The Doctrine of Justification Cleared, Treatise (1 of 4)

The Doctrine of Justification Cleared · Treatise (1 of 4)

p. 1The Doctrine of Iuſtification cleared by Animadverſions on M. John Goodwins Animadverſions upon M. George Walkers Defence of the true ſenſe of the Apoſtle Rom. 4. 3, 5. &c. containing the two firſt Chapters of his Treatiſe of Juſtification.

Sect. I. THe Doctrine of free Juſtification isThe worth of the doctrine of free juſtificatiō. worthily, highly eſteemed of, by all Orthodox Divines. As by Heretiques, aaPraecip…è in controverſiam vocatur.it is principally called into controverſie: ſo by the other againſt them hath it beene maintained. When'as they have entred liſts with them, they have ſet the ſame amongſt the chiefeſt Articles of Chriſtian religion. The truth thereof profeſſed and maintained in the Reformed Churches againſt Romaniſts, I finde ſtiled by one, bbDoctrinam Chriſti & Apoſtolorum de praecipuo ſalutis articulo Dr. Prid. Lect. 5. de juſtif p. 143.the doctrine of Chriſt and the Apoſtles of the chiefe Article of Salvation: who afterwards leaveth this alſo upon record concerning it. ccJuſtificatio principium eſt & cardo (ut ingenuè cum Pighio agnoſcit Bellarminus de Juſtif. l. 1. c. 4. a quo pendent, vel in quo verſantur omnes inter nos & Pontificios controverſiae. ib. p. 148.Juſtification is a principle and hinge (as Bellar. with Pighius ingenuouſly confeſſeth) on which depend, or in which all contraverſies betweene us and the Pontificians are infoulded. Pareus calleth it, ddPraeter caeteras maximè neceſſatiam.beſides others moſt neceſſary; and giveth this reaſon. eeEſt enim quaeſtio haec (de formali cauſa Juſtificationis) una ex maximis quibus ſacra theologia a Philoſophia humana, Evangelium a Lege, Eccleſia Chriſti a Judaeis, Turcis, Paganis; Evangelicia Papatu ſeparantur.For this queſtion (of the formall cauſe of juſtification) is one of the greateſt, in which ſacred Theologie is ſeparated from Philoſophy that is humane, the Goſpell from the Law, the Church of Chriſt from Jews, Turks, Pagans; Proteſtants from papiſts. ffCaſtigat. de Juſtif. p. 364. Potiſſima fuit & eſt cauſa divortii, quod Eccleſiae Evangelicae annis ab hinc 97 a Romano Papatu facere coach ſuemnt. ib. p. 364.It was, ſaith he, & is the chiefe cauſe of the divorce which the Proteſtant Churches were inforced to make from the Roman Papacy. Learned Junius calleth it ggVelut nucleus Evangelii & Conſolationis caput. Theſ. 11.as it were the kernell p. 2of the Goſpell, and head of conſolation. hhGerhard. l. de juſtif p. 435 in fol. p. 2. Hic locus eſt tanquam arx & praecipuum pro pugnaculum totius doctrinae & religionis, quo vel obſcurato, vel adulterato, vel ſubverſo, impoſſibile eſt puritatem doctrinae in aliis locis retinere: ſalvo autem hoc loco, corruunt per ſe omnes idolomaniae, ſuperſtitiones & quic quid eſt corruptelarum in omnib. aliis locis. Ger. ubi ſupra, ex Clem. & Luthero.Gerhardus, This place is as a Caſtle and chiefe Fort of the whole doctrine and religion, which obſcured, or adulterated, or overthrown, its impoſſible to retaine pureneſſe of doctrine in other heads; this being ſafe, idolatries, ſuperſtitions, and all corruptions elſe, fall to the ground by themſelves. iiHic locus eſt praecipuus in doctrina Chriſtiana. Chemnit. exam. 231.This head is the chiefe in Chriſtian doctrine, as Chemnit. It eſpecially ſetteth forth the free grace of God, and declareth his righteouſneſſe. It is the chiefe of thoſe that glorifie Jeſus Chriſt; It ſetteth and keepeth the Crowne on his head. Its a foundation of ſolid peace and comfort to Chriſtians whilſt on earth. In ſanctification the ſtreames run very muddy at the beſt, here they are liquid, alwayes very cleere, from hence peace and comfort flow; inflow into the heart and defuſe themſelves through their life: the ſoule is at peace with God and with its ſelfe, and hence it glorieth in the ſaddeſt condition, as appeareth by the word of God, examples in Scripture, and the ſweete experience of Gods Saints. If ever the ſoule did leape, was of good cheare, and comforted, that was the time when as God juſtified it; when as that was diſcovered unto the ſoule, with the bottoms and foundations thereof. Here all doubts are anſwered and ſcruples ſatisfied and removed: for hereby ſuch a man is not onelyonly inveſted with the great priviledges of a man perfectly righteous, deliverance from death and condemnation, acceptation into favour with God, as Mr. John Goodwin. 1 cap. p. 55. Edit. Walk. to which I may add a Long, &c. But alſo made white, though before as blacke as a coale; though before as Scarlet, as Crimſon: as Scarlet in regard of the bloody Die of ſinne, yet then white as wooll, white as ſnow, whiter then the ſnow. Chriſts kkCum nigra eſſem peccatis & per opera affinis eſſem & conjuncta tenebris, me pulchram ſecit per dilectionem ſua pulchtitudine commutata cum mea turpitudine In ſo enim tranſlatis ſordibus meorum peccatorum, me ſua puritate impertiit, efficiens participem ſuae pulchritudinis. Hom. 2. in Cant. Greg. Niſſen.beloved is wholly faire, and there is no ſpot in her; they that are Chriſts are preſented holy, unreproveable, and unblameable in Gods ſight, exactly juſt and perfect; perfected for ever, compleate in Chriſt, and hence ſinnes are pardoned. I cannot ſay, they are llIn ſtatu quo.in the ſtate they were before; the ſtate of innocencie, by pardon (as ſome) which cannot be in regard of p. 3inherent righteouſneſſe in this life; which if it were in them would be but juſtification by inherent righteouſneſſe, Popery; but by that which is farre exceeding, even the moſt perfect and exact righteouſneſſe and obedience of Jeſus Chriſt. By this is the true beleever Juſt before God as Chriſt is, the beleever in him. mmAeque juſti ſumus (ſaith that learned Dr. out of the Chaire) quia eadem juſtitia, licet non aequaliter, & eodem modo; Ille ſubjective, nos imputative; ille de proprio, nos de illius largitate. Dr. Prid. ubi ſupra p. 171. See Maſter John Goodw. as by Mr. W. & Mr. W. from p. 55. to 62.We are alike juſt, becauſe with the ſame righteouſneſſe, though not equally, and in the ſame manner: He ſubjectively, we imputatively; He of his owne, we of his bounty. This judging of God and account, is according unto truth: deliverance from ſinne and condemnation and acceptation to the favour of God follow righteouſly here; God's juſt in juſtification: Here feares, queſtions, doubts, &c. which are and may well be where there is nothing but inherent righteouſneſſe or faith in a proper ſenſe, which are and ariſe in the minds of men, ſtill moving men to aske where is the righteouſneſſe, are calmed and anſwered rationally. Here (if I be called to an account) I have to anſwer to ſcrupulous conſcience, to the Devill, to God! which will ſerve before God, and is good in his righteous ſight: a ſtrong ground of comfort both in life and death. All Chriſtians have experience nnIn agone; in agone quanti Papiſtis? ſaith Pareus, caſtig. de Juſtif p. 363.in a conflict; of how great eſteeme to papiſts themſelves in a confiict?

In all which names as a Chriſtian, as well as a Miniſter of Gods word, I (the leaſt of many thouſands) may not be blamed if in this cauſe, for keeping the Crowne on the head of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt I appeare and encounter gaineſaiers.

When as the whole world ſtandeth ingaged in this controverſie ile not withdraw my ſelfe. Ile give this golden Apple to none but Chriſt. If ever there was in me that which is as new Wine, bubling and ſtriving to have its vent; If ever any word of the Lord was in me as fire, it is this, and it muſt have its went. I have beleeved and ſpoken comfort to others from hence, and I cannot but ſpeake in this cauſe, eſpecially being called thereunto.

Sect. 2. I take not upon me the honour to be a defender of him who hath ingaged himſelfe in this cauſe, he is p. 4an old Souldier, and I think his work will beare him out. But as a wel-wiſher ile offer my mite; and doe humbly crave leave of Maſter John Goodwin, to conſider his reply to Maſter Walker, as I finde cauſe in his Animadverſions, to animadvert, ppVeniam petimus dabimuſque viciſſim.We crave leave and will give it in like manner. In this let me be pardoned if I doe not walke in the ſame ſteps of Maſter Goodwin, that I profeſſe the contrary in the beginning, (it is what he deſireth in his ſecond booke) that I Animadvert not on ſome and thoſe the looſer and fouler paſſages of his reply, as he profeſſeth in the Frontiſpice of his booke, and promiſeth to doe to Maſter W. I conceive that evilly to conduce to the cauſe, as well as to the Authours honour and worth, and reſpect in the world, and that it is but an indirect way to ſteale hearts after the Author of the Reply.

It is no praiſe in a Reply to meddle but with ſome paſſages,a. much leſſe with the looſer & fouler paſſages: That is but a kind of cowardize, as the falling on lame, wounded, ſtragling parts of an Army: to leave the Army we ſhould oppoſe in full ſtrength. Little honour is gotten by the Captaine that doth and glorieth in this. Theſe might have beene neglected with more honour. The ſoundeſt and faireſt paſſages in which ſtrength lieth, ſhould have beene his ambition, not looſe and foule ones, much leſſe the fouler and looſer paſſages. It is ominous, indeed a ſtumbling on the threſhold.

O that there were not too manifeſt a truth in that paſſageb. of your Animadverſions, and that ſo much paines had not beene ſpent about foule and looſe paſſages, there had not beene ſo foule and looſe a Recipe, the reply had not beene ſo full of foule and looſe paſſages, much labour might have beene ſpared by him that replied, and thoſe that reade and anſwer the ſame. I know not who can reade with comfort, or content. It ſuted not with a grave Divine, or ſo waighty a matter as the chiefe Article of ſalvation.

It was not now a time in that manner to laugh orSee the Front of Maſter G. book. dance, in that manner to ſpeake, to warre with ſuch weapons; p. 5the Scriptures cited in the front are but abuſed. It was not a time of love, it reliſheth of ſomewhat elſe, it will have a time of weeping and mourning before there be ſolid peace; ſuch veines, how rich ſoever, yeeld much vanity; ſuch jeſting is not comely: the Prophets practiſe will not patronage ſuch ironies as abound here. Our times have beene times of licence under the name of recreation: and mans nature is foully degenerated that can recreate it ſelfe thus: It is not wiſdome to make a paſtime of ſinne. The labour and ſtrength to which, may well be ſuſpected that is thus repaired. It were evill in tranſient words, for which yet we muſt give an account; it is worſe in publiſhed bookes, which may continue with the world. It is an evill example, ſome adverſaries will laugh, others blaſpheme, the Lord give repentance for it to him that did it, and thoſe that take pleaſure therein.

You will ſay, he was provoked: It ſhould not have beene, had it beene ſo, wiſe men ſhould have borne with ſuch as they account fooles; and it was neither wiſdome nor ſtrength to be overcome to ſuch evill; evill ſhould have been overcome with good; this had beene to be approved of men, and acceptable to God. My profeſſion is not to meddle with impertinencies, or to rake in fouler and looſer matters, but in a humble manner to follow the cauſe, as God ſhall inable.

Nunc itaque & verſus & caetera ludicra ponam;

Quod verum atque decens curo & rogo, & omnis in hoc ſum.

Neither will I be a Patron of any evill word in any man, words againſt the perſon of a brother, or Chriſtian man, let evill words be applied to evill things, and ſo farre forth I cannot much blame Maſter Walkers language. M. W. The cenſure of others.hath written or ſpoken little that way which hath not beene written long before.

I could preſent the Reader with a large catalogue of ſuch ſpeeches.

p. 6Sibrandus Lubbertus againſt Bertius, that Prince of the Arminian band as you phraſe him; holding Juſtification by faith in a proper ſenſe againſt the figurative ſenſe, which is yours, calleth it qqDeteſtabilem & abominabilem doctrinam, Epiſt. p. 1.Deteſtable and abominable doctrine. rrDamnatam Serveti haereſin, p. 5.The damn'd hereſie of Servetus. ssSocini blaſphemiam, p. 29. 33. 58.Socinus his blaſphemy. ttDamnatos Serveti ſurores, p. 26.The damned phrenſies of Servetus. uuTradidit ante vos Servetus, fecit idem Socinus, & Oſterodus, ubi etiam Arminium ſecum ſentire teſtem citat Bertium, p. 6.Servetus before you delivered it, ſo did Socinus and Oſterodus, where he alſo citeth Bertius a witneſſe that Arminius jumpeth with him. xxEx Blaſphemiis Serveti & Oſterodi, quas omnes Eccleſiae noſtrae deteſtantur, deſumptae, ib.Taken out of the blaſphemies of Servetus and Oſterodus, which all our Churches deteſt. yyAbominabilem & execabilem Serveti & Socini haereſin quae papiſticis erroribus deterior eſt, p. 116.The abominable and accurſed hereſie of Servetus and Socinus, which is worſe then Popiſh errours. zzDico eſſe blaſphemam & …e…que quaterque execrabilem haereſin, p. 121.I ſay it is a blaſphemous and thrice and foure times execrable hereſie. aaHaec tua theſis eſt cauſa quare ſtatuam vobis, ſi ramen vobis ipſis conſtare vultis, neceſſario eo tandem deveniendum eſſe ut cum Serveto, Socino, Oſterode, meritum ſive ſatisfactionem pro nobis factam omnino tollatis, dicatiſque neque Chriſtum nobis juſtitiam peperiſſe, neque nos ipſius juſtitia imputata juſtificari, p. 85. Illi negant Chriſti mortem eſſe ſatisfactionem pro peccaris noſtris, ut denique negant illum ſatisfactionem nobis imputari, & nos illa nobis impurata juſtificari. Ita tibi faciendum eſt, p. 87. Quorſum enim juſtitia Chriſti ſi non habet in ſe vim juſtificandi, & ſi nos non juſtificat? ib.This thy poſition is the cauſe why I conclude, if you will be like your ſelves, you muſt at length with Servetus, Socinus, and Oſterodus, deſtroy wholly the merit or ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and that you ſay that Chriſt neither attained righteouſneſſe to us, nor that we are juſtified by the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt imputed to us, for to what end is the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt if it hath not in it force to juſtifie? bbPonis illa in tuis literis ex quibus impia illa & blaſphema Serveti, Socini, & Oſterodi bdelugmata neceſſatio ſequuntur, p. 87.You write thoſe things from whence thoſe wicked and blaſphemous abominations of Servetus, Socinus, and Oſterodus, doe neceſſarily follow. ccPaſſim audimus viros doctos dicere Authores hujus opinionis Papiſmum non ſatis exuiſſe; quin diſette dicunt juſtificationem ob fidem proprie ſic dictam, hoc eſt, ob opus noſtrum, eſſe ex reliquiis Monachalis Phariſaiſmi. Hoc certum eſt Socinum & ante eum Servetum hoc à Papiſtis mutuatum eſſe, &c.We heare every where learned men ſay that the Authors of this opinion have not enough put off Popery, they plainely ſay juſtification by faith in a proper ſenſe, that is, our worke, to be the reliques of Monkiſh Phariſaiſme. This is certaine that Socinus and Servetus before him borrowed this of the Papiſts. p. 7ddNon nego Authorem hujus ſcripti nobiſcum & cum Papiſtis ſentire Chriſtum pro nobis ſatisfeciſſe: Sed quod dolendum eſt, dum hanc juſtificationem per fidem proprie ſic dictam probat; talia adhiber argumenta per quae meritum & ſatisfactio Chriſti prorſus evertitur, p. 98.I deny not the Authour of this writing to thinke with us and Papiſts, Chriſt to have ſatisfied for us; but which is grievous, whileſt he proveth this juſtification by faith in a proper ſenſe, he giveth ſuch arguments by which the merit and ſatisfaction of Chriſt are overthrowne. eeQui haec diligenter expendunt vident facillimum tranſitum eſſe ab hoc novo Samoſateniſmo ad Papiſmum, p. 98.Thoſe that wright theſe ſee the paſſage eaſie from this new Samoſateniſme to Popery.

Conſider how neerely theſe may concerne you Maſter G. who deny profeſſedly the imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe to juſtification as Socinus doth, which yet Bertius profeſſeth, p. 104.

ffSi ſequerer non veritatem ſed mendacium neque Deum ſed Socinum, Servetum, & Oſterodum ſequeret, p. 117.If I ſhould follow I ſhould follow not the truth, but a lie, not God, but Socinus, Servetus, Oſterodus. ggEgo autem ut me vel tellus optem prius ima dehiſcat, quam admittam, &c. p. 117. So Sibrandus.I wiſh the earth might open is mouth and ſwallow me up rather then I admit it.

Beza (as Maſter W. citeth him) calleth it blaſphemy, Maſter Forbs de juſtificatione, groſſe impiety in placing it either in whole or in part in our righteouſneſſe as it is our owne worke, ſeeing by no worke of his owne can man poſſibly be juſtified, p. 78. and p. 80. he ſaith, by this we may perceive that the opinion of theſe men who place our righteouſneſſe in faith properly taken as it is the act of our heart, without relation of it, as an apprehending inſtrument to Chriſt, is much more pernitious then the opinion of the Papiſts, p. 80.

Now it is certaine that if God ſhould justifie us either by the workes of the Law, or by faith as it is a worke or habit in us, God could never be ſeene to be juſt in juſtifying of us, p. 29.

Which opinion can never be maintained with Gods honour, p. 163.

He calleth it a dangerous errour, p. 171. and a manifeſt errour, p. 193.

Hearken to Pareus hhQuem ſenſum (Metonymicum) ſi oppugnar Adverſatius, certe non Lutherum impugnat, ſed Spiritum Sanctum blaſphemat qui Chriſtum expreſſe vocat noſtram juſtitiam, 23. ler. & 1 Cor. 1. 30. Pareus Caſtig. p 419.1 Cor 1:30who ſaith, Which (Metonymicke) ſenſe if our Adverſary (Bellarmine) oppoſeth, truly he doth not impugne Luther, but blaſpheme the Holy Ghoſt, who calleth Christ expreſſely our righteouſneſſe.

p. 8I my ſelfe cannot ſpeake well of your cauſe, it were to call evill good, to procure a woe. The juſtification of wickedneſſe, abomination to the Lord. This is my judgement, I will indeavour to make it good by anſwering this reply, which I deſire to doe without paſſion.

Sect. 3. It offendeth you that Maſter Walker calleth his interpretation the true ſenſe; there was no cauſe untill he be refuted, and doe not you the ſame of faith in a proper ſenſe?

What you, therefore, ſay they did of the golden Calfe, and of the practiſe of thoſe that adulterate Coine, ſerveth your ſelfe as well as Maſter W. and may be returned; but of this let them judge who reade when they come to the end.

Neither doth he abate of the true ſenſe or his confidence by adding, according to the common judgement of the moſt godly, learned, and judicious Divines of the beſt reformed Churches, that argument is your owne. You take upon you to prove a proper ſenſe by authority, as of Ancient, ſo Moderne Divines, and thereby pretend confidence; Maſter W. might have ſo much leave as you take to your ſelfe, without the leaſt diminution of his confidence. He may be farre more confident, if this be a ground; the authority of judicious and godly Divines, they are not for you, but Maſter W. I thinke I ſhall make it good by the time I ſhall come to the end of this worke, what you ſay.

That there may be as great a difference betweene the true ſenſe Mr. G.and meaning of the Scripture, and the judgement of moſt godly and learned Divines, as is betweene Heaven and Earth, and is in examples.

1. Is not to purpoſe, unleſſe what may be, be a truth ofAnſw. theſe Maſter W. meaneth.

2. It is evilly urged againſt M. W. when as your ſelfe uſe them to proppe your owne cauſe, with ſuch confidence.

3. It argueth weakneſſe on your ſide in the argument, and ſelfe conviction, when you urge Authors, you doe but pretend it and make a ſhew.

p. 94. In my weake judgement your wiſdome will be to give over that argument in this Name. I adviſe you to it, if it be not too late.

Whom Maſter W. meaneth by Divines you need not curiouſly to enquire, they are no ſecret packe, when he commeth to that part he nameth the men. Luther, Calvin, Muſculus, Bullinger, are of thoſe men, neither are they made by him.

When I found theſe mentioned by you in this cauſe, it put me in minde of the practiſe of Bertius that Prince of the Arminian band, he for faith in a proper ſenſe maketh the world beleeve that Luther, &c. were for his cauſe; but how vainely, Lubbertus ſheweth, who diſputing againſt that proper ſenſe, for that which is relative and figurative, proveth it out of the ſame and other Divines. Let it pleaſe you to heare him, it may be what he ſaith concerneth you, though he be dead, to this purpoſe in that booke doth he ſpeake unto you.See Gerhard de juſtificatione, p. 180. & p. 201.

iiIn co conſentiunt omnes Doctoresnoſtri, Lutherus, Melancthon, Brentius, Bucerus, Cytreus, Hemingius, Calvinus, Zuinglius, Oecolompadius, Gryneus, Bullingerus, Gnulterus, Simlerus, Beza, Daneus, Zanchius, Martyr, Muſculus, Ʋrſinus, Marloratus, luellus, Perkinſus.In that (the Relative ſenſe) agree all our Doctors, Luther, &c. kkTu & Arminius negatis, provoco igitur ad omnes Doctores noſtors an non aliquid novi in Eccleſiam noſtram introducere velitis, p. 12.Thou and Arminius deny it, I appeale to all our Doctors whether yee would not bring in ſome new thing into our Church. Where alſo he addeth. llJam peto abs te, ut unum, unum, unum, inquam, Doctorem reformatarum Eccleſiarum producas qui idem doceat.Now I intreat thee to produce one, one, I ſay one Doctor of the Reformed Churches that teacheth the ſame.

He giveth the teſtimonies of Pareus, Duneus, Ʋrſinus, &c. p. 15. 16. &c. The Palatinate Catechiſme, Chemnitius, Muſculus, Hemingius, Bucanus, p. 17. Heſuchius, Martir, Piſcator, p. 18. the Augustane and Belgike Confeſ. and Muſculus, p. 19. Bucer, p. 20. Melancthon, p. 53. 54. and 60. Zanchie, p. 62. and 76. Pezelius, p. 63. 64. Where alſo he repeateth his chalenge to the ſame purpoſe as before. mmExperire virestuas & vide an vel unum, unum, unum, inquam, locum qui hoc claris & perſpicuis verbis doceat adducere poſſis, p. 61.Try thy ſtrength and ſee whether thou canſt bring forth but one, one, I ſay one place which teacheth this in cleare and manifeſt words.

p. 10I will tranſcribe one paſſage more thence, and I intreat you conſider whether it doth not concerne you in the ſame cauſe. Sibrandus having examined that argument of authority ſaith: nnSi haec dicta quae a doctoribus a te allegatis exſcripſi expendes, indicabit tibitua conſcientia te hic vel ex inſcitia impegiſſe, & ho…um ſcripta nunquam legiſſe, aut ex malitia hanc ſententiam illis per calumniam attribuiſſe, ut imperitosatque incau…os …alleres, illiſque perſuederes ſummos illos vitos Lutherum, Malarcthonem, &c. appro…aſſe & ſoviſſe Serveli & Socini furores, quos vos calide & occulte in Eccleſiam introducere conammi. Rectius dixeritis vos, ſpretis doctoribusnoſtris, haec a Serveto & Socino didiciſſe. So Lubbertus.If thou wilt weigh theſe ſayings which I have written out of the Doctors you alleadge, thy conſcience will tell thee that here either thou haeſt ſtumbled out of ignorance, or out of malice by a calumny given this opinion to them that thou mighteſt deceive the unskilfull or negligent, and mighteſt perſwade them, thoſe chiefe men, Luther, &c. to have approved and fomented the mad conceits of Servetus and Socinus, which you ſlily and ſecretly indeavour to bring into the Church; you ſhould more truly ſay that you deſpiſing our Doct…s, learned theſe things of Servetus and Socinus.

Pareus ſaith, ooquae omnium Evangelicorum eſt ſen…en…ia, caſtig de juſtif. p. 368.Which is the judgement of all Proteſtant Divines. And thus before I am aware I am come to conſider whether the contrary expoſition and cauſe built on it are not Socinian and Arminian?

Sect. 4. And here I profeſſe it my judgement, that if the aſſimulation of you to Socinus, &c. be the inhumane practiſe of the tyrant Mezentius, it is not Maſter W. but your owne fault, for your faces anſwer faces, and hands hands, in this queſtion; and your ſelfe have coupled your ſelfe with theſe in this cauſe. Maſter Walker is but a diſcoverer of what he found, and in part is ſhewed to have beene in Bertius by Sybrandus, as in his judgement of your opinion, and the laſt paſſages cited out of him in this cauſe. The ſhame that is in it, is from your ſelfe, and ſorrow, which if you take not to yourſelfe, you may with ſorrow and ſhame alſo goe downe unto the grave (as you ſpeake.) If his Withs are greene (as you ſay) they will hold you the ſtronger, your Art in Withs did faile here, they are dry ones that ſnap aſunder, they doe ſo without fire. Your Knife truth, (but why doe you reprehend it in Maſter W. and offend in the ſame thing?) is errour at the leaſt, and will never deliver you, and though you be never ſo cunning (as you ſpeake) in ſtretching on Tenter-bookes, and doe your utmoſt, Daedalus ſis, liceat, mediocritatem excedis & ad ruinam tantum ingenioſus videberis.

p. 11When as you tell us what you could doe if you ſought revenge on the man, and of your confidence that you could make him hold up his hand to the Barre, to anſwer the crimes of Hereſie and Blaſphemy; none beleeve you but your owne Diſciples, I doe not; you doe but beg him to be erratique, the intelligent Reader will judge theſe ſtraines, militis glorioſi, and ſay, projecit ampullas, &c.

But (ſay you) what if Socinus and Arminius were of the ſame judgement with you in the interpretation of the Scriptures in queſtion?

I ſhould thinke that cauſe ſufficient to ſay, that erra…ique Arminius (to ſpeake ſoftly) and that heretique Socinus and your ſelfe in this opinion are coupled, face to face, and …ands to hands, that you are ad hoc gemelli, and what the earned in this have laid to their ſcore, lieth on yours alſo, …nd muſt ſtand there untill you be acquited.

Neither is it Popiſh Mountabankery for M. W. to put you …n their company, to number you amongſt them. Sibrandus …id ſo by the opinion before him, and it was your owne ault to be ſo indeed. Your being ſo is rather Popiſh Mounabankry in the judgement of learned men, as before out of Sibrandus, as after ſhall appeare through our diſcourſe; the weapons you uſe are for the moſt part meerely Po…iſh, you may be noted for it. We reade ſome taxed for …oing in the way of Caine; others for walking in the way of …alaam: ſo long as there is a reall agreement betweene you …nd them, a man may ſay it.

Daniel was not by choyce with the Lions, he was with …hem as Lillies amongſt Thornes, as the Lord Chriſt be…weene two Theeves, by Gods heavenly diſpoſition. You …ight have bin ſo with theſe. No man would have accoun…ed you a Papiſt had you been caſt amongſt Prieſts into the Gatehouſe, or a Separatiſt for being in the ſame room with them, or for ſuffering ſimply with them; Contraries may be in …he ſame ſubject, asfleſh and ſpirit in the godly. You are bre…hren in the ſame evill, the man that runneth may ſee you the ſame in judgement, and ſpeech, and opinion, in this Expoſition of Scripture, as it is ſhewed afterwards. It were not p. 12abſurd to ſay, Daniel & the Lions agree in animality, or the Lilly with the Thornes in being vegetative. It is not affirmed of you that you agree in all opinions, and it troubleth us it is in this, this, we doe judge too much.

But Maſter W. did not firſt prove it erronious before thoſe imputations. That I confeſſe ſhould be done. Did we not doe both in one work? hath he not done it ſince? was it not done to his hands by Divines of the reformed Churches? by our owne Divines in Print, as well as in Pulpit, moved thereunto by your Preaching? If none of theſe be, the imputation is juſt ſo long as there is a reall agreement.

Have you not read it theirs before this, nor that it is cenſured as erronious?

I think you have, and cannot be ignorantof this controverſie betweene us and Arminians, I, us and the Popiſh party. Have you not read their hatred againſt this Tenet of imputed righteouſneſſe? read Gerhard. de justif. p. 234.ppDoctrinae huic de imputatione juſtitiae Chriſti admodum iniqui ſunt Pontificii: Adeo ut appellent imputativam & imaginariam juſtitiam. Andradius in defenſ. …id. Trid. p. 477. vocat amentiſſimam inſaniam. Stapeltenus in Antid. Apoſt. p. 97. nominat ſpectrum cerebri Luthe. Cenſ. Colon. dicit, à ſeculo non eſſe auditam. Will Rainold in l. contra Whitak. p. 314. vocat mathematicum ſolifidianorum commentum, &c. Andradius hanc Mediatoris juſtitiam fide nobis imputatam blaſphemat eſſe commentitiam, adumbratam & fictitiam, ſic Chemnit. exam. p. 266. Oſius dicit novam & a ſeculo in auditam eſſe vocem juſtitiae imputativae. Item juſtitiam Chriſti nobis imputari, nec inCanonic is nec in Orthodoxorum libtis reperiri, p. 270. ib

Have you not read that the Obedience or Righteouſneſſe of Chriſt imputed to us by God apprehended by faith is the formall cauſe of our juſtification before God? Have you not read it affirmed and proved by ours againſt Papiſts?

I thinke I heard it from Doctor Davenants mouth, and I am ſure he hath left this on Record to be qqCommunis omnium noſtrorum ſententia, neque quod ad rem attinet quiſquam è noſtris aliter ſcripſit aut ſenſit, De juſti. hab. p. 312.The common opinion of all ours, neither for the ſubſtance hath any one written or thought otherwiſe. And doth he not prove the ſame? p. 363 &c. he doth by many arguments.

rrDiſp. 8. Dicimus imputationem juſtitiae Chriſti eſſe formam noſtrae juſtificationis ex parte Dei, adverſarii negativam in ſe ſuſcipientes, &c. p. 334.Johannes Crotius, We ſay the imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be the forme of our juſtification of Gods part, our adverſaries taking the negative part on them, &c.

p. 13It is manifeſt by the ſtate of the queſtion laid downe bySee Bellarm. de juſtiſ. l. 1. c. 17. p. alterum argumentum, p. 997. & l. 2. c. 9. 106…. See Dr. Dan. p. 370. 371. Joh. Croc. de juſtif, imput. p. 358. & 420. & 335. & 343. non relative Papanis D. Prid. p. 162. Papiſts and Proteſtants, and in this you agree with them. Have you not read faith to juſtifie againſt them in a Relative and figurative ſenſe? and that as it taketh in the object, the obedience and righteouſneſſe of Jeſus Chriſt? See Maſter Perkins, Maſter Wotton, def. p. 166. ſtating the queſtion betweene us and Romaniſts.

Did you never read Romaniſts in this controverſie of juſtification, urging, Rom. 4. with your interpretation of a proper ſenſe, againſt the Relative ſe…ſe which the Proteſtants urge? Doe you not agree for the proper ſenſe of faith againſt the Relative, and againſt the imputation of Chriſts righteouſeeſſe?

Untill you have anſwered all the arguments of the Proteſtant party, and ſo farre made good the Papiſts cauſe, you muſt be coupled with them. Sibrandus ſheweth what men ſaid of this opinion before, and I ſhall doe it often in this worke.

Did you never read in Feſtus Hommius this propoſition gathered out of Arminius, ssAd Hip. Fidem pro prie loquendo, ſeu foreign credere nos juſtificare, ſeu eſſe juſtitiā qua coram Deo conſiſtimus & juſtificamur. Dico ipſum fidei actum, id eſt foreign credere, imputari ad juſtitiam, id que proprio ſenſu, non metonymice, ib. Fides pro juſtitia habetur per gratioſam dignationem Dei. Declar. p. 65. Quaeſtio movetur de verbis Apoſtoli Pauli ad Rom. c. 4. hiſce vid. fides imputatur ad juſtitiam, utrum ea debeant proprie intelligi, ſicut ipſa fides tanquam actus, juxta mandatum evangelii praeſtitus imputetur coram Deo, in, ſive ad juſtitiam, idque ex gratia, cum non ſic ipſamet juſtitia Legis, an vero ſic intelligi debeant, ut juſtitia Chriſti per fidem apprehenſa nobis in juſtitiam imputetur, ideſt, figurate & improprie: ego priorem ſententiam ſequutus ſum in theſibus de juſtificatione ſub me diſputatis.Rom 4Faith, ſpeaking properly, or that act of beleeving to juſtifie us, or to be the righteouſneſſe by which we ſtand before God, and are juſtified. And, I ſay the very act of faith to be imputed unto righteouſneſſe, and that in a proper ſenſe, not metonymically, faith is accounted for righteouſneſſe by Gods gracious eſteeme.

A queſtion is moved of the words of the Apoſtle Paul, Rom. 4. faith is imputed for righteouſneſſe, whether they ought to be underſtood ſo as faith it ſelfe as an act performed according to the commandement of the Goſpell, be imputed before God in or unto righteouſneſſe, and that by grace, ſeeing it is not the very righteouſneſſe of the Law; or whether that ought ſo to be underſtood that the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt apprehended by faith be imputed to us for righteouſneſſe, that is, figuratively and improperly: I indeed followed the firſt opinion in the theſes of juſtification diſputed under me.

p. 14Where alſo you may finde other like paſſages taxed, and cited out of Vorſtius, Bertius, and Arnoldus himſelfe, who there p. 41. ſaith, ttArminius dicit fidem juſtificate ut actum, qui opus illud Dei eſt, Joh. 6 atque ipſum foreign credere in Chriſtum, nobis in juſtitiam imputati.John 6Arminius ſaith, faith juſtifieth as an act, which is that worke of God, John 6 and the very beleeving in Chriſt, to be imputed unto us for righteouſneſſe.

Doth not Peltius in his uuHarmoniam Remonſtrantium & Socinianorum.Harmony of Arminians and Socinians inſtance in this point, wwforeign credere nobis imputati p. 151. 152. 153the beleeving to be imputed to us out of both? and ſhew in the next Paragraph the agreement of both in this, xxFidem gratioſe pro juſtitia haberi, &c.Faith graciouſly to be accounted for righteouſneſſe?

Doe not both ſhew their agreement in this, yyJuſtitiam Chriſti non imputari in noſtram juſtitiam co…am Deo. Hom. p. 84. Pelt. p. 148. &c. through the whole three Paragraphs. P. 33. de juſtif.That the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is not imputed for our righteouſneſſe before God?

Doth not that worthy Scholler Maſter Pemble ſhew the Authors of this tenet, Servetus, Socinus, Oſterodus, Arminius? doth he not give it to Bertius, Vorſtius, Epiſcopius, and Bellarmine? You could not but reade this in Doctor Prideaux, for you cite him. zzLect. 5 de juſtif. p. 157. Aſſerimus nos, negant pontificii una cum Socinianis & Remonſtrantibus.We aſſert it, the Pontificians, together with Socinians and Arminians deny it, where he ſtateth the queſtion.

In Mr. Wotton I finde thoſe **Fidem formalem cauſam ſtatuentes, vel in ſolidum, ut Arminius aliique eum ſequnti tradiderunt, vel pro parte, quod Eccleſiae Romanae placuiſſe intelligo; de recon. p. 102That teach faith the formall cauſe, either wholly, as Arminius and his followers have delivered, or in part, which pleaſeth the Church of Rome.

aaJuſtitia imputata quam a Chriſto habemus juſtitiari nos cum ipſo contra Socinum ex aequo agnoſcimus. Gat. pars ult. p. 8. n. 36. p. 84. 4.We with you equally acknowledge our ſelves juſtified with imputed righteouſneſſe which we have in Chriſt againſt Socinus.

Let theſe paſſages out of the Cenſura of thoſe praiſed Theologs of Leiden by you, p. 13. be obſerved, and it will be ſeene whether they are not of the ſame judgement with you.

bbMoliuntur (Remonſtrantes) quod Pontificii & Sociniani, &c. Ita ut fide juſtificemur non ratione quadam Metonymica, qua fides ſit inſtrumentum, apprehendens juſtitiam illam quam Chriſtus nobis obedientiae ſuae merito acquiſivit, quod quidem fidei officium ha ctenus in omnibus Eccleſiis reformatis tanquam ei proprium agnitum fuit, p. 143.Arminians doe the ſame with the Papiſts, and Socinians, &c. ſo that we are not juſtified by faith, metonymically as p. 15an inſtrument apprebending that righteouſneſſe which Chriſt got for us by the merit of his obedience, which office of faith as proper to it, hath beene hitherto acknowledged in all the reformed Churches.

Paul ſaid, onelyonly faith to be imputed to righteouſneſſe, and Paulus dixit tantum fidem imputatam ad juſtitiam, at illi de ſuo addunt, ipſam, ut loquutionem figuratam in propriam transforment, & ſuam interpretationem aut potius commentum pro ipſis Paull verbis obtrudant, ne vid. fides accipiatur Metonimice aut correlative cum ſuo objecto, nempe juſtitia Chriſti fide apprehendenda, ſed pro fide ipſa in ſe quae apud Deum habetur pro juſtitia, &c. p. 146. Chriſti juſtitiam nobis imputari negat quidem Socin. iid. Epiſcopi.. us alibi id expreſſerit non eſſe juſtitiam Chriſti propri… id quod imputatur. Diſp. 12. theſ. 4. ib.they adde of their owne that, that they may transforme a figurative ſpeech into a proper one, and obtrude their interpretation, or rather errour, for Pauls words, leſt ſaith ſhould be taken by a metonymy or relatively, with its object, that is the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt apprehended by faith, but for faith it ſelfe, in it ſelfe, which is accounted for righteouſneſſe by God. Socinus truly denieth Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed to us. Epiſcopius elſewhere expreſſed it, that it was not the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt properly that which is imputed.

By this time I hope you may be abundantly ſatisfied in this, neither is Mr. W. the onelyonly cenſurer of your opinion, others have ſaid as much of Arminius for the ſame as he doth.

Sect. 5. But when as **Mr. Walker no Arminian.Mr. W. crieth out of Arminianiſme, is not he himſelf the Arminian? ſurely (ſay you) no two judgements ever jumped better together, the judgement of Arminius the Heretique, and Mr. W. the Erratique in the point of imputation.

Why, what ſaith Arminius? ccArminius in reſp. adart. impoſ. Juſtitiam Chriſti nobis imputari, & fieri noſtram gratuita aeſtimatione Dei. & arbitrari ſe id ipſum contineri verbis Apoſtoli, Cor. 5. Chriſtum fecit Deus pro nobis peccatum, ut nos eſſemus juſtitia Dei in illo.He ſaith the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to be imputed unto us and to be made ours in the gracious account of God, and that he ſuppoſed the ſame thing contained in the words of the Apoſtle. 2 Cor. 5. God made Chriſt ſinne for us that we might he the righteouſneſſe of God in him.

1. I anſwer, yet Mr. W. is no Arminian: Firſt, ſuppoſe he fully held the ſame with Arminius. It might not denominate Mr. W. ſeeing the tenet is his in common with all of the reformed Churches. Neither in that name, had it beene a fault in Mr. W. to hold the ſame Arminius did, how faulty ſoever Arminius elſe, it is the ſubſtance of your owne anſwer.

p. 162. Arminius himſelf in that agreeth not with himſelf, &c. Your ſelfe confeſſe him and ſome of his followers much more to expreſſe themſelves on the other hand, and to affirme the imputation of faith for righteouſneſſe, and not the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt.

3. You ſay ſometimes, if ſo, it is more then once, name another time if you can; you might have ſaid alwayes, elſe: So that there is farre more reaſon denomination ſhould be from what is ever his fault (being ſo indeed) you conſtantly ſpeaking with him, then that Mr. W. ſhould be ſo ſtiled from his once.

4. Againe, doe you not clip his words? and doth not Arminius ſay more then you report in that point? and would he have theſe two, Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed unto us, and faith to be imputed unto us for righteouſneſſe to be the ſame? and did he there approve that phraſe the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to be imputed to us for righteouſneſſe? which yet is Mr. Walkers, and of all Proteſtants. Thoſe praiſed Divines of Leiden, having repeated what you doe out of Arminius, truly obſerve and adde.ddSed non voluit idem eſſe Chriſti juſtitiam nobis imputari, & fidem nobis imputari ad juſtitiam. Imo nec phraſin illam volebat probare, juſtiam Chriſti nohis imputari ad juſtitiam. But he would not that Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed unto us, and faith to be imputed to righteouſneſſe, ſhould be the ſame. Neither would be prove that phraſe, Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed to righteouſneſſe. Both which Mr. W. would have done. So that Mr. W. and he jumpe not together. Nay Arminius faith (eeFieri nequit, Deus Chriſtum ejuſque juſtitiam nobis imputer ad juſtitiam. Epiſt. ad Hippol. Juſtitiam Chriſti imputari ad juſtitiam, mihi non probari dixi. Quicquid imtatur ad juſtitiam, vel in juſtiti…, vel pro juſtitia, idipſum non eſt juſtitia ſtricte & rigide ſumpta: at Chriſti juſtitia quam ille praeſtitit, eſt ipſiſſima juſtitia ſtricte & rigide ſumpta: ergo non imputatur ad juſtitiam. It cannot be that God ſhould impute unto us Chriſts righteouſneſſe. He profeſſeth he followed the contrary in his Theſes, in his Declaration, and ad art. 31. he ſaith, I ſaid I approve not the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to be imputed to us, whatſoever is imputed to righteouſneſſe, &c. that is not righteouſneſſe ſtrictly and rigidly taken: but Chriſts righteouſneſſe which he performed is righteouſneſſe it ſelfe ſtraitly and rigidly taken: therefore it is not imputed unto righteouſneſſe.

For my part I conceive that by his imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe, he meant not that, in it ſelfe, but in its effect, faith, the imputation whereof is the effect of Chriſts righteouſneſſe. Forſooth Chriſt by his righteouſneſſe p. 17merited that faith ſhould be gratiouſly accepted in the place of righteouſneſſe. So he conſtantly, and in the ſame ſenſe anſwering to the queſtion of a proper or figurative ſenſe, he denieth the latter and aſſerteth the former, with an, I plainely thinke ſo, wherein he agreethIta plane ſentio. not with Mr. W. but your ſelfe; you are the men that jumpe together. Theſe are a ſufficient defence of him, they ſhew he doth not (as you charge him) directly maintaine what Mr. W. doth; there is palpable difference. Mr. W. ſaith that the right teouſneſſe of Chriſt is imputed to righteouſneſſe. Shew me the ſame in Arminius, then I will yeeld they jumpe, till then you come ſhort of your undertaking.

Sect. 6. But Mr. W. in this, Fairy-like, leaves a chanleging to the Arminians, better favoured then their owne, giving them Mr. G.an opinion rather, then relating theirs, to make the Arminian tenet and yours to meete: forſooth the Arminians meane by faith not as Mr. Walker ſaith that grace onelyonly conſiſting in confidence and aſſent, but an univerſall obedience to the will of God in all thoſe duties which be requires of men in the Goſpel.

Anſw. For the practiſe of Fairies, I never read of it, and if it be ſo I ſhall thinke better of them then I did. Thoſe that tell tales of them, ſeeme to ſay otherwiſe, and I never heard of a well-favoured changeling before. But how prove you that to be the Arminian tenet? you anſwer from thoſe Divines of Leiden, c. 10. Who challenge them for affirming the word faith to be ſometimes taken in Scripture ggPro tota & univerſa illa) voluntate Dei.for that whole and univerſall will of God, which before they ſaid God would have performed by us, in which ſenſe they would be taken and underſtood in this Chapter. 2. They are charged with Pontifician friendſhip, hhIn eo quod opera inter juſtificationis cauſas numerant, aequali cū fide jure.In that they number works amongſt the cauſes of Juſtification with faith by an equall right. And after to have drawn this their notion of faith out of the Socianin lakes. iiMemin iſſe debemus fidem hanc ſc. qua juſtificamur, Dei obedientiam eſſe.We muſt remember this faith by which we are juſtified to be obedience of God. And after, in Chriſtum credere, nihil aliud eſt, quam Deo ad ipſius Chriſti normam & prae ſcriptum obedientem ſe praebere: and after that by faith which they hold to be imputed for righteouſneſſe, they underſtand and meane fidem ipſam in p. 18ſe quae apud Deum habeatur pro juſtitia, quatenus fidei nomine comprehenditur p…nitentia, reſipiſ…entia & in univerſum obedientia hominis Chriſtiani.

Anſw. To anſwer. Firſt, were there a difference in Explication, yet there is agreement in the ſame thing faith; neither can you blame men for diſagreeing in Explication who are therein notorious for agreement with Bellarmine, and diſagreement with reformed Divines.

2. Though I might let them ſtand or fall by their Explication. Yet I muſt doe them right. Thoſe Divines you name ſay that they involve all in ambiguities, as their manner is, ſo as one cannot eaſily attaine their mind; ſo that one may miſtake them.

They doe not peremptorily as you, but doubtfully as inquirers affirme. kkId tamen videntur velle, & videntur cum Sccino accipere, p. 142.Yet they ſeeme to meane that, and they ſeeme to take it with Socinus.

Thus the Remonſtrants in their Apologie anſwer thoſe Divines, and obſerve the ſame. llIſtud aperte profiteri non audeant: ubique enim ſuum iſtud videtur ingeminan, & concluſio tandem eſt cos propio…s S… … quam Eccleſi… Reformantae videri poſſe: quae loquutio quam ſit, circumſpecta & ſolcita, quis non vider?They dare not plainely profeſſe it, for they every where double that there, they ſeeme, and conclude at length they may ſceme nearer to Socinus then the reformed Church; and much more to that purpoſe, which you would not or did not ſee.

To that queſtion, mmAn Remonſtrantes …dei formam eſſentialem faciant obedientiam & quidem operum lega'ium atqu… imprimis Evangelicorum.Whether the Remonſtrants make the eſſentiall forme of faith to be obedience, that of the workes of the Law, and eſpecially of the Goſpel; they ſeeme to cleare the matter whilſt they anſwer. nnHaec prima manifeſta ca'umnia eſt. Auſquam id a … in confeſſione ecrum factum prohabitur. C…ntrarium …atet in termiais Nam obedienr am no vamſive obedientiam proprièdictam, quae in Scholis ita vocatur, ſ…mp…r & ubique diſtingunt à fident effectum à cauſa ſua, à qua …manat ut rivus à lcnte, ut … à matre, contra quam So…inus faciendum eſſe ſentit, p. 110.2.This is a manifeſt calumnie, this will not be proved done in their Confeſſion, the contrary appe ireth in termes, for they alwayes diſtinguiſh obedience properly called from faith, as the effect from the cauſe from which it fla…eth, as a River from the Fountaine, as the Child from the Mother, where is Socinus thinketh otherwiſe. Arminius himſelfe diſclaimeth it, ad artic. 5.

p. 19And when as they joyne workes with faith in inſtification, they ſay it is but a Grammatical or Logicall controverſie, and that the confeſſions of all reformed Churches acknowledge faith to be ooVivam.living, not ppMortuam, fidem quaeconjuncta ſibi habet bona opera, imo quae ſine bonis operibus nec eſt, nec eſſe poteſt, eſſe fidem illam veram juſtificantem, ut vocant, quae iſta proprietate ab hiſtorica & temporanea ac miraculorum fide ut ajunt, diſtinguitur.dead, faith which bath joyned with it good workes, yea, which neither is without good workes, nor can be, to be that true juſtifying faith as they call it, which by that property is diſtinguiſhed from hiſtoricall faith, temporary, and that of miracles, as they ſpeake. Where alſo they urge out of thoſe Cenſores, p. 11. qqDiſerte obedientiam operum aeceſſatiam eſſe aſſerunt ad juſtificationem, non quidem neceſſitate efficientiae, ſed praeſentiae.They plainely aſſert obedience of workes neceſſary to juſtification, not indeed with neceſſity of efficiencie, but of preſence.

So that you ſay they ſay it, and your witneſſes that they ſeeme, and themſelves deny it. Judge now whether Mr. W. giveth them a better opinion then they have to make you meet with them.

If they did ſo, Mr. Walker telleth you that they are more tolerable herein then your ſelves: you and Maſter Wotton: for it is more agreeable to juſtice and reaſon that God ſhould count all graces of renovation for righteouſneſſe rather then faith alone in the proper ſenſe, which is but one grace, and ſo Mr. Forbs alſo.

Finally, whoſoever ſhall reade that Chapter, and the anſwer, and compare ſome paſſages with your opinions, will ſee you meete indeed; and that you deſire not leave to diſſent from thoſe learned men for nothing. I could finde much obſervable. But I paſſe to what you relate out of Doctor Prideaux concerning Vorſtius. Who ſaith:

He holds rrFides imputatur immediate & formaliter, & meritū Chriſti mediate & effective.Faith is imputed immediately and formally, and the merit of Chriſt mediately and in effect.

What is this but your owne opinion? You ſay faith is imputed immediately, and the merit of Chriſt but mediately, if at all. Roundly, you, in its effect, that is faith, which is imputed.

But there he addeth. ssPer fidem ulterius oſtendit ſe obſervationem Chriſtianiſmi ſolumodo intelligere, quia credere idem eſt quod obſervare Chriſti praecepta, nec diſpuduit tandem concludere fidem juſtificantem illam, eſſe illam inhaeientem juſtitiam quam Papiſtae urgent.By faith be ſarther ſheweth be only underſt andeth obſervation of Chriſtianiſme, becauſe to beleeve is to keepe Chriſts precepts, neither was be aſhamed at length p. 20to conclude that juſtiſying faith, to be that inherent righteouſneſſe which the Papiſts urge.

This is given unto him alone by the Doctor, and with a ttUlterius.further; belike, in this he went beyond Arminius. So Arminius himſelfe, and ſo the Remonstrants as before.

And I pray you is not faith obedience to Chriſts commandement and Gods worke? (as you both love to ſpeak, in oppoſition to the morall Law, out of the 1 John 3. and Job. 6. of which after.) And is not faith that juſtifieth in a proper ſenſe the inherent righteouſneſſe the Papiſts urge in this cauſe by the ſame text? Rom. 4. The difference is.

Papiſts make it a part, the beginning, and give it to all the graces, you to faith alone, both are for a proper ſenſe againſt the Relative one.

Ours call it groſſe impiety to place that righteouſneſſe, whereby we are juſtified in faith, in whole or in part, Forbs 78. And of faith properly taken, and without relation he ſaith, it is more pernitious then that of the Papiſts, p. 80. Ne… dum diſpuduit.

But, a little before he ſaith out of Corvinus, that Arminius was not pleaſed that faith ſhould be called the inſtrumentall cauſe of juſtification, which is againſt what you teach.

It is true he ſaith not ſo; you do, and yet that which the Doctor there ſpeaketh to Arminius, appertaineth to and toucheth you both. uuBona igitur ſide dic Armini pro tuo acumine, qua ratione fides juſtificat? foreign credere, hoc eſt actum fidei (dicit Arminius) imputa…i in juſtitiam, id que proprio ſenſu non Me…onymi…, quatenus objectum apprehendi…. Epiſt. ad Hippol.Tell us in truth Arminius out of thine acute judgement how faith juſtifieth? The act of faith (ſaith Arminius) is imputed for righteouſneſſe, in a proper ſenſe, not metonymically as it apprehendeth the object. If not as an inſtrument, How? So the Doctor anſwereth himſelfe. So he denying, ſo you calling it an inſtrument, both teach the foreign credere in a proper ſenſe imputed, for righteouſnes; both deny the figurative ſenſe; you that teach it an inſtrument, deny juſtification by it as an inſtrument receiving and applying Chriſts righteouſneſſ… to juſtification; The agreement being ſuch, it had beene wiſdome to conceale this diſagreement.

p. 21You ſay he citeth Bertius, another Prince of the Arminian band; that he acknowledgeth wwHanc ſententiam meritum Chriſti exclude…e.this opinion to exclude the merit of Chriſt, which is contrary to what you have taught and profeſſe.

If he be a Prince of the Arminian band; you are no common Souldier, but ad ho…, a Prince, as he, above him, a King. That he derogateth not from Chriſt he ſheweth, (with what agreement to himſelfe let him looke to that) xxFides iſta meritum Chriſti reſpicit, atque hoc modo verum eſt quod dicitur, fides juſtifica …non per ſe, ſed correlative, quatenus nimi…um apprehendit Chriſtium ejuſque juſtitiam, Sib. Ep. p. 144.That faith reſpecteth the merit of Chriſt, and thus it is true which is ſaid, faith juſtifieth not by it ſelfe, but relatively as it apprehendeth Christ and his righteouſneſſe: he is nearer the Proteſtant tenet in this then you, and if deſcent will make it, he leaveth you to be a King, you are lower or higher in that band. That faith in a proper ſenſe is imputed, &c. he ſaith, and therein is but one of the Princes with you.

When as the Doctor ſaith yyHanc ſententiam.this opinion; he hath no relation to Ʋorſtius, or that his opinion, of which before, of faith ſo taken. When as he ſaith Arminius his opinion to exclude Chriſts merit, it concerneth you. Sibrandus ſaid to Bertius. zzHaec tua theſis eſt cauſa qua…e ſtatuam vobis (…i tamen vobis conſtare vultis) neceſſario tandem eo de veniendum eſſe ut cum Serveto, Socino, Oſterodo, meritū ſive ſatisfactionem Chriſti pro nobis ſactam omnino tollatis dicatiſ que ne que Chriſtum nobis juſtitiam peprriſſe. Ne… nos ipſius juſtitia nobis imputata juſtitiari, p. 85. Talia enim ponit fundamenta per quae meritum Chriſti neceſſario eve…titur, ib.This your theſis is the cauſe why I conclude, if you will be like your ſelves, at length neceſſarily to come to it, that with Socinus, Servetus, Oſterodus, you altogether take away the merit or ſatisfaction of Chriſt made for us, and ſay that Chriſt neither brought righteouſneſſe for us; (when you with Arminius preach yee are not juſtified by any righteouſneſſe at all) Neither that we be juſtified by his righteouſneſſe. Bertius ſaid not the latter; Arminius and Socinus, &c. did, Bertius muſt come to it. Bertius ſaith it of Arminius. For he layeth ſuch foundations by which the merit of Chriſt is neceſſarily overthrowne. For either it muſt be by faith in a proper ſenſe imputed and Chriſts righteouſneſſe imputed, or one of them: If it be by faith in a proper ſenſe as in your Doctrine, juſtification by Chriſts righteouſneſſe imputed, is excluded; and it is your Doctrine as this latter excludeth the proper ſenſe of Faith. Indeed at beſt the merit of Chriſt, as a remoter thing, muſt be eſtabliſhed, meriting that faith ſhould be imputed, which is Socinianiſme p. 22as Sibrandus ſheweth out of Oſterodus, p. 10. & p. 97. and that which was taxed by the Doctor in Vorſtius, but even now; ſee your 15. p.

As for your charge on Mr. W. that he by his opinionMr. G. of imputation of the active obedience of Chriſts righteouſneſſe doth more trench on the merit of Chriſts righteouſneſſe then your opinion, it is arreſting, arraigning, and finding full of guilt.

Anſw. You ſhew not at whoſe ſuite, nor at what barre, nor in what. Neither can I divine which way it will appeare, leſſe you be the accuſer, the witneſſe, and the Judge in that Aſſiſe; open it when you pleaſe. Looke at home, you deny it to Chriſts active obedience; as being Chriſts☞ debt, and Chriſts paſſive obedience alſo, when as thereunto you doe call his active obedience as an eſſentiall requiſite, though not without contradiction. Seeing nihil dat quod non habet, that which meriteth not, being debt, cannot make his ſufferings to be ſo, of this in the anſwer to your treatiſes.

The other things which you ſay you could improve, p. 16. I paſſe and leave to the Readers to judge whether there be not Arminian bloud in your tenent apparent, which is that the foreign credere of Abraham in a proper ſenſe is imputed denying the imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe to juſtification: theſe are yours, they are of Arminius and Arminians, as before. In the words of Sibrandus I will adde. bbHoc ipſum ante …e docuit Servetus, ſcribit enima. libro de lege & Evang. ut eſt apud Calvinum in refutatione errorum Michaelis Serveti, p. 903. ſuum credere reputatum fuiſſe Abrahae ad juſtitiam.This ſame thing Servetus taught before thee, for he writeth, his faith was reputed to Abraham for righteouſneſſe. ccSed & Socinus hoc ipſum docet de Chriſto ſervatore, p. 388. ejus verba haec ſunt, cum fides noſtra nobisad juſtitiam imputatur, ſenſus eſt, fidem noſtram pro juſtitia habe…i. Cum juſtitiam Abrahae exemplo imputari docet, &c. ſed ideo (nos juſtos coram Deo) quia Deo viſum ſit fidem noſtram juſtitiae loco nobis ducere.And Socinus teacheth the ſame. When our faith is imputed to us for righteouſneſſe; the ſenſe is, our faith is accounted for righteouſneſſe, when he teacheth righteouſneſſe to be imputed to us by Abrahams example. But therefore, becauſe it ſeemed good to God to account our faith to us in the place of righteouſneſſe.

p. 23Socinus in one place writeth ddNe ſyllaba quidem in ſacris monumentis exter, de Chriſti juſtitia nobis imputanda. Utapud Sibrand in cenſuris p. 463 & credidit Abraham Deo, & ob eam cauſam ab ipſo juſtus habitus ſuit, p. 463.There is not a ſyllable in the Scripture of Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed to us. Abraham beleeved God, and for that cauſe was he accounted juſt of him.

And when as you detract not juſtification from the bloud and merit of Chriſt, but give it the bloud and death of Chriſt, what doe you more then Oſterodus? theſe are his words. eeQuatenus ſanguis ille & mo…s in nobis efficiunt eas res propter quas Deus nos juſtificat, nempe fidem. Ex his quilibet videre poreſt t… & Arminium … dem docere de fide juſ…ican…e quod an…e vo… Serven…, S…cinus, Oſtero…us, de illa ſcript… l…eris & viva voce docuerunt.So farre as that bloud and death worke in us thoſe things for which God doth juſtifie us, forſooth faith. I will conclude in Sibrandus words to Bertius. Out of which every one may ſee thee and Arminius to teach the ſame of juſtifying faith, which before you, Servetus, Socinus, Oſterodus, wrote and p…ea…hed. And if you deſire to ſee farther agreement, ſee it in Peltius his Harmony de juſtif. par. 3. & 4.

Here is Arminian bloud, neither have you proved the ſame in Mr. W. nor can you, ſift and examine as throughly as you will. When as you ſay Arminian faith imputed includeth obedience to the Law of God. You heare they diſtinguiſh it from workes, and you know, it is called by them and your ſelfe, the worke of God, the commandement and condition of the Goſpel Mr. Ws. faith in the Relative ſenſe indeed includeth the perfect obedience of Jeſus Chriſt to Gods Law.

You ſay Arminian faith is performed in their owne perſon. So is yours: you ſay it was Abrahams faith in a proper ſenſe as before. Mr. W. teacheth the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt applied by faith ſo to conſtitute us juſt as if we had performed it in our owne perſons.

You ſay the Arminia… faith excludeth Chriſts merit from juſtification. So doth yours as before; as that which is immediate, as that with which imputed we are juſt. You cannot ſay Mr. W. faith doth little leſſe; perfect righteouſneſſe is that which faith applieth in Mr. W. Doctrine, by which we are juſtified before the Lord.

When as you aske, if Chriſts righteouſneſſe and obedience be imputed to righteouſneſſe, what need there is of any ſatisfaction or atonement by bloud.

p. 24Mr. W. will anſwer you, both are debt, full ſatisfaction conſiſteth in them both.

Mr. J. Goodw. will tell you it is an hainous crime to divide Chriſts righteouſneſſe: and that his active obedience infloweth, and is in a ſort ſatisfaction.

When as you tell us you have wrung the beſt weapons out of the adverſaries hands, you are but Miles glorioſus, (to continue your Metaphor) It was ſine hoſte, tua te jact as in aula. And me thinkes thoſe that teach this doctrine ſhould not be profeſſed enemies to you. The Church of England teacheth the ſame in her Homily, and the Articles of Ireland. As great and as godly as the lively faith is (ſaith the Homily) yet it putteth us from it ſelfe, and remitteth, or appointeth us unto Chriſt for to have onelyonly by him remiſſion of our ſinnes or juſtification, 3. part. hom. ſalv. p. 18. 19.

When as the world was not able to pay, &c. It pleaſed God to prepare for us the moſt pretious Jewels of Chriſts body and bloud, whereby the ranſome might be fully paid, the Law fulfilled, and his juſtice fully ſatisfied, p. 15. So that Chriſt is now the righteouſneſſe of all them that truly beleeve in him, he for them paid the ranſome by his death, he for them fulfilled the Law in his life, ſo that now in him and by him every true Chriſtian man may he called a fulfiller of the Law; for as much as that which their infirmity lacked, Chriſts juſtice hath ſupplied, &c. p. 15. Is this tenet your adverſary? It is the tenet of your Mother: It is not to know or acknowledge your Mother; to be her adverſary, and an adverſary to your ſelfe.

And though you thus part with Arminianiſme now in words; you are found not to doe ſo indeed, and ſhall be ſhewed to doe ſo, to the end.

For the other grand hereſies Socinus holdeth which you doe not; I know not that Mr. Walker laieth them to your charge directly. It is good you ſhould looke to conſequences. Sibrandus gave Bertius good cautions, p. 85. 87. 122. &c. In the imputation of faith in a proper ſenſe, and denying the imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe you agree, as Sibrandus to Bertius, of which before; theſe he called blaſphemous hereſies.

p. 25Sect. 7. Here (paſſing many vaine words, impertinencesP. 21. …nd froth) you ſay Mr. W. granteth p. 7. that Abraham re…ing on the Lord by firme faith for the performance of the …omiſes made unto him, the Lord counted it to him for righ…eouſneſſe; and after, even faith was rockoned to him for …ighteouſneſſe; and after p. 11. whereby faith (he ſaith) he …eaneth the holy ſpirituall faith and beliefe, which is before …ewed to have beene in Abraham, and which is proper to the …ect and regenerate. What of this? It agreeth not with his …inion, it is not his tropicall or metonymicall faith, it is …aith in the proper nature and direct ſignification; and ſo …hat have we to doe with the diſcourſe following? he holds the …ame interpretation of faith with you.

Softly Sir, his interpretation is out of your mouth …opicall, in this I ſee no agreement with you, nor diſagree…ent with himſelfe.

By faith in Chriſt Abraham reſted on God for perfor…ance of the promiſes, the word to him was, In thy ſeed …all all the Nations of the earth be bleſſed, in him all promiſes …re Yea and Amen. He muſt reſt by faith in Chriſt, on God for them; indeed in him he was Abrahams God, to …im the promiſe is made firſt, in him, to us, if yee bee Chriſts, yee be Abrahams ſeed and heirs, &c. Gal. 3. ult.

This faith in Chriſt he ſaith was reckoned to him for …ighteouſneſſe, and the faith which apprehendeth and ap…lieth the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is proper to the elect …nd regenerate, and is an holy ſpirituall faith and beliefe: …ere is no oppoſition to himſelfe, or agreement with you, …ou doe but flatter your ſelfe, and deceive your Reader.

But faith ſo often ſaid to be imputed for righteouſneſſe, P. 22.Mr. W. cannot underſtand a tropicall or metonymicall faith, …iz. the righteouſneſſe is evident (ſay you) becauſe immediately after, p. 11. interpreting the word righteouſneſſe, he ſaith, by it is meant the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, &c. ſo that if by faith we underſtand the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, and by righteouſneſſe, the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt too, we muſt make the Apoſtles meaning to runne thus. The righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is imputed to a beleever for the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, an hyper abſurdity.

p. 26The Remonſtrants Apol. p. 113. giving a reaſon why they uſed not the phraſe (ffChriſti juſtitiam nobis imputari.) Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be imputed to us, give this reaſon, (ggNeceſſe eſt juſtitiam Chriſti dicamus nobis imputari propter juſtitiam Chriſti, quae loquutio non modo foreign ſed manifeſtam in ſeſe habet abſurditatem.) We muſt neceſſarily ſ… that the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is imputed to us for the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, which is not proper but abſurd. It was borrowed, Diſcipulum t… facile agn…ſc….

1. Faith in a tropicall ſenſe is that which Mr. Walke teacheth with all the Reformed Churches.

2. The explication of Mr. W. is of righteouſneſſe imputed, which he ſaith is that which faith laieth hold of, no… thoſe words, to righteouſneſſe, which you might obſerve to have a diſtinct interpretation given it by Mr. W. His words are by imputing and accounting that faith for righteouſneſſe to Abraham, and every one of his faithfull ſeede is be… mea… Gods ſetting of Chriſts righteouſneſſe on the ſcore and putting it on the account of the beleever, his judging them perfectly rightneſſe.

By that phraſe for righteouſneſſe, is not meant the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt as you would faſten on him, no… perfect conformity to the Law, as in the firſt Covenant, perſonall righteouſneſſe of Abraham, but a righteouſneſſe by which the beleever is as if be had perfectly performed the Law in his perſon, in ſuch a ſtate, and had never ſinned, by which the beleever is juſt in the ſight of God.

A beleever is not ſo by faith in a proper ſenſe, that is not perfect righteouſneſſe, and cannot make a man ſo▪ But in a relative ſenſe as it applieth the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt active and paſſive, by which imputed, ſet on our ſcore, it is that we are righteous, and ſo accounted.

Sect. 8. But let us come to the phraſe of imputing, orMr. G. …ting, and here Mr. W…. firſt fault is. He makes a ſuppoſ…tion, that to impute and account are univerſally termini aequipollentes, to runne alwayes hand in hand.

Anſw. 1. He hath no ſuch words in that place, there i… neither univerſally, nor alwayes.

2. If he did ſo, there is no …iſpri…ion from his owne Scripture inſtances,

p. 27It had not beene good Engliſh (you ſay) I and my ſonne Solomon ſhall be imputed offenders, and yet you muſt acknowledge to have offence imputed is to be accounted an offender.

Your ſelfe confeſſe in ſome caſes and fals of ſpeech, they may be of indifferent uſe and ſignification, and in the caſe in hand to be expreſſions of good propriety, and that there is not …uch difference betweene them, except a man hath a minde to …avill and wrang…e about words. The man then that quar…els theſe words muſt be conceived ex confeſſis, to have a minde to cavill and wrangle. Who then laieth on tongue …nd multiplieth diſcourſe? it is your phraſe.

But this is his great fault indeed, namely, the deſcription …e layeth downe of the ſenſe of the phraſe, imputing a thing …o one, which deſcription is this. The phraſe of imputing or counting a thing to one ſignifieth both in the Old and New Teſtament, an act of judgement and eſtimation by which a …hing is judged and eſteemed, reckoned and accounted to be as it is indeed.

Theſe are his words, but he calleth it not a deſcription once, as you doe twice, and ſo uſually afterwards: forſooth, that you may examine it by the rules of a right definition, or deſcription, as in your 2. exception, where you trie it by that Law.

But the bare giving of the ſenſe of a word cannot be …ermed a deſcription, neither is every deſcription to be …ried by the rules of a true definition, much leſſe every explication of the ſenſe of a word; paſſe that, What ſay you to it?

Capiat qui. potis eſt …aper…, and confeſſe his eloquence to Mr. G.paſſe your intelligence.

Anſw. Which ſurely is a wonder, when as he ſeemeth to explaine his ſpeech to a common capacity. Doe not you know what it is to judge a thing to be as it is indeed? I would not have ſaid ſo of you, his words following ſpell them more plainely when as he addeth, then it is juſt and according to truth. The judgement is ſo not when it is judged as it is not, but as it is, for that is unjuſt judgement p. 28and not according to truth. Hee addeth, Gods thoughts are alwayes juſt, and his judgement is according to truth, Rom. 2. 2. therefore a juſt imputing and counting is here meant, ſaith Mr. for God doth account of all perſons and things, as they are. He giveth inſtance of an unjuſt account and falſe imputing, 1 King. 1. 21. and of true counting, Neb. 13. 13. and Levit. 17. 4. and Pſal. 22. 30. and doe you not yet underſtand it?

Why doe you diſpute againſt it, and condemne Mr. W. for it in the entrance, ſaying, The man is no where liker himſelfe then in the deſcription? Surely you can never juſtly judge him or his cauſe in diſpute, if ſo be that you doe not underſtand him: you might have ſpared your 1. 2. 4. and laſt onſet againſt what is ſaid, and firſt have required Mr. W. explanation, that you might underſtand him.

Theſe are but words; the fault is in your will: he putteth you to it, as we ſhall ſee in examination of your oppoſition.

You ſay, I ſhould have thought that Gods imputing faith for righteouſneſſe (take faith in what ſenſe you will) had beene an act of grace and mercy in God, and not an act of judgement.

1. By an act of judgement in Mr. W. ſenſe you ſhould underſtand, an act of underſtanding.

2. But I ſuppoſe you take it for an act of juſtice, for judgement the exerciſe thereof; and if, why may there not be in juſtification a concurrence both of mercy and judgement? and both not be exerciſed in making men juſt? I ſhould have thought there is ſweete agreement betweene them. I have read in one of our Homilies, that God in our redemption and juſtification, with endleſſe mercy joyned his moſt upright and perfect juſtice. Homil. ſalv. 1. part. That Gods mercy did not deliver us without a juſt ranſome, p. 14. that when as it lay not in us to doe, he provided a ranſome for us, that was the moſt precious body and bloud of his owne moſt deare—who beſides his ranſome ſulled the Law for us perfectly, ib. that in this the juſtice of God p. 29and his mercy did imbrace together, ib. ſo that in our juſtification is not onelyonly Gods mercy and grace, but alſo his juſtice, which the Law calleth the juſtice of God, and it conſiſteth in paying our ranſome, and fulfilling the Law. The grace of God ſhutteth not out the juſtice of God in our juſtification, but onelyonly ſhutteth out the juſtice of, man, that is to ſay, the juſtice of our workes, as to be meanes of deſerving our juſtification, ib.

I have read of Juſtification freely by grace through the redemption which is in Jeſus Chriſt, whom God hath ſet forth a propiriation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteouſneſſe—in it God is juſt and the juſtifier, Rom. 3.

When as faith is taken in a relative ſenſe with its object, Chriſt and his perfect righteouſneſſe, and is imputed to Abraham for righteouſneſſe, Abraham is made juſt perfectly, God judgeth juſtly in accounting him ſo, in pronouncing him ſo, with this he may ſtand in judgement and be as if he had never ſinned, as if he had perfectly fulfilled the Law in his owne perſon.

It is not ſo where faith is taken in a proper ſenſe, neither is that accounting faith for righteouſneſſe a righteous judgement; or that which is in truth. Faith thus taken is a worke of the Law, (ſome thinke) a part of inherent righteouſneſſe, as charity, an imperfect grace, it cannot ſtand in judgement.

Faith in the relative ſenſe eſtabliſheth the Law (as you ſhall ſee) bringeth in what it requireth, and ſo juſtifieth, and ſo juſtification is a worke of mercy and judgement.

I profeſſe I could never indure what I read in Mr. Wotton and Socinians, thathhPoena & venia ſunt adverſa. puniſhment and pardon are adverſe, in ſome, nay in it ſelfe it is joyned with deniall of the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and a deſtroyer of Gods juſtice. Looke you to it.

Juſtice ſhineth through mercy, Mr. Forbs, p. 92. and this Perkinſi verba Wot. in Biſh. p. 174.of faith in a proper ſenſe is againſt the juſtice of God, (as he) When as we are before Gods judgement-ſeate to be judged in the rigour of juſtice; then we muſt bring ſome thing that may countervaile the juſtice of God, not onelyonly acceptation in mercy, but alſo approbation in juſtice. iiJuſtos eſſ… oportet ſi ſimus ei accepti, Cal. in Rom. 5. 1….Rom 5:1We muſt be juſt if we p. 30be accepted of him. kkSimul qualis ſi… Chriſti juſtitia interpretatur, tum vocat obedientiam, ubi nos abnotemus quaeſo, quid nos afferre inconſpectū Dei opotteat ſi velimus operibus juſtificari, nempe legis juſtiti am numeris omnibus abſolutam, Calv. in Rom. 5 19. Sed quia offerimus per…ectam Legis gratuito donat, Calv. in Gal. 3. 6.Rom 5:19Gal 3:6The Apoſtle ſheweth what Chriſt righteouſneſſe is when be calleth it obedience. Obſerve what we muſt bring into Gods ſight if we will be juſtified by works the righteouſneſſe of the Law compleate. But becauſe we bring th perfect obedience of the Law—becauſe we have it not in us, God freely giveth it. llNon aſia juſtitia admittitur in Coelis, quam integra Legis obſervatio, Calv. inſtit. 1. 3. c. 14. p. 13.No other righteouſneſſe is admitted in Heaven then the intire obſervation of the Law. mmJuſtitiam Dei quae apud Dei tribunal approbabitur, Calv. in Gal. 3 9Gal 3:9The righteouſneſſe of God which ſhall be approved at Gods Tribunall. nnNon vivimus coram Deo ſine juſtitia, Calv. in Rom. 1. 17.Rom 1:17We live not before God without righteouſneſſe. ooPrimam juſtification is noſtrae cauſam non ad hominum judicium referri, cum ad Dei tribunal ubi nulla juſtitia cenſetur perfecta abſolutaque Legis obedientia, Calv. ib.At Gods Tribunall no righteouſneſſe is ſo judged but perfect and abſolute obedience of the Law. ppAt juſtitiam quae examen rigoremque judicii ſuſtine at nobis omnibus, integram perfectamque neceſſe eſt, Aret. in Phil. 3. 9.Phil 3:9We have need of righteouſneſſe which will beare the examen and rigour of juſtice intire and perfect.

2. When as you tell us, p. 24. every Act of judging and eſteening a thing to be as it is, is not an imputing or accounting it to another, which yet muſt be if it be rightly defined by the rules of a definition.

The Anſwer is Mr. W. did not define it, he ſaid not it is, but it ſignifieth, which is not the manner of him that defineth. Neither hath he a word of imputing it to another, upon which what you tell us of the Sun and Moone, &c. are built, they are Caſtles in the aire.

3. You ſay, when God imputes either my faith to me, or Chriſts righteouſneſſe (the one being the Scripture phraſe, the other Mr. Ws.) for my righteouſneſſe; he doth not judge any thing to be as indeed it is: for neither is my faith, nor the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt indeed my righteouſneſſe, but my faith in that grace which God hath conſecrated and ordained to bring me into communion and fellowſhip of that righteouſneſſe that is of that Juſtification, &c. which Chriſt by the merit of his life p. 31and death hath purchaſed for m… and for all thoſe that beleeve in him. Therefore the phraſe of imputing doth not ſignifie an act of judgement, &c. by which a man judgeth a thing to be as it is.

1. The Scripture, and what hath beene ſpoken are directly againſt you, which ſhew Gods judgement according to truth. I oppoſe it to your bare negation.

2. For the Scripture as it mentioneth imputation of faith, which you confeſſe is not righteouſneſſe, and truly as in a proper ſenſe, ſo it ſaith righteouſneſſe is imputed, which is alſo againſt your aſſertion that it is not righteouſneſſe indeed, and elſewhere I ſhall make good to be Chriſts; you ſhall not name a third.

3. The righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is mine, he is my welbeloved, mine, he is the Lord my righteouſneſſe. Sir, whether you will or no the Lord ſaith it, this is his name whereby he ſhall be called, The Lord our righteouſneſſe, Jer. 23. 6.

4. Faith in a proper ſenſe bringeth not into communion with the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, as your ſelfe, though here you ſay it, elſewhere you deny it, & here you confound righteouſneſſe and juſtification as if they were one; if ſo, why doe you deny it elſewhere? if it be different, indeed it is an effect of righteouſneſſe imputed (ſo is juſtification) the matter, by imputation that by which) Why doe you confound them?

And here we may ſee what a goodly effect faith hath, and what a bringing into communion you meane, when as you deny communion with Chriſts righteouſneſſe, but in the effect of it, to which after.

5. Faith in a relative ſenſe ſetteth all at rights, it cauſeth communion and fellowſhip with Chriſt, and his righteouſneſſe to juſtification; by this Chriſts righteouſneſſe is our owne; the judgement of God is according to truth; when as the Lord imputeth it to righteouſneſſe, as the ſtreame of Proteſtants runneth.

4. When as you ſay, Mr. W. inſtances from Scripture, …ply not naturally with his deſcription of the word Imputing. It is but a deniall; a deniall will anſwer it. To omit, p. 32it is you, not Mr. W. that made it a deſcription.

Vlt. You ſay, ſome inſtances contradict that deſcription of his according to his owne interpretation, of the phraſe imputing, as that of Shimei, Let not my Lord impute iniquity to me, hee doth not (ſaith Mr. W. truly but contradictingly to himſelfe) that David ſhould not judge his iniquity to be none, and therefore it is againſt all reaſon be ſhould ſay, ſtill it ſo ſignifies; and ſo for that of Job 33. 10. whence you deduce it, doth alwayes ſo ſignifie.

To which the anſwer is eaſie. The words univerſally and alwayes, before, ſtill and afterwards repeated now againe are not in Mr. W. they are your owne, as theſe, definition and deſcription; deviſed to ſerve a turne. Where he ſaith it was ſo, he ſaith, it is taken ſometimes in other ſenſes there named, when uſed by a trope, a metonymy of the cauſe for the effect, &c. a metaphor, &c. ſee his inſtances; neither hath Mr. W. yet delivered you his application.

When as to ſhew the contrary you inſtance in Rom. 4. 8. & 2 Cor. 5. 19. Where God is ſaid not to impute ſinne, the meaning is not that God doth not judge a beleever to have ſinne in him, and to judge as it is, but that God abſolving men from guilt and puniſhment, and ſo imputing righteouſneſſe, that it is of a full different nature from judging it as indeed it is.

For my part I know not, but when as God imputeth not ſinne, he judgeth as it is, for there is neither guilt nor puniſhment properly ſo called to them that beleeve in Jeſus Chriſt; which is therefore true, becauſe they are juſtified by the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, truly given them and applied by faith, by which as they are accounted righteous, and are ſo indeed.

When as you ſay Mr. Ws. owne tenet ſheweth it, that God imputeth Chriſts righteouſneſſe for the righteouſneſſe we ſhould have performed in our owne perſons, which is not our owne perſonall righteouſneſſe. You miſſe-report it. Mr. Ws. words are, when God imputeth Chriſts righteouſneſſe to a beleever, he counteth him perfectly righteous by that righteouſnes, and ſo he is indeed.

p. 33And becauſe you judge Mr. W. for that paſſage (which a reaſon why imputing ſignifieth an act of judgement) Gods …oughts are juſt, and his judgements according to truth, Rom. … 2. as if Gods imputing righteouſneſſe to him that is a …nner, and hath no righteouſneſſe, were an act of injuſtice … him, and contrary to truth.

Anſw. I ſuppoſe he did it with good cauſe. Then when … a man is accounted righteous for the righteous for the righteouſneſſe of …hriſt imputed by God, applied by faith, as he is righte…us indeed, ſo the judgement or account is true and righ…ous. Which not being a truth of faith imputed in a pro…r ſenſe, if it ſhould be impu…d, doth therefore render …ods account not true nor juſt. So that directly you deny …e one and other in this exception.

Neither is it a new practiſe of Mr. W. or his alone, but …dinary to be found in the learned.

Mr. Forbs, condemning imputation of faith in a pro…er ſenſe, (which is your opinion) and calling it pernitious, …d more pernitious then that of Papiſts, ſheweth the ſame …hus.

For when faith is not Relatively or inſtrumentally taken, … reſpect of Chriſt apprehended by it, it can never containe per…ct righteouſneſſe, and ſo the Lord can never juſtifie us …y it; for the judgement of God is juſt and according to …uth, Rom. 2. v. 2. 5. &c. They wittingly lay a ground … themſelves touching juſtification, wherein it is impoſſible that …ods judgement can be according to truth, ſeeing they make him … juſtifie them, by that which in their owne confeſſion is ne…er anſwerable to the juſtice of God, p. 91. ſo he.

If God ſhould juſtifie us—or by faith as it is a worke or abit in us, God could never be ſeene to be juſt in juſtifying of …s, &c. p 92.

(qqSybrandus to Bertius: Deus eſt juſtus & judicium ejus ſecundum veritatem; fides autem, non eſt tota legis juſtitia, ſed tantum exigua pars illius, p. 10. Sed Dei judicium eſt ſecundum veritatem, Rom. 2. 2. ſcimus, &c. Num autem ille qui judicat ſecundum veritatem, & qui in judicando errare nequit, quique nec fallere nec falli poteſt, exiguam juſtitiae portionem, eamque imperfectam, & multis peccatis contaminatam, habebit aut habere poterit pro perfecta legis juſtitia? p. 30.Rom 2:2) God is juſt, and his judgement according to truth, faith … not the whole righteouſneſſe of the Law, but onelyonly a little part …hereof.

But Gods judgement is according to truth, Rom. 2. 2. We know, &c. Will he who judgeth according unto truth, and who in judging cannot erre, who cannot deceive nor be deceived, account p. 34or can be, a ſmall portion of ſaith imperfect and much defiled, for the perſect righteouſneſſe of the Law.

(rrQuando Deus nosre putat juſtos ex fide, veritas quae huic reputationi divinae reſpondet, noneſt juſtitia Chriſti formalterinhaerens in nobis, ſed juſtitia Chriſti reali…er participata & donata nobis ordinationedivina. Si Deus ex eo quod nobis imputat Chriſti juſtitiam exiſtima…e… nos inhaerenrer juſtos (quod neſas dictu) erraret Dei judicium atque eſſet in mente divina exiſtimatio cui veritas rei non reſpondet, Biſh. Dav. c. 28. p. 171.) When God doth account us juſt by faith, the truth which anſwereth this divine account, is not the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt formally inhering in us, but the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt really communicated and given us by divine ordination. If God ſhould eſteeme us inherently juſt from that, that he imputeth unto us Chriſts righteouſneſſe, his judgement ſhould erre, and there ſhould be in the minde of God an account to which the truth of the thing anſwereth not (which is wickedneſſe for a man to ſpeake) (ssFallit ig…tur & fallitur Bellarminus imputationem juſtitiae Chriſti vocans nudam exiſtimationem ſive opinationem ſine re, cum ſit realis acceptatio peccatoris credentis pro juſto in judicio Dei, Pareus Caſtig. de juſtif. p. 485. Ut Cham. n. c 5. Sect. 24.) Therefore Bellar. deceiveth and is deceived, calling th… imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe, a naked eſteeme or thought without the thing, ſeeing it is a reall acceptation of the beleeving ſinner for a juſt man in Gods judgement.

Papiſts and Proteſtants agree that in juſtification Gods account is true and right. Bellar. and Becanus urge the judgement of God according to truth, to which Cham. (ttJudicium Dei ſateor eſſe ſecundum veritatem. Vere juſti facti ſunt quicunque juſtificantur a Deo, ſed aliter per inhaerentem aliter per imputatam juſtitiam, p. 865. 866.) I confeſſe that the judgement of God is according to truth, they are truly made juſt who are juſtified by God, but one way by inherent, another way by imputed righteouſneſſe. (uuEſto, imputare non ſimplici…e… exiſti mare, ut cum fallitut intellectus, & videtur hypocrita bonus qui tamen malus eſt: eſto potius conjunctum cum … veritate, ſed ſua: nimirum ut cuique Chriſtiano, vere & realiter imputetur Chriſti juſtitia… hanc nos veritatem imputationis abſit ut oppugnemus, c. 13. Sect. 14. p. 20.) Grant that to impute is not ſimply to ſuppoſe, as when the underſtanding is deceived, and an Hypocrite ſeemeth good, who is wicked. Let it rather be joyned with the truth of the thing, but its owne truth, that Chriſts righteouſneſſe be truly and really imputed to every Chriſtian; this imputation God forbid we ſhould oppoſe.

Mr. Pemble to Becanus, urging Rom. 2. 2. ſaith. Wee embrace this rule, and the reaſon of it, acknowledging that whereſoever there is juſtification, there is juſtice, one way or other in the party juſtified. The queſtion ſtill ſtands in the manner, &c.

p. 35We affirme that it is by imputing unto him the perfect righ…eouſneſſe of Chriſt, accepting Chriſts obedience for …is.

We here take up the forenamed rule, laid downe by our adverſaries. De juſtif. p. 13.Whomſoever God pronounceth to be perfectly juſt, be muſt needs be made perfectly juſt, for Gods judgement is according to truth, p. 9. and elſewhere. God accounts that onelyonly for perfect righteouſneſſe of the Law which is ſo indeed and truth, but faith is not the perfect fulfilling of the Law: therefore God doth not account it for ſuch.—

The major muſt be proved that God accounts not that for perfect juſtice, which is not perfect indeed; this appeares, Rom. …. 2. the judgement of God is according to truth. When therefore any thing is not truly good and perfect, there God eſteemes it not truly good and perfect, ib. p. 37.

Gualter (you ſay) an orthodox Interpreter findeth grace and favour not ſtrictneſſe of judgement in the phraſe of im…utation. It teacheth us that God might indeed have dealt in …rictneſſe of judgement with us, and that we are indebted to …is free gra… that he dealeth not with us as we have de…rved.

Who denieth but God might have dealt in ſtrictneſſe, equired and exacted perſonall obedience, and have execu…ed death on us for our ſinne? and that it is mercy that God imputeth or giveth Chriſts righteouſneſſe: the A…ſtle ſheweth Chriſt and all his, gifts, and ſo effects of …race, and yet in that there is ſtrict juſtice, and that is …nſwered by the L. Chriſt our ſurety by his perfect righ…eouſneſſe, ſo that Gods righteouſneſſe is declared thereby. He is juſt in juſtifying, and ſo Orthodox interpreters, our …wne, and others, as before. I may adde more.

The Law muſt be ſatisfied, or elſe we cannot be juſt, for the Lord doth allow no other righteouſneſſe but the very ſame which …s deſcribed in the Law, which whoſoever cannot attaine are pro…ounced guilty of eternall death; therefore if we will be righ…eous and ſaved, ſuch a righteouſneſſe muſt be ſought out, then which the Law cannot require a more abſolute—and where …hall we finde it? Our faith is but begun and we must alwayes pray it may be increaſed in us—but righteouſneſſe muſt p. 36be of that kind as that nothing at all may be added thereunto.Dr. Whitak. againſt Camp. Engliſhed by M. Stoke, p. 224. & p. 229. 230.

The juſtice that freeth us from the Law, neither increaſeth nor groweth, but is ever most perfect and abſolute, that is, Chriſt his obedience imputed to us by faith;—what that righteouſneſſe is ſee there. I will not make application. (wwAd Dei tribunal, ubi nulla juſtitia cenſetur niſi perſecta legis obedientia, Toſſ. in Rom. 2. 21.Rom 2:21) At Gods tribunall nothing is accounted righteouſneſſe but perfect obedience of the Law. (xxNihil imperfectum aut maneum poteſt dici juſtitia Dei juſtificās, Id. ad Rom. p. 173. 7. Deum verè & ſummè juſtum in ſponſore, Beza. ad Rom. 4. 25.Rom 4:25) Nothing imperfect or lame can be called the juſtifying righteouſneſſe of God. (yyNam ut alibi dixi nullos pro juſtis approbat Deus, niſi quos prius verè ac ſummè (non in ipſis ſed) in Chriſto ſuo, ſeu imputata Chriſti juſtitia juſtifica…et, ut Pro. 17. 15. Bek. ad Rom. 4. 21. 5.Prov 17:15Rom 4:21Rom 4:5) God is truly and moſt juſt in the ſurety. God, as I have elſewhere ſaid, doth approve none for juſt, but thoſe whom firſt he maketh juſt truly, and in the higheſt degree, not in themſelves, but Chriſts righteouſnes imputed. (zzJunius. Sola Dei Patris mi…ericordia juſtificari peccatorem ita profitemur, ut Chriſtum cum Officio Mediatoris cauſam proximam agnoſcamus, qui ſibi non natus ſed nobis, Jeſ 9. 5. ita offenſi Patris ſempiternam juſtitiam abſolutiſſimae perſectionis foreign miſeris hominibus reconciliavit, ut Deus juſtitiae laudem in media miſericordia non amitteret. Et ſi ut agens liber…imum quos & quomodocunque velit juſtificare potuit; obedientiam tamen filii neceſſariam fecit, tum natura ipſius qua infinite juſtus, tum patefacta in Lege voluntas quae in Deo eſt aeterna & immota juſtitiae regula (ſic & Calvinus inſtit. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 15. quae inſuper immutabiliter requirit ſatisfactionem pro peccato, & Legis impletionem per obedientiam, cum juſtificare impium ſine ulla juſtitia foreign eſſe dixerit, Pro. 17. 15. facta eſt igitur tranſlatio Legis, Heb. 7. 12. quae non potuit vivifica…e, Gal. 3. 2. in Chriſtum qui pro nobis ſub Lege factus, Gal. 4. 4. Legi omnimodo …atis…ace…et, Theſ. Theol. 35. p. 689.Prov 17:15Heb 7:12Gal 3:2Gal 4:4) We ſo profeſſe a ſinner to be juſtified by the only mercy of God the Father that we acknowledge Chriſt with his office of a Mediatour the next cauſe, who being borne for us, not himſelfe, Jeſ. 9. 5. who by the ranſome of moſt abſolute perfection ſo reconciled the eternall juſtice of his offended Father to miſerable men that God loſt not the praiſe of juſtice in midſt of mercy. Though as a moſt free agent he could juſtifie whomſoever, and in what manner ſoever he would, yet both his Nature as he is infinitely juſt, and alſo his Will revealed in the Law, which in God is the eternall and immovable rule of juſtice: which moreover, in immutably requireth ſatisfaction for ſinne, and fulfilling the Law by obedience, ſeeing to juſtifie a wicked man without righteouſneſſe he hath …alled it abomination, there is therefore made a tranſlation of the Law which could not give life on Chriſt, who being made for us under the Law might every way ſatisfie the Law for us.

p. 37(aaHoc foreign pro…ſus ſuit complendum etiam in nobis, ideoque Chriſtus induens noſtram carnem noſtro nomine perſecte praeſtitit legem, Matth. 5. non veni—& 16. hic facilius eſt coelum—pertinet hoc membrum ad beneficii Chriſti applicationem ad nos, Aret in Rom. 8. 4.Matt 5Rom 8:4) This righteouſneſſe was altogether to be fulfilled in us, therefore Chriſt putting on our fleſh in our behalfe perfectly performed it. I came not, &c. Matth. 5. & 16. here it is eaſier for the Heavens to paſſe, this member appertaineth to the application of Chriſts benefit to us. (bbNam tum demū redderetur inanis ſi illi non ſatisfiere…, vel per nos vel noſtro nomine per aliū ▪ atqui id per Chriſtum eſt ſatisfactum, qui non venit ſolvere ſed implere, Matth. 5. & eam in ca…ne noſtra implevit ad Rom. 8 Toſſa…. p. 26. Beza in Rom. 8. v. 4.Matt 5Rom 8Rom 8:4) Then ſhould it be vaine if not ſatisfied by us, or in our name by another, and that is ſatiſfied by Chriſt who came not to diſſolve, &c. and he did fulfill it in our fleſh. (ccforeign, illud ipſum quod requitit Le… ut ex ejus praeſcripto juſti & integ…i coram Deo cenſcamur: nam tum ad peccatorum remiſſionem & impletionem juſtitiae acceſſerit etiam hoc tertium, id eſt, perfecta naturae noſtrae integritas (quae omnia gratis conſequimur in Chriſto per fidem apprehenſo) ut in omnes facies ſe convertat Satan, juſti ſumus coram Deo, etiam ex illa abſolutiſſima Legis formula quamobrem dixit Apoſtolus ſupra, c. 3. 31. ſe Legem non evertere ſed ſtabilire.) That very righteouſneſſe which the Law required that by its preſcript we may be thought juſt and intire before God, for when as to forgiveneſſe of ſinnes and fulfilling the Law this third ſhall come, the perfect integrity of our nature, (all which we freely attaine in Chriſt apprehended by faith) let Satan doe what ever he can we are juſt before God, and that from that moſt abſolute forme of the Law, therefore the Apoſtle ſaid he came not to deſtroy the Law, but to eſtabliſh it, Rom. 3. 21. (dd…uſtitia Jeſu Chriſti, per quam juſtificamur coram D…eſt perfectiſſima totius Legis divinae obedientia—juſtitia in Evangelio pa…eſacta eſt impletio Legis a Chriſto facta pro nobis, Polan. ſynt. l. 6. c. 36. p. 2947. per Evangelium Lex non aboletur ſ…d ſtabilitur, R… 3. ….) The righteouſneſſe of Jeſus Chriſt by which we are juſtified before God is the moſt perfect obedience of the whole Law of God—the righteouſneſſe manifeſted in the Goſpel, is the fulfilling of the Law made by Chriſt for us. (eeCalv. hunc ſcrupulum optime diſcurit cum ex ipſa Legis doctrina … Legis ju… tiam. Calv. ad Rom. 10. v. 5. Stabilimus, merito hoc dixit Apoſtolas, nam Chriſt ſatisfactio quid aliud quam Legis minas oſtendit, min…e irritas eſſe, quum … lucre Chriſt… oportuerit? Sed & Chriſti juſtitia quid aliud eſt quam plena Legis praeſtatio: doctrina igitur ex fide quum non prius nos ſervet quam juſtificet (ideſt, Chriſtum nobis pe… imputationem applicet his omnibus virtutibus Legis ornatum) certe juſtitiam … non modo non evertit, ſed potius ſtabilit in nobis, Bez. ad Rom. 3. ult,Rom 10:5Rom 3) He excellently taketh away this ſcruple, when as out of the doctrine of the Law he eſtabliſheth the righteouſneſſe of the Law. (f) The Apoſtle well ſaid we eſtabliſh; for what doth Chriſts ſatisfaction but ſhew the threats of the Law not voyd when as Chriſt muſt indure them? and what is Chriſts righteouſneſſe elſe p. 38but a full performance of the Law. The doctrine therefore of faith ſeeing it doth not ſave us before it juſtifieth us, (that is, it applieth Chriſt to us by imputation, adorned with all theſe vertues) ſurely it doth not onelyonly not overthrow the Law, but rather ſtabliſheth it in us.

Hitherto may I referre that eternall rule, Doe this and live, ſee Mr. Perkins argument. That which muſt be our righteouſneſſe before God muſt ſatisfie the juſtice of the Law, which ſaith, Doe theſe things and thou ſhalt live, but there is nothing that can ſatisfie that juſtice of the Law, but the righteouſneſſe and obedience of Chriſt, ergo. See Abbot. p. 387. ſee Abot. p. 389. See Sybrand againſt Bertius, p. 140. & 144. and Mr. Pemb. p. 149.

By all which much may be noted by you if you will put the ſame to uſe, and that not onelyonly mercy, but juſtice, exact ſatisfaction to the Law, are by Orthodox Writers eſtabliſhed in free juſtification.

Sect. 9. You goe on, and ſay (when as Mr. W. by righteouſneſſe P. 27.ſaith is meant Evangelicall righteouſneſſe—even the perfect ſatisfaction and righteouſnes of Chriſt our Mediator and ſurety, which he the Son of God, in mans nature performed to the Law.)

Riddle me, riddle me, &c. and that faith in any ſenſe cannot be Mr. G.imputed for the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt.

1. If it be a Riddle, how can you ſolve it without explication? your arguing is a beating of the aire.

2. And in the reſt you doe but trifle, that which is imputed is the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, ſo Mr. W. truly; that is Evangelicall, Dan. 9.

3. That for the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is not Mr. Ws. but your owne before anſwered, ſee his explication.

4. To that queſtion, (though impertinent) whether any thing may properly be ſaid to be truly and indeed the ſame with it ſelfe, and your reference of it to Mr. Walkers owne determination when his Logick returnes againe unto him.

I Anſwer, that I ſhould thinke any thing may truly and properly be ſaid to be the ſame with it ſelfe; neither doe I conceive any thing more truly and properly the ſame then the thing it ſelfe: other things may be like, are not p. 39the ſame. Every thing is every way the ſame with it ſelfe, identity is the ſameneſſe of a thing in my Logick. Your owne immediately preceding words may anſwer your queſtion, which are, ſurely there is nothing truly, really, and indeed the ſame with the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, but this ſatiſfaction it ſelfe.

So that what Mr. W. ſaid is a truth, that which God accounteth for righteouſneſſe is ſo indeed and maketh the perſon righteous indeed.

So is faith (not in a proper ſenſe) in a figurative ſenſe apprehending the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, righteouſneſſe indeed, and your inference, p. 28. but a formerly deſtroyed Remonſtrant device.

When you comprehend not why Mr. W. ſhould call the 2.righteouſneſſe of Chriſt evangelicall righteouſneſſe, oppoſed to legall, and yet define a legall righteouſneſſe to be every mans fulfilling the Law in his owne perſon.

I take it no difficult thing; take it as performed by himſelfe, it was his performance and legall; take him to be our ſurety, and conſider him ſo performing the ſame, and it graciouſly given unto us by God in the Goſpel, it is Evangelicall and rightly ſo called: Chriſt and all his benefits are Evangelicall, ſuch is his everlaſting righteouſneſſe, Dan. 9. (ggNec deſunt apud Prophetas loca de juſtitia juſtificante in Chriſti Regno, ut Iſai. 45. & 53. & Dan. 9. Toſſan ad Rom. p. 173.Isa 45Dan 9) Neither are there places wanting amongſt the Prophets of juſtifying righteouſneſſe, as,

You ſay legall righteouſenes of workes cannot be inherent, becauſe they are matters tranſient.3.

1. Though the works paſſe, the habit whence which alſo is ſtrengthened by the worke, is inherent.

2. As ſinfull acts paſſing, leave a ſtaine and skarre as well as guilt on the ſoule, why may not acts of righteouſneſſe a contrary luſtre?

3. The acts of righteouſneſſe of Chriſt paſſe not ſimply, they remaine with God to whom they were offered to the ends and uſes for which they were performed as in the effects thereof.

4. Habits and acts in the Apoſtles diſputes are infolded, neither doth he diſpute againſt tranſient acts alone, p. 40but inhering habits, the habit is actus primus, neither is it the love of God, or faith in Chriſt that acteth not o… him, conjoyning the ſoule and the object thereby.

You demand why he ſhould ſay, that to be inherent in every 4.man which was never in any but Chriſt.

That may have a faire account. Legall righteouſneſſe was inherent in Adam, as well as in Chriſt. God made man juſt, what Adam had, the whole nature had in him, and ſo it was in every man. There is alſo a proportion to the Law in every Chriſtian, the Law of God is in his heart, though it be imperfect and given by the Goſpel.

You know not why he ſhould affirme Evangelicall righteouſneſſe 5.to be a ſatisfaction performed to the Law. Why not? You grant it of the active obedience of Chriſt, but how the paſſive obedience of Chriſt which Mr. W. intendeth ſhould be a ſatisfaction to the Law you apprehend not. You ſay the Law was ſatisfied in that perfect and intire obedience which Chriſt exhibited to it, and did not require of him (no more then it doth of any other man that ſhall fulfill it as he did) that he ſhould be made a curſe and die the death.

1. I anſwer, both make up full ſatisfaction in our behalfe, the Law ſaid, Doe this and live, and, Accurſed is every man that abideth not in all the Commandements of the Lord to doe them: both are our debt: our ſurety muſt doe both in theſe names. God required doing, he muſt fulfill all righteouſneſſe; as God threatned death, Chriſt muſt ſuffer theſe things; he was accurſed for us, he died for us.

2. The Law requireth full ſatisfaction of the ſurety as well as the principall, and puniſheth the ſurety as well as the principall.

But he ſetteth himſelfe againſt the wrath of the Law, and Luther ad Gal. p. 160. 2.taketh it away, and ſatisfieth the Law in his owne body by himſelfe, I ſatisfie the Law for thee.

But the Law doth not require that an innocent perſon ſhould Mr. G.die, but the tranſgreſſour, ſo you; he ſhould not, conſidering the innocent perſon per ſe, in himſelfe, & qua, as a ſurety, it is not ſo: ſo conſidered he was and might be numbred with tranſgreſſours. He was made ſinne for us, the iniquities p. 41of us all were laid on him. They, ſinnes were on his account, on him, he bore our ſinnes; hence guilt, hence puniſhment; Satisfactory it was (you ſay) but not to the Law, it knowes no ſatisfaction, but to God, becauſe hee required it.

Anſw. Whoſe Law was it, but Gods? you ſay God required Bez. ad 2 Cor. 5. ult. Etſi peccatum victima ex Hebraeorum idiotiſmo, &c. Tamen ratio Antitheſis poſcit ut potius Chriſtus dicatur factus eſſe peccatum pro nobis, ideſt peccator, non in ſe ſed ex omnium peccatorum noſtrorum reatu ipſi imputato.—I pſe peccatum & nos juſtitia, non noſtra ſed Dei, non in nobis ſed in ipſo, ſicut ipſe peccatum non ſuum ſed noſtrū, nec in ſe, ſed in nobjs factus eſt—ſic ergo ſumus juſtitia Dei in ipſo ut ille peccatum in nobis▪ nempe ex imputatione. Luther. ad Gal. c▪ 3. 15. 13. p. 136. 137. C. 53.2 Cor 5Gal 3:15Gal 3:13it, Was it not in the Law? ſatisfie God requiring, and ſatisfie the Law: in it he requireth death on the tranſgreſſion thereof.

Now that our Surety was by imputation a tranſgreſſour, hearken to Divines. Although ſinne be taken for Sacrifice in the Hebrewes ſpeech—yet the reaſon of the oppoſition requireth rather that Chriſt ſhould be ſaid to be made ſinne for …s, that is a ſinner, not in himſelfe, but by the guilt of all our ſins imputed to him—where he citeth that of Auguſtine.

He was ſinne, and we righteouſneſſe, not our owne, but of God, not in our ſelves, but in him, as he is made ſinne, not his owne, but ours, nor in himſelfe, but in us;—We therefore are ſo the righteouſneſſe of God in him, as he was ſinne in us, for…ooth by imputation.

Chriſt is innocent concerning his owne perſon, and therefore he …ought not to have beene hanged upon a tree. But becauſe according …o the Law of Moſes every Thiefe and Malefactor ought to be …anged, therefore Chriſt alſo according to the Law ought to be …anged, for be ſuſtained the perſon of a ſinner, and of a thiefe, not of one, but of all ſinners and theeves.—Therefore it behoved that he ſhould become a tranſgreſſour, and as Jeſ. the Prophet ſaith, to be reckoned and accounted amongſt tranſgreſſours and …reſpaſſers. And this no doubt all the Prophets did foreſee in ſpirit, that Chriſt ſhould become the greateſt tranſgreſſour, mur…herer, adulterer, blaſphemer, that ever was, or could be in all the world. For he being made a Sacrifice for the ſinnes of the whole world, is not now an innocent perſon and without ſinnes, is not now the Sonne of God borne of the Virgin Mary, but a ſinner which hath and carrieth the ſinne of Paul, who was a blaſphemer, an oppreſſour, and a perſecutor: of Peter which denied Chriſt: of David which was an adulterer, a murtherer, and cauſed the Gentiles to blaſpheme the name of the Lord. And p. 42briefely which hath and beareth all the ſinnes of all men in his, body that he might make ſatisfaction for them with his owne bloud.—He verily is innocent, becauſe he is the unſpotted and undefiled Lambe of God: but becauſe he beareth the ſinnes of the world, his innocency is burthened with the ſinnes and guilt of the whole world.

Whatſoever ſinnes I and thou and we all have done or ſhall d… hereafter, they are Chriſts owne ſinnes as verily as if he himſelfe had done them.—But what is it to beare? The Sophiſters anſwer to be puniſhed. Ʋery well, but wherefore is Chriſt puniſhed? ☞Is it not becauſe he hath ſinne and beareth ſinne?—So Luther. See Gerhard de juſtif. p. 207▪I paſſe others for the preſent.

Laſtly, you call him a Dedalian Divine, and ſay he makes 6.no clever worke when he jumbles together the active and paſſive Mr. G.obedience of Chriſt and ſubjecteth them to the ſame conſideration in reſpect to their performance to the Law.

Anſw. Call him as you pleaſe, he hath not exceeded his mediocrity, here you prove it not. I finde no jumbling. What if he had put them together? they agree, and are his obedience. What was his taking our nature, what he did and ſuffered, his making himſelfe of no reputation, his taking on him the forme of a ſervant, his being made under the Law, but his obedience, which laſted even untill death? and what but anſwer to Gods will and commandement on him as our Surety, what the Law ſpake to our Surety?