Satan at Noon, Article 1 – Article 2
1 Article.
In the firſt paper of articles exhibited againſt the Dr.
That the fiery deity of Chriſt mingleth, and mixeth it ſelf with our fleſh.
Anſwer.
I was then ſpeaking of the myſticall union between Chriſt and his Church, and in the illuſtration of this union, I applyed that expreſſion out of the 8 of the Canticles, He mingled his wine and his milk together: ſo in this union Chriſts divine nature mingleth it ſelf with our humanity, his ſpirit without fleſh. This expreſſion Maſter Tickle was pleaſed to charge with blaſphemy, asking me what I meant by fleſh, I anſwered (in conference) by fleſh I underſtood not the ſinfull and fleſhly part of the ſoul, that luſteth againſt the ſpirit, for with this there can be no union. Secondly, nor the outward elementary fleſh of the body, but by fleſh, I underſtand our pure humanity or the regenerated part of the ſoul, the converted, part of the ſpirit; and thus the ſpirit of Chriſt, and the regenerated part were really in union one with the other, according to the Apoſtles phraſe. We are made partakers of the divine nature.
At this anſwer he had nothing to reply.
The proof of this article.
Maſter John Tickle Miniſter of Abingdon, and one of the Aſſiſtants to the Commiſſioners ſworn, and examined.
This Deponent ſaith that Doctor Pordage did deliver in the Pulpit, that the fiery Deity of Chriſt mingleth and mixeth it ſelf with our*The Dr ſaid the deity of Chriſt mingles it ſelf with our fleſh, that is execrable blaſphemy. Then, with our pure humanity, that's canting nonſence: then, with the ſoul of Chriſt, moſt unſound and ignorant. Fleſh, and being charged with blaſphemy by this Deponent; he repeated his ſence thus, he did not mean with our corruption, but with our fleſh, holding his hand over the Pulpit.
And this Deponent being croſſe examined to ſeverall Interrogatories exhibited by the Doctor farther ſaith, that after the Doctor held up his hand, as he hath formerly depoſed, the Doctor ſaid, that he did not mean with our fleſh, but with the ſoul of Chriſt, and that this article was delivered without any the leaſt limitation, as to the ſenſe of it, and that the ſame was fully and roundly delivered in the Doctors ſermon at Ildeſly, whereupon the Deponent charged him with blaſphemy, and afterwards they fell into a diſpute.
Article 2.
That the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is a ſapleſs righteouſneſſe.
The Doctors anſwer to this article is.
I thus deliver the truth: as I was paraphraſing on that portion of ſcripture mentioned in the 9 of Daniel and the 24, of everlaſting righteouſneſſe,Ʋntruth, notoriouſsy falſe, read the proof and the he…ds of his ſermon in the animadverſion. I did ſay words to this effect, That the imputative righteouſneſſe of another was a ſapleſſe and empty righteouſneſſe to all thoſe th…t had no right, or intereſt in it. &c. I ſhall deſire a little to explain my ſelf on this propoſition, that the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt will prove a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe, for he that hath not the ſpirit of Chriſt dwelling in his heart by faith notwithſtanding all hisaThat application can there be of Chriſt and his merits without the ſpirit. application of Chriſt and his merits, yet to him it is but a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe: ſo ſaith the ſcripture, he that hath not the ſpirit of Chriſt is none of his, though he ſhould apply the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to himſelf, But here I do not deny the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, nor his active and paſſive obedience to be the materiall cauſe of juſtification, Yea, I own and acknowledge Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be the ſouls righteouſneſſe in point of juſtification when it is applyed upon a true ground according to the truebSo Mr Erbery would ſay, that Chriſt was God according to the Scriptures, in his ſenſe. ſenſe of the ſpirit in the Scriptures.
The proof of this article
The aforeſaid Maſter John Tickle examined to this article.
This Deponent ſaith that the Doctor delivered that the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe.
And being croſſe examined to this article, and asked by the Doctor whether theſe words (viz) (the fiery deity of Chriſt in the centre of our ſouls, burning &c.) were not added as ſome limitation to this ſecond article.
This Deponent ſaith, he doth not remember any ſuch addition as is mentioned in the interrogatory, unleſſe it were in*Thus, which righteouſneſs Dan. 9.24. Is not the ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, But the fiery, &c. oppoſition to the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt which he called ſapleſſe, and he farther ſaith, the Doctor did not deliver any ſuch limitation as he makes in his anſwer thereunto, and that there was no ſuch word ascLet the Chriſtian Reader obſerve this paſſage. except ſpoken nor any thing like unto it.
Maſter Roger Stephens of Reading Gentleman ſworn and examined.
To the ſecond article this Deponent ſaith, that Doctor Pordage delivered in a ſermon at Ildeſly, that the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe, a mere empty thing,Obſerve what was the drift of the Drs ſermon and he doth not remember any thing to the contrary but that the ſame was an intire ſentence, and only ſo, and that to his apprehenſion the drift of his ſermon then was to take off the ſtrength and efficacy of Chriſts righteouſneſſe.
And this Deponent farther ſaith, that in the ſaid ſermon the Doctor did deliver theſe words (viz) you are not to look to this (meaning as the Deponent apprehended Chriſts righteouſneſſe) but to the fiery deity, burning in the center of the ſoul, conſuming and deſtroying ſin there, which laſt mentioned ſentence did not immediately follow the words which he uſed when he ſaid, the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was ſapleſſe, but the ſame was farther off in the midſt of his ſermon.On the defendants part.
In behalf of the Doctour to this article,
Mary Pocock ſworn and examined.
This Deponent (being asked whether ſhe heard the Dr deliver the ſecond article (viz.) That the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, was ſapleſſe, and whether it was delivered with a limitation or not) ſaith it was with this limitation (viz.) Except the firery deity of Chriſt be in our ſouls, burning up our luſts and corruptions.
And this Deponent (being asked whether theſe laſt words were ſpoken together with the other words to make up one ſentence) ſaith yes, thus that the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was ſapleſſe, except the fiery deity of Chriſt be in the center of our ſouls burning up our luſts and corruptions.
Richard Higgs of Sulhamſted Turner ſworn and examined.
This Deponent ſaith, that he hath been a hearer of Doctor Pordage, at certain times for five or ſix years laſt paſt, and that during that time, for ought the Deponent knows, the ſcope of the Doctors Miniſtry hath not been againſt the right or due application of Chriſts righteouſneſſe, but againſt the mis-application thereof, for ought he knows: But this Deponent being asked whether he hath been a conſtant hearer of the Dr, he ſaith he hears him very often, but he is at his own pariſh in the mornings, and ſometimes he is abſent at other times, but he hath often heard the Dr.
And this Deponent being further asked, what he hath uſually heard the Dr preach concerning the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, he ſaith he cannot charge his memory, but hath a note to which he would reflect for recollecting of his memory, and thereupon produced a note drawn in the form of an examination, in which, what he ſhould ſay was preſcribed unto him, which note was given him from the Dr as he confeſſeth: and being asked what himſelf, or what the Dr meant by Chriſts righteouſneſſe, he ſaith he cannot depoſe:fThis witneſſe the Dr called, godly, ſober, learned was the animadverſion. But here the Dr interpoſing ſaith, that Chriſts righteouſneſſe is his active and paſſive obedience. Upon which the Deponent was further asked, what was Chriſts active obedience, he ſaith it was his ſuffering on the croſſe.
Daniel Roberts of Reading feltmaker, ſworn and examined.
This Deponent ſaith he doth not remember he ever heard the Dr preach above once, which was about three years ſince at Bradfield on thegThe men of his perſwaſion keep the Lords day on this account, becauſe it is the cuſtome of the nation. Sabboth day, as the Deponent was going to Wayhill Fair, and that then the Drs text was upon that Scripture (The Kingdome of Heaven is like unto a treaſure hid in the fields,) which treaſure the Dr did ſoundly apply to the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, and that he did very much extoll the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, but he doth not remember any expreſſion of imputative righteouſneſſe, and that to his beſt remembrance, the Dr did explain the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to be his obedience to his Fathers will, as far as the Deponent could judge, and the Deponent being asked whether the Drs drift in his ſermon were not to advance an inherent righteouſneſſe, he ſaith he cannot remember.