the ſame Reaſon that the Puniſhment is due to me upon Diſobedience, the Promiſe is due upon Obedience. You ſay, Its ſure by Promiſe, ſo every promiſſory Covenant makes Bleſſings ſure; but that which is ſure and free, cannot be by Law Conditions.
P. 20. You give us a very long and confuſed account of your New Law, the ſum whereof is, That upon Believing and Perſevering in ſincere Faith and Holineſs, Life and Salvation is promiſed, and upon non-performance Death and Damnation threatned. The Senſe is, Do and live; the very ſame Eſſentials as to Matter and Form; the Matter, the Duties and Promiſes, or Sins and Puniſhment; the Form is the connection of theſe together by the Sovereign of Authority of a Law giver. You ſay, That you mean by ſaying, The Goſpel is a Law, that God in Chriſt commands Sinners to receive Chriſt with a true operative Faith.
R. We grant the Goſpel doth ſo command, but is it a Condition required of the Creature, to be performed in and by his preſent Abilities? Muſt he have this firſt Grace given before he perform the Condition, and by him that commands it? Yet muſt this Command be a Law with Sanction? No, this Command carries with it to the Elect nothing but a gracious Offer and Invitation, and effectual operative Means to bring a poor Sinner from under a Law with Sanction, to Life and Salvation: Rom. 5.1. The Wages of Sin is Death: He lies under this Law-condemnation. Joh. 3. He is condemned already: The Goſpel calls him not to come under another Condemnation, but it calls him to the Gift of God; What's that? Eternal Life through Jeſus Chriſt; beſides God's Commands in the Goſpel are gracious, its to ſuch Duties which the ſame Grace promiſeth, and there's no middle between being under the Law and under Grace, under a gracious Command and a legal, they are adverſa ſine medio.
You ſay, vponupon their believing they ſhall be united to Chriſt; therefore they muſt firſt do ſomething before Union to Chriſt, that they may have the Benefit of Union, make the Fruit good, and then the Tree afterward, contrary to one of the fundamental Maxims of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. You proceed and ſay, it threatens, if any dye unbelieving, impenitent, &c. they ſhall be barred from theſe Benefits.
R. The meaning is, They ſhall die under the Condemnation of the Law they are in already; as much as to ſay, a Phyſician offers a Sick Patient a Remedy, he refuſeth it, and dies of his Diſeaſe, will you ſay the Phyſician brought him under a Law, with Sanction? Many ſuch Inſtances might be given; The King ſends a Pardon to all the condemned Priſoners in Newgate, ſuppoſe it be upon condition of Acceptance; ſome one accept not, will the Court now try him upon a new Law? No; there's no further Tryal, he is executed upon the Sentence before received: And ſo are all thoſe Places to be underſtood that ſay, He that believes not ſhall be damned: If you ſay by what Law: I ſay not by a new one, but by the Old Law. I own, as I believe there are degrees of Glory, according to the degrees of the Veſſels of Honour greater or leſſer; ſo there are degrees of Wrath, which the Law will execute according to the degree of Sin; and the Law will look upon rejection of Chriſt, as the higheſt degree of Diſobedience: Therefore are thoſe Expreſſions, It ſhall be more tolerable for Sodom than for Corazin; ſome ſhall be beaten with fewer, ſome more Stripes; ſome counted worthy of ſorer Puniſhments than others; but all this is by the Law, not by the Goſpel: And Unbelief and Impenitency are Sins Judged and Condemned with all their Aggravations, ſeverely enough, by that Law, you need not doubt; there needs no new Law to do it. Your referring yourſelf to the Aſſembly will caſt you, for they never intended any ſuch thing, that the Goſpel is a Law.
You ſay, 1. Here's the Eſſentials of a Law, God is our Ruler and we his Subjects.
R. Are Ruler and Subjects the Eſſentials of a Law? that's ſtrange Logick: The Ruler in his legiſlative Power is the efficient: and ſo in his executi…e, in application of it to its Ends, and the ruled are therefore called Subj cts, becauſe under Subjection to both; the Law is eſſentially diſtinct from both. Put go on.
His Will revealed in a way of Governm…nt, here's the Precept that binds to Duty; here's a Promiſe made to them that comply, and a Threatning denounced againſt ſuch as rebel.
R. Theſe look like Eſſentials of a Law of Works, ſuch was Adam's Law, there was God's Will for Duty in a way of Government revealed, a Promiſe to him if he complyed, and a Threat denounced, in caſe he did not: Now then, that Law which hath all the Eſſentials of a Covenant of Works, is a Covenant of Works; but your new Law, by your Deſcription, hath all the Eſſentials of a Covenant of Works.
Therefore you ſay 2. This is a Law of Grace, and its made by our Redeemer for fallen Man.
R. Say you ſo? 1. That which is made and executed in a way of Judicial Proceeding, is not a Law of Grace; for Grace and judicial Proceeding is diametrically oppoſite: But you ſay it's a Law in a way of Government, by a Law therefore of Judicial Proceeding. 2. You ſay its made by our Redeemer: Is it made with our Redeemer? I ſuppoſe you muſt mean ſo, becauſe you ſay for fallen Man; then Chriſt covenanted in our ſtead, which you deny elſewhere, and he is to perform the Conditions for us. 3. You ſay, All the Benefits of it are founded on Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, as the immediate Cauſe of them.
R. And where are the Duties founded in Man's Natural Power and Will? No; youl ſay in Election abſolutely as to the firſt Grace: Well then, here's the Benefits ſecured in Redemption, abſolutely I hope, and the firſt Grace in Election: Now if you can tell us where to get Security for after Graces and Perſeverance, we ſhould have this whole Covenant abſolutely ſecured. Effectual Ability to perform the Duty (i. e. the firſt Duty) is provided for, you ſay, in Election: But is after Duties provided for there? if ſo, election is the ſole Covenant Condition for Duty and Redemption for Benefits: Thus you may mangle the Grace of God.
Again, you ſay, God doth not fix on theſe Terms for any Worth in them, or Profit to him.
R. Its true he did not fix on Adam's Terms for any Worth in them; what proportion could the forbearing an Apple bear to eternal Life, or what Profit would it have been to God, if Adam had let the Apple hang on the Tree, or perſevered all his Days in Holineſs?
Mr. W. The Goſpel is the Inſtrument or Sign by which this Will of God is expreſſed; this is not the Language of God in Adam's Law.
R. An Inſtrument in this Senſe is a Law, Deed or Conveyance, engroſſed or enrolled, which is but a ſmall adjunct to the Law. The Scripture of the Old and New Teſtament are called Inſtruments, becauſe they are the enrollments of this Will of Chriſt and his Teſtament ratified by his Death; and you ſay the Goſpel is a Sign, the Seals of the Covenant are Signs, but the Covenant of Grace is not a Sign, unleſs you mean it ſignifies God's Will and Pleaſure in Government, and ſo did Adam's Law, and was the Language of it.
Mr. W. It ſixeth that Rule of the Promiſe, which Mr. C. p. 33. is at a loſs to know.
R. And ſo are more than I: for you ſay, Its not the Promiſe nor the Precept, where to find a Rule for the Promiſe in the Law, I know not, if it be not in Promiſe or Precept, will you ſay its the connection of Precept and Promiſe? if ſo its the Rule rather of the Law, forma perquam lex eſt; is it God's Rule to diſpenſe by, or our Rule to claim by? it may be you mean both, Precepts and Promiſes are deſparata at leaſt, therefore what your new Term is, I ſuppoſe you do not know what it is yourſelf, no more than your other new Rules of Sin, which is foreign, and miſery, foreign.
Since in ſtead of clearing the Ouſtion you have confounded it, I will take the true ſtate of it from a Man that would ſpeak his Mind more intelligeably in theſe Matters.