An Answer to William Sherlock, Title page – To the reader
AN ANSWER TO THE Diſcourſe OF Mr. WILLIAM SHERLOCK, TOUCHING The Knowledge of Chriſt, and our Union and Communion with Him.
By EDWARD POLHILL of Burwaſh in Suſſex, Eſquire.
LONDON, Printed for Ben. Foſter, and are to be ſold by moſt Book-ſellers in London. MDCLXXV.
TO THE READER.
IN that excellent Piece the Soul of Man (which is too great for this lower World, and in the very Frame of it aſpires after an Infinite Good) the foreign or uppermost Room is the Ʋnderſtanding; and among all the Truths, which are the Furniture thereof, none are ſo rich, as thoſe Theological ones, which are drawn out of the Golden Mines of Scripture. Arts and Sciences are in compariſon but the Poor of the Mind, the Riches and Treaſures of Knowledge lie in Evangelical Mysteries; theſe outſhine the Sun, and out-weigh the Earth: They have the highest Certainty, as coming down immediately from heaven; and withall the noblest Tendency, as leading us thither: Infinite Truth is the Fountain, and infinite Goodneſs the Center of them. Theſe, when in their Lustre, make a ſpiritual Day, and derive ſuch a pure Influence upon the Hearts and Lives of Men, as moulds them into the Divine Image, and thereby makes them meet for the bliſs-making Viſion in Heaven. No ſooner can theſe be under an Eclipſe, but there will be a Night and a Chaos of confuſions; the Path of Life and Happineſs will be wrapt up in darkneſs; black Legions of Errors and Corruptions will creep forth, and pious Souls will wiſh for the day, I mean, for a freſh Illuſtration of Truths from that ſacred Spirit, which at first breahed them out into the World; and, after all the Clouds and dark Veils put upon them, can bring them forth in their Oriency and true Glory. Theſe to Believers are as Pearls and ſacred Jewels, dearer than the Apple of their Eye, nay, than their own Souls: They build upon them by Faith, eſpouſe them by divine Love, lay them up in a pure Conſcience, diſtil the Vertue of them into a holy Life; and, if it were poſſible, they would have none of the ſacred Light put out, nor the least Jot or Tittle of thoſe Truths fall to the ground. O what a rate did the famous St. Auſtin and others ſet upon God's ſpecial Effectual Grace! How highly did the heroical Luther value the Point of Juſtification! Jacente articulo Juſtificationis jacent omnia, ſaith he, as if a Chriſtians All were in it. When ſuch Truths are violated, Christians, how meek ſoever in other things, muſt earnestly contend, and not give place, no, not for an hour; here, if ever, Luther's pia & ſancta pertinacia is in ſeaſon.
Not to ſtay any longer on the excellencies and great Concerns of Evangelical Truths, which no tongue of Men or Angels is able fully to expreſs. I ſhall now ſpeak a little touching Mr. Sherlock's Book. When I read it, I thought my ſelf in a new Theological World; Believers appearing without their Head for want of a Myſtical Ʋnion, ſtrip'd and naked for lack of imputed Righteouſneſs; the full treaſures of Grace in Chriſt, which have ſupplied all the veſſels of faith, emptied out of ſacred his perſon, & transfuſed into the doctrine of the Goſpel; as if according to Pelagius all Grace were in doctrine only: The holy Spirit, the great Origen of Graces and Comforts, in its Illumination ſeems to be ſuperfluous, in its Teſtimony to Believers an Enthuſiastical Fancy, and in the work of Regeneration, if any, at most but a partial Co-cauſe, parting ſtakes with the Will of Man: Faith in Abel and Enoch lying as low as Natural Principles; in Noah and Abraham raiſed up a little to particular Revelations, but not ſo high as the Meſſiah: In Christians ſtanding off and at a distance from Chriſt its dear Object, not daring to lay hold on, or ſo much as touch him, to draw any Vertue from thence. As if Socinus had hit it right, when he ſaid, Chriſti apprehenſio merum commentum & inaniſſimum ſomnium eſt. The immutable Love of God, the only Cement of the Church, ſeems to be turned off from Perſons to Qualities, and towards Perſons to be as variable as the fickle Will of Man is; and yet he is immutable ſtill, he loves for the ſame Reaſon, or, as Socinus ſaith, Non ſine cauſa mutat. The Pontifician Theſis touching Juſtification by inherent Righteouſneſs, ſeems to be revived a freſh, and that in a way leſs tolerable than among the Romaniſts: They, though they would have inherent Righteouſneſs come in for a ſhare, yet allow the Imputation of Chriſts paſſive Obedience; but in the New Scheme, inherent Righteouſneſs takes up all the room, and leaves none for imputed. The Drollery and ſarcaſtical Reflections in the Book are but the Cover of it; within there is a dark Eclipſe upon many excellent Truths which hitherto have been owned in the Churches of Chriſt, and particularly in our own. Among other Truths none have had a greater ſhare of ſuffering than thoſe two, touching our Myſtical Ʋnion with Chriſt, and the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us; both which are to me very momentous. The Mystical Ʋnion hath I ſuppoſe, been generally received in the Church. Indeed Gregory de Valentia once cavilled at it, as if it were Myſterium Calviniſticum; and yet he ſeems to own it, when he ſaith, Animum noſtrum poſſe per fidem corpus Chriſti, etiam ut in coelo exiſtens, atque adeo ut eſt extra Sacramentum manducare. He that denies the Myſtical Ʋnion, cannot hold the head Jeſus Chriſt, from which all the body by joynts and bands hath nouriſhment miniſtred, Col. 2.19. Take away that Ʋnion, and Chriſt is a Head of no Influence, the Joynts and the Bands, which were made to convey divine Nutriture from him, are but empty Titles, and ſignifie no more than thoſe Conduit-pipes do, which are ſevered from the Fountain. Again, he that denies the Myſtical Ʋnion, must loſe that piece of his Creed, the Communion of Saints; their Communion among themſelves primarily depends on their Ʋnion with Chriſt the Head, from whom the whole body is fitly joyned together and compacted, as the Apoſtle tells us, Eph. 4.16. All the Harmonies in the Body Myſtical hang on its Ʋnion with the Head; without this Believers could have no Communion one with another, ſave in this only, that they must all die one common death, hy being ſevered from their Head: The living Stones, once off from their Foundation, can hang no longer together in the ſpiritual Building, but muſt totter down into a Chaos of Confuſion. Moreover, he that denies the myſtical Ʋnion, muſt turn off the Believer from his true ſtanding: according to the Goſpel, the Believer is a man in Chriſt; he is built on him, as on a Foundation; he ſubſists in him, as the Branches do in the Vine; he hath vital Influences from him, as the Members have from the Head; he is acted by his divine Spirit in all the pure ways to heaven, and all this is his ſecurity, his preſervation in Jeſus Chriſt: But take away the Myſtical Ʋnion, he is a man out of Chriſt, he ſtands upon his own bottom, he ſubſiſts by himſelf alone, he receives no influences from Chriſt the Head, nor is acted by any higher Spirit than his own; and in ſuch a caſe, the next news we hear of him must be an utter downfall. But to ſay no more of the Myſtical Ʋnion; that other Point touching the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us, hath alſo been ever owned in the Church; he that denies it, muſt, I fear, in the conſequent, overturn the Law, the Goſpel, and the Satisfaction of Chriſt. He must overturn the Law; for he muſt own a Juſtification without a Righteouſneſs anſwering thereunto; inherent Righteouſneſs being imperfect, and imputed a Nullity, there is nothing to anſwer the Law, and yet we are juſtified, which is as much as to ſay, the Law is no Law: If it be a Law, none can be juſtified without a Righteouſneſs adequate to it; if we may be juſtified without ſuch a Righteouſneſs, the Law is no Law, which is what the Antinomians would have: That a Law ſhould be in force, and a man ſhould be juſtified without an adequate Righteouſneſs, and that before a moſt righteous Judge, who judgeth according to truth, is utterly impoſſible. Again he must overturn the Goſpel, and that upon a double account: The one is this: He muſt ſubvert the Promiſes of Juſtification made in the Goſpel; the Promiſes run thus; That we ſhall be juſtified by Chriſt's blood, made righteous by his obedience; that his blood ſhall cleanſe away ſin, and purge our conſciences from dead works; and how can theſe be fulfilled without an Imputation? To ſay, that Christ's Blood founded the Covenant, will not ſerve the turn; theſe are Promiſes of a Covenant founded already, and a founded Covenant doth not promiſe the founding of it ſelf. Chriſts blood as it founded the Covenant, is precedent to the Promiſes, and by it as ſuch the Promiſes cannot be fulfilled; for then they ſhould be fulfilled before they were made, or at least in the making of them: It remains therefore that Chriſts righteouſneſs muſt be made ours by imputation, & thereby the promiſes may be made good to us. If the Promiſes mean as they ſpeak, then we muſt be juſtified by Chriſts blood & obedience, which infers Imputation; if the Promiſes (how plain, how emphatical ſoever the words be) mean not, that we ſhall be justified by Chriſt's Blood or Righteouſneſs, then Chriſt ſhed his Blood for us, that we might be juſtified without it; he ſatisfied for us, that we might be pardoned without a ſatisfaction, which is an odd reflection on his ſatisfaction, if not a total evacuation of it. The other is this; he muſt pervert the Conditions of the Goſpel from their true end and ſcope: Theſe Conditions were in infinite Wiſdom accommodated and attempered to the death of Christ which founded them, they were made to be ſubordinate and ſubſervient to Christ's ſatisfaction and the glory of it: The Faith required in them was not intended to be the matter of our Juſtification, and in that notion to diſcharge and juſtifie us; the main ſcope and end of thoſe conditions was to ſhew upon what terms Christ's righteoſneſs and ſatisfaction ſhould diſcharge and juſtifie us. Now as long as theſe conditions are made but conditions, as long as Faith keeps its proper ſtation, all is well and as it ought to be; but if thoſe conditions be advanced above their own ſtation, if our inherent righteouſneſs be made the very matter of our Juſtification, as indeed it muſt if imputed Righteouſneſs be denied, then the conditions of the Goſpel are corrupted and perverted from their true end, they are no longer ſubordinated to Chriſt's ſatisfaction, but made to ſet up our inherent Righteouſneſs in the room of it, they ſhew no longer upon what terms Chriſts ſatisfaction ſhall diſcharge us, but how our own Righteouſneſs may do it, which is plainly to pervert the conditions of the Goſpel. Moreover he muſt overturn the ſatisfaction of Christ: Touching this three things are conſiderable, viz. Chriſt's ſurrogation in our room, Gods acceptation of the foreign on our behalf, and the operation of that foreign in our diſcharge; none of which can ſtand without an imputation. The firſt thing is Chriſt's ſurrogation, he ſuffered foreign, Matth. 20.28. in ſtead of many; he was our foreign, putting his Soul in the room of ours, or elſe he could not have ſatisfied for us. Now that Chriſt ſhould ſuffer in our room and ſtead, and his ſufferings ſhould not be accounted or imputed to us, is a contradiction; take away Imputation, and you take away Surrogation; take away Surrogation, and you take away Satisfaction. The ſecond thing is Gods acceptation of the foreign on our behalf: Chriſts Sacrifice was a ſweet-ſmelling ſavour unto God, Eph. 5.2. God accepted it on our behalf, or elſe Chriſt could not have ſatiſfied for us. Now that Chriſts ſufferings ſhould be accepted by God as on our behalf, and yet that they ſhould not be accounted or imputed is utterly impoſſible; ſo far as Chriſts Satisfaction was accepted by God for us, ſo far it must be imputed to us; if it was accepted only for a remiſſibility, then it is imputed no further; but then remiſſion will be without ſatisfaction, which is what the Socinians would have; but if (as the truth is) it was accepted for Remiſſion and Justification to be diſpenſed upon believing, then it is imputed to that end, actually to juſtifie and diſcharge us: Take away Imputation, and you take away Acceptation, and with it Satisfaction. The third thing is the operation of Chriſt's ſatisfaction in our diſcharge. Satiſfaction is deſtructio obligationis, it doth really and properly diſcharge him for whom it is made: accepted abſolutely, it diſcharges him immediately; accepted on terms it diſcharges upon the performance, and that as properly and really, though not ſo ſoon as in the other caſe; its vertue and efficacy, which was ſuſpended by the condition, breaks forth into effect upon the performance; this is the nature and property of Satisfaction: A Satisfaction which doth not diſcharge, doth not ſatisfie, that is, in plain terms, it is no Satisfaction. Now the ſatisfaction of Chriſt doth no diſcharge us immediatly, but upon believing, which is the Evangelical Condition; and how doth it do it? Surely one of theſe two ways, either it diſcharges us meerly as it founded the Covenant, or elſe as it is made ours by Imputation; the former cannot be, it founded the Covenant before our believing, & if it do no more after, it diſcharges us not, for it doth as much before believing (before which it diſcharges not) as after: It founded the Covenant for thoſe that periſh, at leaſt ſo far, that upon believing they might have been justified; & if it do no more for thoſe that are ſaved, it diſcharges us not; for it doth operate as much and as far towards the diſcharge of thoſe that periſh, who are never diſcharged, as of thoſe that are diſcharged and ſaved; which plainly ſhews, that it properly diſcharges none at all: and if it diſcharge not, it ſatisfies not, that is, it is no ſatisfaction. It remains therefore, that Christ's Satisfaction is made ours by Imputation, and ſo doth diſcharge us: If it diſcharge us, it muſt be made ours by Imputation, and if it diſcharge us not, it is no Satisfaction. Socinus, who denied Chriſt's Satisfaction, had reaſon to deny imputed Righteouſneſs; and he, who denies imputed Righteouſneſs, muſt in the conſequent deny Chriſt's Satisfaction, nay, he muſt ſet up another ſatisfaction in ſtead of it. In Justification there muſt be ſome Righteouſneſs or other, to be the matter of our Juſtification, and to diſcharge us before God; if the imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt be not ſuch, then our own inherent Righteouſneſs muſt be the very thing, that must diſcharge us and ſatisfie for us; that indeed muſt be the ſatisfaction much rather than Christs, becauſe it properly actually diſcharges us, which Christs doth not: Ʋnleſs we ſay with the Socinians, that there is Remiſſion without Satisfaction, there must be ſomewhat to be a Satisfaction, and what that is very obvious: That which is the matter of our Justification, that which doth properly diſcharge us, that is the Satisfaction: if Chriſts Righteouſneſs imputed be not it, our inherent Righteouſneſs muſt be ſuch; and yet alas! what a poor thing is it to be ſo advanced? Its own defects call for a pardon, and how ſhould it juſtif…e or diſcharge us? May that, which wants a pardon it ſelf, juſtifie; or may it first be pardoned it ſelf, and then juſtifie its Subject in which it is? Both are abſurd: Before it is pardoned it ſelf, it cannot justifie; and after it is pardoned, it is very odd, that it ſhould give that which it ſelf once wanted. Not to be tedious; I have endeavoured to return an Anſwer to Mr. Sherlock's Book, not out of Paſſion or diſreſpect to his Perſon, who is my acquaintance, and for whom I have reſpects; but meerly out of love to the Truth, which is dearer to me than all Relations. I have for the most part ſet forth his words at length; and where ſometimes for brevities ſake I have contracted them, it hath been my care to be just to every thing of Emphaſis or Argument. The Lapſes in this my Anſwer beg the Readers pardon, and the Truths in it call for his conſent: If any thing in it tend towards the clearing or eſtabliſhing of ſacred Truth, it is enough for him, who is
A Well-wiſher to the Truth, EDWARD POLHILL.