The Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Christs Righteousness Part 2, Tract · Chapter 4

The Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Christs Righteousness Part 2 · Tract · Chapter 4

p. 75CHAP. IV. An Anſwer to the Arguments againſt the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs.

WE are now to examin the Arguments which are brought againſt this Doctrine; where as I ſhall paſs by none that I meet with which ſeem to have any weight, and whoſe ſolution may add any evidence to this weighty Truth; ſo I ſhall not count my ſelf concerned in a great number of Objections, that are heaped up by ſome againſt it, ſome being meer deviſed cavilations, and many nothing to the purpoſe. For our Oppoſites deal in this Argument as the Arminians did in the point of Reprobation, load it with calumnies, or with the unadviſed expreſſions of ſome particular men, but ſay but little that concludeth againſt the Truth it ſelf. Their uſual Fallacy is Plus in concluſione quam in praemiſſis, or ignoratio Elenchi; when the plain Queſtion is, Whether we are accepted and juſtified for the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt wrought for us, and given to us by the Promiſe of the Goſpel, and accepted by Faith; And their Arguments ſhould conclude againſt this naked truth, they uſually conclude againſt Imputation of this Righteouſneſs as expreſt by the Antinomians, or by Popular and not Logical Men, or elſe againſt ſome terms of Art applyed to this Subject. p. 76The like they do when they diſpute againſt the Imputation of our ſins to Chriſt; yet ſome Inſtances of this kind I muſt take notice of, that the Reader may be the more excited to obſerve it in their Books.

Object.Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is the Morally Efficient, ſc. the meritorious Cauſe of our Juſtification,Hotchkis ut ſupra, p. 23. therefore it is not the proper matter, or properly a material Cauſe of it: Matter being an internal conſtitutive Cauſe, and an efficient and external Cauſe, which cannot agree to the ſame thing.

Anſw.The Queſtion is not (nor did ever any man ſay it that knew what he ſaid) whether Chriſts Righteouſneſs be a proper material Cauſe, as Matter is oppoſed to a Form: When it is ſaid to be the Matter or formal Cauſe of our Juſtification, it is meant only Analogically; Chriſts Righteouſneſs conſiſted in Actions and Paſſions, which were neither Matter nor Forms as taken for Internal Eſſential Parts of any thing: But when theſe Actions and Paſſions are the thing for which a man is juſtified, they are analogically called the Matter of his Righteouſneſs, becauſe his Righteouſneſs is made up of them; and as a man is accepted for theſe very Actions and Paſſions wrought for him, and imputed to him, ſo they may be called the Formal Cauſe of our Juſtification, as a man is denominated Juſt before God from that Righteouſneſs: And thus as Chriſts Righteouſneſs is analogically called Matter or p. 77Form, ſo it may analogically be ſaid to conſtitute a man Juſt or Righteous before God, or to be pars conſtituens hominis juſtificati, quatenus juſcificati, as any other Accident, moral or phyſical, intrinſecal or extrinſecal, being appli d to the ſubject maketh the concretum ex ſubjecto & accidenti, and ſo the ſubject in that compoſition is as the matter, though otherways perhaps the Efficient; and the Accident as the Form; both are the Conſtitutive Parts of that concretum, yet Analogically. Thus much for the Logick of this Argument, now for the Divinity. It is true that Chriſt's Obedience offered as a Ranſom for all the Elect in general is the Meritorious Cauſe of their Salvation, but when it is applied to each particular perſon (as all Cauſes muſt be applied to the Patient that they may produce their Effect) it is that thing for which God doth accept and juſtifie them in particular, and ſo is ſaid to be the matter of their Righteouſneſs, the Material, and by ſome the Formal Cauſe of Juſtification,de Just. ch. 22. vid. Dav. Atque revera in juſtificatione, talis cauſa formalis ponenda eſt, quae ſimul & meritoria eſſe poſſit: Niſi enim contineat illam dignitatem in ſe, propter quam homo rite juſtificatus reputetur, nunquam erit formalis cauſa, &c.

2.Object. If Chriſt's Righteouſneſs be imputed to us, then we are freed from all obligation to Obedience: If he hath obeyed for us,Trueman ut ſupra, p. 118.4. what need is there of our obedience, we cannot mend his, and if he hath done all, there is nothing left for us to do?

p. 78Anſw.We are freed from any obligation to obedience of that kind and to that end for which Chriſt obeyed: His Obedience was the Fulfilling of the Law of Works, as a Covenant of Life, and by fulfilling it he purchaſed life for us, and ſo was the perfective end of that Law or Covenant for righteouſneſs to them that believe, Rom. 10.4. Perfect obedience to the Law of Works is not required of us, that we ſhould live by it, or periſh for lack of it, as it would have been, had not Chriſt obeyed for us. But it doth not follow from hence that we are freed from all Obligations of Obedience upon other accounts, viz. as Creatures to a Creator, as Servants to an abſolute and ſoveraign Lord, as Children to a Father, and as the Preparatives to an Eternal Life; upon theſe accounts we muſt obey ſtill, though not to be juſtified by it: Chriſt himſelf is not freed from the general obligation of obedience to God, as he is a Man, though he hath finiſhed his ſatisfactory Obedience to the Law as the Means and Covenant of Life, and is for ever acquitted from the Obligation thereto: In like manner his Obedience hath acquitted us from all obligation to the Law as the way of life, yet not from all Obedience. But this Argument, as all the reſt of this Author in the ſame place, is levelled againſt a Popular Expreſſion of this Doctrine, and are nothing to the main Queſtion, viz. That Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is ſo imputed to us, that we are accounted to have obeyed in him, to have fulfilled the Law, to have done and ſuffered all in him, &c. which p. 79Poſition is true only in this Sence, That all which Chriſt did and ſuffered was intended for us, is given to us, and doth as really juſtifie us, as if we had fulfilled it our ſelves. But it is not true that God accounteth us to have perſonally obeyed in Chriſts obeying, or us to have ſuffered in Chriſts ſuffering, to have fulfilled the Law in his fulfilling it: For then we muſt be accounted to have ſatisfied for our ſelves in him, and to have purchaſed our own Juſtification. The Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is God's, accounting it to be wrought for us, and ſo he accepteth us for it; but not his accounting us to have wrought it, or to have been actively righteous as if we had fulfilled his Law.

But did not Chriſt obey as a common and publick perſon for all the Elect,Queſt. and ſo he and they are one in Law, and ſo what he did they are accounted to have done.

Chriſt was a common and publick perſon in that he intended his Obedience not for himſelf nor for any one perſon, but for the whole Company of the Elect: Chriſt and they are one in Law, in that the benefit of his ſatisfying the Law, was intended for them, and in time conferred on them: But he was not a common perſon, or one in Law with them ſo as they might be properly reckoned to have done what he did; for this holdeth only where the common perſon is a Delegate or Commiſſioner of others, when they appoint him their p. 80Repreſentative, give him his Inſtructions and Authority to act in their Name, then they are lookt upon as doing what he doth, and not elſe. But it was God the Father and not Men that ſent Chriſt, and appointed him to die for the Elect, gave him all his Inſtructions what to do and ſuffer, and then accepted it for them, being done by his own Appointment, not by theirs.

But are we not made Righteous with Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, Queſt.and ſo may be accounted to have obeyed, or fulfilled the Law in him?

Anſw.We are made righteous with his righteouſneſs, not morally, as if we were made perſonally Holy and obedient by it, or were ſo accounted by God; but legally we are made righteous, that is, juſtified by his righteouſneſs, acquitted from condemnation, and accepted to life eternal. Therefore we are juſtified as ſinners, as ungodly, Rom. 4.5, 7. in the way of repentance, and acknowledgment of our ſins, by faith in the promiſe of life through Chriſt. But we are not juſtified as innocent or blameleſs in our ſelves: Juſtification doth not find us righteous but makes us righteous, viz. it acquitteth and reconcileth us guilty, condemned ſinners for the righteonſneſs of Chriſt; and thus we are made righteous in Law, ſuch as ſhall not be condemned, but have eternal life.

p. 81Are we then juſtified according to the Premiant and Retributive part of the Law, Queſt.and not according to the Preceptive part alſo?

Anſw.We are juſtified according to the Precept as well as according to the Promiſe, Chriſt having fulfilled or obeyed the Precepts for us, and thereby procured all the reward that was promiſed, with ſome addition of happineſs, becauſe of the eminency of his Perſon and Obedience. He alſo purchaſed deliverance from the Curſe threatned, by undergoing the Curſe for us, yet we cannot be ſaid to have obeyed the Precepts, or to have born the Curſe in him in any proper ſence: He did it in our behalf, that we might thereby be juſtified and brought to life as certainly as if we were innocent, but not that we ſhould be accounted really innocent in our own perſons.M. Baxt. 4. diſput. of Juſt. p. 263. As for the diſtinction of Righteouſneſs according to the Precept and according to the Sanction, or retributive part of the Law, and that again divided into the promiſe and the threatning:Idem Anſwer to Dr. Tully, p. 50. Righteouſneſs according to the Promiſe being jus ad donum, a right to the thing promiſed, and righteouſneſs according to the threatning being jus ad impunitatem, a right to impunity or to eſcape puniſhment; this diſtinction I ſay as to the matter of Juſtification, is very needleſs and impertinent. For it is the fulfilling of the Precept which gives right to the reward promiſed, and the violation of the Precept which intituleth to puniſhment. What though p. 82the righteouſneſs of obedience to the Precept, and the right to the bleſſing of the Promiſe differ as the cauſe & effect, yet the latter doth oppoſe the former, when we are to be juſtified before God; ſo that if we have right to life on the account of Gods Promiſe to the righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and this righteouſneſs be his obeying the precept of the Law, then his obedience to the precept is imputed to us alſo, and is the foundation of our right to the Promiſe: The like is to be ſaid of our right to impunity, which is founded upon Chriſts ſuffering the puniſhment for us, and therefore his ſuffering the penalty is imputed to us alſo, and thus that which is built upon this diſtinction falls to the ground, viz. That Righteouſneſs as to the Promiſe and Threatning of the Law being in ſome ſort diſtinct from the Righteouſneſs of Obedience to the Precept; that therefore we may have the former without the latter, i.e. we may have a right to life by the promiſe of the Goſpel, and a right to be delivered from wrath, and yet Chriſt's Righteouſneſs of Obedience and Suffering not to imputed to us. For this is the immediate Cauſe and Foundation of our right both to avoid the penalty and inherit the promiſe. The reſt of Mr. Trueman's Arguments I paſs by as being directed againſt the Antinomians only and not touching us, as alſo what he writes againſt the Imputation of Chriſt's active and paſſive Obedience in the ſence before explained, which is repeated by a later Author,Juſt. Evang. p. 54. as being partly impertinent and partly anſwered in the firſt p. 83Chapter. This later Author giveth us three Arguments againſt the Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs,p. 56. though he doth (as the others before him) miſs the ſtate of the Queſtion; reporting our Opinion thus, That Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is ſo imputed to us as if we are accounted to have perſonally done and ſuffered what he did:p. 57. His third Argument runneth wholly upon this miſtake, therefore I ſhall paſs it by, the two firſt deſerve ſome conſideration.

The Firſt Argument is:

If every Believer be perſonally righteous before God in the very individual Acts of Chriſts Righteouſneſs,p. 58. one of theſe two things will thence enſue: Either that Chriſt in his own perſon did perform all the particular Acts of Righteouſneſs required as due from each ſaved perſon; or elſe, That every ſaved perſons righteouſneſs before God is identically and numerically the ſame with Chriſt in his publick capacity as Mediator, and ſo every ſaved perſon is perſonally righteous with a Righteouſneſs that hath a ſtock of merit in it, ſufficient to ſave the World.

Anſw.This Argument is untrue both in the dilemma and in the conſequence: In the dilemma, becauſe there is no oppoſition betwixt the Members of it, viz. Chriſts performing the obedience due from every Believer, and their being righteous with a Righteouſneſs that hath p. 84an infinite merit in it: Theſe are not deſtructive the one of the other: The conſequence is untrue, becauſe neither of theſe things follow from the Doctrine of Imputation. The Error of this worthy perſon proceeded from his thruſting two Arguments into one, when the Form of it would not bear it: I ſhall therefore take leave to ſeparate them and anſwer them apart.

The one is, If we be juſtified by the very perſonal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, then he muſt have performed all the Duties that belong to every particular Believer, the Ceremonial and the Moral to the married and to the unmarried, to Parents, &c. But this he neither did nor could do: Ergò.

Anſw.We grant that Chriſt did not perform all the particular Duties of every particular Believer, nor was it neceſſary he ſhould. They acknowledge that what Chriſt did was ſufficient to ſatisfie the Law of Works and to purchaſe a new Covenant of Life, though he performed not the particular Duties of every particular Man. If it was ſufficient for this, why is it not ſufficient to juſtifie us by immediate Imputation: They will not ſay that our obedience to the Goſpel doth fill up the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt wherein it was ſhort or deſective, why might it not then juſtifie us abſolutely by the meer application of it to us as well as purchaſe that we ſhould be juſtified by New Obedience? This is further manifeſt by this, That the Subſtance and End of the Law, p. 85ſc. univerſal Love and Subjection to God in whatſoever he doth or ſhall command is equally the Duty of all men, and every one muſt habitually keep the whole Law: This was chiefly intended by God, and to be attended by Men; the particular Duties are various, and ſomething are the Duties of one which are not of another; and in many caſes things are and have been Duties at one time which have not been at another. It was therefore ſufficient that Jeſus Chriſt had the habit of all Grace and the readineſs to obey his Father in any thing that he ſhould require, as well as in thoſe things which he did actually perform, and that he did obey actually in as many things as the Father thought fi… to impoſe on him, which were not a few: The Law had its end by him, even perſonal Obedience, and thoſe particulars wherein he obſerved it were more honour to God than if we had all obſerved our particular Duties, becauſe of the Dignity of his perſon, and the ſupereminent meaſure of Grace and the Spirit from which he did obey. This is evident à pari: Adam brought condemnation upon all men, not by breaking every particular Command, which might concern every particular man, but by one act of Diſobedience, by breaking our Command, whereby his univerſal Obedience was tryed; Why might not then the Sovereign Law-maker impoſe upon Chriſt ſo much particular Duty for ſo many years as the Exerciſe of the Univerſal Habit of Obedience that was in him, and accept it as if he had fulfilled every particular p. 86of the Law? If he that offendeth in one Command is a Tranſgreſſor of the whole Law, James 2.10. Why may not he that keepeth it in all particulars required of him, and that was able and ready to keep it in any other, had they been impoſed, be accounted to have kept the whole Law? If they ſay, that Adam virtually broke the whole Law, I ſay that Chriſt virtually and habitually kept the whole Law; Therefore this was ſufficient that we might be juſtified by his Righteouſneſs. The ſame is to be ſaid concerning the Sufferings of Chriſt; he did not ſuffer all the particular Puniſhments due to every particular Sin of all Believers, nor ſome of the circumſtances of any puniſhment, viz. Eternity and Deſperation, &c. yet he ſuffered the Wrath and Curſe of God which was the ſubſtance of the Threatnings, and in ſuch an eminent manner as no meer Creature could have ſuffered, and with a Mind habitually ready and able to have endured any other particular Puniſhments if the Father had thought fit to enjoyn them: It was death in the general, the Curſe of God, which was the Subſtance of the Threatning; God diſpenſeth the particularities of Puniſhment as he pleaſeth, baring more and longer with ſome than others, giving more and greater Mercies to ſome than others, and will exempt ſome, even of the Wicked from Natural Death, even thoſe that ſhall be found alive at Chriſt's Coming: The particularities therefore of Puniſhments are not Eſſential to the Law, and Chriſt did bear the Subſtance of the p. 87Curſe with all the Particulars of it, which God thought ſit to inflict, being ready to have born more if it had ſo pleaſed the Father. Why is not this ſufficient to juſtifie us by Imputation, in concomitance with his active Obedience, as well as to procure our Juſtification, upon fulfilling Goſpel-Obedience, which they contend for? By this alſo we may anſwer that Argument which all our Opponents uſe as unanſwerable, viz. That Chriſt paid not the idem but the tantundem, not the very Obedience and Suffering due from every particular Believer, but ſomething in liew of it, and therefore it cannot be imputed to them for Righteouſneſs: For Chriſt did both, performing the idem in the Subſtance, obeying the ſame Law which obliged them in his univerſal Obedience, and ſuffering the Subſtance of the Curſe, and alſo in as many particulars of obedience and ſuffering as the Father thought fit to exact of him, and this which was ſo far idem, the ſame, being performed by ſuch a Perſon, was tantundem, equivalent to all the reſt which were not actually done or ſuffered by him: Yea he did habitually in the readineſs of his Mind, and virtually in the interpretation of his Actions and Paſſions do and ſuffer all the reſt. What ſome add, That Chriſt did not do and ſuffer the very individual Duties and Sufferings of each Believer,Trueman ut ſupra. is foreign, things being not individual before they exiſt, and Actions and Paſſions, ſuch as our Duties and Sufferings be, are individuated by the ſubjects wherein they p. 88exiſt, at leaſt in part, as are all other individual accidents, which cannot be but in that individual ſubject wherein they are. This therefore is impertinent.

The ſecond Particular in this Argument is; If every Believer be juſtified by the very Individual Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, then every ſaved Perſons Righteouſneſs before God, is identically and numerically the ſame with Chriſts, in his publick capacity as Mediator, and ſo with a Righteouſneſs that hath a ſtock of Merit in it, ſufficient to ſave the World.

Anſw.We grant the whole, That every Believer is righteous with that Righteouſneſs which Chriſt wrought as Mediator, and which is infinitely meritorious: nor doth what is objected, in the leaſt diſprove it.p. 59. It is ſaid, that Chriſts Righteouſneſs was the righteouſneſs of God-Man, that no creature could perform any thing in that manner, and with thoſe circumſtances as he did; yea, that ſome things which Chriſt did, would be unlawful for Man to do, and that all he did and ſuffered, was in purſuance of the Office of a Mediator: the whole comes but to this, that men are not, could not be the authors, workers of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, either in the matter, circumſtances, or immediate ends of it, and therefore they cannot be juſtified by it: this is no conſequence, they are juſtified by it, as wrought for them by the Mediator God-Man, though not as wrought by them. Moreover, though the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt and a Believer be numerically the ſame righteouſneſs, p. 89the infinitely meritorious Righteouſneſs of the Mediator; yet it agreeth to them in divers manners, and ſo hath different effects: it is Chriſts Righteouſneſs as the efficient who wrought it, as the Mediator performing it in purſuance of his Mediatorial Office, and thus it is one perfect and compleat publick Righteouſneſs, ſatisfying the Law, purchaſing eternal life for all the Elect, whereof Chriſt is the only immediate and proper ſubject; but it is a Believers righteouſneſs ſecondarily, as being intended and wrought for him, that he ſhould be juſtified by it, and ſo his only, ſo far forth as he ſtands in need of it; not as Mediatorial, or meritorious, or univerſal extending to others alſo; it is infinite and meritorious as it is in Chriſt, not as it is in a Believer; for there it is an infinite meritorious Righteouſneſs accepted for him, ſo far as he needeth it, not as infinite or univerſal for all the Elect. Thus alſo we may anſwer what is commonly ſaid; if we are righteous with Chriſts Righteouſneſs, then we ſatisfied for our ſelves; we are our own Mediators, ſeing by that righteouſneſs Chriſt ſatisfied and was our Mediator. For the matter of the righteouſneſs may be imputed to us, and not the circumſtances and qualifications of it; we may be accepted for that righteouſneſs, and yet not be accounted to have wrought it for our ſelves or others: it is a common rule, Quie quid recipitur, recipitur ad modum recipientis; a thing is received according to the capacity of the receiver; not always p. 90according to the extent of the thing, or the virtue of the efficient. The Sun which is ſeen by half the World at once; the ſound which is heard by many thouſands, are ſeen and heard by each one in particular for themſelves, but not accordieg to that univerſal extent whereby they are ſeen and heard by all the reſt. But to come nearer the caſe, Gods act of Creation and conſervation is infinite, and yet every creature created and preſerved thereby is finite: Gods courſe to the actions of the creatures is infinite as proceeding from him, yet it maketh not the actions of the Creatures infinite; yea, all the acts of creation, preſervation & concourſe are of the ſame ſpecies, of the ſame ſort as they proceed from God; it is not one kind whereby Men and Angels are created, preſerved and aſſiſted, and another whereby the ſame things are done for lower creatures, but the ſame infinite power of God applied to each one according to their neceſſities, yet this Identity of the Divine Acts doth not make the Creatures to be of the ſame ſpecies or nature, or to exiſt in the ſame manner, or all to operate with one kind of Action. In like manner the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt as wrought by him, and proceeding from him, and intended for all the Elect, is infinite and meritorious, but as applied to every ſingle perſon, it procureth ſo much pardon as they have need of, and ſatisfyeth ſo much of the Law as they are obliged to, and ſo purchaſeth Eternal Life for every one according to their neceſſity and ſtation. Of the ſame nature is that common p. 91Objection, viz. If we be juſtified by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs then are we as righteous as Chriſt; which followeth not, unleſs his Righteouſneſs was applied to every particular Believer in the ſame manner as it agreeth to Chriſt, which is untrue. Chriſt is righteous inherently, as the immediate, proper Subject of his own Obedience, and actively as the Author of that Obedience, as he that in his own perſon fulfilled the Law: A Believer is not at all accounted the Author of that Righteouſneſs, is not lookt upon as the perſon that obeyed, nor is he the ſubject of inheſion, in whom that Righteouſneſs doth inhere properly and phyſically, but he is a legal, ſecondary ſubject, who receiveth the immediate benefit of that Righteouſneſs, as being intended for his Juſtification. Again, Chriſt wrought his Righteouſneſs for all the Elect in the Office and Perſon of a Mediator, and ſo was not only righteous as a ſingle perſon, but alſo as a publick perſon; but each believer is righteous as a ſingle perſon, by that publick and univerſal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt applied to his particular caſe and neceſſity. If a Debtor be diſcharged by his Sureties paying the Debt, may he be ſaid to be as good, as ſolvent a man as his Surety, becauſe the Sureties Payment is imputed to him. If an Innocent perſon be accepted to die for one that deſerves it, may the Guilty perſon be ſaid to be as innocent, or to have ſatisfied for his Crime, as much as the Innocent that died for it: The Payment and the Puniſhment are accepted for the Debtor and p. 92the Guilty; ſo that they are freed by them, but the honour of being ſolvent and innocent, of paying and ſuffering,p. 61. for a Friend, belongeth not to them but to the Sponſor.

This Authors ſecond Argument is,Object. 2. If we be juſtified by the Acts of Chriſt's Perſonal Righteouſneſs, then are we juſtified by the Works of the Law; but it's the Apoſtles whole deſign to the Romans, to prove that we are not juſtified by the Works of the Law nor unſinning Obedience; Ergò.

Anſw.Never any Orthodox Divine denyed that we were juſtified by the Works of the Law, wrought for us by Chriſt, but on the contrary it is the ſoundation of the opinion of Imputation, that the Law of Works cannot be waved but muſt be fulfilled, both by obedience to it, and ſuffering the puniſhment when it had been once broken; and this being impoſſible in our own perſons, God ſent forth his Son in the likeneſs of Sinful Fleſh; and for ſin condemned ſin in the Fleſh, that the Righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled in us, Rom. 8.3, 4. That which juſtifieth us is the Obedience of Chriſt to the Law of Works, but we are juſtified not in a Legal but in an Evangelical way, becauſe it is the Goſpel that granteth us forgiveneſs upon the obedience of another, and not the Law. Etſi haec Chriſti obedientia legalis nobis imputata, Bradſhaw de Juſt. c. 18. th. 7.pars ſit aliqua juſtitiae illius quâ coram Deo juſtificemur: Non tamen inde concluditur, nos ex legis operibus vel p. 93ex parte aliqua juſtificarieo ſenſu quo ab Apoſtolo ea opera excluduntur, Rom. 3.20. Galat. 2.16. & 3.11. Cum lex illa poſtulet, ut quaecunque preceperit in propriae nimirum cujuſ que perſona, non autem per ſponſorem, aut vicarium quemquam praeſtentur. The Apoſtle to the Romans proveth that we are not juſtified by our own Works wrought in our own perſons, but not abſolutely, That we are not juſtified by the Works of the Law in any ſence; but on the contrary, when he ſaith we are juſtified by Faith, this implyeth that we are juſtified by the Obedience of Chriſt truſted in, or applyed by Faith: What is here further ſaid toucheth not us, viz. If Chriſt's Righteouſneſs be ſo imputed that we are accounted to have done perſonally what he did, then our being juſtified by his Works, is all one as if we were juſtified by our own. For we do not maintain, that Believers are accounted to have wrought what Chriſt did, but only that it was accounted to have been wrought for them; and yet it is not true, that upon ſuppoſition that they are accounted to have wrought in Chriſt, that it is all one as if they had wrought it themſelves. For ſtill they did not obey the Law, but another for them; nor did the Law account it ſelf to have been fulfilled by them, but the Law-maker accepted anothers Obedience for them, and ſo diſcharged and rewardeth them in the right of that Obedient Perſon. But this manner of expreſſion holdeth only when the Law alloweth a Delegate or Subſtitute, and the perſons concern'd do chuſe p. 94and give him his Authority and Inſtructions to act in their name which is not in our caſe.

Object.It is further objected: If our Sins be imputed to Chriſt, ſo that his Righteouſneſs ſhould be properly imputed to us, then would they corrupt his perſon, and he muſt be accounted a Sinner, guilty of all that we have done.

Anſw.Our Sins are imputed to Chriſt not as if he ſhould be accounted the Subject of our evil Nature and Habits, or the Author of our Commiſſions or Omiſſions, but that he ſhould bear the Puniſhment of them, and ſo ſatisfie the Law which was broken by us. This doth not corrupt his Perſon or make him morally a Sinner. If a Surety pay a Debt for another it maketh him not guilty of the imprudence, diſhoneſty, or ill-husbandry whereby the debt was contracted; but he having undertaken to ſatisfie for the Debt, the Law requireth payment of him as if he were the Debtor, and ſo imputeth the Debt to him: If an innocent perſon be accepted by the Law-giver to die for an Offender, it maketh not him an Offender, though he be puniſhed in the Offenders room and the offence as to the Puniſhment be imputed to him: Yet we may ſay, That legally Chriſt was made a Sinner and his Perſon corrupted, in that he having undertaken to ſatisfie the Law for Sin who had not broken it in his own perſon, nor was obliged to ſuch ſatisfaction before, doth now become a Debtor to the Law, to ſuffer the Penalty of it, having p. 95interpoſed himſelf betwixt the Law and the Perſons that had offended. And thus ſaith Dr. Twiſs: … vind. Grot. lib. 1. ſect. 26. p. 211. Col. 1.Col 1Look on what manner Chriſt bore our ſins on the Croſs, in the ſame manner may our Sins be ſaid to have been in him or upon him, and we Sinners to have been in him as he bore our perſon, or ſuffered the puniſhment of our Sins. Negari non potest Chriſtum tuliſſe, ſive geſtaſſe peccata noſtra in ligno, ergò, qua ratione geſtavit peccata noſtra, eadem ratione peccata noſtra illi inerant, aut ſaltem incumbebant; atque eadem ratione & nos peccatores illi incubuimus; idque nondum habita à nobis poſthumis in ipſum fidei, decimus omnes redimendos fuiſſe in Chriſto, non quidem …er fidem inſitos, ſed quatenus dari dicuntur ipſi à patre, & quatenus ipſorum perſonam ſuſtinuit.

Bellarmin to add ſtrength to this Objection,de Just. lib. 2. ch. 7. ſaith, If our ſins be imputed to Chriſt, then muſt be not only be counted a Blaſphemer, Murderer, &c. but alſo a Child of the Devil, ſeeing thoſe for whom he died were Children of the Devil.

Anſw.This is but in terrorem, to affright us with hard words: A Child of the Devil is taken two ways; Firſt by Imitation, for one that is like him and doth imitate his Nature and his Actions: So the Jews are ſaid to be of their father the Devil becauſe they do his Works, John 8.44. And Elymas a Child of the De…il, as being very ſubtile and obſtinate in per…erting the right ways of God, Acts 13. Thus p. 96all men by nature are the Children of the Devil; but Chriſt was not, nor doth it follow That becauſe our ſins were laid upon him … bear the puniſhment of them, he was the… fore the Child of the Devil, i.e. like him … Nature and Diſpoſition. The Imputation … our Sins did not alter Chriſt's Nature, though it did alter the State and Relation of his Perſon for a time, making him obnoxious to the Law as if he had been an Offender.

Secondly, A Child of the Devil may mea… one that is delivered to the Power of Sata… as the Executioner of God's Wrath, he h… ving the power of Death, Heb. 2.14. … Children of wrath are thoſe that are born o… noxious to wrath, and thus (though the te… is hard and irreverent) we grant the thing, vi… That Chriſt ſuffering for ſin, was alſo made o… noxious and ſubject to the Power of the Devil, both in his Temptations and in his laſt Sufferings, of which he ſaid to the Jews, This … your hour and the power of darkneſs, Luke 2… 53. of the Prince of darkneſs: And again The Prince of this World cometh and find… nothing in me, John 14.30. This is ſo far fro… making againſt us, that it confirmeth our Doctrine. The Devil is God's Executioner … inflict puniſhment for ſin, but Chriſt the innocent and perfect Son of God was delivered in… the Power of the Devil for a time, to be vered and troubled by him, therefore it was … the Puniſhment of our Sin.

p. 97Object.Theſe Authors unanimouſly complain, that …he Scripture no where ſaith in expreſs words, That Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to …s.

Anſw.All Scholars know that this is the firſt Ca…il of Innovators to weaken the Faith of the …nwary. For themſelves grant this concludeth …ot, It is not read expreſly in Scripture, there…re it is not the Doctrine of the Scriptures: ſay themſelves grant it, as in expreſs terms … other Queſtions, ſo by their Practice in the …reſent Controverſie; They having new mouled Divinity in this laſt Age, and put it into …ew terms, and unknown both to Scripture …d Antiquity: They that complain of us for …ſiſting upon the term of Imputation of Chriſts …ighteouſneſs, as not contained expreſly in …cripture ought in all juſtice and prudence to …ve ſhewed us firſt the Chapters and Verſes …here their Terms of condition, cauſa ſine qua …n, firſt and ſecond Juſtification, remediaing Law, a Law of Grace, and the like are … be found. Moreover they know, that Im…tation of Righteouſneſs is a Scripture Term …n times uſed in the 4th to the Romans, and …at Righteouſneſs is ſaid to be imputed without Works, to him that worketh not but be…eveth on him that juſtifieth the ungodly, v. 4. …herefore this Righteouſneſs cannot be a man's …wn Obedience; and alſo that Chriſt is ſaid Scripture to be our Righteouſneſs, made of …od Righteouſneſs to us, and we made the p. 98Righteouſneſs of God in him; which are equivalent to his Righteouſneſs being imputed to us. The Learned may find every one … theſe Objections againſt the Imputation … Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, with ſome others … the like kind urged to the ſame purpoſe by Bellarmin and anſwered by B. Davenant for ſubſtance as we do,de Juſti. Cap. 24. and B. Downam in many Chapters of his Learned Diſcourſe of Juſtification.

Object.It is further objected, Our own works an… ſaid to be accounted to us for Righteouſneſs as that Act of Phincas in ſlaying Zimri an… Cozby, Numb. 25.7, Pſal. 106.30, 31. And reſtoring the poor Man's Pledge, Deut. 24.13. It ſhall be righteouſneſs to thee before the Lord And the keeping of all God's Commandments Deut. 6.25. It ſhall be our Righteouſneſs if … obſerve all theſe Commandments before the Lord Therefore Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is not immediately imputed to us for our Juſtification.

Anſw.When our own works are ſaid to be ou… Righteouſneſs or accounted for Righteouſneſs it is only meant that God doth accept then and reward them. Thus he promiſed Phines the Prieſt-hood for ever, which was yet revoked for the ſins of Elies Sons, 1 Sam. 2.30. &c. And the Reaſon ſubjoyned ſheweth ho… this Righteouſneſs was accounted, viz. Th… that honour me I will honour, and thoſe that a… ſpiſe me ſhall be lightly eſteemed: It was accounted for Righteouſneſs, i. e. honoured and rewarded. p. 99Thus mercy to the Poor ſhall be our righteouſneſs before God, i.e. he is pleaſed with it, and will reward it with like kindneſs when we need it, Pſal. 41.1. And our keeping all the Commandments ſhall be our Righteouſneſs, ſhall be accepted and rewarded as the obedience of Children. But all this proveth not that we ſhall be made the Children of God, have our ſins forgiven, and be intituled to Grace and life for our own obedience. We acknowledge obedience to Gods Commands is our Righteouſneſs, whereby we are morally and inherently righteous, i.e. conformable to God's Law and Will; and this, while imperfect is our inchoate or imperfect Righteouſneſs, and when it ſhall be conſummate it will be our perfect and compleat righteouſneſs; as B. Davenant ſaith well againſt the Papiſts Calumnies, de Juſt. cap. 22. But the Righteouſneſs for which we are pardoned, accepted and made Heirs of Life, muſt be every way a perfect and compleat righteouſneſs, even the righteouſneſs of Chriſt, as the ſame Author ſaith, Apertè affirmamus Deum juſtiſſimum neminem juſtificare, h.e.cap. 22. p. 311. (ut expoſuimus) à reatu abſolvere, juſtum declarare, ad vitam aeternam, quae eſt juſtitiae praemium, acceptare, niſi interveniente vera & perfecta juſtitia quae etiam verè fiat ipſius juſtitia. And again, Dicimus neminemjuſtificari niſi qui donetur justitia tam cumulatâ tam que perfectâ, Ibid.ut Deus in illum oculos conjiciens non poſſit eadem donatum pro jnsto non habere.

p. 100It is pleaded that Faith is imputed for Righteouſneſs in the ſame manner that other Works are, and ſo juſtifieth but as they do, and is our Righteouſneſs as they are; and thus they interpret Gen. 15.6. Abraham's Faith was accounted for Righteouſneſs, i.e. it was reckoned a noble and excellent Act of Faith with which God was well pleaſed and would reward it.

Anſw. 1.Faith in the Promiſe of Pardon and Life, of meer Grace and Free Gift cannot be counted any part of our Righteouſneſs: To truſt in the general, in the Goodneſs, Power and Promiſes of God is required by the Moral Law, and is a Natural or Moral Duty, and ſo a part of our univerſal Righteouſneſs or Conformity to that Law: But to truſt in the Promiſe of Forgiveneſs and Mercy (which only is the Faith in queſtion) is not required by the Moral Law, but ſuppoſeth us Breakers of it, and to be under its Condemnation; it only ſeeks for Mercy propoſed in a new, ſupervening Promiſe, and therefore is not our Righteouſneſs as Works are.

The Apoſtle taketh occaſion from a notable Inſtance of Abraham's Faith in a particular caſe,2ly. and its obtaining the Promiſe of Great Bleſſings, to argue, That Faith in the general Mercy of God in Chriſt doth obtain Juſtification, Rom. 4.2, 3. and that with the excluſion of all works, v. 5. To him that worketh not, but believeth in him that juſtifieth the ungodly, p. 101Faith is imputed for Righteouſneſs; and this Juſtification is explained by having ſins forgiven, covered, not imputed, v. 6, 7. Faith therfore is imputed for righteouſneſs only as it doth obtain the forgiveneſs of ſin, & the acceptance of them that have no works, that are ungodly in themſelves; and this muſt be by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, not by its ſelf being our righteouſneſs.

Object.It is alſo ſaid, If we are juſtified immediately by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed, then there is nothing for us to do to obtain Juſtification; we muſt only believe we are juſtified and we are juſtified.

Anſw.There is nothing for us to do to purchaſe Juſtification; this is done by Chriſt: But we muſt apply this purchaſe to our ſelves by believing or truſting in it, flying to it for Juſtification. When a Ranſom is paid for a Captive, there is nothing left for him to do to purchaſe his liberty, yet he muſt accept and challenge the Fruit of this Purchaſe to himſelf, before he can enjoy it. Though Adam hath procured and intituled to death upon all his Poſterity, yet that Curſe reacheth not us till we receive a Being from and do habitually conſent to his Sin. In like manner Chriſt purchaſed life for all the Elect, yet they do not partake of it till they are ingrafted into him, and we do, at leaſt habitually, conſent and truſt to be ſaved by him.

p. 102Object.Laſtly, it is argued, If Chriſts Righteouſneſs be properly imputed, then we ſhould perfectly be delivered from all ſin and miſery and immediately brought to Heaven.

Anſw.Juſtification it ſelf obtaineth remiſſion of all ſins, and an immutable right to life, or the Favour of God, and an actual entrance into that Favour; this every juſtified perſon doth obtain upon believing, 1 Joh. 5.12. He that hath the Son hath life. Rom. 8.1. Juſtification hath its proper effect in this life, viz. it taketh away ſin and the Curſe or Obligation to Puniſhment, it reconcileth to God, and brings us into that Favour which will endure for ever; but God having redeemed us by his Son, intendeth not only to juſtifie us from our ſins and give us the Life promiſed by the Law, but alſo to make us his Children, to give us glory in Heaven, to make us Partakers of his Sons Glory and Kingdom: And for this it pleaſes him to breed us, to nurture and ſit us for it, by conflicting with ſin, by overcoming the World and the Devil, that the Glory of his Son and Grace may appear the more: Therefore the imperfect troubleſome ſtate of Believers in this life is not becauſe their Juſtification is not perfect, but becauſe God hath a further deſign in it, for his Glory and their good.