A Rejoinder to Daniel Williams, Account
Laſtly, I ſhall give an Account of the beginning and progreſs of this Neonomian Error.
This Doctrin was firſt forged by the Phariſees of old, who did not believe themſelves juſtified by perfect Obedience to the moral Law, their owning the Sacrifices and other Types (their Goſpel) being a ſufficient evidence that they acknowledged themſelves great Sinners, and far enough from perfect Obedience; they only thought that Obedience that they did perform, was through the merciful Nature of God accepted to Juſtification of Life, and their Sins expiated by Sacrifices.
For not only the Scriptures give us full aſſurance of this to be truth, but it were eaſy to ſhew what the Opinion of the ancient and latter Jews were, in this Matter. 1. They placed their Righteouſneſs, not in perfect Obedience, but in ſincere. So Paul, before his Converſion, Act. 26.5.9. Chap. 23. 1. Rom. 10.9. The Jews went to eſtabliſh their own Righteouſneſs and their imperfect Obedience, as ſuch, in conjunction with the attoning Sacrifices for their Juſtification. And R. Menahem ſaith, Scito vitam Hominis in praeceptis; Know that the Life of Man, in the Precepts, is according to the intention that he hath in doing them; But they ſay, Faith is the cauſe of Bleſſedneſs, and, therefore, the cauſe of eternal Life. Thus the Author of Sepher Ikkarim. And that Faith juſtifies as Righteouſneſs itſelf; for, ſaith the ſame Author, Our Father Abraham was praiſed, by reaſon of his Faith; for it's ſaid, Gen. 15. He believed God, and it was accounted to him for Righteouſneſs. And that this Doctrin was that which Paul contendeth with the judaizing Chriſtians about, and the falſe Teachers among them, I doubt not in the leaſt, and am very apt to believe, that it was theſe Neonomians that laid that Charge upon Paul's Doctrin; that it was a Doctrin of Licentiouſneſs, and made ſo great a Cry againſt it, for Antinomianiſm; or as being deſtructive to the Righteouſneſs of the Law and Obedience thereunto.
Philip, a Presbyter and Hearer of Hierom, on Job 42. tells of a Heretick, then living, that held this Opinion, That the Goſpel was a Law, Chriſtop. Pelarg. The next I find it charged upon, is Pelagius, as one of h s grand Hereſies. And from the Pelagians, ſaith Dr. Leydecker, the Papiſts have taken up this Principle. The Council of Trent, Anath. 20. Cu…ſe all that ſay the Goſpel is a Promiſe without condition of obſerving the Commands. And Anath. 21. They Curſe thoſe that ſay, Chriſt is given for a Redeemer, and not a Law-maker. And Anath. 26. They Curſe them that ſay, The juſt ought not to expect a Reward for their Works. Peter a Soto tells us, the Catholick Church doth hold, That Chriſt gave a new Law. The ſame ſaith S. De Clara. It is generally h…ld by all the Jeſuits. Bellarmin in his Controv. de Juſtif. contends, That the Goſpel, as ſuch, is a Law; and that it contains proper …aws, with Threats and Promiſes, and requires Obedience as the Condition of Life, and of the accompliſhments of Promiſes, which are ſo conditionated; and that Merits cannot be otherwiſe defended, which the Papacy holds. Gregory de Val…ntia tells us, They reject the uſual diſtinction of Law and Goſpel, viz. That the Law Promiſes are conditional, the Goſpel Promiſes free and abſolute. Tom. 2. Controv. Diſput. 7. Q 6. Le calls it a Fiction. Mr. Fox, in Act. & Mon. Impr. 7. p. 34. vol. 1. gives this following Account of the Papiſt's Opinion in this Point, They ſay, Moſes was a giver of the old Law, Chriſt of the new. Thus, imagine they, the Goſpel to be nothing elſe but a new Law, given by Chriſt, binding to the Promiſes the Conditions of our doings and deſervings, no otherwiſe than to the old Law; and ſo divide they the whole Law into three parts, the Law of Nature, the Law of Moſes, and the Law of Chriſt, to the fulfilling whereof they attribute Juſtification. And thus they lead the Conſciences of Men in doubt, and induce many Errors, bringing the People into a falſe opinion of Chriſt, as tho' he were not a Remedy againſt the Law, but came as another Moſes to give a new Law to the World.
Dr. Barns, who ſuffered Martyrdom in Henry VIII.'s time, An. Dom. 1541. vigourouſly oppoſed the Popiſh Biſhops in this Point; as appears by his excellent Treatiſe of Juſtification.
In defending Juſtification, by Faith alone, according to the true meaning of the Apoſtle Paul, hath theſe Paſſages.
It were but loſt labour for Paul to prove that Works did help to Juſtification; for that the Jews did grant, and required no m…re; but that which they ſtood upon, was, that Works might not be clearly excluded. But here, peradventure, it will be ſaid, that Paul condemns the Works of the old Law, but not of the new Law; Are you now ſatisfied in your Conſciences? Think you, that you have now aſſoyled Paul's Argument? Think you to be thus diſcharged before God? Go boldly to the Judgment of God, with this Evaſion, and doubt not but then you ſhall find St. Paul ſtiflly and ſtrongly againſt you, and your new Works, as ever he was againſt the Jews and their old Works. Briefly, what Works can you excogitate to do, which be not in the old Law, and of the old Law? Therefore he ſpeaks of all manner of Works; for the Law includeth all Works that ever God inſtituted, the higheſt, beſt and moſt of Perfection; what Works, in the new Law, have you better than thoſe of the old Law? &…. — But grant that there be certain Works of the new Law which be not of the old; yet have you not, nor can prove that theſe ſhall juſtify; for there can be no more goodneſs in Works, than were in the Works of the old Law, for they were to Gods Honour, and the Profit of the Neighbour, and yet you grant they cannot juſtify. St. Paul diſput…s againſt them that were Chriſtned, and had Works of the old Law and of the new; yet concludes, that Chriſt alone juſtified. Mark his Argument; If Righteouſneſs cometh by the Law, then is Chriſt dead in vain, &c. where he proceeds to enervate this Doctrin of Neomianiſm.
From the Papiſts the Socinians took up this Doctrin, as Dr. Leidaker ſhews, ſtyling them, Our new Pelagians. They do indeed (ſaith he) exclude Ceremonial Works, and Works of the Jews, who oppoſe the Goſpel, but when they may ſeem to differ from the Roman Catholicks in the Doctrin of Merit, they anſwer;Socin. ſaith, Paul treats concerning perfect Works of that Law, and ſeeing none can be juſtified by them, the Law requiring perfect Obedience; therefore the Apoſtle ſaith, We are juſtified by faith and obedience, ſo far as a man is able to perform them. That Paul excludes Works of the Law not interrupted by Sin (i. e. perfect perſevering Works) or merits, not thoſe that are performed according to the mild Law of the Goſpel: And he takes notice how Dr. P. Barrow, a Divinity Profeſſor in England, was among the firſt of ours that deſerted the true Doctrin, and an aſſertor of this Doctrin, That the Goſpel is a new Law, ſhewing that no Man was ever juſtified by a perfect obſervance of the Law, but by that Obſervation which depends upon Mercy, and includes pardon of Sin the regenerate do perform that Law; in his Treatiſe de p…aeſtantia legis, c. 13. This Dr. Barrow, the Arminians, when they began to ſpring up, highly applauded, ſaith Dr. Leidaker; His Words are, Similes habent labra lactucas; He ſays, they changed the very Decalogue into a Covenant of Grace, confounding it with the Goſpel, aſſerting a Covenant of Works; ſaying, That notwithſtanding the giving Chriſt, God might have ſet up again a Covenant of Works, but he would not, becauſe of the weakneſs of the Fleſh: Therefore in the room of the rigid Covenant of Works he ſubſtituted a milder Covenant, mixed with goodneſs and grace, in which Faith with imperfect Obedience to the Law might be accepted for perfect Righteouſneſs unto Life. Theſe Doctrins Arminians began to vent, but Epiſcopius taught them openly, whom Curcellius alſo followed as his Maſter, and more lately Dr. Limburgius; who aſſerts, That the Scripture no where teacheth Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to us; and ſaith, This Error (ſo he calls the Doctrin of the imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs) ariſeth from a falſe Opinion, That Chriſt gave full Satisfaction to vindicative Juſtice for all the Sins of the Elect, and bore their Puniſhment in their ſtead, and fulfilled the Law for them: That the Goſpel contains no Precepts, but in reſpect of the Elect are meer Promiſes, &c. Which Doctrin of Limbergius are (ſaith the ſaid learned Author) tantum non Sociniana: He ſheweth how this Man excludes all Works from Juſtification, but only the Works of the new Law. He ſhews how the Remonſtrants, the Dutch Arminians took up with this Doctrin; how it prevailed in France, which after the endeavours of Meliterius and Corducus, Camero's triplex foedus, gave the greateſt occaſion to, which Cocceius and his followers oppoſed: And laſtly ſhews how it hath prevailed in England, in oppoſition to which the Labours of Dr. Owen, in his Treatiſe of Juſtification, and of Mr. Troughton, in his Lutherus redivivus, is highly commended by him.
From all which it doth appear, That this is no new Error, but an old ones ever ſince Chriſt's and the Apoſtles times, and hath been a leading Principle to all Doctrins, contrary to the free Juſtification of a Sinner by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt alone, apprehended by Faith: And the foundation of the Doctrin of Free-will, and the natural Power and Ability of fallen Man, to do good Works that are pleaſing unto God, and in ſome way or other, in part or in whole, rewardable.
He that will ſee a full account of this Doctrin, from tho Poſitions of the Jeſuites, and a c…ear Refutation thereof, and all their Arguments they bring for it, even more than you do, let him read, the learned Dr. Chriſtopher Pelargus, loco xii. de Evangelio, in his Jeſuitiſmus, printed Ann. D…m. 1608.
Divers Paſſages in your Reply and its Preface, wherein you lie open, I have omitted remarking upon: 1. For brevity ſake. 2. Such as concern others, I leave to them. 3. As to all material Points, in difference, you'l ſee my mind elſewhere. I ſhall only note, how weak and abſurd the Reaſon is, you give, for your deſiring the Teſtimony of ſo many to your Book, viz. Becauſe the People do often value Names more than Arguments. Q. D. The People muſt be lead by an Implicit Faith, as in days paſt; Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. Can Proteſtants think this Reaſon is for their Honour and Safety? But I ſpare you; and do aſſure you, my Deſign hath not been for Contention, in contending for what I have thought to be the Truth; but my cordial Deſire is, that all may iſſue in the Unity of the Spirit of Truth and Peace, and what collateral Expreſſions have fallen from my Pen, from firſt to laſt, that are juſtly diſreliſhed by you, or any other that feareth the Lord, aſcribe it to human Frailty, which I am lyable to; and uſually may be ſeen in Conteſts of this Nature, how juſt ſoever they be. Excuſe my plainneſs of Speech throughout, and allow ſomething to every Man's natural Temper and Diſpoſition. Sir, I am willing to be, notwithſtanding all that hath paſſed,
Your faithful Friend and Brother in the Lord, J. C.