Baxters Aphorisms, Part 1 · Part 1 · Chapter 22
CHAP. XXII.
Arg. VVhat the reall Antinomians have been, and are, and that Maſter Baxter caſteth this reproachfull name upon all the Churches of Chriſt, charging the innocent with the fault whereof himſelf is guilty.
THE ſecond thing which I promiſed to take into examination, in his explication of this Theſis, is his vellication of the Antinomians, which here and elſewhere throughout this Book he defieth with unquenchable hatred, charging and diſcharging ſo hotly againſt them, as ever Iupiter did againſt the Giants that made a battery againſt the Heavens. And what are they, that Goliah like, he ſhould come harneſſed from the head to the foot, brandiſhing his weavers beam againſt them? he tells us, They are Ignorant [animals] pa. 169. Fitter to learn the grounds of Religion in a Catechiſm, than to manage thoſe diſputes wherewith they trouble the world. pa. 115. If ſo, who can abſtain from laughter, to ſee ſo great a Nimrod as Mr. Baxter, hunting, with no leſſe weapon then Hercules his Club, a neſt of wrens to death? and with the great Monarch of the World Domitian, to ſet himſelf in battel array againſt the gnats and flies that dared to peep into his chamber.
But his aim is to ſhew his Craft more than his power, as I before in part have manifeſted in the preface to this examination, and there promiſed more fully afterward to evidence: The performance whereof, I have reſerved for this place.
That we may the better diſcern Maſter Baxters either ſingleneſſe or doubleneſſe in this Caſe, it ſhall be ſomewhat expedient to enquire after, firſt the originall, ſecondly the growth of the Antinomians properly ſo taken and denominated in the ſeverall reformed Churches, untill our late diviſions within this land have made ſuch a medly and confuſion of all, or at leaſt many errors together, that we know not punctually what error is predominant in moſt of the willfully erroneous: that having ſeene them both in their birth, and their full height alſo; wee may compare Maſter Baxters Antinomians with the Antinomians indeed, and ſo judge how far he goes about to confute the innocent, and how far to defame and deceive the innocent.
The firſt riſe of them was in Germany, Anno. Dom. 1538. as Sleidan in the 12 Book of his Commentaries tells us. Their principall ringleader was Ioannes Iſlebius, Agricola. I have not met with any of their Books, neither know I whether there be any of them extant, from which we may certainly gather their opinions. Wee are forced therefore to take them at the ſecond hand from the foreſaid Author, who in the forequoted place thus ſpeaks of them. Hoc Anno ſecta prodijt eorū qui dicuntur Antinomi. Hi poenitentiam ex Decalogo non eſſe docendam dicunt, & illos impugnant qui docent non eſſe praedicandum Evangelium, niſi primum quaſſatis animis, at que fractis per pradicationem legis. Ipſi verò ſtatuunt quaecunque tandem ſit hominis vita, & quamtumvis impura, juſtificari tamen eum, ſi modò promiſſionibus Evangelij credat. i. e. This year ſprung forth the ſect of them which are called Antinomians. [Their Tenents he reduceth to three generall heads, telling us that firſt] They ſay, that Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue: [2] They impugn them that teach, the Goſpell ought not to be preached to men, untill their hearts be firſt ſhaken and broken by the preaching of the Law. [3] They aſſert that whatſoever the life of a man be, and how impure ſoever, yet is he juſtified if he onelyonly beleeveth the promiſes of the Goſpel.
He addeth further, that Luther wrote againſt this Iſlebius, who thereupon ſubmitted, and in a ſort recanted; and ſo it ſeemes the Sect ceaſed, and their aſſertions for a while ſlept.
Such were they at their firſt riſe. In theſe after times, they diſcovered themſelves in more plain terms than Sleidan here diſcovered them. About twenty years ſince, I had acquaintance, and upon that acquaintance, much reaſoning, and many diſputes with ſome of them in Summer ſet ſhire, who much honoured and profeſſed themſelves to have received their light from that Maſter W…otton, whom Maſter Baxter doth ſeem much to applaud in ſome parts of this Treatiſe. Their opinions that partly were, and partly weretaken by the moſt t… be points of Antinomianiſm were theſe, (as in diſcourſe with them I found them to maintain)
1. That the Law is totally abrogated now under the Goſpel, and that not onelyonly as a Covenant of Works, but alſo from being any more the rule of righteouſneſſe. That wee have but one Maſter, Chriſt, that ſince his coming into the world, he is our Teacher ſent from heaven: the Prophet raiſed up like to Moſes, that we ſhould hear him alone. That ſince the time he began to ſpeak, Moſes hath been ſilent, and we are bound now to attend to the voice of God, as in theſe latter times he ſpeaketh to us by his Son only.
2. That the whole Old Teſtament is (as it were) uncanonized, though it were the Word of God, the Rule and Canon of Faith, and practice, to them that lived under it; yet to us that are under the Goſpel it remains not in its former power. Becauſe the Laſt Will and Teſtament onelyonly ſtands in force, and when a latter Teſtament is made, the former is thereby to all uſes and purpoſes made voyd. We may read the Old Teſtament as other Apocryphal, and Eccleſiaſticall Writings, but muſt no more ſubject our judgements or conſciences to it, then to theſe: For Moſes and the Prophets prophecied (onelyonly) untill John the Baptiſt, were in force untill he began to preach the Goſpel, and ever ſince the Kingdom of heaven hath ſuffered violence, the doctrine of the Goſpel hath ſucceeded in its place.
3. That we have no Sabbath under the Goſpel, but all holyneſs in dayes, and difference between dayes and dayes is taken away; ſo that to ſanctifie any one day to the Lord above another, is meer Wil-worſhip, and Superſtition. Upon this ground they actually made uſe of ſhooting, bowling, and other lawful recreations upon the Lords day, pronouncing it to be a uſe of the Liberty which Chriſt had purchaſed for them.
4. They diſreliſhed altogether that phraſe of Juſtification by Faith, as attributing ſomewhat to man; and would that all ſhould rather ſay that we are Juſtified by Grace, or by Chriſt or by being found in Chriſt, or by our union unto Chriſt, that the praiſe of our Juſtification might be reſerved whole and entire to the Grace of God in Chriſt alone.
5. That we are juſtified by the Paſſive, not the Active obedience of Chriſt.
6. That God ſeeth no ſinne in the juſtified, he knows indeed when they ſinne, and that they have ſinned, but the doth not ſee it becauſe themſelves and it are covered under the righteouſnes, and croſs of Chriſt, ſo that the Father doth not, will not ſee it. As if the eternal God had any other eyes beſides the eyes of his knowledge to ſee; or that Gods ſeeing, and his knowing were at leaſt diſparats, and not the ſame thing.
7. That God puniſheth not ſinne in his people, for he ſeeth not ſin in his people, and what he ſeeth not, that he cannot puniſh. He hath puniſhed it upon Chriſt, therefore are they free from puniſhment.
8. That whatſoever is not in preciſe words forbidden in the New Teſtament, that is lawfull for a Chriſtian to doe, how ſtrictly ſoever it be prohibited in the Law, and Old Teſtament. So that I have taken notice that when in diſputes, ſuch and ſuch things have been denyed to be expreſly forbidden in the New Teſtament, and that they could not finde any clear teſtimonies of the New Teſtament literally forbidding them; though before they made it a caſe of conſcience to abſtain, yet thenceforth, notwithſtanding all that is ſaid in the Old Teſtament againſt it, they have taken full liberty to commit it.
Theſe things were formerly (as farre as I have taken notice) either all, or the chief things, branded with the name of Antinomianiſm. And they that held them were called by the moſt Antinomiſts, or Antinomians, becauſe either in all, or moſt of theſe aſſertions, they either did, or ſeemed to oppoſe, and ſet themſelves againſt the Law, or Old Teſtament.
In theſe laſt ſeven or eight years indeed, wherein all the Ghoſts of all the Hereticks of former Ages have been let looſe from hell in full ſwarms, to infeſt this Nation more then ever the Locuſts did the Land of Egypt; and men in wantonizing againſt Chriſt and his Truth, have thought it too little to be Satans budget-bearers in ſome, except they had their packs filled with all varieties of his hell-bred errors, ſo that the Legion of Devils now might be found ſometimes in one man, which heretofore was diſtributed into a legion of men: By means whereof, many Hereſies moulded together have gone under one denomination; partly through ignorance, and partly out of malice, both all the dreames of mad E…thuſi…ſts, and blaſphemies againſt the Word ſometimes, and ſometimes the very ſacred truths of the Goſpel of Chriſt have been expoſed to the hatred of the multitude under the title of Antinomianiſm: Men ful of all ſubtiltie and miſchief thus painting Chriſt in the midſt of many Devils, that he might be taken for one of them, and the truth of his Goſpel bee abandoned under the name of Hereſie.
But as to the forementioned tenents in former times charged with Antinomianiſm, I ſhall ſay ſomething.
Firſt thoſe three mentioned by Sleidan, as he expreſſeth them, it is very ambiguous whether they were truths or errors. Becauſe the words by which he deſcribes them, are ambiguous: and may be taken either in a good, or evill ſenſe.
1. That they taught that Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue: It is doubtfull what his meaning is; 1. Whether they denyed it to be taught ſimply, or ſecundum quid, either that it ought not to be thence taught at all, or not to be taught thence, as ordained and effectual to juſtification, and ſalvation? 2. It is doubtfull alſo what hee meanes by the Decalogue, whether he means the Ten Commandements conſidered ſtrictly in their own words, as meer Law (for ſo I ſee not how repentance can be taught properly out of the Decalogue, becauſe it commandeth perfect obedience, that there may be no need of repentance) or as the Doctrine of the ſaid Decalogue is amplified, and expounded in other Scriptures: where we ſhall find indeed Repentance required in caſe of tranſgreſſion, with a promiſe of temporall deliverances and bleſſings annexed; and ſo the teaching of Repentance out of the Law be here oppoſed to the teaching of it out of the Goſpel, and conſequentially the Legall be here oppoſed to the Evangelical Repentance? 3. Or whether his meaning be, that they would not have repentance at all taught, becauſe they took it to be a meerly Legall, not an Evangelical duty, therefore pertaining to the adminiſtration of the Law, not of the Goſpel? I conceive the Hiſtorian being a man ſingular for his moderation in all that he writes, though he ſpeaks of their opinion in the eaſieſt words he may, yet meanes that they held it in the worſt ſenſe, (And ſuch have been the Antinomians in theſe latter times) otherwiſe in a good ſenſe, that his words will bear, this firſt tenet deſerves not the name of Antinomianiſm, or error.
To the ſecond, if his meaning be, that they impugned thoſe that preached the Law to ſhake the hearts of men into ſelf-denial, and to break down the proud confidence of ſafety, and righteouſneſſe in themſelves, thereby to make way for the doctrine of Chriſt into them: There is ſomething indeed worthy of blame layd to their charge. But if we take his words ſtrictly as they lye, viz. that they oppoſed them which teach that the Goſpel is not to be preached untill the Law hath ſo convinced, and ſhaken the conſcience, &c. I profeſſe my ſelf to be an Antinomian alſo, if this be Antinomianiſm. For what warrant hath any Miniſter ſo to teach? The commiſſion which we receive from Chriſt is, to preach the Goſpel to every creature in all the world. Mar. 16. 15. without any reſtriction whether they be ſhaken, or unſhaken: And if we continue Law-ſhakers ſtill among ſome people, untill wee ſee them thereby ſhaken into a Palſie of ſelfe-deſpairing, I know no ground we have to promiſe to our ſelves a time of preaching Goſpel ſo long as we live. And what anſwer can be given in ſuch a caſe to Chriſt for following our own carnall wiſdome, and not his commiſſion? Neither was it one of Luthers praiſes (pace tanti viri dixerim) from the experience of Gods working upon himſelf, which was firſt the laying of him proſtrate by the Law under great horrors, and then reviving him with the precious comforts of the Goſpel; to preſcribe unto God the ſame method, or to conclude the ſame to bee the method of God in his operations upon all in converting them. The rending whirlwind doth not alway goe before the quickening beams of the Sun of Righteouſneſs.
To the third, if he mean that they taught that Juſtification by Faith in the Goſpel promiſes might be ſound and effectuall, though no ſanctification, but all allowed impurity of life ſhould follow; the aſſertion and doctrine implies a contradiction; for there can be no living Faith in the promiſes, that is not fruitfull in good works: And herein they declared themſelves no leſſe Anti-Goſpellers, then Antinomians. But if hee meane that without all ſuch extream horrors of the Law, a man may be truly juſtified by Faith in Chriſt, notwithſtanding all his former looſe and impure life, and ſo the Publicans and Harlots enter into the Kingdome of God before the ſelf-righteous Phariſees; this is not Antinomiſtick, except Pauls doctrine alſo be ſuch, Rom. 4. 5.
2. As for thoſe opinions charged in theſe latter times with Antinomianiſm by many, the 1, 2, and laſt cannot be excuſed. OnelyOnly (to give the Aſſertors their due) whatſoever of doctrinal truths to be beleeved, or of Moral duties to be practiſed, are expreſſed both in the Old and New Teſtament, they were conſcientious to ſubmit themſelves thereunto, yet not for the authority of the Law, or Old Teſtament, but of the New only.
The third can bee juſtly charged with Antinomianiſm no farther, then as either the Maintainers of it were in other points Antinomiſts, or in reſpect of the foundation, which they laid to maintain it, which was the abrogation of the Law and old Teſtament. The Law of the Sabbath being one part therof, which muſt ſtand or ſink with the reſt. But as they denyed the lawfulneſs of all diſcrimination or difference of daies, by way of Morall, or Eccleſiaſtical, or Apoſtolical order, for the more orderly, and profitable celebration of publick Aſſemblies, and the ordinances of Chriſt in publick Communion, calling it Will-worſhip, and Superſtition: This error they drew from the Petrobuſians, and Anabaptiſts, not from the Antinomians that had been before them. As to other queſtions about the authority of the Sabbath firſt, & now of the Lords day, what relation they have either to other, whether the obſervation of them be of Natural, or Poſitive right: If of Moral and Natural right, by what expreſs authority it is altered from the laſt, to the firſt day of the week? If of Poſitive right, whether it began from the Creation, or from the Law given upon Mount Sinai? Whether the fourth Commandement hath any thing in it Typical, now vaniſhed in Chriſt? Or whether wholly Moral, and binding for ever? how far it did, or did not bind preciſely to a day, & not this day of 7? Whether it were of Moral Righteouſnes, or elſe only of Moral order? Whether the holyneſs of the 7th be now wholly tranſlated upon the firſt day of the week? By what authority the obſervation of the ſeventh day ceaſed, and of the firſt day of the week was inſtituted to ſucceed? Whether by virtue of Chriſts Reſurrection, or by ſome expreſs command of Chriſt? and where that command is to bee found? Or elſe by Apoſtolical appointment? And then whether in reſpect of order, or of the aforegoing authority of Gods Commandement about the Sabbath? or elſe by the appointment and conſent of the Churches in, or after the Apoſtles times? Theſe, and many other the like queſtions Mr. Baxter knoweth to have been in agitation between both the greater and the leſſer Divines and Members of the Reformed Churches, & adhuc ſub judice Lis eſt. OnelyOnly ſome within the Church of England, ever ſince a Tractate came forth upon this ſubject from one Dr. Bownd, Anno Chriſti 1595. ſeem to fix the obſervation of the Lords day upon more ſtrict grounds, and to bind it to more preciſe termes then the other Reformed Churches beyond the ſeas admit, or many of the ſolid Divines have approved. But of this there is no proper occaſion here given to diſpute. This aſſertion therefore, any further then hath been ſpecified, I doubt not but Mr. Baxter himſelf will diſcharge of Antinomianiſm.
The 5. & 7. Mr. Baxter himſelf will not have to be ranked among Antinomian errors, confeſſing the former to be the judgement of many learned, and godly Divines, of ſingular eſteem in the Church of God, pag. 53. & Ap. pag. 12. The latter hee pronounceth to be the Common Judgement, viz. of Churches, and Divines; therefore of ignorance accuſed of Antinomianiſm, pag. 68 of his Aphoriſms.
The fourth gives us cauſe to accuſe them of ſome audaciouſnes, in teaching the Holy Ghoſt to ſpeake, and pertinaciouſneſs in binding themſelves to phraſes and words, even to the declining of the language of the Holy Ghoſt in Scriptures. To be juſtified by Faith, and to bee juſtified by Chriſt, or our being found in Chriſt, being ever both in Canonical, and Eccleſiaſtical Writings taken as Equipollent terms, until in theſe few laſt years Mr. Bax. and ſome of his fellows irradiated from Rome, and by the doctrine of Socinus, and Arminius, have broached another, a new, and unheard of interpretation of the phraſes. For whether we ſay we are juſtified by Faith, wee were formerly underſtood to affirm our Juſtification by Chriſt, to whom our Faith hath united us; or by Chriſt, it was underſtood by Chriſt apprehended by faith. Neither manner of Locution therefore was to be rejected, as oppoſing the other.
The ſixth I take to be a fancy (if they underſtand Gods ſeeing and knowing in generall, without reſtriction) troubling the brains of men with a ſtrife about words without ſubſtance. God ſeeth no ſin unpardoned upon his people, we acknowledge. In reference to Judgement and Vengeance, hee hath ſeen them all upon Chriſt, and puniſhed them upon Chriſt, ſo that he no more ſees ſinne in beleevers, to take vengeance of them for it. But it were our loſs and miſery, if God ſhould not at all, and ſimply ſee ſinne in us; How then ſhould he purge it from us, and us from it? He is the Husbandman of his Vineyard, ſees, and cuts out every canker from his Vines, ſeeth, and pareth off every unprofitable ſprigg from the branches, by meanes whereof fruitfullneſſe followeth, where elſe▪ there muſt enſue barrenneſſe and rottenneſſe. Some Divines therefore thus diſtinguiſh, that Gods ſeeing of ſin may be conſidered as either in Articulo providentiae, (ſo he ſeeth all ſinns of all men alike to diſpoſe of them to his glory,) or in Articulo Iuſtificationis, (ſo he ſeeth the ſinnes onelyonly of the unjuſtified; Ier. 18. 23. Forget not their iniquity, neither blot out their ſin from thy ſight: but the ſinnes of the juſtified are forgotten, and blotted out of his remembrance and ſight (as the conſtant phraſe of Scripture affirmeth) no more to be imputed. If they mean onelyonly in this latter ſenſe, they erre not.
By that which hath been ſaid, we may eaſily perceive (without any further and new ſumming up the particulars) what the aſſertions are which may be truly and properly charged with Antinomiſm, and gave firſt the Term of Antinomiſm to the Aſſertors.
Now let us ſee alſo what the Tenents of Maſter Baxters Antinomiſts are, and what opinions he curſeth to Hell, unde the name of Antinomianiſm. Their Hereſies according to Maſter Baxter are theſe which follow.
1. That Juſtification is, or there is a Juſtification from Eternity. pag. 93.
2. That it is an immanent act in God. pa. 173.
3. That our Evangelicall righteouſneſſe by which we are juſtified, is without us in Chriſt. pa. 109. or performed by Chriſt, and not by our ſelves. pa. 111.
4. That Juſtification is a free act of God, without any condition on our part. pa. 169, 170.
5. That God ſeeth not ſin in his juſtified ones, pa. 207.
6. That we muſt not work or perform duties for life and ſalvation, but from life and ſalvation: or that we muſt not make the attaining of juſtification, or ſalvation, an end of our endeavours, but obey in thankfullneſſe onelyonly, becauſe we are ſaved and juſtified. pa. 324, 325. 330.
7. That they acknowledge no condition of life, but bare beliefe in the narroweſt ſenſe, that is, either belief of pardon, and juſtification, and Reconciliation, or affiance in Chriſt, for it: ſo alſo they acknowledg no proper damning ſin, but unbelief, in that ſtrict ſenſe, as is oppoſite to this faith, i. e. the not believing in Chriſt as our Saviour. Append▪ pa. 20, 21.
8. To theſe he addeth many more, (or rather moſtly the ſame in other Termes) out of the Marrow of Modern Divinity, (I mean the book ſo entitled) which in due place we may as far as ſhall be thought needfull, examine. Appen. pa. 100. to pa. 106.
Laſtly, he ſeems to accuſe them of all the prodigious Doctrines which Colyer, Spriggs, Hobſon, and the reſt of that Anabaptiſtical, Enthuſiaſticall, and phanatick ſtrain of men, have (if indeed they be of them that have at any time) ſaid and unſaid; whether ſuch as they have derived from Nicolas Stock, David George, Thomas Muncer, John of Leyden, Cniperdolins, &c. and others of the ſame ſtamp in theſe latter times: or ſuch as either of them hath by a kind of Necromancy raiſed up from the aſhes of Manes, Samoſatenus, Arrius, and other curſed Hereticks of antient times. All theſe he would willingly inure upon the Antinomians, i. e. upon them that will not ſay the ſame things with him, who ſpeaks the ſame things with the Jeſuits in the point of Juſtification. This he doth ſubtlely, and underhand, to beguile his unwary reader. Append. pa. 99.
Of all theſe onelyonly the fift hath been (as far as ever I could finde) by any conſiderate and judicious perſon, nicknamed with Antinoniſm, untill Maſter Baxter and ſome other of his fellowes in theſe late years have taken upon them a Soveraignty, as Lords and judges from Peters Chair, which they have Canonized again, to baptiſe with new names, all the Doctrines of the Goſpell that croſſe the pride of their ſelfe-ighteouſneſſe.
And even the ſift it ſelf in Scripture ſenſe (as I have before ſhewed) is a Soul-comforting truth, which we muſt no more ſuffer to be wreſted from us, than our Chriſt and all our happineſſe by him, vizt. that God ſeeth not ſin in his juſtified ones, to impute i…, to hate and condemn them for it. Hee ſeeth not the guilt of any ſin upon them, having laid it and the condemnation to which it obliged, upon Chriſt Jeſus. But that God doth not ſimply ſee ſin in them, either Originall or Actuall, to act about it in a way of grace and truth, according to his promiſes in Chriſt; This I take to be a foppery, the fruit of mens willfullneſſe, and pertinacity, to have their own words and phraſes ſtand as impregnable as Chriſts truth lapt up in them. Let it be called Antinomiſm, or Antigoſpelliſm, or what elſe Maſter Baxter will ſtile it, I ſhall not herein withſtand him; To me the truth and ſpirit of the Doctrines conteined in the word, ſufficeth, the letter I ſhall no further propugn or oppugn, than as through it the ſpirit and truth is levelled at.
To the firſt and ſecond I have before ſpoken, and let any man upon earth be produced, that ever charged them with Antinomianiſm, ſaving Maſter Baxter himſelfe, or one of his Diſciples: And if they be Antinomian Tenents, then is Maſter Baxter one of thoſe Antinomians, being forced after his long and impotent cavill againſt, as laſt to grant both; as wee have before ſeen.
To the third, I have alſo before anſwered. Neither hath Maſter Baxter named, nor can he (I am confident) name one man, but either a Papiſt, or at beſt an Arminian, that before him hath either called Faith and Goſpel obedience the Evangelicall Righteouſneſſe by which we are juſtified: Or that hath denyed our goſpell righteouſneſſe by which we are juſtified to be without us, in Chriſt. So that he pronounceth here all the orthodox of all Churches, yea, all profeſſed Chriſtians, ſaving Papiſts, Arminians, and (perhaps) Socinians to be Antinomians: So much of Antichriſtian pride and impudence poſſeſſeth him.
To the fourth and ſeventh I anſwer,
1. That they are contradictory either to other. For how can both be true, that they affirm Juſtification to be a free Act of God without any condition on our part, and yet teach alſo Faith or affiance in Chriſt to be a [neceſſary] condition of our Juſtification? who ſhall take upon him to defend him that arraigneth and proveth himſelf to be a ſlanderer?
2. Yet may it without contradiction be both affirmed, that Juſtification as an act immanent and Eternall in God, is abſolute and without condition, but as it is tranſient and Terminate upon the conſcience of a believer, not to be without condition.
3. Becauſe the Scripture never nameth Faith, much leſſe works, the condition of Juſtification in time; to queſtion whether Faith itſelf may not more properly be termed by ſome other denomin…tion in reference to juſtification, than a Condition, is no peece of Antinomiſm, but a point of Chriſtian prudence to conſider and examine: ſpecially at ſuch a time when Maſter Baxter and other of the Popes Factors, under the word condition beſtirre themſelves to re-erect Juſtification by works.
4. That Juſtification by that which Maſter Baxter abaſingly calleth bare belief, or affiance in Chriſt the Saviour, i. e. by Faith without works, is no Antinomian Doctrine, but the Doctrine which Chriſt and Paul, and the reſt of the Apoſtles, have preached and ſealed with their blood; that which all the reformed Churches have unanim…uſly maintained, and do maintain unto this day: and that which Antichriſt with his vaſſalls, and others apoſtatized from the reformed Churches to them do purſue with fire and fury unto ruine. With whom though Mr. Bax. come up in the rear, driving Jehu like furiouſly in his Charriot, to deſtroy it, yet ſhall it ſtand impregnable, as the prime Article of their Creed, who either are, or ſhall be juſtified and ſaved.
To the ſixth, I ſhall reſerve my anſwer untill I come to examine the forequoted places of Maſter Baxter, together with his impetuous and fiery diſpute againſt it, Append. pa. 76. and thence forward unto pa. 98. where wee ſhall find him combating againſt this opinion, with as much gallantry, and poſſibly with no leſſe ſucceſſe than the Dragon fought againſt Michael.
In the interim, I doubt not thence (after the queſtion rightly ſtated) to maintain the poſition, as our Divines moſt eminent in the reformed Churches have taught it, to be the ſacred and ſound Doctrine of the Goſpell, as free from Antinomiſm, as the contrary aſſertion of Maſter Baxter is full of Popery.
The examination of the things▪ conteined in the eighth and ninth, I ſhall leave to their proper place, particularly to be examined, becauſe they have a multitude of particulars congeſted in them, requiring particular anſwers.
From all that hath been ſaid upon this point, wee may take up two obſervations, in reference to Maſter Baxters dealing therein.
1. That there is no truth and ſincerity in his pretence of fighting againſt the Antinomians (truly ſo called) throughout this his Tractate, (For he medleth not at all with their erroneous Tenents:) But contrariwiſe, that he uſeth meer fraud, to inure the odious Term of Antinomiſm upon the choice and moſt pretious Doctrines of the Goſpel, delivered by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and taught and defended by the moſt able and moſt faithfull Miniſters of Chriſt in all ages, to make both the pure Goſpel, and the defenders thereof, to ſtink in the noſtrills of unread and unwary men: ſubtlely concealing the names of thoſe worthies which have taught and maintained theſe truths, leſt their light and glory ſhould bring his Doctrines, contrary to theirs, into ſuſpition firſt, then to examination, and laſtly to an abhomination among men. How much more candour do we find in his fellowes the Arminians, or Remonſtrants? Theſe in all their Tenents wherein they diſſent from the Proteſtant Churches, do not load the contrary opinion with the imputation of Antinomiſm; but throughout their Apology, ever and anon ingeniouſly confeſſe of that which they hold, Contra quod fere hactenus creditum eſt, in theſe, and in words equipollent, acknowledging ſtill their opinions to be wholly againſt the judgement of the beſt Churches and Divines before them. Maſter Baxter it ſeems hath more of the ſerpent in him than they had, therefore followes the ſteps of our Engliſh Arminians, rather than thoſe in Holland before them. For as theſe blaſted the ſacred truths which they oppoſed with the name of Puritaniſm, ſo doth this man with the name of Antinomianiſm, to make them odious. A trick which the old Phariſees had learned of their Father, Jo. 8. 44. and propagated to their ſonns the Papiſts, to beſmear the Doctrines of Chriſt with the infamous titles of Schiſm, Nazariſm, Hereſie. Who then will lay it as a fault to their Children in our times, if they doe alſo Patrizare.
Secondly, that he hath the like fraudulent deſign in mingling with the truths of the Goſpel, which he brandeth with Antinomiſm, the dreams of Colyer, Spriggs, Hobſon, and other Ranters, (if indeed theſe be ſuch, for I have not read them) giving the ſame brand to theſe as to the former; by this feat endeavouring to inſtill into the mindes of them that will be deceived,
1. That all the hereticall and blaſphemous Doctrines which theſe men teach, are Antinomian.
2. That the truthes which the one ſide teach againſt Antichriſt, and the Blaſphemies which the other ſide vent againſt Chriſt, are of one Nature, and the former to be no leſſe abhorred than the latter. Now if the Pamphlets of theſe men be ſo abhominable as Maſter Baxter affirmeth, and others alſo that are both able to judge, and faithfull to give their judgement, have told me; (for I acknowledge my ſelf never to have been ſo ill at leiſure to ſpend two hours in reading what any, or all of them have written) he dealeth unjuſtly to yoake them together with thoſe tenents which he falſely accuſeth of Antinomiſm, yea, with thoſe that are rightly fathered upon Antinomians indeed. For granting that they hold ſome Tenents of the Antinomians, yet this neither argueth that all their hereſies and blaſphemies are ſo many peeces of Antinomiſm; Nor yet that the Antinomians ſpeaking the ſame things with theſe in the points proper to their ſect, do alſo cloſe with them in their abhominable Doctrines that are totally alien from the Antinomiſts Tenents. Elſe becauſe Maſter Baxter joineth with the Jeſuits in the Doctrine of Juſtification by works, we might conclude that in all points he is a Jeſuit, holdeth not onelyonly lies, equivocations, and mentall reſervations; but alſo murthers, Maſſacres, Seditions, Powder treaſons, and all other practices deviſed in hell it ſelf, to be Meritorious works, if done to the advancing of Romes intereſt. And becauſe he holdeth the very Act of believing to juſtifie, with the Socinians, therefore he is in all other the moſt blaſphemous of their aſſertions againſt Chriſt and his blood, a Socinian alſo: or on the other ſide, that the Jeſuits and Socinians are in all things, becauſe in ſome things of the ſame judgement with Maſter Baxter. Were it the truth of Chriſt which Maſter Baxter goeth about to propagate, he would doubtleſſe ſeek the propagation of it in Chriſts Spirit, and Chriſts way. When we ſee ſuch ſerpentine windings and crookedneſſe in his diſputes, who can but judge that it is the work of the Old Serpent about which he is imployed? Neither the truth of Chriſt, nor Chriſt which is the truth, have any ſuch impotency in them, as to need any deceits and ſhifts for their ſupport. When Mr. Baxter, yea when all the Jeſuits have raiſed all their miſts of Sophiſtry, Sycophancy contumely, &c. as thick as the ſmoke from the bottomleſſe pit, to dim the beams of Gods grace ſhining forth in the Sunne of Righteouſneſſe; not one Raie thereof ſhall be thereby diminiſhed, it ſhall hide the [pure light of the] Goſpell onelyonly from them that periſh, whoſe eies the God of this World hath blinded. 2. Cor. 4. 3, 4. No one Soul ſhall be thereby beguiled, ſave thoſe onelyonly that were made to be taken and deſtroyed, 2 Pet. 2. 12.
A large Catalogue more of the Antinomian Tenents are ſet forth by Maſter Anthony Burgeſs, affixed to his Lectures againſt them: Which he ſaith he hath gathered from Luthers works againſt them. I will not queſtion his faithfullneſſe in collecting them, whether Iſlebius and his Diſciples directly maintained ſuch Doctrines; or whether Luther in proſecuting them, enumerates theſe as abſurdities that would follow upon their Doctrine? whether they are imaginary, or reall opinions of any ſect of men, the moſt of them are deteſtable. But I find not that either Maſter Burgeſs, or Mr. Bax, can name any one creature under the Sun, that hath declared by words or writing, that he held them. If they can, we ſhall joyn with them, as diſſenters from, and excepters againſt every ſuch perſon. That theſe Antinomians of the former age were filthy dreamers, looſe livers, ſuch as turned the Grace of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt into laſciviouſneſs, is very probable, if not certain, from that which Calvin and others have written againſt Antinomians and Libertines. And from ſuch we have no leſs abhorrence then Mr. Baxter.
But while Mr. Baxter declaimeth againſt the innocent, hee proclaimes himſelfe a rank Antinomian, in teaching, and maintaining that the perfect obedience and righteouſneſſe of the Law are not required, and conſequentially not due under the Goſpel. Iſlebius himſelf never ſpake ſo derogatorily to the righteouſneſs of the Law.