Inquiry into the Nature of the Present Controversy About Justification Part 1, Chapter 4

Inquiry into the Nature of the Present Controversy About Justification Part 1 · Chapter 4

p. 66CHAP. IV.

What Antinomianiſm is not, in ſome other Inſtances Cleared, To Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace, not Antinomian. The State of this Controverſie, as managed by the Papiſts, and Firſt Reformers. The ſence of the Arminians, and Socinians about Condition. Faith a Condition, Aſſerted. In what ſence.

IT is not Antinomianiſm to Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace.

There is not, it may be, any one Point in the Body of Divinity of greater Difficulty than this about the Covenant of Grace, and its Conditionality. They that ſearch deeply into the many Controverſies agitated between us, the Papiſt. Arminian, Socinian, and Antinomian; will find that the moſt Important Parts of it Turn on this Hinge. The Papist, Arminian, and Socinian cannot ſee, how the Covenant of Grace could be made with Jeſus Chriſt, as a Second Adam; and with the Elect, as his Seed, which is One Reaſon of their many Miſtakes. And the Antinomian fixeth his thoughts ſo very much on the Covenant of Grace's being made with Chriſt, that there is no Room left him to Conſider, how it can be made alſo with his Seed; which occaſions their Aſſerting, That Chriſt perform'd the whole requir'd of us in order to our p. 67being actually Intereſted in him, and his Benefits; as well as make Satisfaction by his Sufferings; and Merit by his Righteouſneſs for them that Believe: That Chriſt Believed, and Repented for us, as if there had been no other Reaſon for our Doing either, than to Obtain the Knowledge of our having what actually was ours, whilſt under the Power of Unbelief, and Impenitency.

But, it not being my Province to enter on a Large Debate of theſe things, I will only ſhow, that there are ſuch Senſes, in which the word [Condition] is uſed by the Papiſts, Arminian, and Socinian, as do Confound Goſpel Grace with the Law of Works, and eſtabliſh Merit; Deſtroy the Doctrine of the Spirits working the Firſt Grace; and ſubvert Chriſt's ſatisfaction, and ſo make it Evident, That One, who Deteſts Antinomianiſm, may yet Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace.

If the word [Condition] when ſpoken of the Two Covenants, namely, of Works, and Grace, be taken in the ſame ſence in both, the one will be Confounded with the other.

To Evince thus much, I will ſhow the Import of the Condition of the Covenant of Works, and how it agrees with the Popiſh Doctrine of Merit, and leave it to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader to conſider the Truth of my Aſſertion.

The Condition of the Covenant of Works is ea res, quae Praeſtita, dat Jus ad Praemium. It is that Obedience, to which the Promiſe was made; and from the Performance of which, a Right to the Reward immediately Reſults, p. 68and for which, in Juſtice, it is due.

This Condition, being Perfect Obedience, was to a Law, enforc'd with Rewards and Puniſhments, which Obedience, the Reward becoming due to it, ex Juſtitia, is Meritorious. And as, on the Rendring the Required Obedience, the Reward is Juſtly Due; ſo, ſeeing the Performance of the Condition, is the ſame with the Render of Perfect Obedience, the Bleſſing Promiſed is thereon Juſtly due unto it; and the Performing the Condition is meritorious, for Merit is nothing but that Actio quâ Juſtum eſt, ut Agenti aliquid Detur.

There is much, much variety (I muſt confeſs) amongſt the Papiſts in ſtating their Doctrine of Merit, but the Prevailing Opinion is,Meritum & Merc…s ad Idem referuntur, Tho. 1 a, 2. e. Q. 114. Art. 1. That Merit, and Reward, Eſſentially Reſpect one another. That Merit is a Good Work freely done,Exhibitio at MERITI & Redditio MERCEDIS, actus ad alterum, ſunt ſecundum aqualitatem Rei ad Rem, ſcil. Meriti ad Mercedem, & è converſo, Cajet. in Loc. to which ſome Reward as a certain Price is Juſtly Due, that between the Merit and the Reward there is ſome ſort of Equality.Meritum eſt opus bonum liberum cui ex-juſtitia Merces Debetur. Medin. in Loc. Thus Aquinas, Cajetan, Medina, and Gregory de Valentia.

The Reward,Gregory de Valentia hath it thus, — Per aliquem Juſtitiae modum, aliquo munere Compenſari à Deo deveat. In Tho. Diſp. 8. Quaeſt. 6. Punct. 1. being made ex juſtitia, Due, Merit of Congruity is denied to be Merit in a Proper ſence. So Gregory de Valentia, Merit of Congruity is but Improperly Merit.Meritum improprie dictum —vocatur Meritum de Congruo Val. ubi ſup. The Diſtinction of Merit into that of Congruity, Aliqui Scholaſticorum Meritum de Congruo prorſus Rejiciunt, tanquam id, quod Meritum dici nequaquam meretur: Propterea, quod idi ne que ex dignitate ſua, ne que ex Lège debetur Praemium, ſed ex ſola congruitate, gratis acceptatur ad Praemium. Alfonſ. à Caſtro de Haereſib. Lib. XI. in Verb. Opera. Haereſ. 4.and Condignity, is not (ſaith Alfonſus à Caſtro) held by all the Schoolmen, for ſome Reject p. 69Merit of Congruity, as what can by no means be truly called Merit, becauſe in this inſtance the Reward is not Due, either from any worth in the Work it ſelf; nor made Due by the Law: but only from a mere Congruity or Condecence,Alterum Meritum de Congruo Proprie non habet rationem Meriti, ſid tantum cujuſdem Congruentiae, ac proinde non eſt neceſſe de to Diſputare. Nihil enim ceril de eo affirmare poſſumus. Sic enim videri poteſt NOBIS congruum, & conveniens, ut Deus hoc vel illud praeſlet huic vel ini homini; Ita è contrario non defunt DEO Rationes congruentes, cur id nolit Praeſtare, quod alioqui apparet Congruum, ut Praeſtet. Becan. Opuſc. Theol. Opuſc. 7. cap. 3. P. inibi 203. a Reward is freely given. Becanus affirms the ſame, for (as he words it) The Reward doth not certainly belong to him, who is ſaid thus to Merit; for tho' it appears to Ʋs very Congruous for God to Reward this or the other Perſon, for this or the other thing, yet on the contrary there are Reaſons Congruous to God for his Not Rewarding them.

But that the Work may be Properly Meritorious, and the Reward be Juſtly due to it, It muſt be Eree, not Forced; Forced acts being more Brutal, than Rational can't Pleaſe God: It muſt be a Work done in Obedience to God's Law; by One that is in via, and Reconcil'd unto God. All others being full of Sin can Merit nothing but Puniſhment, whence the Meritorious Work muſt flow from Grace, which is freely beſtowed, and not merely from the Intrinſick virtue of the Work it ſelf, but from the Ordination and Promiſe of God.

The Schoolmen Generally Diſtinguiſh Merit ex Juſtitia into that which is, De Rigore Juſtitiae, and what is ex Condigno. Sanctae p. 70Clara, Scio enim viros Theologos Eckium, Marſilium apud Vegam Q 4. Et Bellarminum, & alios negare Omne metitum de Condigno, licet concedant de Digno, reſpectu Beatitudinis, Sancta. Clar. Dues Nat. & Grat. Prob. 18. de Merit. p. 113.indeed ſaith, That Eckius, and Marſilius, in Vega, as alſo Bellarmine, with ſome others, Deny Merit, de Condigno, holding a Merit only ex Digno. Not to trouble our ſelves with theſe Niceties, I muſt obſerve, that (whatever Arriaga ſuggeſts to the contrary) Merit, ex rigore Juſtitiae, is what ariſeth from the Work it ſelf,Meritum de Rigore Juſtitiae eſt quod non innititur gratiae, aut Miſerecordiae ſed habet valorem ex ſeſe, & ex Perſona offerente, quale eſt Meritum Chriſti, Medin. in Prim. Sec. Q 114. Art. 3. and Worth of the Perſon, that doth it, and not from God's Gracious and Merciful Acceptance. This They Aſſign to Chriſt alone. So Medina.

Sancta Clara, who gives us the ſenſe of the Scotiſts, ſpeaks much to the ſame purpoſe,Meritum quidem Chriſti poteſt dici Meritum ex Juſtitia, ratione Perſonae offerentis, & ſic non innitebatur Gratiae acceptantis, ſed dignitati ſuae perſonae, & rei Oblatae, ſecus autem valde eſt in nobis, ubi ex parte perſonae, & rei Oblatae, SƲMMA PAƲPERTAS, ſi excludas Dei Promiſſionem acceptationis, vel Pactionem Retributionis. Santc. Clar. Ubi ſup. The Merit of Chriſt (ſays he) may be called Merit Ex Juſtitia, becauſe of the Excellency of the Perſon, offering it, whereby, it doth not Depend ſo much on the Grace of God accepting it, as on the worth of his Perſon. It's much otherwiſe with us, whoſe Perſons, and Works, conſidered in themſelves, abſtract from the Promiſe of a Gracious Acceptance, and the Covenant of Retribution, are Poverty it ſelf.

Alfonſus de Caſtro, and Gregory de Valentia delivering the Senſe of the Church of Rome with much Clearneſs, and Candor, I will, to find out their Genuine ſenſe, if poſſible, Give what they write of it.

p. 71Si Lutherus accipit meritum pro tali opere quod ex ſua natura, & ex ſe ipſo aequale eſt Praemio, certe illius ſententia non eſt de errore notanda, quoniam non eſt aliquod opus noſtrum ex ſe tal… quod aequari poſſit Gloriae aeternae. Alfon. à Caſtro. Averſ. Haereſ. Lib. X. p. 23.If Luther (ſaith Alfonſus) takes Merit for ſuch a Work, as in its own Nature, and of it ſelf is Equal with the Reward, and in that ſenſe Denies it, He is not to be blamed. For there is no Work of ours, that can thus be Equal with the Eternal Glory. For, as the Apoſtle, I Reckon, Si noſtra opera ſint ex ſe indigna Gloria, & nos per illa nullum ius habere poteramus ad Gloriam Aeternam— tamen quia Miſericors Deus Promiſit ſervanti mandata ſua—poſt talem Promiſſionem DEBET Deus dare gloriam — Quod Débitum in Deo non Oritur ex noſtris Operibus, ſed ex Benignâ ejus voluntate, qui Promittens nobis, ſeipſum obligare voluit— non dicimus Deum Obligari aut eſſe Debitorem noſtris Operibus, ſed cum Obligari EX PROMISSIONE SƲA, & eſſe DEBITOREM PROMISSIONI SƲAE. Quod a. Promiſit ipſe, ſimpliciter, & abſolute Tribuendum eſt GRATIAE. De Caſt. ub. ſup.that the Sufferings of this Preſent Life are not to be compared with the Glory, which ſhall be Revealed in us. But Merit is not always taken to Import ſuch an Equality and Natural Obligation. In the caſe before us, it Denotes only ſuch an Equality, as ariſes from an Agreement, Compact, or Covenant; on which account that Work, which before was not Equal with the Reward, now is made ſo: And what was not a Debt before, is made a Debt; which Debt, in God, doth not ariſe from our Works, from any Dignity in them: But from the Benignity of God, who making Gracious Promiſes Obligeth himſelf, whereby he is indebted, not to us, but to his Promiſe. —This Promiſe is Simply, and Abſolutely, to be Aſcribed to his Grace.

Satis eſt ut Praemium Debitum ſit EX LEGE. Nam Lex potest facere paria, quae ex naturâ ſuâ erant Imparia. Lex naturae docet, ut omne Promiſſum fit Debitum.The Reward is not always made a Debt by the Nature of the Works, it being ſufficient if p. 72made Due by the Law. And the Law can make thoſe things Equal, which in their own Nature, were not ſo. The Law of Nature teacheth us, that Every Promiſe is a Debt, whence it comes to paſs, that by the Promiſe, thoſe things, which were in themſelves Unequal, are made Equal.

We are not ſo Ignorant, nor ſo much Elated in our Conceit,Data hâc Promiſſione, & ſacta nobiſcum Conventione, Opera hona hominis cum Adjutorio Gratiae Dei ſiunt Digna vitae aeternae, & illi aequilia, quae ſecluſa illa Dei promiſſione, fuiſſent tanto Praemio Indigna. Et haec fuit, illa ſuprema Dei Miſericordia, à qua pendet totum meritum noſtrum, &c. De Caſtro ubi ſup. in Verb. Opera. Lib. XI. as to Equalize the Intrinſick Value of our Works, which are moſt Inconſiderable, with the Tranſcending Excellency, and Immenſe Worth of the Heavenly Glory. It is from the Promiſe and the Covenant made with us that our Works which we are Enabled through the Grace of God to Perform, that makes them worthy of Eternal Life, which ſeparated from the Promiſe, would be altogether Unworthy. We are therefore wholly owing to the Unſpeakable Mercy of God for our Merit, that he hath made ſo Glorious a Diſplay of his Grace in this, That when he Owed us nothing, he did of his abundant Goodneſs to Enrich us, make himſelf a Debter.— Nor let any calumniate us, as if we Detracted from the Merit of our Bleſſed Redeemer:Quod a homines & bona illorum Opera ſint Deo Grata, & ad vitam aeternam acceptata, hoc habent ex MERITO CHRISTI, qui pro illis Paſſionem, & mortem ſuam. Deo Patri Obtulit, & pro illis omnibus quos ſcivit eſſe ad gloriam Praedeſtinatos, oravit. Ʋb. ſup. None but they who underſtand not our Doctrine, can talk after this Rate. We have oft Declared, p. 73It is not of our ſelves, that our Good Works Merit Eternal Life: But we, and our Works, are Rais'd to this Dignity merely through the Divine Clemency, by which he Promiſes to them, who Obey him, Eternal Life.—And that they are thus Rais'd, is through the Merit of Christ, who offered himſelf a Sacrifice, and Prayed Earneſtly for all them he knew were Predeſtinated to Eternal Life. From this therefore, as from the Chief and Principal Merit, all Grace and Glory is Derived, and from this, it is, that Juſt Men, and their Works are freely Ordinated to Eternal Life. De ſolo Merito ex Condigno lequimur. Alfonſ. de Caſt. Ʋb. ſup.This and much more hath Alfonſus de Caſtro about Merit de Condigno, which is highly applauded by Gregory de Valentia, whoſe Endeavours are to Raiſe it to a Merit by the Rule of Commutative Juſtice. Not that he thinks our Good Works have any ſuch Intrinſick worth in them, as Equalizes them with Eternal Glory, for he grounds that on the Gracious Ordination and Promiſe of God, (as the Papiſts generally do) and illuſtrates it thus.Ac poſſumus hoc totum Exemplo facili declarare. Nam ſi Pecunia juſſis Principis, fiat ex vili aliqu… …ateria, quae Vid. ex Naturâ ſua conſiderata non tantum valeat, quantum Res quae pro illa ſunt Commutandae, tunc quidem ſi Pecunia haec, abſolute ſint Reſpectu ad Principis Conſtitutionem Conſideretur, certum est, Eam ſecundum juſtitiae Commutativae Rationem, non eſſe Equalèm iis Rebus, quas poteſt aliquis pro Eâ Conſ…qui: bene autem ſi Conſideretur, ut ſubſtat Conſtitutioni & Legi Principis, qua decretum eſt, ut qui hujuſmodi Pecuniam exhibu…rit, Conſequatur Res Neceſſarias ſecundum factam Pecuniae taxam Nam ſi hac Ratione Conſideretur hujuſmodi Pecunia, tanti merito aeſtimabitur, quanti Res ipſae quae pen Eam Comparari poſſunt. Ita prorſus ſe habet Res in propoſito. Nam ſibonum opus Juſti conſideres praeciſè ex ſe, non eſt aequale Gloriae; Si autem ut ſubſtat divinae Proniſſioni ob quam per illud certo poteſt Comparari Gloria, tanti poteſt aeſtimari, quanti illa at que eatenus eſt aequale Gloriae. Greg. de Valen. p. 1275. Suppoſe a Prince by his Ordinance puts an Extraordinary Value on Money of a baſe Alloy, by this means, tho' the Money in it ſelf, and abſtract from the Regal Conſtitution, falls very ſhort of the thing, for which 'tis Commuted; yet, by Virtue of the Royal Ordinance it's made of Equal Price with it; and ſo it muſt paſs in Bargains by the Rules of Commutative Juſtice. The ſame he ſaith p. 74of Good Works, which, conſidered in themſelves ſeparate from the Divine Ordination, and Promiſe, are not to be compared with the Glory, yet having ſo great a Value put upon them by God's Ordination, they are after a ſort made Equal with Eternal Life, and Merit according to Commutative Juſtice.

To Improve what is taken out of theſe Popiſh Writers, about Merit of Condignity, it muſt be obſerv'd;

1. That altho' the Reward Infinitely excel the Work in its own Nature conſidered; and that the Promiſe be ſimply and abſolutely Free, and it is Impoſſible for a Juſt Man to do the good Work, without the Help of God's Grace; yet the Work thus done may be Meritorious ex Condigno. All theſe things they allow, and yet make good Works Meritorious.

2. That this Merit lying in a Duneſs of the Reward to the good Work ex Juſtitia, it is founded in the Promiſe. We are, ſay they, under a Law, which has, not only a Preceptive, but a Promiſory Part, whence becauſe of the Connexion there is between Obedience to the Precept, and the Promiſe, a Right to the Reward immediately Reſults from the Obedience, or good Work. The good Work gives Right to the Reward, that is, it Merits the Reward, and the Reward is justly due for that Obedience.

p. 75But here they are at a Plunge, how to ſtate this Matter ſo as to make the Reward due ex Juſtitia, the Promiſe as a ſingle Promiſe being inſufficient for their Purpoſe.

Dices, ſi Actus Meritorius eſt talis ſolum Promiſſione Divine ſeu ejus acceptatione, ergo non ex juſtitia, ſed ex fidelitate praemiabitur. Quod eſt Contra Definitionem Meriti de Condigno. Reſpondeo quod adimpletio Promiſſionis nudae eſt ſolum Actus Fidelitatis; adimpletio vero Promiſſionis, quae habet Naturam Pacti, id eſt ubi à Promiſſario exigitur Conditio, ficut inter Dominum & ſervum, ubi Dominus promittit ſtipendium ex Conditione ſervitutis adimpleuio illius Promiſſi eſt ex juſtitia. Sic in Caſ…. Sancta Clar. Deus. Nat. Grat. p. 111.The Objection that lyeth againſt them is this, If the Meritorious Act be ſo, only from the Divine Promiſe, or God's Gracious Acceptation, then the Reward cannot be ex Juſtitiâ, the good Work may be done, and God not oblig'd in Juſtice to give the Reward. The utmoſt that can be ſaid is this, God in Faithfulneſs is bound by his Promiſe to Reward the Doer, but not in Juſtice; and yet unleſs God be in Juſtice bound, the Work cannot be meritorious ex Condigno. To this Objection their Anſwer (as I find it in Sancta Clara) is, that the fulfilling a Naked Promiſe, is only an Act of Fidelity and Faithfulneſs: But, the fulfilling a Covenant Promiſe, which is made on Condition, as between a Maſter and Servant, where the Maſter Promiſes a Reward on Condition of ſuch a Service, here, for the Maſter to fulfil the Promiſe to his Servant on his Performing the Condition, is an Act of Juſtice, which is (ſay they) our Caſe.

Thus to make good Works meritorious, they aſſert a Law, with a Promiſe; making the Dignity of the Work to lean on the Promiſe: And that the Reward may be Due ex juſtitia, the Law is turn'd into a Covenant, where p. 76Obedience to the Preceptive Part is made the Condition, that giveth Right to the Reward. So that it is that Conditionality of the Covenant, on which the Merit of Condignity is Founded. All which is undoubtedly true of the Covenant given Adam. For if he had but rendred the Perfect Obedience required by the Preceptive Part of the Law; or, which is the ſame, if he had Perform'd the Condition of that Covenant made with him; it would have given him a Right to the Reward, it would have been in Juſtice due to him, that is, he would have merited it Ex Condigno.

Tho' his Temporary Obedience fell infinitely ſhort of the Reward of Eternal Life; yet becauſe of the Promiſe made on a Covenant-Condition, giving Right; the Reward, on his performing the Condition, would have been Due to him ex juſtitia (i. e.) he would have merited it Ex Condigno.

In like manner, if the word [Condition] when aſſign'd to the Covenant of Grace, be taken in this ſenſe, viz. for that thing, which, being Perform'd, gives Right to the Reward, the Covenant of Grace is Confounded with that of Works, and Merit of Condignity effectually eſtabliſhed.

'Tis Confounded with the Covenant of Works, and made a Covenant of the ſame kind with it, for in both, as there is a Precept enjoyning Duty, and a Promiſe of Reward; even ſo, notwithſtanding the Work falls infinitely ſhort of the Reward, yet the Reward being Promiſed on a Condition, giving Right; A Right unto it Reſults from the Performance of the Condition, and the Reward is due ex juſtitia, and ſo Merit of Condignity is alſo eſtabliſhed.

p. 77Nor can it ſignifie any thing to ſay, we exclude all Merit from our Good Works, by aſcribing all to the Grace of God, enabling us; and nothing to our own Strength, making their Rewardableneſs to Lean on the Ordination, and Promiſe of God,That Grace is neceſſary to Merit the Papiſts induſtriouſly endeavor to Prove. Gertum ex ſide eſt (ſaith Gregory de Valentia) Meritum Condignum eſſe Proprium effectum Gratiae. Probatur. 1. ex Script. ad Rom. 6. Gratia Dei vita aeterna. Ʋbi non eſt ſenſus, Vitam aeternam dari GRATIS, ſed dari eam pro meritis, quae contulit GRATIA-Sine me nihil poteſtis facere. Poſſemus enim ſine aliquid facere, ſi vitam aeternam promereri valeremus, non inſiti per gratiam Chriſto, tanquam viti Palmites, ut ipſe ibi Loquitur. Valent. ubi ſup. Suu…ma igitur est, quod actus me…is dicitur meritorius, quia elicitus, ſeu Imperatus à Gratia, ex Pactione Divina acceptatus ad Praemium, unde ipſa acceptatio eſt Intrinſ…a actui. Sanct. Clar. ub… ſup.Rom 6 For the Papiſts make all theſe Neceſſary to Merit ex Condigno; affirming, That unleſs the Work proceed from Grace▪ it cannot be meritorious of Eternal Life, and that they give not any Dignity to their Good Works, but acknowledge that in themſelves conſidered and Preciſe; as ſeparate from the Ordination of God they are of no worth, that their Rewardableneſs is founded on the Promiſe.

In theſe things lye the very Nature of Merit; for which reaſon, to deny our Works to be meritorious becauſe their Rewardableneſs is founded on the Promiſe, it is as if, you would deny Peter to be a Man, becauſe he is a Rational Creature.

This being the Doctrine held by the Papiſts about Merit, one Great Point Controverted between them, and firſt Reformers, Si quis hominem Juſtificatum— dixerit non teneri ad Obſervatiam mandatorum Dei, & Eccleſiae: ſed tantum ad Credendum, quaſi vero Evangethum ſit nuda & abſoluta Promiſſio vitae aeternae, ſine Conditione Obſervationis Mandatorum: Anathema ſit. Concil. Trid. S…ſſ. 6. Can. 20.was about Our Works being a Condition of Eternal Life, and accordingly in the Council of Trent p. 78it's Decreed with an Anathema, That if any hold—we are not bound to Obſerve the Laws of God, and the Church, but only to Believe, as if the Goſpel was but a Naked, and Abſolute Promiſe of Eternal Life without a Condition of Obſerving the Commands. Let him be Accurſed.

In the Scholia of the Reformed, on this Canon, as Lucas Oſiander Repreſents it,Epit. Hiſt. Eccleſ. ub. ſup. their ſenſe is manifeſt, for ſay they, The Aſſertion of the Council, that the Goſpel is a Promiſe of Eternal Life on Condition of keeping the Commands, is altogether Falſe, the Goſpel Promiſe of Eternal Life leans not on a Condition of keeping the Commands, But Requires Faith, whereby we lay hold on the Mercy of God offered to us. If that Promiſe lean on ſuch a Condition, no Chriſtian can be certain of his Salvation.

Calvin, on this very Canon is Poſitive, That the Apoſtles Placing the Difference between the Law and the Goſpel is this,Antidotum in Conc. Trid. that the Goſpel doth not Promiſe Eternal Life on the Condition of Works, as the Law did, but to Faith; is a ſtanding Truth, that can never be ſhaken. What can be more clear than this Antitheſis? The Righteouſneſs of the Law is ſuch, That the man that doeth theſe things ſhall live in them: Rom. 10.5.Rom 10:5But the Righteouſneſs of Faith is after this manner,Rom. 4.14.Rom 4:14 He that Believeth, &c. To the ſame Purpoſe is that other place. If the Inheritance be of the Law, then is your Faith Vain, and the Promiſe of no Effect, therefore it is of Faith, that of Grace, the Promiſe may abide Firm to every one, who believeth.

p. 79I might give many Authorities more, but theſe are enough to make it Evident, that the First Reformers denied the Goſpel to be a Promiſe of Eternal Life on Condition of our keeping the Commandments, which muſt be Underſtood to be in that ſence, in which the Papists held it; that is, they denied our Good Works to be ſuch a Condition of Eternal Life, as gave Right unto it, as a Reward, which may be done by them who are not Antinomians, which is very clear from the Scholia of the Reformed on the Nineteenth Canon of the Council, which is to this effect. Let him be accurſed, who holds, that nothing is Commanded in the Law, but Faith; That all other things are Indifferent; and, that the Ten Commandments belong not to Chriſtians. To which they Anſwer, That there is no ſuch Dogma held by the Divines, who Subſcrib'd the Auguſtane Confeſſion, that none but one Iſlebius was tainted with this Falſe and Wicked Opinion, that Luther oppugned and confuted this Error, and brought its Author to a Recantation, and that the other Divines rejected it.

2. The word [Condition] is alſo taken in this very ſenſe by the Arminians, who argue ſo very Plauſibly from the Grant of it, againſt ſome Important Doctrines of the Chriſtian Faith, that many Orthodox, and Judicious Divines are afraid to Uſe it.

They make it (If I may uſe the word) a Legal Condition, that is, Obedience to the Preceptive Part of a Law, giving Right to the Reward. It is that thing, which being Performed, gives Right to the Bleſſing Promiſed. p. 80Or,Conditio, quatenus praeſtita eſt, aliquomodo Medium ſieri dici poteſt, quo Conſequimur Rem quae ſub Conditione Promittitur. Exam. Cenſur. Cap. 10. P. 112. Conditio, cujus Praeſtatio Medium ſive cauſa ſalutis aliquomodo dici poteſt, non modò eſt Gratioſa per ſe; ſed & Gratia ad Eam praeſtandam perpetim neceſſaria eſt, & Praemium Praeſtanti promiſſum extra & ſupra omnem Comparationem eſt. Ʋb. ſup. Cap. 8. P. 95. it is that which being Perform'd, is a means by which we attain to what was on Condition promiſed. Again, Condition, whoſe Performance may be called a Mean, or Cauſe of Salvation, is, not only in it ſelf full of Grace; but Grace is always neceſſary for the Enabling us to perform it, and the Reward Promiſed thereunto Infinitely exceeds it.

However, from the Grant, that our Faith is ſuch a Condition of Eternal Life, they triumphantly oppugn ſome Important Truths. Particularly,Si enim Chriſtus nobis meritus dicatur Fidem & Regenerationem tum Fides, Conditio eſſe non poterit, quam à Peccatoribus Deus ſub Comminatione Mortis exigeret; imo tum Pater ex vi meriti iſtius obligatus fuiſſe dicatur neceſſe eſt, ad Conferendum nobis Fidem, & Eſſiciendum in nobis omnia, quae nobis ſub Comminatione Mortis praeſcribit, quo nihil abſurdius Cogitari poteſt. Exam. Cenſ. Cap. 8. P. 59. they thus argue againſt Chriſt's Meriting Faith and Regeneration for the Elect. If Chriſt merited Faith, and Regeneration for us, (ſay they) then Faith cannot be a Condition, which God exacts from Sinners, under the Commination of Eternal Death. They go Higher, affirming, That if Chriſt purchaſed the First Grace for Us, then the Father by virtue thereof, is obliged to give us Faith, and work all theſe things in us, which are preſcribed under the Threatning of Death. Than which nothing can be more abſurd. Such a Collation of Faith, flowing from Chriſt's Merit, doth effectually deſtroy the Divine Conſtitution, by which Faith is enjoyned Sinners, with a Promiſe of Life and Threatning of p. 81Death. Thus much from the very Nature of the thing is moſt apparent—If Chriſt be in this way our Saviour, he can't be our Law-giver, nor can our Faith, or Obedience be Acts of Duty, they can be but Effects of Chriſt's Merit. Again they add, That the Preſcription of a Condition, and an Efficacious working it in them to whom it is preſcrib'd, are Incompatible. That Condition, is not a Condition, Conditio non eſt Conditio, quae ab Eo, qui Eam praeſcribit, in Eo cui praeſcribitur, efficitur. Merus Effectus Praeſcribentis non poteſt eſſe Conditio Praeſcripta, nedum Praeſtita. Exam. ub. ſup. P. 106.which is wrought in Him to whom it is preſcribed, even by the Preſcriber. The mere Effect of a Preſcriber cannot be a preſcribed, much leſs, a Performed Condition. He that gives a Condition to another, will, that it be performed by that other. If it be wrought in Him. Haec Actio ludicra tota & vix Scaena digna eſt.it ceaſeth to be a Condition; and he that wrought it, doth by that very Act null it's being a Condition, becauſe he will not have it done by that other, but will Himſelf work it in Him. Right Reaſon dictates thus much unto us— No Wiſe Man will act thus,Legiſlator ſerius, totam ſuam Legiſlationem ludibrio exponit, cum Conditionem Praeſcribit, iis quos irrevocabiliter Praemio afficere & in quibus, quam Praeſcribit Conditionem, ipſe efficere vult. nor can any thing be more ludicrous, theſe things are ſcarce fit for a Play. That Law-giver, who preſcribes a Condition to them, whom he has Irrevocably Deſign…d for a Reward, will expoſe his Legiſlation to the utmoſt Contempt.

They carry it yet further, aſſerting, This Condition to be Inconſiſtent with the Particular Election of a Select Number of Perſons. p. 82A Condition, Conditio omnis Stulte & Ridicule Proponitur iis, qui nominatim & praeciſe jam ante deſtinati ſunt ſaluti. Exam. Cenſ. c. 9. p 102. Deſtinatio Irrevocabilis ad vitam, & Promiſſio vitae ſub Conditione, non niſi Stulte Conjunguntur. Exam. Ʋoi ſup. p. 104.ſay they, is Fooliſhly, yea, Ridiculouſly Propoſed to them, who are Particularly and by Name Ordain'd to Salvation. An Irrevocable Decree of Salvation, and the Promiſe of Life on Condition, are moſt weakly Put together.

A Condition, they ſay, is that which when Performed, gives Right unto a Reward, That there is Grace glorified, in that the Reward Excels, Infinitely excels what is Requir'd of us as a Condition; and that help is vouchſafed for the Enabling us to Perform it. But then they add, That what is a Condition of our Intereſt in Chriſt's Merits, muſt be what was not merited for us by Chriſt. To make that a Condition of our Intereſt in the Benefits merited by Christ, that was merited by Chriſt is an Inconſiſtence; Or, to Affirm that to be a Condition Requir'd of us, which is not Performed by us, but wrought in us by him that Preſcribes it, is the Greateſt Folly; Or, to make the Salvation of any to Depend upon a Condition, that may, or may not be Performed, and yet aſſert the certainty of their Salvation flowing from the Unalterable Decree, is Ridiculous.

This is the Improvement the Arminians make of the Goſpels being a Promiſe of Eternal Life, on Condition, namely, the denying Chriſt's meriting the firſt Grace, and the Spirits working it, and the Doctrine of Particular Election.

What Strength there is in their Arguments; or how Naturally theſe Conſequences flow p. 83from the Aſſertion, [That Eternal Life is Promiſed us on a Condition of our own Performance; and, that it is the Reſult of our Obedience,] is not my Buſineſs at this time to Enquire: Only thus much is Clear; That they, who run not to the Antinomian Extreme, may, to Avoid theſe Arminian Rocks, Deny the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace, at leaſt in the ſence the Arminians uſe the word [Condition]: Eſpecially, conſidering, the Plauſibleneſs of their Reaſoning. Undoubtedly Men, Orthodox in the Faith, may be Influenced to Conclude, That the making Faith the Condition of an Intereſt in the Merits of Chriſt, and yet a Part of the Merit are ſo Inconſiſtent, that they cannot be both True; and that therefore, being Convinced, that Faith is merited by Chriſt, they cannot but Deny it's being a Condition. Beſides, they may think, that this ſort of Condition muſt have ſo much of our own in it, as interferes with the Spirits working the Firſt Grace in us, and they Believing the Firſt Grace to be Abſolutely Beſtowed on us, and effectually wrought in us, by the Spirit muſt neceſſarily Deny its being ſuch a Condition, as this, we are Diſcourſing of. In fine, Condition, as Explained by them, and, as by ſome Jealous and Overwary Perſons, ſuppos'd to be held by all, that Uſe that word, cannot ſtand with the Doctrine of Particular Election. For their Condition doth neceſſarily Infer Salvation to be Undetermined and Uncertain, it may be, or it may not be, Juſt as we our ſelves Determine.

p. 84The Socinians do not ſtrive a little to ſubvert Chriſt's Satisfaction, from this very Conſideration, That the Remiſſion of Sin is offer'd on Condition. A Zeal for the Advancement of Holineſs, and the Checking Debauchery, Provokes them (as they tell us) to Inſiſt on the Conditionality of our Faith and Repentance, and Oppugn the Doctrine of Satisfaction.

This, among others, is one Cauſe, why (ſaith Smalcius) we Reject the Dogma about Satisfaction, Et heac una eſt inter alias Cauſa, ob quam, Dogma ſatisfactionis prorſus ſit Repudiandum. Quia ſcilicet hominibus Perſuadere poſſit, non eſſe opus ullâ Reſipiſcentiâ, ſi quidem pro peccatis plane ſatisfactum eſt. Smalc. contra. Smeglec. c. xi. p. 286.viz. Becauſe Men are apt to Conclude, That if a Full Satisfaction be made for their Sins, there is no Need of their Repentance. Beſides, they Preſſing Repentance, as a Condition of Pardon, find themſelves under a Neceſſity of Denying Satisfaction.

To evince thus much, 'twill be ſufficient to conſult once morce Smalcius, who having affirm'd; That to Require Repentance of them, for whoſe Sins full Satisfaction had been made, was Unneceſſary, Smiglecius replies, That Satisfaction doth not exclude Conditions from him, for whom Satisfaction was Offer'd. For (ſaith he) who will Accept of Satisfaction for an Injury; if he, who did it, Perſiſts in his Enmity. To this Smalcius Rejoinds; Aſſuring us, That Smiglecius doth not Prove, nor is it Probable, that Conditions may be Preſcribed to him, for whom a full Satisfaction is made. In this caſe the Creditor is bound to Diſcharge his Debter, without any Regard to his Future Demeanour. Of this, Smiglecius, being aware, p. 85changes the Terms, ſaying, Satisfaction doth not interfere with the Impoſing a Condition on him, for whom Satisfaction is Offer'd, whereas, in the preſent Caſe Satisfaction is not only offer'd, but ſaid to be Really made and Finiſh'd. Whence it's manifeſt, That ſeeing Conditions and ſuch a full Satisfaction are Incompatible, and yet Conditions, for the Obtaining the Remiſſion of Sins are ſtrictly Injoyned, there can be no True, Real Satisfaction, There can be only a Free forgiveneſs of Sin without any Anteceding Satisfaction. This Aſſertion excludes not; but neceſſarily Infers Conditions. God freely offering us the Forgiveneſs of Sins, we muſt Repent and be Servants to our Luſts no longer; for, if we Repent not, the Offer'd Pardon will not be Given us. So far Smalcius, whoſe Argument can be of no force, unleſs the Condition Import ſomewhat that Gives Right to Pardon. If the Pardon of Sin be not the Immediate Reſult of Chriſt's Satisfaction only, but ſomewhat in us is moreover neceſſary to Give Right unto it, the Satisfaction is not Full, and if not full, it's none at all. If it be Adequate and Full, the Right Reſults only from it, and not from any thing …n us, not from our Faith, Repentance, or any other Good Works. The Right …o Impunity muſt Reſult from Chriſt's Satisfaction only; or not at all. If there be ſomewhat elſe from which it muſt Reſult, then hath not Chriſt made Full Satisfaction: a Condition therefore giving Right; Or Chriſt's Satisfaction muſt be laid aſide. They can never be together. The ſetting up the One, is a caſting down the other.

p. 86This being the true State of the Caſe, the Socinians Unable to ſee, how the Neceſſity of our Holineſs, and Good Works, can be maintain'd conſiſtently with the laying aſide Conditions; choſe rather to part with the Doctrine of Chriſt's Satisfaction, than deny Faith. Repentance, &c. to be the Conditions, giving Right to Pardon.

If there be a full Satisfaction made by Chriſt for any Sinners, a Diſcharge (ſay the Socinians) muſt be immediately given them. They can't ſee any middle Way between themſelves and the Antinomian. Juſtification muſt flow either Immediately from Chriſt's Satisfaction to the Elect whil'ſt in the Heigth of Iniquity, or from a Condition Perform'd by them, Giving Right thereunto. If the former that's Antinomianiſm; If the latter, then no Satisfaction, which is Socinianiſm.

Thus you ſee in what ſenſe the word Condition is taken by the Papiſt, Arminian, and Socinian, and diverſly Urged to Eſtabliſh the Doctrine of our Merit, and Deſtroying thoſe other about Chriſt's Meriting the Firſt Grace, his Spirits working it, Particular Election, and Chriſt's Satisfaction, which Conſiderations may frighten Men, ſound in the Faith, from the Ʋſe of the word; and Provoke the Generation of the Juſt to Reject it, unleſs, when Uſed, it be with an Explication.

What the Learned Dr. O. hath on this Occaſion is worthy of our weightieſt thoughts, who ſpeaking of the Term [Condition] is Expreſs, That the word is no where uſed in the Scripture in this matter: which I argue no farther p. 87(ſaith he) but that we have no certain Rule, or Standard to try, and meaſure its Signification by. Wherefore, it cannot firſt be introduced in what ſenſe Men pleaſe, and then that ſenſe turned into Argument for other Ends. For thus on a Suppoſed Conceſſion, that it is the Condition of our Juſtification, ſome heighten it into a Subordinate Righteouſneſs imputed unto us antecedently, as I ſuppoſe, unto the Imputation of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, in any ſenſe, whereof it is the Condition: And ſome, who pretend to leſſen its Efficiency, or Dignity in the uſe of it in our Juſtification, ſay, it is only Cauſa ſine quâ non, which leaves us at as great an Uncertainty as to the Nature and Efficacy of this Condition as we were before. Nor is the true ſenſe of things at all Illuſtrated, but rather darkned by ſuch Notions.

Conditio in the beſt Latine Writers is variouſly uſed; anſwering foreign, in the Greek; That is, Status, Fortuna, Dignitas, Cauſa, Pactum initum. In which of their Significations it is here to be underſtood, is not eaſie to be determined. In common uſe among us, it ſometimes denotes the State and Quality of Men, that is, foreign; and ſometimes a valuable Conſideration of what is to be done, that is, foreign. But herein, it is applied unto things in great variety; ſometimes the Principal-Procuring-Purchaſing-Cauſe, is ſo expreſſed. As the Condition whereon a Man lends another an Hundred Pound, is, that he be Paid it again with Intereſt. The Condition whereon a Man conveyeth p. 88his Land unto another, is, that he Receive ſo much Money for it. And ſometimes, it ſignifies ſuch things as are added to the Principal Cauſe, whereon its Operation is ſuſpended. As a man bequeaths an Hundred Pound unto another, on Condition, that he come or go to ſuch a Place and Demand it. This is no valuable Conſideration, yet is the Effect of the Principal Cauſe; or the Will of the Teſtator ſuſpended thereon. And as unto degrees of Reſpect unto that, whereof any thing is a Condition, as to Purchaſe, Procurement, Valuable Conſideration. neceſſary Preſence, the Variety is Endleſs. We therefore cannot obtain a determinate ſenſe of this word, Condition, but from a particular Declaration of what is intended by it, wherever it is uſed. And although this be not ſufficient to exclude the uſe of it from the Declaration of the way and manner, how we are juſtified by Faith; yet it is ſo to exclude the Impoſition of any Preciſe ſignification of it, any other than is given it by the Matter treated of. Without this, every thing is left Ambiguous, and uncertain whereunto it is Applied.

For Inſtance; It is commonly ſaid, That Faith and New Obedience are the Condition of the New Covenant. But yet, becauſe of the Ambiguous ſignification and various uſe of that Tern (Condition) we cannot certainly underſtand what is intended in the Aſſertion. If no more be intended but that God in, and by the New Covenant doth Indiſpenſably require theſe things of us, that is, the Reſtipulation of a good Conſcience towards God by the p. 89Reſurrection of Chriſt from the Dead, in order unto his own Glory, and our full Enjoyment of all he Benefits of it, it is Unqueſtionably true. But, if it be intended, that they are ſuch a Condition of the Covenant, as to be by us perform'd antecedently unto the Participation of any Grace, Mercy, or Priviledge of it, ſo as that they ſhould be the Conſideration, and Procuring Cauſes of them; that they ſhould be all of them, as ſome ſpeak, the Reward of our Faith, and Obedience, it is moſt falſe, and not only contrary to expreſs Teſtimonies of Scripture; but Deſtructive of the Nature of the Covenant it ſelf. If it be intended, that theſe things, tho' promiſed in the Covenant, and wrought in by the Grace of God, are yet Duties Required of us in order unto the Participation and Enjoyment of the full End of the Covenant in Glory, it is the Truth, which is aſſerted. But if it be ſaid that Faith, and New Obedience, that is, Works of Righteouſneſs, which we do, are ſo the Condition of the Covenant, as that whatever the one is ordained of God as the means of, and in order to ſuch or ſuch an End, as Juſtification, that the other is likewiſe ordained unto the ſame End, with the ſame kind of Efficiency,Dr. O. Of. Juſtific. or with the ſame Reſpect unto the Effect, it is expreſly contrary to the whole Scope, and Expreſs Deſign of the Apoſtle on that Subject.

But, notwithſtanding the various ſenſes the word [Condition] is Capable of; and how miſchievous ſoever the Popiſh, Arminian and Socinian Uſages of it are; there is a Sound p. 90Senſe in which the Word may be uſed.

Relativa Quis, Qui, Quae, Quod Juncta verbo futuri temporis faciunt ſuum Antecedens' Conditionale. Ot. Phil. Zepper. Cynoſ. Legal.That Faith is a Condition (if we may in our Interpreting of Scripture, obſerve the Rules of the Juncts) is as certain, as if it had been expreſly mention'd in the Holy Scriptures. Theſe words [He that believes ſhall be ſaved] Import a Condition. For, Relativum junctum Verbo futuri temporis conditionem facit: which, our Modern Divines, who Reject the above-mentioned Errors, do yet approve; but in what Senſe, is our Buſineſs at this time to Explain.

Condition then may be Diſtributed into Legall, and Goſpel, or Teſtamentary. A Legall Condition is Obedience to the Preceptive Part of a Law, giving Right to the Reward; ſuch was that of the Covenant of Works made with Adam; and of this ſort are the Popiſh, Arminian, and Socinian Conditions. A Goſpel Condition is of the ſame Kind with what Peculiarly belongs to Teſtamentary Diſpoſition. It is, (ſay the Civilians) Lex Negotio appoſita, unde Ipſius Eventus pendet. Or, Lex addita negotio quae donec praeſtetur ſuſpendit Eventum. Which, (ſays Dr. Owen) ſignifies ſuch things, as are added to the Principal Cauſe, whereon its Operation is ſuſpended. As a man bequeaths an Hundred Pound unto another, on Condition, that he come, or go to ſuch a Place, and Demand it. This is no Valuable Conſideration, yet is the Effect of the Principal Cauſe, or the Will of the Teſtator ſuſpended thereupon.

To underſtand this Teſtamentary Condition, we muſt conſider that there is a Principal Cauſe, whoſe Operation is ſuſpended, till a Rule, added thereunto, be obſerved. There is the Promiſe, p. 91or Donation of a Legacy, which muſt be given according to the laſt Will of the Teſtator. But to this Promiſe, or Donation, there is added a Rule, that muſt be Regarded, viz. That this Legacy be given either in ſuch a time or Place, or in ſuch a way, or manner. This is the Lex addita Negotio that muſt be obſerved before the Legacy be actually given. It is the Condition, which, till Perform'd, ſuſpends the Event; namely, the giving of the Legacy. And (as the Learned Mr. Baxter explains it) 'tis only the Modus Promiſſionis Donationis, Cath. Thiol. lib. 2. p. 248.vel Contractus; where, the fulfilling of the Promiſe, is as Really ſuſpended until this Modus be obſerved, as if it had Reſulted from the Obſervation of it.Diſpoſitio enim facta ſub Conditione vel modo nibil valet, niſi Conditio & Nodus adimpleatur. Nunquam …nim actio in Eſſictu competit niſiprius oblat â & praeſlit â Cautione de made adimplendo, quia alias locum habet Exceptio doli—Mode deficiente extinguatur debitum perinde ac ſi deficeret Conditio: Or. Phil. Zepper. Cynoſ. Legal. A Diſpoſition made on Condition, or ſub modo, ſignifieth nothing until the Condition or Mode be perform'd. Tho' it hath no Cauſality in Producing the Effect; yet, is the Effect, as Really ſuſpended thereby, as if it had. Thus it has Pleaſed the Teſtator to diſpoſe, and his Diſpoſition none can diſannul.

In this ſenſe, ſeeing Juſtification is Promiſed, in the Last Will, and Teſtament of our Lord Jeſus, to Him, that Believeth, Faith is the Modus Promiſſionis, vel Donationis So that altho' Juſtification be not the Reſult of our Faith, but of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs alone; yet Faith being made by the Teſtator, a Modus of the Diſpoſition or Donation, there can be no Juſtification without it. The Operation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, which in this Caſe, is the Negotium, or p. 92Principal Cauſe of our Juſtification, is by the Non-Performance of Faith ſuſpended, and ſo long we remain Unjuſtified.

It hath pleaſed God to fix ſuch an Order in the Diſpenſation of his Bleſſings, that the one neceſſarily antecedes the other, and what goeth before another hath an Influence upon that other, as it is ſo ſetled, and eſtabliſh'd by the Ordinance of God. Not that the former gives Right unto the latter; but ſo it is appointed of God, that ſuch an Order be obſerved in the diſpoſing of theſe Bleſſings, that he who has not the firſt, ſhall not have the ſecond; He that hath not Faith ſhall not be Juſtified.

But whether it be a Condition of the Covenant of Grace; Or, a Condition in this Covenant; Or only a Condition of our Juſtification, tho' our Divines have different Sentiments about it, yet 'tis generally held, that Faith is a Condition of Juſtification. They that ſcruple the uſe of the Word, own the thing ſignified thereby.

The Learned Author of Anti-ſozzo ſaith, that Faith is a Condition in the Covenant of Grace, tho' not of it, and they, who hold, that the Covenant of Grace was made with Chriſt as a Second Adam, do aſſert, that it is alſo made with the Faithful, the Members of Chriſt,Diſcourſe of the two Covenants, lib. 3. c. 3. p. 162. for which the Judicious Mr, Strong gives ſeveral Reaſons; namely, That the Saints may ſee that they are as ſtrictly bound to Obedience in their own Perſons under the Second Covenant, as they were, under the First. And that the Doctrine of the Goſpel, tho' it be a Doctrine of Liberty, is not a Doctrine of Licentiouſneſs; and that they may ſtand in awe of the p. 93Threats of God. This Doctrine (ſaith he) I do the rather pitch upon in Oppoſition to the Licentious Tenent of the Antinomians, who ſay, that all is Required of Chriſt, and nothing of Us.

This Notion of a Condition, as it doth moſt fully Provide againſt Antinomianiſm, by Inferring the Neceſſity of Faith's being in Order of Nature before Juſtification; ſo, it doth as effecctually ſecure us from the Popiſh, Arminian, and Socinian Rocks, in that it is not a Legal, but a Teſtamentary Condition, that cannot Eſtabliſh the Merit of Good Works, nor Interfere with Chriſt's meriting, or the Spirits working the Firſt Grace; nor Subvert the Doctrine of Satisfaction, or Particular Election. All Teſtamentary Diſpoſitions, whatever be the Modes of Donation, are of Free Grace, not of Metit, and being Given to us, as the Children of a Testator, the Merit and Gift of the Firſt Grace, which is neceſſary to our being ſuch Children, cannot be Deſtroyed by ſuch a Modus, or Condition.

Theſe things will Appear with much more Clearneſs if we conſider, that the Holy Scriptures Repreſent Chriſt as a Second-Adam; the Father of a Spiritual Off-ſpring.

Two things Chriſt did, as a Second-Adam. He undertook to beget a Seed, and Raiſe that Seed unto Glory. This Seed Chriſt Purchaſed, and on his Purchaſe they are given him by the Father according to the terms Agreed on between the Father, and the Son in the Eternal Compact.

That Chriſt begets a Seed, and by his Word and Spirit Governs, and Raiſes them unto p. 94Glory, is ſo far from being inconſiſtent with his Meriting, and Giving the First Grace, that it is in Purſuance of it. Chriſt merited a Seed; and, that he may have what he merited, a Seed is Given him; which is by the Fathers drawing, the Sons gathering, and the Spirits working Grace in them.

Chriſt alſo, as a Second-Adam, made ſatisfaction for his Children; who, as ſoon as they do ſpiritually by Regeneration Deſcend from him, have a Right to Impunity. If the Satisfaction had been made by Chriſt, as a Mediator for the Elect, as ſuch, then indeed, as ſoon as they had any Being, they would have been Diſcharg'd from the Debt. But Chriſt making Satisfaction for the Elect as his Seed, they cannot partake of the Right reſulting from it, but as they become his Seed. As they are his Seed Virtually, they have a Virtual Diſcharge; but an Actual Diſcharge, they cannot have, till they are Actually born again.

Moreover, the Covenant of Grace being made with Chriſt, as a Second-Adam, the Promiſes are made unto Chriſt, as the Reward of his Obedience, but for his Seed; ſo that in Chriſt you muſt be by Faith, that you may be Pardoned, and Saved; and yet your Pardon and Salvation Reſults not from your Faith; but from Christ's Righteouſneſs: whereby, it's manifeſt, that Goſpel-Promiſes are Powerful Motives to Engage us to do our utmoſt to Believe and Repent, and muſt be Preached to this Very-End, and Purpoſe.

Thus the Doctrine of our Merit is laid by, Chriſt's meriting and working the Firſt Grace, p. 95and his making Satisfaction to God's Juſtice, and the neceſſity of our Faith, Repentance and Sanctification are abundantly cleared by this Goſpel-Repreſentation, that is made of Chriſt, as he is a Second Adam, with whom the Covenant of Grace is made, and with his Seed, as ſuch, which is ſo far from deſtroying Particular Election, that it eſtabliſheth it. For the Elect were Promiſed unto Chriſt, merited by him, and given unto him, as the Reward of his Sufferings, whereby it is made ſure; that the Death of Chriſt ſhall not be altogether in vain. He ſhall ſee the Elect as the Travel of his Soul, and be ſatisfied.

Thus as in Oppoſition to Popery, Arminianiſm, and Socinianiſm, Legal Conditions are Juſtly Rejected; ſo in Contradiction to the Antinomian Error Teſtamentary Conditions are here explicated and aſſerted.