CHAPT. I. The Introduction; & the text (the ground of this following discourse) opened-up.

THe Doctrine of Iustification cannot but be acknowledged by all, whose thoughts are taken up about an interest in everlasting felicity, to be of great concernment; & debates or Controversies about the same cannot be esteemed vaine & fruitless Digladiations, & Disputes about a thing of naught; seing in this lyeth the Ground of all our Hop, peace, & Eternal Salvation; & a Mistake or Errour, as to the Theorie in this matter, followed with an answerable & corresponding practice, (I meane as to what toucheth the heart & Substance of this Divine Mystery) may, yea must of necessity, prove not only dangerous to Souls; but even inevitably destructive. Wherefore it cannot be justly accounted blame worthy, that Churches & particular persons, who woule be faithful (& so accounted) unto the grand-interests of Souls, contend, with alle earnestness, for the faith once delivered to the Saints, in this particular; this being the true Basis of all Religion, & of Christianity; without which there can be no access to, nor Communion with, God; No peace with God, nor true peace in owr own Consciences; no life of Comfort here, nor true hope of Salvation for ever here after; No change of State, nor saving change of li • e & conversation; in a word, no life of Grace here, nor of Glory hereafter: And what then must follow upon the corrupting of this Truth, & upon Erroneous Apprehensions & practices herein, is aboundantly obvious to all such, as have not sinned away all sense & consideration, in these matters.

Wherefore it is no wonder, that Satan hath, in all ages, laboured, by one Instrument or other, upon one occasion or other, and under one pretext, or other, to corrupt the pure streames of this wholesome Fountaine of Truth, in one Measure or other, in one particular or other; & that by such Mediums & Arguments, as he knew would be most taking, & seem most plausible, at these Several times, & upon these Several occasions. What way, & how far the corruption of this Truth was advanced, in the Antichristian Church, is yet known; & what ground, their errour in this gave un to such, as began to be enlightened in the knowledge of the Truth, to separate from them, & to appear against them, is manifest: and what Effaies the Devil made, about the beginning of Reformation, or shortly after, to darken this Truth, by Questions & Disputes, even among such, as hold the Truth fast, as to the maine, and what since, by Several New Opinions, or new Modes and Methods (as they were called, and given out to be) vented, and improven by Several Artifices, to seeming different Ends, he hath effectuated; to the hardening of some, in their Misapprehensions; & to the Corrupting of the Hearts & Mindes of others; and also the Staggering and Shaking of not a few, may be called to minde with grief and sorrow; Not to mention the bold attempt, made by Socinians, to overturne the whole Grounds of Christian Religion; and to take away at once all the pillars of Gospel-justification.

The devil began early, in the breaking up of the clear day of Christianity, to darken this Sun, that the poor Church might for ever abide in darkness, if the Church, her Head and Husband had not provided a Remedie, and had not effectually dispelled these Cloudes: And he had no small advantage of the corrupt Iewes, who had a zeal of God, but not according to knowledg, and had a very Specious pretext of crying up the Law, prescribed by God himself, and of Obedience thereunto, and constant observation thereof, in all points, to the prejudice of the Gospel-truth, in the matter of Justification. And though the first rise of this difference and debate was upon occasion of the Ceremonial Law, which was the dispensation of the Grace of God, which the ancient Church was under, while under Tutors & Governours, and in her Non-age state; and was never rightly obeyed, or improven, but when in led them unto the promised Messiah, Christ, the end of that law, in a peculiar manner, the Substance thereof, and vailed thereunder; and which they might have known, was to be done away, when Christ, the Substance of all those shadowes, came in to the world, in the due time appointed and foretold; and which, contrare to its very Nature & End, to the many prophecies of old, & to the signal dispensations of God, giving clear significations of his mind, touching the evanishing of these shadowes, the Iewes, principled with false Conceptions about that Law, & with prejudices against the truth of the Gospel, and animated and encouraged by false Teachers, raised up of Satan, to corrupt the Doctrine of the Grace of God, did strenuously contend for the constant Observation thereof, either Solely, as a Sufficient ground of their Justification; or in conjunction with the Gospel: Yet, because this tookalongs with it, the observation of all that Law, which God had prescribed of old, as the only ground, in their mistaken apprehension, of their Justification, & acceptance with God; therefore we finde the Apostle Paul (who was especially stirred up, & immediatly inspired of the Spirit, to vindicat the Gospel-way of justification from this corruption; after he had been singularly fitted thereunto, by being in so signal a manner brought to embrace this Truth, (who was formerly so zealous for the Law, & against the Gospel in all points) prosecuting the controversie to the full; & not only handling it in reference to the immediat Rise & occasion thereof; but in reference to that also, where-unto of necessity it must have come, & where it must have landed, at length.

And though there have been few, since those dayes, & none at present, who will contend for the Observation of the ceremonial Law, in the sense, & for Ends, urged by the jewes, & jewish false Apostles, in the primitive times; yet we must not think, that therefore all the Doctrine of the Apostle hereanent is if no use to us. Many debates & discourses had the Apostle, beside what we have recorded of him in Scripture; & to think, that his Disputes & Discourses, in his Epistles, concerning Justification, are of no more concernment to us, as to the question about justification, because none now adaies, plead for justification by the observation of the ceremonial Law, as did the jewes, against whom Paul Disputed, is, in my judgment, no small imputation upon the Spirit of the Lord, inspireing the Apostle to write these Epistles, & putting them into our Canon: and of this such, in my apprehension must be guilty, who think to wave all the Apostles Discourses, in this matter, with this, that he is only to be understood, as speaking & Disputing against such, as criedup the constant observation of the Ceremonial Law, as such.

But, whatever circumstantial differences, whether as to the Rise or occasion, or as to other things of the like Import, there may seem to be, or may really be, betwixt the Disput, as then stated, & as now prosecuted; Yet all the Disputes & Differences about the Maine & Essentials of justification, as also about inferiour & subordinat Questions, in so far as they depend upon, or are influenced by the Maine, will be found to be, upon the matter, one & the same, whether managed of late or of old: For different Termes & Expressions may be, where the matter & thing so expressed, is really one & the same. And therefore, as we are to observe with thankfulness the Lords love to & care of His Church, in providing & preserving, for the use & Edification of the same, in all ages, to the end of the world, such a necessary Depositum; & His wonderful wisdome in inspireing His Amanue • ses so to write, as not only to refell the Errour, in all its Circumstances & Branches, as it was then broached, to the darkning of Gospel-light; but so also as the Truth might remaine full cleared, confirmed & saifguared against all the assaults of Satan, in all time coming, by whatever Instruments, & under whatsomever new Notions, Distinctions, Termes of art, Expressions and pretences, the same may come 〈◊〉 be attacqued: So are we to acquaint our selves well with the Doctrine of the Spirit of the Lord, in this matter; to the end, we may be fully instructed in the Truth, & enabled, to maintaine the same, & fortified against all new Assaults; or, rather, old Assaults renewed, howbeit mannaged by seemingly new weapons, & new filed Instruments & Arguments.

It would prove long & tedious, to handle at length (& to touch in short, upon them, may seem to some to be but superficiary work) all the various controversies, that are on foot this day, about the matter of justification; & a short discovery of the truth, in this matter, as to the most principal things controverted (to which others may be so reduced, as a Scriptural discovery of the truth, as to those, may serve for a discussion of the rest; at least, so pave the way, that a solution of these Inferiour Controversies may be the more easie) may therefore be sufficient to such, at least, whose Edification and Instruction we mostly Intend here; that is, Such, as are not in case to improve what is written of Controversies, in Scholastick & abstruse termes. And, I judge, who ever handle this Controversie, in such termes only, or mostly, as are above the reach of ordinary Christians, who are herein as much concerned, as others, misse that mark, which they should mainely aime at, that is, Edification & Instruction of such, whose high concernment this is; & who have most need to be plainely instructed in this foundamental point of Truth, a Practical mistake in which may prove to them deadly & destructive; & especially of such, who, when under the pangs of an awakened Conscience, & under the convictions of sin, & fears of wrath, pursueing for sin, are then most ready to take any course that may seem to promise present ease & reliefe; & to be led away from Christ, the onely peace-maker, through the slight of Satan, & the deceitfulness of their own heart; & through Ignorance of, or Mis-information about the true Gospel-way of Justification & peace with God; whereby their Ease & Reliefe may prove more deadly, than was their Distemper & Disquiet. As therefore, I Judge, this concerning Truth cannot be made plaine enough; so I think, the less use be made of Philosophick or Scholastick termes (which none but such as are well versed in these dry Nations, can competently understand; & which, though never so handsomely, set off, will prove very unsatisfying to awakened Consciences) it will be so much the better; seing, let men please themselves in them, as they will, as they are not the language, the Spirit of the Lord hath thought good to use in this matter so they darken rather, than cleare the matter, at least to me.

The Apostle (that we may in short cleare the words, upon which we are to ground our Discourse) in this vers. 11. after other Arguments, formerly adduced to prove the Thesis, which he laid down Chap. 2. vers. 16. to wit, That a man is not Iustified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ; he bringeth another Argument from Scripture, after he hath againe repeated the one halfe of the grand Thesis, by which the other is suffificiently understood, & more emphatically included in the probation, or Testimony of Scripture adduced, saying,

Gal. 3: 11. But that no man is Justified by the Law, in the sight of God, it is evident; for the just shall live by faith.

HE doth not explaine what is meaned by that word, Iustified; but presupposeth that there was no doubt, concerning the true meaning thereof, among those, with whom he had to do, in this Disput: as Indeed none, that consider what is the constant use thereof, in the Old Testament, (well known to the Jewish Teachers) yea & in the New Testament also, can doubt of its true Import, how ever Papists do quite mistake its true Nature & Import, supposing that it signifieth an Inward Renovation, or Infusion of Holiness; & so make it the same with Sanctification. But as no man, acquainted with the Scriptures, & with what is said of justification in them, can be ignorant of its right meaning; so every man, exercised with the sense of his own natural condition, & of the curse of the Law, under which he feeleth himself lying, according to what is here said, in the foregoing verse, readily understandeth, what it is to be justified & freed from that curse & Sentence of Condemnation; & so made free from the wrath that he is liable unto, because of the broken Law of God: So that we need say no more of it here.

He saith, No man is Iustified by the Law; & so, maketh no exception of any what somever, no not of the holiest meer Man, that ever existed since the fall: & this is of the same import with that expression Chap. 2: 16. No flesh; for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified. So he hath the same expression Rom. 3: 20.

It is here said, by the Law; in the original it is, in the Law: but the sense is the same with that expression Chap. 2: 16. thrice repeated, by the works of the Law. The Ethiopike Version here is rather a short Commentary: for there it is; They are not justified doing the command of the Law. It is observable, That the Apostle useth variety of expressions, in this matter, all tending to cleare this one thing. That there is no justification by the works of the Law; so as no coloure or shew of evasion might be left unto any. Rom. 3. 20. he saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by or out of the works of the Law; as also Gal. 2: 16. And Rom. 3: 28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , without the works of the Law; they having no consideration therein. Rom. 4: 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by, or out of works. So that there is no justification by the Law, nor by works; nor by the works of the Law: all which expressions are used to signifie one & the same thing. And in the following verse, he taketh the Law, & doing of them, that is, the commands of the Law, for one & the same thing. Those that were looking to the Law for justification, he saith of them vers 10. That they are of the works of the Law and chap. 4: 21.—Ye that desire to be under the Law. This elsewhere viz Phil. 3: 9. he calleth his own righteousness, which it of the Law: & Tit. 3: 5. works of righteousnoss, which we have done- & Rom. 10: 3. their own righteousness & Rom. 9: 31. the Law of righteousness. But what Law is this, by which, he denieth, that any can be justified? The forementioned Expressions do Sufficiently cleare, what Law he meaneth, even all that Law, that was the Rule of Righteousness, & was prescribed of God, as such; & not the Ceremonial Law only: that Law, by the works whereof he denied (Rom. 4: 1, 2.) that Abraham, the father of the faithful, was justified. That Law, in obedience to which consisted that righteousness, which the jewes laboured to cause stand; & that righteousness, which himself desired not to be found in: That Law, which was called the Law of righteouness: That Law, which the Gospel establisheth Rom. 3: 31. In a word, it is that Law, whereof he speaketh, in the preceeding verse, that is, that Law, the transgression of which, in the least particular, bringeth the sinner under the curse, according to that saying. Cursed is every one, that continueth not in all things, which are contained in the book of the Law, to do them Deut. 27: 26. And here also we see the Law & the book of the Law, are one: & sure, this book of the Law contained more, than the Ceremonial Law, even all the Moral Commandments; in respect of which & not in respect of the Ceremonial Law, the Gentiles, & amongst the rest, these Galatians, at least, so many of them, as had not yet Judaized, were of the Law, & so, under the curse. It is obvious, how useless all the Disput of the Apostle here, & in his Epistle to the Romanes, is rendered by asserting, That Paul's Disput runneth only upon the observation of the Ceremonial Law; seing now the very Subject of the debate is taken away from us. And, if matters be so, I would faine know, why the Apostle should have used any other Argument, in all his Dispute, beside this one, That by the Gospel, the subject of the question is wholly removed; the Ceremonial Law being utterly abrogated by the Gospel? Sure, this would have Sufficiently put an end to that debate. But this Supposal is, I confess, a short cutt to answere all the otherwise unanswerable Arguments of the Apostle against Justification by works, but yet it is such, as cannot yeeld satisfaction.

He addeth, in the sight of God, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is the same, upon the matter, with that expression Rom. 3: 20▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in His sight; whereby we understand, what justification this is, whereof the Apostle speaketh; even; justification before Gods Tribunal, in His Court, who is the Supream & Righteous judge; as it is with Him alone that the poor convinced & wakened Sinner hath to do: And this is the justification, that we are most concerned to know the nature of, & to understand what way it is brought about, or to be had: This is the justification, which the Apostle alwayes denieth to be by works, & asserteth alwayes to be by faith, in opposition to works. As for a justification of our selves against the false Accusations of Satan, the unjust Surmises of our own treacherous Hearts, & mis-informed Consciences, & the groundless Alleigances of men, judging not according to truth, but according to their owne mis-apprehensions (whereof Iob's friends were guilty, in an high measure) It is not that justification, whereof the Apostle treateth. And whatever Interest good works may have herein, as real fruites of an upright working faith, & consequenly as evidences of our Interest in Christ, & of our being in a state of justification; Yet they are utterly excluded from having an Interest in that justification, which is before God, & in His sight: & here, Christ's Righteousness, Laid hold on by faith, only taketh place.

The Argument, whereby the Apostle disproveth this justification by the works of Law, in the sight of God, is in the following words, where he ushereth-in the argument with an, It is Manifest, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; to shew, That the Argument was irrefragable, & that the truth thereby was certaine, & beyond Contradiction. Now, the Argument is taken from the opposition, that is betwixt Faith, & the Law, or, the works of the Law, in the matter of justification: A ground, whereupon the Apostle goeth, in his whole Disput, upon this matter; as we see Rom. 3: 27, 28. & 4: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. & 9: 32. Gal. 2: 16. and therefore it must be a certaine truth, That if justification before God be by faith, it can not be by works; & consequently, whoever assert justification by works, destroy Gospel-justification by faith: and hence, it is also Manifest, That justification cannot be by both together, Faith & works conjoined; because what is of faith cannot be of works; these two being here inconsistent Rom. 11: 6.

That Gospel-justification is by faith, the Apostle proveth from that known sentence, the just shall live by faith; a sentence, which the Apostle adduced first of all, when he was to handle this question, in his Epistle to the Romans Chap. 1. vers 17. saying; for therein (i.e. in the Gospel) is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, the just shall live by faith. Where we see, that this Sentence confirmeth the whole nature & contents of the Gospel, that is, That the Righteousness of God, i.e. the Righteousness, which only will stand in Gods Court, & be accepted of him, in order to the justifying of sinners; & which is the Righteousness of one, who is God, is revealed from faith to saith; that is to say, is hold forth to be embraced bysinners through faith, first & last; & this Righteousness, thus embraced & laid hold on by faith, is the onely ground of the life of justification: so that beleevers their living by faith, saith, their faith laith hold on the Righteousness of God, revealed in the Gospel, as the onely ground of their life.

As to the passage it self, it is cited our of Habakuk chap. 2. vers 4. where the Prophet being told vers 3. that howbeit sometime would passe, ere the promised delivery should come; Yet it would come; & that therefore he & all the People of God, should waite for it, & live in the certaine expectation thereof, addeth these words, as being told him of the Lord, that his Soul, which is lifted up, is not upright in him (how variously & these words are rendered by diverse, we need not mentione) the meaning is this, That such, as will not, in faith & patience, waite with confidence upon the Lords promise, that shall be made good, in His good time; but in their pride & impatience of heart, will think to anticipate their delivery, by sinistrous & sinful meanes, declare, that their heart is not upright, & that they are void of true faith. Upon the other hand, it is said, the just shall live by his faith, that is, Such, as are real & true beleevers, will waite in the exercise of faith, till God's time come; & by this faith, trusting & leaning to the faithful promise of God, through the Messiah, in whom all the promises are yea & amen 2 Cor. 1: 20. they shall have a life of it, they shall be carried thorow, supported, strengthened & com • orted. And much to this same Purpose, is this passage, cited by the Apostle Hebr. 10: 37, 38. For yet a little while, & he that shall come, will come, & will not tarry, now the just shall live by faith &c. (of which we have spoken elsewhere) in all these places, the Apostle leaveth out the pronoun his, which the Prophet useth; but that maketh no great alteration, the matter being clear, & that sufficiently understood. The Septuagints make a great alteration, when they render the words thus, The just shall live by my faith.

The great difficulty is, how these words of the Prophet, spoken of such, as were already justified, & beleevers; & his saying of them, that they shall live by their faith (for we need not owne that sense of the words; which some think may not improbably be given, to wit, That he, who is by his faith just (or justified) shall live) can be applicable to the Apostl'es purpose, to prove justification by faith. Not to mentione what others say to this, nor judging it very necessary to enquire anxiously into this matter, seing the Spirit of the Lord's moving & inspireing of Paul to alleige, & apply this passage of Old Testament truth, for confirmation of what he was about to prove, may fully satisfie us, as to its pertinency, though we should not satisfie all by proprosing our thoughts concernin it. • Conceive, the ground may be this, That this being a general truth, & universally true, that even beleevers, who are already changed, & have a life begun in them, must all their life long make use of faith, gripping to the promises, as yea, & amen in Christ, (promised & come) who is the Substance & Kirnel of them all, to the end they may be supported, Strengthened. Upheld, & carried thorow Difficulties, Distresses, Darknesses, Temptations & the like, without fainting, or doing what is unbeseeming a living Beleever, in the day of trial; so that their whole life, even unto the end, is kept-in & continued by faith, bringing new supplies & influences from the head, through the promises; it will hence follow, that without faith no man can at first attaine to this life, & change from death; yea, that in this case, faith is much more necessarily requisite, yea faith only without works is & must be, the only way to justification of life: for if the progress, & continuance of this life, or renewing of it after decayes, be had by faith, drawing sap, life & influence from the head, much more must this be the way of getting the first change made from death to life. And this way (or not much different) of argueing in this same debate, we see the Apostle followeth Rom. 4. where from what was said of Abraham, a considerable time after he was a beleever, he proveth justification by faith, without works, or that Abraham was justified by faith, & not by works. The Import then of the Testimony is, that this life, whereof beleevers are made partakers, is begun, continued & carried on by faith, & therefore it is not by the works of the Law, but by faith, that they are justified & brought into a state of life; If it be true, that without faith, even belevers cannot be supported, nor in case to live, as becometh, to the glory of God, & to their own peace & Comforth, in new Trials & Difficulties; much more is it true, that without faith those, who are in nature, & in state of Enmity to God, cannot live the life of justification, & with it alone they can & shall.

Before we come to speak particularly to any Truthes, deducable from the words, we shall premise some few things considerable.

CHAP. II. Naturally we are inclined to cry up Selff, in Justification.

THe Apostle, as we see, in all his writtings about this matter, is very carefull to cleare the question of justification so, as Man may have no cause of boasting, or of glorying in himself, upon the account of any thing he hath, or he hath done in order to justification; that hereby he might cast a copie unto all such, as would approve themselves faithful unto the Lord, in being co-workers with Him, in the Gospel; & that he might so much the more set himself against that innatelusting of heart, that is in all naturally, unto an exalting & crying up of Self, in the matter of their justification before, & Acceptance with God; and especially we finde, how zealously, how frequently, & with what strength & multitude of Arguments, he setteth himself against, & cryeth down that, which men do so naturally, & with such a vehement byasse, incline unto; to wit, justification by their own works, or by their own obedience to the Law; to the end, their innate pride may have ground of venting it self, in boasting & glorying before men.

From this we may premit, in short, the consideration of these Three things, to prepare our way unto the clearing-up of the Gospel-Doctrine in this matter.

First. That there is a corrupt byasse in the heart of men by nature, & a strong Inclination, to reject the Gospel-Doctrine of free justification, through faith in Christ; & to ascribe too much to themselves, in that affaire: as if they would hold the life of justification, not purely of the free grace & rich mercy of God, through Jesus Christ; but of themselves, either in whole, or in part, in one measure, or another.

Secondly, That it is the duty of all, who would be found faithful Ambassadours for Christ, after the example of the Apostle, so to preach forth the Grace of God, in this mystery, & to explaine the same, as corrupt Nature within, & such without, as are byassed with mistakes about this matter, & are led away with proud & carnal self conceits, may have no apparent or seeming ground of boasting; nor be confirmed in their natural prejudices & Mistakes therein.

Thirdly, That in very deed, free Gospel-justification is so contrived & ordered as that none have any real ground of boasting, or of glorying in themselves, or of ascribing any part of the glory thereof unto themselves, as if they, by their deeds & works, did contribute any thing to the procuring thereof.

It will not be necessary to speak to these at any length, but only briefly to touch upon them, to make way unto what followeth to be said on this weighty subject, which is of so much concernment to us all.

As to the First of these (to which we shall speak little, in this Chapter, & thereafter of the rest, in their due order) it is too too apparent to be a truth from these grounds following.

I. This is most manifest from the many Errours & false opinions, that are Vented, Owned & Maintained, with so much Violence & corrupt zeal, & all to cry-up Self, in less, or in more; & to cry down Grace. Hence so many do plead, with great confidence, for an Interest of our works, in our justification; Such as Papists, (who quite mistake the nature of true justification) Socinians, Arminians, & Others, who side with these in less, or in more; & will plead for a justification by our inherent Righteousnoss, or works of Righteousness, which we do. Others, that will not plead for such an early Interest of our works, in this matter, will plead for faith, as our Gospel-Righteousness; & affirme, that the very act of our Obedience in us, is imputed for a Righteousness to us, & is accounted such by God; & so, hath the same place in the New Covenant, that compleet & perfect obedience had in the Old Covenant of works, made, with Adam; which, as shall hereafter appear, driveth us upon the same rock.

II. It is manifest likewise from the large & frequent Disputes about this matter, that we have in Paul's Epistles. If there had not been a great pronness in man, by nature, to cry-up himself, & to set up his own Righteousness, in matter of justification, why would the Spirit of the Lord have been at so much paines (to speak so) to cry down Self & our works, in this matter, as He is, in these Epistles of Paul, if He had not seen the great necessity thereof, by reason of this strong Inclination, that men Naturally have hereunto? We must not think, that any thing is there spoken in vaine; or that the Spirit of the Lord would have left that Doctrine so fully cleared, wherein our works are so expresly excluded, if there had not been a necessity for it, & if it had not been as necessary, in all after ages of the Church, as at that time, when first written. Whatever the truth be, that is so frequently & pungently inculcated in the Scriptures, we may saifly suppose, that as the faith & practice of that truth is necessary; so there must be much reluctancy of Soul in us to receive the same, & to close with it, and a strong Inclination to beleeve & practise the contrary.

III. In the Infancy of Christianity, we see, what a strong Inclination there was to cry-up works, what we do, & the Law, as the only ground of justification; or, at least, to have a share with Christ, in that Interest, which gave occasion to the penning of these Epistles of Paul, where this matter is so fully & clearly handled; particularly that to the Romans, & that to the Galatias; & unto the speaking less or more hereunto, in almost all his other Epistles. And this Inclination to the crying up of works & the Law, in Opposition to the pure Gospel-way of justification, was not only among the Gentiles, who had been without God, & without Christ, & all the Meanes of understanding any thing of Salvation, through a slaine Saviour; but even amongst the Jewes, who, by the Dispensation of the New Covenant, which they were under, might have been better principled; for it was they, who most urged the Interest of the Law, & of works, & thereby • laboured to corrupt the Gentiles, & to lead them off the simplicity of the Gospel-truth; and of them, saith the Apostle Rom. 10: 3. that, being ignorant of God's Righteousness, & going about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. They sought after a Righteousness another way, than by faith in Christ, who is the end of the Law for righteouness, to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10: 4. but as it were by the works of the Law Rom. 9: 32.

IV. The Pharisee, who went up to the Temple Luk. 18: 11, 12. & prayed thus with himself God, I thank thee, that I am not, as other men are, Extortioners, Unjust, adulterers, or even as this Publican: I fast twice in the week, I give Tithes of all that I possesse, &c. hath many followers. Many there are, who will have confidence in the flesh, & in what they do. Nature never taught Paul, to account all his great Privileges & Attainments loss & dung; but rather to account them gaine; for he saith, they were gaine to him; that is, while he was a stranger to the Gospel, & to the Grace of God, manifested therein. Hence is it, that the last are first, & the first are last; such, as thought themselves far advanced, & to have attained a great measure of righteousness, & so to be children of the Kingdom, are shut out, & Publicanes & Harlots are preferred, as being willing to renounce themselves & their own righteousness more, than such Legalists & Iusticiaries, who confide in something, which they themselves do, & have attained.

V. This is also manifest from the great difficulty of prevaling with such, as seem to themselves to have in them something more than ordinary, to relinquish & renounce these things, & to betake themselves only unto Jesus, & to rest on Him alone, for Righteousness, Life & Salvation; & from the little fruit that the Gospel Doctrine findeth among them. How many subterfuges finde they out, under which they think to shelter themselves from the wrath of God? How many fig-leaves do they sowe together, that they may cover the shame of their nakedness withall? And at what cost, paines & charges are they, in seeking to establish their own Righteousness? And all to fortifie themselves in their own delusions, & to keep our the pure Doctrine of the Gospel. And how ready are some to take hold of the smallest wig, that they may hang upon it, & finde reliefe, if it can yeeld but the least ground of hop, in their imaginations, ere they betake themselves to Christ according to the Gospel? How many Fetches, Turnings & Windings hath a Soul, pursued with wrath, & the apprehension of death, ere it be willing to close heartily with Christ, offered in the Gospel? Yea, if such, as have had some wakenings, come so far, as to change something of their former outward sinful courses, & be not so loose & prophane, as formerly, how ready are they to sit down, even upon that bit of negative righteousness? Much more, if they be brought the length, to go about some religious duties, how will they then sit down & sing, as if all were well? All which do plainly evince, that there is a strong Inclination in us by nature, to follow the way of works, that we may have some share of the honour of our own justification.

VI. This sad truth is hence apparent likewise, That when any Opinion is broached, that but seemeth to give more to works, than ought to be given, though possibly upon the matter, there be but little said, that may make any real Difference, how ready are many to close therewith, to entertaine that Doctrine, to cry it up & commend it, & to improve the Advantages, real or supposed, there had, to the fur • er Confirmation of that Anti-evangelik errour, which their Soul's fully comply with: when, upon the other hand, there is such a nauseating in many too too manifest, at the Simplicity of the Gospel, & of the Doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ.

If it be enquired, whence doth this proceed? or what can be the true causes hereof? I answer, Many things have a powerful Influence into this, as.

I. The Natural Enmity unto all the wayes of God, that each hath, as a piece of his heirship from Adam: What ever God willeth, we will not, yea we will nill; though our nilling of it be against ourselves, & we have no reason for it. There is a Spirit of Contradiction & Enmity to God in us all by nature, that we neither can, nor will comply with God's wayes, & with what tendeth to set forth His Glory. It is marked of the Iewes, that they stumbled at that stumbling stone, Jesus Christ, who was the end of the Law for righteousness, to all such as beleeve Rom. 10: 4. & 9: 32. They had such a prejudice at Christ, & at the way of Salvation through Him, that they brake their necks upon Him, who onely was the rock of Salvation.

II. The innate darkness of Mens mindes, touching themselves, & all the things of God, especially the Mysteries of Salvation, is another cause of this Opposition to the Gospel-way of justification. They neither know their own hearts, nor their own wayes & doings; nor are they acquainted with the holy & righteous Nature of God, nor with the nature of His Lawes & Commandments &c. They know not, I say, the Corruption of their own Natures & the innate wickedness which is there, which neither is, nor can be subject to the Law of God. Hence ordinarily such as erre, in this matter of justification, do intertaine erroneous apprehensions about Original sin, & our innate Pravity; as do all the S • cinians, Papists, & many Arminians & others. So they are ignorant of the Law of God, not knowing how Holy, Good & Spiritual it is; & how it obligeth the whole man, Spirit, Soul, Judgment, Understanding, Will, Affections & Memory; & all the out ward Man; condemning the least sin, in Thought, word or deed, & commanding the highest pitch of holy duties, & right Principles, Ends & Motives &c. And hence they see neither Omissions of what is commanded, not their Commissions of what is prohibited, whether as to their Nature, Multitude, or other Aggravations; and the ignorance of this maketh them to see less the necessity of a Righteousness without them; & to seek for it with less earnestness & zeal: whence it cometh to passe, ordinarily (as is to be seen among Papists) that such as are most for works, in justification, shape the Law according to their minde, & curtaile it, as did the Pharisees of old, that it may look more conforme to their works, when their works are no way conforme to it. So likewise, they are ignorant of god, & of His Holiness, & Righteousness; & because they see, that if He be Such, as the Orthodox say He is, according to His Word, they cannot stand before His justice; therefore they deny His justice altogether, as do Socinians; or Imagine Him to be all Mercy &c. & so imagine Him to be altogether such an one, as themselves; & therefore are not very zealous for any other righteousness, than what may come most readily to hand, & they themselves can make up with their own diligence & care; never remembering, that the justice of God must be satisfied; therefore deny all Satisfaction (as do Socinians;) or suppose Christ hath satisfied for all, & procured a New Covenant, or way to life, wherein we may bring what we have, & it will be accepted, & there is no more to do: Nor remembering, that we must have an Interest in Christ by faith, ere we have any Interest in His Merites & Satisfaction; & that the whole of our Salvation is so contrived, as Man may be abased, & Christ only exalted.

III. A vaine conceite, that all things in Religion must be just as we apprehend them to be; & our blinde, corrupt & byassed Reason & Understanding must be the Supream judge & Determiner of all these Mysteries. Hence the Socinians down-right say that 〈◊〉 the Scripture say what it will, & how oft it will, they are to beleeve & to receive nothing, but according to their Reason: so that, what their blinded Reason cannot comprehend, they may & will reject. And others, who possibly will not so plainely lay down this ground; Yet in stead of conforming their judgments and Apprehensions to the word, & of being led by it, do frame a conception of the Matters of God, in their own heads, & then cause the Scriptures comply with their Apprehensions, by Interpreting them accordingly. So that following a corrupt guide here, they cannot but incline to that way, which suiteth most with that corrupt Principle; & be most averse from compliance with the Mystery of God, which is most opposite there-unto.

IV. Natural corrupt self love is another evil Principle, concurring to this effect, by its malignant Influence. We love to cry-up ourselves, to have something of our owne to boast of, & to glory of before men; and hence we cannot naturally comply so sweetly with that way, which taketh away all boasting, & leaveth no ground for man to glory in any thing, save in the Lord; & such is the way of faith, & of Gospel-justification Rom. 3: 27 & 4: 2.

V. A vaine & groundless high conceite, that people have of themselves, & of what they do, as if there were worth & excellency in it, to oblige God, to bestow upon them, what reward they think meet; not knowing, that when they have done all they can, they are but unprofitable, & that they have nothing but what they have received; & that for any good they do, they are more beholden to God, than God is beholden to them; & that the best of their actions are so defiled, that they could not answere for one of them, nor stand, if God should enter into judgment with them, & strickly mark iniquity Psal. 130: 3 & 143: 2.

VI. Pride of heart is another malignant cause of this Aversation & Unwillingness, to comply with God's way; & of this strong Inclination to the way of justification by Works. This was it, which led the jewes away from Christ, the end of the Law for righteousness: they would not submit themselves unto the righteousness of God Rom. 10: 3. & because they would not bow themselves to take on this Righteousness, therefore they were at so much paines & labour, to establish their own, & to cause it stand. Proud man would work, & enjoy the reward of his laboures, & will not willingly hearken to any other way. he will not be beholden to free Grace, nor ascribe glory to the Lord Mediator; but will still be at the old way of the first Covenant, at work & wages; that he may have it to say, he hath erned & purchased the crown of life with his own hands & industrie.

Therefore, from this we should all take warning, to look about us, & to guard against this strong & violent torrent, that is ready to carry us headlong to our ruine; & to be jealous of our treacherous hearts. Hence also we may see, whence it cometh, that the Gospel getteth so little footing among many; & how nothing less than the mighty power of God, will be able to prevail with a Natural Soul, & cause it comply with the Gospel-way of justification, & submit it self unto the Righteousness of God, & hold on Christ by faith. Further, We need not wonder to see, so many riseing-up, in all ages, against the Gospel of the Grace of God, & corrupting the Gospel-Doctrine of justification, seing blinded & unmortified Man is not in case, to be cast in its mould, nor willing to embrace it, untill he be broken, & broken over againe.

CHAP. III. The Doctrine of justification should be keeped pure with all diligence; & what dangerous expressions should be shunned.

WE come next to speak a word unto the Second particular mentioned; to wit, That all, who would be found faithful Ambassadours, & be accepted of the Lord, should endeavoure, both in practice & in Doctrine, to keep this doctrine of the Grace of God pure & unmixed: & particularly guard against the giving ground, or occasion to proud Nature, to cry-up Self, in the matter of justification, by any expression, used in the explication thereof. We see here & elsewhere, how careful Paul is in this Matter, using such expressions, as may most emphatically exclude man, & all his paines, & set free grace on high, that God alone may be exalted; for here & elsewhere he debaseth man, & excludeth all his works, even the works of the best of men; even his works, who was the father of the faithful: & he crieth up Christ as all, & free grace as beginning & carrying on all; consonant to what the Prophet Esaias said Esai. 45: 24, 25. Surely shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness & strength (or, as it is in the Margine, Surely, he shall say of me, in the Lord is all righteousness & strength) Even to him shall men come—In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, & shall glory. So that such, as look to Him (as it is vers 22.) & come to Him (as it is vers 24.) have all their righteousnesses in the Lord, & from Him; and in Him alone are they & shall they be justified, & shall glory; & not at all in themselves. So Ieremiah Chap. 23: 6. expresseth the matter very emphatically, holding it forth, as one of Christ's glorious & comfortable Titles of honour, that He shall be called, the Lord our Righteousness, thereby Importing, that all the Saints their righteousness, in order to their justification before, & acceptance with God, was in Christ; & that it would be a robbing of Christ of His due honour, to seek for a righteousnes else where. So Chap. 33: 14, 15. it is promised that the Lord will cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David, & that hereby Iudah should be saved, & Israel should dwell saifely: And it is further said, that His spouse should wear her husbands name, & be called after Him, the Lord our righteousness; thereby professing her adherence to Him, as her Husband, & her owning of Him, as all her righteousness, & glorying in that, that He and He alone is her righteousness.

In compliance herewith, we should beware of expressing our conceptions, about the matter of justification so, as may give proud man ground of boasting, & of robbing Christ of His Crown, Title & Glory, in less, or in more: and these expressions following seem to me justly chargable herewith.

I. To say, That all works are not excluded in justification; but such only as are done by the meer Power & Strength of Nature; & not the works of Grace, wrought by the Spirit. But who seeth not, how this is to set up proud Man, whom Paul would have debased & kept down? And doth not Paul expresly tell us, that neither Abraham, nor David were so justified Rom. 4? And that if our father Abraham were justified by works, he should have had, whereof to glory, though not before God vers 2? And doth he not also tell us, that this would make the reward to be reckoned not of grace, but of debt vers 4? & would exclude faith & its operations, in reference to justification, & take away that blessed & refreshful stile of God, that He justifieth the ungodly vers 5? Should we not thus be saved by works of righteousness, which we do, & not according to His mercy, expresly contrary to Tit. 3: 5.

2. In like manner to say, That we are not justified by the works of the Ceremonial Law; but by obedience to the Moral Law, is peccant here also: for the works of the moral Law are works of righteousness, which we do, & such as obey this Law, & are considered as such, cannot be called ungodly. Neither doth the Apostle thus distinguish, that proud man might have any Interest. Nor doth he exclude only such works, when he saith, that Abraham was not justified by works; for his works were not works of the Ceremonial Law, but of the Moral, which will as well give ground of boasting, & make the reward of debt, & not of grace, as works of the Ceremonial Law, if not more. And it is manifest, that Paul speaketh of that Law (& of obedience to it, or of works commanded by it) which convinceth of sin, & discovereth it Rom. 3: 20. & 7: 7. & maketh all the world guilty Rom. 3: 19. & bringeth them under the curse Gal. 3: 10. is established by faith Rom. 3: 31. & hath the promise of life annexed to it Rom. 10: 5. Gal. 3: 12. Nor doth he exclude only such works, when he speaketh of himself Phil. 3: 9.

3. Likewise to say, That all works are not excluded, but only Outward works, which are done out of Principle of fear, & not out of love & faith, & are not inward works of grace; is to adde Fewel to this fire of pride, & to please proud Self, & proud Man: for who can think, that only such works, would lay the ground of boasting, & of glorying before men? or that only such would make the reward of debt? or that any in these daies were pleading for justification, upon the account only of such works? or that such works were to be understood by the Law, as if the Law did command no other? or that such were Abraham's works? or that Paul thought of none other, when he desired not to be found in his own righteousness Phil. 3: 9?

4. They are guilty of the same crime, who say, That Paul only excludeth the jewish Law: for if thereby they meane only the Ceremonial Law, it is manifest from what is said, that hereby Self & Man shal be much exalted, when justification is made to be by, & according to the works of the Moral Law. If they meane thereby the Judicial Law, then justification should be by obedience to the Moral Law; yea & by obedience to the Ceremonial Law, as well as by obedience to the Moral Law, quite contrary to the whole discourse of the Apostle. And if they meane all the Law, that was given to the jewes, then the Moral Law is included: & so all works are excluded, which are done in obedience to any Law of God.

5. It is no less injurious to truth, & favourable to proud Self, to say with Socinus, That Paul onely excludeth perfect works, done in full conformity to the perfect Law of God; but not our Imperfect works, which through grace are accepted, & accounted our righteousness: for even these works being works of righteouness, which we do, would not exclude boasting, but give ground of glorying before men. Neither did Abraham, or Paul, or any other Saint suppose, that their works were perfect. Nor is it Imaginable, that any in these dayes did plead for justification, by their own works, upon the account, that they were perfect, & wholly commensurat unto the Law. Nor doth Paul insinuate, in all his discourse, any such Distinction, or give any ground to think, that Imperfect works should be the ground of justification, when Perfect works are not. And all this is grounded upon this gross mistake, That by faith, which the Apostle opposeth to works, is meaned our Imperfect Obedience unto the Commands of God.

6. It is injurious, upon the same account, to say, That Paul onely excludeth such works, as are accompanied with a conceite of merite, & none else: for he excludeth all works, without any such Distinction, even the works of Abraham, (who, doubtless, was far from any such fonde conceite, to think, that his works were meritorious) & all such works, as give ground of boasting before men, though not before God. And who will say, that even Adam's works, performed in Innocency, had any proportion, in the ballance of commutative justice, or would merite at God's hand, ex condigno? And yet, sure, such works would have made the reward of debt, according to the Compact. Yea, the Apostle, in his way of argueing, supposeth, that works cannot be mentioned in this case, without merites; so that merite is inseparable from them. And shall we think, that Paul Phil. 3: 9. meaned, by his own righteouness, only such works, as he expresly accounted meritorious? Or that he could, or did account any of his works such?

7. It runneth far in the same guilt, to say, That faith it self, which is our work, & considered as our act of obedience, is Imputed to us for righteousness, & is that righteousness, upon which we are justified: for how easily might proud Self lift up its head, & boast & say, it was justified, because of some thing within it, or because of one work of righteouness, done by it: & so glory in it self, & not in the Lord? for though it were granted, that faith were the gift 〈◊〉 God yet that would not sufficiently keep down pride, seing such, as plead for justification by good works, will also grant, that these good works come from the Grace of God, & are wrought by the Spirit: & yet such a justification would lay a foundation of boasting, & of glorying before men; & some would have more ground of boasting, than others, because of their stronger faith: And justification by this way, would as well be opposite to justification through Christ, & His Imputed righteousness, & by Grace, as justification by good works; for faith here would not be considered, as bringing-in & laying hold on a Righteousness without, the Righteousness of Christ imputed; but as a commanded duty, & as a piece of obedience to the Law; & would as well make the reward of debt ex congruo, & ex pacto, as if justification were by works.

8. It is of the same Nature, to say, That Paul excludeth the works of the Law, but not the works of the Gospel: for the same ground of pride, boasting & glorying should be laid, that would be laid, by pleading for the works of the Law: because these are still works of righteousness, which we do, & so opposite, in this matter, unto mercy, Tit. 3: 5. And Paul, to exclude all boasting & glorying before Men, opposeth faith, (not considered in it Self, but as laying hold on the Righteousness of Christ, & as carrying the Man out of himself to Christ for Righteousness) unto works; & not Gospel-works unto works of the Law. And, sure, we cannot say, that none of Abraham's works were Gospel-works, or works required in the New Covenant, seing even then he was a beleever, when the object of his faith, or that which he laid hold on by faith, in the Gospel, which was preached unto him, was said to be imputed unto him for righteousness. And is it not plaine, that if justification were upon the account of Gospel works, that God should not then be said to justifie the ungodly; seing he, who is clothed with a Gospel righteousness, cannot be called, or accounted an ungodly person? And yet faith looks out unto, & laith hold upon a God, that justifieth the ungodly Rom. 4: 5. In a word, the asserting of this would be the same, upon the matter, with asserting of justification by the works of the Law: for what ever is required in the Gospel, is injoined by the Law; & so is an act of obedience to the Law, which is our perfect Rule of Righteousness, & all our obedience must be in conformity thereunto.

9. It must also be accounted dangerous, for puffing-up of Self, to say, That we are justified by our Inherent Righteousness: for then the Man could not say, that all his righteousnesses were as filthy rags Esai. 64: 6. Nor could that be true, which is Psal. 143: 3. for in they sight no man living should be justified, to wit, if God should enter into Iudgment with him. Why should Iob have abhorred himself Chap. 42: 6. if he had a righteousness within him, & had been justified by the Lord, upon the account of that inherent righteousness? And had not Paul as good ground, as any, to assert his justification by his personal inherent holiness & righteousness? Yet we hear of no such thing out of his mouth; but on the contrary, his accounting all things but less & dung, that he might gaine Christ, & be found in His Righteousness, hath a far different import. How proud might man be, if he had it to say, that he was justified in the sight of God by works of Righteousness, which he had done, or by his own inherent righteousness?

10. Nor will it much help the matter, to say, That this Inherent Righteousness is not the price laid down, but onely the Condition, or Causa, sine qua non, or the like: for still man would hereby have some thing to be proud of, & to glory of before men; because, he would have it to say, that his own Inherent Holiness was as well the ground of his justification, & the Condition thereof, as Adam's obedience would have been the ground of his justification. And who knoweth not, that Self can wax proud, & be puffed up, upon a smaller occasion, than is this? And is it not strange, that Paul never once made mention of this distinction? Shall we think, that Paul denied Abraham to have been justified by works, because Abraham looked upon them, as the meritorious cause, & not as the Condition only of his justification? or that Abraham indeed did so? or that Paul included them, as the condition of his justification, when he said, he desired not to be found in his own Righteousness, meaning, not his own righteousness as a price, or as the Meritorious cause of his acceptance? Why should David have spoken so absolutely, & said Psal. 143: 2. enter not into judgment with thy Servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, seing, even though God should enter into judgment with His servants, they should be justified, as having fulfilled the condition? And why should he have said Psal. 130: 3. If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities; ô Lord, who shall stand? seing, though the Lord should mark iniquities, yet where the Person hath fulfilled the Condition, & hath a Personal Inherent Righteousness to hold up, as the fulfilling of the condition required, he is in case to stand in judgment, & to plead for his justification, & absolution, upon the account of his performing all the condition required: And would not vaine man have great ground of boasting here?

11. Neither yet will it prevent this boasting, to say, That this Inherent Righteousness is but a Subordinat Righteousness, whereby we have right unto the Merites of Christ, which are the Principal Righteousness, answering the demandes of the Law: for if man have any thing in himself, that can be called a Righteousness, though but a Subordinat Righteouness, & yet such a Righteousness, as giveth right & ground to justification, though that justification be also called, only a subordinat justification, conforme to the New Covenant, & the Condition thereof, he will soon boast, & account his justification not of free grace but of due debt, conforme to the covenant: And though this be called, only a Subordinat Righteousness; yet proud Self will account it the Principal; because upon it dependeth all his justification; for thereby not onely hath he a right unto Christ's Merites, but unto justification it self; this being called the proper condition of the New Covenant, wherein justification, Adoption &c. are promised (as they say) upon this condition. And will not proud Man see, that he hath a price in his hand, & a compl ••• Righteousness, conforme to the Covenant, to presente unto God where-upon to seek & expect the reward of debt, according to the covenant? And so much the rather should we abstaine from such expressions, in this matter, that we finde no mention made of two fold Righteousness, & of a twofold Justification; the one subordinat, the other Principal, in the Scriptures; but all expressions, in this matter, framed designedly to abase man, & make all appear to be of free grace, that he, who glorieth, may glory in the Lord. And as Self will be ready, in this, to make that, which is called a Subordinat Righteousness, a Prinpal Righteousness; so it will have this faire & plausible ground to do so; to wit, That upon our own Righteousness, we are Immediatly accepted of God, as Righteous; especially when the Merits of Christ are made subservient unto our personal Righteousness, as procuring the New covenant; & that therein our Personal Righteousness shall be accepted, & accounted perfect & compleet, though it be not so in it self, & we thereupon immediatly justified, & accepted of God, as Righteous; as they love to speak, who assert these things.

12. Though faith be indeed the mean of our justification, that is, the onely thing required of us, in order to our Interest in Christ, & actual participation of the benefites of His Redemption, & of justification in the first place, according to the Gospel methode: Yet it is too favourable to proud Self, to call it such a Condition, as hath a far more dangerous Import; That is, (1.) To call it a Condition, & withall deny, that it is an instrumental Cause, or that it is to be considered, in the matter of justification, as it laith hold on Christ, & His Righteousness. (2.) To say, that the very act of faith, or the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 credere is imputed for Righteousness; & that Paul is to be so understood Rom. 4. as speaking properly, & not metonymically (3.) To say, that this is the Righteousness, which is imputed to us, in order to justification, & not the Righteousness of Christ, except as to its Effects, in respect of some whereof, Yea the chiefe & only immediat, it is equally Imputed to all, Reprobat, as well as Elect. (4.) To say, that this faith is our Gospel-Righteousness, & because a Righteousness, is perfect, & adequate to the Rule of the New Covenant. (5.) To say; that this faith hath the same place & consideration, & consequently, the same force & efficacy, in the New Covenant, that perfect obedience had in the Old Covenant with Adam. (6.) To say, that Christ hath purchased the New Covenant, & that this shall be the condition of persons partaking of the benefites thereo • : & withall (7) To say, that Christ hath died for all, & by his death made Satisfaction to justice for the breach of the Law; & so purchased freedom from the Curse of the Law to all, equally, at least conditionally; whereby it is apparent, that all are put in statu quo prius, in the state, they were once in, & that equally; & now have new conditions proposed unto them, which, if they performe, they are righteous, & upon that performance are freed from the Curse, & made heirs of Glory: and thus the New Covenant is of the same Nature & kinde with the Old, only its Conditions are a little altered, & made more easie; & their Performance of the condition must-have a 〈◊〉 with it, at least, ex pacto, though not ex condigno, as neither Adam's Perfect obedience could have had. And the performers of this condition, in this case, may reflect upon their own deed, & lay their weight on it, &, it being their Righteousness, may plead upon it, as their immediat ground of right, before God, unto justification, & Acceptance. Let any man now consider these things, & see whether or not, the asserting of faiths being such a condition, as this, be not a plaine gratification of proud Self, & the laing down a ground for vaine man to boast, & of glorying, though not-before God, yet before others; And whether this be not an ascribing more to faith, than is done by such, as, yeelding it to be a condition, of the mean appointed of God, & required of us, in order to justification, say with all, that it is to be considered not in it self, nor as an act of our obedience; but as an Instrument, or mean laying hold upon the Righteousness of Christ without us, that it may be ours, & our onely Righteousness, where upon we may expert, according to the Gospel justification & absolution, &c.

13. It tendeth too much to blow up proud Self, to say, That if works of Obedience be not the Condition of our first justification, yet they may be called the Condition of our Second justification, or of the Continuance of our justification: for, as the Scripture speaketh nothing of a Second justification; so to assert our works to be the Condition thereof, is to crosse the argueings of the Apostle, & manifestly to lay a foundation of glorying for Man: for if even Abraham had been justified by works, a considerable time, after he was first justified, and first a beleever, he should have had, whereof to glory, though not before God, as saith the Apostle Rom. 4: 2. And vers 3. he proveth that he was justified by faith, & that after he had been a beleever; for that passage, Abraham beleeved God, & it was imputed to him for righteousness, was not spoken of & at his first beleeving; & so cannot be properly meaned of his First justification onely; but some yeers there after: & therefore must be true, of his Second justification, if there were any such; Yea, the just liveth by faith (a passage that the Apostle useth (as wee have seen) to prove justification by faith, both here in our Text, & Rom. 1: 17.) all alongs, both first & last; so that the beginning & continuance of this life of justification is by faith, & not by works.

14. It is also dangerous, to say, That the work of the Law, convining of sin, with the Effects & Consequences thereof, Sorrow, griefe, Anxiety, Legal Repentance, &c. are either Dispositions, Preparations, or Conditions of justification, or Meritorious thereof by way of Congruity; as if there were a certaine & constituted connexion betwixt these & the blessing of justification, made by any Law or promise of God; & as if none could be justified, that had not these sensible & affecting Effects going before. Sure, the asserting of this cannot but contribute much, to stirre up & foster pride in Man, & give occasion to think, that man himself hath done or suffered something, that calleth for, procureth, &, in congruity at least, meriteth justification.

CHAP. IV. Justification is so contrived, in the Gospel, as man may be abased, & have no ground of boasting.

THirdly, we come to speak to the third thing mentioned above, to wit, That justification is so contrived, begun & carried on, that man hath no real, or apparent ground of glorying before men, or of boasting in himself. A few particulars will sufficiently cleare this.

I. The Lord's ordinary & usual Method, in bringing His Chosen ones into a justified State, is first to convince them of their Sin and Misery, by setting home the Law, & wekening their Consciences; as Paul doth Doctrinally follow this method, when he is about to cleare-up, & explaine the truth, about Gospel-justification, in his Epistle to the Romans; where in the first place, he convinceth all of Sin, both jewes & Gentiles Chap. 1. & 2. & 3. concluding vers 23. That all have sinned, & come short of the glory of God, & vers 9. he giveth an account of his foregoing Discourse, saying, we have before proved both jewes & Gentiles; that they are all under sin. And againe vers 19. that every mouth may be stopped, & all the world may become guilty before God. Now this work of Conviction layeth the sinner low before God; for thereby the Man is discovered to himself, to be undone in himself, to be under Sin & Wrath, under the Sentence of the Law, having his mouth stopped, & having nothing to plead for himself, neither by way of Extenuation, nor of Apology; & having nothing in himself, wherewith he can come before the Lord, to make Atonement for his Transgressions, & to make Satisfaction to justice: And thus the man is made to despare in himself, as being irremediably gone & undone, if free grace prevent him not.

II. Whereupon the man is made to renounce all his former grounds of Hop, & Confidence, all his former Duties, good works, civility, Negative Holiness, & what else he placed his Confidence in formerly; Yea all his Righteousnesses are as filthy rags, & accounted as loss & dung. So that he hath nothing within himself, as a Righteousness, that he can expect to be justified by, before God; but on the contrary, he findeth himself under the Curse, & that what he thought before to be his Righteousness, is now, by the light of the Law, & the discovery he hath of his natural condition, founde to be sin & iniquity before God; & therefore to be so far from bringing any reliefe unto him, that thereby his anxiety is made greater, & his case more desperat.

III. The way of Gospel-justification is so contrived, & the wakened man (whom God is about to justifie) is now convinced of it, that Man must be abased; for he is now made to see, that he is empty & poor, & hath nothing to commend him to God, no Righteousness of his own to produce; nothing within him, or without him, except the alone Righteousness of Christ the Mediator & Cautioner, that can stand him in stead; Nothing of his own must here come in reckoning, neither alone, nor in conjunction with the Righteousness of Christ; for what is of Grace, must not be of works, otherwise Grace is no more Grace Rom. 11: 6. Christ must have all the glory, & he, who glorieth, must glory alone in the Lord. And therefore is Christ made Righteousness unto us. 2. Cor. 1: 30. & is become the Lord our Righteousness Ier. 23: 6. And all His must say, That in the Lord, they have righteousness Esai. 45: 24.

IV. Nothing, that preceedeth faith, no motions or workings of the Law, no legal Repentance, & the like, have any infallible connexion with justification; nor are they any congruous disposition thereunto, or a Condition thereof, there being no promise made, that all such, as are convinced & awakened, & have some legal terrours & works of the Law upon their Spirites, shall certainely be justified; & experience proving, that several, who have had deep convictions & Humiliations, have, with the dog, returned to their vomite, & become afterward worse than ever, doth also confirme this. So that, after the deepest legal Humiliations & works of Terrour & outward Changes, & the like Effects of the Law (though when they are wrought by the Lord, intending & bringing about the Elect sinner's Conversion & justification, they have this kindly work upon the heart, to cause the Soul more readily & willingly listen to the offers of Salvation & Mercy, in the Gospel; & to submit to the termes & Method, which God hath, in His great wisdom & mercy, condescended unto, as to the actual Conferring & bestowing of the blessings, purchased by Christ, for His own chosen ones) justification is an Act purely of God's free Grace, undeserved of them, on any account; & an act of His meer mercy & Love. So that they are justified freely by His grace, through the Redemption, that is in Christ Rom. 3: 24.

V. Unto this justification, their good Works are not required, upon what somever account: for good works must follow justification, & not preceed it. They must be first accepted through Christ, before their works of holiness can be accepted. The whole Gospel doth most plainely exclude works of the Law, under whatsoever Notion, Qualification, or Restriction, as we manifested above, & shall more manifest hereafter: Yea, all works, upon what somever account, are excluded, as opposite to justification by faith, through Jesus Christ. The man, who had no more to say, but God be merciful to me a sinner, went home justified, when he, who said, God, I thank thee, I am not as other men, nor as this Publican, &c. did miss that Privilege. Paul hath so directly & plentifully proved, that no man is justified by works, that we need say no more of it; and therefore, in this matter of justification, man hath no ground of boasting, but must glory in the Lord alone.

VI. As without a Righteousness no man can be justified before God, because His judgment is alwayes according to truth, & He will pronunce no man Righteous, who is not so, or who hath no Righteousness: And as no man hath a Righteousness of his own, & in himself, that will abide the trial of God's judgment; for if He should enter into judgment, with any that liveth, they should not be able to stand before His judgment seat, & be justified; but all, who are justified, are in themselves ungodly, & void of all Righteousness, that can ground a sentence of absolution from the Condemnation of the Law: So it is the Righteousness of Christ, as Mediator & Cautioner, which is to them the only ground of their absolution & justification; & this Surety-Righteousness of Christ is imputed to them by God, & they are clothed therewith; & being considered as clothed there with, are pronounced Righteous by the Lord, the righteous judge, & dealt with as such. So that all the Righteousness, which is the ground of their absolution from the Condemnation of the Law, is without them, in another, who was appointed their Cautioner: & therefore all appearance of any ground of boasting in themselves, is quite taken away by the Law of faith Rom. 3: 27. & the reward is now wholly of grace, & not of debt Rom. 4: 4.

VII. Though faith, & faith only be required of us, in order to our having Interest in Christ & His Righteousness, & to justification therethrough; Yet this leaveth no ground of boasting unto man, or of glorying in himself; for it is in it self a plaine solemne Declaration of the Beleevers Sense, Conviction, & Acknowledgment of his own Beggarliness. Poverty & Nakedness, & of his being a dyvoure & non-solvendo, haiving no Righteousness of his own, & renounceing all that is in him, in order to his own justification; &, as it were, a swearing of himself bare; & a laying hold upon a Righteousness without him, even the Righteousness of Christ, who is the End of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10: 3, 4. & resting upon it; & a producing of it, as the ground of his Absolution, in face of court, to his own shame, & to the glory of his Cautioner So. far is it from being the mans Righteousness, that it is a plaine & open declaration, that he hath no Righteousness, but must go to Christ for a Righteousness. And so far is the beleever from reflecting on it, as his Righteousness, & from darring to present it to God, as his Righteousness, & plead for absolution upon the ground thereof, as if it were perfect, & a full Righteousness, according to the Gospel; that he only thereby saith, in the Lord have I Righteousness; & he looks upon it, as most weak & imperfect; &, being encouraged by the free promise of God, he laith hold on Christ, with the trembling & weak hand of faith, which he hath; & ostentimes, so far is he from having any confidence in his faith, that with much doubting & hesitation, he, as almost despairing of being the better thereby, seeing no other outgate, or remedie, ventureth, with a peradventure, he may be saved so, & that how ever he can but perish. How far, such a soul, that is fleing to Christ for refuge, is from conceiveing any ground of boasting in himself, is sufficiently plaine, & the sense & experience of all, so exercised, can declare.

VIII. Even this Act of the soul, looking out, going to, gripping & laying hold upon Jesus Christ & His Righteousness, held forth & offered in the Gospel to all self condemned sinners, despairing in themselves, is not of themselves; it is the gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. The Spirit of Jesus boweth & inclineth the soul hereunto, & determineth the doubting man unto this choice, & maketh him willing, whether it be in a lesser, or in a greater degree, to flee to Christ for shelter, from the storme of wrath, & to be saved from the Curse: And though the soul, in the meane while, be not in case to observe & take notice of the powerful workings of grace herein; Yet afterward he is in better case to see it, & to celebrate the rich & free grace of God, who hath visited him in his low condition, & began à work in him & never left him, untill he landed him in Christ, in whom was all fulness, & he found he was compleat, & through whom he obtained that delivery from wrath, which he was seeking after, meerly out of his wonderful free grace & mercy.

CHAP. V. In Justification there is a State of life.

HAving premised these three particulars, not unworthy of our consideration, & serving to prepare the way unto what followeth to be spoken unto; we come more particularly to handle the words, & to see what may be drawn out of them for our Information & Edification, that we may be instructed concerning the nature of this noble Privilege, & concerning the way, how it is brought about, & persons may be made partakers thereof, as also stirred up unto a right Improvement of the truth herein, whether we be already made partakers thereof, or are yet strangers thereunto.

We Intend not (as we hinted at the beginning) to touch upon, far less to discuss at lenghth, all the many & perplexed controversies, that are moved, both of old & of late, by men of different Principles & perswasions. Nor do we intend to handle the several Arguments, which the Apostle adduceth for confirmation of the Truth, in this matter, But our purpose only being to touch upon, &, at least, to endeavoure the clearing of some of the Principal Questions, moved in this matter, in reference to the forementioned ends, we shall satisfie our selves, at present, with speaking to such particulars, as the Text will give ground for.

The words having been cleared, & the Scope of the Apostle declared, which cannot be hid from the eyes of any, who will read the purpose, there are only two things, which call for our Consideration; First The Conclusion, which the Apostle is disproving & confuting with a manifesto; to wit, That no man is justified in the sight of God by the Law, or by the works of the Law. Next The argument, which the Apostle maketh use of, to this end; for the just shall live by faith.

The Apostles way of argueing here, & elsewhere, with the same, or the like Argument, whereby he stateth an Inconsistency, yea an Opposition, betwixt justification by the Law, & justification by faith, saith, that it will not be very necessary to speak much to that, which is here the Apostles Conclusion; that is, to cleare, that justification is not by the works of the Law: for the clearing of justification by faith will enforce that of it self. We shall not therefore insist upon that, howbeit we may in end, consider, what is said by some for justification by works, & what way such think to shun the odium, of manifestly contradicting the Apostle, & of maintaining that Errour, which he setteth himself so peremp • orily against, as acted by the Spirit of God.

The Principal thing then, which we have here to do, is to consider the Import of the Apostles argument, for the just shall live by faith, yet we are not to consider these words, in their just length & breadth, nor particularly, in reference to the use, which the Prophet Habbakuk maketh of them. Hab. 2: 4. & this same Apostle Heb. 10: 38. (of this we have spoken elsewhere) But only in reference to the use, which the Apostle here maketh of them, in clearing up the way, how justification is brought about. And considering them in this respect, we will have two things only to take notice of; First The assertion of justification by faith. Next The Influence, that this assertion hath into the Apostles Conclusion; to wit, That therefore justification is not by the Law, nor by the works of the Law.

In speaking to the First, we will have occasion to speak both to the beginning, the nature & ground of this change, made in justification, as also to the continuance of that state of justification. And then we will have occasion to show, how both the beginning & Continuance of justification is by faith: for as the sinner at first becometh just, or is brought into a justified state by faith, so is he carried on & continueth in that state of life, to the end: this being alwayes true, that first & last, the just liveth by faith; faith beginneth, & faith carrieth on this life, untill the justified man be glorified.

The Apostle (that we may come to speak something to cleare the nature of this State of justification) is asserting justification by faith, to cry down justification by the Law, or by the works of the Law, which some false Teachers were perswading those Galatians to beleeve; & he adduceth a passage of Scripture, which saith, the just shall live by faith, thereby giving us to understand, that the just man, or the justified man, is a living man; for the just liveth. And it is too narrow, to interprete this life, of eternal life; & this would make the Apostles argument very obscure; we must therefore unde • stand it of a life begun here, which shall certainely end in glory: & this is most consonant both to the Prophet's scope, & to the scope of the Apostle here.

Whence we may gather, That in justification by faith, there is a real life obtained: by justification the soul • is brought into a new state of life; & by it, such, as were really dead, are really made alive. This may be further cleared from these particulars following.

I. Such are said to be born again Iob. 3: 5. not only by the Spirit, which may import Sanctification, but also by Water, which may import Iustification, wherein iniquities are pardoned, & the Soul is washen from its guilt, through the bloud of Jesus Christ, represented by the Water in Baptisme. Thus are they also put into a new state, being delivered from the Power of darkness, and translated into the Kingdome of His dear Son, Col. 1: 13. Christ now owneth them, as His, & Satan hath no more power and jurisdiction over them, their guilt being removed, and their sinnes being pardoned: for, because of sin hath Satan, as a jailour, had power over them, as so many prisoners, but sin being taken away, in their justification, they are loosed from his bondes, and delivered from his prison and power. We see Paul was sent Act. 26: 18. To open eyes, and to turn from darkness to light, & from power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sinnes, &c.

2. Hereby they are brought into a State of Salvation, and being out of harmes way, they are said to be saved, being now in a State of life and Salvation, through Jesus Christ, Ephes. 2: 5, 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith: and how was this? It was by Christ, together with whom they were quickened; when before they were dead in sins & trespasses, v. 5. So Tit. 3: 5. Not by works of rigteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. But how was this work of Salvation begun? See vers 7. That being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs, according to the hop of eternal life. So that as justification maketh way for Adoption; so it bringeth Souls into a saife state, a state of Salvation; so as they, in a sense, are already denominated, saved; that is, brought out of the state of death, and put into a state of Salvation: Thus are they also said, to be quickened together with Him, (i. e. Christ) having forgiveness of all their sinnes, Col. 2: 13. This will be further clear, if we consider how

3. Those, who are justified, shall certainly be saved, not only in respect of the Decree and purpose of God; but in respect also of the Gospel constitution, and the declared will of God. Therefore saith the Apostle Rom. 8: 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them, which are in Christ Iesus. And all such, as are in Christ Jesus, are justified; as the Gospel cleareth. And againe more clearly, vers 30. And whom he justified, them he also glorified. The connexion betwixt these two is indissoluble. So doth the Apostle not only assert, but he confirmeth this, Rom. 5: 9. Much more being now justified by his bloud, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. And againe, vers 17. For if by one mans offence death reigned by one, much more they, which receive aboundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness. (That is, who welcome, embrace and receive the rich offer of grace, and the rigteousness of Christ, freely and graciously presented in the Gospel to all that will accept thereof) shall reigne in the life by one Iesus Christ. So likewise, vers last. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ, our Lord.

4. They who are justified, are brought into a state of blessedness, and therefore may well be said to live, or to be made partakers of a life, Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. Even as David also describeth the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness, without works; saying, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sinnes are covered. Blessed is the man, to whom the Lord will not impute sin. See Psal. 32: 1, 2. If then they be brought into a state of blessedness, they must be a in a state of life; for death and blessedness are inconsistent.

5. They are said to be redeemed; and consequently brought out of the state of death, wherein they were, Ephes. 1: 7. In whom we have redemption, through his bloud, the forg • veness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. In & by justification is this forgiveness of sinnes, whereby they are made partakers of a redemption. See Col. 1. 14. Where the same is asserted by the Apo •• le.

For further clearing of this, let us see wherein this life consisteth; and then we shall not only see, that it is really a life, but also, that it is a special and excellent life. To this end therefore, let us consider these following particulars.

1. Hereby they have Remission and pardon of their Iniquities, as was now cleared, and is manifest from Rom. 3: 24, 25. Being justified freely by this grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ; whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation for the remission of sins, that are past, &c. And by this Remission and pardon of sins, they have a freedom and exemption from the Curse and wrath of God, that was lying upon them, and to which they were obnoxious by sin and guilt, Orginal and Actual, which they were to be charged with, that being the penalty threatned in the Law, even death and the Curse of God; for it is written, cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the Law, to do them, Gal. 3: 10. Deut. 27: 26. O how excellent a life is this, to be delivered from the wrath of the Almighty, sinrevenging God, and from the Curse and malediction of the great Legislator, and dreadful Judge? How rightly may they be said to live, who are freed from the sentence of death, to which they were liable; from the penalty of the broken Law of the great God of Heaven and Earth; and from that doom, that all, who shall not share of this rich privilege of Remission, shall be made to hear at length, depart from me, ye Cursed, &c. A person guilty of death, and lying in chaines, looking for nothing but the sentence & doom to be given out against him, would think himself a living man, if in stead of that sentence, which he was every houre looking for, he should hear of a free and gracious pardon. Much more may this state of Remission be looked upon as a state of life. (2) They are hereby freed from that death, Slavery and Tyranny, which the Law did exercise over them before, and doth exerce over all such, as are not yet justified, for as the Law discovereth sin, Rom. 3: 20. So it worketh wrath Rom. 4. 15. And thereby hath dominion over a man, binding him over in chains, as it were, unto the wrath & Curse of God. But Christ hath now delivered them from the Curse of the Law, being made a Curse for them, Gal. 3: 13. And they by faith having fled to him, are pardoned, and the Law hath no more to say, especially seing it is satisfied by the Cautioners being made a Curse, and having fulfilled it in our Nature and place, Rom. 8: 3, 4. Thus are they freed from and dead to the Law by the body of Christ, Rom. 7: 4. O what a noble, sweet and refreshing life is this, to be free of this Slavery and Bondage, whereby the Law is alwayes lying about the neck of the poor sinner, the Curse and wrath of God, as oft as he sinneth. And adde to this (3.) That they are freed from the just and well grounded managment of the Law against them by Sa • an, or a wakened Conscience. I say, just and well grounded managment; for I grant, the Devil and a mis-informed Conscience can bring forth the Law, and terrifie therewith a true beleever, by charging, him with the transgressions thereof, even after these transgressions are pardoned; but this is unjust and illegal; and the beleever is under no obligation to acknowledge these Charges, or to admit them, but, on the contrary, to reject them, as being groundless, & contrary to the tenor of the Gospel. But the unbeleever and unjustified Soul is laid open to all these fearful charges and dreadful challenges, to all those summons, that are as so many poisoned darts, shot into his very heart, every one of which is a death to him, which he seeth not how to evite. Must not then this be a considerable and noble heavenly life, to have sin pardoned and thereby be freed from these Soul-affrighting, Heart-pierceing, Conscience-burning and Mind-tormenting Acculations, Charges, Libels, and Dittayes, brought home and delivered by the wicked Accuser of the Brethren, and a wakened enligtened Conscience? Must there not be many lives in this one?

2. Hereby they have peace and Reconciliation with God, being justified by faith, we have peace with God, Rom. 5: 1. God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them, 2 Cor. 5: 18, 19. They are now reconciled, Rom. 5: 10. So Col. 1: 20. And, (having made peace, through the blood of His cross) by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself. Herein also they have received the Atonement, Rom. 5: 11. And the Enmity is abolished, Ephes. 2: 15. And slaine v. 16. So that the enmity on both hands is taken away; they are reconciled unto the Lord, who before were alienated and enemies in their mindes by wicked works, Col. 1: 21. And the Atonement being made, the wrath of God is apaced towards them, and that Law-wrath, under which they did formerly lye, is quite removed, and they are no more looked upon, nor dealt with as Enemies, but owned and regarded, as reconciled friends. And who can express the good and sweet of this life? or who can conceive what an heaven lyeth wrapped up here? How justly may he be accounted a dead man, who is an Out lawer and a Rebel to God, who tasteth nothing of the Kindness and Friendship of God, getteth nothing from Him, as from a Friend, but all as from an Enemie, even all the outward favoures he enjoyeth in the World; how great and glorious so-ever they be, in the eyes of men? And, on the other hand, how happy is he, and how justly and deservedly may he be called a living man, who can call God his Friend; go to Him as to a Friend; receive all from Him as from a Friend, how inconsiderable so-ever in the eyes of the World the things be, which he getteth. This is a life, the Good, the Advantage, the Joy, the Comfort, the Peace of which, who can express?

3. Hereby they are absolved and acquitted from all, that could be justly laid unto their charge: for justification in Scripture, is expressive of a juridical Act of a just Judge, absolving a person from the guilt laid to his charge, and from the sentence of the Law, due upon the account of that, where with he was charged; and never doth denote a making of righteous by infusing of tigteousness, or by making any real physical change within, whatever Papists say, as wee see, Deut. 25: 1. 2 Sam. 15: 4. Prov. 17: 15. Esai. 50: 8. 1 King. 8: 31, 32. Ex • d. 23: 7. Mat. 12: 37. Luk. 7: 29. & 16: 15. And in multitudes of moe places. O! what a life is here, when a poor self-condemned sinner standeth before the Judge, the righteous Lord, & hath his sinnes charged upon him, and the Law brought forth, cursing every transgressour, for every transgression, and justice appearing against him, calling for the execution of the sentence, according to Law, and for death & vengeance due by Law; and upon all this can look for nothing but doom and present execution of the dreadful sentence: what a life, I say, is it for such a sinner; standing in this posture, to have a sentence of absolution pronounced, and be openly declared righteous, and not worthy of death, or free of the charge given in against him: and thus is it with Beleevers, according to the Gospel constitution; for though they have sinned, & come short of the glory of God, in themselves; yet now they are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, and that by faith, Rom. 3: 22, 23, 28. Gal. 2: 16. Though they were Unrighteous, Fornicators, Idolaters, Adulterers, Effeminat, Abusers of themselves with mankind, Theeves, Covetous, Drunkards, Revilers, and Extortioners; yet now they are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10, 11. God justified the Ungodly, Rom. 4: 5. The Circumcision by faith and the Uncircumcision through faith, Rom. 3: 30.

4. The ground of this sentence of Absolution, passed upon them, or in their favours, will more manifest both the Reality and Excellency of this life. Though they in themselves have been, and are sinners and ungodly, & cannot plead not guilty, nor adduce any ground in themselve where upon they can plead Exemption from the penalty of the Law; but as they stand guilty in Law, so they stand convicted in their own Consciences, their mouthes are stopped, and they are become guilty, Rom. 3: 19. They know and acknowlege that they have sinned, and come short of the glory of God vers 23. & so can expect nothing, but death & destruction, if the Lord should enter with them in jugdment, and mark iniquity, Psal. 130: 3. & 143. 2. Yet, the judgment of the Lord being alwayes according to truth, Rom. 2: 2. Such as He pronunceth Righteous, and absolveth from the sententence of the Law, as such, must be Righteous; for to justifie the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 17: 15. And seing they are not, neither can be Righteous, in themselves, nor have a Righteousness of their own, which they can present to justice, and in which they can appear before God, who is a righteous Judge, they must needs have a righteousness from some other; and this is a Surety-righteousness, the righteousness of the Mediator and Cautioner, Jesus Christ, Imputed to them, and received by faith: and being clothed with this noble rob of Rigteousness, with Christ, who is the Lord our Righteousness, and beareth this Name and Title, Ier. 23: 6. And who is made of God unto us Righteousness. 1. Cor. 1: 30. They may be looked upon as living indeed. In the Lord have they righteousness, and upon this account, in the Lord are they justified, and shall glory, Esai. 45: 24, 25. This is the Righteousness of God, without the Law, which is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets; the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Iesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that beleeve. Rom. 3: 21, 22. This is that faith, or object of faith, that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness, Rom. 4: 3, 5, 9. And the righteousness, that God imputeth without works vers 6, 11. This is the righteousness of faith, through which the promise is, vers 13. This is the righteousness, that shall be imputed to all, who beleeve on Him, that raised up Iesus our Lord from the deed. vers 24. This is the free gift by grace, which is by one man, Iesus Christ, that hath abounded unto many, Rom. 5: 15. This is that aboundance of grace, and gift of righteousness, which beleevers receive, whereby they reigne in life, by one Iesus Christ, vers 17. And that righteousness of one; by which the free gift come upon all beleevers, unto justification of life. vers 18. And the obedience of one, by which many are made righteous, vers 19. And that righteousness, through which grace reigneth unto eternal life by Iesus Christ, our Lord, vers 21. This is the righteousness of the Law, fulfilled in us, by Gods own Son, whom He sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, Rom. 8: 2, 3. This is Gods righteousness, to which the Jewes would not submit, but went about to establish their own righteousness: for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10: 3, 4. It is that righteousness, which is of faith, which the Gentiles have attained, who followed not after righteousness; & which Israel did not attaine to, though they followed after the Law of righteousness, because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law, for they stumbled at that stumbling stone, Rom. 9: 30, 31, 32. By this are Believers made the righteousness of God in Him, who, though He knew no sin, yet was made sin for us. 2 Cor. 5: 21. This is that righteousness, which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness, which is of God by faith, Phil. 3: 7, 8, 9. which Paul desired only to be found in, and that in opposition to his own righteousness, which is of the Law; and for which he did account all things, which formerly were gaine to him, to be loss & dung. Now, what a noble life of faisty and Security is this, for a poor naked sinner, void of all righteousness, and thereby exposed to the lash of the Law, to the Curse and wrath of God, to be covered with a compleet and perfect righteousness, consisting in full satisfaction to all the demandes of the Law, both for doing and suffering; with which the Self condemned sinner may now, with boldness and confidence, think of approaching unto, and appearing before the Tribunal of God? who can express the Serenity of Soul, the inward peace calmness, and Quietness of mind, the Joy, Cheerfulness and Exulting of heart, that followeth here upon? How is the Drooping, Sincking, Dead and discouraged Soul, that hath any sense or feeling of this, revived & quickened? And how beit the sense of it be away (as oft it happeneth) yet the change, that is hereby made, when the Lord imputeth this righteousness of Christ, & causeth the Soul by faith to embrace it, and accept of it, is as a Resurrection from the dead.

5. They have, as a benefite, necessarily following upon, and inseparably accompanying this justification, the noble and rich privilege of Adoption: For to as many, as received Him, to them gave He power to become the Sones of God, Joh. 1: 12. And all those, that are justified, receive Him and His righteousness, and rest upon it. Being thus redeemed from under the Law, they receive the Adoption of Sones, Gal. 4: 5. And being justified by His grace, they are made heirs, according to the hop of eternal life, Tit. 3: 7. And by this as their State is demonstrated to be a State of life; so the many and exceeding great and rich, yea incomprehensibly glorius and excellent favours, Advantages, and Privileges, that lye in the womb of this comprehensive Privilege, shew their life to be an excellent life: for (1) Being thus adopted, they have a new Relation unto God, as their Father, and they are His Children, taken into His Family: they have His name put upon them, they are called by His name, or His name is called upon them, Ier. 14: 9. Then is that word make good, 2 Cor. 6. 18. I will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters, saith the Lord God Almighty. Then is He their God in a peculiar manner, and they are His People, Ier. 31. 1. Then have they written upon them the name of Christs God, and the name of the City of His God, and His own new name, in its earnest and beginnings, Revel. 3: 12. O! what a life is here, to stand thus related unto the great God? what an honourable life and Privilege is this, for such, who were by Nature Children of the Devil! (2) Being thus Adopted, they have a Relation to all the Children of the Family, and are united unto them, as members of the same Familie, as Brethren or Sisters of the chosen Family. They are then among those, whom Christ hath gathered together in one, Ephes. 1: 10. And belong to that Church, which is His Body, the fulness of Him, that filleth all in all, vers 22, 23. They have a relation now unto the Church Triumphant, as well as to the Church Militant; whence that is in part verified. Heb. 12: 22, 23. But ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the living God, the heavenly Ierusalem, & to an innumerable company of Angels; to the General Assembly & Church of the first born, which are written in Heaven. They are no more Strangers and Forreigners but fellow-citizens with the Saints, and of the houshold of God, Ephes. 2: 19. (3) Being by Adoption Children, they are heirs, heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ, Rom. 8: 17. Gal. 4: 7. They are now begotten to an Inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for them. 1. Pet. 1: 4. Hence they are heirs of Salvation, Heb. 1: 14. Being Abrahams seed, they are heirs according to the promise, Gal. 3: 29. & these promises they do inherite, Heb. 6. 12. What a life hath the Son and heire of a great King, when he may look upon the many great Dominions & Kingdomes of his Father, as his own? But what a greater life is it, when a poor sinner, that is now adopted through faith, may look thorow all the great and precious promises, contained in the Book of God, and say all these are mine; and may look up to Heaven, & to that glory, which eye hath never seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive, & say, all that is mine, through Jesus Christ I am served heire thereunto, & have the begun possion thereof, in mine Head & Elder Brother Jesus Christ? (4.) Being adopted, they have the earnest of the Spirit, sealing them to the day of Redemption: for in Christ they have obtained an inheritance, & are sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession Ephes. 1: 11, 13, 14. & 4: 30. And who can express what a life this is? (5) Being adopted, they have free access to the throne of Grace with boldness, God being their Father, the door standeth open, & they may approach with liberty, freedom, & filial Boldness; for through Christ, they have an access by the Spirit unto the Father Ephes. 2: 18. And in Him, they have boldness & access with Confidence, by the faith of Him Ephes. 3: 12. They may now come boldly unto the throne of Grace, that they may obtaine mercy, & finde grace for help in time of need Heb. 4: 16. By Him they have access by faith into the grace, wherein they stand Rom. 5: 2. And here certainely is a life, the riches of the joy & Comfort whereof cannot be expressed. (6) Being adopted, they receive the Spirit of adoption, whereby they are delivered from that Spirit of Bondage, under which they were formerly; & are now Principled, Spirited & • mboldened to cry Abba, Father Rom. 8. 15, That slavish fear, under which they some time were, is away, & they have now the reverential fear of Children, which doth not hinder, but encourage them to approach, with freedom & Enlargment of Spirit & now they have the Spirit of prayer & Supplication, whereby they can call on God, as their Father in Christ; because they are Sones, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son, into there hearts crying Abba, Father Gal. 4: 6. What a resurrection from Death unto life is this, to have heart & tongue loosed, & to be in case to speak unto the Father, in the language of the Spirit through Jesus Christ? (7.) Being adopted, they have a right to all the Privileges of the Sones of God, & are under the Fatherly Care, Inspection, Provision, Protection, Leading, Teaching & Chastisement of their kind God & Father Psal. 103: 13: Prov. 3: 11, 12. & 14: 26. Mat. 6: 30, 32. 1 Pet. 5: 7. Heb. 12: 6. And o! what a bundle of Mercies of life is here? The beleever may welcome all the Dispensations of God, & receive them, as out of the hand of a tender-hearted Father; & say, Thus & thus doth my Father unto me; this is the hand & working of a Father about me: This how sharpe so ever it seem to be, yet is the effect of tender love, & floweth from the heart & bowels of a kinde & compassionat Father to me.

6. Their justification saith, They are translated out of nature, & delivered from that death, under which they did lye formerly, unable to performe any, even the least, vital act of life: for before justification, they are united unto Christ by faith, life is begun in their soul, the seed of life is beginning to bud in them, & to bring forth fruit, when they are enabled to beleeve, & to act faith upon, & to receive Jesus Christ, as He is offered in the Gospel. The spiritual life is in them, & is working, when it moveth them Christ-ward, & powerfully draweth & inclineth their Soul, to close with Christ. This faith is the work of the Spirit of God alone; It is not of our selves, but the gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. This beleeving is according to the working of his mighty Power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead Ephes. 1: 19, 20. Therefore is the Spirit called, the Spirit of faith, which all beleevers have 2 Cor. 4: 13. for now, in order to the effectual producing of this grace of faith in the Soul, their mindes are enlightened to understand Spiritually & Savingly, the things of God Act. 26: 18. For God revealeth them unto them by His Spirit, who only knoweth the things of God; which Spirit they have received, that they might know the things, that are freely given them of God 1 Cor. 2: 10, 11, 12. Now they have received the Spirit of Wisdom & Revelation, in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of their understandings being enlightened Ephes. 1: 17, 18. And as their mindes are changed, so is their heart; for the heart of stone is taken away, & the heart of flesh is given, according as was promised Ezek. 36: 26. & their wills are renewed & inclined unto good: They have gotten the one heart, & the New Spirit, Ezek. 11: 19. The Lord hath wrought in them both to will & to do Phil. 2: 13. Their heart is circumcised to love the Lord, according as was promised Deut. 30: 6. And the Lord hath put His Spirit in them Ezek. 26: 27. & thereby hath drawn them unto Christ Ioh. 6: 44, 45. all which saith, that the life of God & of Grace is begun in their souls; & the Spirit of life hath taken possession of them, & abideth there & worketh.

These things cleare, how justly the justified soul may be said to live; & in what respects, the justified state is a real state of life.

CHAP. VI. What mysteries are in Justification.

WHat was said in the foregoing Chapter may by way of use, First, discover unto us that Kindness and Love of God our Saviour, that hath appeared unto men, whereof the Apostle speaketh, Tit. 3: 4. For this is one remarkable Instance thereof, and calleth for Admiration and praise from us, upon that account. O! what Tenderness, Love and Pity appeareth here! And what a wonderful Grace is this, that is here manifested? what condescension of Love and free Grace is clearly legible in this business? And how clear and distinct will all this appear to a self condemned sinner, arraigned in its convinced Conscience, before the tribunal of God; and then seeth, in the Gospel, a well contrived way of absolution, & closeth with it? How will all this shine forth unto them with a heavenly Lustre and Majestie? And how sweetly will their hearts acquiesce in this Sure and Saife way of obtaining life?

Secondly, This may discover unto us, what a manifold wisdom of God is to be seen & observed, in the Gospel dispensation, that even Principalities and powers may look into, and wonder at; as it is said to be made known unto them, by the Church, Ephes. 3: 10. That is, by what they see and observe, in the administration thereof, in the Church. And in this part of Gospel-device, there are several things remarkable, that may give us ground to wonder at this manifold Wisdom of God. The whole is a mysterie, and this is a prime part of the mysterie, and in this mysterie there are many mysteries, a short view of which may be of some use to us.

1. What a mysterious and wonderful thing is it, That such, as are dead by Law, lying under the sentence thereof, & so bound over to the wrath of God, according to the threatning of the Law, which is just and righteous in all points; and such, as have nothing to defend themselves by from the threatned death, unto which they are obnoxious; nor any thing, whereby to make Satisfaction to the demandes of the Law, or to the offended Lawmaker, or where with to appease Him; should notwithstanding hereof be Really, Formally and Effectually absolved from the sentence of the Law, by the sentence of the Judge; and so made and declared to live juridically & in Law-sense; and to be as free of the curse and penalty of the Law, as if they had never been guilty of the transgression thereof. And thus is it here indeed; Such, as were dead in trespasses and sinnes, and in the uncircumcision of the flesh, are quickened together with Christ, Ephes. 2: 1, 5. Col. 2: 13. He, who before had the wrath of God on him, and abiding on him, by beleeving on the Son of God, hath everlasting life, Ioh. 3: 36. And they, who were in a manner condemned already, yet, by beleeving on Him, are not condemned, yea have eternal life, Ioh. 3: 15, 18.

2. What a mysterie is this, That God, who is righteous and just, and the righteous Judge of the World, and who hath declared, that he looketh upon it, as an abomination for any man to justifie the wicked Prov. 17: 15. And whose judgement is alwayes according to truth. Rom. 2: 2. Should be one that justifieth the Ungodly? And yet so is He said to be, and so is He stiled, and so is He held forth, as the object of faith, Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not, but beleeveth on Him, that justifieth the Ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness, Papists & others, who will not suffer their Reason to follow Revelation, but will measure all the mysteries of the Gospel, by the corrupt rule of Reason; and wiredraw those, according to the dictats of this, pretend an Inconsistency here; and therefore will rather pervert the whole nature of Gospel-justification, than yeeld to the Spirits Revelation of the matter. Hence it is, that they say, a person cannot be justified by God, untill he be a Godly man, and have a Righteousness within him, upon the account of which he must be justified; little adverting, That by their own principles it would follow, that no man should ever be justified: for, seing God is a God of righteousness, and it is a sure and certaine thing, that His judgment is alwayes according to truth, He could not absolve a Person as righteous, that were not perfectly righteous, and void of all sin; & where is the man, (not out of his wits) that dar say this, remembering what David said, Psal. 130. 3. & 143. 2. But here lyeth the truth & the mystery. Such as are really and truely Ungodly in themselves, and have nothing of their own, but unrighteousness within them, and whose righteousnesses are but as filthy rags, Esai. 64: 6. are yet justified by God upon the account of a perfect righteousness, imputed to them, & received by faith. In the judgment of God, such, as in themselves are Ungodly, are considered as clothed with the perfect righteousness of the Mediator, Christ, that Head & publik person, which free grace putteth on them, & they receive & stand under by faith; and so are justified & declared to be righteous by God, whose judgment herein and sentence is most righteous, & most consonant to truth: for he justifieth such, as are righteous, though not with their own inherent righteousness, yet with the righteousness of their cautioner, now made theirs.

3. Here is another piece of this mystery, That Transgressours of the Law shall be Absolved and Justified; & yet the Law established, which threatneth death to Transgressours, and promiseth life only to such, as observe it in all points. Who can reconcile this seeming Contradiction, that is not acquanted with the glorious mystery of the Gospel? Paul, a man well acquanted with this mystery, tels us expresly, that the Gospel-way of justification, which he preached, and fully cleared in his Epistles, derogateth nothing from the Law, but establisheth it, Rom. 3: 31. Where, after he had cleared & confirmed the Nature and Causes of Gospel-justification, & had said vers 30. that He was one God, who would justifie the circumcision (or Jewes) by faith, and the uncircumcision (that is, the Gentiles) through faith; hy obv • ateth this objection, that some might have proposed, & said, What shall then become of the Law? you make it void, by speaking of faith, & ascribing justification to it, as a mean, in opposition & contradiction to works: he answereth. Do we then make void the Law, through faith? That be far from us, yea we establish the Law. So that there is nothing, in this Gospel justification, that weakeneth, or maketh void the Law; but, on the contrary, it is thereby more fully confirmed and established: for, what the Law could not do, in that it was weak, through the flesh, God sending His own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, & for sin condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteouness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, Rom. 8: 2, 3. Here is then the mysterie, Transgressours of the Law are justified, upon the account of what their Mediator, and Surety, their publik person & Representer did & suffered, for Satisfaction to Law, Justice & the Law-giver; & by what He did & suffered, the Law is more established, then it would have been by any thing that we did, or could suffer; for He made Satisfaction to all its demands; there was perfect obedience given thereunto, & its commands answered, in all points, by our Lord Jesus Christ, who knew no sin, nor was deceite found in His mouth, 2 Cor. 5: 21. Esai. 53: 9. And because it was violated by sinners, & the Curse threatned was due, therefore, He did also satisfie that demand, by dying the shameful death of the cross, & undergoing the wrath & curse, due to us for sin; & thereby making a more perfect Satisfaction unto the Sanction and threatning part of the Law, than we could have done, by lying in hell for ever more. And by faith, closeing with Christ, & resting upon Him, as such a satisfying Cautioner & Redeemer, the sinner acknowledgeth the Law, in all its force, confessing himself a Transhressour, and obnoxious to the Curse; & now presenting to the Law & Law-giver the obedience & Satisfaction of Christ, whereby both its commands & Sanction are fully answered; & resting thereupon, as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law for his guilt, and of his right to the Crown, which he formerly had forfeited.

4. Here is another mystery. That such, as are unrighteous, and Ungodly, should be declared and pronunced Righteous. In justification, the person is declared not guilty, of what was laid to his charge, in order to punishment, & that juridically; and so he is declared free from the punishment, that the Accuser was seeking to have inflicted upon him; and so is declared & pronunced to be a righteous man, though not one, that hath not sinneth, yet now one, that is juridically righteous, But how can this be, seing every man and woman is guilty before God, and is come short of the glory of God? The mystery lyeth here (as was said) The righteousness of their Cautioner, Christ, is reckoned upon their score, and is imputed to them, & they receive it by faith, and so it becometh theirs; for now by faith they are united unto Christ, & become members of His mystical body, He being the Head and true Representative; & thereby He and they are one Person in Law, (being one Spirit) as the Husband and the Wife are one person in Law (being one flesh) and as the Representer and Represented, the Cautioner & principal debtor: and thus they have a true Interest in His Righteousness & obedience to the Law, which He yeelded, not upon His own account, being not obliged thereunto, antecedently to His own voluntary condescension for us; for as to His person, He was God, and so not obnoxious to any such Law, imposed upon man, who is in the way to the obtaining of a Crown, as the end of his race: yea nor was this requisite, as to His humane Nature, which, by vertue of the personal union with the God-head was, as to it self, either in Patria, and in possession of the State of blessedness; or in a capacity thereto, without working therefore: And it is certaine, that therefore His being made under the Law, was for His owne people, that, in their room, He might, in the Nature of Man, give perfect obedience to the Law; and so make up a righteousness, with which they might all become clothed, by Imputation on Gods part, & by faith receiving it, on their part; and so be justified. Hence-saith the Apostle, by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, Rom. 5: 19. And thus are they, who are unrighteous in themselves, being Transgressours of the Law, constituted righteous as to the Commands of the Law by the righteousness of their Cautioner. As also they are, though guilty in themselves & obnoxious to wrath, yet pronunced free, and absolved from that charge, by the Imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ, made in His sufferings, & death, who did bear our griefs, and carry our sorrowes, and was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed, Esai. 53: 4, 5. 1 Pet. 2: 24. And his own self bear our sins, in His own body on the tree.

3. There is likewise a mystery here, That the Imputation of the obedience and Righteousness of Christ doth not take away the Imputation of His Satisfaction, nor make His Satisfaction useless & of no Importance, or necessity, as Socinians imagine, who cast the whole Gospel in the mould of their own corrupt Reason and understanding: For they think, if Christs Righteousness be imputed to us, we are perfectly righteous; and if we be perfectly righteous, we have no sin; & if we have no sin, there is no need of Satisfaction for our sin. But they little consider, that we are both guilty of the broken Law, and also nothwithstanding obliged to perfect obedience. It is unreasonable to think, that Adam, by his breach of the Law, was exeemed & delivered from any obligation to obey the Law; sin doth not, neither can, dissolve that obligation; otherwayes, the best way of being freed from the Lawes of God, or Man, were to break them, & cast them at our heels. We then being transgressours, & still under the obligation of obedience to the whole Law, our Mediator and Cautioner must not only obey the Law for us, to the end, we may inherite the promised reward; but must also make Satisfaction, for the Violation of the Law, to the end we may escape Gods Curse & wrath, threatned in the Law, and due to us for the breach of the same. Had we perfectly kept the Law, we had then had no need of any Satisfaction for our breach thereof: but being guilty of sin, this Satisfaction and the Imputation thereof to us, is absolutely necessary. And though we need not nicely here distinguish betwixt this Righteouness & Satisfaction, in reference to the different ends; and say, that by His Righteousness imputed to us, we have right to the Crown, & by His Satisfaction, freedom from death, which was the penalty of the broken Law: for God hath joined both together for both ends; & what He hath thus joined together, as we should not separat, so neither may we nicely & scrupulously distinguish; but adore the wonderful wisdom of God in this contrivance, and observing our necessity of both, sweetly acquiesce in and thankfully accept of both. But you will say, if we be perfectly righteous by the Imputation of Christs righteousness, what need have we of any more? are we not possessed of right to the reward, and being righteous, are we not free of our sin? I answer. It is true indeed, if we said, that Christs Righteousness, or compleet obedience, was first imputed to us; or if the Scripture gave any ground to say so, there might be some coloure for this Exception: but, as the Scripture giveth no such ground; so neither do we assert it: Only we have need of both, & both are graciously imputed, and received by faith: yea, we being sinners, if we might speak of an order here, Satisfaction must first be imputed, that thereby we may be freed from the sentence of the Law, which most presseth a wakened, convinced sinner, who is most anxious hereanent, crying out, How shall I escape the wrath and curse of God? But, as the Lord hath graciously and wonderfully knit the effects together, so is the Cause. Both Christs obedience and Sufferings were so woven together, that they belonged both to, & made up His state of humiliation; & by both imputed by God, and received by faith, the beleever receiveth the whole Effect, that is, both Immunity from punishment, & a Right to the reward promised to obedience, or to the Crown. As Christ, the Messias, made an end of sins, & made reconciliation for iniquity; so He brought in an everlastingh righteousness, Dan. 9: 24. And beleevers have the benefite of both; for as they receive the grace of God, & the gift by grace, & aboundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness; so they shall reigne in life; and grace through righteousness reigneth unto eternal life, Rom. 5: 15, 17, 21.

5. Upon the other hand, this mystery is also observable. That Christs Satisfaction taketh not away the necessity of the Imputation of Christs Righteousness & obedience; as some do say, who think, that because we have full pardon of all sinnes, by vertue of the Satisfaction of Christ; therefore we need no more; a person, who is pardoned, being therefore one, that is not unrighteous; & one that is not unrighteous, being righteous, for (say they) there is no mids betwixt just, or righteous, and not unjust, or not unrighteous; & he, who is righteous, having done all his duty, & so having a right to the promised reward of life. So that, upon this ground they suppose, there is need of no more, in order to obtaining of life: & beside, say they, the Scripture saith, that the man is blessed, to whom the Lord imputeth not sin; & he, who is blessed upon this account, needeth no righteousness to be added, to render him blessed, and to give a right unto glory. But (1) we were (as was said) guilty of the breach of the Law, & so, liable to punishment, & were also under obligation, to give perfect obedience unto the Law; Satisfaction therefore for our breach, & our pardon upon Satisfaction, faith not, that we have not broken the Law; and if we have broken the Law, we cannot be said to have yeelded perfect obedience unto the Law, when God pardoneth upon a Satisfaction made, He doth not judge, or suppose, that the person pardoned hath perfectly kept the Law; for His judgment is according to truth; and the very pardon supposeth a Transgression; and a Transgression taketh away perfect obedience; as perfect obedience destroyeth or rendereth useless all pardon. Wherefore neither before God, nor man, can a person, meerly because of Pardon, be said, or be accounted to have all that was required. Upon Pardon, it is true, he is as much exeemed from the obligation to punishment, as if he had kept the whole Law; but yet, by that pardon, he is not made, nor accounted to be one, who never broke the Law, & there upon hath a right unto the reward promised: As (supposing for illustrations sake) when a Prince maketh a Law, & commandeth such & such persons to obey the same, under the paine of death; & with all promiseth to such, as observe the Law, and do what is commanded, that they shall enjoy a rich reward, & become heirs of a great Kingdom; and the persons, after they have broken the Law and become guilty of death, are pardoned, upon the Interposition of some great person, & Satisfaction made by the same for the failure; they cannot, upon the account of this Satisfaction, & their pardon thereupon, be said to have done what was commanded, nor to have right unto the reward, & to the Inheritance, promised to such, as obeyed the Law. (2) Therefore, though a person, that is pardoned, be one that is not unrighteous, that is, obnoxious to the penalty; yet he is not one that is righteous positively, or in reference to the reward; but only one that is negatively righteous; that is, one that though he hath no right to the reward, yet he is not liable to the punishment: and therefore, though he be thus negatively not unrighteous, that is, one that is freed from the punishment; yet he cannot be accounted one, that hath done all that was commanded; & so he cannot be accounted Righteous, in reference to the reward. (3) So that there is a manifest mids betwixt being righteous, that is, one having a right to the reward, and being not unrighteous, that is, not obnoxious to the punishment, as is clear by the Instance of Adam, before his fall; for during that time (how long, or how short so ever it was) he could not be said to be untighteous, because he had not yet sinned; nor could he be said to be righteous, in reference to the reward, that was promised, on condition of perfect obedience to the end; that is, such as had done all his duty: for if he had then done all his duty, or all that was required, in order to the reward, he had then had a full and compleat right to the reward of life promised, & God would have given it to him, according to the Covenant and Promise. But we know it was not so; for he was to finish his course & run his race to the end, before he could have challenged a right to the promised inheritance; and this he did not. So that before he fell by transgression, it might have been said of him, that he was not unrighteous, that is, that he was one, that had not yet transgressed, and deserved the punishment-threatned; but he could not be said to have been fully & positively righteous, that is one, that had done all his duty; and therefore had now a full & compleat right unto the reward. (4) It is true, the Scripture saith, that the man is blessed, to whom the Lord doth not impute sin: but it doth not say, That he is blessed, to whom the Lord only imputeth not sin, or to whom He giveth no more: nor doth the Scripture say, that this pardoning, or not imputing of sin, purely & abstractively considered, that is, considered alone without any more (as it must be considered by such, as oppose us here) is that compleat blessedness, whereof the Scripture speaketh. But the reason, why such are said to be blessed, to whom the Lord doth not impute sin, is, because Imputation of • ighteousness is inseparebly annexed with non-imputation of sin: & therefore in that same place of Scripture; to wit, Rom. 4. 6. It is said, that David Psal. 32: 1, 2. describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness, while he saith, blessed is the man, unto whom the Lord will not impute sin, &c. Whereby we see, that both these are so firmly connected by the Lord, that the one cleareth and confirmeth the other; & that who ever hath the one, hath the other also; and upon that account are blessed, enjoying the whole Effect of the Imputation of Christs whole Surety-righteousness: and these two, to wit, pardon of sins, and the Right to the Inheritance, flowing from the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction, & of His obedience, though they are never separated, yet they are distinguished, & spoken of distinctly in Scripture. It is one thing to be delivered from under the Law, & another thing to receive the Adoption of Sones, and the blessing of Abraham, Gal. 3: 13, 14. & 4: 4, 5. As it is one thing to finish the Transgression, to make an end of sin, & to make Reconciliation for iniquity; & another thing to bring-in Everlasting Righteousness, Dan. 9: 24. Yea, the redemption from the Law and from its curse is mentioned, as preceeding the other; as the finishing of transgression is also mentioned before the bringing-in of Righteousness, in the passages cited. And thus, as these Effects are distinguished, though inseparable, so is the Cause. By the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction, we have pardon of sin, being redeemed from the curse of the Law, by His being made a curse for us, & by the Imputation of His Rigteousness, and obedience, we are looked upon as Righteous, & so have a right to the promise and Inheritance: Though we need not thus distinctly consider both, save only to demonstrat the necessity of the Imputation of both: for Christ by His death did also purchase the Inheritance for us; and by His obedience made Satisfaction for sin, it being a piece of His Humiliation. So that both, in the deep wisdom of God, make up one cause of that one Effect, which comprehendeth all Blessedness; that is, both pardon of sinnes and Right to the Inheritance, &c. By the Imputation of both, or of this compleat Surety-righteousness of Christ including both, beleevers are pardoned and adjudged unto life. Hence our pardon and justification are often ascribed unto Christs death, not as distinctly considered, or as excluding His Righteousness & obedience; but, among other reasons, because that was the compleating Act of His obedience; and to which all the rest preceeding had a respect, as to that, which should compleat the whole Meritorious part of His Mediation. And hereby His obedience can no more be excluded, than His foregoing soul-sufferings. Nay His death did presuppose and include His obedience; for it was the death of one, who had perfectly obeyed the Law; which death & obedience, being His Mediatory work in the state of His Humiliation, was a compleat Righteousness, for the blessedness & advantage of all those, for whom He appeared, & whose debt He undertook to pay. (5.) That the obedience of Christ must also be imputed to sinners, is manifest from this, That otherwise they should have no Righteousness at all imputed to them, that properly can be called a Righteousness: for if nothing but that, which is commonly called Christs passive obedience, or His Sufferings, be imputed, there can no Righteousness be said to be imputed; for dying and suffering the penalty, as such, are no righteousness; being no obedience to the commands of the Law, in conformity to which consisteth proper Righteousness: as when one dieth for his crime of Murther, he cannot be said to be thereby a righteous man, or to have obeyed the Law, forbidding Murther, nor can we be said properly to have obeyed the Law, when Christ in our room did suffer the penalty of death, due to us for the breach of it. They who are in hell, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, cannot be said to be obeying the Law. It is true, Christ in dying did obey a command, Imposed upon Him by the Father; but that was no command of the Moral Law, prescribed unto man: & thereafter in dying & Suffering, He gave no obedience to that Law, under the obligation to which we were standing; no more than He can be said to have Suffered the penalty, while He was obeying the Law; these two being so manifestly different. So that it is clear, that if Christs obedience be not imputed to us, no proper Righteousness is, or can be said to be imputed to us. Yea (6) If Christs obedience be not imputed to us, that Law, which saith, do this and live, is not fulfilled; but rather abrogated & quite abolished: and it must be said, that not withstanding of that constitution of Gods, we live, though we neither do this; nor is our Cautioners doing of it imputed to us. And so we have a right to the Reward, & get it at lenght, without the Righteousness required in order thereunto. Let us therefore admire the harmonious perfection of this Effect, & Work of infinite wisdom. I know several things are objected against this Truth, as there are many other grounds & Reasons adduced for the same; but these I shall speak to at more length afterward.

7. This is also a mysterie here to be noticed, That a Righteousness, that is not ours inherently, but Christs, should be made ours, made over to us, & reckoned upon our score, or we become clothed therewith, & there upon justified as Righteous, as really & effectually, as if we had wrought it our selves, and it had been properly inherent in us. Socinians, Papists, Arminians & others, who will not subject their reason unto this mystery, and give credite to Revelation, will acknowledge no such imputation of Righteousness: but at most do grant but an improper imputation; that is an imputation as to Effects: so that with them, Christ neither Suffered, nor obeyed, in our stead & room; but only for our good & advantage; & that too conditionally only, in case, we beleeve and performe the Gospel-condition. But this imputation as to Effects only, is no imputation at all, there being no thing thereby Imputed; not the Righteousness of Christ it self; for this they expresly deny; nor yet the Effects themselves, for we no where read of Imputed Justification, Adoption, Pardon &c. which are the Effects. Yea, it is not enough to them to deny this Imputed Righteousness; but in contempt & scorne, they call that, which we name an Imputed Righteousness, a putative Righteousness, as if it were a meer imaginary thing. But whatever such in decision think or say, the Gospel holdeth forth to us a Righteousness imputed, or the Righteousness of Christ, graciously bestowed upon & made over to belevers, or freely given unto them, so that they are dealt with by God, as Righteous Juridically & legally, or as possessours of such a compleat & perfect Righteousness, & that as really, & to all Effects, as if it had been their own inherently, & performed by them, & so had been theirs without any such Imputation. And because this, as the cause, is imputed to them & made theirs; therefore all the Effects thereof shall really & certainely be bestowed upon them, in God's appointed time & methode. This is the Truth, which the Gospel holdeth forth, to the solide peace, joy & comfort of Beleevers; the full clearing & vindicating of which would require a just Treatise. I shall therefore here propose but a few clear & manifest Grounds of this refreshful & comfortable truth, leaving the further prosecution & vindication of them, & of other arguments, that are used in this matter, with the examination of what is objected on the contrary, till afterward. First therefore, we say, as Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin; that is; had the sinnes of His people laid upon Him, & imputed to Him; so that they were all caused to meet together on Him Esai. 53: 6. & He therefore was made a Sacrifice for sin, or dealt with & punished, as a sinner, though no sinner inherently, but only by Imputation, for He did bear our griefs, & carried our sorrowes, & was wounded for our transgressions, & bruised for our iniquities, Esai. 53: 4, 5. to wit, now imputed to Him by God, & reckoned upon His account, who knew no sin in Himself inherently: So are we made the Righteousness of God in Him 2 Cor. 5: 21. that is, have His Righteousness, who is God, imputed to us, who were in our selves & inherently sinners; & being in Him by faith are dealt with as Righteous. The manifest scope of the place, & the plaine Import of the word, must enforce this truth, on all, who are not more than ordinarily blinded with prejudice. Secondly as Adam's posterity, who were not existing, when he transgressed the Law of God, but were only in his loines, & federally comprehended with him, in that covenant, by God's voluntary disignation & appointment; & so did not actually, & really eat that fruit, which Adam did eat; yet have that sin & guilt so imputed unto them, that it is really accounted theirs; & not meerly in its Effects, for its Effects are not truely Imputed, neither can be saied to be so; for that natural contagion & corruption of Nature, which is truely propagated to the posterity, & all actuall trangressions, the fruits thereof, cannot be said to be imputed, because they are really theirs, & inherent in them. But that original sin, which is the guilt of Adam's first sin, is only it, which can be imputed (unless we mean such an Imputation, whereby our actual sinnes, which we commit, are said to be imputed to us, when they are laid to our charge, & we actually punished therefore) to them, who did not actually commit it, in their own person; & by vertue of this Imputation, they are accounted guilty of that self same sin; & therefore are dealt with & punished, upon the account thereof, no less than if they had actually committed it themselves, in their own persons; & no less than Adam himselfs was punished therefore. So are Beleevers, being by faith united unto Christ, & made real members of His mystical body, & now interessed in Him, as His Children & Brethren, made partakers of His Righteousness, & have it imputed unto them, for all ends & uses, as if it had been their own, without any Imputation. The reading of the Apostles discourse Rom. 5. from vers 12. & forward to the end, may satisfy any as to this whole affaire, who will yeeld themselves captives unto Truth: for upon this doth the Apostle found His whole discourse & explication of the rich advantages, had by Christ & His Righteousness, clearing, & illustrating the same by that similitude of Adam, whom He expresly calleth the figure of Him, that was to come vers 14. & so asserteth, that as by one man sin entered into the world, & death by sin, & so death passed upon all, be • ause all did sinne; so by one man, Jesus Christ, the second Adam, righteousness ontered into the world, & life by it, & so life passed upon all, that were in Him, because they are righteous in Him, or have His righteousness imputed unto them. Nay, in the following verses, the matter is cleared with an advantage unto Beleevers in Christ. But (saith he vers 15, 16, 17, 18, 19.) not as the offence, so also is the free gift; for if through the offence of one, many be dead; much more the grace of God, & the gift by grace, by one man Iesus Christ, hath abounded unto many, &c. And so he goeth on to shew what & how great things beleevers receive from Christ, with no less, Yea rather with much more of a certainety, than the Posterity of Adam were interessed in what he did: and therefore, as judgment was by one to condemnation; (saith he) so the free gift is of many offences unto justification; & if by one mans offence, death reigned by one, much more they who beleeve or receive aboundance of grace, & of the gift of righteousness, shall reigne in life by one Iesus Christ. And as the offence of one Adam was imputed unto all, & thereby guilt & judgment came upon all, making them liable to condemnation: So by the righteousness of one Jesus Christ, imputed to all, that receive this aboundance of grace & of the gift of righteouseess, the free gift of justification cometh unto them, reconciling them to God, & instating them for life. And the ground & reason of this is laid down vers 19. for as by one mans disobedience, many were made sinners; & so were guilty, & made liable to judgment & condemnation; So by the obedience of one, that perfect obedience to the Law, that Christ performed, opposite to Adam's transgression & disobedience, shall many be made righteous, that is, constituted righteous; & therefore dealt with as such, through this imputed righteousness; & so justified & made heirs of life: for vers 21. he addeth as sin hath reigned unto death, even so grace must reigne, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Iesus Christ, our Lord. They then, who will deny, or oppose themselves unto this Imputation of Christ's righteousness, must do manifest violence unto the whole discourse of the Apostle, in this place. Thirly. Hence another evidencing ground of this imputation: for as what is done by a publick person, representing others, whether upon one ground, & after one manner, or another, is accounted legally to be done by those, who are represented, & they are dealt with accordingly, as Adam was a publick person, representing all his posterity, that were to come of him by ordinary generation, according to the ordination & appointment of God: So Christ, of whom Adam was a figure, was a publick person, representing all, whom the Father had given to Him, & for whom He had undertaken, & for whose sake He sanctified Himself Ioh. 17, 19. & become their Brother taking on their Nature. Heb. 2: 11, 14. & becoming like them in all things, sin only excepted Heb. 2: 17. comp: with Heb. 3: 15. Therefore He took not upon Him the Nature of Angels, but the seed of Abraham Heb. 2: 16. & He was the Captaine of their Salvation, vers 10. He is also made & called the Head of the Church, which is, His body & fulness Ephes 1: 22, 23. & 5: 23. Col. 1: 18. and so He with His Church make up one mystical body, whereof He is the Head, & Beleevers are members; Thus there is a closs & mystical union betwixt Christ & Beleevers; beyond any union, that is in Nature, whether it be that of Head & members, of Root & Branches, of King & Subjects, or of that betwixt Husband & wife, for all these are but dark resemblances of this Spiritual Union betwixt Christ & Beleevers, which is therefore compared unto these, & in part explained thereby, for our better understanding of the matter: but none of them, nor all of them do fully unfold the mystery. And in it there is ground enough to suppose, Christ to be a publick person & a Representative; as also for asserting of this Imputation; because Beleevers being thus united unto Christ, are made partakers of His righteousness, & of what He, as Head & Husband, did & suffered, in their room & place; & they thereupon are blessed with all the fruits & effects thereof. Fourthly His being called a Surety Heb. 7: 22. doth also give ground & confirmation unto this Imputation: for as He who becometh Surety for another, undertaketh to do or suffer, what he, for whom he is Surety, was obliged to do, or suffer: As when Paul became Surety for Onesimus; & bound himself, as such, unto Philemon, he would have Philemon, requiring all, that Onesimus was due to him, at his hand, & reckoned upon his score; & he undertook to satisfie him for this debt, or for what he could crave of Onesimus; as we see Philem. vers 18, 19. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that upon mine account, I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it. So what the cautioner doth, or suffereth, as such, or according to his undertaking, is reckoned upon the score of the Principul debtor; as Paul's paying of what Onesimus & imputed to was endue te Philemon, was to be reckoned on the score of Onesimus, him, that he thereby might be freed from all pursuite of Law, or action against him, at the Instance of Philemon. Wherefore as Christ, becoming Surety for His Children, & saying to the Father, Lo, I come, in the volumne of they book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will; ô God Psal. 40: 7, 8. Heb. 10. 7. did take upon Himself the debt of sinners, & engaged to pay all; that is, both to give perfect Obedience to the Law, & fulfill all Righteousness, Mat. 3: 15. as also to pay the penalty, to make Satisfaction to Justice, by becoming a Curse, & suffering Griefs, Sorrowes, Bruisings, Mockings, & the cursed death of the Cross: for all this He did willingly & cheerfully. I have (said He) a baptisme to be baptized with, (meaning His death) & how am I straitened (or pained) untill it be accomplished Luk. 12: 50. He laid down His life, that He might take it againe; & no man took His life from Him, against His will; but He laid it down of His own accord Ioh. 10: 17, 18. And as Christ did really & actually performe all, that He did undertake, so that He said upon the Cross, it is finished: It must of necessity follow, that all they, for whom He became Surety, & undertook to do & suffer what was laid upon Him, must have that Imputed, & made over unto them, & they must be clothed with that rob of Righteousness, which He did make for them, & must appear before the throne of justice clothed therewith. Fiftly Christ's making proper & full Satisfaction to the Father, in the Name & room of His people, saith also, That there is an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness unto them, for whom He performed that Righteousness; as His Satifaction must be for them. So that if Imputation be denied, Satisfaction also must be denied. Hence the Socinians wickedly deny both: & indeed, who ever deny the one, must also deny the other, or not speak consequentially; for when one laith down a satisfactory price for another, it must be reckoned upon the score of & imputed to that other; to the end, he may be dealt with, as if he had laid it down himself; & thereby be freed from what otherwayes he must have undergone: & if upon the account of that Satisfaction, he be not so freed, it cannot be called a Satisfaction for him. When Christ laith dwon his life for His sheep, His sheep must not dye & perish; for if they perish, He did not die for them; & if they perish not because of His dying for them, His death must be imputed to them; & upon the account of it they must be saved So that Christ's dying for His own is dying in their Room, Person, place & Stead, as the particle for manifestly importeth 2 Sam. 18: 33. Gen. 44: 33. Numb. 3: 12. Rom. 5: 6, 7. Hence His Ransome is expresly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Tim. 2: 6. Many moe arguments might be here adduced, for confirmation of this Truth; but I shall satisfy my self at present, with these few & plaine ones; & so proceed.

8. This Mystery is also considerable here, That both the justice of God, the Mercy & free Grace of God, take place in this matter. Socinians cry up the Mercy & free Grace of God, in the matter if justification: but it is to this end, that they may, with more desperat confidence, shut out the Justice of God, so as it may have no place there: & therefore they deny all Satisfaction, Redemption & Atonement &c. (except what is meerly metaphorical) because they cannot see, how justice & mercy both can with joint hands concurre to our justification. But the Apostle, better taught than they, & better acquainted with the mind of Christ, in this Mystery, than they are, seeth no Inconsistency; But rather declareth the sweet & & perfect harmony & concurrence of these, in this mystery; telling us Rom. 3: 24, 25, 26. That we are justified freely by His grace; & yet addeth, through the redemption, that is in Iesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in His bloud, to declare His righteonsness, &c. And againe, to declare His righteousness, that He might be just, & the justifier, of him, which beleeveth in Iesus. Here is a free grace triumphing; & yet Justifice declared and manifested; God declared to be just, and His righteousness manifested; & yet sinners and beleevers justified freely by grace. So Eph. 1: 7, 8. There is a Redemption through the price of bloud; & yet a free pardon of sinnes, according to the riches of Gods grace, wherein He hath abounded towards us, in all wisdome & prudence. But if it be enquired, wherein appeare to this mercy and freedom of grace, in our justification, seing there was a Satisfaction made to justice, for all the sinnes of His peaple? I answer, (1) was it not an Act of wonderful free grace & mercy, that, when the Lord might have executed the sentence of the Law upon us, according to that threatning, that day thou eats, thou shalt die; and so have made us, sinners, who transgressed the Law, to die and suffer; yet He would accept of a Satisfaction, at the hands of a Surety & Cautioner? (2) Was it not Act of grace & mercy to us, that He himself would provide a Surety and put His name in our obligation; & so make Him sin for us, who know no sin, & lay all our iniquities upon Him, that He might bear the punishment, due to us for the same? See Ioh. 3: 16. (3) Was it no Act of Soveraigne grace & mercy, that God should both provide a Mediator & Surety for us, & accept of His Mediation and Satisfaction, most freely, out of free Grace and Love, when we neither had done, nor could do any thing to move Him hereunto, or to procure this at His hands; yea, when all our carriage, & all that He could see in us, did rather cry aloud for the contrary dealing? (4) Was it no Act of Soveraigne Grace, that God should provide all this remedie for a few, whom He did choose for Him self out of free Grace and Love, and gave away to Christ, to bee redeemed by Him, leaving the rest, & passing them by, though no more unworthy, than such, as were chosen? (5) Is it no Act of grace & mercy, that in order to this great favour of justification, no more should be required on our part, than faith in Jesus Christ; seing this very faith, including an Union with and a marriag-consent unto Christ, is, in it self, a favour nothing, in a manner, inferiour to the pardon of all our sinnes, & to the accepting of us as Righteous, in His sight? (6) Is justification no Act of grace and mercy, though it be upon the account of the obedience and Satisfaction of Christ; when that very faith, which is only required of us, in order to our full interest in Christ & His merites, is also the free gift of God, Ephes. 2: 8? If these particulars will not aboundantly say that we are saved in justification by grace, & by the exceeding riches of Gods grace & kindness towards us, through Christ Jesus, according to Ephes. 2: 7. what will!

9. Here is a great and wonderful mystery, in this matter, That the Innocent should suffer, and the guilty escape & go free. The Socinians, that they may strengthen them selves in their mischievous prejudices against the Satisfaction of Christ, imagine an Impossibility here, & an Inconsistency with Justice, that an Innocent person should be put to suffer. But what ever they dream, who will walk in these mysterious matters by no other guide, than the dim light of corrupt nature, it comporteth aboundantly with Justice, that the Surety be put to pay what he hath undertaken to pay, for the principal debtor. And here was no wrong done to our Surety, Jesus Christ, who willingly undertook this debt, and was lord of His own life, having absolute power to lay it down, and power to take it up againe, and to raise him self from the dead; & knowing withall, how richly to compensate & make up that loss another way, so as He should be no loser, when He should see His Seed, and receive the rich reward of His laboures from the Father, whose Servant He was, in this affaire. Here is then a mystery of wisdom, Grace and Love, that the Innocent Lamb of God, who knew no sin, who did no violence, nor was guile found in his mouth, 2 Cor. • : 21. Esai. 53: 9. Who; when He was reviled, reviled not againe. 1 Pet. 2: 22, 23. Who was Holy, harmless, undesiled and separat from sinners, Heb. 7: 26. That He should be made sin by God, 2 Cor. 5: 21. And so legally guilty, & obnoxious to the punishment due for sin; that He should be made an High Priest to offer up Him self a sacrifice for sin, Heb. 9: 14, 28. That He should bear our grieves, & carry our sorrowes▪ and be wounded for our Transgressions, and bruised for our Iniquities; that the punishment of our peace should be upon Him; & He should stripes, & be oppressed & afflicted, and be cutt off out of the Land of the living; have strokes upon Him, & make His grave with the wicked; be bruised & be put to griefe, and make His soul an offering for sin. Esai, 53: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. That he, who could not be charged with sin, should yet be put to suffer most grieveous torments, immediatly in his soul, Mat. 26: 37, 38. & 27: 46. Luk. 22: 44 Ioh. 12: 27. And paines in his body, Mat. 26. & 27. Chapters. That He should die, and that He should die the Shamful, Painful, and cursed death of the Cross, Gal. 3: 13. Phil. 2. 8. And, upon the other hand, that we, who were the sinners, and guilty, and so obnoxious to all the miseries of this life, to death it self, and to the paines of hell and wrath of God for ever, should escape, and be healed by His stripes, Esai. 53: 5. 1 Pet 2: 24. & become the righteousness of God in Him. 2 Cor. 5: 21. And be justified and made heirs of the promises; O! what an unsearchable mystery of Love and free grace shineth forth here?

10. This is also a Part of this Mystery, That nothing should be forgiven, & yet all should be forgiven. Nothing was forgiven to our Surety, He paid all that was required of Him; for the Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all. He gave full obedience to the Law, in all its demandes, & made a perfect & compleat Satisfaction for our Offences; so that the Father was well pleased in Him; & the same was at two several times declared, & expressed out of heaven; once at His Baptisme, Mat. 3: 17. & againe at His Transfiguration, Mat. 17: 5. The sword of Justice was awakened against Him, though He was Gods fellow, Zech. 13: 7. And did abate Him nothing of what was due. The Lord Jesus gave him self for us, an offering and a Sacrifie to God, for a sweet smelling savour, Ephes. 5: 2. He is a perfect High Priest, continueing for ever, having an unchangable Priest-hood, and therefore is able to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by Him; for He needeth not daily as the High Priests under the Law to offer up Sacrifie first for His own sinnes, & then for the People; for this He did once, when He offered up Himself: for the word of the Oath maketh Him a Priest, who is consecrated for ever more, Heb. 7: 24, 25, 26, 27. And yet, though He had nothing forgiven or abated to Him, while standing in our room, but paid all to the outmost farthing; all notwithstanding is freely forgiven to us, and we have blessedness, by the Lords forgiving our Iniquities, & covering our sins, or not imputing them to us, Psal. 32: 1, 2. Rom. 4: 7, 8. Our Redemption is forgiveness of sinnes Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. And all sinnes must be forgiven to us, or our Redemption should not be perfect, nor we saved; for one sin would ruine us for ever; because if the Lord should mark iniquity, & enter in to judgment, no man should stand, & no flesh should be justified Psal. 130: 3. & 143: 2.

11. Here is another Mystery, considerable in our justification, That though thereby we be declared & pronounced righteous, & so acquite & absolved from what was, or might be charged upon us; Yet we have need of Pardor, & must be freely pardoned. Socinians cannot or will not 〈◊〉 Conexion, that Infinite Wisdom hath made here; & therefore make use of forgiveness & free pardon of sinnes, as an Argument, wherewith to fight against true Gospel justification, or the justification of a sinner upon the account of the Imputed Righteousness of Christ; & against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to this end, that the sinner may be absolved & pronounced righteous, & accepted as such. But the Scripture seeth no Inconsistenry or Repugnancy here, but an harmonious & sweet accord betwixt the Lord's causing people their iniquities passe from them, & His clothing them with change of raiment Zach. 3: 4. And the Apostle joineth both, as inseparable; yea he declareth the necessity of both, saying Rom. 3: 21, 22. That now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested— even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Iesus Christ, unto all, & upon all them that beleeve. where upon it followeth, vers 24. that they are freely justified by His grace. But then, what need is there of Remission? might one say: doth not this quite take away all Remission? No; for he addeth vers 24, 25. through the redemption, that is in Iesus Christ, whom God hath setforth to be a propitiation, through faith in His bloud, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sinnes, that are past. Yea, the forgiveness of sinnes establisheth & confirmeth the Imputation of righteousness, where by we are justified; for thus speaketh the Apostle Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, saying, blessed are they, whose iniquities are forgiven, & whose sinnes are covered; blessed is the man, unto whom the Lord will not impute sin. Where we see, that non-imputation of sins is so far from shutting out Imputation of Righteousness, that it confirmeth it, & proveth it, & is in separable from it, & must necessarily presuppose it: for we, being sinners, can have no Absolution, untill the Satisfaction of Christ be applied to us, & made ours by Imputation: & where this is imputed by God, the soul must be absolved from all that can be laid to its charge. Therefore in justification, as we are declared righteous, by reason of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us & received by faith; so have we thereby a full remission of all our sinnes. Paul tels us 2 Cor. 5: 19. That God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. And what giveth he for the ground of this? See vers 21. for) saith he) He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

12. It is also observable in this mysterious business, That though our jestification be an act of God's free grace, wherein, only upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ Imputed to us by God; & not upon the account of any thing in us, or done by us, He pardoneth our sins & accepteth our persons as righteous: Yet this is not with an exclusion, bur rather with an Inclusion of faith, which is a Receiving, a laying hold upon, & a Leaning unto the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, So • inians & others are utter strangers unto this mystery; & make use of their wit here, to plead against the imputation of Christ's Righteousness, the onely ground of our justification; because faith is required of us, in order to our justification, and 〈◊〉 (as they say) it self 〈◊〉 to us as our Righteousneis; upon the account of which we are justified. They suppose, that if Christ's Righteousness be imputed to a person, & he thereupon acquite & pardoned of all his sinnes, that person must be righteous, pardoned & Justified, whether he beleeve, or not; & the Righteousness of Christ must be his, before he beleeve, But, leaving the debating of that Question, whether faith properly taken, that is, as our act, done in obedience to the command of God, be Imputed to us, as our righteousness? untill we come to the next part of the words. I shall only now say, as to the other thing here alleiged, That they, as ignorant of the Gospel, feigne an opposition in things, among which the Gospel pointeth forth to us a perpetual & harmonious agreement; & upon the other hand, they will patch up a reconciliation & agreement betwixt those things, which the Gospel setteth at perfect Opposition & variance: for Paul, better acquainted with the Gospel, & with the nature of Gospel-justification, than they, tels us, yea he proveth it by many Arguments, That by the deeds of the Law, there shall no flesh be-justified; & consequently, not by faith, as one deed or work of the Law. And he maketh mention of the righteousness of God without the Law; & saith, that that righteousness of God is imputed to & upon all them, that beleeve. And notwithstanding of this; he tels us, that this Righteousness is by faith of Iesus Christ, & imputed to all that beleeve, exclusive of others Rom. 3: 20, 21, 22. And againe he tels us, that as we are justified freely by bis grace; yet it is through the Redemption, that is in Iesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in His bloud vers 24, 25. And againe vers 26: as God is declared in this matter to be just; so is he the justifier of him only, that beleeveth in Iesus. Moreover vers. 27. he mentioneth the Law of faith, as opposite to the Law of works, in that it excludeth boasting; & concludeth againe vers 28. That a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law, and vers 30. that God justifieth by faith & through faith. Yet we never hear, that he faith, we are justified for faith or upon the account of faith. Further, That faith is required, in order to justification, is clear from Rom. 9: 31, 32. where it is said, that Israel which followed after the Law of righteousness, hath not attained to the Law of righteousness, because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law. This also is fully proved by the same Apostle, in this Epistle to the Galatians, knowing (saithe he Chap. 2: 16.) that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of iesus Christ; even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ. And to pointe forth this Interest of faith; & yet not as imputed for our righteousness; when properly taken, the same Apostle Phil. 3: 9. calleth that righteousness, which he opposeth unto his own righteousness, which is of the Law, a righteousness, which is through the faith of Christ, & the righteousness which is of God by faith. By all which, & many other passages mentioning our justification by faith, which might be cited, we see that the Lord hath so ordered the matter, that faith should have an Interest in justification as an Instrumental cause, or some such thing (for to contend about words, is not much to edification) as may fully denote & pointe forth the Emphasis of the Scripture expressions herein; such as are to be found Rom. 3: 22, 28, 30. & in other places now cited; and that because faith carrieth a poor convicted & self-condemned sinner out of himself, to seek a righteousness in Christ, in & upon the acount of which, he may be accepted of God & justified: & so bringeth him to close with Christ & to accept of His righteousness, & put it on, that he may appear in it before God, & so receive the Atonement & abundance of grace and & of the gift of righteousness Rom. 5: 11, 17. And albest it may satisfie us to know, that so the Lord God hath ordained it, that the self-condemned sinner should flee to the Righteousness of Christ, held forth in the Gospel, lay hold on it, & lean to it, thereby he may attaine Justification and Remission, without enquireing after reasons of this Contrivance: Yet we may clearly see the wisdom of God shining forth, in this appointed way of justification: for the sinner is hereby brought to swear (as it were) himself bare, to renounce all in himself, to declare & profess himself a plaine bankrupt; and so to despare in himself; that the riches of the free grace of God, & everlasting love may shine forth in him, in a more divine lustre, & in a singular heavenly beauty: & hereby all ground of pride, boasting, or glorying in himself is taken away; & the sinner is made to see & to subscribe unto the glorious wisdom, that then appeareth in that contrivance, & to wonder; as also to see his everlasting obligation unto the Lord contriver, & to the Lord Ransomer. So is he made to see the perfect ground of security & saifty in this way, when he seeth, that, in order to his partaking of the great blessings & favoures, his soul longeth for, he must first be united unto Jesus Christ himself, & married unto Him, in a perpetual marriage-Covenant, that shall never be dissolved. And he winneth hereby to a sure ground of peace & Tranquillity of soul, when he seeth, that it is nothing in himself, that is taken, as Satisfaction to the Infinite justice of God; but the Righteousness of Christ who is God & Man in one person; & so a perfect & Infinite Righteousness, able fully to repare the breach made, & to make Satisfaction for the wrong done to the Infinite God. So that upon this ground, he may boast & glory in the Lord alone, & triumph over all assaults & Temptations of Satan. Hereby then as the Lord hath consulted His own glory; for the sinner, fleing to the Righteousness of Christ, as his only refuge, & resting there, doth proclame God to be Holy, Just, Righteous, Gracious & only Wise; so he hath consulted the saifty, Peac, joy, & Confidence of His own. The consideration whereof should make us comply sweetly with this noble contrivance; & in stead of disputing against it, or ourselves out of it, acquiesce with all our heart in it, & rest there.

13. We may observe further another mystery, in this matter of justification to wit. That the way of justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, doth not take away the necessity & Usefulness of the Exercise of the Grace of Repentance. Socinians & others, who follow their footsteps, can observe no harmony here, & cry-out against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, because (as they suppose) it 〈◊〉 the Use and Necessity of Repentance, and enervateth all the commands enjoining it. But (1) This mistake must certainly flow from a misconception of the true Nature Use & ends of Gospel-repentance, for they must of necessity Suppose, that Gospel-Repentance is required for the same Ends & Uses, for which the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is required; otherwise they could not think, that the asserting of the one should tend to the justling out of the other. But whatever they imagine, we assert no such thing; but affirme. That Christ hath purchased the whole of our Remission: and Repentance, whatever Papists say, hath no interest herein; nor hath it any merite with-it, whether ex condigno, or ex congruo, to procure Remission, & the Favoure of God, or Reconciliation with Him; but it is only required in its own place, to accompany faith, & to follow upon it, as a sutable & profitable exercise for sinners, advanced to such high favoures & Privileges. And the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, can no more prejudge the exercise of this grace, than of any other Gospel-Grace, or duty, such as Love, Fear, Hop, prayer, Patience &c. but rather incite & encourage to it (2.) what was formerly said of faith & its harmonious agreement with the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, will sufficiently also clear & confirme this: for if the Adversaries speak of legal Repentance, the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will no more take that away, than faith, for it preceedeth faith, whereby the sinner laith hold on Christ. And if they speak of Gospel Repentance (which is more to the purpose) they must know, that though in its Exercise (at least in its remarkakle exercise) it doth follow faith, and in order of Nature is posteriour to it; Yet it is inseparably-connected therewith; so that where faith is, there is & must also be Repentance, at least, in its root & begun exercise: for a sinner cannot rightly accept of & close with Christ, as offered in the Gospel, for Gospel ends, & in a Gospel manner, & according to the call of the Gospel, but withall he must have a sight & sense of his sins, & a hatred thereof, as also a purpose firme & fixed, to turn from them unto God, as also an Endeavour after new obedience. Yea, we finde sometimes, Repentance pressed, as including faith in it; as when pressed in order to pardon & acceptance with God: Sometimes againe it is mentioned together with faith, as being inseparable therefrom. (3.) As the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, and the justification of beleevers thereupon, doth not put them in such a case, as they shall sinne no more afterward, so neither doth it take away the Usefulness and necessity of renewed Acts of faith and Repentance; nor in the least weaken the after exercise of these Graces, but rather doth excite thereunto, each in their proper place, and to their proper ends, in order to actual pardon, according to the Gospel Method, in which it is required, that justified persons or Believers repent of their after sinnes, and by faith flee to Christ for pardon, and as at the first, so afterward there can be no true exercise of faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, for pardon of after sinnes, without a true exercise of Repentance towards God, these perpetually accompanying other: yet we must not think, that Repentance considered by it self, and as distinct from faith, hath the same Interest in the Covenant, for pardon, first or last, that faith hath: for neither doth it so act on Christ and his Righteousness, in order to pardon, as faith doth; nor is it appointed or called for, for that end: and when it is enjoined and mentioned, in order to Remission, it is to be taken as distinct, far less as separated from faith, but as including faith, being the necessary concomitant and consequent thereof, as also the publick and sensible expression and evidence of true and lively faith: for Repentance being towards God, & a turning to God, from whom Sin draweth the Soul away, must of necessity have faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, accompanying it, and laying a ground for it, seing there is no coming to the Father, but by the Son. Ioh. 14: 6. (4.) To say, that by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, we should have no more need of Repentance, than Christ had, who was wholly without Sin, is to imagine, that we dream of such an Imputation, as maketh us to have been no Sinners, or under no guilt; and consequently to have stood in need of no gracious Imputation. But we assert no such thing; for we were Sinners, and so stood in need of a Righteousness to be imputed to us, in order to our iustification. And he who graciously did provide this Righteousness for us, might also, without the least derogation from the freedom and glory of his Grace & Favoure, as appointe the meanes, Method & way, how he will have us made partakers of the benefites of this Grace & Imputed Righteousness first & last; so also to prescribe what duties He thought meet for such, as He had so visited with Grace & Mercy.

14. Another part of this Mystery lyeth in this, That justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, taketh not away the rich & honourable privilege of Adoption. Such, as are Adversaries unto this Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, alleige that there is no consistency here; because, say they, if Christ's Righteousness or Obedience should be imputed unto us, that so we may have a Right and Title to life, according to the tenour of the Covenant, do this and live, Adoption, by which this Title and Right is conveyed, according to the Scriptures, is rendered Useless. But not to mentione the great difference, that is betwixt the Life and Privileges of Life, a Right whereunto is solemnly had in Adoption; and the Life, that was promised in the old Covenant, by these words, do this and Live. They consider not, that the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness doth no more destroy or take away Adoption, than it doth destroy, or take away pardon; and that it is so far, from rendering either Useless, that it establisheth both, & is the ground and firme Basis of both: for as without the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and Satisfaction, there can be no ground for pardon; so without the Imputation of his Righteousness and obedience there is no ground for Adoption. As justification is a solemne and formal stating of a person in Favour & reconciliation with God, and in pardon of Sinnes; so Adoption is a Solemne and formal stating of a person in a Right to glory and to all the Privileges of Son-ship here & hereafter. Now netther of these are rendered Useless, through the Doctrine of Imputation; but both are the more cleared, confirmed and secured thereby. The Imputation of Righteousness is not formally pardon it self, nor is it formally a Right to glory; but the necessary ground of both. Christ's Righteousness is Imputed, that we may be justified, and that we may be Adopted; that is, solemnely and formally placed in a state of pardon & Reconciliation, & into a state of Right & Interest in the Privilege of Son-ship. As the producing of the cautioners payment, in judgment, is not formally the absotion of the debtor, but the ground of a formal sentence of absolution; so the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and Satisfaction, is not the formal sentence of Absolution & pardon, but the ground thereof: And as the paying of the price condescended on for Land or houses, is not a formal infeofing, or a formal and legal conveyance of Right & Title, by Charter and Seasing, but the ground thereof; So the Imputation of Christ's merites and obedience is not the formal & legal Conveyance of Right to the Inheritance of glory, and glorious Privileges of Son-ship; but is the ground thereof, upon which necessarily followeth adoption, which is, as it were, the Beleevers Infeosment and Seasing, whereby Right is formally & legally, conveyed unto him, to all these Privileges.

15. This is also a mystery in this matter, that such as are adversaries to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, cannot understand, to wit, That Beleevers should be accounted Righteous, & there upon justified, through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; and yet the Lord should see sin in them. They say, if beleevers be righteous with the righteousness of Christ, God can no more see sin in them, than in Christ. But they distinguish not betwixt the being of sin, and obnoxiousness to punishment, which is separable from the being of sin, otherwise there could be no pardon. In such, as are coered with the Righteousness of Christ, imputed by God, and received by faith, God seeth sin in its being, for He pardoneth it, and pardon doth not make sin to have been no sin; nor say, that the man hath not sinned; for then pardon should be no pardon, seing all pardon supposeth sin: but he seeth not sin so, as to punish and condemne for it: for in respect of this Reatus, guilt and obligation to punishment, sin is taken away, forgotten, cast behind God's back, & in to the depths of the sea &c. As the Scripture expresseth this matter. The judge seeth not the debtor guilty & obnoxious to the sentence, when the payment made by the cautioner is instructed in open court: yet He cannot but see, that he hath contracted debt, and was thereupon obnoxious to the sentence. Neither do our Adversaries here consider, that by this way of argueing, they destroy all pardon; for when a man is pardoned, he is no more obnoxious to punishment; and God cannot see sin in him, in order to condemnation, because it is pardoned; & thereby that obligation to condemnation is taken away: And so, if they mean this only, by God's not seeing of sin, when they deny this, they must deny Remission, nor yet do we say, that the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness taketh away the being of all after sins, and maketh them no sins; but only that it ensureth their pardon. Nor do we argue the not being of after sinnes, or God's not seeing of them, from this Imputation, but only the Non imputation of them unto condemnation; for we know, that sin, in its being, is killed and mortified another way viz by the work of Sanctification.

16. To the same end, we may consider. That though by the way of justification through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, and faith laying hold on the same, the Law is not made void, but established; as the Apostle saith Rom. 3: 31. and the righteousness of the Law is in some sense fulfilled in us, being fulfilled in our Nature, by Christ, the Mediator and Surety Rom. 8: 4. yet we are not justified by the Law, but by the Gospel; not by the Covenant of works, but by the Covenant of Grace. The Adversaries to Imputation alleige, that we, by asserting the same, do establish justification by the works of the Law, because the obedience of Christ was obedience to the Law, and so legal Righteousness; and if that be imputed to us, so as we are accounted to have done what he did, we must be justified by Law-righteousness, & consequently by the Law; which is contrary to the Scriptures. But in answere to this I say (1.) They advert not, that some of themselves do expresly call Christ's Righteousness, our legal, or prolegal righteousness; & therefore it must be a righteousness answering the Law, & also made ours. (2.) Nor do they observe, that justification by the Law, or by the works of the Law, which the Scriptures speak so much against, is not to be understood in their sense; the obvious, plaine and only meaning thereof being this, that no man can be justified by his own personal obedience to the Law, for by the Law, the doers only of the Law are justified Rom. 2: 13. The plaine tenor of the Law is Set down: Rom. 10: 5. Where Moses is mentioned, as describing the Righteousness of the Law to be this, that the man, who doth those things, shall live by them. Levis. 18: 5. When therefore the Law saith, that the man, that doth these things, shall live by them, & not, the man that either doth those himself, or getteth a cautioner to do them for him, shall be justified; it is manifest, that we are not justified by the Law, seing we do not these things ourselves, in our oun persons; but by the Gospel, which only provideth this Surety, & proposeth justification through His Righteousness imputed & received by faith. Thus we see. That justification through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, doth quite annull & destroy our Justification by the Law: all Imputation being inconsistent with Law-justification, & repugnant thereunto, because it is of grace; & what is of Grace, neither is, not can be of works, Rom. 11: 6. (3.) We assert not Imputation in this sense, to wit: That we are accounted & reputed to have done what Christ did; for that cannot be, God cannot judge amisse; but He should judge amisse, if He should judge, that we did what Christ did. Our meaning is this, that the Beleever, being now united unto Christ, hath an Interest in Christ's Righteousness & upon the account thereof, now reckoned upon his Score by Imputation, he is freed from all that the Law could charge upon him, and that as fully, to all ends, as if he had performed that Righteousness himself.

17. It is likewise here considerable, That we are justified upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed; and yet this Righteousness of Christ is the proper meritorious cause of our justification, & of all that followeth there upon. Some, who oppose this Imputation, imagine an opposition here: But mistakingly they think, that the Righteousness of Christ must be made the meritorious cause of it self, or of that Righteousness, which is imputed; whileas we only say, That Christ's Rightteousness is the meritorious cause of our justification, Adoption &c. and that it is also imputed to us, for this end, that we may be thereby formally righteous, juridically & in Law sense; and so justified. &c. And who seeth not, that it must be so, seing we can be justified by no Righteousness, which is not a proper meritorious cause of our justification: & consequently, that we cannot be justified by any other Righteousness than the Righteousness of Christ; & so not by our own Gospel-righteousness, nor by faith, as suchs a Righteousness; for that cannot be a meritorious cause of our justification.

18. This is also a considerable part of this mystery, which carnal eyes cannot see, and which men, carried away with prejudice at the pure doctrine of the Grace of God, in the Gospel, cannot sweetly comply with; to wit. That our justification is Solely upon the account of the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, and not upon the account, or because of any thing wrought in us, or done by us: & yet our obligation to holiness & conformity to the Law of God, in all points, is not hereby in the least weakened. Paul's frequent preoccupying of this Objection, in his Epistles, may let us see, how ready carnal hearts are to abuse the doctrine of the Grace of God, revealed in the Gospel, to carnal liberty; and what a propensity there is in us, to look for justification upon the account of our works only; so that if we hear of any thing, to put us of this apprehension, we presently are ready to conclude, that all study of and endeavour after holiness, is wholly useless & unnecessary: and that we need not wonder much at Socinians & others, who do thus reasone against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. But Paul doth cleare to us a sweet consistency betwixt free justification upon the account of Christ's Righteousness imputed, and the serious study of holiness. He saw no Inconsistency betwixt the study of obedience to the Law, in all points, and the expectation of justification by faith in Christ alone, whatever men, who would seem sharp-sighted, & zealous for the study of holiness, do suppose they cannot but see. And albeit men in those dayes were ready enough to except against free justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ; and to pretend, that the asserting thereof did take away all study of holiness: yet (& this is very remarkable) the Apostle, to remove that objection, never giveth the least hint of the necessity of our works of obedience, in order to our justification. And though He doth frequently press to holiness; yet he never maketh use of any argument thereunto, which might so much as insinuat, that we were justified by works, in one measure, or other. Nay, we will finde, that He draweth arguments, pressing unto holiness, from the very nature of their Gospel-justification, & of their State by vertue thereof. And experience proveth, this day: that the most effectual Medium to holiness, is taken from free justification, through faith in Christ alone; and that the holiness and obedience of such, as practise the orthodox doctrine, concerning justification, hath another heavenly lustre (as it floweth from another fountaine, & standeth upon another ground) and looketh more like true holiness, & universal sincere obedience, than what is to be seen among such, as lay most weight upon their own duties, whether we speak of Papists, Socinians, Arminians, or of others. And whatever inconsistency men may imagine to be betwixt free justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, and the Universal, Sincere, & Acceptable study of holiness, yet the Gospel knoweth no such thing; but presseth holiness, though not for this end, that we may thereby be put into a state of justification, or might sweat & foile, run & work for the prize, as the hire & wayes of our work; yet upon more Spiritual & Gospel like grounds; and by Arguments more sutable to the state of the justified, who only are in case to performe acts of obedience, and duties of holiness, acceptably unto God; Such as the Image of God proposed for our Imitation; the perpetual obligation of His Law; the Relation they stand into; the holy appointment of God; the engagments they stand under, the Spiritual help & furniture, which is at hand, the Nature of holiness it self; the genius & kindly inclination of the new Nature, whereof they are partakers; and the many advantages thereof here and hereafter, too many, here to be mentioned. Let any consider the Arguments, used to this purpose by Paul Rom. 6. & 7. & 8. Chapters, and in many places elsewhere, & he shall finde this true

CHAP. VII. Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, cleared out of the Old Testament, & the Passages Vindicated from the exceptions of JOHN GOODWINE.

WE shall now proced unto another use, & mentione another way, how this Truth, That belevers in Christ attaine unto a life in justification, ought to be improved, to wit Secondly That we may hence take notice of a loud call herein to all Persons, not yet justified, to beware of a cheate in this matter, & not fix upon a wrong bottom in Justification, nor lay their weight on any thing within themselves, or on any thing else whatever, except upon the Imputed Righteousness of Christ alone, which they are to embrace & to leane to by faith. If they leane to their own works, and make them the condition & ground of their justification, they will be disappointed; for by the works of the Law • an no man be justified, in the sight of God, as the Apostle asserteth, & proveth, in our Text, & irresragably concludeth Rom. 3: 20, 28. & in several other places. Yea, if they leane unto faith it self, which is called for only to interesse us in the Righteousness of Christ, that free grace may be exalted, & proud man abased, they deceive themselves; & not only disappoint themselves of what they are expecting, but even destroy the very Nature & Ends of true Gospel-justifying faith: for its native & proper work is, to carry the man out of him self wholly unto Christ, for Righteousness, Life & Salvation: for faith is the Mans looking to Christ, as the stung Israelite in the wilderness did look unto the brazen serpent Ioh. 3: 14, 15. and saying, as it is Esai. 45: 24. In the Lord have I righteousness: and it is the beleevers putting-on of the Lord Jesus, that he may be found in Him, & clothed with His Righteousness Phil. 3: 9. It is the Man's receiving of Christ Ioh. 1: 12, and receiving of the Atonement in Him, & through Him. Rom. 5: 11. and of aboundance of grace & of the gift of Righteousness. Rom. 5: 17. Therefore it is called a beleeving on His name. Ioh. 1: 12. & on Him, whom the Father hath sent &c. Ioh. 6: 29 & 7: 35. & 17: 20. Act. 16: 31. & 19: 25. And because faith laid hold on this Righteousness of Christ; therefore is this Righteousness called the Righteousness of faith Rom. 4: 11. & the righteousness, which is of faith Rom. 9: 30. & that, which is through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith, Phil. 3: 9. Now if this be the native work of justifying faith (as we shall more fully cleare afterward) to receive Christ, and His Righteousness; & consequently to carry the Man out of himself, that he may finde & partake of that al sufficient Righteousness of Christ, to the end he may with confidence stand before God, and expect pardon and Acceptance; It cannot be said without destroying the & Native work of justifying faith, that faith is that Gospel-Righteousness, unto which they may leane, & upon the account of which they may expect justification. Faith, in this matter, is as the eye of the Soul • , that, seeth not it self, but looketh out to another. Beside, this would overturne the whole Nature of the Covenant of Grace, and is irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Apostle Paul about justification, as shall be manifested hereafter. Therefore, all, who would live the life of justification, must betake themselves to Jesus Christ, & leane to Him, & to His Righteousness: for with the rob of His Righteousness must they alone be cloathed, & in Christ alone must they be found; & they must think of standing before God, having on His Righteousness, that God imputeth unto Beleevers, & which they receive by faith, in order to their justification.

I know, this doctrine is not favourie to many, now adaies, & as Papists, Socinians & Arminians do oppose themselves with all their Industrie & learning unto this doctrine of the Imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ; so there are now a dayes, and have been of late, who would not willingly be reckoned among either of these mentioned, and yet do oppose this foundamental truth, the sure ground of our Hop, Peace & Comfort. As the Principles, whereupon these mentioned go, are different, so are the grounds, upon which they plead against this truth; yet they do unanimous enough joine in this: 〈◊〉 , & argu • against this Imputation, which the Orthodox have owned and do owne.

Before I come to consider the chiefe (at least) of their Arguments against the Truth, which hath been now asserted, I shall, with what brevity & plainness I can, lay down & vindicate the Grounds and Reasons of our Assertion; and then take notice of their contrary Objections; that this Truth may be made plaine & clear to such, as are concerned therein. As to our Grounds, I shall first beginne with Scripture Authority; & here propose our Reasons from the Old Testament.

First The First passage to this purpose, which I shall take notice of, is Esai. 45: 24. Surely shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness, (or in the Lord is all righteousnesses) to wit, for me: and this following upon what was said vers 22. look unto me, & be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; which was an Invitation & call to them, to act faith upon Him, in order to their Salvation; as the stung Israelites did look unto the brazen serpent, in order to their recovery; this looking being clearly explained by coming vers 24. Even to Him shall men come (and we know how frequently faith is held forth & expressed by coming, in the Gospel) saith, that hereby is pointed forth the rich Advantage, that such shall have, who look & come to Him by faith, & submit unto Him heartily & cheerfully, imported by bowing of the knee, & swearing with the tongue, to wit. That they shall have a righteousness in Him; & this they shall avow & profess: and this being exclusive of all others, as the Context cleareth, saith, that they should be brought to that, that they should renounce all other righteousness what somever, & rest on this God alone, who is the only God vers 22. & on His righteousness; for in Him they shall be made to look for it, & that in rich aboundance: And upon this followeth their justification, & glorying in the Lord alone vers 25. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, & shall glory. This passage therefore doth clearly hold forth a justification, through the righteousness of the Messiah, of the true & living God, laid hold upon & applied by faith, or owned & embraced, as their only righteousness: & this righteousness is not a righteousness wrought in them; for such a righteousness is aboundantly hold forth by the word strength; but a righteousness made over over Beleevers, & which they owne as theirs, and rest upon.

It is too narrow & scanty an Interpretation, to limite this justification, to the Lords vindicating of His peoples sincerity & Innocency, in respect of their Enemies, at whose hands they suffered great things, and that unjustly; & not to take in their Spiritual justification, & delivery from the guilt of sin, through faith in the Messiah; especially seing there is an Invitation going before to them, to lay hold on the Lord Messias by faith, according to the Gospel Methode; and upon this followeth their glorying in the Lord conforme to what the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 1: 30, 31. that the Lord Jesus is made of God Righteousness to His people, that he that glorieth, may glory in the Lord.

Nor is there any weight in that, which Io 〈◊〉 in this Treatise of justification Par • . 2. pag. 129. 130. alleigeth, to Infringe the authority of this Testimony, to wit. That the meaning only is this, that they receive these favoures, of the free grace and donation of God, by Iesus Christ. For, as the expressions are more emphatick; so all the circumstances of the Text, pointe out their eyeing of the Lord, and coming to Him, and that in order to their justification and Salvation; together with their profession of owneing the Lord's Righteousness alone, for their Righteousness, renouncing all other Righteousness, in themselves, or in others, in order to justification: and thereby declaring, that they look upon it as necessary for them to have a Righteousness; and that this is onely the Righteousness of Jehovah, or of the Messiah, where with they desire to be clothed, and rest satisfied. All which import the Lords bestowing of this Righteousness upon them, that is, imputing of it unto them; for without this they cannot have it, nor glory in it, as their owne.

Secondly, it is faid Esai. 61: 10. I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; My Soul shall be joyful in my God; for He hath clothed me with garments of Salvation, He hath covered me with the rob of Righteousness &c. And this coming in upon the back of what was said, in the beginning of the Chapter, concerning Christ's furniture for His work of Mediation, His Call thereto, and His special work, or the End, for which He was sent, to wit, to binde up the broken-hearted, to proclame liberty to the Captives &c. pointeth forth the sweet welcome, and hearty acceptance, that the anointed Messiah should have among His own chosen ones: for these words hold forth their expression of their sense of what they had received from Him, and of their joy upon the account thereof. They professe openly their joy & rejoiceing in the Lord, because He had clothed and covered them with the garments of Salvation, and with the rob of Righteousness. Now this rob could not be a rob of their owne making; nor can it be understood of their Inherent holiness; for it is a Garment put on, and wherewith they are covered. Thus are we said to put on the Lord Jesus Rom. 13: 14. Gal. 3: 27. And Iohn Rev. 19: 8. helpeth us to understand the meaning of this Expression, when he saith. And to her was granted, that the should be arayed in white Linen, clean and white: for the fine Linen is the Righteousness of Saints.

Against this Testimony; the fore-named Author Io. Goodwin. pag. 130. &c. maketh some Exceptions. as 1, These Expressions (sai's he) concerne the jewes onely, and are meaned of their deliverance out of Babylon; if not out of their present Condition; which is an effect of God's faithfulness and truth, or of his goodness and graciousness. Ans. (1.) To limite this to the jewes, and to their outward and temporal delivery, is but a part of their Socinian fiction, without any apparent ground in the Text. Nay, the first part of the Chapter, which Christ applieth to Himself Luk. 4. and the several particulars there mentioned, may shame this out of countenance; unless we minde to make Christ only a temporal deliverer • , as the jewes did dream their Messias would be. And the Gospel reacheth us Spiritually to expound, as pointing forth Spiritual promises, even such promises, as savoure more of temporal things, as to the letter, that what are here mentioned do (2.) it is but ground-less to imagine (and a piece of the ordinary course of Socinians, in evading clear Testimonies of Scripture, brought against them) that Righteousness here doth signify God's faithfulness: for though somewhere, where mention is made of God's Righteousness, and other circumstances of the Text make it evident, this sense might be admitted; yet it cannot be so understood here, where the Righteousness is said to be granted to the people, as a rob and a garment to cover them: and the very following words of the verse show, that this is meaned of Some thing, bestowed upon them, for it is added, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth her self with her jewels; or, as Some render the words, He hath decked me with ornaments, as a bridegroom, and with jewels as a bride.

2. He excepteth, If these words be taken in a Spiritual sense, the promise, which is contained in them, cannot suite the Church; because the Church is at all times and alwayes clothed with Christ's Righteousness, being justified in Him Ans. This one answere will destroy all the Spiritual promises, hold forth by the prophets, as the fruits & effects of Christ's coming; for the Church of true and faithful beleevers was really, in some measure answerable to that more dark dispensation, made partaker of these Saving and Spiritual benefites, both at that time, and before, even from the beginning: and thus there shall be no promises in all the old Testam of Spiritual things, touching pardon of Sin, Justification, Grace and Sanctification, and the like, made unto the Church; but all of them must be interpreted of carnal things: though the New Test. teacheth us the contrary, as might be evinced by multitudes of places. But the matter is clear, to wit. That this is mentioned, as the open profession of the Church, with joy and thankfulness, of what she was blessed with, and made partaker of in Christ; and had, as a fruit and effect of His performing His Mediatory work; that is, That she was clothed with a rob of Righteousness; and that by Him, which was, and would be to her a ground of perpetual joy, and rejoiceing in the Lord.

Against that passage Rev. 19: 8. which was adduced for clearing of the place, now under hand, he excepteth thus, These words only pointe forth the honour and dignity, which Christ now conferreth upon the Church, in remembrance of her Righteousness: for it is parallel to that other place Rev. 3: 4. Ans. This is nothing, but a plaine perversion of the Scriptures; for it is not said, for her Righteousness; nor for the Righteousness of the Saints: but in these words a reason is given, why by this araying in fine Linen, the bride is said to be made ready; and withall hereby the signification and Import of that finelinen is held forth, when it is said, for the fine linen is the Righteousness of the Saints. The Spirit of the Lord is here speaking of the returne of the jewes, and of their marrying of new with their former husband, from whom they had so long departed, by playing the harlot; (as worthy and judicious M. Durham sheweth, in his comment on the place) and of this new Bride it is said, that she is arayed in fine linen, clean and white; and this linen is explained to be the Righteousness of Saints, or justifications of Saints, the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the same, that is used Rom. 5: 16, 18. Where it is translated justification; and it is called here the Righteousness, or justifications of Saints, because it is no other, than that which is common to all Saints; whereby is signified, that the jewes, at their conversion, shall be accepted and justified, after the same manner, that all the Saints have been; even after that self same manner, at which they formerly stumbled, and which wickedly and peremptorily they refused and rejected. This Righteousness therefore can be nothing else, than the Righteousness of Christ imputed: for this only is cleane and white, all other having spots and defilements. This is not within, but from without, and is put on, & is granted to the Church, and so imputed.

Against that saying of putting on Christ, twice mentioned, he excepteth saying. That none of them speak of justification, but that Rom. 13: 14. speaketh of Sanstification; and that Gal. 3: 27. of profession. Ans. If we are said to put on Christ in Sanctification, and as to a profession, much more may we be said, to put Him on in justification, which is the basis and ground work of Sanctification, and the truth & reality of that which is professed. Without justification there is no Sanctification; and except we be clothed with Christ, and put Him on in order to justification, we cannot put Him on, in order to Sanctification. And as such, as are baptized in Christ, have declared, that they have put on Christ; so such have done it in truth and reality, who are the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus, and are Christ's and are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise Gal. 3: 26, 29. Not could they be said to do this outwardly, as to a profession, in their Baptisme, if a real putting on of Christ were not to be found in such, as had the Spiritual and inward thing Imported & signified by outward Baptisme.

Thirely a 3 passage is Ier. 23: 5, 6. Bohold the dayes come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a Righteous Branch, and a King shall reigne & prosper, and shall execute judgment & justice, in the earth. In his dayes judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell saifly: and this is His name, whereby He shall becalled, the Lord, our Righteousness. It is undeniable and manifest, that this is spoken of Christ, who was the Branch, raised up unto David; and the King that should reigne and prosper; and it is through Him, that judah is saved, and Israel made to dwell sai • ly. Now of this Righteous Branch, it is said, that His name shall be called Jehovah our Righteousness: He shall be owned and embraced as such; whereby it is declared, that as we have need of a Righteousuess, and have none of our owne; so this Righteous Branch shall become a Righteousness to us: in Him, and in Him alone shall all His people have a Righteousness: He and His Righteousness shall be made over unto them. And as they shall glory in Him, acknowledging all their Righteousness to be in and from Him; so He shall glory in that stile and Title, which shall be given to Him upon that account, and He shall owne it, as His glorious Title and Name, for their further refreshment and Consolation. He shall look upon that, as His greatest honour, to be called the Lord our Righteousness, Jehovah that purchaseth and prepareth for and bestoweth a sufficient Righteousness on His people. This passage with its forcible light so opened the eyes of Bellarmine, the popish adversary to the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, that he was forced to confess, That Christ is said to be our Righteousness, because he hath made Satisfaction for us to the Father; and doth so give and communicat that Satisfastion unto us, when He justifieth us, that it may be said to be our Satisfaction & Righteousness—and in this sense, it would not be absurd, if any should say, that the Righteousness of Christ & His merites are imputed unti us, as if we our selves had satisfied. De justif. lib. 2. cap. 10.

Fourthly, adde to this Ier. 33: 15, 16. where, as Iunius & the Dutch translation have it, this same Title is repeated, as given unto the righteous Branch: but if we take the words, as they are rendered by others, & as they are in our Translation, as the Stile & name of the Church, they willcon tribute not a little to our present purpose. And this, wherewith she shallbe called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNES: for hereby is clearly Imported the Churches glorying in that Title, & in having all her righteousness in & through her Head & Husband; that as she owned herself to be the Spouse of Christ, & had His name called upon her; so this would be all the name, that she would owne, as her greatest glory; & by that alone would she be called; thereby professing, with glorying & satisfaction, that she had no righteousness of her own; & if any would know her aright, & give her her highest titles, they should know her under that notion, & give her that Name, that should openly declare, that she were void of Righteousness in her self, & were ungodly, & had all her Righteousness from her husband, & would appear before God in no righteousness, but in her husbands. So that she would owne that Title alone, which should be a proclamation to all the world, that she was covered with her Husbands, righteousness, & with that alone, & a constant Memorandum, to keep her in the fresh conviction, Faith & Profession of this.

Against these clear & pregnant passages Ioh. Goodwine excepteth. pag. 127. saying, It is not here said, the righteousness of the Lord shall be our righteousness, or shall be imputed to us for righteousness. Avs. Though this be not said, in so many words & syllabs, yet that same is said in a more clear, convinceing & emphatick manner: so that he, who seeth not this lying in these words, must be more blinde than Bellarmine was. When this righteous Branch is raised up by Jehovah, & gotteth this name, the Lord our Righteousness, what can be more manifest, than that, He is made Righteousness to His people; Yea & all their Righteousness; & that this Righteousness is made over to them; so that He is, in a manner, wholly theirs, & nothing but theirs, & all that He hath is theirs; & particularly that His Righteousness is all the Righteousness they owne, as their Righteousness.

He excepteth 2 That in no tolerable sense, can Christ, being a person, be said to be imputed to us. Ans. Do we not hear, that a childe was born to us, & a Son was given to us? Esai. 9: 6. & was not that child & Son a person? And may not a person be as well said to be Imputed, as given, seing imputation, upon the matter, is nothing but a giving, or bestowing? Yet we do not say, that Christ is Imputed; but that this expression here used, doth manifestly evince, that we are righteous through the righteousness of Christ made ours, & that Christ is become the Lord our righteousness, & that true beleevers receive & owne Him, as such, & rest upon His righteousness alone by faith.

He excepteth 3. The plaine & direct meaning is, that He shall be generally acknowledged & celebrated by his people of the jewes, as the great author & procurer of that righteousness, or justification in the sight of God, upon which aboundance of outward glory, peace & prosperity should be cast upon them, Ans. (1.) That this is not to be restricted to the jewes, is manifest, seing it is spoken of the Gospel times, when the righteous Branch shall be raised up unto David, & a King shall reigne & prosper. (2.) It is too carnal an Interpretation, to think, the text speaketh only of such a justification, as is followed with aboundance of outward Glory, peace & Prosperity; whileas the whole Gospel informeth us of something more spiritual, attending upon & following justification. (3.) Righteousness & justification are here made Synonymous, which ought not to be; though these two be inseparably lincked together; yet they are formally different. (4.) Wherein standeth this righteousness & justification? He tels us, in the place, to which he here referreth us, that it standeth in Remission of sins: But pardon of sins is no righteousness; though a man pardoned hath freedom from the obnoxiousness to punishment; yet righteousness is another thing, & respecteth the obligation to duty, required in the Law. (5.) Though it is true, Christ is indeed the author of our justification & pardon (which is an effect of God's pronouncing us righteous, & of His accepting of us, as righteous in justification) as of our peace; yet that needeth not destroy what we assert, there being no inconsistency here, but a necessary & essentiall agreement betwixt the Imputation of Christ' righteousness & justification; but it rather contributeth to the establishment of our Assertion: Yet it is obvious, that when Christ is called the Lord our Righteousness, there is more Imported, than His being the author of our peace & justification; even the way also, how He bringeth about our peace & justification, is here denoted, to wit, His being made of God righteousness to His people; so that His righteousness becometh theirs, in order to their peace & justification.

But to confirme his Interpretation, he tels us, 1. That the Imposition of name upon either thing or person, often notes the quality, or proprity in either, or same benefite redounding from either, answereable thereunto, as Esai. 9. his name shall be called wonderfull, that is, he shall be acknowledged & looked upon by men, as a doer of things very strange. Ans. Seing all these names given to Christ Esai. 9. cannot be so interpreted, as to have this import mentioned; for who will say, that the name everlasting Father, & the mighty God can be so interpreted, as to denote only some answerable benefite redounding there from; who seeth not how little this can satisfie? But (2.) be it so, that this name shall denote some benefite, redounding therefrom, why may it not denote this Effect, which is only answerable hereunto, to wit, that His people shall be made partaker of His Surety-righteousness, & have the same made over unto them, as they become united unto Him, & have His name called upon them.

He tels us 2. That it is familiar to attribute the Effect to its Cause, or Author, by a verbe substantive only; as when Christ is called our Hop, our life, Resurrection, peace & Glory, meaning that he is the author & purchaser of all these. Ans. Yet this proveth not, that He is the author of all these Effects after one & the same way. He is otherwise our hope, of which He is the Object▪ as well as the Author, than He is our life: And He is otherwise our life and peace, which He worketh & createth in us, than He is our Resurrection and Glory. So He is our Righteousness, by making us partaker of His Surety-righteousness, & imputing it unto us, that it may be reckoned on our Score; for this the nature of the thing requireth, seing a Righteousness we must have, ere we be justified; and a Righteousness of our owne we have not; and therefore must have one imputed to us: and what Righteousness can suite us better than His, who is THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS?

He tels us 3. That by Righteousness is meaned that justification, which standeth in Remission of Sinnes: and the meaning is, that through Him God would be reconceled to them and pacified with them. Ans. Justification is something else, than pardon of sins; for a justified man is one, that is declared and pronunced Righteous in order to pardon of Sins; and in order to a persons being declared such, by God, who alway judgeth according to truth, he must be Righteous; & Righteous can no man be in the sight of God, in order to his justification, by what is in himself; & therefore he must have a Righteousness from some other: & seing Christ is called, the Lord our Righteousness, it must be His Righteousness, which must be bestowed upon them, in order to God's being reconciled to them, & pacified with them.

Fiftly another passage is Dan. 9: 24. to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, & to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting Righteousness. That all this is to be understood of the gr • at & spiritual effects of power & Grace, which are to be brought about by the Messiah, no Christian candeny; and among the rest we see, He is to bring in a Righteousness, and a Righteousness of ages, an everlasting Righteousness, that shall endure for ever, & shall have everlasting effects: and this Righteousness is something more, than Remission of Sins, & is distinct from it, which is sufficiently held forth by the foregoing Expressions of finishing transgressions, of making an end of Sins, and of making reconciliation for iniquity: which saith, that to justification there is a Righteousness required, & that this Righteousness is not meer Remission of Sins; but some thing beside, that must endure, when sin is taken away. This Righteousness is to be brought in by the Messiah, as a favoure, distinct from the preceeding, & yet inseparable there from, & firmly connected therewith. This Righteousness, which the Messiah is to bring in, being something beside Remission of Sins, must be a Righteousness wrought by the Messiah, & brought in for the use and advantage of His people, who, as they are to be made partaker of the foregoing favoures, are also to be made partaker of this; and consequently must have it imputed to them▪ seing no other way, it can be made theirs.

Sixtly We way adduce to this purpose, Zech. 3: 4. take away the filthy garments from him: and unto him he said, behold, I have caused thine iniquity to go from thee; I will cloth thee with change of rayment. Here by a vision is signified to the propher, how the Lord would at length be reconciled to His Church, & bring her in to His favour againe, that her service might become acceptable to Him, which now was wholly defiled, and so defiled, that even their High priest, who should weare the holy garments, whereupon was engraven Holiness to the Lord, is said to have had on filthy garments; whereby the accuser of the Brethren, Satan the enemie, had no small advantage against them: and the way is set down in borrowed termes, which are in part explained. First the Lord caused to take away the filthy garments from the High Priest; and this is more plainely expressed, in these words, I have caused thine iniquity to go from thee. But beside this, there is a Righteousness required, in order to acceptance with God, as was said above: therefore that this work of justification may be compleated, it is added, & I will cloth thee with change of rayment. Some, it is true, would referre this to Sanctification; but others unto justification. Iunius's Notes, & the English annot, take in both: and sure, if this be true of Sanctification, which is wrought in us, it is much more true of the Righteousness, that is required unto justification, which is without us, and must be put on. And the Chaldee Paraphrase turneth it thus, behold I have taken away thine iniquity, & have clothed thee with Righteousness. The word in the original, which is translated change of rayment, importeth some suite of apparell, that is not for ordinary wearing, but kept for solemne times, & so may well import the Saints wedding or Marriage-suite: & that which is added in the sollowing verse, may be understood, as denoting Sanctification, which is added with the Mitre on his head, signifying the graces of the Spirit, qualifying the High priest, for his work.

CHAP. VIII. Some passages of the New Test. confirming the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, Vindicated from the exceptions of JOHN GOODWINE.

HAving seen, what countenance the Old Test. giveth unto the Truth, we are asserting; & vindicat some of these passages from the Exceptions of Iohn Goodwine. We come next to search for confirmation of this truth, out of the New Test. and I shall here beginne with such, as the said Author taketh notice of, in order to excepting against them, in his Treatise of justification.

First Rom. 3: 21, 22. But now the Righteousness of God without the Law, is manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve. But if men would disput against this truth, they should except against whole Chapters, in that Epistle; and disput against the very scope & designe, yea and all the Arguments of the Apostle, who, in the first part of that Epistle, is about to clear and confirme that, which he setteth down Chap. 1: 17. as the summe of the whole Gospel, and clear demonstration of its being the power of God unto Salvation &c. to wit, that in it the Righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; a Righteousness revealed, laid open, and offered to all, that hear the Gospel, that they may lay hold on it by faith: a Righteousness, revealed from the true and faithful God, unto our faith (as Ambrose, P. Martyr and others understand it) or revealed from faith to faith, that is only to faith, (as Pareus) or (as Calvin, Beza, Musculus and others) from a weak faith, to a stronger faith: or rather, to faith first and last, through the whole of a Saints life here, as the following words clear it, as it is written, the just shall live by faith. Yet let us see, what he excepteth pag. 136.

He 1. Supposeth, that he hath proved before, that this passage speaketh plainly for the imputation of faith for Righteousness; but no way for the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, for any such purpose. And. We may have occasion hereafter to examine his grounds, both from this and other passages, for the Imputation of faith, in opposition to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. I shall only say at present, that this Righteousness cannot be faith it self, because it is revealed to faith; & it is called the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of Iesus Christ; & so not faith it self. One thing cannot be both the Act, & the Object of that Act. And what sense would that make, to say, faith is upon all them that beleeve.

2. He said. By the Righteousness of God some under stand here His truth and faithfulness, in keeping promise. Ans. But though God's Righteousness may elsewhere import & signifie His faithfulness in keeping promise; yet that is not the Righteousness here understood; for this suiteth a guilty sinner; such as the Apostle hath been proving, in his foregoing discourse, both jewes & Gentiles to be; & is such a Righteousness as is requisite to such, as would be justified in God's sight vers 20. & cannot be had by mans doing the deeds of the Law, by which is the knowledg of sin, & which therefore rendereth their case more desperat; & such a Righteousness, as is had by faith, & which is unto all & upon all them that beleeve vers 20, 22. and such a Righteousness, as is manifested without the Law vers 21. All which, and much more, which might be mentioned, show, that some other thing is here understood by the Righteousness of God, than His Faithfulness & Truth; even the Righteousness of God, which is imputed unto, & bestowed upon all that beleeve.

3. He saith. Hereby is mea • t that way, method & meanes, which God himself hath found out to justisis, or make men Righteous: or else that very Righteousness, by which we stand justified, or Righteous, in the sight of God. But not the Righteousness of Christ: nor is there the least appearance in the context of any necessity to take is so. Ans. It is true, the 〈◊〉 is here showing the whole way, method & meanes of our justification; & particularly, what that Righteousness is, by which poor sinners can stand justified & Righteous in the sight of God; even a Righteousness, that is not had by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ: and this sufficiently evinceth, that the Righteousness of God, here spoken of, is the Righteousness of Christ, which saith seeketh in, and goeth to Christ for, that it may be imputed; for faith hath no other end or errand to Christ, in reference to a freedom from the wrath & Curse of God, but to lay hold on a Righteousness, in which the poor self condemned sinner may appear before God. Beside that the following words vers 24, 25, 26. where the Redemption & propitiation of Christ, which was His Surety-righteousness, is mentioned, may Satisfie us, as to what is meaned by this Righteousness of God. Sure, there is not the least appearance of Paul's understanding that Mean & Method, which this Excepter supposeth to be the onely Method, to wit. That our faith, considered, as our Act, is that: as if that were the Righteousness of God, & could constitute us Righteous, in the sight of God, and were a Righteousness had without works & without the Law, & received by all that beleeve.

Secondly, Rom. 3. last Do we then make void the Law through faith? God forbid; yea we establish the Law. Where the Apostle, preoceupying an objection, asserteth; That through justification by faith, he did not make void the law, but rather did establish it; the ground whereof is this, That by the Gospel-way of justification, the law getteth full Satisfaction, in all points, because Christ not only Satisfied for the penalty thereof, which we were guilty of, and did lye under; but did also yeeld a perfect obedience thereunto; that so He might make up a full & compleat Surety-righteousness, by the Imputation of which unto His own, or the Lord's reckoning it upon their score, when they receive it by faith, they may be justified. And thus, though sinners, who have broken the Law, & so have forfeited the reward, promised to such as observe it in all points, & are come under the Curse, threatned to Transgressours, be not only freed from the Curse, but receive the rich Recompence of reward; yet the law is not made null & void, but is rather established & confirmed in its full force, both as to its Commands & Sanction.

Iohn Goodwine excepteth 1. There is no necessity, that by the Law, in thisplace, should be meaned precisely the moral law; others understand it as well of the Ceremonial Law. Ans. But sure, Paul's doctrine was not for establishing of the Ceremonial Law, in whole, or in part. The Law, whereof the Apostle is speaking, is that Law, by which both Gentiles & jewes were convinced of sin, & had their mouthes stopped, & were become guilty before God vers 19. & that Law, which maketh a discovery of sin vers 20. comp. with Rom. 7: 7. & by the deeds of which no flesh shall be justified, in the sight of God vers 20, 28. It is that Law, by the works whereof even Abraham could not be justified, nor David Rom. 4: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8.

2. He said, It is much more probable, that Paul should here assert the establishing of the Ceremonial Law, than of the Moral 1. Because the jewes were more tender and jealous over the Ceremonial Law, placing the far greatest part, if not the whole of their hop of justification and Salvation, in the observation thereof. 2. Because the Doctrine of faith did not carry any such colour of opposition to the Moral, as to the Ceremonial part of their Law. Ans. To imagine, that no Law is here to be understood, but the Ceremonial Law, is to make the Apostle establish here, what he destroyeth else where, particularly in his Epistles to the Galatians & Colossians, & in his whole doctrine: yea this would make the Apostle, to cross the whole intent and designe of the Gospel, which who dar once have the least thought of? The Law here doth plainely signifie that, which was the Rule of Righteousness and of Obedience, & was publickly given unto the jewes for that end; & by obedience to & observation of which Law, they were expecting justification & life; as by the young man is manifest, who came to Christ to enquire what he should do to be saved; & said, he had observed all these &c. As to his reasons, they have no force: for. 1. The jewes had a zeal for the whole Law, but not according to knowledg, & went about to establish their own Righteousness, which was not in meer Ceremonials but in obedience & full conformity (as they supposed) unto the Righteousness, which they sought after, yea followed and hunted after Rom. 9: 31. & 10. 3. (2.) The doctrine of faith carrieth the same colour of opposition to the Moral Law, that it doth to the Ceremonial, in the point of justification. And it is not the doctrine of faith that carrieth any colour of opposition to the Ceremonial Law; though the doctrine of the Gospel-administration doth; else we must • ay, there was nothing of the doctrine of faith, under the Law, or that old dispensation.

3. He saith. Though the moral Law were precisely here understood; yet there is no necessity to say, that it is established by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness: for, Some affirme, that the Law is therefore said to be established by faith, because faith compasseth & attaineth that righteousness, which the Law sought after, & could not attaine. 2. The Moral Law may in this sense be said to be established; because faith purgeth the hearts of beleevers, & so promotes the observation of it. Ans. As for the first, I do not understand, what the meaning of it is. What is that Righteousness, which faith compasseth, and the Law sought after, and could not attaine? It would seem to be nothing else but Holiness and Sanctification: and if so, the two make but one: and therefore I answere to this also, by saying to the Second. That albeit Subordinates can well consist together, & this sense needeth not thrust out our sense; yet I judge, this is not the maine Objection, that Paul obviateth here: he reserveth a peculiar place for that hereafter, where he speaketh fully to it Chap. 6. & 7. But he speaketh of the establishing of the Law, both in its commanding power and Sanction; for having spoken so much of justification by faith in opposition to justification by the Law; and having said in the foregoing vers that the circumcision shall be justified by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith: and neither the one, nor the other by or through the Law; some might have thought, that by his thus crying up of faith, and speaking so much of it, and only of it, as to justification, he was quite casheering and rendering the Law null & void: And therefore he answereth, That he is so far from making the Law void through faith, that he rather doth establish the same, as was shown above.

4. He saith. The Law may be said to be established by saith, in as much as the threatnings of the Law are by the doctrine of faith declared not to be in vaine, Christ's sufferings being a full confirmation of the force, efficacy and authority of the Curse of the Law. Ans. This is so fargood: But why shall not also His obedience be a full confirmation of the force, efficacy & authority of the commanding power of the Law? This being principally intended in the Law, belongeth as much, at least, to the establishment thereof, as the Sanction. We assert not the one with an exclusion of the other; but assert the establishment of both by faith: and thus the Law is by faith fully established, in all its parts & demands.

5. He saith. The best Interpretation is, that by the Law here is meant that part of the Old Test. which comprehendeth the writting of Moses, with those other books, whi • h together with the writtings of the Prophets, make up the entire body thereof, as it was used vers 21. and in this sense, the Law may most properly be said to be established by Paul teaching the Doctrine of faith, because it is fully consonant & agreable to those things, that are written there. Ans. But this sense is not the same with the sense of the word Law v. 21. for the Law there is mentioned, as distinct from the Prophets. And if that part of the Old. Test. be meaned, which is different from the book of the Prophets, what ground was there to think, that the doctrine of faith did more seem to cross what was con ained in the one, than what was contained in the other? especially seing he had said v. 21. that the Righteousness, he spoke of, was witnessed both by the Law and the Prophets. And if both should be here understood, seing the Apostle did fully enough declare his mind as to that v.21. what ground is there to think, that he was called to remove that objection here againe? And what imaginable colour can be from any thing that the Apostle spoke, in the foregoing words, for such an objection, as this? This manifestly is nothing but a groundless invention of men, that know not else what to say.

Thirdly Rom. 4: 6. where mention is made of a Righteousness imputed without works, & that as the ground of a mans blessedness & justification: for it is of the blessedness of justification that the Apostle is there speaking, and he showeth, that this is attained, not by the works of the Law, but by an imputed Righteousness, which can be none else, that the Righteousness of God, spoken of in the preceeding Chapter; or of Christ, who wrought the Redemption, and was set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood.

Against this He excepteth pag. 140. saying 1. If we • will needs here understand a positive legal Righteousness, it is much more probable, He should meane a Righteousness consisting of such, or of such an obedience to the Law, as hath an absolute & perfect agreableness to every mans condition & calling respectively, than the Righteousness of Christ, which hath no such property in it. Ans. The Apostle speaketh of a Righteousness, and of a Righteousness imputed, and all Righteousness must consist in obedience to the Law, and in full conformity thereto: and seing it is said to be imputed, and not by our works, it must of necessity follow, that the Apostle is to be understood, as speaking of the Surety-righteousness of Christ. And if the Righteousness of Christ, who gave perfect obedience to the Law, and was constituted Mediator and Surety by the Father, and as such did give full Satisfaction both in obeying the Law, and in paying the penalty, be not such an obedience to the Law, as will serve every Beleevers turne, where else will the beleever finde a more adequat Righteousness? Shall we think, that his act of saith, which is but one act of obedience to the Law, or an act of obedience to one command of the Law, hath a more perfect & absolute agreablness to every mans condition respectively, than the perfect obedience & Righteousness of Christ! Let such beleeve this, as can.

2. He saith. The Righteousness, which God is said here to impute, is placed in Remission of Sins. Ans. That Imputation of Righteousness and pardon of sinnes do inseparably go together, is true; and that the one proveth the other, is also clear from these words. But it is not proved, nor can it be proved, that Imputed Righteousness and Remission of Sins are the same; seing it is obvious enough, that Righteousness is one thing, and pardon of sinnes is another distinct thing. No man will say, that a pardoned thiefe, is a Righteous man; for that were as much, as to say, He was never a thiefe. It is true, by pardon He is no more obnoxious to the penalty; the obligation to underlye that being now taken away: yet that will not evince, that He is a Righteous man: and there is still a difference betwixt him, and one that never was chargable with that guilt: this man, as to this, is indeed a Righteous man, but not the other.

3. He saith. The phrase of imputing Righteousness is best understood by the contrary expression of imputing sin; & this signifieth either to look upon a person, as justly liable to punishment; or to inflict punishment upon him, in consideration of sin. Therefore doubtless to impute Righteousness importeth nothing else, but either to look upon a man as righteous, or to conferre upon him the privileges, belonging to persons truely righteous. Ans. This is true, if we speak of a person, who is truely Righteous, antecedently unto this Imputation; as the sinner is supposed to be truely a sinner antecedently unto this Imputation. But when sin is imputed to a Righteous person, or to one, who, before the imputation, was not guilty, nor looked upon as a Sinner, as Sin was imputed to Christ, the Holy and Righteous one, who knew no sin; and as Sin through injustice, was imputed to Naboth, who was not guilty of what was laid to his charge; Imputation, in this case, must import some thing else, than either of these two mentioned, and that antecedently to an holding of that person liable to punishment, or to a punishing of him, with consideration to that sin: thus before Christ could be looked upon, as a person liable to punishment, or could be punished for sin, by the Righteous God, sin must first have been imputed to Him, and reckoned upon His Score; and that Righteously, because of His undertaking and willingly submitting to the debt, as Surety: as when Iezabel would have Noboth killed as a Malefactor, she first by injustice and indirect meanes, made him guilty of sin, & then held him liable to punishment, and dealt with him accordingly. So, upon the other hand, when Righteousness is imputed to a sinner (as we all are sinners) before He can be looked upon as a Righteous person, or be dealt with, as a Righteous person, He must first have a Righteousness imputed to him, and bestowed upon him: for how can God, whose judgement is according to truth, look upon a person as Righteous, and conferre privileges upon him, due only to such as are Righteous, who is not Righteous indeed? Must He not first bestow a Righteousness upon him, & reckon a Righteousness upon his Score, to the end He may be just and Righteous, when He is the justifier of him that beleeveth?

Lastly He said. Here is neither peer nor peep of the least ground or reason to perceive, that by Righteousness, in this Scripture, should be meant the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. It is enough that the Text saith, Righteousness is imputed: for the man here spoken of, hath not a Righteousness of his own, as the Apostle hath proved in the preceeding Chapters, & doth here, take for granted: And therefore this Imputed Righteousness must be the Righteousness of another; and it must be such a Righteousness of another as can found free Remission of Sins. And whose Righteousness else can this be, if it be not Christ's? Is there any third competitour here imaginable? must it not be the Righteousness of Him, whom faith goeth out unto & laith hold on, in order to justification? Must it not be His Righteousness, who was the Mediator, who laid down the price of Redemption, & was a propitiation, as He told us in the preceeding Chapter? Some men, in alleiging a difference, betwixt a Righteousness imputed to us Sinners, and the Righteousness of Christ, as if there could be any other Righteousness imputable to us, except the Surety-righteousness of Christ; as they expresly in this joine with Socinians (See Volkel de vera Relig. lib. 5. cap. 21. p. 565.) & with Papists & Arminians; so they declare themselves utter strangers to the Gospel; yea greater strangers; than those were, against whom the Apostle wrote, who took it for granted, that if any Righteousness from without, or that was not by any thing, which we do, were imputed, it behoved to be the Righteousness of the Mediator: And this, we may conceive, is the reason, why the Apostle doth not say, in so many express words, that it was the Righteousness of Christ; for who could have thought of another?

Fourthly Rom. 5: 19. a place, with its whole contexture pregnant for our purpose: for the Apostle is not onely here confirming, but also illustrating this whole matter, from the Imputation of Adam's Sin unto his posterity; & after many various and emphatick expressions, used there-anent from vers 12. and forward, he saith here vers 19▪ for as by one mans disobedience, many were made Sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Socinus de Servat. lib. 4. cap. 6. is so bold as to tell us, That he supposeth, there is nothing written in the Scriptures, that hath given us a greater occasion of erring, than that comparison betwixt Adam & Christ, which Paul made & did prosecute at length here. And he would cleare to us the comparison thus, That as by Adam's Sin & disobedience, it came to passe, that all men were condemned and died; so by Christ's righteousness and obedience it came to passe, that they wero absolvod, and did live: for Christ by His own Righteousness and Obedience, by vertue of the decree of God, did penetrate the heavens, there to reigne for ever, and there he begote eternal life and everlasting blessedness both to Himself, and to His. How aliene this is from the whole of the Apostle's discourse, needs not be declared, seing there is not one word giving the least hint of the Apostle's designe to be, to declare how & what way Christ obtained power and authority to save: Yet He goeth on to tell us, That as Adam's fault made him guilty of death, whence it came to passe, that all mankind, that are procreat of him after that guilt, is obnoxious to death: so Christ by His Righteousness purchased to Himself eternal life; whence it cometh te passe, that who ever are procreat of him, partake of this life. But He never once taketh notice, that Paul giveth for the ground of all mankind's becoming guilty of death, their sinning in him vers 12. even such, as had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression vers 14. yea, in every verse this cause is noted, or pointed at: & it being Notour of it self, that ifall mankind did sin in Adan, Adam's sin must be imputed unto them; so Christ's Righteousness must be imputed unto all His, inreference to their justification, & that with a much more.

Let us now see what Iohn Goodwine excepteth pag. 142. &c. It is not here (said He) said, that by the Imputation of Adam's disobedience, men are made formally Sinners, but simply sinners, that is, either obnoxious to death and condemnation, or else sinners by propagation, not Imputation. Ans. This is the same upon the matter, with Bellarmin's answer de justif. lib. 2. cap. 9. & here we have a distinction proposed without any explication, to wit. betwixt simply sinners, and formally sinners▪ And what can he meane by formally sinners? possibly he meaneth that, which otherwise is expressed by inherently sinners: And if so, though Adam's posterity, so soon as they come to have a being, have an universal corruption of Nature convoyed by propagation; yet that is not it, which is properly said to be Imputed: for that which is imputed, is the guilt of Adam's sin, whereby they become sinners, that is guilty legally, and so obnoxious to punishment, death & condemnation: & this is enough for us; for as the posterity of Adam have the sin of Adam so imputed to them, that they become guilty and obnoxious to wrath; so Beleevers have the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto them, and they thereupon are accounted legally righteous. (2) Whileas he will not grant, that Adam's posterity are sinners by imputation, he joineth with the Socinians, who turne these words vers 12. 〈◊〉 not in whom; but because, or whereas, which the Ethiopick version doth better sense, saying. Because that sin is imputed unto all men, even unto them who know not what is that sin; And the Arabick turne thus, seing all have now sinned: and the Syriack word is Behi, or Bhi, which may as well be interpreted in whom, as because. And in several other places, this praeposition so construed, as here in the Greek, hath this same import; as Mark 2. 4. Luk 5: 25. & 11: 22. Rom. 6: 21. Phil. 4: 10. 1. Thes. 3: 7. But enough of this here, seing that matter is sufficiently cleared by the orthodox, writting against the Socinians; and we have also spoken of it against the Quakers.

Againe saith He, Neither doth the Apostle here oppose unto, or compare the Obedience of Christ, with the disobedience of Adam, as one Act unto or with another; but as Satisfaction to and with the provocation; or the Remedie to and with the disease. Otherwise he should make sins of Omission to be no disobedience, be cause Omissions are no Acts. Ans. The Apostle so compareth the Obedience of Christ with the disobedience of Adam, as the Satisfaction with the provocation, or as the Remedie with the disease; as that withall & chiesly, he cleareth up the manner & way thereof to be by Imputation, thus, That as Adam's sin of disobedience (which includeth both Omission & Commission, being a Violation of the Law, & of the Covenant) was imputed to his posterity, & they hence became guilty & obnoxious to death, yea & were punished with original Corruption, (which cometh by propagation) & the consequences thereof; so Christ's obedience, which was full & compleat, is imputed unto Beleevers, whereupon they become Righteous, in order to their recovery out of their Natural state of sin and misery.

Further He saith, By that obedience of Christ, whereby it is here said, that many are, or shall be made Righteous, that is jus • ified, we cannot understand that Righteousness of Christ, which consists only in obedience to the Moral Law; but that Satisfactory Righteousness, or obedience, which He performed to that peculiar Law of Mediation, which was imposed upon him, and which chiesly consisted in his sufferings. Ans. By the obedience of Christ unto the Law of Mediation, strickly so taken, as distinguished from His obedience to the Moral Law, beleevers could not be made Righteous, as the posterity of Adam are made sinners by his disobedience; for that could not be properly imputed, as this is, as hath been shown; & so Paul's similitude should halt. But (2.) Why is Christ's obedience to the Law of Mediation set in opposition to His obedience to the Moral Law, seing this was a part of that, & unto this He obliged Himself, in undertaking the Mediation. Was He not by the Law of Mediation bound as well to give obedience to the Law, as to suffer the penalty? And was He not obliged to both, as Surety, in room & place? And then why may not both be imputed unto them? (3.) Why should obedience here be thus restricked to the Law of Mediation? He addeth two reasons, but neither are valide. The 1. is this, Because otherwise the opposition • etwixt Adam's disobedience, which was but one single Act, and Christ's Obedience, if it were his universal conformity to the Law, would not hold. Ans. This same man told us in his former exception, That Christ's obedience, in respect of Adam's disobedience, was considered & opposed, as the Satisfaction to the provocation, & as the Remedie to the disease: now if this be true, Christ made Satisfaction for no provocation, but for that single act of eating the forbidden fruit: & what He did & suffered should be only a Remedie for that one distemper: & if so, how shall the rest of the Provocations and diseases be taken away? or are there no more Provocations or diseases? (2.) Adam's disobedience was no Single act of disobedience; but a disobedience including the breach of the whole Moral Law: Saith not Iames, that he who offendeth in one, is guilty of all? Iam. 2: 10. & prove it too, in the following vers? The 2. is this, The Effect that is here attributed to this obedience of Christ, to wit, justification, or Righteous making of many, is constantly appropriated to the death & blood of Christ. Ans. This that is attributed to the blood & death of Christ elsewhere, to wit, our justification, sheweth, that the death of Christ is not understood exclusively; for by His death, exclusivly considered, we cannot-be made Righteous; for the Imputation of another's suffering, though it may exeem from death & suffering; yet it cannot constitute Righteous, in reference to the commanding Law. (2.) The death of Christ must not be looked on, as one act of obedience; but as including all His foregoing acts of obedience, belonging to His State of humiliation, whereof His death was the crowning piece; & so as including as His whole suffering; so His whole obedience to the Law, under which he was made: for He is said to have been obedient unto death, even unto the death of the cross Phil. 2: 8. not that the death of the cross was all His obedience, as it was not the whole state of His humiliation, but the terminating remarkable act thereof; as it was not all His suffering, His whole life being a life of suffering. (3.) If this obedience be understood of this one act of obedience in His dying, & justification be looked upon, as the effect of this only, what shall become of His Soul-sufferings, while He was in an agonie in the garden? But if the act of obedience in His death, include these, why not His whole state of humiliation? And if it include all this, why not also His obedience to the Law, seing His being made under the Law, belongeth to His state of humiliation, as the Apostle tels us Gal. 4: 4.

He excepteth furder, saying, Suppose, that by the obedience of Christ, we should here undorstand, His active obedience to the Moral Law, yet it will not hence follow, that men must be justified, or made Righteous by it, in such a way of imputation. Ans. If by Christ's obedience to the Moral Law, we be made Righteous, as the posterity of Adam were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, that obedience of Christ must necessarily be imputed to us, as Adam's disobedience was imputed to his posterity: for there is no other way imaginable. Let us hear his reason to the contrary.

For certaine it is (said he) that that justification or Righteous-making, whereof the Apostle speaketh vers 19. is the same with that, which He had spoken of v. 16, 17, 18. Now that Righteousness vers 17. is described vers 16. to be the gift (i.e. the forgiveness) of many offences i.e. of all the offences, whereof a man either doth, or shall stand guilty of before God, unto justification: and evident it is, that that Righteousness &c. cannot stand in the Imputation of a fulfilling of the Law. Ans. (1.) Though making Righteous and justification be inseparable; yet they are not formally one & the same; but Righteous-making (to wit by Imputation) is antecedent unto justification, & the ground thereof, as becoming sinners is not formally to be condemned, but is prior to it, & the ground thereof. (2.) That free gift mentioned vers 16. is not free forgiveness, but is that, which is opposite to judgment, or guilt, or reatus, tending to condemnation; & so is the same with that which is called the Grace of God, & the gift by Grace vers 15. and the gift of Righteousness vers 17. which is in order to justification & free pardon. As therefore the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , guilt is not the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 condemnation; but tendeth thereunto; so neither is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the free gift the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 justification, but leadeth thereunto, & is followed therewith. (3.) Nor can the Adversary Himself take these words vers 16. the free gift is of many offences, to be the same with free pardon of many offences, else he must say, that this free pardon goeth before justification & consequently is not justification it self, as he saith else where; for the text saith, that the free gift is of many offences unto justification; as judgment or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was antecedent to condemnation. (4.) So then, the true meaning is, that the free gift of Righteousness hath respect unto many sinnes, to the end, that justification & pardon, that followeth thereupon, might be full, whileas the guilt, that was imputed to Adam's posterity, had respect only to his first breach of the Covenant, for which all were made obnoxious to condemnation.

Lastly He saith. It is but loose and unsavoury argueing, to reason from a thing simply done, to a determinat manner of doing of it: so is it to reason from being made Righteous, to a being made Righteous by Imputation. Ans. The particular manner or way how we are made Righteous, is aboundantly signified by our being made & constitute Righteous by the Righteousness of another, who was our Head, Representative & Surety: & that because it can be imagined to be no other way, than by Imputation. And Further, the whole discurse of the Apostle here, & particularly the comparison so much here insisted upon, putteth the matter beyond all debate. As Adam's sin was imputed to his posterity, whereby all were accounted sinners, & dealt with as such, even as guilty, by reason of Adam's act of sin: So Christ's Righteousness becometh ours by Imputation, & we are made Righteous & accounted such & dealt with as such, upon the account thereof. No man can imagine, how one shall be accounted guilty, & punished as guilty of a sinful act, done by another, unless the guilt of that sinful act be imputed to him; so no man can imagine, how one can be accounted Righteous, & dealt with as such, upon the account of the Righteousness of another, if that Righteousness of the other be not imputed to him. And beside, This is called a gift, a free gift, & a free gift of Righteousness, & a free gift of Righteousness received, which fully pointe forth this Imputation, which we contend for.

Fiftly. Rom. 8: 3, 4. For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, & for sin condemned sin in the flesh, that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us. The Law could not help a sinner from under the Curse, nor unto the recompence of reward, because it was weak through the flesh, through the sin & corruption of man, whereby he could not give right and full obedience thereunto. And therefore God sent His Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, who by His obedience & suffering, in His state of humiliation, took away the sting of death, & the strength of sin, by satisfying all the demandes of the Law, the whole 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the jus & right of the Law, which consisted in yeelding full & perfect obedience, & in making full Satisfaction for the violation committed: for the Law said, cursed is every one, that continueth not in all things, which are written therein, to do them Deut. 27: 26. Gal. 3: 13. And the Righteousness, which is of the Law, is, that the man, who doth these things, shall live by them. And this was so ordered, that the Righteousness of the Law, the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Law, the jus and demand of the Law mentioned, might be fulfilled in us, that is, in our Nature, by the Redeemer & Surety, who did & suffered all this in & for His own. The Ethiopik Version is a clear commentary, and when we were impotent to do the commands of the Law, God sent His own Son for that sin, who took on our body of sin, & condemned sin it self in our body, that he might justifie us, & be propitious unto us, and that so he might fulfill the work of the commands of the Law for them, who walk in the Law of the holy Spirit. Let us now see what John Goodwine excepteth p. 145. &c.

He saith. (1.) Some understand this rather of Sanctification, than of justification; & by the fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law, that Evangelical obedience to the precepts thereof, which all those, that truely beleeve in Christ, do in part performe, and desire and strive to performe more perfectly. Ans. Gospel justification & Gospel-Sanctification agree well together, and Christ is the true foundation & cause of both. But that this is to be understood rather of justification, appeareth hence. (1.) That this is a further explication & confirmation of what was said vers 1. There is therefore now no Condemnation to them, which are in Christ Iesus (2.) all that measure of Sanctification, which the Saints through Grace attaine unto here, cannot be called a fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law, the Lawes demands are not thereby satisfied; for it calleth for perfect obedience, which none of the Sanctified can give. (3.) If this were understood of Sanctification, why are these words added, who walk not after the flesh, bue after the Spirit?

2. He said. By the Righteousness of the Law, which is here said to be fulfilled in beleevers, cannot be meant the Righteousness or active obedience of Christ imputed, because it must of necessity be such a Righteousness and such a fulfilling, as may be apprehended as a proper and sutable effect of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh, as the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 declareth. But it is unpessible that the active obedience of Christ, or the imputation of it, should be any proper effect of condemning sin in the flesh, that is of the abolishing or taking away the guilt, or the accusing and condemning power of sin; for when the guilt of sin is purged away, there needeth no other Righteousness, nor Imputation of Righteousness for justification. Ans. (1.) Christ's obedience & Suffering need not be distinguished, both being done in His state of humiliation, and belonging-thereto, & both being necessary to answere the demand of the Law, which we did lye under: Christ performed both, to the end the whole 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or jus & right of the Law might be ful • illed in us, and for us, by this Surety. And before guilt be purged away, we must have both imputed to us; for justification by saith must not make the Law void, but rather establish it. (2.) Neither is this vers 4. to be looked on, as holding forth the end of that, which did immediatly preceed in the end of vers 3. or of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh; but rather as a further end of God's sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh; or as a comprehensive end of all that was mentioned before.

3. He saith. That clause in them still notes either a subjective inhesion of some things in persons, or else some kind of Efficiency. But the Righteousness of Christ is Subjectively and inherently in Himself only; nor are we the workers of this righteousness. Ans. Though the Righteousness of Christ be subjected in Him only, & wrought by Him alone: yet the same being imputed unto Beleevers, the Righteousness of the Law may be said to be fulfilled in them because by faith they are in Christ, & Christ is in them: and in them, is as much, as for them, or upon them, or on their account (as this same person hereafter granteth, in a like case) & so it is accepted of God for all ends, as if it were performed by them; & so it is fulfilled in our nature, for for this end, He came in the likeness of sinful flesh.

3. He saith. If by Righteousness of the Law we understand that entire obedience, which every beleever, according to the great variety of their several conditions, callings, & relations stand bound to performe, it cannot be said to be fulfilled in them, by the imputation of Christ's righteousness: for every beleever is bound to many moe particular acts, than can be found in all that golden Catalogue of works of Righteousness performed by Christ. Ans. If the works of Righteousness, performed by Christ, shall not be a compleat Righteousness, that can Satisfie the demandes of the Law, where shall beleevers get a compleet Righteousness? Shall their poor imperfect obedience, wherewith themselves are not satisfied, but complaine much of, and mourne for, be a more perfect & compleat fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law, than was the perfect obedience of Christ, with which the Father was well pleased? Or shall the single & weak act of their Faith (as this Author saith) be a more entire fulfilling of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Law, than the Catalogue of the works of Righteousness, performed by Christ? What probable ground is there for this imagination? (2.) Christ's obedience was perfect, & the Law-giver was satisfied there with, & accepted of it, in the behalfe of all the chosen ones, & all their defects & sinnes, in their various conditions, callings & Relations, were done away by the Satisfaction made by Christ: so that the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Law was perfectly fulfilled, in their behalf; & this being imputed unto them & received by faith, no more is requisite unto a stateing of them into a state of pardon & right to glory.

5. He saith. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth not obedience to or conformity with the Law, but rather that justification, which was the end and intent of the Law, or rather that jus, or right, or Law (as it were) of the Law. Ans. But all this will not weaken our Argument: for that right, jus, or demand of the Law was, as to us now sinners, both Satisfaction for transgressions committed, and full and compleat obedience; & till both were done & performed, there could be no justification of sinners: and so this rather establisheth than hurteth the doctrine of Imputation, whatever he may imagine.

6. He saith By the word Law, cannot necessarily be understood the Moral Law for 1. The weakness of the Law extends also to the judicial and Ceremonial. 2. The jewes, to whom he specially addresseth himself, in all this disputati • n, built as much on the observation of the Ceremonial Law. 3. The Moral Law, though perfectly observed, could not have justified all men, at least, not the jewes, who were obliged to the observation of other Lawes. 4. The Imputation of the observation of the Moral Law would not have served for the justification of the jewes, who were under the transgression of, other Lawes. Ans. It wi •• satisfie us, if by the Law here be understood, that universal Rule of Righteousness, which God prescribed unto men, & that certainely is the Moral Law, whereof, as to the jewes, the Ceremonial & judicial were a part, or were reduced unto: & particularly the Ceremonial Law, being God's instituted worship, they were obliged to observe it by vertue of the Second command. And thus both the Exception, & all the Reasons confirming it, evanish: for (1.) we take not the Law here so narrowly, as to exclude the other lawes, which God gave to the jewes, seing they are all reduced there unto, & comprehended thereunder. (2.) Paul is here mainly writting for Information of the Gentiles, the Church of Rome; & though there might be some jewes among them, & what he saith may be also for their use: yet this will not prove that by the Law, he understandeth any other, than that perfect rule of Righteousness, which God gave unto them, comprehending these other Lawes, as appendices thereof. (3.) The Moral Law, thus taken, if observed, could have justified even jewes, if we suppose they had not been born sinners. (4.) Christ having fulfilled all Righteousness, His Righteousness was an observation of this Universal Law: & therefore the Imputation thereof can serve for the justification both of jewes & Gentiles.

Lastly He saith. The clear meaning of the place seemeth to be this, That that justification, or way of making men Righteous, which the writings of Moses prophefied of long since, to wit, by faith in the Messiah, might be accomplished, made good, and fully manifested in us, or upon us, viz in our justification, who by an eminency of holiness in our lives, above the straine and pitch of men under the Law, give testimony unto the world, that the Messiah, the great justifier, is indeed come into the world, and having suffered for sin and overcome death, hath poured out the Spirit of Grace aboundantly upon those that beleeve. Ans. (1.) To take the Law here for the meer writtings of Moses, & then to Interpret the fulfilling thereof, as is here done, is to exclude the witnessing of the Prophets, which Paul expresly mentioneth Rom. 3: 21. (2.) What could this contribute to prove, that there was now no condemnation to such, as were in Christ Jesus, among the Gentiles? (3.) How can this be a proof of what was said vers 3. foregoing? (4.) How can this be the end of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh, as himself said it was, Except 2? (5.) He told us before, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 did properly Signifie jus, right, or Law of the Law, now I pray, what is this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , this jus, right, of Moses's writtings? And how is that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o • Righteousness fulfilled? (6.) What then can be meant by the weakness of Moses's writtings? or how could they be said to be weak through the flesh? (7.) And how could God be said, by this Interpretation, to send His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, because Moses's writtings were weak through the flesh? (8.) I see then, in us may import the same that upon us importeth, though it was excepted against formerly, as we heard (9.) It seemeth by this Interpretation, that there was no Eminency of holiness or walking after the Spirit, among those, who were under the Law; which is utterly false▪ (10.) Christ, by His coming, did not only fulfill Moses's writtings, but also all the predictions & prophecies, many of which are else where to be found, than in Moses's writtings. Yet to fortifie this Audacious & groundless Interpretation.

He tels us 1. That this Interpretation (as far at least, as • oncerneth the clause in question, that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us) is confirmed by the sweet proportion between, such a fulfilling &c. as the effect, & that sending of Christ &c. as the cause or meanes thereof. Ans. But before this proportion appear to be so sweet, it must be shown to us, what proportion there is hereby kept with the manifest scope of the Apostle, which is to cleare & explaine, how there is now no condemnation to them, which are in Christ Jesus, notwithstanding of the weakness of the Law, through the flesh. As also it must be shown to us, what interest these words, for what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, have, or can have, in this Interpretation: for a proportion, that suiteth not all the parts of the Text, is but a disproportion, being a plaine perversion of the true meaning of the words.

He tels us. 2. In this Interpretation the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fulfilled hath its proper & genuine force, which is to signify the accomplishment, making good, or full manifestation of a thing, which before was only promised, or foretold. Ans. Not only the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is often taken in another sense than is here alleged, as we see Rom. 13: 8. Gal. 5: 14. but the very verb in the same Tense & Mood, that is here viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used, to import some other thing, than a fulfilling of what was promised, as we see 2. Cor. 10: 6. when your obedience is fulfilled, that is, perfected, established & confirmed. So Ioh. 15: 11. & that your joy might be full, or fulfilled, that is, might be aboundant and full in all points, and upon all considerations. So Luk. 22: 16. untill it be fulfilled in the Kingdom of heaven, that is, perfected.

He tels us. 3. The Righteousness of the Law here must be the same with that mentioned. Rom. 3: 21, 31. Ans. The Righteousness of the Law here, is the Lawes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , jus, right & demand, which was Satisfied by what Christ, the Surety, did & Suffered. But that Righteousness, mentioned Rom. 3: 21. is the Righteousness of God, or of Christ, which he performed, to Satisfie the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Righteousness of the Law; & so they are not the same formally, this being the obligation, & that the payment. It is true, the Law here & Rom. 3: 31. is the same; & that maketh for us, as appeareth by our foregoing Vindication of that place.

He tels us▪ 4. By this Interpretation, this passage is of perfect Sympathy with those Rom. 3: 21, 22, 25. Ans. This also will make for us, as appeareth by our foregoing Vindication, where this gloss was rejected: & I wonder, how he could imagine such a perfect agreement, seing there mention is made of the Prophets, as well as of the Law, giving countenance to Gospel Justification: but here by his Interpretation, only the Law of Moses is understood: where then will he make his harmony appear? And what would he hence inferre? 1. (saith he) That the righteousness of God, that is, the way that God holds for justification of men, stands in remission of sins Ans. Of this we have hithertill seen neither peer nor peep: pardon of sins hath no affinity with the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 legis, the righteousness of the law. 2. Saith he That this righteousness or justification of his is witnessed, that is, asserted & vindicated by the law, that is, the writtings of Moses. Ans. Neither is Righteousness & justification one & the same thing, as we said above, nor are the writtings of Moses all the law & the prophets. Neither is witnessed by the law the same, with fulfilling of the law. 3. Saith he, That this way was not manifested, declared, or fulfilled, that is, fully revealed to the bottom & foundation of it, till the coming of Christ, & dying for sin. Ans. What ever truth be in this, there is no foundation for it here, but in his Imagination; as is manifest from what is said. And thus this place is vindicated.

Sixtly. He mentioneth next, that he may except against, Rom. 9: 31, 32. But why is not vers 30. mentioned? Is it because the matter is there too clearly hold forth? The Apostle doth there expresly say, That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, That is, did not pretend to justification by the • r own works; nor once think, by their own works to patch up a righteousness, wherein they might appeare before God, and be absolved) have attained to righteousness. even the righteousness which is of faith (that is, have a righteousness imputed to them, & they made possessours there of by faith, laying hold upon it) But Israel (as it followeth vers 31.) who followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness, (That is. Isra • l, who conceiting their own works, & crying them up, and seeking after Absolution, justification & life, by the law of righteousness, and their conformity thereunto, & that with all earnestness & eager persecution, have not attained to that, they were pursueing after) vers 32. Wherefore? because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law (that is, They would not submit to the Gospel-way of justification, through the righteousness of Christ, laid hold on by faith; but would still be essaying the way of works; though all they did, was rather a shadow of obedience, or of conformity to the law, than a true performance of what was commanded.) The Aethiopick Version, though a corrupt Translation, yet hinteth something of the true sen • e, saying, But Israel, following after their law, could not be justified because they did not performe compleatly the commands of the law. Wherefore? Because the law doth not justifie, but only is by faith, which perfecteth the accomplishment thereof. And we may further notice here, that what the Apostle, when speaking of the Jewes, calleth the law of righteousness, he called, while speaking of the Gentiles, simply Righteousness: and what he there called the righteousness of faith; he here, speaking of the jewes▪ calleth by faith, in opposition to the works of the law. What excepteth Mr. Goodwine?

He saith 1. That by the law of righteousness here cannot be meant the moral law, or any law: for God had prevented them with the gift of all these, so that they needed not have soughs after them. Ans. But Cal • in thinketh there is an Hypallage here, & the law of Righteousness is put for the Righteousness of the law. And if we take the law of Righteousness here for the law of that law (as he himself spoke above) that is that forme of righteousness and holiness, which the law called for, will not this satisfie? But the matter is plaine, Their fault was, that they sought after a righteousness, by their owne obedience to the law; & neglected that righteousness, which the Gentils attained by faith, viz. the Righteousness of Christ, at whom they stumbled, vers 32. 33. And the Righteousness of God, of which they were wholly ignorant, Rom. 10: 3. This was not a simple endeavour of keeping the law (as he hinteth in the following words, where he would preoccupy this objection; and then tell us, that this study could be no cause of their coming short of righteousness, as Christians are never further off from justification, by keeping the commands of God) but a proposeing of that designe of attaining a Righteousness by their own works, whereby alone they might be justified. And when Christians endeavour after holiness, but not from Gospel-principles, nor upon Gospel-grounds; but to the end they may attaine unto a Righteousness of their owne, by their works of obedience; they prejudge themselves of justification: for thus they do not lay hold on Christ, but reject Him, and stumble at that stumbling stone, that is at Christ, who is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10: 4.

2. He faith, neither Calvine, nor any other restaine the law to the Moral law. Ans. Nor do we so restraine it to that law, strikly so taken; but comprehend thereby all that God prescribed for a righteousness; and this is the Moral law, in its full sense; the ceremonial & judicial being parts thereof & appendices thereto.

3. He saith, There is no reason to limite this to the Moral law only, for the jewes sought righteousness by the Ceremonial also. Ans. This is but the same with the former; and we have told him, that the Ceremonial law was then enjoined by the Moral law; & so the Moral law did comprehend it, so long as the Ceremonial law was unrepealed. And whatever law it was, their seeking of righteousness by it, and their refusing of Christ and his Righteousness went together; and they so pursued after it, that they sought Righteousness by their obedience to it; and did not seek by faith after Christs Righteousness, nor would they submit thereunto.

4. He saith, The righteousness of the Moral law alone, suppose they should have attained to it by beleeving, could have stood them in no stead, they being bound also to the observation of the Ceremonial law. Ans. This hath been answered before. Christ fulfilled all righteousness, and satisfied that law of righteousness, which was an Universal Rule of righteousness; & so comprehended the ceremonial lawes, so long as they were in force: so that if they had forsaken their own righteousness, and embraced by faith the righteousness of Christ, they had been certainely saved; & the Imputation of this Righteousness had made them up.

Lastly, he saith, The clear sense is, that the law of righteousness is justification it self, or righteousness simply and, indefinitely taken, which the jewes seeking to attaine to by the works of the law, that is, by themselves, & the merites of their own doings, and not by faith in Iesus Christs, lost Gods favour and perished in their sinnes. Ans. (1) That the jewes sought after justification by the merites of their own works, otherwise than merites are included in all works, is not manifest, in this place. (2) Otherwayes this may passe for part of the sense, for by faith he understands the act of faith it self, as our righteousness, & not the Righteousness of Christ, which faith laith hold on, or faith as laying hold on & receiving a Surety-righteousness, which is here imported, when the contrary is expressed of the jewes, & of them it is said, that they stumbled at that stumbling stone; & in the next chapter it is said, they would not submit themselves unto the righteousness of God. What he addeth, as a confirmation of this interpretation, is to no purpose, for he speaketh nothing to cleare the maine thing in doubt; but all is to prove, that by the law of righteousness, Righteousness is meaned; which is not denied: & withall he taketh for granted, what is not proved, & hath been denied, viz. That Righteousness and Justification are one & the same thing.

Seventhly, Rom. 10: 3, 4. A passage cleat & pregnant for our purpose, where the Apostle is but prosecuting the same purpose, as to the jewes, and shewing whence their disappointement & missing of that came, which they so earnestly endeavoured after, viz. A righteousnss by which they might be justified before God: for (saith the Apostle) they being ignorant of Gods Righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the Righteousness of God: for Christ is the end of the law for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth. There is a Righteousness here called Gods Righteousness, which is opposite to, & inconsistent with mens owne righteousness, that is, all that is done by them in conformity to the law of God, as a righteousness, whereupon to be justified: yea, so great is this opposition, that who ever laboures most to establish & set on foot his own Righteousness, or to seek after a Righteousness by his own performances, is furthest from the Righteousness of God, as being both ignorant thereof, and in pride refuising to submit thereunto. This Righteousness of God is explained vers 4. to be the end of the law, that is, the full righteousness, which the law, in its primitive institution, called for, & which is the accomplishment of the lawes designe, as proposed to be a Rule of Righteousness, and the condition of life promised, upon the performance thereof. And Christ is said to be this end of the law for righteousness. He, by yeelding perfect obedience, hath brought forth a righteousness, in which the law hath its End, And Christ is this, to every one that beleeveth, the righteousness being made over unto them, who beleeve, and by faith lay hold on him; which, because the Gentiles did, they therefore attained to this righteousness, Rom. 9: 30.

Mr. Goodwine, pag. 137. &c. excepteth several wayes, 1 There is (saith he) no coloure of Reason, that by the law here should be meaned precisely & determinatly the Moral law; because the jewes never dreamed of justification by this law only, but chiefly by the Ceremonial law. Besides, vers 5. he citeth that description, which Moses giveth of the righteousness of the law not out of any passage of the Moral law; but out of the heart, as is were of the ceremonial law, Lev. 18: 5. Ans. The first part of this Exception hath been often answered: we take not the Moral law so precisely & determinatly, as not to include, as parts or appendices, all other lawes given by God. And the last part of this Exception will say nothing, unless he think, this law is precisely & determinatly to be understood of the Ceremonial law, excluding all others, & especially the Moral law, taken as distinct from judicial and ceremonial. But why doth he say, that this description of the righteousness of the law is taken out of the heart of Ceremonials, seing in the place cited, both before and after the words, morals are mentioned? yea that whole Chapt. is taken up, in rehearsing morals.

Except 2. Neiter is it any wayes agreable to truth, that the Righteousness of Christ imputed to beleevers, should be called; the end of the moral Law, for no Law, considered simply as such, is any cause or meanes of justifing a person, than by the observation of it self; & consequently justification by Christ cannot be conceived to be the end of the moral Law: for nothing can properly be said to be the intent or end of a thing, but that which in likelyhood may be obtained by it. Now it is impossible that justification by Christ should be procured by the moral Law. It may be said, with a for more favourable aspect to truth, that Christ is the end of the Ceremonial Law; yet not simply considered, as a Law, but as comprehending in it such & such usages & rites typifying Christ. Ans. (1.) This whole Exception looketh with a very ill favoured aspect both to truth & modesty: For its scope & drift is not so much against the truth which we maintaine, as against the Apostle Paul himself, & against the language of the Spirit of Lord; for it faith this in effect; that either the Apostle spoke not truth, or spoke not good sense, when he said, that Christ was the end of the Law: for (to use Mr. Goodwin's reason) as nothing can be properly said to be the Intent or end of a thing but that which in likelihood may be obtained by it; so nothing can be said to be the Intent & end of a Law, but what in likelihood may be obtained by it: But how can any think, that Christ can be, in any likelihood obtained by the Law? (2.) But we say not, that justification by Christ is had by the moral Law: yet, why the righteousness of Christ, consisting in perfect obedience to the Law, & in full answering of the same, in all its demands, may not be called the end or fulfulling of the Law, I see not; especially seing the Apostle saith expresly, that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness. The question being moved about a Righteousness, required by the Law, & this not being to be found in Man's obedience, but in Christ's, who was the end of the Law for righteousness, the Law hath its full accomplissement in him also when He suffered, & satisfied the Sanction of the Law, the Law had satisfaction, or the Lawgiver rather, & the Law its end & accomplishement, Now this Righteousness of Christ being imputed to beleevers, they are thereupon justified, & the Law is satisfied. And though the Law because it was weak throuw the flesh, could not bring about this righteousness, & this end, in us; yet Christ having answered all the demands of the Law, & given full Satisfaction both in point of obedience, & in point of Suffering, the Law hath its full accomplishment in Him, & that End, which is here meaned (3) We do not say, that the Righteousness of Christ, imputed to beleeleevers, is, or is called, the end of the moral Law: but that Christ came, & was made under the Law, that He might answer all the demands thereof; & both satisfie for its violation, & yeeld perfect obedience unto its commands; & so fulfill it in all points: So that it had its end & accomplishment in & through Him, & what He did & suffered: & that He submitted Himself hereunto, that He might make up a righteousness, wherewith the Law should be satisfied, for the justification of Believers. (4.) Though the Moral Law, nor no Law, considered in it self, can be any cause or meanes of justifying a person, otherwise than by the observation of it self; & though justification by Christ cannot be conceived to be the end of moral Law: yet in Christ's obedience & Suffering, the Law may be said to have received its Accomplishment and Satisfaction; & thereby a compleat Righteousness may be said to be obtained for all Believers.

Except. 3. The Greek Expositors make Christ in this sense, to be called the end of the law for righteousness, because he performed, or exhibited unto them that, which the law propounded to it self, as its end, & would have performed, but could not, to wit, their justification. Ans. Seing the law ptopounded their justification, as its end, only by the perfect observation of it self, or by a full & perfect conformity unto it, Christ cannot be called the end or accomplishment of the law, unless He had performed all that, which the law required: nor could He be called the end of the law for righteousness, unless He had fully satisfied the law; and thereby made up a Righteousness, in the behalfe, & for the behove of Believers, to whom it being Imputed, they might be accepted, & justified upon the account thereof. And this righteousness, where with the law was satisfied, & wherin it had its full accomplishment, is, I grant, exhibited in the Gospel, to the end, that all, who would be justified, may lay hold on it, receive it, & rest upon it, as the only righteousness, in and through which they desire to be accepted, and to stand before God, the righteous judge.

Except. 4. Some conceive, that Christ is said to be the end of the law, &c. Because the law, by convinceing men of sin, and exacting of them a Righteousness, which it doth not enable them to performe; & againe by threatning & condemning them for the want of it, it doth as good as lead them by hand to Christ by whom they are freely justified. But neither doth this seem to be the meaning of the place. Ans. Seing he himself is not satisfied with this interpretation, he might have forborne to have added it. But as for the interpretation it self, I judge the thing said to be true, and that it hath a subordinat aspect unto what we have said; & holdeth forth part of the truth; though it be not a plaine and full exposition of the place: for there is mention made here of a Righteousness of God, which the jewes neither understood, not would submit unto: but in opposition to this they went about to establish their own righteousness, that is, to seek after a righteousness by their own works, or by their own obedience to the law; & therefore did misse their end: for this righteousness, which they were seeking after▪ & which they could not attaine unto, by all their own acts of obedience; that is, a righteousness, that was a perfect obedience & conformity to the law, & withall a Sufficient compensation & Satisfaction for the breaches of the law, already committed, was only to be found in Christ, who is the end of the law for righteousness, that is, made full Satisfaction for the breaches committed, and performed compleat and perfect obedience, which the law did principally require (what ever other accidental ends it might have had, or the law-giver in promulgating it, & accompanying it with other things, as to the Nation of the jewes) because for this end was the law, as a law, given by the law-giver, that Subjects might walk according to the same, and that they might become thereby righteous, and have a right to the reward promised, by fulfilling this condition of the Covenant. Now, when these ends (or this end, putting these together as one) were onely attained by what Christ did and suffered, the jewes, who stumbled at this stumbling stone, & rejected this righteousness of God, could never be justified by all their own acts of obedience to the law, how zealously so ever they should have sougt after a rigteousness thereby.

Except. 6. (The 5. we passe, because he laith no weight on it him self) The plaine & direct meaning is, that the law, that is, the whole Mosaical dispensation was for that end given by God to the jewes, that whilst it did continue, it might instruct and teach them, concerning the Messiah, who was yet to come, and by his death to make atonement for their sinnes, that so they might beleeve in Him accordingly and be justified: and further that in time, that Nation might be trained up & prepared for the Messiah himself, and that Oeconomy & perfection of worship & service, which He should bring with him, & establish in the world at his coming. Ans. What was said to the two foregoing Exceptions, may serve for an answere to this: for what ever truth may be in this; yet it is no true sense & exposition of the place; because Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth; & so to the Gentiles, as well as to the jewes; whereas this gloss limiteth & restricketh all to the jewes. (2) There is nothing here, keeping correspondence with what is said, vers 3. touching their going about to establish their own righteousness and refuising to submit unto the righteousness of God. 3. The righteousness of the law, described by Moses, & here cited vers 5. hath no interest in the Mosaical Oeconomy, as given for the mentioned end to the jewes. (4) If Christ made an atonement for sins, & was to be bele • ved in accordingly, by such as would be justified, then that atonement was to be made over unto them & reckoned upon their score, to the end they might be justified upon the account thereof. (5) The Text saith, that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness; & so was to bring in everlasting Righteousness, as well as to make atonement for sins, Dan. 9: 24. (6) The perfection of that service & worship, which Christ was to establish at His coming, was a clearer manifestation of the Gospel of the Grace of God, whereby the Righteousness of God, or the Surety-righteousness of Christ, was imputed unto Beleevers, & received by faith, in order to justification, as the whole Gospel declareth.

He laboureth to confirme this gloss with two reasons, 1. Because the jewes sought Righteousness & self justification, as well from the observation of the Ceremonial, as of the Moral law. 2. Because Christ is held forth; as the end of this dispensation, 2 Cor. 3: 13. Gal. 3: 24. Ans. As to the first of the reasons, we have often replied to it already. And the second will not prove, that there is no other interpretation of this passage, that can have place. And beside, That whole Oeconomy did pointe out and lead them to the Messiah, that in Him they might find that, which they were seeking after by their own works, & all in vaine; even the Righteousness of God, which will sufficiently cloth all beleevers, and both keep them from wrath due for sin, & give them a right to glory. So that even this sense, if rightly understood, doth rather strengthen than hurt imputed Righteousness.

Eightly. 1 Cor. 1: 30. Is excepted against by him pag. 162. &c. To which we may adde vers 29. & 31. Which will help to cleare the matter. That no flesh should glory in His presence: but of Him are ye in Christ Iesus, who of God is made unto us Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification & Redemption. That according at it is written, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. All the work of God in and about His chosen ones, is so contrived, that no flesh should have ground to glory in the presence of God; but that he, who glorieth, should glory in the Lord: and therefore He hath made Christ to be all things to them, that they stand in need of, in order to their everlasting enjoyment of Himself; and particulary, Christ is said to be made of God to us (among other things, which our necessity calleth for) Righteousness, answering His Name the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS, Ier. 23: 6. And a Righteousness he cannot be made unto us, any other way, than by clothing us (who are naked and have no righteousness of our own) with a Righteousness; that is, by Imputing to us His Righteousness, that we may thereby become Righteous, & be looked upon, as such, and so be accepted of God, & justified.

Except. 1. Christ is no other way said to be made righteousness, then He is said to be made Wisdom, &c. Therefore we may as well plead for the Imputation of His Wisdom, or His Sanctification: there is no more intimation made of the Imputation of the one then of the other. Ans. This is but the old exception of Socinus part. 4. de Servant, Cap. 5. And of Volkel. De vera Relig. Cap. 21. p. 566. And it standeth upon this onely ground, That Christ is made all these particulars to us here mentioned, after one & the same manner: and what that manner is, should be declared: & of necessity it must be a very general one, otherwise it shall not agree to all these particulars. Therefore Socinus hath devised a very general manner of way, saying in the place cited: That all this signifieth nothing else, than that we have attained to that by Gods providence, through Christ, that we are become wise, holy & redeemed before Gods: & that therefore Christ is said to be righteousness to us, because through the providence of God by Christ, we have attained to be just before God. But this general way maketh us not one white wiser. Volkelius, in the place cited, giveth us no relief, but only tels us, That Christ is said to be made all these to us; because he was the cause of all these; & because God, by his meanes, made us wise & holy, & will at length redeem us. Bellarm. condescendeth to tell us, that He is said to be our Righ • eousness, because He is the efficient cause thereof. But how that is, he doth not explaine: But Bellarm. next answere is to some better purpose; Christ (saith he) is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the Father for us; and doth so give and communicat that Satisfaction to us, when he justifieth us, that it may be called our Satisfaction & Righteousness. (2) Such as oppose us here, do (& must necessarily so do) speak of this matter, as if Righteousness & Sanctification were one & the same thing; & so give us here a most needless Tautologie. And others, who will not yeeld to imputed Righteousness, & yet will grant a difference betwixt Righteousness & Sanctification, must tell us distinctly, how He is the one, & how He is the other, to His chosen ones. (3.) Wisdom & Sanctification are of a different Nature from Righteousness; for Righteousness cannot be here taken for Inherent Grace & Holiness; for then it should be the same with Sanctification, & so there must needs be here a Tautology; & withall no perfect enumeration of the several great things, we stand in need of, & Christ is made to be unto us of God: & seing they are different, there is ground to say, that He is not to us Righteousness, the same way that He is Sanctification; Sanctification is wrought in us by His Spirit; but so is not Righteousness; for if we had a Righteousnes wrought in us, we should be justified by vertue thereof, & upon the account thereof; & if we be justified by a Righteousness within us, we are justified by our own works, & by the law, contrary to all the Apostles disput, & contrary to what preceedeth & followeth the words under consideration; for then he who glorieth might glory in himself, & not in the Lord alone. 4. Al these particulars here mentioned, we must have or finde in Christ, as the Ae ••• opik version hath it, & each, according to its Nature. And withall we must be made partakers & pos • essors of them all, according as the Nature of the benefite will admit: & therefore, as Christ is forthcoming to His chosen ones, for Wisdom, so as they may really become wise; for Sanctification, that they may become holy; & for Redemption, that they may be redeemed: so is He forthcoming to His own for Righteousness, that they may be justified; for though Righteousness & justified be not one & the same, as our Excepter often alleigeth; yet they have constant respect to other, and are inseparable, in our case. If then we finde a Righteousness in Christ, for justification, that Righteousness must be made ours, & this being a Righteousness, that is not our own, before it be made our own, it must be imputed to us, that we may be there by justified.

He addeth, Suppose, Christ were made Righteousness unto us by Imputation: yet this special manner of his being righteousness to us, must be made out by other Scriptures, than this: as because a rich man hath silver & gold & jewels in possession, it will not follow, that he hath silver in one chest, and gold in another, jewels in a third. Ans. Christs being made Righteousness to us, who have no Righteousness of our own, in order to our justification, saith, that the Righteousness, we have from Him, can be no otherwayes ours than by Imputation, for it cannot be wrought in us, else it should be the same with Holiness & Sanctification. And therefore the similitude of gold, silver & jewels is not worth a straw, in this case; because the dissimilitude is obvious.

Except. 2. The meaning only is this, That Christ is made, ordained of God, to be the author, or sole meanes, by way of merite of our justification. Ans. (1) According to his former exception, it will follow hence, that He worketh not Holiness & Wisdom in us, by His Word and Spirit; but only is the meanes thereof, by way of merite: for he will have Christ to be all these particulars to us, one & the same way. (2) This differeth little from the answere of Schlightingius cont. Meisnerum, p. 250. who saith, It is enough that Christs righteousness be the cause of our justification: & Christ may be said to be made righteousness to us, because his righteousness redoundeth to our good and justification. (3) It is not said, that Christ is made justification to us; but it is said, He is made Righteousness to us, & though it is true, that He hath merited our justification; yet when He is said to be made of God Righteousness to us, it is apparent, that He bestoweth a Righteousness upon us, in order to justification, or He must be Righteousness to us, ere we be justified: & how shall we partake of His Righteousness, if not by Imputation? (4) Christ can not be the Author, or sole meanes, by way of merite, of our justification, till we have a Righteousness; that is, He must be the sole Author & Meanes of a Righteousness; for we must not say, That He hath merited, that we shall be justified without a Righteousness, it being an abomination to the Lord, that even a terrene judge should justifie one, that hath no Righteousness. If then He hath merited, that we shall be justified by having a Righteousness, that Righteousness must be within us, or without us: if within us, then He hath merited, that we shall be justified by the works of righteousness, which we do, & by the law, & by the works of the law, contrary to the whole Gospel: If without us, then it must either be Christs own Righteousness, or the Righteousness of some other. It cannot be the Righteousness of any other, as will easily be granted: and if it be Christs Righteousness, it must be imputed to us, to the end it may be ours, and we justified thereby: and this is the thing we press.

He addeth, to confirme this sense, That Righteousness is very frequently used for justification. Ans. Thus he gaineth nothing: for. (1) That will not prove, that it is so used here. (2) And though it did Import justification here; yet seing there is no justification before God, without a Righteousness, it would say, That Christ were our Righteousness too, or that He merited a Righteousness for us: and what is that Righteousness, that He hath procured, that we shall have, in order to our justification? Is it the Righteousness of our own works? Then He hath merited, that our works shall merite justification; & why not also glorification? Is not this to overturne th • 〈◊〉 Gospel▪

He addeth. 2. Righteousness or justification, which Beleevers have in or by Christ, is still attributed unto His death & Sufferings, & never to His active obedience. Ans. But he hath forgetten what is said, Rom. 4: 25. Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised againe for our justification. Sure, His Resurrection was neither His death, nor His Sufferings. He hath forgotten also what is said, Rom. 5: 19. So by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous. And to be Righteous, and to be justified, is all one with him, as we have oft-times heard.

Except. 3. This will not say, That Christs active obedience only is imputed; or that he only, by his active obedience, is made righteousness to us. Ans. I plead not for the sole Imputation of Christs active obedience, but for the Imputation of Christs whole Surety Righteousness, that is, His compleet obedience & Suffering, or of what He did & suffered in answering all the demands of the law, which we were lying under.

Except. 4. Many sound & able expositors are for this sense; understanding nothing by this, but our justification, or righteous making by Him; some placeing this justification in Remission of sins; some ascribing it to the Sufferings of Christ. Ans. We • ould also cite sound & able expositors for our sense, & bring-in beside the general Verdict of such, as write against Socinians, & Papists, & others also: but this is not our present work. (2.) Justification & Righteous-making are not one & the same. If we be made righteous by Him, it must be by His Righteousness: an • if we made righteous by His Righteousness, it must be imputed to us. (3) That justifi • ation is nothing but Remission of sins, is not yet proved. (4.) We have hea • d Paul say, That by the obedience of one (i e: Christ) (in opposition to the disobedience of Adam, whereby all his posterity were made sinners) many are made righteous, Rom. 5: 19.

Ninthly, 2 Cor. 5: 21. For he hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. This is added, as a confirmation and further explication of what was said, vers 18, 19. Concerning the reconciliation of a sin • ul world unto God, in & through Christ, and of Gods imputing their Trespasses unto them. As if he had said, all our Salvation, & all the way how it is brought about, is of God, who, in and through Christ, reconcileth the sinfull world of His own chosen ones to Himself, and Pardoneth their sinnes, by laying them all on Christ, & making Him bear the guilt and punishment of all; that the chosen ones might be made partakers of that Righteousness, and have it imputed unto them, as their sinnes were imputed unto Christ; and so become the Righteousness of God in Him, or by being in Him, and united to Him. This place is pregnant and full of proof: so that the whole matter cannot be more clearly & emphatically expressed, than it is here hold forth. Yet Mr. Goodwine laboureth to darken it with his Exceptions, pag. 164. &c. let us hear him.

Except. 1. Here is nothing said, touching any Imputation of our sins to Christ: & consequently here can be nothing to build a reciprocal Imputation of His righteousness unto us upon. Ans. If that Expression of Gods making Christ to be sin who knew no sin, & that for us, will not enforce an imputation of our sinnes to Christ, it must be so only with such, as will hold fast their opinion, let Scripture speak what it will to the contrary: for when it is said, that Christ, who knew no sin, i. e. was guilty of no sin, by committing of it, in thought, word or deed; was yet made sin by God, & that for us, what words can be imagined, that shall more emphatically express this Imputation? And the Greek commentators (whom our adversary doth oft cite, when he findeth it any thing to his advantage) give the meaning to be, That he was made a great sinner, & was handled, as if he had been the worst of sinners, even very wickedness it self. And Esaias tels us, Chap. 53: 6. That the Lord laid all our iniquities on Him, or caused them to meet in one upon Him. And nothing can be alleiged against this, except it be said, the meaning is, He was made an offering or Sacrifice for sin. But this is so far from weakening the truth, concerning the Imputation of our sinnes to Christ, that it aboundantly confirmeth it: for there was a real imputation of the guilt of the sinner upon the Sacrifie, as is expresly said, Lev. 16: 21, 22. And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all this iniquities of the Children of Israel, & all their trespasses in all their sinnes, putting them upon the head of goat, and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited. And the people were to lay their hands on the head of the Sacrifice, to signifie their rolling of their guilt over upon the expiatory Sacrifie, Levit. 1: 4. & 3: 2, 8, 13. & 4: 4, 15, 24, 29, 33. So that if Christ was made sin, that is, a Sacrifice for sin (though the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is no where in the New Test. so taken) it must needs be granted, that guilt was transferred upon Him, in order to His becoming a Sacrifice for sin: justice could not exact upon Him, if it had not been so, He having been free of all sin and guilt, in His own person.

Except. 2. Some of the most judicious & learned assistants of the way of this Imputation, absolutely reject this equality or reciprocation of Imputation between the sinnes of beleevers unto Christ, and the Righteousness of Christ unto them. There is not the same force and power of our unrighteousness to make Christ unrighteous; which is of His Righteousness to make beleevers righteous. Therefore we are not made formally righteous by such an Imputation. Ans. We willingly grant several differences, beside what is mentioned: yet this agreement & correspondency (which is all we seek) is manifest, That, as Christ, who knew no sin, as to Himself, was made sin, or had the guilt of sin laid upon Him, and was handled by justice as a sinner legally; so we, who have no righteousness of our owne, have Christs Righteousness imputed to us, and bestowed upon us; and upon the account thereof are dealt with as legally righteous. We do not speak of Christs obedience only; but assert the Imputation of His Sufferings too. Nor do we say, that we are hereby made formally Righteous, if the terme formally import inherently; but that by the Imputation thereof to us, we are accounted & looked upon by God as Righteous formally in a legal sense; and as such are accepted of God & justified.

Except. 3. There is not so much, as the face or appearance, in this place of any comparison between Christs being made sin for us, & our being made the Righteousness of God, in Him; but only the latter is affirmed, as the end, consequent, or effect of the former. Ans. Though the latter be a consequent of the former; yet every word holdeth forth a comparison, or correspondence; Christ made sin, & we become Righteous: Christ made sin, or a sinner for us, and we made Righteousness, or Righteous in Him: Christ knew no sin, and yet was made sin; & we, who were sinners land rebels, standing in need of reconciliation (as the preceeding words evidence, & as is undeniable) are made Righteous.

Except. 4. That the weight of that particle, in Him, should be by the Imputation of His active obedience unto us, hath neither Instance or parellel expression in Scripture, nor rule in Grammar, nor figure in Rhetorick, to make probable in the lowest or lightest degree. Ans. We plead not solely for the Imputation of Christs active obedience, as is said; but for the Imputation of His whole Surety-righteousness. And though these words in Him, that denote Beleevers Union with Him, as the ground of their Interest in His Righteousness, should not be asserted, to Import this Imputation: yet this words, that we might be made the Righteousness of God, will be a rock, whereupon Imputation may stand: for they hold this forth unto us, That as God made Christ sin by Imputation; so He maketh us righteous, yea the Righteousness of God, by Imputation.

Except. 5. The clear meaning is this, that God for that end made Christ sin, that is, an offering or Sacrifice for sin, for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him, that is, that we might be justified, or made a Society or Remnant of Righteous ones, after that peculiar manner of justification, which God hath established, through that Sacrifice of His Son. Ans. When Christ was made an offering for sin, the guilt of sin was laid upon Him, even the guilt of our sin. And if we be justified, or made a Society of justified ones, we must be made a Society of righteous ones: and if we be made a Society of Righteous ones, we must first have a Righteousness; seing we have not a Righteousness of our own, we must have a Righteousness made over to us: and seing we have this Righteousness made over to us, as being in Christ, it must be the Righteousness of God. So that though this Interpretation be very far fetched, and hath no countenance from the words, and destroyeth the cohesion of these words with the former, as also the reason, that is contained in them, adduced for confirmation of what was said, vers 19. yet it cannot destroy the doctrine of Imputation; but must contribute to its support, though a little more remotely.

He laboureth to give strength to this his Interpretation by alleiging. 1. That it is a frequent Scripture expression, to call the sin-offering, or the Sacrifice for sin, by the name of sin simply,as Exod. 29: 14. and 30: 10. Levit. 5: 6, 16, 18, 19, & 7: 1, 2, 7 & 9: 7. Ezek. 44: 27. & 45: 19. 23. Hos. 4: 8. Ans. Though it be true, that the Hebrew words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 do sometimes signify sin, & sometimes, an offering for sin: yet the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth alwayes signify sin in the New Test. and the 70 do not use this Greek word in the places cited, except Exod. 29: 14. & there, in the version that is in the Biblia Polyglot, Lond. It is in the Genitive case 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of sin: & the chald-paraph calleth it an Expiation Targ. Ionath. & Hierof. say, it is a sin, & so doth the persik version: & the Samaritan Version turneth it, that is for sin; & the Arabik, an Expiation. But further, though it were granted to be so taken here; yet our cause would hereby suffer no prejudice; but be rather confirmed, as was lately shown. And when the same word used to express a Sacrifice for sin, which signifieth sin it self, we may hence be confirmed in this, that that Sacrifice for sin hath guilt laid upon it, before it can be Sacrifice for sin; & it must be sin, in respect of this, before it be a due Sacrifice, or oblation for sin. And therefore Christ must have been sin, in law, by Imputation, or have the guilt of sin laid upon Him, before He could be a fit Sacrifice for sin.

He alleigeth. 2. To express a Number of justified or righteous persons by the abstract terme of Righteousness, is very agreable to the Scripture dialect, in other places, as poverty for poor, captivity for captives. Ans. (1) Yet no one instance can be given, where the word Righteousness hath this Import. (2) But how ever, as was said, these justified, or righteous persons, must be righteous, else they cannot make up such a company; as captivity can never signify a company of men, that are not captives; nor poverty a company of persons, that are not poor. So that this company of righteous ones must needs be righteous, and that in order to justification: & seing they have no Righteousness of their own, for in themselves they are ungodly, they must have a Righteousness by Imputation. (3) Why should they be called the Righteousness of God, according to this Interpretation? And how is the opposition here observed, betwixt Christs being made sin, & their being made the Righteousness of God in Him? But this man, by this Interpretation, transgresseth all lines of Correspondence.

He alleigeth 3. That addition of God imports, that that righteousness or justification, which beleevers obtaine by the Sacrifice of Christ, is not only Righteousness of Gods free donation, but of His special procurement and contrivement for them. Ans. (1) Righteousness and justification are not one & the same, how oft so ever he name them as Synonymous. (2) We grant, that the Righteousness & the Iustification, which Beleevers obtaine, are both Gods free gift & His contrivement: But notwithstanding hereof, yea so much the rather, is there a Righteousness imputed to them, & the Righteousness of Christ, who is God, and a Righteousness, which will be accepted of God, whose judgment is according to truth, as a sufficient ground, whereupon to pronounce such, as in themselves are ungodly, to be Righteous, & so to justifie them.

He alleigeth 4. That by the grammatical construction & dependance of the latter clause, our being made the Righteousness of God in Christ, upon the former, it is evident, that in the latter such an Effect must of necessity be signified, which may answere that cause, to wit, the death of Christ for us; & this is deliverance from the guilt & punishment of sin, not the Imputation of His active obedience. Ans. As Christs death could not be separated from His Obedience, which is thereby presupposed. His death being the Sacrifice of one, who is made under the law, and was obedient thereunto unto death, & that in the room & stead of His own; So the Imputation of Righteousness to us should not be separated from the Imputation of His Sufferings, both being necessarily required unto sinners, who had sinned, & yet remained under the obligation of the law, in order to their acceptance with God, and Justification.

He alleigeth 5. The Scriptures, when they speak of the Sufferings of Christ, as a cause, inrespect of justification, never ascribe any other effect unto them, but only, either the Remission of sins, deliverance from wrath, Redemption, or the like. Ans. As the Scriptures making so frequent mention of the Sufferings of Christ, do not exclude His Obedience; so neither do they exclude the Imputation of His Obedience, in order to our justification, and receiving a Right to glory: yea they make our being constitute Righteous, an Effect of His Obedience; & Righteousness or Righteous-making is accompanied with Justification. So that though the Scriptures speak sometimes more expresly of the Sufferings, & sometimes more expresly of the obedience of Christ, according to the exigence of the cause handled; yet both are inseparable, as a cause; & so is our Righteousness & Justification inseparable, as the full Effect.

CHAP. IX. Other passages of the N. T. briefly mentioned, which plead for this Imputation of Christs Righteousness.

THere are other passages of Scripture, beside these mentioned, in the preceeding chapter, and against which I finde no Exceptions made by Mr. Goodwine, in the forecited Book, which yet do with no small clearness and fulness of evidence plead for the truth, which we owne, to wit, The Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Beleevers, in order to their Justification. These we shall not insist upon, but only mentione in short; seing the full insisting upon them will not be necessary, after what is said, in the Explication & Vindication of foregoing passages.

1 Rom. 1: 17. For therein is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, the just shall live by faith. The Apostle is here giving a reason, proving the Gospel, whereof he was not ashamed to be a preacher of, to be the power of God unto Salvation, & that to every one that beleeveth, be he jew, or be he Gentile; viz. Because there is a Righteousness revealed therein, which sinners only stand in need of; & that Righteousness of God; that is, not only a Righteousness, which is devised by God, and is accepted in His sight; but an excellent Righteousness, even the Righteousness of one, who is God; and a Righteousness revealed for faith to lay hold on & receive, & that which faith leaneth to first and last, when it is weakest, and when it is strongest; that thereby the poor sinner, who formerly was dead by law, may live, as one reconciled to God. So that hence we see, Sinners have need of a Righteousness; and this Righteousness is the Righteousness of God, & is revealed in the Gospel, that it may be received by faith, and so Imputed & made over to the poor sinner, in order to his Justification, and acceptance with God.

2 Rom. 4: 11. And he (i. e. Abraham) received the signe of circumcision, a seal of the Righteousness of the faith, which he had, yet being uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also. Here is a Righteousness, and a Righteousness called the Righteousness of faith, because received & applied only by faith; and a Righteousness, whereof circumsion was appointed a seal, & granted to Abraham as such; and a Righteousness, which was imputed to Abraham, that he might be the Father of all them, that beleeve: for it is added, that Righteousness might be Imputed to them also: And this must be the same Righteousness, that was Imputed to Abraham, & the same way Imputed, & the same way received, that there migt be no essential difference betwixt the way of justification of Father and Children. The Aethiopick Version may serve for a commentary, and he had circumsion, a signe of his righteousness, which He gave him, and the signe thereof; that this might be made known unto him, that God justified Abraham by faith, when he was not at that time circumcised, that they may know, that they also are justified by faith.

3. Rom. 4: 24, 25. But for us also, to whom it shall be Imputed, if we beleeve on Him, who raised up tesus, our Lord, from the dead, who was delivered for our offences, & was raised againe for our justification. Here is some thing said to be Imputed, & this must be in order to justification: And this that is Imputed, cannot be faith it self, or our act of beleeving; for what is said to be Imputed, is promised to be Imputed upon condition of faith, or our beleeving on Him, who raised up Iesus our Lord. So that it must be the Righteousness of Christ, consisting in His Mediatory work, which He undertook & performed for His owne: for it is added, that He was delivered for their offences; that is, He was delivered unto the death, to make satisfaction for their sinnes; & He rose againe, that He might declare, He had given full Satisfaction; & that He might apply this Surety-righteousness of His, to the end, they might be justified. Socinus doth not understand this, & therefore de Servat. part. 4. p. 333 saith, It is most certaine, that the Apostle doth not speak of any Imputation of the righteousness of Christ; but assert, that the faith or credite, we give God, because He hath called Iesus Christ, our Head, from death to eternal life, shall be accounted unto us, in the place of righteousness; just as faith, whereby Abraham gave credite to the words of God, was Imputed to him for righteousness. But the Text hereby is manifestly perverted: for it saith, that some thing shall be imputed, if we beleeve, which can not be faith; but something distinct from faith, which is to be Imputed, upon condition of faith. And what can this be else, than the Surety-righteousness of Christ, who is here mentioned, as dying & riseing, in the place, and for 〈◊〉 good of His people, that they might be justified. And further, if it were faith it self, that were here said to be Imputed, in order to justification, the justified man should not be one, that is in himself ungodly, because he hath a Righteousness in himself; and he, who hath a Righteousness in himself, is not ungodly: & yet it is said, Rom. 4: 5. That God justifieth the ungodly. Againe, That, which is Imputed, must be a Righteousness without works, vers 6. but if faith it self be Imputed, a work is Imputed, and not a Righteousness without works: and this would also lay down a ground of boasting, & make the reward of debt, & not of grace, v. 14.

4. Rom. 10: 10. For with the heart man beleeveth unto Righteousness, & with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation. The Apostle had been before vers 4. telling us, That Christ was the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth; & thereafter he discriminateth the way of justification by the law and by the Gospel, under the Notion of a Righteousness which is of the law, and a Righteousness, which is of faith: & then more particularly he describeth the Righteousness of faith, or a Righteousness is had unto Salvation, in & through faith vers 9. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Iesus, & shalt beleeve in thine heart, that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved; which he proveth in the 10. vers, now cited; & therein sheweth, how by this beleeving that God hath raised the Lord Jesus from the dead, Salvation is brought about; viz. That by beleeving with the heart, a Righteousness is obtained & received: and this righteousness must be Christs, even His Surety-righteousness; for faith looketh on Him, as raised from the dead, & that by God, as having now received full Satisfaction from Him; & thereupon bringing Him, as it were, out of prison. And in the Text cited, we see, that by faith a Righteousness is received; or faith is the way unto the possession of a Righteousness, as Confession is the way unto Salvation, or as the actual possession of Salvation is had by Confession. And as Confession it self is not Salvation, but the way thereto, and the mean thereof; so faith it self is not the Righteousness, but the way thereunto, and the meane or medium thereof.

5. Gal. 2: 21. I do not frustrat the grace of God; for if Righteousness come by the law, Christ is dead in vaine. Whence we see, that a Righteousness must be had; and that this cannot be had by the law, or by our obedience to the law; but by Christ; & to deny this, is in plaine termes, to frustrat the grace of God, & to say, that Christ is dead in vaine. And if we look back to vers 16. & forward, we shall see, that the Apostle is speaking of justification by faith in opposition to the works of the law; that is, by faith in Jesus Christ, receiving a Righteousness, which He hath wrought in His estate of Humiliation.

6. Gal. 3: 21, 22. For if there had been a law given, which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law: but the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Iesus Christ might be given to them that beleeve. Whence we see, that Righteousness is required unto life, viz. the life of justification; and by whatever way life is had, by the same is Righteousness had: and that neither life, nor Righteousness is had by the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ: and both are held forth in a free promise, & given to the Beleever in Christ.

7. Gal. 4: 4, 5. But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a Woman, made under the law, to redeem them, that were under the law, that we might receive the Adoption of sones. Christ, we see, was made under the law, & that to redeem such, as were under the law, that they might be freed from what they were liable to by the law, and by being under the law, and withall receive the Adoption of sones, which necessarily taketh in His Obedience, as the Aethiopik Version explaineth it saying, He was begotten of a Woman, & was a doer of the command, in the law. And that His Sufferings are here included, is plaine from the one end assigned, that he might redeem them, who were under the law, or under the lawes curse. The end therefore here being twofold, viz. Deliverance from under the law, and receiving the Adoption of sones; the Cause must have a subtableness thereunto; and say, That this compleat Righteousness, comprehending both, must be Imputed unto us, for the ends mentioned.

8. Gal. 5: 5. For we through the Spirit, wait for the hope of Righteousness by faith. Whether we take here the hope of Righteousness, for justification, as the Aethiopick Version doth, translating the words thus, and we in the Holy Spirit, and in faith hope to be justified; to which also the scope may give some countenance; or for the Recompence of glory, which is the thing hoped for; that which we intend, will be equally confirmed; for if Justification be immediatly here spoken of, it is manifest, that hereunto a Righteousness is requisite, and that this Righteousness is had by faith; and so is not in our selves; and therefore must be the Righteousness of Christs, unto whom faith carrieth forth the soul, & of whom he spoke, vers 4. Saying, Christ is become of none effect unto you, who soever of you are justified by the law. If glory be here immediatly intended, we may see, that the Apostle, to perswade the Galatians, not to seek after a Righteousness by the law, tels them, what he & others did, and were resolved to do; to wit, how they ventured their whole Salvation on the truth he delivered; for they waited and looked for heaven and happiness (which is here called, hop, by a Metonymy) not by the works of the law (for heaven with them was not the hop of the law, or of the works of the law) but by the Righteousness of faith; that is, by & through that Righteousness, which is by faith; & therefore it is called the hope of Righteousness by faith; that is, that which they hope for, through the help of the Spirit, and expect in & through the Righteousness of Christ; which Righteousness is had by faith in Christ: & that this Righteousness is none else but the Righteousness of Christ, the following verse cleareth, where he saith; for in Iesus Christ, &c.

9. Philipp. 3: 8, 9. That I may win Christ, & be found in Him, not having mine own Righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith. This place is so clear and full, that by speaking much of it, we may rather darken it, than explaine it. We see, what was the maine thing Paul designed, in opposition to what he once intended and sought after: what he did formerly look upon, as gaine, and was hote in the pursuite of, he now had no better account of, than of as much loss & dung: yea he had no better esteem of all things beside Christ, & in this judgment, he persisted, accounting all but dung, that he might win Christ, & have Him for all his gaine. And what would he make of Christ? He would be found in Him, hid in Him, covered with Him, and united to Him. In opposition to this, he desireth not to be found in, or having on his own righteousness, which is of the law; thereby showing us, That it was the Righteousness of Christ, he desired to be clothed with, and found in; & therefore addeth; but that (i. e. that Righteousness) which is through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness which is of God by faith. The he was seeking, is the Righteousness of God, and which is of God by faith, and is had through the faith of Christ; and all this was said in opposition to the way, that the dogs, the evil workers, the concision, mentioned vers 2. were crying up, and following, viz. the observation of the law, in order to justification.

10. Hebr. 11: 7. By faith Noah became heir of the righteousness, which is by faith: Where there is a Metonymy, the Cause puth for the Effect; Righteousness put for that life, which is had by this righteousness: which sheweth, • hat a righteousness is necessarily required, unto the life of acceptance with God, and unto Salvation; and that this righteousness is not in or of our selves, but in and from another; for it is had by faith; and therefore is called, the Righteousness, which is by faith: and faith layeth hold on no Righteousness, but on that, which is Christs.

These and other passages, which might be mentioned, are evident proofs of the Truth, we are asserting, with all such, as are unprejudiced, in the point; beside all those passages, which prove justification not to be by the works of the law, but by faith; for they also confirme this truth, That in order to our justification and Salvation; we must be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ; which is that, which faith grippeth to & apprehendeth, that the shame of our nakedness may not appear, and we may be in case to stand before the Tribunal of God.

CHAP. X. Some Arguments for the Imputation of Christs Righteousness, Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwine.

THe truth concerning the Imputation of Christs Righteousness, hath been hitherto asserted from Scripture; & several of these passages have been vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. Goodwine, a maine adversary thereunto. For further clearing of the matter, we shall see what Exceptions the same man bringeth-in against the Arguments, which are made use of by the Orthodox for the truth asserted.

Argum. 1. If there be no standing in judgment before God, unless we be endued with perfect Righteousness; then must the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us, in our justification. But there is no standing for us in judgment before God, unless we be endued with a perfect Righteousness. Ergo, &c.

Against this he excepteth, pag. 192. Chap. 7. saying, That the consequence of the former proposition is not good. And so doth Bellar. answere de Iustific. lib. 2. cap. 7. So do also the Socinians. But let us hear his reasons. Remissin of sins (saith he) which is the purchase & procurement of the death of Christ, is a perfect Righteousness, & is every way able to bear us out in judgment. Ans. Remission of sins neither is, nor can be called righteousness; • or a pardoned person is no • the same with one, that hath kept the law: though by vertue of this pardon, he is freed from the punishment, due to the transgressours of the law; yet hath he no right to the reward, promised to the keepers of the law. (2) Remission of sins being the purchase of Christs death & Sufferings, cannot be had without the Imputation of the death & Sufferings of Christ unto the Beleever: & so hereby one halfe of the truth must be granted. But His Sufferings & Obedience going together & both making up one Mediatory & Surety-righteousness, performed by Christ in His estate of humiliation, both most be Imputed, & made over to the Beleever, to the end he may receive pardon, & right to Glory.

Arg. 2. He that is justified by the Righteousness of another, and not by his own, must needs be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed; because there is no righteousness to be found in any other, for the justification of a person, in the sight of God. But every man, that is justified, is justified by the righteousness of another, and not by his own. Ergo, &c.

He excepteth 1. The Major is false, because the passive obedience of Christ is the Righteousness of another: and men may be & are throughly & fully justified by the merite hereof, communicated to them in the free pardon of their sinnes; and so need not the imputation of His active obedience. Ans. (1) We plead not for the sole Imputation of Christs active obedience; but for the Imputation of all, that He did and suffered, for & in the room & stead of His owne. (2) Where are Christs meer Sufferings, as distinguished from His obedience, called a righteousness? or how can meer Sufferings, as such, or bearing of the punishment threatened by the law, be called a righteousness? doth not righteousness denote the conformity of actions unto the law? (3) When it is said, the merite of Christs passive obedience is communicated unto us, the meaning must be one of these two; either that it self is properly made over & imputed to us; or onely in its effect, free pardon of sinnes. If this latter be said, Then no other Imputation is granted, than what Socinians will yeeld unto: & how can it be said to be Imputed, as to its Effects, when it self is not Imputed, in order to the partaking of these effects? If the former be said, then there is something, that is in it self imputed, & not meerly in its Effects. And if Christs Passions & Sufferings be imputed, abstracted from His righteousness & Active obedience, they shall be justified without a righteousness. And it neither is, nor ever will be proved, that pardon of sinnes is the whole of justification; or that a pardoned man is, 〈◊〉 ipso, that he is pardoned, a righteous man; or that a pardoned man, meerly as such, hath right to the recompence of reward, promised to the fulfiller of the law.

Except 2. to the Minor, A man may be said (saith he) to be justified by the Righteousness of another, and not by his own, in a double sense, Either 1. by way of merite; and then it is true, that every one is justified by the Righteousness of another, that is, by the merite of the righteousness of another, or 2. by way of forme; & so it is altogether untrue; for that Righteousness, where with a man is formally made Righteous, is alwayes a mans own by donation & Possession. Ans. (1) When a man is justified by the merite of the Righteousness of another, that Righteousness of the other must be imputed to the justified person; or we have no other Imputation, than what Socinians yeeld to (2.) If the righteousness, whereby one is formally justified, be his owne by donation & possession, & no other possession be thereunto requisite, then we may be said to be formally justified by the righteousness of Christ: for we affirme, that Beleevers are possessed thereof by Gods free donation and Imputation: & thus the whole is granted; for nothwithstanding hereof, that same righteousness, which is made over to the Beleever, by free donation & Imputation, is Christs Inherently, & so is the righteousness of another. Whereby we see, that the members of this distinction thus explained, are not different. Yet, we must not think, that this righteousness of Christ is so given to us, as that it is inherent in us, & wrought in us, as Faith & Repentance are: for even Remission of sinnes, whereby he will have us formally justified, is not so in us, as Faith and Repentance are in us: And through Gods Imputation and Donation, the righteousness of Christ may be the Beleevers, when it is received by faith, as well as Remission of sinnes: for, to speak in his own language, that which is given unto man by God, may truely and properly be called his own. (3) That remission of sins is formal justification, will never be proved: and seing he will have Remission of sins to be the pure Effect of Christs Sufferings and death; so must justification be: and then, why saith the Apostle, Rom. 4: 25. Who was delivered (viz. to Sufferings and death) for our offences, and raised againe for our justification?

Arg. 3. If Beleevers have a true and real communion with Christ, then is his Righteousness theirs by imputation. But the former is true, &c. It may be, he proposeth the Argument, in such a mode & way, as may be most to His own advantage; for who argueth thus, he nameth not. Yet it is true, that the Union, which beleevers have with Christ, is the ground or their communion with Him in all things, which He was made or God to be for them, & which their necessity called for; among which His whole Surety-righteousness doth challenge a chiefe p • ace. Nor would I argue from the Union & communion in general; but from such a particular Union and communion, as is darkly shadowed forth unto us in the Scriptures, by such and such similitudes; such as the Union betwixt Man and Wife, who are one flesh, as Christ and Beleevers are one Spirit; as the Union betwixt the principal debtor and the Cautioner; and betwixt the publick Head and Representative, and the Members represented; as betwixt the Redeemer and the Redeemed and the like. And to argue from such an Union, for such a peculiar end, to such a communion, as we here plead for, may stand against all his Exceptions, pag. 195. &c. Which are these following.

Except 1. The Major wants truth, because a true and real communion with Christ may stand, without His active obedience being made theirs by Imputation. There is a real Union and communion between the head and the feet, in the same Natural body; yet is not the braine, or the proper functions & operations of the head, made the braine or functions of the feet. So between the Husband and the Wife; yet is not the holiness, strength and Wisdom of the Husband made over to the Wife by Imputation. And. Similitudes go not alwayes upon foure • eet: and as these Similitudes come short of expressing the Union and Communion, that is betwixt Christ and Beleevers; so they are not appos •• ely here applied: for neither is the end of the Union and Communion between the Head and the Feet, that the braines and operations of the Head should be communicate to the feet; but that the head should use its proper operations & functions for the good of the feet: nor do the feet stand in need of any other thing from the head. And thus also is it in the other Similitude, as to the particulars Instanced: yet in other particulars, this last Similitude will come neerer to our business; for though the Husbands Wisdom, Holiness or Strength (which are not communicable) be not imputable to the Wife; yet his Honour & Riches can be & are imputed or communicated: for, though before the Mariage, the Woman was in a base condition, yet being matched with on honorable person, she partaketh of his honour; and being, before the marriage, a person in debt, her Husbands riches are so imputed to her, that she may be & is made thereby solvendo, and freed from her Creditors pursuit, and her Husband and she becometh one person in law, & he becometh chargable with her debt, & obliged to pay it So that as there is an Imputation, or a real devolving by law of the debt of the Wife upon the Husband; so his making payment & Satisfaction for the same, is by law accounted hers; & she is thereupon freed from all charge & trouble from her creditours.

Except 2. The Major wanteth reason; for there is no coloure of truth in it, that that Union and Communion, which beleevers have with Christ, should of necessity draw after it the Imputation of His active obedience; so that this obedience of His should become their formal Righteousness; more than the Imputation of His Wisdom, Power and Glory. Ans. (1) If by formal righteousness he understand with Papists, inherent holiness, or righteousness, it is nothing to the purpose; for we assert no such Imputation. (2) That the whole of Christs Surety-righteousness be so imputed to beleevers, as that it becometh theirs; so that they, meerly upon the account thereof, and clothed therewith, may be and are repute and held to be persons just, in the account of God, & so be justified in His sight, is the thing we assert: and that this doth necessarily flow from Beleevers Union with Him by faith, and is a part of the Communion they have with Him, and that upon a double account, First because He became Surety, and undertook their debt; & so was made under the law, and obeyed and Suffered all that it could have demanded of them; for this end and purpose, that what He thus did & suffered, as a publick person or Surety, might stand for them, & be accepted on their behalfe. Secondly because their case and necessity called for this, in order to their justification and Acceptance with God. (3) His Wisdom and power are other waves improven, and laid forth to their advantage, according to the Nature of the thing, and necessity.

Arg. 4. If there be no other principal End, Reason, or Necessity, why Christ should fulfill the law; but only that His obedience thereunto might be imputed to us for Righteousness, in our Justification, then is not the Imputation thereof to be denied. But the former is true. Ergo, &c. And sure, if Christs obedience to the law, was not necessary in respect of Himself, it must have been performed upon the account of Beleevers; and that principally and mainely for their Justification and Salvation; and therefore for this end, that it might be imputed unto them. Against this, pag. 197. &c. He,

Except. There are diverse other ends, reasons and necessities to be assigned hereof. Ans. This is not the maine thing, that is here denied; nor will all this help our Adversary, unless it can be shown, that those other Ends, which we deny not, are prejudicial unto, & inconsistent with that, which we look upon, as the chiefe, & as peculiar to Him, as Mediator & Surety, standing in the room of His people, who did mainely stand in need of this. Let us now see the particular ends he toucheth.

1. One reason (saith he) might be, to procure the greater Authority & deeper reverence to the Doctrine, which he taught, Matt. 7: 28. Ans. (1) The Socinians, upon the same account, deny, that His death was any proper Satisfaction for Beleevers: and if this be a weak argument in their mouth, it cannot be strong in the mouth of our present Opposites. (2) This End is but subordinat unto, and no way inconsistent with the principal End, which we have mentioned. (3) Though Christs Miracles had a more direct tendency to procure this Reverence, than His Holy life; yet neither the one, nor the other were peculiar to Him alone: for both the Miracles, wrought by others, such as Prophets and Apostles, and their holy life, had a tendency to procure Reverence and Beleef to their Doctrine: And himself confirmeth this in the following words, saying. It is a truth of general acknowledgment, that the holiness, uprightness and unblameableness of the lives of Teachers have a powerful Influence into the consciences of Men, to render them more observant & awfull in their attention to the things, which are taught by them, citeing Mat. 2 • : 32. Ioh. 5: 35. & 8: 46. 1 Tim. 4: 12. 2 Tim. 3: 14. (4) We are to consider Christ, as Mediator and Surety, in what He did, as well, as in what He Suffered, in His state of Humiliation: for to us a Childe was born, and to us a Son was given; He was made under the law for us, that he might redeem such, as • ere under the law, that they might receive the Adoption of Sones. Esai. 9: 5. Gal. 4: 4, 5.

2. This active obedience of Christ, (saith he) was serviceable to that same great End, whereunto our righteousness and obedience are subservient, viz. the glory of God, & the advancement of His Kingdom, Ioh. 8: 49. & 7: 18. Ans. And was not His death & Sufferings also subservient unto this great end? Will it therefore follow, that He died not, to make Satisfaction to justice, for the sinnes of His people? And if this cannot follow, what ever Socinians imagine; how shall it, or can it hence follow, that His obedience was not to satisfie the demands of the law, and to procure the reward to His people? Is there any Inconsistency betwixt His fulfilling the law, as Mediator and Surety, in the room of His people; & His doing it for the glory of God, & the advancement of His Kingdom?

3. Another en • (saith he) is the exemplariness of it. Ans. This is but another arrow, taken out of the quiver of the Socinians; & is of no force to weaken our argument; seing a subordinat & less principal end doth not destroy a more principal end. Was He not exemplary to us in His death & Sufferings? shall we therefore say, That there was no satisfaction for sins intended thereby? And what is there here peculiar unto Christ, as Lord Mediator, seing the lives of other Saints are also exemplary?

4. It had (saith he) an excellent Importance to draw to Imitation. Ans. This is the same with the preceeding, and deserveth no further answere.

5. It was (saith he) a meanes of continueing His person in the love and complac • ncy of His Father, which was a thing of absolute necessity, for the carrying on of the great work of Redemption: for if He had once miscarried, who should have mediated for Him? Ioh. 15: 10. & 8: 29. Ans. As to His Person, He was God equal with the Father, in power and Glory: It were therefore blasphemy once to suppose, that His person stood in need of this, for any such end: or to suppose, that He could have failed, as to any act of obedience, & thereby have displeased God. Wherefore His obedience being the obedience of one, who was & is God over all, blessed for ever, it could not be necessary to Himself unto any such end. Therefore it behoved to be wholly for us, for whom He was made under the law; as He was given to us, and borne for us.

6. It was (saith he) of absolute necessity to qualify & fit the Sacrifice for the Altar, and render Him a person meet by His death and Sacrifice of Himself, to make attonement for the world, and to purge and take away the sin of it. Ans. Shall we think that He, who was God, was not a fit enoug Sacrifice for the world; but that He must be made fit and prepared by acts of obedience? And as for His Humane Nature, which was no person, but did subsist in the Divine Nature, being assumed into the subsistence thereof, was it not sufficiently fitted to be a Sacrifice, by its personal union with the Godhead? was it not thereby Holy Harmless & undefiled & separat from sinners, which is all that the Apostle requireth, Heb. 7: 26? Was not the Humane Nature personally united unto the Godhead, from the very first moment of conception? The holiness then, that consisteth in Acts of Actual obedience, was not required unto this Union: and after this Union it was not possible, that He could sinne: as it is not possible, that the glorified now in Heaven can break the Lawes, that we break here, while on earth; and yet it will not follow, that they are under the same particular obligations to particular acts of commanded duties, that we stand under: So nor was Christ, as to Himself, under the obligation of the p • rticular duties of the law, to which He willingly submitted Himself, & gave obedience; but all this was for us: Nor was this necessarily required to make His Sacrifice Holy; for His Humane Nature, being once united, to the Divine, could not otherwayes be but holy and without sin; and so a sinless and holy Sacrifice. And withall we would take notice, that the Actions of the Mediator, were the Actions of the person, and not of either of the Natures alone; & therefore must not be looked upon, as the Actions of a meer man. So that His acts of obedience, were the acts of obedience of God man, or of that person, that was God. He needeth not then tell us, that the Absolute holiness and Righteousness of the humanity it self was of necessary concurrence unto His obedience: for we grant it, and this flowed from the hypostatical union: but that, which we deny, is, That there was an Holiness and Righteousness in acts of outward obedience to the law requisite thereunto; as if the humane Nature, by vertue of the hypostatical union, had not been holy and harmless, untecedently unto those outward acts of obedience; and so had not been a sinless and holy Sacrifice, if He had been offered up in His Infancy, or before He was in capacity to do any commanded acts. He needeth not say (as he doth pag. 204.) that we conceive, that Christ-man might have been righteous without doing the works of Righteousness, which is all one, as to say, that He might have been Righteous, though He had transgressed; for not to keep the law, in those, to whom the law is given, is nothing else, but to transgress. For we neither do, nor need assert any such thing: for by vertue of the hypostatical union, He was Righteous, and could not transgress, or do any thing contrary to what was imposed upon Him: but we say, that by vertue of this union, as to Himself, the Humane Nature was not under the law, as we are; but He was under the law, that He might fulfill it for others; & not to fit and qualifie Him to be a meet Sacrifice, as if for this His Humane Nature had not been meet enough before. To this he saith, pag. 205. Let this Supposition be admitted, that Christ had suffered in the womb, and that this Suffering of His had been fully Satisfactory; yet had He been as perfectly righteous, in this case; and consequently had kept the law perfectly, as now He hath done; for the law requireth of Infants, during their Infancy, nothing but holiness of Nature. I Ans. (1.) This is enoug to confirme what we say, viz. That all His after actual obedience was not necessary to this end. (2) And beside though this holiness of Nature was conforme to the law upon the matter, yet it was not a formal obedience unto the law, if we speak of Him in reference to Himself; for the Humane Nature had this Holiness by vertue of the Hypostatical union: and Christ, when the Humane Nature was first conceived, was God-man; and the person was under no law; & so was not under the obligation of any such law; but was made under the law, as Mediator; and so, for us, and not for himself; nor it is any more to advantage, to except againe & say, that His meaning is not, that there was an absolute necessity, that he should keep the law, upon the same termes, every wayes, which now He hath done, as that He should performe the same Individual acts of obedience, or the same number of acts, in case He had been called to suffer any white sooner: but that untill the very Instant, in which He should suffer, whether it were sooner, or later, He should in all things submit himself unto the good pleasure of God. For it doth hence sufficiently appear, That all his after obedience, in all these particular acts, was not necessary to fit Him, as a Sacrifice; & so could not be necessary for Himself. And therefore seing He had been a sufficiently holy Sacrifice, had He been offered up before the actual performance of these commanded duties in the law, it is manifest, that these duties were not required unto the end alleiged: but that, as He was made under the law for us; so all His actual obedience to the law was for us, and not for himself. The Excepter, in end, perceiving the Invalidity of all his own discourse here, closeth the matter thus, pag. 206. But however suppose this necessity or use of the Righteousness of Christ could not be sufficiently cleared; yet since there are many others of undeniable evidence, the position so much contended for; to wit, that the Godhead of Christ sufficiently qualified Him for such a Sacrifice, as He was, makes nothing at all for the Imputation of His Righteousness. Therefore we shall not trouble either our selves, or our Reader any further with untying an Impertinent knot. What these others of undeniable evidence are, we have not yet seen: and, sure, this one ground is sufficient to demonstrat, that his obedience to the law, in all points, was not for himself, nor to qualifie him, as a Sacrifice; but for us: and therefore it must be imputed, & made over to us and become our Righteousness, whereby and whereupon, together with his Sufferings, made over to us also, we are to be justified and accepted of God, as Righteous; and not only have pardon of sinnes, but also a Right to the Inheritance, and to the reward promised upon obedience.

7. As Christ (saith he, p. 206.) was a Sacrifice; so was He and yet is, & is to be for ever, Hebr. 7: 27. &c. An High-Priest; and that Righteousness of His we speak of, qualifieth Him, that is, contributeth to His qualification for Priesthood, as well as it did for His Sacrifice. Ans. Seing it cannot be proved, that his actual obedience to the law (which is the Righteousness we are here speaking of) was necessary to qualifie him to be a Sacrifice here on earth; much less can it be proven, that it was necessary to qualifie him for his Priest-hood in heaven. And all these qualifications mentioned, Heb. 7: 26, He had, before that actual obedience was either performed, or he in a capacity to performe it: & therefore his actual obedience was not necessary thereunto.

8. That holy pleasure (saith he) and contentment, which Christ himself took in these works of Righteousness, may be looked upon, as one considerable end, Ioh. 4: 34. Ans. So took He pleasure and delight to Suffer: He had a Baptisme to be baptized with, and how was he straitned, or pained, till it was accomplished, Luk. 12: 50. Shall we then say, that therefore his death was not to make Satisfaction for the sins of his own? These are but Socinian Evasions, that have no force to weaken the truth, in the least. And thus, notwithstanding of all his Exceptions, this Argument abideth in its strength. We proceed to another.

Arg. 5. If we be debtors unto the law, and that not only in matter of punishment, but in perfection of obedience also; then did Christ • ot only suffer death for us, that we might be delivered from the Curse; but also fulfilled the law, that so we may be reputed to have fulfilled the law in him, or by the Imputation of His fulfilling of the law to us. Otherwise the law should yet remaine to be fulfilled by us. But the former is true. Ergo, &c. The force of the Argum. lyeth here, that we were debtors unto the law, not only as to the punishment, which we had deserved by transgression; but also as to perfect conformity thereunto: and therefore coming in our law-place, & taking on our debt, did not only undergoe the punishment for us, but did also yeeld perfect obedience: And this compleet Surety-righteousness of Christ, consisting both in doing and Suffering, must be imputed unto us, and reckoned upon our score, to the end, we may be justified and Accepted of God, as Righteous; & have Right not only to Impunity, but also to the Reward, promised to the obedient.

He excepteth p. 208. &c. Against the Minor, upon these grounds. 1. If the meaning (saith he) be, that we, who are beleevers, are debtors to the law in perfection for our justification; it is false. But as for these, that beleeve not in Christ, it may be true, in this sense; that if they mean to be justified, and to escape the punishment, otherwise than by Christ, they must keep the whole law. Ans. (1) We say not, that Beleevers, who are already justified, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, are debtors unto the law, for this end: but that ere they could be justified and accepted of God, as Righteous, they were obliged to perfect obedience, as well as to suffer the penalty: and seing this was impossible unto them, their Surety was to do it, and he did it, and what he did was imputed unto them, and reckoned upon their score. (2) As for Unbeleevers (ans such are all by Nature) seing it is confessed, that they ere under this obligation, then it is necessary, that before they be justified, either they, or a Surety for them, must satisfy both these demands of the law. And though none be now under a command, to give perfect obedience unto the law, to the end, they may be justified; but such as hear the Gospel are commanded to beleeve in Christ, and to accept of him by faith, that they may have an Interest in his Righteousness, & so be justified: yet that taketh not away this Imputation, but establisheth it rather; because Christ having satisfied all the demands of the law, both in doing and in Suffering, and that as a Surety, Head, Redeemer and publick Person, by beleeving in him, they receive this, and have it made over unto them.

2. If the proposition (saith he) meaneth, that Beleevers are debtors of perfect obedience to the law, in a way of Sanctification & thankfulness. This is true, but it concerneth not the question. Ans. Nor do we speak of this, knowing that it is nothing to the present question: But this we say, That all men by nature, and so Beleevers, before they be justified by faith in Christ, are not only under the Curse, because of sin; but are under the demand of the law, or the commanding power of the law, requiring perfect obedience, in order to the reward: And that therefore both these demands of the law must be satisfied by their Surety, and the same must be imputed to them and reckoned upon their score, before they can be looked on, as free of the Curse, and as heirs of the Reward, promised to full & perfect obedience.

3. We are not (saith he) therefore exempted from keeping the law, no not in respect of justification it self, because we have transgressed it, but because 1. having once transgressed it, we are utterly uncapable of such an observation, whether personally, or by imputation, which may amount to justification, or exemption from punishment. 2. That relaxation or release from an observation of, or dependance upon the law by justification accrueth unto us by meanes of our dependance upon Christ for justification, through his death, Rom. 7: 4. Ans. (1) If our transgression of the law doth not exeem us from the obligation to keep it perfectly, in order to justification, then, ere we be justified, that obligation must be satisfied, as well, as the obligation to punishment; and so the law must be perfectly keeped, as well as its penalty suffered: And seing we our selves can do neither, our Surety must do it for us, & that must be accepted for us, & imputed to us. (2) Nor can it be said, that our uncapableness to keep it, so as may amount to justification, doth exeem us from the obligation, or destroy the lawes power to require that of us; more than our uncapableness to suffer the penalty, so as may amount to a justification, doth or can exeem us from the obligation to suffer, or destroy the lawes power to require the penalty of us. It is true, that no man now is called of God to endeavoure this way of justification: yet all such, as live without the Gospel have not the better & more sure way, through faith in Christ made known unto them. The obligation to perfect obedience remaining after the transgression, saith, that, ere a man, that was both obliged to Suffer, and to yeeld perfect obedience, can be justified, the law, as to both these demands, must be satisfied, & the Sureties Satisfaction to both must be reckoned upon his score. (3) Justification & Exemption from punishment are not one & the same, in our case, more than pardon & Righteousness. (4) The Exemption, that accrueth to beleevers, saith not, that there was no obligation upon mankind both to suffer and to obey, in order to justification, anteriour to Christs doing both.

4. God never required (saith he pag. 210.) of any man, but only of Christ, both exactness of obedience to the law, & subjection to punishment, due to the transgression of the law conjunctim, but divisim only. He that shall perfectly keep the law, is not bound to suffer the penalty. Ans. (1) Then our transgressing of the law should exeem us from the obligation to obedience, contrare to what was granted in the First Exception. (2) Though he, who perfectly keepeth the law, is obnoxious to no punishment; yet he, who breaketh the law (as we all did in Adam, beside our daily transgressions) is obnoxious to punishment; & this obnoxiousness to punishment no more dissolveth his obligation to obedience, than his transgression was able to do. And therefore we are all, considered in our Natural state, obliged to both conjunctim; for we are borne sinners, and yet born under the obligation of keeping the law of God. (3) Gods requiring both of Christ, who was Mediator & Surety, saith, that both were required of us: for what was required of him, as Surety, was required of the principal debtors.

5. He saith, In case a Man hath transgressed the law, & hath suffered (whether by himself, or by some other for him) the full punishment threatned, he is no further a debtor unto the law, neither in point of punishment, nor of obedience: for the punishment is of equal consideration to the law, with the most absolute conformity: and as no man can be obliged to fulfill the law twice for his justification; so neither is it reasonable to conceive, that he, who hath suffered the full penalty, that being as satisfactory to the law, as the exactest obedience, should be still bound to the observation of the law. Ans. When the law promiseth life to the fulfillers, as well as threatneth death to the transgressours, the suffering of death for the transgression, is not such a fulfilling of the law, as hath the promise of life annexed to it: Devils, though now suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, the death threatned, yet cannot be said to be fulfilling the law, or obeying unto life; nor can they be said to be justified, nor to be suffering any thing, in order thereunto. In order therefore to our justification & Acceptance with God, as heirs of the life promised, who were both obnoxious to punishment, & also obliged to give perfect obedience to the law, the law as to both, must be satisfied. Nor can we say, that the punishment of Devils is of equal consideration to the law, with the conformity yeelded thereunto by the confirmed Angels. And though the suffering of the penalty in lawes penal or such as promise no reward unto the obeyers, may be said to be of equal consideration with the keeping of the law; yet this cannot be said in lawes, which promise a Reward to the observers, as well as threaten a punishment to transgressours: Nor can the man, that suffereth the punishment, suppose to the full, that is threatened in the law, be said to have fulfilled the law, and to have deserved the reward promised to obeyers. (2) Though Christ hath both obeyed the law, & suffered the punishment; yet the law is not twice fulfilled, but once, because, as was granted, such as were sinners and obnoxious to punishment, were also obliged to yeeld perfect obedience: for transgression did not destroy this obligation. As when a man is punished for breach of a law, that not only required obedience under such a penalty, but also promised a reward to the observers, when he is put to performe what was commanded, ere he can have the promised reward, he is not put to fulfill the law twice: for his punishment was but Satisfaction to one part of the law, or to threatning; but it was no satisfaction of the law, as to the reward promised.

Arg. 6. If there be no justification, without a perfect Righteousness, & no such Righteousness to be found, but the Righteousness of Christ performed to the law, then of Necessity this Righteousness must be imputed to us unto justification. But the former is true. Ergo, &c. The ground of this Argument is, that justification is the pronouncing of a person righteous, & justification being Gods act, the person justified must be righteous, ere God can judge & pronounce him to be such; for the judgment of God is alwayes according to truth; & no person having a righteousness of his own, all that are justified must have a Righteousness imputed to them; and there is no Righteousness that can be said to be imputed, but the Surety righteousness of Christ, and particularly, in satisfying all the demands of the law.

He Excepteth, pag. 211. against the Minor 1. That however it be true, that justification cannot take place, without a perfect Righteousness, being nothing else than the making of a man perfectly Righteous: yet a Righteousness consisting determinatly of such a tale of righteous acts, as Christ performed unto the Moral law, is not absolutely necessary: for in reference to the jewes, there must have been righteous acts performed unto the ceremonial law also. Ans. (1) Justification is not the making of a man perfectly righteous; but the judicial pronouncing & declaring of a man to be so, through the Righteouseness of Christ, imputed to him & received by faith. (2) A perfect Righteousness, consisting in compleat obedience the law is required: we urge not such a determination of acts, in number & tale to the moral, or to the Ceremonial law: only we assert the necessity of a full obedience to the Rule of Righteousness, which God prescribed unto men, & this was the Moral law: Though, as to the jewes there were other prescriptions proposed, than were to others of the world; yet these same prescriptions, consisting in Ceremonials, or in Judicials, were reduced to the Moral law, & were enjoined thereby, so long as they stood in force, and were not repealed by the Supream Law giver.

Except 2. Neither is it so absolutly true, that there is no perfect Righteousness to be found, beside Christs. There is a Righteousness in the law as absolut & compleat. And it is much more probable, that if God Imputes a legal Righteousness unto Men in justification, He fournisheth them this way out of the law. Ans. But what is that Righteousness in the law? doth the law hold forth any Righteousness, but perfect obedience? and how can God furnish them with this, but by Imputing unto them the perfect obedience of Christ, seing He hath not so ordered matters, as they shall be in case, while here, perfectly to keep the law themselves. (2) He remitteth us to what he said formerly in the same Treatise; and in that place, he maketh this compleat Righteousness to consist in Remission of sinnes. And yet, it is certaine, that Remission is no obedience; nor is it a Righteousness held forth in the law; not is it any Satisfaction to the law: yea, it agreeth noth with common sense, nor with Reason to say, that by Remission of sins men are made formally Righteous.

Except. 3. That perfect Righteousness, wherein justification consisteth, and where with men are made formally Righteous, when they are justified, is nothing else but Remission of sins, Rom. 4: 6, 7. Ans. Remission of sins is not a perfect Righteousness. This hath no countenance, from Scripture, nor from Reason, or common sense. Who ever thought, or said, that a pardoned Thiefe or Murderer was a Righteous man? or that his pardon made him formally Rightheous, and an observer of the law? Though thereupon he be freed from the penalty, or from the punishment threatned in the law against such transgressours; yet is he nor thereupon either made or declared to be Righteous; but his pardon is a virtual declaration, that he is not Righteous, but a Transgressour. How that place, Rom. 4: 6, 7. is perverted, when adduced to give countenance to this fiction, is declared already.

He addeth, pag. 215. two Reasons for this: the first is, That remission of sins is equivalent unto, and virtually containeth & comprehendeth in it, the most absolute and entire obedience unto the law. Ans. Remission of sins, as such, is so far from being equivalent to this, or from comprehending this in it, that it is a plaine declaration of the contrary: for where entire obedience is, there Remission hath no place, and Remission must presuppose a Transgression. The next is, Because (swaith he) it hath all these great and high privileges annexed to it, and depending upon it, which a Righteousness, most strickly so called, could have, as the Love, Favour, acceptation and approbation of God. Ans. If we speak of Remission of sinnes, in it self, and abstractly considered, this is also false: for though a pardoned man be freed from the punishment, due to Transgressours; yet, as meerly pardoned, he hath no right to Reward, promised to the perfect observers of the law: Nothwithstanding hereof, we grant that the man pardoned of God hath all these high and great privileges; but not by vertue of his meer pardon; but because there is a Righteousness, imputed to him, upon which these privileges do depend, and Exemption from punishment dependeth upon his pardon.

He hath two other Reasons elsewhere, pag. 5, 6. to this purpose; as 1. That Remission includeth the acknowledgment of the observation of the whole law, even as the Imputation of the law fulfilled, necessarily includeth the non-imputation of sin. Ans. Though in our justification, this might be granted to be true, upon the matter, because there is an Imputation of the whole Surety-righteousness of Christ together; and the one part is not separated from the other; so that the one consequently inferreth the other. But when it is thus reasoned against the Imputation of the one, the Inference here must be understood of a formal Inference, and so it is false, that Remission includeth the acknowledgment of the observation of the whole law; for it only includeth the non-Imputation of guilt, notwithstanding that the law was broken: yea, as is said, it manifestly supposeth the contrary, viz. That the law was not perfectly observed, for had the law been perfectly observed, there had been no place for pardon. Moreover, Remission as such, giveth no Right to the reward, promised unto perfect obedience; but only impunity from the punishment, threatned for disobedience. 2. saith he. He cannot be said to have all this sinnes fully forgiven, who is yet looked vpon, as one that hath transgressed, either by Omission, or Commission, & intended to be dealt with all as such. Ans. Though he, whose sinnes are fully forgiven, cannot be dealt with, as one guilty of sin, that is, as one liable to the punishment; yet he may be looked on, as one, that was guilty, and so did not give full and perfect obedience: and therefore, though he cannot be dealt with as a Transgressour; yet neither can he be dealt with, upon the account of his Remission, as one that hath yeelded perfect obedience, & did never transgress. Wherefore, seing he cannot be looked upon, as one that never transgressed, he cannot be looked upon, as one that hath a perfect Righteousness, and so, a Right to the Reward. The similitudes taken from a phisician, restoreing his patient to health, by recovering him from his sickness; and from the Sun, in one act expelling darkness & bringing in light, which are here adduced for illustration, have no force to prove any thing here, in regard, there is no correspondence in all points, betwixt Matters Natural, & Matters meerly Moral, or Political. There is no Medium betwixt light and darkness, or the habite and its privation; but there is a Medium here betwixt Transgressing of the law, & perfect obedience to the law unto the end, Adam, so long as he stood, was no Transgressour; yet he had not then given perfect obedience to the end, according to the Covenant. So there is a Medium betwixt Freedom from the Penalty, & the Right to the Reward, as was shown above.

Arg. 7. If do this & live, be an everlasting Rule of God, & which shall never be dissolved, then must the Active obedience of Christ be imputed unto Men, in justification, that so they may be said to have done this, and so live. But the former is true, Ergo, &c. That these words, do this and live, containe a determination & constitution of the Lord, as unalterable, as these words, That day thou eats, thou shalt die, cannot well be denied: and therefore, if because of this latter, no man can be saved, unless their Surety die for them; so because of that former, no man can have right to the reward, unless his Surety performe perfect obedience. And as the one is imputed to the Beleever, so must the other be Imputed also, in order to his compleat Salvation.

Against this he excepteth, pag. 216. &c. thus, In this sense, I grant, that do this and live, is an everlasting Rule, that is, it is, hath been, and shall be everlastingly true, that who so ever shall fulfill the law perfectly, shall live. But not in this sense, that it is the only perpetual and standing Rule, whereby and according to which, men must be justified, and so saved: for in this sense, it neither is, nor ever was, nor ever shall be a rule of God: for God hath alwayes had, and for ever will have another rule for the justification of men. Ans. (1.) Was it not a Rule of life & justification to Adam, in the state of Innocency? was he not, according to that Covenant, where in he stood, to purchase the good promised by his doing? It may be, the Excepter thinketh, with the Socinians, that no more was promised to Adam, than what he had in possession. (2.) We do not assert it, as a standing rule, whereby we should now expect to be justified; but we say, that it being a constitution of God's, as well as the other, viz. That day thou eats, thou shalt die, It must be satisfied, as well as the other. And as the rule of faith taketh not away Christs suffering of death, according to what was threatened in the law; so nor doth the law of faith take away His obedience, according to the command of the law: and as Christs paying down of the Penalty was necessary for our freedom from death; so His giving full obedience to the law is necessary to our life; though, as was said, we need not nicely thus distinguish, save to shew the necessity of the Imputation of both.

Arg. 8. That Righteousness, which God accepteth on our behalfe, is the Righteousness imputed to us in justification. But the Righteousness of Christ is that Righteousness, which God accepteth on our behalf, Ergo, &c.

He excepteth, pag. 217. 1. Denying the Major, because God may and doth accept that for us, or on our behalf, which yet He need not impute to us; at He accepted of Abrahanis prayer, in the behalf of Ismael; & of the prayer of Elisha for the Shumanites Son, and yet neither was imputed to the other. Ans. But all this, & a thousand Instances of the like nature, can evince nothing; for the Argument speaketh of what is accepted of God, in order to justification, as the ground and meritorious cause thereof; which the Instances adduced come not nigh unto. He addeth, In like manner, these, in whose behalf, Christs Sufferings were accepted, receive an unspeakable benefite & blessing by them; but this operats nothing to the Inference of the Imputation pleaded for; that is, that God must look upon these Sufferings of Christ, as if they had personally endured them, on whose behalf they are accepted. Ans. Then it seemeth not only is the Imputation of Christs active obedience denied; but also the Imputation of His death and Sufferings; and no more is granted, than what Socinians will yeeld unto. (2) The Imputation, we plead for, is not such as maketh God to look upon these Sufferings of Christ, as if Beleevers had personally endured them: but such, as maketh God to look upon them, as the Sufferings of Christ, as Surety, Head & Publick person, in the room & stead of His chosen ones; which Sufferings & payment of the Penalty by the Surety, being made over unto, & reckoned upon the score of Beleevers, they are, upon the account thereof, accepted & dealt with, as if they themselves had so Suffered and Satisfied, in their own persons.

2. He distinguisheth thus, If by the Righteousness of Christ the proposition meaneth, precisely that obedience, which He exhibited to that general & common law, whereunto all Men are obliged, considered apart from His obedience to that particular law of Mediator, given to Himself alone, so it is false. If by Righteousness be here meant that obedience of Christ, commonly called passive, or both active and passive together; so it may be true: but then the other will be found tardy. Ans. (1) Christs obedience to that general law, by which all men were obliged, did as well belong to His law of Mediation, and was comprehended under it, as His giving up Himself to Suffering & to death: for as Mediator He was made under the law, as well as suffered the Curse. (2) The Minor proposition is to be understood of the whole Surety-righteousness, consisting not only in Suffering; but also in actual obedience to the law: & when this is granted, the whole we seek is granted. Neither is the former proposition found tardy, as appeareth from what is said; & the Syllogisme is good, and no Paralogisme, what ever he supposeth.

Arg. 9. If Christ were a publick Person, standing in the place or stead of all those that should beleeve in Him; then all that He did and Suffered, is to be looked upon & reputed by God, as done & Suffered by these, & consequently are Imputed to them. But the former is true, Ergo, &c. Sure, if Christ was a publik person, standing in the place and room of the chosen ones, all that He did, as such a person, or as a Surety, as to that wh •• h law and justice required of them, & they were obliged unto, must needs be imputed unto them, & reckoned upon their score; and they must be dealt with upon the account thereof, as if all had been done & suffered by themselves. We do not say, that all He did & Suffered, is or must be Imputed: but that all, which He did and suffered, in Satisfaction of the law, and in payment of that, which we were liable unto, & stood under the obligation of, is and must of necessity be imputed, to the end we may be deliver •• from under the former obligation.

He excepteth, pag. 220. &c. 1. The publickness of Christs person, or His standing in the place of those, that should beleeve, is no sufficient ground to build this Inference upon, That therefore all He did & suffered, are looked upon by God, as done and suffered by them; such as His conception, Birth, &c. Ans. We have obviated this already, by showing, that the Major is to be limited to, & understood of those things only, which the law required of us, & which we were under the obligation of, and were debtors to do and suffer, amongst which none of the particulars mentioned, and many moe such-like, can be reckoned. His after rambling discourse upon this mistake, is not worth the noticeing: And who seeth not, how vaine it is for him to say, that then God should look upon men, as having redeemed the world: For, as the law did not require this of us; so to speak thus, destroyeth all acts of Sutetyship: for the Sureties acts can never be so imputed to the debtor, as to make him thereby the Surety. We know, that Sureties and publick persons may do many things, which cannot be said to be imputed to the deb • ors & persons represented: but these things are not done by them, as such publick persons & Sureties, but in another capacity. And it is folly hence to inferre, that therefore the Sureties payment of the debt cannot be said to be imputed to the debtor; or that wherein the publick person was a publik person, and which he did as such, cannot be said to be imputed to those, whom he represented.

2. Except. Itagreeth not with Scripture expression, to say, that the Sufferings of Christ are by God looked upon, as our Sufferings, or to conceive, that we should suffer in Him. It is not all one to say, we were punished in Christ, and Christ was punished for us. This last as warranted by Esai. 53: 6. But the other cannot be affirmed; for seing in Christs death, we hav • remission of sins, we cannot be said, for the same sinnes to be punished in and with Christ. Ans. This is wholly founded upon his own way of wording the Argument, so as he thought it would give him most advantage: for all this looketh to these words, in the Major propos. are to be looked upon, & are reputed by God, as done & suffered by those; which words might have been left out, without any hurt to our cause: the Argum. without them would have been full and concludent for us, whether any have argued so, or he hath framed the Argum▪ to his own mind, I know not. Sure, there is no necessity for adding of these words: yet the words may admit of a candide Interpretation; for it hath no repugnancy, or dissonancy to Scripture expression, to say, that the Sufferings of Christ are looked upon as the beleevers sufferings, when they are impu •• d to him; not as if God should think, judge or conceive, that the beleever, in his own Physical person, had suffered, that which Christ did suffer; but that he hath a special legal interest in these Sufferings, as being in a special manner interessed in Christ: and are now dealt with by God, no otherwayes, than as if he himself had, in his own person, laid down that satisfactory price. And in this sense, there is no difference betwixt the saying, that we are punished in Christ, & that Christ was punished for us: for we 〈◊〉 only punished in Christ legally, as Christ suffered for us, as coming in • ur law-place. Neither doth the saving, in this sense, That we are punished in Christ, take a way Remission of sins, but doth rather establish the same, as being the only ground thereof: for till we have an Interest in Christ, and in His Sufferings, by the Imputation thereof to us, & our leaning to them by faith, we can have no Remission, according to the Gospelway.

Except. 3. The publikeness of a person, who negatiats the affaires of others, doth no further, nor any other wayes, interesse those, whose affaires he mannageth, in what he doth in, or about such a transaction: buth only with reference to the issue, & success of what he doth for them, in that behalf: so that his dishonest, or unconscientious way, in the miscarying, or his wisdom & faithfulness, in the right managing, are no wayes imputable to the persons, whose business is negotiated. Ans. It is not necessary, that that special manner of managment should be so imputed unto the persons, whose affaire is negotiated, it being sufficient, that the persons represented be interessed in the transaction it self, in reference to an interest in the issue in the same affaire managed: and the transaction it self is so imputed to the persons represented, in reference to the effects, as if it had been done by themselves. So in our case, though the Wisdom, Faithfulness & patience of Christ, used in the managment of that publick affaire intrusted to Him, as a publick person, undertaking for, and representing all His Children, be not imputed unto them: yet the business it self, with which He was intrusted, viz. Giving satisfaction to the law in all points, by Suffering & Obedience, which the law required of us, is imputed to us, & must be so, in order to our partaking of the benefites & advantage thereof.

Except. 4. It is not altogether so solide or sound, as is supposed, that Christ stood in the place & stead of those, that should beleeve in Him, especially in all things, performed by Him, and which tended to the qualification of His person. To stand in the place and stead of another, implieth a necessity of his being in the same place, & doing the same things himself, wherein he stands, & which he doth, who is supposed to stand in his stead, unless they had been done by this other for him. Ans. This last Exception is the same with the first, & needeth little more consideration. We do not assert, that He did so stand in the place & stead of beleevers, as to all things He did & suffered; but only that He stood in in our room & stead, in the whole of His active & passive obedience, or in making satisfaction to the demands of the law, in His state of humiliation, this being it, for & in reference to which, He was appointed to be a publick person: all other things He did, as His Miracles, assuming a body, and the like, need not be said to be imputed to us; though, in that they concerned His person, & were requisite thereunto, & to the work He was imployed in, they carry a special advantage in them for Beleevers; & were in a particular manner designed for their good, & were subservient to that maine designe.

Arg. 10. If we cannot be justified by the Righteousness of Christ otherwise than by the Imputation of it, then must it needs be imputed to us, in our justification. But the former is true. Ergo. &c.

He excepteth p. 225. The Righteousness of Christ concurreth toward justification, by qualifying His person for that Sacrifice of himself, by which justification hath been purchased for all those that beleeve Ans. The Argum. is to be understood of His whole Surety-righteousness, and not of His active obedience only. (2) Even as to this, it was answered above, that it was not requisite unto this end, His humane nature being sufficiently hereunto qualified, by the personal union, by which His bloud became the bloud of God, and all He did and Suffered was the deed & Suffering of Him, who was God.

Arg. 11. If we may truely be said to be dead & crucified with Christ, to be quickened & have risen againe with Him, &c. then may we truely be said to have fulfilled the law with Christ; & consequently that should be imputed to us. But the former is true, Ergo, &c. These expressions pointe forth the closs union, that is betwixt Christ and Beleevers, & thereupon their Interest in what He did and suffered, as Mediator, Surety & publick person, to the end they may have right to, and possession of the great benefites, purchased and procured by Him. So they hold forth Christs suffering, dying, riseing, &c. as a publick person in their room & in their stead, & as their Representative: so that it is r • ckoned for them, and upon their score, and they are so interessed therein, as that they are to be dealt with, as if all these things had been done & suffered by themselves. And though, in these expressions mentioned, there be no express mention made of Christs fulfilling the law; yet they sufficiently hold forth that, which by parity of reason will enforce this, as well as the other: for they pointe forth Beleevers their union & communion with Christ, as to His Mediatory work, to which His fulfilling of the law did belong.

Against the consequence he saith, These expressions have no such Inference: for if we could be said to have fulfilled the law with Christ, our own fulfilling it in Him should rather be said to be imputed to us, than His fulfilling it for us. Ans. (1) This will say as much against the Imputation of Christs sufferings; for we are said to be dead with Christ; & therefore not Christs death, but our own death in Him should be said to be imputed to us: But the Scripture knoweth no such thing. (2) The meaning of the expression is, we say, but to denote emphatically the imputation of what Christ did & suffered, unto us: for our own fulfilling of the law in Him, is but His fulfilling of it for us, & the same imputed to us; so as we are dealt with no otherwayes, than if we had done it our selves; as our being dead & buried with Christ, is but His dying in our place & stead, or our having such an Interest in His death & burial, as that we are dealt with, as if, in a manner, we had died our selves. But he supposeth, there is a difference, as to this, betwixt Christs dying & His fulfilling the law, saying, When the Scripture saith, we are dead &c. with Christ, the meaning is not, that God looked upon us, as if we had laid down our Natural lives by death, when he laid down His; & as if this laying down our lives were a satisfaction to His justice; for then we might be said, to have satisfied for & redeemed our selves: But these expressions import either a profession of such a death in us, which holds proportion with, or hath a likeness to the death of Christ, or else this death it self really wrought in us, by that death of Christ. Ans. We do not asserte the meaning of these expressions to be, That God looketh upon us, as if we had laid down our Natural lives, &c. But that beleevers have such an Interest in Christs death, as being the death of their Surety, Redeemer, Head, Husband and publick person, that they receive the benefites & advantag •• thereof, no less really & effectually, than if they themselves, in their own persons, had dyed & satisfied, the same being now imputed unto them, & laid hold on by faith. (2) Though these expressions, at least some of them, & in some places of Scripture, as Rom. 6. may & do import what is here expressed; yet the full import of these Expressions is not hereby exhausted, as the scope & circumstances of the places may cleare; as particularly that expression, Gal. 2: 20. I am crucified with Christ: & these Ephes. 2: 5. 6.

He addeth against this. That Gal. 2: 20. The expression is taken in the latter sense, importing that the natural death of Christ for Paul & others, had wrought upon him, in a way of assimilation to it self, & had made him a dead man to the world. Ans. Paul is rather clearing & confirming, how he was become dead to the law, and alive unto God, vers 19. in & through the vertue of Christs death & crucifixion, in which he had such an Interest, that he accounted him self, as it were hinging-on the cross in & with Christ; & did so rest upon that by faith, & owne that Sacrifice alone, that he & Christ, as it were, were become one person; & he owed his being dead unto the law onely thereunto, & had it as really flowing therefrom & following thereupon, as if he himself had hung upon the cross, as a satisfactory Sacrifice.

To that Ephes. 2: 5, 6. he saith, The meaning is not, that God looks upon them, as quickened from a natural or corporal death, as Christs quickening & riseing againe was. Ans. Nor do we say, that this is the meaning, nor need we either think, or say so: but this we say, that the expression holdeth this forth, that Christ dyed & rose againe, as a publick person & Surety; & that Beleevers have so neer an Interest in His Mediatory work, & so closs an union with the Mediator, that they are as one person in law; so that they are really made partakers of some of the fruites of what Christ did & suffered, already, & shall as really partake of what is yet to be communicated, as if they themselves had laid down that purchasing price. Let us hear what he giveth for the meaning.

The meaning (saith he) is either to signifie the profession, that is made by us of that newness of life, which in way of a Spiritual Analogy, answers that life, whereunto Christ was quickened and rose againe; or else the new life it self wrought in us. Ans. That the Apostle is not here speaking of a meer profession, is manifest: nor is he speaking only of a new life, wrought in them; for he addeth, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Iesus: Nor doth that, which he saith, invalidate the meaning, which we give; for that effect, or inwrough quickening is spoken of, as flowing from Christs dying & riseing, & from their Interst in His dying and riseing, & their union with Him in all that, as being one person in law with Him; & so as virtually riseing with Him, and now sitting with Him, who is their common Head & Representative All which doth abundantly confirme the Doctrine of Imputation, which we plead for.

He addeth finally, But on the other hand, as there is no such expression in Scripture, as this, we have fulfilled the law with Christ; so neither • if there were, would it make any thing at all to salve the truth of the proposition, under question: for what if we should be said either to profess such a fulfilling of the law, as holds proportion with Christ's fulfilling it, or really & personally to fulfill the law, after such a manner? Ans. The expressions already mentioned do sufficiently evince this union and communion, that beleevers have with Christ, in His mediatory work, which is a solide ground of Imputation of the same unto them, as the foundation of their partaking of the benefites flowing therefrom: for there cannot any shew of reason be given for the one, which will not hold good for the other also. And it is said, but not proved, that these & the like expressions hold forth no more, but one or both of these two things alleiged: yea the scope of the places, and the Import of the words, hold forth much more, as is said.

Arg. 12. Whosoever is a sinner, & so continueth whil'st he liveth, cannot be justified other wayes, than by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness. But every man (Christ excepted) is a sinner, &c. Therefore, &c.

He excepteth, pag. 219. &c. If there be no other meanes of justifying, the condition of the whole world is hopless; for there is no such Imputation. Ans. The contrary hath been shown, & shall be more demonstrated hereafter. He addeth, Without Imputation there is another door opened. What is this? Those that truely beleeve in Iesus Christ, being not under the law, but under grace, are not liable to condemnation for their daily sinns, 1 Ioh. 2: 1, 2. Ans. True, but what then? How come they to be under grace, & not under the law? Is is not by vertue of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto them, unto their Justification; & because of their Interest in Christ, as Mediator, as their Head, Husband, Surety, Interessour & Advocat? He addeth. So that for the dissolving & taking away of all guilt, there needs no Imputation of the active obedience of Christ. The propitiation, which He is unto them, by His blood & Intercession, hath done this service to them, before this Imputation is supposed to come at them. Ans. We plead for the Imputation of His whole Surety & Mediatory work; & say that it is wholly imputed, & that at once, & not one part now, and another at another time. Nor do we say, that Christs death did procur • one thing, & His obedience another thing: but that in & by both, He, as Surety, performed what the law required of us; & thereby procured all to us, that we stand in need of, to make us happy.

Thus have we vindicated the Arguments, which this Author thought good to make any answere unto: others might be mentioned, but we shall forbear mentioning of them, till some other occasion.

CHAP. XI. Objections taken out of Scripture by Mr. Goodwine, against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Justification, Answered.

HAving in the foregoing Chapters proved, both from Scripture & Reason, That Christs Righteousness is imputed unto Beleevers unto justification; & having vindicated such of them, as were excepted against by Mr. Goodwine; we shall now come & examine the Arguments, by which he oppugneth the Doctrine of Imputation, in the first part of his Treatise of justification; Where he marshalleth his Arguments under two heads, viz. of Scripture & Reason. He beginneth with his supposed Scripture proofs, Chap. 2. &c. As to the first of which, largely prosecuted Chap. 2. we shall speak to it afterward, when we come to speak of the Interest of faith in Justification; for thereunto it doth more properly belong, being rather a proof of the Imputation of faith, in a proper sense, as our Righteousness, unto justification, than of the Non-Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ.

Leaving therefore the examination of this to its proper place, we come to see what other Scriptures, adduced by him against the Truth hitherto asserted, do say, in this question under debate; & that the more willingly, because Mr. Baxter in his late book against D. Tully, referreth us to this man for Arguments.

First, he adduceth such passages, as absolutely exclude the works of the law from justification, as Rom. 3: 28. Gal. 2: 16. Rom. 3: 20. We spoke something to this matter, while we were mentioning the Mysteries, remarkable in justification: yet we shall here consider what he saith. He thus reasoneth, pag. 55. If a man be justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto him, he shall be justified by the works of the law; because that Righteousness of Christ, we now speak of, consists of these works. Ans. The vainity & falshood of the Consequence is obvious: nor doth the reason added, make any supply. It is true the Righteousness of Christ did consist in works of obedience, required by the law; yet though this be imputed to us, it doth not follow, that we are justified by the works of the law •• ccording to the Scripture sense of that expression: for the Scripture meaneth works of the law, which we do in our own persons, Tit. 3: 5. And the whole Scope, Drift & purpose of the Spirit of the Lord, in all these places cited, & in all others, evinceth this; and all the Arguments mentioned in Scripture against justification by the works of the law, demonstrat this to be the true and only impo •• of that expression, as cannot but be plaine to any considering person. Yet he hath 4. answers, and he addeth several other things, which we must examine.

He saith I. Where the Holy Ghost delivereth a truth simply & indefinitly & in a way of a General & Universal conclusion, without imposeing any necessity there, or else where, to limite or distinguish upon it; for men to interpose by distinctions & limitations, to overrule the express meaning of the words, is to usurpe authority over the Scriptures. Ans. I grant, to adhibite distinctions or limitations, which the Scripture giveth no warrand for, to over rule the express meaning of the words of the Holy Ghost, is to exercise an unlawful authority over the Scriptures, & savoureth of audacious profanity. And I judge, that there are not afew of such distinctions & limitations to be found, in his Book, making him fall under the lash of this censure. But to assert such a general and universal sense of a Scripture expression, as neither will agree with other Scriptures, nor with common Sense & Reason; yea which so directly crosseth the whole Gospel, and destroyeth the Scope, Cohesion, & obvious Sense of the whole purpose, and of every sentence, used by the Spirit of the Lord in that matter, is to usurpe a Supra-papal power and Authority over the Scriptures of truth, and a most ready way to render them wholly useless. (2) As for our sense of this Expression, who, that will willingly be ruled by the Scriptures, cannot submit unto it? Let us but look to the very first place cited by himself, Rom. 3. & consider the whole preceeding discourse of the Apostle from Chap. I: 18. & forward, & particularly Chap. 3: 19. Where the Apostle closeth his discourse, tending to evince both jewes & Gentils to be under the Curse, by saying, Now we know, that what things so ever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Is not this to be understood, in respect of their own personal deeds & works? See then his conclusion, vers 20. Therefore by the deeds of of the law, there shall no flesh be justified in his sight. Can any man, that hath not renounced common sense, understand this otherwise, than that no man shall be justified in the sight of God by his own personal works; seing this is the only native conclusion, that floweth from the premisses; seing by their own personal works they can be justified before men; & seing the following words, for by the law is the knowledge of sin, that is, the law proveth & evinceth all, that we do, to be short & sinful, enforce this likewise? Is not this also enforced by these words, vers 23. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God? Is it imaginable, that justification, through the Imputed obedience of Christ to the law can evince, that we are not justified freely by His grace through the Redemption, that is in Jesus Christ, vers 24? If this general sense were the true meaning, what ground was there for that vers 27. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? no, by the law of faith? Would Justification by Christs obedience give ground of boasting? And what ground were there for that objection vers 31. Do we then make void the law, &c. & in the following Chapter, when speaking of Abraham, doth he or can any man imagine, that the Apostle doth mean any other works, when be denieth that Abraham was justified by works, than Abraham's own personal works? And meaneth he, or can he meane any other works, when he saith vers 4. Now to him, that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt? But it were tedious to prosecute this matter further, that is so clear in it self to every ordinary Reader, that it must needs argue a desperat designe, together with unpasrallel'd boldness, thus, with confidence & peremptoriness, to assert the contrary.

He saith 2. If the Apostles charge had been, in delivering of this doctrine, either to have made, or to have given allowance for any such distinction, certainly he should have been unfaithful in his trust, in giving the honour, due to the works of Christ, unto a thing of a far inferiour nature, viz to faith, as he doth Gal. 2: 16. Where he saith not, but by the works of Jesus Christ, but by faith Ans. This answere is, in a great measure, sick of the same distemper of presumption, with the former. We must not think, that the Apostle is still to be blamed for unfaithfulness, when he speaketh not, as we would have him speak: Christian sobr • ety should reach us, to search for Gods mind, in the expressions He hath thought good to use, for signifying of His mind. These, against whom the Apostle here wrote, & whose errour, in the matter of justification, he was confuting, never had a thought of such a general groundless sense, as we have here obtruded upon us; nor can it come into the thought of any rational man; & when then should we suppose, that the Apo •• le should have spoken to such a thing? (2) Paul giveth not the honour, due to the works of Christs, unto any thing of an Inferiour Nature, no not to faith, whatever this Author, misunderstanding the Apostle's mind, & perverting his words, would make his Reader beleeve, as we shall have occasion to shew hereafter. This Author setreth Christ and Faith at variance, whileas the Apostle every where sheweth their agreement & indissoluble union. (3) Taking faith, in this Authors sense, we see, That by his own Confession, the ascribing of that unto faith, which he doth ascribe to it, in the matter of • ustification, is a giving of that honour unto it, which, we say, is due to Christs obedience. So that the question betwixt him and us, is, whether Christ and His obedience, or Faith of a far inferiour Nature, must have that honour? We see no ground to imagine, that Paul would give the honour, that Universal obedience might call for, unto one act of obedience, or think that he would cry up one act of obedience, that is, faith, & cry down all other acts of obedience: far less that he would cry up faith, in prejudice of the full & perfect obedience of Jesus Christ, the Redeemer and Surety.

He saith 3. If Paul's intent had been, to have reserved a place in Iustification, for the works of the law, as performed by Christ, his indefinite expression would have been, as a snare upon men, to cause them passe over the great things of their Iustification. Ans. Paul's indefinite expression neither was, nor could have been a snare unto any; nor came such an imagination ever in the head of any man, but such an one, as can stumble in the most even path, being blinded with prejudice at the truth, & drunk with love to his own Inventions, which he cannot otherwise maintaine, but by new and unheard-of fictions. What great things of justification could, I pray, Paul's expressions cause any passe over? Why are not some of these great things mentioned?

He saith 4. If this had been Paul's meaning, it cannot be once imagined, but that he would have made use of such a distinction, or reservation, & would have been glad, if, without trenching upon some Gospel-truth, he could have come over so neer unto the jewes, who where chiefly incensed against Paul, for passing over the law in justification. Now had he said, that be did not exclude the righteousness of the law by faith, but advance it rather; only he preached that they could not be justified by their own observation of it; who seeth not how this would have taken off great part of their opposition, Ans. It is a wonder to see, how some men can shut their eyes, that they should not see what is most obvious, and what is in plaine termes asserted in the Scriptures. Did not Paul say expresly enough, Rom. 3. ult. That he did not make void the law through faith, but did establish it? doth he not also plainly tell us, where the difference lay betwixt him & the jewes; & what it was especially, at which they stumbled, when he said, Rom. 9: 31, 32. But Israel, which followed after the law of Righteousness, hath not attained to the law of Righteousness; wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law, for they stumbled at that stumbling stone. And againe Rom. 10: 3, 4. But they being ignorant of God's Righteousness, & going about to establish their own Righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the Righteousness of God; for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness, &c. Is it not hence clear, that they rejected Christ, and would not owne Him, as the end of the law for Righteousness: & that they stumbled at Him, seeking after justification & life, by their own personal following after the law of Righteousness, & by seeking to establish their own righteousness? How then can this man say pag. 61. That Paul was as far from holding justification by the works of the law, as performed by Christ, as the jewes were, who would have nothing to do with Christ, but stumbled at Him, while as Paul sought only to be found in Him, not having his owne Righteousness, which is of the law; but that which is through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness which is of God by faith, Phil. 3: 9. And proclamed Christ to be the end of the law for Righteousnes, to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10: 4.

Against Fit. 3: 5. where mention is made of the works of righteousness; which we have done; & a sufficient ground laid for the distinction mentioned, & to prevent the stumbling of such, as love to walk in the light, he advanceth several answers, pag. 62. &c. As I. He never said, that the active righteousness of Christ should be made a stander-by; but that it hath a blessed influence into justification, as it issueth into His passive obedience, which together may be called a Righteousness for which, but not with which we are justified, except it can be proved to be either the Material, or formal, or instrumental cause of justification, & whoever attempt to do this, will wholly dissolve the merite of it. Ans. (1) All this maketh nothing to the purpose now in hand, which is to show, that Paul by this expression cleareth sufficiently, what he meaneth by the works of the law, which he excludeth from having any interest in justification, viz. The works of the law, performed by us in our own persons. (2) What influence the active obedience of Christ hath in justication, when he will not admit it to be any part of that Surety-righteousness, which is imputed unto us, he showeth not; nor what way it issueth in to His passive obedience. If all this influence be to make Him fit to be a Sacrifice, we have shown above, that the personal Union did that; and consequently His active obedience, if it had no other influence, is made a meer stander by. (3.) A Righteousness for which, & a Righteousness with which, is a distinction, in our case, without a difference; for the one doth no way oppugne, or exclude the other, because the meritorious cause imputed, made over to and reckoned upon the score of beleevers, can be also that Righteousness with which they are justified. (4) Whether it may be called the Material, or Formal cause of justification (that any ever called it the instrumental cause, is more than I know) is no great matter, seing it may be either, as the termes shall be explained, which men are at freedom to do, according to their own minde, when they apply them unto this matter, which hath so little affinity with Effects meerly Natural, unto the causes of which these termes are properly applied: though I should choose rather to call it the formal objective cause, if necessitated to use here philosophik termes. (3) That to call Christ's whole Righteousness either the Material or Formal cause of justification, is to overthrow the merite of it, is said, but not proved: It is not these philosophical termes themselves, but the explication of them by such, as use them in this matter, that is to be regarded: and none shall ever show, that either of these termes, as explained by the orthodox, doth overthrow the merite of Christ's Righteousness, both doth rather establish it.

He saith, 2. The H. Ghost may reject the works of men from being the cause of such or such a thing, & yet no wayes intimat, that the works of any other should be the cause thereof, If the words had gone thus, not by the works of Righteousness, which we our selves had done, this had been some what an higher ground, to have inferred the opposite member of the distinction upon, viz. by the works of another, or of Christ. Ans. This exception is as little to the purpose, as the former; for these words were here brought only to show, what the Apostle meant by the works of the law, which he excluded from justification, viz. the works which we do: and not to prove immediatly, that the works of any other were understood hereby. (2) It is foolish thing to imagine a distinction, betwixt works, which we do & works, which we our selves, do, the same word in the original, which vers 5. is rendered we, is rendered we our selves, vers 3. What poor shifts are these, which men take to support a desperat cause?

He saith 3. To put the matter out of all question, that excluding the works of the law, which we had done, he had no intent to imply the works, which another might do, he expresseth the opposition thus, according to His mercy. Ans. The mistake is still continued in: By these words, we onely cleare what the works are, which are excluded; viz. our personal works, or works, which we do, or have done: whose works else are accepted, other places prove expresly, & this by consequence, unless the worke of a third could be alleiged. (2) The opposition here made, destroyeth not the opposition, which we make: for when we are justified & Saved by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, we are justified & saved according to His mercy; as well as we are justified freely by His grace, when justified through the Redemption, that is in Jesus Christ, Rom. 3: 24.

He saith 4. & thereby seemeth to reply to what is last said. The Apostle delivereth himself distinctly of that, wherein this Mercy of God, be speaks of, consisteth, viz. regenerating us, &c. Ans. But, I hope, the Apostles mentioning of Regeneration, doth not exclude the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, the ground thereof; nor can he suppose this, unless he plead with Papists for justification by our good works, done after Regeneration, & the new birth.

He saith 5. Such an inference is neither probable, nor pertinent to the purpose; because the Apostle rejecteth the works of righteousness, which he nameth, from being any cause, antecedaneously moving God to save us; & not from being the formal cause of justification: and we our selves (saith he) will not say, that the works of the law, which Christ hath done, moved God to saveus. Ans. (1) The Inference, which he here speaketh of, is his own, and not ours, as we have said. (2) The Salvation here mentioned is comprehensive, and includeth Justification & Adoption, as vers 7. cleareth; & the Mercy, mentioned, v. 5. comprehendeth all other subordinat causes & meanes, which the Lord hath appointed: & though the obedience of Christ be no cause, moving God to decree to save; yet it may be a cause of justification. But then (saith he pag. 65.) This will only establish the merite of Christ's Righteousness in justification, but overthrow the formality of it. And why so? Because (sait be) it is unpossible, that one and the self same thing, in respect of one and the self same effect, should put on the different habitude both of the Formal & Efficient cause. Ans. All this is but vaine talk, & a reasoning from termes of art, or philosophical notions taken improperly, to the same taken most properly & strickly; as if a Moral, polititical or legal effect were every way the same, with a Natural physical effect: and yet in physical Effects, as such, meritorious causes have no proper Efficiency: But, as to our case, we plainly say, that Christ's Righteousness is the meritorious cause of our justification, & yet may be called the formal cause thereof, as that terme may be adapted & fitly explained, according as the matter will bear; or the formal objective cause, which we rather incline to.

He speaketh against Gal. 4: 4. pag. 66. saying, that it is adduced to prove, that Paul mentioneth the works of the law, as done by Christ, in the discourse of justification; & consequently, that he had no intent to exclude the works of the law, as done by Christ from having their part in justification. But, as was shown above, there are many other places of Scripture evincing this. Yet let us see what he saith. 1. The law, under which Christ was made, is the ceremonial law, as is clear vers 5. we are not redeemed from the Moral law, which is of eternal obligation; but from the Ceremonial law. Ans. (1) That Christ was made under the Ceremonial law only, no reason can evince; for He was made under that law, under the curse whereof we were, who were to be delivered there from by Him, Gal. 3: 10, 12. But this was not the Ceremonial law only; otherwise he should have died only for the jewes. Againe, The law, which he speaketh of, was ordained by Angels, in the hand of a Mediator, Gal. 3: 17, 19. but this was the Moral law, contained in the decalogue. Is the ceremonial law only that law, that cannot give life vers 21. was nothing a Schoolmaster to Christ, but the ceremonial part of the law, vers 24. (2) To be under the law, is not only to be under the lawes obligation, but chiefly to be under the lawes Curse, which is the same with being concluded under sin, Gal. 3: 22. (3) If being under the law be thus limited, or restricked, to a being under the obligation of the ceremonial law, no more can be meaned, by receiving the Adoptions of Sones, there mentioned, as the opposite mercy, than a freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law! but this, I suppose, will be too narrow an Interpretation. (4) Though none be redeemed from obedience to the Moral law; yet they may be delivered there from, as the sole condition of the Covenant, & as the sole way of obtaining life. 2. He saith, hereby may be meaned His subjection to the curse of the law. Ans. That this may be part of the meaning, may very easily be granted: & what then can hence follow? The expression of being under the law, hath not alwayes this single and sole import, as we see in that same Chapter, vers 21.

Secondly, Chap. 4. pag. 69. He argueth from Rom. 3: 21, 22. thus, If the Righteousness, of faith, which is here called the Righteousness of God, consists in the Imputation of Christs Righteousness, then is it not, nor can it be, made manifest without the law, that is, without the works of the law. But the Righteousness of faith is sufficiently manifested without the law, that is without the works or Righteousness of the law. Ergo. The connexion of the Major he thus confirmeth. Because to such a Righteousness the law, and the works thereof, are every white as necessary than faith it self; for faith is made only a Meanes of the derivation of it upon men; but the body & substance of the Righteousness it self is nothing else, but the pure law, & the works of it. Ans. The connexion of the Major is unsound, and its probation is founded upon a manifest wresting, or misinterpretation of the place: for the meaning of these words, The Righteousness of God without the law, is this, The Righteousness of God, which is not had by our performance of the commands of the law, or, doth not consist therein; not, the Righteousness of God, which is without all obedience to the law: for there be no such Righteousness; all Righteousness being a conformity to the law of God; & if Righteousness consist not in obeying the law of God, wherein shall it consist? The Righteousness then of God is a Righteousness consisting indeed in full obedience to the law; but yet a Righteousness consisting in obedience to the law, performed by one, who was God (& therefore also called the Righteousness of God; & not meerly because invented by God; or because bestowed by Him upon men; or because such, as will only be accepted of by Him, as he saith; though these be also true, & may in part ground the denomination) & not by ou rselves, who were properly and originally under the obligation of the law.

This will not satisfie him, & therefore he saith. I. This sanctuary hath been polluted, & the hornes of ibis altar broken down, in the demonstration of the former proof. Ans. The contrary is manifest from our foregoing examination of that supposed demonstration.

He saith 2. There is not the least intimation given, that the Apostle should have any such by, or back meaning, as this. Ans. Nor was there any necessity, for any express mention hereof; not only because the party, the Apostle had here mainely to deal with, understood nothing else by the law, but our obedience performed thereunto; knowing the meaning of the law to be this, he that doth these things shall live by them; but also because the whole scope and manner of argueing of the Apostle, & his whole procedure in this debate, manifest this to be the meaning: for having convinced both jewes and Gentiles to be under the law, as guilty before God, he inferreth, that therefore by the deeds of the law, there shall no flesh be justified, Rom. 3: 20. That is, by their own deeds or actions: for the law to them can do nothing, but convince of sin, & binde guilt more upon them. But it did not so to Christ, who yeelded perfect obedience. We might also demonstrate this from the Apostles following discourse, if it were necessary; but we said enough of this, in answere to the foregoing objection.

He saith 3. The works of the law are never the less the works of the law, because performed by Christ. Ans. Yet when performed by Christ, they are not the works of the law done by us, who did lye under the obligation; and by the Imputation of such an obedience, as was performed by Christ, we have no ground of boasting or of glorying, either before God, or Man: and it is against such an obedience to the law, as the ground of justification, as doth not exclude glorying or boasting, and such as consisteth in works of Righteousness, which we have done, & is exclusive offree grace, that the Apostle disputeth.

He saith 4. This righteousness is said to receive testimony from the law, that is, from that part of Scripture, which is often called the law; and from the Prophe •• . Now, neither of these give any testimony to such a Righteousness, but to a Righteousness procured or derived upon a man by faith, Gen. 15: 6. Hab. 2: 4. Ans. It is true, this Righteousness receiveth testimony from the law, and from the writtings of the Prophets; & we plead for no other Righteousness, but such, as is so testified of, & hath the concurrent consent both of the O. and of the N. Testament. Both law & Prophets, that spoke of the seed of the Woman, & of the Messiah, & of His being the Lord our Righteousness, or spoke of the peoples duty in reference to Him, as such, did bear witness to this Truth. (2) What is that Righteousness, which is here said to be procured, or derived upon a Man by faith? Is it the Righteousness of Christ? Then the cause is yeelded. Is it the Righteousness of men themselves? Then justification by works is established, & the whole Gospel is overthrown. And how, I pray, can this besaid to be procured or derived upon a man by faith? The places cited speak of no such thing, but have a far contrary Import, as may hereafter appear.

He saith 5. This Righteousness of God is said to be unto all, & upon all 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by or through faith, by way of opposition to the works of the law: Now between Faith & the works of the law, there is a constant opposition; but between the law and the works of righteousness of Christ, there is no opposition. Ans. (1) If this Righteousness be unto and upon all, by or through faith, it must of necessity be the Righteousness of another, in bringing home and applying of which, faith is an Instrument: & to this way of bringing in the Righteousness of God by faith from without, is the seeking of Righteousness by our own works, or by our own acts of obedience to the law, manifestly opposite & irreconcilable: & this is the opposition, which the Scripture alwayes maketh, betwixt justification by the law, & by faith, as the very Scriptures, cited by himself, make manifest, to wit, Rom. 3: 27, 28. & 4: 13, 14. & 9: 32. & 10: 5, 6. Gal. 2: 16. & 3: 5, 11, 12. &c. (2) This argument & all the steps of its prosecution, make against himself, who will have our act of faith to be the Righteousness of God, though it be no where so called; & cannot be that, which is by, or through faith; for faith is not by or through faith; nor doth faith become a Righteousness by, or through faith: nor is faith, as our act, against the law, otherwise it should be no act of obedience, but a piece of willworship; and consequently no righteousness at all but an unrighteousness, & a plaine disobedience, or a work of Supererogation: nor do the law or Prophets, any where, testify to this, as our Righteousness.

Thirdly Chap. 5. pag. 73. He reasoneth from Rom. 5: 16, 17. thus. The gift of righteousness (as it is called vers 17.) which is by Christ, in the Gospel, & is said vers 16. to be a free gift of many offences unto justification, that is the forgiveness of many offences, cannot be a perfect legal righteousnes imputed unto vs, or made ours by Imputation, but the righteousness which is by Christ in the Gospel, is the gift of many offences. Ergo, &c. The Major he thus confirmeth. That righteousness, which extends unto a mans justification, by the forginess of sins, can be no perfect legal righteousness imputed. But the righteousness of Christ, in the Gospel, by which we are justified, extendeth unto a mans justification, by the forgiveness of sins. Ergo, &c. The Major of this, he thus proveth. Because a legal or perfect righteousness doth not proceed to justifie a mans person by way of forgiveness of sinnes; but is of it self intrinsecally & essen • ially a man's justification • t yea such a justification, with which forgiveness of sins, is not competible: for what need hath he, that is legally righteous, or hath a legal righteousness imputed to him, of forgiveness of sins, when as such a rightousness excluded all sin, & all guilt of sin from his person.

To all which I ans. (1) The Major propos. of the two Syllogis • es, is true only of a perfect righteousness, wrought by our selves, in conformity to the law; and not of the Righteousness of another imputed to us; which though it may be called legal, as to Christ, as consisting in perfect obedience & conformity to the law; yet is rather to be called Evangelical, as to us, upon the account of its discovery and revelation, and manner of communication unto us. (2) The confirmation of the Major is likewise only true of a righteousness performed by our selves: for that indeed excludeth all Remission: and therefore if our faith be accounted our righteousness (as he faith) it must be our justification, & so, inconsistent with free forgiveness. (3) As to the Scripture, where upon all this founded. I say, The text saith not, that our righteousness is only free forgiveness; but that in reference to pardon & free forgiveness, there is a gift bestowed; & that this gift by grace, which aboundeth unto many, is attended with free forgiveness, as a necessary consequent. It is the free gift, that cometh upon all men unto justification vers 18. & that, by which many are made righteous vers 19. & therefore is called the gift of righteousness, vers 17.

He objecteth against himself thus, A man's sins are first forgiven him, and then this perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed unto him; and so he is justified. But this is not the thing we would say, but on the contrary, That first the perfect Righteousness of Christ is imputed, whereupon the beleever is justified & pardoned, Let us hear his answer.

1. He saith, If we will needs distinguish the effects of the active & passive obedience of Christ, so as from the active part to fetch a perfect righteousness for Imputation, & from the passive remission of sins; yet whether it be any wayes reasonable to invert the order, I leave to sober consideration. Christ did not first die, & after death keep the law; therefore reason requireth, that what is first purchased, should be first received & applied. Ans. I see no necessity of distinguishing, after this manner, the Effects of Christ's active & passive obedience; but judge it best, to keep as conjoined what divine wisdom hath firmerly & inseparably joined together: But though we should thus needlesly distinguish these effects; yet there is no necessity of saying, That Christ's obedience, because first existing, should be first imputed unto justification; and then His death to Remission: for neither do we assigne justification to His active obedience only; nor is the same order to be observed, in the application of the Effects, that was observed in Christ's performance, of what was laid upon Him, and required of Him, as our Sponsor: for the Nature of the thing required, that Christ should first have obeyed, before He died: & on the other hand, the condition of sinners requireth, that they be first justified and pardoned, before they have a right to all the Effects of Christ's active obedience imputed.

2. He saith, If a man hath once sinned, it is not any legal righteousness what so ever imputed, that can justifie him. Ans. This is granted; But in order to justification we say, That Christ's whole Surety-righteousness is imputed; & this comprehendeth both His active & His passive obedience, so usually distinguished.

3. He saith, If a mans sins be once forgiven him, he hath no need of any further righteousness for his justification; because forgiveness of sins reacheth home, & amounteth unto a full justification with God. Ans. If justification were nothing else, but forgiveness of sins, there would be some colour for this: but in justification there is also an accepting of the man as righteous, & to this a meer pardon of sins will not serve: for a Righteousness is hereunto requisite; & pardon of sins and Righteousness are not one thing. It is false then to say, as he addeth, That this is all the justification, the Scripture knowes, or speaks of, the forgiveness of sins, or acquiting from condemnation. For both according to Scripture, and the native import, and universal usage of the word, justification denoteth a constituting legally and declaring solemnely a person to be righteous, or free of the accusation, given in against him; or a pronouncing of an accused man to be righteous; & therefore supposeth, when the sentence is just, that the person is a righteous person: &, in our case, the sentence of God being according to truth, the person justified, having no righteousness of his own, must be clothed with the Surety-righteousness of Christ, as Surety, Head & Husband, imputed to him & received by faith.

He addeth, That righteousness, which we have by Christ, and where with we are said to be justified, is only a negative righteousness, not a positive: It is nothing else, but a non-Imputation of sin, which I therefore call a Righteousness by Imputation, as having the privileges, but not the nature & substance of a perfect legal righteousness, Ans. A Righteousness not positive, but meerly negative, is no righteousness at all; for a true Righteousness is a positive conformity unto the law, the Rule of Righteousness; and as the Righteousness is but negative and Interpretatively such; so must the justification be, that is founded thereupon. He thinketh to prove this from Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. & addeth, a Righteousness without works must needs be a negative or privative Righteousness. The Imputation of righteousness vers 6. is interpreted vers 7, 8. to be a not imputing of sin. Ans. The place cited, as we declared above, giveth no countenance unto this sense of the word justification; but evinceth rather the contrary. A righteousness without our works (which is the Apostles meaning) may be, & is no negative, nor privative Righteousness; but a positive, full and compleat Righteousness, being the Surety-righteousnes of Christ, the Sponsor: and the Text saith, not, That this Righteousness is nothing else, than a non-Imputation of sin, but inferreth rather the Imputation of Righteousness, as the cause, from the Non-Imputation of sin, as the Effect; and all this to prove, that justification is not by the works of the law.

He tels us, that we have the like description of this Righteousnes, 2 Cor. 5. that which vers 19. he calls in God, the not imputing of our sins unto us, he calls in us vers 21. a being made the righteousness of God in Him. Ans. This is a plaine perversion of the scope of the meaning of the words: for vers 21. the Apostle is giving the ground & reason of what was said vers 19. & showing how this Reconciliation & Non-Imputation of sin is founded, & what is the special ground thereof; as appeareth by the particle for vers 21. for He hath made Him sin, &c. He saith, This is most plaine, Act. 13: 38, 39. where forgiveness of sins is immediatly thereafter called justification. Ans. All that can be hence inferred, is, that in justification sins are pardoned; or that such as have forgiveness of sins are justified; or that these do inseparably go together: But no appearance of proof here, that they are both one thing; or that in justification there is no more, but pardon of sins.

He prosecuteth this purpose yet further, saying, This is the most usual & proper signification of the word, justifie, not to signify the giving or bestowing of a compleat positive righteousness; but only an acquiting or discharging & setting a man free from guilt & penalty, due unto such things, as were laid to his charge. Ans. (1) Nor do we say, that justification signifieth such a giving & bestowing of a compleat, positive Righteousness; but that it signifieth a declaring & pronouncing of a person to be righteous: & therefore presupposeth this giving or be stowing of a compleat Righteousness; for the man, whom God declareth & pronounceth to be Righteous, must be Righteous; & seing he hath no Righteousness of his own, he must have his Suretie's Righteousness imputed to him. (2) And so, in this sense, justification is an acquitting, or setting a man free from the guilt & penalty, due to such things, as were laid to his charge; for he is pronounced Righteous. But it is not a simple discharge of the person from the guilt and penalty, upon a pardon & Remission: for a pardoned man is not a justified man, but rather is supposed to be guilty, & is pardoned, because guilty.

He proceedeth, In the Scripture, it is usually opposed to condemning Prov. 17: 15. Where, by justifying the wicked, nothing is meart, but the making of them just, in the rights & privileges of just men, which are freedom from censure, punishment, &c. So that by justifying the wicked, nothing else is meant, but the not condemning of him, Rom. 8: 33, 34, & 5: 19. Therefore by justifying nothing else is meant, but acquitting from condemnation; & so to be justified & live are equipollent, Gal. 3: 11, 21. Esai, 53: 11. Ans. (1) That justifying is opposed to condemning, is granted; but this maketh for us; for condemning is something-else, than a not pardoning, even a pronouncing or declaring of a person guilty; & therefore an adjuging of him to the punishment, due for the guilt; and therefore justification must be something else than pardon. (2) Justification is more than not condemning; for not condemning may be a meer suspending of the sentence of condemnation; & while the Process is under tryal, or the guilty person not yet convicted in law, he is not condemned; yet he is not therefore justified. (3) When justification & life are said to be equipollent, it is manifest, that justification is more than pardon, even an adjudging of one to the reward promised: for life here is not a meer Negative or privative life, but a positive life, called a Reigning in life, Rom. 5: 17. & the blessing of Abraham Gal. 3: 14. the promise of the Spirit, ibid. & all the blessings of the Covenant vers 17. & the Inheritance vers 18. Here then is a difference betwixt justification in our case, & justification among men: for among men, justification is usually in reference to the Accusation given-in; & the accusation beareth a reference only unto the sin committed & to the punishment due to such or such transgressours: so that the justified man is declared not guilty, & therefore not liable unto the penalty; but there is no word here of a Reward, due to the observers of the law, unless in cases, where a reward is expresly promised. And yet, even where there is no more, but a simple declaring of the person not guilty, & so not liable to the punishment, justification is more than meer pardon. But in our case, when the Lord justifieth the Beleever, He not only declareth him not liable to the punishment, due to transgressours of the law; but also adjudgeth him to the Reward promised to the observers: and therefore here the person is declared and pronounced righteous, having a right to the reward, through imputed righteousness.

Fourhtly, He objecteth from Phil. 3: 9. This objection must be hard-headed, & sheweth, with what confidence, some men, once in love with their own darling conceipt, can abuse the most plaine passages of Scripture: for what can be more plaine & full against our Adversaries, than is this Text? The Apostle is here shewing, upon what ground he desired to stand, in his appearing before God, & expresly renounceth all his former privileges, & what once he had an high esteem for; & particularly also his own Righteousness, of whatsoever kind, that consisted in his obedience to the law; & he saith not, which consisteth in my full obedience to the law; but, in mine own righteousness, which is of the law. And, in opposition to all this, he desireth to be found in Christ, stated & hid in Him, which includeth Christ's Righteousness: for Christ & His Righteousness are not separated; & the Righteousness he also expresly mentioneth, calling it, that which is through the faith of Christ, & againe, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith. By which he cannot meane the act of faith, for that is his own righteousness, all which he renounced; for it was conforme to the law & commandement, being enjoined by the law of God, otherwise it had been no act of obedience. Moreover; Faith is not through faith, nor by faith; but this Righteousness, which Paul sought after, is a righteousness, that is through faith & by faith, as an Instrument laying hold upon it, & applying it; Faith cannot be that Righteousness, which is through faith, or by the faith of Christ; for if so, Christ should be rendered useless, & the nature of faith in Christ should be changed, seing true faith in Christ carrieth the soul out of it self to Christ, to the end a Righteousness may be had. Faith, sure, is not the Righteousness, which is of God, wrought by God, & imputed by Him. So that when Paul desired to be found in Christ, having the Righteousness, which is through faith in Christ, even the Righteousness, which is of God by faith, what can be more plaine, than that he desired to be found in the Righteousness of Christ, which is imputed by God, & received by faith?

As to this place, our Adversary frameth no formal argument therefrom, but hath some observes, tending rather to make it useless to our point, than directly to confirme his own Chap. 6. pag. 84. I shall only take notice of such things, as he alleigeth to darken the glorious light of the grace of God, shineing with a meridian brightness in this passage.

He (i. e. Paul) doth not say (saith he) that he may be found in His righteousness; much less in His righteousness imputed to him; but simply in Himself; which is an usual expression in Scripture of the Spiritual state & condition of a Beleever. Ans. (1) To be found in Christ, who is the publick person & Surety, is to be found in His Surety-righteousness: for Christ & His Righteousness are no more separated, than a Surety, as such, and his Surety-payment and satisfaction: And therefore, when Paul spoke of being found in Him, he emphatically enough expressed what we say. (2) It is true, the expression, in Christ, doth else-where denote a spiritual state, but here Paul speaketh not simply of being in Christ, but of being in Him, in order to the having of a Righteousness, wherewith to appear before God; in order to which, he had renounced all his former privileges and attainments.

What it is (saith he) to be found in Christ, he expresseth, negatively thus, not having mine own righteousness, yet not simply & altogether, no righteousness, that may in no sense be called his own; but precisely & determinatly no such righteousness, as his own, which stands in works of the law; such he must be sure, not to have; i. e. not to trust to, or to shroud & shelter himself under, from the stroke of Gods justice. Ans. Then faith, considered as an act of obedience, must not be that Righteousness, under which he could think to shelter himself from the stroke of justice: for that stands in one work of the law; & if that righteousness be renounced, which standeth in works of the law; much more must that be renounced, which standeth in one work of the law. (2) The Righteousness of Christ, imputed & received by faith, may in some sense be called the Beleevers own: but that Righteousness, which the Apostle calleth his own here, is opposed to the Righteousness of another, and comprehendeth all his own acts & works, done in obedience to the command of God.

Next (he saith) affirmativly thus, but that, which is through the faith of Christ, &c. Here is not the least jot or title of any Righteousness, he should have by Imputation, no nor of any Righteousness by or through tht Righteousness of Christ; but only such a Righteousness, as is through the faith of Christ. Ans. (1) When all that Righteousness is excluded, which is in mans self, or in any acts of obedience to the law, which he doth; & yet a Righteousness mentioned as the only refuge & sheltering place, what can this Righteousness be else, than an Imputed Righteousness? & what can this Imputed Righteousness be: if it be not the Righteousness of Christ? Is there any other that will do our business? (2) A Righteousness through faith in Christ is most clearly a Righteousness obtained, possessed & laid hold on by faith.

The Apostle addeth (saith he) by way of commendation of this Righteousness, that it is the Righteousness of God i.e. a righteousness, which God himself hath found out, & which He will owne & countenance, even the righteousness of God, which is in faith, i. which cometh, & ac • rueth, and is derived upon a man by faith. Ans. (1) It is not only a Righteousness, which God himself hath found out, and which He owneth & countenanceth; but a Righteousness also, which is in God, or is in Him, who is God, & is derived from Him to man; for it is a Righteousness, that is not to be found in man, or in any thing he doth, in conformity to the law of God, all such Righteousness being already renounced by the Apostle. (2) The Righteousness of God, which is by, or through saith, & cometh, accrueth, or is derived upon a man in & by faith, must needs be some thing else, than faith it self, even the Righteousness, that is without a man, & is derived unto him from another, viz. from Him, who is God, & on whom faith laith hold, that is, Jesus Christ, in whom alone the Apostle was seeking to be found.

Fiftly, Chap. 7. pag. 88. &c. He abuseth to this end all those Scriptures, wherein justification is ascribed unto faith, as Rom. 3: 28. & 5: 1. As to the Interest of faith, in the matter of justification, we will have occasion hereafter to speak of it, at some length: here we are only enquiring after that Righteousness, upon the account of which, we are justified, which our Adversary, as it would appear, placeth only in faith: and so, in stead of making faith the meane of applying & bringing home the Surety-righteousness of Christ, he maketh it the very formal righteousness it self, upon the account of, and because of which we are justified. Let us hear what he saith.

When men say (saith he) that faith justifieth, I demand, what is it, they meane by faith? do they not meane their beleeving of act or faith? Ans. When the Scripture • aith, That we are justified by faith, faith is taken for our act of faith, laying hold on Christ & on His Righteousness, it being the mean appointed of God for this end, by interessing us in & uniting us with Christ, & applying that Surety-righteousness of His. But this can no way prove, that therefore faith it selt is that Riphteousness, upon the account whereof we are declared Righteous in the sight of God, in order to justification; or is the formal objective Reason of our justification. Though faith be said to justifie, as an Instrumental cause (as this Author himself afterward confesseth) it will not follow, that therefore it justifieth as a principal cause, or as the formal objective cause. The hand receiving riches doth instrumentally enrich; but is not the principal cause of the mans riches. The producing, in face of court, of the Surety's payment, by the principal debtor, now pursued by the creditor, is not the formal ground of the debtor's absolution from the charge, but the payment it self, which is instructed, is the only formal ground, though the Instruction of that payment by the debtor, in face of court, be requisite in its place, and a mean to the debtor's absolution.

He saith, he conceiveth not of faith as divided, or severed from its object, either Christ in person, or Christ in promise. Ans. It is true, the act cannot be conceived without its object; & all the consideration of the object here had by him, is by vertue of the act reaching the object, & so the act is only considered by him no further, than as a commanded duty, or as any other act of the Soul, which is commanded: and beside, this faith, thus acting on Christ, is but an historical faith: for if he consider faith, as acting on Christ, according to the Gospel, & as it is called Justifying or Saving faith, in distinction from the faith of Miracles, & from Historical faith, he must look upon it, as the soul's fleeing out of it self to Christ for refuge; and as laying hold on His Righteousness as only sufficient; and as receiving, embraceing, leaning to and resting upon Christ and His Righteousness; whence it is manifest, that it cannot be conceived, nor looked to, nor rested upon, as our Righteousness, its use & work being to bring-in and receive another gifted Righteousness, and to rest upon that for life, Justification and Salvation.

He •• ls us next, That he also confesseth, that saith justifieth instrumentally, & not otherwise; & that he hath neither said, nor intended to say any other thing. Ans. But how this can agree with what he hath said, & with what hereafter we shall hear him saying, let men of understanding judge. Did ever man before acknowledg faith, to justifie instrumentally, & yet deny the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, as he doth? and yet assert that this Instrument faith is imputed for our Righteousness, for our only Righteousness, and as the only formal ground of our justification, as he doth? Did ever man assert this Instrumentality of faith, to shoulder-out the chiefe and principal Interest, that the Surety-righteousness of Christ hath, in the business? This therefore must be looked upon, as inconsistent with his only designe, in this whole book; and as an unwary expression overturning all; or else that he must have said all this in an hid sense, not yet understood.

To that, That faith justifieth, as it taketh hold of Christ's Righteousness, he answereth, That yet it is the act of faith that justifieth. Ans. And did ever any meane otherwise, when they spoke of faith as an Instrument, or mean? But that is not our present question: we are now enquireing after that Righteousness, for which, & upon the account of which we are justified; and not after the Instrument, or Mean, by which we are possessed of that Righteousness, upon the account of which alone we are justified, & by which we are put into a state of Justification. So that all this waste of words is to no purpose.

He moveth another objection against himself, thus, If it be said, that when we are justified by faith, the meaning is, we are justified by that, which faith apprehendeth; & this is far from saying, that faith is imputed for Righteousness.

Here I can observe nothing but confusion, & a jumbling together, as one, these two far different Questions, viz. What is that Righteousness, for, because and upon the account of which we are justified: & what is that way, Mean, or Instrument, by which we partake of Righteousness, unto Justification, & are justified. Here is a manifest confounding of the principal Meritorious cause, & the Instrumental cause: of the formal objective cause (which some call the Formal, others the Material cause) and the Inferiour Meane, or Instrumental cause. Here also these two are confounded & made one, viz. We are justified by faith; & faith is Imputed unto Righteousness. That these are far different, shall be cleared hereafter. But what answereth he? He saith 1. If their meaning be simply so, that we are justified by that, which faith apprehendeth, they speak more truth, than they are aware of. But that whatsoever faith apprehendeth should justify, is not true. Ans. Who speaketh thus, I know not; yet I see little danger in it, their meaning being only this, in that expression, we are justified by that, which faith apprendeth, that Christ & His Righteousness, which justifying faith, in the act of justifying, laith hold on▪ is the formal objective cause, or that upon the account of which we are justified: & this no way saith, that our faith is that Righteousness, for which we are justified.

Next he saith, If men ascribe justification, in every respect, to that, which faith apprehendeth, they destroy the Instrumental Iustification of faith. Ans. No man, that I know, doth or will ascribe Justification, in every respect, unto that which faith apprehendeth, & so, they need not destroy the Instrumental use of faith in Justification; for as to the Instrumental justification of faith, I understand it not; it seemeth to be a very catachrestick expression.

In end, he addeth, If faith justifieth any way, it must of necessity be by Imputation, or account from God, for righteousness; because it is all that God requires of men to their justification, in stead of the righteousness of the law. Therefore if God shall not impute, or account it to them for this righteousness, it would stand them in no stead at all to their justification; because there is nothing useful, or available to any holy, or saving purpose, but only to that, whereunto God hath assigned it. If God in the New Covenant, requires faith in Christ, for our justification, in stead of the righteousness of the law, in the old, & this faith will not passe in account with him for such righteousness, but his command and Covenant for beleeving, and the obedience it self of beleeving, will both become void, & of none effect, the intire benefite of them being suspended upon the gracious pleasure & purpose of God, in the designation of them to their end. Ans. Whatever interest, or place Faith hath, in the New Cov. & in the matter of justification, it hath it from Gods sole appointment & designation, & it is all that, which is now required of us, in order to our justification, & entering into Covenant with God: yet unless we change & alter its true nature, and assigne another place & power to it, that God hath, the Crown is keeped on the head of the Mediator, & His Righteousness is only owned, received, produced by the sinner, as it were, in face of Court, & rested upon by faith, in order to justification. But when faith is said to be imputed for Righteousness; that is, when our act of beleeving is made our Righteousness, & said to be so accounted & esteemed by God; & all this to shoot out the Righteousness of Christ, and to take away the Imputation thereof to us, as the only ground of our justification, not only are the native & kindly actings of justifying faith destroyed; but the very nature & gentus of the New Covenant is altered, & it is made to be the same, in kinde, with the first Covenant, with this gradual difference, that the first Covenant required full & perfect obedience; the second one act of obedience only, viz. Faith, as a Peppercorn (as some speak) in stead of a great rent, & our whole Righteousness: for no other Righteousness will our adversaries grant to be really imputed to us, save what they grant of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness only as to Effects, and thus they make the Lord to repute (for that is the meaning of imputing with them) that to be a Righteousness, which, at best, is but imperfect, & not every way conforme to the command of God, enjoining it. Whereby thus one imperfect act of obedience, viz. Faith, is made that, whereupon the wakened sinner is to rest, and lay his whole weight, & wherein he is to refuge himself from the wrath of God, & which he is to hold up, as his legal defence, against all accusations, coming in against him: and all this use is to be made of faith immediatly, in stead of Christ, & His Surety-righteousness. Whence we see, that it is false to say. (1) That if faith justifieth any way, it must of necessity be by Imputation for righteousness: For it justifieth as the mean appointed of God, to lay hold on an Imputed Righteousness, and to carry the soul forth thereunto. The reason added is vaine, for though it be all that God requires of men to their justification, it is not that Rightheousness, which is imputed unto Justification, or the ground thereof; but the Mean or Instrument of a soul's partaking of that Righteousness of Christ, which is the only ground, or formal objective reason. (2) It is false to say, That if God shall not account it to them for righteousness, it shall stand them in no stead to justification. For it is required, as the meane, whereby the Sinner is married unto Christ, & partaketh of His Righteousness, in order to justification; and is as the legal production of the righteousness of the Surety, in face of court, as the ground of absolution to be pleaded & stood unto. The reason he here addeth is of no force, because faith is assigned of God to this end & purpose, as the Gospel cleareth; & only to this end, that so the Mediator alone may weare the Crown, & beare the weight of sinners; & nothing in us, or from us may share with Him, in that glory. It is false (3) to say, or suppose (as his following words intimate) That faith in the New Covenant hath the same place, force & efficacy, which the righteousness of the law had, in the old Covenant: For then Faith should be Meritorious ex pacto, & should give ground of glorying before men. It is (4) false to say, That if faith hath not this place, force & efficacy in the New Covenant, the command for beleeving, & beleeving it self shall be vaine. Seing it hath another use designed to it of God; and it is required for another end, as is said, according to the gracious pleasure & purpose of God.

Lastly Chap. 8. pag. 93. &c. he argueth from Gal. 3: 12. thus, If the Scriptures do not only no where establish, but in any place absolutely deny a possibility of the translation or removing of the Righteousness of Christ from one person to another, then there is no Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. But the former is emphatically true from this place. Ergo, &c. Ans. This, upon the matter, is but what Socinus said lib. 3. cap. 3. viz. That one mans deed can no more be the deed of another, than one mans death, or paine can be the death or paine of another: & that in deeds of the law, the deed it self is not simply called for, but the proper deed of every one, who is under the law: & that nothing can be more ridiculous, than to say, that one mans righteousness can be the righteousness of another, who is unrighteous in himself: & that it is against common sense, to say, that one may obey for another. But howbeit we easily grant, there neither is, nor can be any physical translation or removing of Righteousness from one to another: yet to deny all legal translation, is to deny all Suretiship & cautionry; yea and all Satisfection: & therefore the Socinians, who see the force of this consequence, do peremptorily deny, that Christ made any Satisfaction to justice, or payed the debt of the chosen ones, as their Surety: & such, as deny this legal translation of Christ's Righteousness, would do well to consider, if they do not hereby weaken the truth, concerning Christ's Satisfa&ion, & His dying in the Room, place & Stead of the Elect. As for the thing it self, every one, that knoweth what a Surety is, knoweth that his payment of the debt is by law reckoned on the score of the principal debtor, & so transferred upon him, as he is no more liable to the charge of the Creditor, or to the execution of the law against him for non-payment, than if he himself had laid down the full Summe.

He would prove, what he alleigeth, thus, This Scripture doth not barely and simply deny a possibility of translation of the Righteousness of the law from one person to another; but denieth it emphatically. Ans. Howbeit it be a truth, that no meer-mans righteousness is derivable from him to another: set this Text proveth no such thing; but only telleth us the nature 〈◊〉 of the Covenant of works, viz. that it required personal and perfect obedience of him, that would have right to the promised reward. Which speaketh nothing against the new contrivance of the Gospel, wherein the Supream God and Law-giver, & the great Rector of the world did, in Mercy & Love, appoint Jesus Christ to be the Mediator & Surety for the chosen ones, to pay their debt, & suffer for them; & did ordaine a way, how they should, in due time, come to have an Interest in, & to partake of that Surety-righteousness of Christ Jesus, that so they might be justified, & dealt with as Righteous persons, having Christ's Surety-righteousness imputed to them, & reckoned upon their score, when by faith they close with Him, and lay hold on it.

He addeth for proof, for it denies a possibility of it to be done even by faith, which was the likeliest hand to have done it, if the nature of the thing had not resisted the doing of it. Ans. The meaning of these werds, the law is not of faith, is, only to shew, That the way of justification by faith & by the law, are so far different, that they cannot agree together: but not to show, that by faith Beleevers are not made partakers of the Righteousness of Christ, or have it not imputed unto them & reckoned upon their score; as the whole scope & circumstances of the place show. That therefore is not true, which he addeth, By which it appeareth also, that be (i.e. the Apostle) had an Intent particularly, to make the righteousness of the law, as performed by Christ himself, uncapable of this translation, or Imputation. For though the law should be against the Imputation of the Righteousness of one man, who is Naturally and every way under the law, & obliged by his being, to obey the law, unto another: yet it is not against the Imputation of the Righteousness of one, who is God; & so under the law only by voluntary Submission, & is appointed thereunto by the Supream Law-giver & Rector, unto all such, as were committed & given to Him to save that way, in a way condescended upon by Jehovah, and the Mediator.

He proceedeth, The meaning of these words, the law is not of faith, must be this, that the righteousness of the law doth not arise, or come upon any man, out of his faith, or by his beleeving: & this is proved because the very doer shall live in or by them, Ans. It is true, the law-way of justification, or the way of justification, revealed in and by the law, and hold forth in the old Covenant, saith only, that the man that doth these things shall live in them: and doth not prescribe the way of justification through faith. But the Gospel revealeth, how the righteousness of the law, which was part of our debt, being performed and payed by the Lord Jesus, the Surety, appointed of God, is transferred and imputed unto those, He did represent.

He addeth further, The word law here is put for the Righteousness or fulfilling of the law. Ans. And why also shall not the word be taken in that sense in the following vers, where it is said, Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law; & so the meaning will be, from the curse of the righteousness or fulfilling of the law? Againe, what though the word had that Import here? can any thing more hence follow, than that personal Righteousness is not derivable now from one man to another, so as to stand for his personal righteousness? But how shall this sense of the words make them a proof or confirmation of what was said in the former verse?

He answereth to this, saying, The Apostle in the former verse had delivered it for a truth, that no man could be justified by the law i.e. by the righteousness or works of the law; because the Scripture saith, the just shall live by faith. Now because this consequence might seem doubtful, upon this account, that it might be said, why may not the just live by faith, & by the works of the law too? may not the righteousness of the law be made over to them by faith? No, saith the Apostle, The law is not of faith, there can be no legal rigteousness drawn upon men by faith, &c. Ans. This confirmation is manifestly perverted: for there was no occasion for that question, whether the righteousness of the law could be made over by faith, whether it be taken in his sense, viz. Whether the Righteousness of Christ, performed to the law could be made over and received by faith; as appeareth from what he had said of the Gospel-way vers 8, 9. Or whether it be taken in this sense, that the righteousness of the law, performed by a meer-man, only for himself, according to his obligation, can be now made over to another by faith; for no man over dreamed of such a thing. But enough of this froathy trash.

What he talketh afterward of the opposition betwixt the law and faith, in the matter of justification, is utterly impertinent; because quite mistaken, and misunderstood by him: for he only understandeth the difference thus; That faith hath nothing to do with the Righteousness of Christ, but must be considered alone, as our act of obedience; & wherever the law, or the righteousness thereof is excluded in the matter of justification, there the righteousness of Christ is as well to be understood, as our own personal acts of obedience. But how crosse this is unto the whole doctrine of the Gospel, is already abundantly shown; and we may have further occasion to touch upon this matter hereafter.

CHAP. XII. Some other objections, proposed by John Goodwine, examined.

MR. Iohn Goodwine proceedeth, in his forementioned book Chap. 9. and forward, to propose some Arguments, against the Imputation of Christ's righteousness, which in order fall under consideration.

Obj. 1. That Righteousness, which will not furnish all Beleevers with all points or parts of that righteousness, which the law requireth of them, cannot be imputed to them unto justification. But such is the Obedience, that Christ performed unto the Moral Law. Therefore &c. Ans. (1.) We plead not only for the Imputation of Christ's Obedience to the Moral Law; but for the Imputation of His whole Surety Righteousness, that is, of all He both did & Suffered, as the designed & appointed Surety. (2.) This Argum, though it be levelled only against the Imputation of Christ's Obedience; yet it equally wageth warre against the Imputation of His Sufferings: for as to the Satisfaction & payment of the old Covenant, or His Suffering of death, it may be also said. The payment of the penalty must be such, as they, for whom it was laid down, were otherwise lying under, & under a necessity to pay it themselves. But Christ's death & payment was not such; for He did not suffer the same, as to duration, nor as to concomitant despaire, & other evils, that would necessarily attend the same in Man, & doth attend it in the damned. Which consideration is enough to render this Argument suspected of falshood, unto all such, as are not bred in the School of Socinus.

Let us see, how he confirmeth this Argum. & particularly the first proposition thereof. Because (saith he) a compleat legal righteousness requireth a punctual through-obedience unto all things in the Law, in reference to each mans place & Calling. Ans. But we may distinguish the proposition thus. That righteousness, which will not furnish all beleevers with every specifick & individual act of obedience, which is required of them, in their places & Stations, i.e. Is not made up of, nor expresly & explicitly comprehendeth in it all these particular Acts, specifically & numerically considered, cannot be imputed unto them in justification; It is false in this sense. But if it be thus taken. That righteousness, which neither did comprehend in it, not was made up of every specifick & numerical Act, required of them, nor yet was infinitly transcending & exceeding the obedience of all men whatsomever, in all their distinct and particular occasions, Relations, places, & Callings, & brought more glory unto God, the Law-giver, and was a fuller proclamation of the holiness of the Law and of the Law-maker, and acknowledgment of His Authority; and with which the great Rector of the world and Law-giver was fully satisfied in all points, cannot be imputed; in this sense it may be granted. But then the Minor is palpably false; and so the Conclusion is null. And as to the first sense, or branch of the distinction, it is no way touched, let be weakened by the confirmation mentioned, as every one may see. And so the Argument is null. And as for the ground & relevancy of the distinction, it is clear from what is said, touching the Sufferings of Christ; so that it can be denied by none, who are not professed Socimans.

To confirme the Minor, he tels us of duties of Servants, Masters, husbands wives, judges &c. Ans. The distinction given maketh all this useless, and to no purpose. Christ obeyed perfectly the same Law, we were lying under, & that as made under the Law, and as willingly subjecting himself thereunto, in our room and stead, as Surety and Sponsor; and this obedience of His was full, perfect end Compleat, for He fulfilled all righteousness. Mat. 3: 15. He was, dureing His life, holy, harmeless, undefiled, and separat from sinners, Heb. 7: 26. He knew no sin 2. Cor. 5: 21. No man could convince Him of sin. Ioh. 8: 46. Yea the father was well pleased in Him Mat. 3: 17-& 17: 5. And this perfect and full obedience, which Christ gave unto the Law, which He came to fulfill Mat. 5: 17. being the obedience of one, who was God, equal with the Father, had in it a Supereminent excellency, worth and dignity, to the full Satisfaction of the Law and of the Law-giver, and to the repairing of that loss, and to the recovering of that Glory, which was wronged by mans violation of the Law. So that howbeit He performed not all duties, which were required of every one of the Chosen ones, in their several Sexes, Ages, Relations, occasions and Callings, which was Impossible and not needful: Yet He performed that obedience to the Law of God, which was required of Him, as standing in the room and stead of the given ones, and that in all points, yea and full obedience, wherewith the Supream Law-giver was fully Satisfied. And, Sure, every unprejudiced person may easily see and be convinced, that this perfect and compleat obedience of Christ is moreable to furnish beleevers with all points of Righteousness, which the Law requireth, than the single act of faith, which our Adversaries Substitute in the place thereof. Shall we think, that God accepteth of, in place of all, and imputeth that unto beleevers for their Righteousness, rather than the Full and perfect Obedience of Christ? Shall one imperfect Act of obedience be of more value, than the Full and perfect obedience of Christ? W • ence we see, that whatever shew our Adversary maketh with this Argument against us; yet it is of no weight with himself; for as He useth it against the Imputed Obedience of Christ, so we may use it, with much more strength of reason, against the Imputation of our Faith for Righteousness, as is obvius.

We need not take notice of that objection, which He moveth against himself pag. 101. viz. That love is the fulfilling of the Law; nor of his Replies made thereunto: for we assert Christ's fulfilling of the Law in another manner, and upon other grounds: He fulfilled all righteousness, and performed all particular acts of obedience, required of Him as our Surety, so that the Father was well pleased with Him: and what more is requisite!

He moveth another objection pag. 103. viz. That it is not necessary, that men should have all particular Acts of Righteousness, qualified with all circumstances, imputed to them, it being Sufficient, that such a righteousness be imputed, which is equivalent; yea and more than equivalent, as bringing more glory to God, and as much worthy in it self. He answereth. 1. The Law will not know any thing by way of proportion, but must have its jot for jot, title for title, or else it will curse. Ans. (1.) We are to regard here more what the Law-giver and Supream Rector will know, than what the letter of the Law will acquiesce in. (2.) This taketh away the Satisfaction of Christ, and all His Sufferings, as Mediator, and destroyeth that ground of our hope and Salvation: for the Law, as to its letter, saith, the Soul that sinneth to it shall die; and hath not one jote or title of the Satisfaction and Suffering of a Mediator. (3.) What shall our Adversary now do with faith? doth any jote or title of the Law countenance the Imputation of faith, for a proportionable Righteousness? doth faith answere every jote, title, point and letter of the Law? He answereth. 2. To impute acts of Righteousness to a Man, which are proper to another calling, is rather to impute sin, than righteousness, Ans. Christ was a publick person, appointed of the Father to represent all the chosen ones, & did, in their place & room, fulfill the law, in all points, according as was required of Him, by the Supream Lord Rector & Law-giver; & this perfect & compleat Obedience is made over to all those, who are His; & not one part to this particular Beleever, and another to another, or some acts to this man, & some other acts to that man: & therefore this reply is groundless.

As to that viz. That God inflicted on Christ, not the circumstantiat curse threatned, but its equivalency, he saith. 1. That in these words, Thoushalt die the death, there is no necessity to meane precisely & determinatly eternal death, according to the letter. Ans. If that was not threatned in the Law, no man shall suffer it, for the breach of the Law; and so there shall be no eternal death even to such as perish, which yet himself granteth. (2.) It was a spiritual death, and such as includeth many circumstances, which Christ neither could, nor did suffer. He saith 2. Gods meaning there was not, to threaten eternal death in one kinde, or other; but to have the word death understood, as it indifferently signifieth that evil of punishment, which was known by that names for eternity is not of the essence of the punishment, due unto sins. Ans. The doubt remaineth concerning other circumstances, & ingredients of that death, as threatned to man. And whether eternity be of the Essence of the punishment, threatned for sin, or not; this is sure, that all, for whom Christ hath not suffered, shall perish eternally; & all had perished eternally, if Christ had not suffered: And when God threatned death to man, he know, that if that threatning did overtake him, his death would be eternal. He saith 3. Though God should take liberty to vary from the letter of the Curse; yet it followeth not, that the creature, who was bound to obey the precepts of the Law, might take the like liberty to do one thing, in stead of another; or that God should accept any such payment for them. Ans. We assert no liberty for man: but why should not this liberty be allowed to the Supream God? All the reason he giveth, I finde to be this. That God accepteth on any mans behalf, as a perfect legal righteousness, the performance of such things, which are not required of him, hath no correspondence with any of the Covenants. Ans. If God could accept that, as a perfect Satisfaction, which did not every way answere to & correspond with that, which Man himself was to suffer; why might He not accept of that, as a perfect legal righteousness, which did not in all particulars, answere to, & correspond with that, which every beleever was obliged unto? What reason is, or can be given for the one, which will not hold for the other? The answere he hath given, is no answere unto this. Perfect obedience was required of all by the first Covenant, & Christ did performe perfect obedience for all His owne; & this being a perfect legal Righteousness, is sufficient for all; & is not the performance of such things, as are not required of them.

Obj. 2. Chap. 10. pag. 107. That Righteousness, which is exactly and precisely fitted to the person of Him, that is Mediator between God & man, cannot be imputed unto any other man. But such is the Righteousness of Christ. Ergo. The Major he thus confirmeth. He that assumeth this Righteousness of Christ, represents himself to God, in the glorious attire of him, who maketh men righteous, & may conceue himself as great in holiness, as Iesus Christ himself &c. Ans. Christ's Righteousness was indeed the Righteousness of a Mediator & Surety; & therefore was imputable to all, who by faith should be married to Him, & have union with Him, as their Head, & Husband, & are become one person in Law with Him, as their Representative & Surety; though not as it was subjected in Him, but according to the nature of the thing, & to their necessity. Hereby therefore is no wrong done to Christ, no robbing of Him of His mediatory glory; but, on the contrary, a more clear & manifest ascribing of the same unto Him, by acknowledging Him for the only Mediator, & by resting on Him, & on His Righteousness, as our only Righteousness and ground of Acceptance. We cleare the matter thus. When the payment of a Surety is imputed to the debtor, and he pleadeth the same in court, for his own absolution, he doth no injurie unto the cautioner; but rather declareth himself unable to pay, & ascribeth the honour of the payment unto the Surety: for he doth alleige or produce that payment, as if he would thereby declare, that he himself; as Surety, had paid the summe for another; but only produceth the payment of a Surety, in reference to himself, as a ground sufficient in Law, whereupon he should be absolved from the Charge, giuen-in against him by the creditor. So when the beleever applieth to himself the Righteousness of Christ, he doth not make himself a Mediator or Surety; but only applieth the Righteousness & payment of his Surety, Head & Husband, for his own use, to answere the charge given-in against himself, and in reference to his own particular case & necessity. Hereby the beleever doth not assume to himself an equality of Righteousness with God himself; but only assumeth that Mediatory & Surety-righteousness, which He wrought, who was equal with God, & was God, so far as their own case & necessity requireth. We dream of no such imputation, as would give ground to us to conceite our selves to have done & said all that He did & said. This is the fiction of the Adversary, not our Assertion.

Against the consideration of the Union betwixt Christ, as the Head, & beleevers as the Members, which is the ground of this Imputation & communication, He saith pag. 113. 1. Christ & Beleevers are a mystical body, & therefore an universal agreement, in all things, with a natural body, cannot be thought on; one difference is this, what one member of the body natural doth, the whole may be said to do. But not so in the mystical body; the body of Christ cannot be said to have wrought miracles &c. Ans. Nor de we asserte an agreement betwixt this mystical body & a natural body, in all points: But yet, as Christ accounteth Himself a sufferer, when the members of His body are suffering, as such: So what Christ did, as an Head to His mystical Body▪ and Spiritual Kingdom, according to the designation and appointment of God, who made Him both King & Lord, must redound to their advantage, according to their necessity; and therefore what He did, as a publick Head & Representative, must be imputed unto them, who are of His Body, & were undertaken for & represented by Him.

He saith, 2. Though the benefite of what the head doth, be communicated to the whole body; yet what the head doth, is no wayes to be imputed to hand, or to foot. Ans. The hand or foot needeth no imputation of what is done by the head, but a community, or political body, and every member thereof, needeth an Imputation of what is done for their good, & in their Law-place, by their Head & publick Representative. And in this matter, we look upon Christ, as such an Head.

Against the Marriage Union betwixt Christ & Beleevers, mentioned as another ground to cleare this Imputation, he saith 1. It is true, the wife by marriage, comes to be endowed with all that is her husbands, but this endowing is no ingredient into the marriage it self, but a fruit thereof; so the right, which a beleever hath to the Righteousness of Christ, accrueth unto him by & upon this Spiritual marriage; and therefore it cannot be imputed to him. The marriage must be first made up, before the right be had unto this Righteousness. Ans. If the right unto Christ's Righteousness accrue unto Beleevers by & upon their Spiritual marriage with Christ, this Righteousness must be imputed to them, and reckoned upon their score, or made over unto them, as the dowrie is made over to the wife and reckoned hers, upon her marriage. We grant the marriage is first made up, and that this is done by faith; and yet at the very act of beleeving, this Righteousness is imputed. This marriage Union is first in order of nature, but no time interveeneth betwixt this Union and the Imputation of Righteousness. He saith 2. all that is the husbands is not every way the wifes, nor for every use & purpose, but only in a way of expediency and beneficialness; as his clothes are not hers to put on: so the beleever must take heed of assuming the glorious rob of His Righteousness to himself, otherwayes than in the benefite and comfort of it. Ans. All that is the husband's becometh the wifes by Marriage, for every use and purpose, that her necessity calleth for, and the nature of the thing admitteth; as his riches becometh hers to her maintainance, and to the paying of her debt; and his honour becometh hers, to the exalting of her to a Sutable state of honour; even so must Christ's Righteousness become the Beleevers, that his debt may be payed, and he saved out of the hand of justice, & advanced to a state of life, and have right to glory.

Obj. 3. Chap. 11. pag. 118. If God hath sufficiently provided otherwayes for the justification of his people, He doth not impute this Righteousness of Christ for that end. But God hath provided otherwayes for this end. Which he thus prodeth. He that is compleatly justified by having his sins forgiven, is justified without this Imputation. But a beleever is sufficiently justified before God by the forgiveness of sins. Ergo. Ans. Though a person justified is pardoned, yet justification includeth more, than meer pardon of Sins. Justification is the pronouncing and accepting of a person as Righteous; and therefore the person so justified and accepted must be righteous: and seing he is not inherently righteous, he must be righteous by Imputation. What he said to this purpose before Chap. 5. of his book (to which he here remitteth us) hath been examined already. What he addeth here, shall now be considered, waving mens Sayings, wherewith I purpose not to medle here. He citeth againe to this purpose Rom. 4: 6, 7. to which we spoke above. He supposeth, that the Apostle here did intend a full description of justification; But this he cannot clearly evince, & he forgetteth, that the Apostle maketh mention of Imputed Righteousness; and that not as one and the same thing with free Remission, but as inseparable from it. The Apostles designe was not to give here a full Definition or description of Justification, it being Sufficient to the purpose he had in hand, to mention so much thereof, as did clearly & irrefragably confirme the same viz. That the blessed state of justification is not brought about, or had by the works of the Law: yea, (as is said) that very Imputation of Righteousness is not only included in the word blessedness, by which this State of justification is expressed; for a blessed man is one, who not only is freed from guilt and punishment, but hath also a right to the Crown, and to the rich recompense of reward, which is not had without a Righteousness; but is plainly also expressed, when he saith, Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without works. Here is a Righteousness, even a positive Righteousness, mentioned, and a Righteousness imputed, and a Righteousness without our works of obedience to the Law. Hence we need not assert any Synecdoche here; or say, that a part is put fot the whole, which yet is no unusual thing in Scripture; and might be admitted here, even in this matter, without any absurdity; seing where one part of this business is mentioned, the other is necessarily understood, because of the necessary & inviolable connexion, that is betwixt them.

He saith further pag. 130. If forgiveness of sins be but a part, and the worser half of our justification, then when the Scripture saith, we are justified by His blood (Rom. 5: 9.) the sense must be, we are justified by half through his blood, but the better halfe of our justification must come another way; for by his blood we cannot have his active Righteousness imputed to us. (1.) We use not to make such comparisons betwixt these things (here called parts) had in justification; as to call the one the better part, and the other the worser part, both being requisite to make up our state of blessedness, and necessary thereunto. (2.) When the Scripture saith, we are justified by His blood, the meaning is not, we are justified by the half through His blood: for half justification is no justification. (3) Nor is the Reason added of any force: for by blood here, we may as well understand, by a Synecdoche, His active Righteousness, as all His passive, both being but integral parts of His Surety-righteousness, & emphatically expressed by His death, or blood, the most remarkable piece thereof, & expressive of His love and condescension, and terminating point of Surety-obedience; for He said, it was finished, when He offered up Himself, & gave up the Ghost.

He addeth, So where it is said againe Chap. 5. vers 16. that the gift (viz. of Righteousness by Christ) is of many offences unto justification: If the gift of many offences, i.e. the forgiveness of Mans Sinnes, will not amount to a justification, without the Imputation of a legal Righteousness, we must give a check to Paul's pen. Ans. This is but vanity: we need give no check unto the Apostle's pen: for though He said not in this verse expresly, that there was a gift of Righteousness also imputed; yet he said it expresly vers 17. & 18. & 1. And shall we think, that in such a continued discourse, as this is, wherein the Apostle is explaining the whole mystery by its parts, he should mention all things, in one verse?

He proceeds to prove, that Remission of sins is the whole of justification pag. 131. Because the end (saith he) for which this Imputed Righteovsness of Christ is thus brought in to the business of justification, viz. to be the Right to the Inheritance, is supplied in a way more evangelical, & of more sweetness & dearness to the Children of God, to wit, by the grace of Adoption, Ans. To this we have said enough above, & will have occasion to speak againe to it, in the next objection.

He addeth further 4. That if we thus separat and divide the benefite of Christ's Active and passive Obedience, in Iustification, we take a course to lose & destroy both. Ans. Not to transcribe his tedious discourse, on this accout, I only say, That it is wholly founded upon a mistake, as if our showing the necessity of the Imputation of both, were a separating or dividing of the benefite of both, whileas the whole Effect floweth from the whole cause, both Christ's Active & His passive obedience making up one compleat Surety-righteousness; and so producing one whole blessedness to beleevers, consisting in Remission of Sins, & in a Right to Glory: we say with him, that neither of them separated or abstracted from the other can profite us; and therefore we assert the Imputation of both, as one compleat Surety-righteousness, answereing our necessity in all points. His own words pag. 132. 133. make clearly for us. I would not have (saith he) the active obedience of Christ separated from the passive, nor againe the passive from the active, in respect of the common & joint effect, justification, arising from a concurrence of them both; yet would I not have Christ in his mystery tumbled up together on a heap; for this would be to deface the beauty and excellency of that wisdom, which shines forth gloriously, in the face thereof. I would have every thing, that Christ was, did-and suffered, to be distinguished, not only in themselves; but also in their proper and immediat Effects, respectively ariseing and flowing from them severally.

Lastly. He tels us, If the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness must be added, as another part of justification, then must the formal cause of one & the same Effect be double; yea one & the same formal part of the thing shall be compounded of two things, of a diverse and opposite consideration. Ans. We make the Imp • tation of Christ's Righteousness not a part of justification; But the cause of it; and yet the formal cause of one and the same Effect is not made double▪ for as the Cause is one compleat Cause, viz. the Surety-righteousness of Christ, so the Effect is one compleat Effect, though both Cause and Effect may be considered, as consisting of several Integral parts. There is no ground here to say, That one and the same formal part of a thing is compounded of diverse or opposite things.

Obj. 4. Chap. 12. Pag. 136. &c. That which dissolveth and taketh away the necessity & use of that sweet evangelical grace of Adoption, cannot hold a streight course with the thruth of the Gospel. But this is done by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. Ergo. The Minor, which is only here to be denied, he laboureth to prove, because we say, The Righteousness of Christ must be imputed in order to our obtaining Right and Title to Life; & that by Remission of Sins a man is only delivered from death, but receiveth no Right to the Kingdom of heaven. But what can he hence inferre for confirmation of the Minor? Now (saith he) this being the direct & proper end, use, office, purpose & intent of Adoption, to invest a beleever with a capacity with heaven; it followes, that whosoever shall attempt to set any thing else upon this throne, seeks to dissolve Adoption. Ans. The Consequence is null. The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will no more take away Adoption, than justification; for it is the ground and Cause of both. He might as well say, That because in and by justification, we have Remission of Sins, to assert the Imputation of Christ's death and Sufferings for this end, is to dissolve justification. But the truth is clear, as was explained above Myst. 14.

He thinks both cannot stand together, because either of them is a compleat & entire Title within itself; perfect Righteousness is a perfect title alone; so is Adoption or Sonship. Ans. (1.) This will say as much against the Imputation of Christ's death and Sufferings, as against justification: for either of these is a compleat Title (according to our Adversary) to Immunity from death: perfect Satisfaction is a perfect title alone to this Immunity, as well as perfect Righteousness is a perfect title to the Inheritance: & Justification or Remission of Sins, (which are one with him) is also a perfect Right to this, as well as Adoption is a perfect Right to that. (2) But as Justification is founded upon the Imputed Righteousness of Christ; so is Adoption. As Christ's death and Satisfaction is not formall pardon, or Right to Impunity, but is, when Imputed, the ground and cause of justification, wherein the Beleever is solemnely brought into a state of freedome from death: So Christ's Obedience and Fulfilling of the Law is not a formal Right unto the inheritance, but, when Imputed and received by faith, the ground and cause of Adoption, whereby the Beleever is, as it were, solemnely infeoffed of the Inheritance. Here then is nothing in vaine; but all things so ordered, as may most commend the riches of the wisdom & Grace of God; & may most ensure life and all to the • eleever. So that his following discourse is meer froath and vanity: for, as God may appoint moe meanes for the same end, as He pleaseth; as His promises, oath & Sacraments to confirme the faith of beleevers; so there can be no reason given, why it may not be so here: & yet, to speak properly, Adoption is no mean, or Cause of the Right and Title to Glory, being the solemne Collation of that Right to the beleever, or the solemne stating of him in that Right; as justification properly is no Meane to or Cause of pardon and Acceptation of Sinners, but rather the solemne bringing of them into or placeing of them in that state of peace, Pardon and Reconciliation, who beleeve in Jesus and lay hold on His Righteousness. What he speaketh of the opposition betwixt the Law and the promise, in giving of life from Gal. 3: 21. is most Impertinent; so also is that, which he saith from Gal. 2: 21. for though it be an abrogating and making void of the ordinances of God, when another thing, that is contrary & expresly excluded by the Lord from that office & work, is set up with it, to bring the same end to passe, or to serve in the same place and office: yet is there not the least coloure of ground to say, That if our Right & Title to heaven be by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, then doth God give the grace of Adoption in vaine: for the Righteousness of Christ is the Meritorious procuring Cause of this Right and Title to heaven; and when this is Imputed & made over to the beleever, he receiveth the Effect and▪ Fruit of that purchase viz. an Actual Right to glory, & is solemnely infeofed (as it were) thereof. What ignorance & folly would it discover in a man, to say, That the legal installing of a man by publick seasing & Infeofment in the legal Right to & possession of such a Land, or House, is that which giveth the man Right; and therefore the price he hath laid down, to purchase that Land, or house, hath no Interest or Consideration in that purchase, for these two cannot consist, the one must necessarily render the other useless; if he hath made a purchase of the Land & house by his money, he needeth no Charter or Infeofment thereof: or if his Charter & Infeofment giveth him Right to possesse the same, the price laid down is of no use? would not every one smile at such Non-sense? And yet so reasoneth this learned Adversary, who will have the Righteousness of Christ laid by, which is the only price and purchasing Merite of our Right to Heaven; or the Grace of Adoption, whereby the beleever becometh legally (as it were) infeofed of the Inheritance. It is vaine, if he should think to escape by saying. That he acknowledgeth the price of Christ's Righteousness; but speaketh of the Imputation of that Righteousness, in order to this Right; For the Imputation of this Righteousness is but the Interessing of the beleever in that price, as the price of such a purchase, to the end he may receive the legal infeofment of the Inheritance purchased, in Adoption.

Obj. 5. Chap. 13. pag. 145. He that hath a perfect & compleat Righteousness of the Law imputed to him, standeth in need of no Repentance. Ans. This Consequence is utterly false, as was shewed above Chap. 6. Mystery. 13. Repentance is not prescribed in the Gospel, for any such use or end, for which the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is called for. If Adam (saith he) had kept the Law, he had needed: no Repentance, more than Christ himself needed; & those that kept the Law in him, as exactly & perfectly as he did, what more ne • d of Repentance have they, than he had, Ans Adam, it is true, had needed no Repentance, if he had kept the Law: But the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness & obedience to us, though thereby we come to enjoy the Effects & purchase thereof, as really as if we had Fulfilled the Law ourselves; yet it maketh us not to have been no sinners; nor doth it exeem us from the Law, in time coming, nor put us out of case of sinning any more; and consequently prejudgeth not the true & lively exercise of that grace of Repentance.

He addeth. He that is as righteous, as Christ is, (which those must needs be, who are righteous with His righteousness) needeth no more Repentance, than He needed. Ans. We do not love to say, that beleevers, through this Imputation, are as Righteous, as Christ was: for that expression might import that thereby they become as Righteous inherently, as He was; which is false: But that thereby they are legally accounted Righteous, to all ends & purposes, as if they themselves, in their own persons, had Fulfilled the Law: And therefore, though thereby they become, in Law-sense, Righteous; yet they are inherently ungodly & unrighteous, till sanctifying grace make a change here; & therefore stand in need of Repentance.

To that That Beleevers need Repentance for their daily & personal failings, he saith, But they that have an entire & perfect Law-righteousness Imputed to them, have no such need, in any respect; because in the Imputation of a perfect Righteousness, there is an universal non-Imputation of sin apparently included. Besides, if God doth Impute a perfect Law-righteousness, it must be supposed, that the rights & privileges, belonging to such righteousness do accompany it, in the Imputation—Now, one maine privilege hereof is to invest with a full & entire right unto life, out of its own intrinsecal & inherent dignity & worth, which is a privilege, wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin, in the person that stands possessed of it. Ans. Where there is an Imputation of a perfect Righteousness, there there is an universal Non-Imputation of sin, in reference to actual condemnation, or to the prejudging of the person, partaker of this Imputation, of the reward of life; but as this Imputation of Righteousness maketh not a sinner to have been no sinner; so neither doth it make their future sinnes to be no sinnes, or them to be no sinners, in time coming; because it is imputed for no such end. (2) It is true, the Rights & privileges, belonging to this Righteousness, do accompany the Imputation thereof; & that thereby beleevers become invested with a full & entire Right to life, because of its intrinsecal & inherent dignity; but it is utterly false, to say, That this full & entire Right to life is inconsistent with the least tincture of sin, in the person possessed of it: & hereby he must say one of these two; either that there is no full Right had to life, while persons are in this life; or that there is a full and sinless perfection attainable and had by all beleevers; so that they sinne no more, Both which are most false.

But what will he say of Faith, which he will have imputed for Righteousness, seing this must bring alongs with it the same privileges; & so exclude Repentance too? To this he saith. The meaning is not, as if God either Imputed, or accepted, or accounted faith for the self same thing, which the Righteousness of the Law is intrinsecally & formally; or as if God, in this Imputation, either gave or accounted unto faith any power or privilege to justifie, out of any inherent worth of it. But the meaning only is, that God, upon Man's faith, will as fully justify him, as if he had perfectly fulfilled the Law • He that fulfilled the Law & thereby is justified, is justified out of the inherent dignity of that, which justifieth him; but he that is justified by faith, is justified by the free & gracious acceptation of it by God; for that, which is justifying in its own Nature, & by vertue of its inherent worth & dignity. Ans. What God Imputeth & reputeth to be a Righteousness, in order to justification, must be accounted such, or a man shall be justified, without all consideration of a Righteousness▪ and so be pronounced & declared Righteous, though he be not Righteous upon any account, or in any manner of way: And if faith be not accounted for the self same thing, or for the equivalent with the Righteousness of the Law, how shall it be accounted a Righteousness, in order to the justification of a sinner, who is under the Curse of the Law, & who, because of the breach of the Law, hath no right to life? wherefore faith must have that inherent worth, that the Righteousness of the Law should have had, else it cannot be a Righteousness, whereupon a sinner can be justified before God, who is Just and Righteous, and will not pronounce such to be Righteous, as are not Righteous. (2) If God, upon a man's faith, will as fully justify a man, as if he had fulfilled the Law, either that faith must be a Righteousness, and so accounted, which he here denieth; or the man must be declared Righteous, who hath no Righteousness; and so the judgment of God should not be according to truth; or upon his beleeving he must be justified, as being Righteous by an Imputed Righteousness; which is the thing he peremptorily denieth. (3) When one is justified by faith, by God's free & gracious Acceptation of it, this act of grace must either import, that faith is accepted as a Righteousness, & so accounted of God; or still the beleever shall be declared and pronounced Righteous, though he hath no Righteousness; or the meaning of this Acceptation must be, that God hath graciously condescended to appoint this mean & way of sinners having an Interest in the Righteousness of Christ, whereby he may be accounted Righteous & justified, as really, as is he had performed that Righteousness himself, in his own person: & in this sense, it is most true, but utterly destructive of his designe. (4) If faith be accepted for that, which is justifying in its own Nature, & by vertue of its Inherent worth & dignity, it must either be that, which is of such inherent worth, or it must be accepted for that, which it is not, & so a man must be judged by God to have that, which he hath not.

He concludeth thus. Wherefore, the Imputation of faith for righteousness may well stand with personal sins, in him, to whom this Imputation is made, in respect of which sins he remaines obliged to repent: but the Imputation of a perfect legal Righteousness makes a man perfectly righteous in the letter & formality of it. Ans. Then it seemeth that by the Imputation of faith for Righteousness, a man standeth not invested & possessed of a full & entire right unto life: for that, he said before, was a privilege wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin. (2) If by a perfect legal Righteousness, he meane a Righteousness required of the Law & performed by us personally, we plead not for the Imputation of any such: but if he mean a Righteousness consisting in full conformity to the Law, performed by Christ & graciously imputed to us, & received by faith, that is well consistent with inherent & personal sins. What he meaneth by making a man perfectly righteous in the letter & formality of it. I know not, till some be pleased to explaine it.

Obj. 6. Another argum. he prosecuteth pag. 149. &c. thus. If men be as Righteous as Christ himself was, in his life, there was no more necessity of His death for them, than for himself▪ then the just should not have died for the unjust, but for the just. Ans. If we had not transgressed the Law, there had been no necessity, that either we, or any for us, should have died; but having transgressed the Law, & thereby fallen under the Curse, & wanting all right to life, we must have a Surety-righteousness, whereby not only the Curse shall be taken away, but the blessing of Abraham may come upon us, & we may have a full right to life: & therefore both the Active & passive Righteousness of Christ is necessary (2) Christ died for the unjust, because His death, which was the period & terminating act of His obedience, and Surety righteousness, which He undertook to performe in our room and Law-place, was for sinners, lying under the Curse, & void of all right & title to life. He imagineth, that first Christ's Active Righteousness is imputed, & thereby the person is constituted Righteous; & then inferreth the non • necessity of Christ's death: By we say, that Christ's whole Surety-righteousness, consisting in what He did & suffered, in His state of Humiliation, in our room, and as Cautioner, is at once imputed, and not in parts; that so the necessity of sinners may be answered in all points.

He thinks to prove this consequence by these words Gal. 2: 21. If righteousness be by the Law, then Christ died in vaine; rejecting the sense of the word Law, viz. as importing the works of the Law, as performed by us, in our own person, & thereby doing violence to the whole Scope of the place, & to the constant acceptation of the expression; & supposing that the Consequence will be strong, though the works of the Law, as performed by Christ, be here understood; & that meerly upon this false ground, Because the Righteousness of Christ's life imputed had been a Sufficient, & every wayes a compleat Righteousness for us. Nor need we say, as he saith in our name, That there was a Necessity, that Cbrist should did, that so the righteousness of His life might be imputed to 〈◊〉 . For the necessity of His death arose from our transgressing of the Law, & being under the Curse.

Obj. 7. Chap. 14. pag. 151. He alleigeth, that this Imputation evaniateth Remission of Sins, saying, for if men be righteous with the same righteousness, wherewith Christ was righteous, they have no more need of pardon, than He had. Ans. We spoke to this above. Chap. 6. Mystery 11. & therefore need say no more here, then that the Consequence is null, & that the probation is insufficient, for though we be constituted Righteous through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; it is but a Surety-righteousness, & not our own inherently: & the Surety not being of our appointing or fitting & furnishing, our pardon is a Consequent & Effect of this Imputation. (2) The consequence is no more valide from the Imputation of the Active Righteousness of Christ, than from His passive and Satisfaction: and so with Soci • ians, he must also hereby deny Christ's Satisfaction, that he may establish his free Remission. But Gospel free forgiveness is rather established, than any way weakened by our Assertion of the Imputation of Christ's whole Surety-righteousness.

He addeth, Christ hath taught us to pray for forgiveness of Sins: now to pray for that, and yet to conceite ourselves as righteous, as Christ was, is rather to mock, than to worship. Ans. This expression to conceite ourselves as righteous as Christ was, is none of ours; & though it may admit of a good sense as being true, quoad veritatem, though not quoad modum: yet because it is so ambiguous, & liable to misconstruction, I chose rather to forbear it, seeing no necessity touse it. And to conceite our selves legally & juridically righteous with the Imputed Surety-righteousness of Christ, is very consistent with praying for pardon: for Christ's Surety-righteousness is not, nor yet said to be, imputed for this end immediatly, that all our after actions should be sinless; but to this end rather, that we may have actual pardon of by past sinnes, & of future sins too, after the methode of the Gospel; and that none of our sins should actually procure our Condemnation, or prejudge us of eternal Felicity; but that notwithstanding thereof, we should not come into condemnation, but enter into life.

He saw, that what he here objecteth against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, will militat as much against the Imputation of Faith, which must derive a righteousness upon the person, as perfect and compleat, as the Righteousness of the Law; & so can leave as little place for Remission, as what we plead for; and therefore to obviat this, he tels us. That when faith is imputed, another thing is imputed▪ then the righteousness of the Law it self, to wit, faith, by name, in stead of it: Now any other righteousness, or any other thing imputed for righteousness, besides the righteousness of the Law, will bear a consistency of sin with it, & of remission. Ans. If by the righteousness of the Law here, he only meaneth that, which we performe in our own persons, it is true, that is inconsistent with sin or pardon: but it is false, if he understand thereby, the righteousness of the Law, performed by another, Christ our Surety. And sure, if his faith be accounted a Righteousness, it must be a Righteousness, or God's estimation is not just: & if it be a Righteousness; it must be accompanied with all the privileges of a Righteousness (as himself saith) and consequently exclude all Sin & Remission, if these be such concomitans of an Imputed righteousness.

He addeth, when a perfect Sanctification is imputed to a man for his justification▪ that man can be no more reputed to have sin in him, than to be obnoxious to death, which is opposite to justification. Ans. And no wonder; for perfect Sanctification being a perfect inherent holiness, cannot, without a contradiction, but exclude sin. But who speak of such an Imputation of Sanctification? We know no such thing; for Sanctification is wrought & inherent in us, & not imputed to us. If he meane by this perfect Sanctification, the perfect Obedience and Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, we say, though that perfect Sanctification or Righteousness could be consistent with no sin in Christ; yet, when imputed to us, it can consist with sin inherent in us, & with pardon of sin also; as we have already cleared.

Further saith he. But when that, which either is no Sanctification, or at most, but an imperfect Sanctification, is imputed for Righteousness in a mans justification, place is left for inherencie of sin, & consequently for the forgiveness of it. Ans. That which is no Sanctification, or at most, but an imperfect Sanctification, must either be no Righteousness, or at most, an imperfect righteousness; and therefore cannot be reputed or accounted a perfect righteousness; and so cannot be imputed to a person, in order to justification. Or if we should suppose, that God did make it, & really repute it to be a righteousness, it must be a compleat righteousness; & consequently inconsistent with pardon, because it shall hereby become a compleat inherent Holiness & Righteousness.

Obj. 8. Chap. 15. pag. 153. &c. Whoseever is perfectly righteous, or as righteous as Christ is, in him God can see no sin. But every beleever (saith this opinion, which we impugne) is as perfectly & compleatly righteous, as Christ himself is. Therefore &c. Ans. How false this consequence is, was manifested above Chap. 6. Mystery 15. And now, waving that expression of being as righteous, as Christ himself is. I distinguish the Major thus, Whosoever is perfectly righteous with an inherent Righteousness (taking perfection here not for kind, but for degrees) in him God can see no sin, true: but in this sense the Minor is false. Whosoever is perfectly Righteous with an Imputed righteousness, in him God can see no sin, or order to actual condemnation, it is true, but then the Conclusion containeth nothing but truth. It is true, God could see no sin in Christ, because there was no sin existing in Him; yet He can see sin in beleeves, in whom sin existeth, notwithstanding they be clothed with the perfect Righteousness of Christ, which only maketh, that God can see no sin in them, for which He will actually bring them into condemnation; and this is consonant to Scripture Rom. 8: 1.

Obj. 9. Another Reason he proposeth Chap. 16. pag. 154. &c. alleiging; That by this Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, we confound the two Covenants of Works & of Grace. But as to this, we have cleared the truth above Chap. 6. Mystery 16. Nor need we be much troubled at his bold alleigance; fo • not we, but he & others with him, by his opinion, in pleading for the sole Imputation of faith, as our Gospel Righteousness, to which some adde other works of obedience, do turne the Gospel into a new Covenant of Works: for if faith, properly taken, alone, or conjunct with other works of Righteousness, which we do, be all our Gospel-righteousness, we are justified by our own personal obedience & righteousness; and this was the plaine tenor of the Covenant of works: The variation of the obedience, now required from what was of old, though now it be but as a pepper corne, in comparison of the greater rent formerly required, doth make no alteration in the Nature and Essence of the Covenant: for justification & life is still by works of righteousness, which we do, and which are our owne. But when the Righteousness of a Surety is imputed, & we are upon that account accepted, though the righteousness, wrought by the Surety, be obedience to the same Law, that was in force under the first Covenant, & which we were obliged unto, & lying under the Curse of (as it must needs have been, seing He did substitute himself in our place, & took our debt upon Him) the Covenant is altered: for the first Covenant knew no Righteousness, but what was our owne & personal; & did not admit of a Surety. Thus these two Covenants are not confounded by us, but kept manifestly distinct; & we cannot owne their Gospel-way of justification, as being a way to bring us back againe to the old Covenant of works, with a meer pretext of some ease, as to the Conditions, or Termes.

Yet he would prove, that the two Covenants are made one by us, thus, where the parties Covenanting are the same; & the things covenanted for are the same; and the Conditions or agreement the same, there the Covenants are every way the same. But if the Righteousness of the Law imputed to us be the agreement, or Condition of the New Covenant, all the three, persons, things, & Conditions are the same. Ans. (1) It may be questioned, if either the persons Covenanting, or the things Covenanted for, in both Covenants, be the same every way; but to speak of this is not our present purpose (2) The Covenants do not agree, as to their Conditions; for the condition required in the Covenant of works, was a proper antecedent condition, which is a cause of the thing promised; but the Condition of the New Covenant is only a consequent condition, denoting nothing else, than a connexion, or order betwixt the thing promised, & the condition required. (3) The Righteousness of the Law imputed to us, is no condition required of us, in the New Covenant; but it is required of us, that by faith we close with Christ, & thereby come to have an Interest in Christ, & in all His Righteousness, to all ends and purposes; which our case and necessity calleth for. (4) This Righteousness of the Law was called for from us, in our own persons, in the old Covenant; but in the New Covenant, the righteousness is Imputed to us, when we beleeve in Him. And this, as is said, is enough to distinguish these Covenants.

But he thinks. The Righteousness of the Law imputed from another, & wrought by ourselves do not much differ, the substance being the same. Ans. Yet this difference may make a substantial difference in the two Covenants: for when the Covenant of Works did not admit of the performance of the Conditions by a Surety, as himself proved by foure Arguments pag. 155. And the Covenant of Grace holdeth forth justification only through the Righteousness of another, imputed to us, & received by faith: Though the Righteousness, mentioned in both, consist in conformity to the same Law; yet the Covenants cannot but substantially differ, as is obvious to every one. Beside, that the righteousness imputed consisteth in more, than in Obedience to the Law; for it comprehendeth his whole Surety-righteousness; & that took in His Sufferings also. The following objection, which he preoccupieth, is purely his owne, & so I leave it.

Obj. 10. Chap. 17. pag. 158. &c. That for which Righteousness is imputed to those that beleeve, cannot be imputed to them for righteousness. But the Righteousness of Christ is that, for which righteousness is imputed to those that beleeve. Ergo. The Assumption he thinks none will deny, but such as deny the righteousness to be the Meritorious Cause of that Righteousness or justification, which is conferred upon men. The Major he thus proveth If it be Impossible, that the thing merited should be the same thing, with that, which is the Meritorious Cause thereof, then it is not only not true, but impossible, that the Righteousness of Christ should be the Righteousness of a beleever. But the former is true Ergo &c. Aus. This is nothing but a pure fallacy, founded upon a palpable mistake viz of confounding righteousness & justification as if they were one & the same. To discover this, let us put Iustification for Righteousness in the first Argument, thus. That for which beleevers are justified, cannot be imputed to them for righteousness, But the Righteousness of Christ is that for which beleevers are justified. Therefore &c. Who seeth not now, how false the Major propositions is; & how impertinent & ridiculous the probation thereof is? justification, which is the Effect, or the thing merited, is not the same thing with the Righteousness of Christ, the Meritorious cause thereof.

Obj. 11. pag. 160. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to a beleever for righteousness, in his justification, then the meritorious cause of his justification is imputed. But that cannot be imputed. Ergo &c. He proveth the Minor, which is denied, thus, Because the Meritorious cause, being a kind of Efficient can not be either the matter, or the forme of that, whereof it is Efficient—It is an Inviolable Law amongs the foure kindes of causes, Material, Formal, Final & Efficient, that the two former do only ingredi composition, or effectum, & are partes rei constitutae; & that the two latter are alwayes extrinsecal, & stand without. Ans. All which is but vaine argueing, grounded upon this palpable mistake, that justification is a physical Effect, like the whiteing of a wall; (which is the example, whereby, he illustrats the matter) & therefore he thinketh, that these termes are used, in this matter, in as proper a sense, as when they are applied to physical causes & Effects; whileas the matter is quite otherwise; & many of these termes are here used, but in a metaphorical sense. But to the matter, whether Imputed Righteousness, be called the Material cause, with some, or the formal cause, with others, of justification, is no great matter, seing every one hath liberty to explaine, in what sense he useth these termes, in this matter; & I should rather choose to use the terme (if such like termes must be used) of the formal objective cause, or Reason; This is enough to us, That it is that, whereby they become juridically righteous; & that, upon the consideration whereof, now imputed to them, they are pronounced Righteous & justified; & so is the meritorious cause of their justification, & that Righteousness, which covereth them, & upon the account of which, they are declared & pronounced Righteous: as the payment of the Surety, is as the meritorious cause in Law of the absolution of the debtor, & the ground upon which he is absolved, being accounted his payment, because the debtor & Surety are one person in Law. As in a juridical sentence of Absolution of an accused debtor, there is no proper formal, or material cause; so neither in the matter of justification, which is God's juridical Act & Sentence.

Yet I cannot acquiesce to what he addeth, saying That only remission of sins or absolution from punishment, is as the forme applied unto, or put upon the matter, & the matter or subject it self, where unto this forme is applied; Not only because, according to his own argueing, one thing cannot be both matter & forme of the same thing; but because Remission of sins in hereby made the whole of justification; whereas to speak properly it is but an Effect or consequent, or at most a part thereof; & the person justified is properly absolved from the accusation & declared to be Righteous; & so is legally constituted or put into a state of Righteousness, or of Righteous persons, whereupon followeth freedom from guilt, or punishment, & a Right to the reward: & as to this State, whatever we shall conceive as the forme thereof, it must be a Righteousness; & consequently the Righteousness of Christ imputed; for sinners can have no other.

Obj. 12. If the meritorious cause of our justification be imputed unto us, thon the Effects themselves of this cause may be imputed to us also; & so we may be said to have merited both our own justification, & salvation: for if I may be accounted or reputed to have wrought that Righteousness, which is meritorious, why may I not be conceived as well to have merited? Nay further, if I may be conceived to have wrought that Righteousness in Christ, whereby I am justified my self, I may as well be conceived to have wrought that Righteousness, by which the whole world is justified. Ans. This is but a meer sophisme, founded upon a mistake: The consequence is false, & the proof thereof standeth only upon this rotten bottome. That to say, That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us, is to say, that we are reputed, esteemed, or accounted to have done or wrought that Righteousness our selves; whileas the true meaning of Imputation is this. That the Righteousness of Christ is made over by grace unto Beleevers, & reckoned upon their score, where by they are dealt with now, no other wayes, than if they had fulfilled all Righteousness, in their own person. Whence it is clear, that the Effects cannot be said to be imputed to us; but only that we partake of the Effects thereofs, so far as our own Necessity requireth: As the Ransom payed for the Redemption of so many captives, is imputed to each of the captives, in order to his owne Redemption, & to none of them as Redemption of others: & without this Imputation, or reckoning it upon their score, as the price of their Redemption, no man could have right to the Effects thereof in reference to himself, or could be redeemed thereby. So that it is manifest, that through the meritorious cause, or the righteousnes of Christ imputed to us, we obtaine justification & Salvation; but do not merite them: our Redeemer & Surety meriteth them for us, & we enjoy what He merited for our own happiness. It is false then to say, That by Imputation we are conceived to have wrought that righteousness in Christ, whereby we are justified: & therefore it cannot but be most false to think, That we may be conceived to have wrought that righteousness also, by which others are justified; for it was only our Head, Husband, Surety & Redeemer, who wrought it, & free grace imputed it to, or reckoneth it upon the score of Beleevers.

Obj, 13. chap. 18. pag. 165. If the active Righteousness of Christ be in the letter & formality of it imputed unto me, in my justification, then I am reputed before God, to have wrought that righteousness in Christ. But this is false &c. Ans. Neither proposition is true: The Major is denied, unless by these word, letter and formality, he understand such an Imputation, as we do not acknowledge, & his words would seem to import this: for (saith he, in confirmation of the Major) to have any thing imputed to a man, in the letter of it, is to be reputed the doer of what is so imputed to him: And if this be the only sense of his proposition, the conclusion maketh not against us: for we asserte no such Imputation, as inferreth such a Reputation, Nay, to say, That God should repute things so, were to destroy all Imputation, for what God (whose judgment is according to truth) • eputeth us to have done, we must have done it; & if we have really done it, & be reputed to have done it by the Lord, it cannot be said to be imputed to us, in the sense we take Imputation; for Imputation with us, is of that, which we have not, or did not, & which God knoweth & judgeth we did not; & yet is by Imputation so made over to us, & put upon our score, & reckoned upon our account, as that we are as really made partakers of the Effects thereof, that is, of justification &c. As if we had done it ourselves, or it had been ours, without & before any Imputation. Hence the beleever is made the righteousness of God in Christ; & not reputed, or esteemed to have been the righteousness of God, but now, through the gracious Imputation of God, & through faith made to be so.

Hence we see, that the proof of his Minor goeth upon the same Mistake if (saith he) I be reputed before God to have wrought Righteousness, in Christ in my justification, then is Christ, in His Sufferings, reputed before God to have sinned in me. Ans. We say neither the one, nor the other. Christ did not sinne in us, nor did the Lord repute Him to have done so. But he was made sin, by Imputation; the guilt of sin being laid upon Him; or our sinnes, as to their guilt, being caused to meet on Him. Whence it came to passe, that He suffered as really the punishment of sin, as if He had sinned in us, whileas, as to His own person, He knew no sin, neither was deceit found in His mouth.

Obj. 14. pag. 166. If the Active obedience of Christ be imputed, then His Passive is imputed also. Ans. And why not? If the death & Sufferings of Christ (saith he) be imputed unto me; then may I be accounted or reputed to have died or suffered in Christ. But this cannot be: because in Christ, we are justified & absolved from punishment; & therefore cannot be said to have been punished in Him. Ans. This whole Argument is of a piece with the foregoing: Though therefore it be upon the matter answered already: Yet we shall adde this word further. That though in one sense it is false, to say, That we are reputed to have died & Suffered in Christ viz physically; yet in a legal sense, it may be admitted, as a truth, that Beleevers, who now by faith are in Christ, & of His Body, are accounted & reputed to have suffered in Christ, their Head, Surety & Publick person; & therefore are now dealt with, as, such. Hence they are said to be crucified with Christ, to be dead & buried with Him, & to be risen with Him Rom. 6: 4, 5, 6. Ephes. 2: 5, 6. Col. 2: 12. Yet it will not follow hence, that in a legal sense Christ can be said to have sinned in us; for we were not His Representative or Head. Though the debtor may be said, in Law sense, to have paid his creditor, in his Suretys payment; Yet the Surety cannot be said to be contracting debt, in the debtor, for the debtor's deed cannot affect him, untill he voluntarily submit himself to be Surety, where may be after the debt is already contracted by the debtor. And to say, in this Law sense, that Beleevers Suffered in Christ, doth not weaken the ground of our justification, absolution, Acceptation, & Healing, as is manifested above, unless we turn. Socinians; & then upon this same ground, we may deny all the Satisfaction of Christ.

Obj. 15. pag. 168. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us, then are we justified, at least in part, by the ceremonial Law; because part of that Righteousness, which Christ wrought, stood in obedience to the ceremonial Law. But this is not true. Ergo &c. Ans. We are not said to be justified either by the Moral, or by the Ceremonial Law; But by the righteousness of Christ, which consisted in yeelding perfect obedience to the Law of God, & in answering all the demands of the Law, in the behalf of His owne. And so, though the Law doth not justifie us, because we are sinners; yet neither can the Law now condemne us, because Christ, our Surety, hath perfectly fulfilled it, & given full Satisfaction to the Law given, for our violation thereof. And, in this matter, the Ceremonial Law is not to be separated from the Moral, it being but a branch, or an Appendix thereof, & enjoined thereby: for the Moral Law saith, that God must be worshipped only that way, which Himself hath prescribed, & that Ceremonial worship being the then Instituted worship of God, whosoever knowing this did not worship God after that manner; did violat the Second of the Moral Law, which became not Him to do, who came to fulfill all righteousness. And thus the righteousness of obedience, that is Imputed, is Moral, or righteousness consisting in obedience to the Moral Law. And this is wholly imputed to all beleevers, whether of Jewes, or of Gentiles, in reference to their own Redemption, or delivery. The objection, which he frameth against himself. viz. That the Moral Righteousness is Sufficient, & the other needeth not be imputed, is none of ours, as appeareth by what is said; for we do not exclude the Ceremonial, But reduce it to the Moral, obedience to that being enjoined by this.

Obj. 16. Chap. 19. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us, then are our sinnes imputed to Christ, the same manner. But this is not so. Ergo. The Minor he proveth thus If the sinnes of Men be imputed to Christ, then God looks upon Him, & reputes Him, in His Sufferings, as one that truly & really had provoked Him, & sinned against Him. Ans. This consequence is denied; for no such Reputation, or Estimation followeth upon the Imputation, which we assert, as hath been already cleared: only this will follow, that Christ being, through His own willing consent, in our Law-place, as our Surety, & having undertaken to pay our debt, He was exacted upon, & dealt with by Justice, as if He had been the true sinner, though He knew no sin; as Beleevers, having Christ's righteousness imputed to them, are dealt with, as if they had kept the Law, & made Satisfaction by themselves. But as God doth not look upon them, nor esteem, nor consider them, nor repute them, as having really fulfilled the Law in their own Physical persons; so nor doth He look upon, esteem, consider or repute Christ to have been truely & really a Transgressour of the Law, in His person. Hence we see, that his proof, that God did not look upon Christ so, is impertinent; for we do not say so, knowing that to look upon Christ, as one that had truely sinned, were to look upon Him, as deserving in Himself what was inflicted upon Him; & that God's judgment is alwayes according to truth; & that Christ knew no sin in Himself, but was made sin, as having the guilt of our sinnes imputed to Him, when He put Himself in our room & Law-place; & so He died & Suffered for us, in our stead, & became a Sacrifice for sin, having the guilt thereof laid on Him.

Obj. 17. pag. 173. If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed unto us, in our justification, then God doth look upon us, as worthy of that justification. But this is an unclean saying. Ergo. The Major he thus proveth. If God reputes me to have kept the Law, as perfectly as Christ did, He must conceive of me, as worthy of my justification; for as the fulfilling of the Law, & deserving justification, are the same Rom. 4: 4. So the reputing of a man to have done the one, is the reputing of him to have deserved the other. The Minor he thus confirmeth, Because then God should show us no grace or favour in our justification. (Rom. 4: 4. with Rom. 11: 6) But if any favour be shewed, it is only in this, that He reputeth us worthy to be justified, or puts a worthiness upon us for justification; whereas the Scripture expresly affirmeth, that God justifieth the ungodly, that is the unworthy Rom. 4: 5. Ans. Unto all this, I say (1.) We say not, that God imputeth to us the righteousness of Christ, in justification; But that He doth it in order to justification. (2.) Though Christ's Righteousness be imputed to us; Yet it will not follow; that God looketh upon us, as worthy of our justification, viz in ourselves: & it may be yeelded, that He looketh on us, when clothed with Christ's righteousness, a worthy of justification, viz in Christ our Surety 〈◊〉 with whose righteousness we are now covered, when it is imputed unto us. But then the conclusion will make nothing against us. (3.) If the meaning be, that therefore God looketh upon us, as worthy of justification in our selves, the consequence is false; & the Reason adduced for confirmation is invalide: for the Text Rom. 4: 4. speaketh of him that worketh, & so hath the ground of the merite in himself: he indeed that fulfilleth the Law in himself deserveth to be justified. And let our Adversaries see to this, who will have no Righteousness imputed, but our own faith, which is in us, & is our own, & is, in their account, as good as the fulfilling of the Law, & is accepted for that end: for Sure, such as have this faith, which is in them, reputed for their righteousness, upon the account of which they are justified, must have the reward reckoned to them, not of grace, but of debt; & so must merite & deserve their justification, in full & proper sense. (4.) It is not to be admitted, as a truth, without the forementioned distinction, to say, that the reputing of a man to have done the one, is the reputing of him to have deserved the other, for to repute a man to have done the one, in his own person, is indeed a reputing of him to have deserved the other. But we assert no such Reputation in God; for His judgment is according to truth; But only assert an Imputation, which taketh away this Reputation, these two being inconsistent: & from this Imputation can no such thing be inferred. (5.) It is true, if we deserved justification, justification should be no act grace; but we deserve no such thing, being in our selves, & as to ourselves, indeed ungodly; yet when justified, we are looked upon as clothed with the Righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, & received by faith: & so, though our justification be merited by Christ, & be an Act of justice & truth in God, in reference to Christ; yet as to us, it is of free grace; & so much the more of free grace, that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us for that end. And such as understand not this, are more principled with Socinian abominations, than with the doctrine of the Gospel of the grace of God.

Obj. 18. pag. 173. If men be formally just by God's act, imputing Christ's righteousness, then do men become formally sinful by the like act of God, imputing Adam's sin. But this is not true: for then an Act of God should be as the life & soul of that sin, which is in men. Ergo Ans. As this argument concludeth nothing against the truth, now asserted, this conclusion being different from the question now in hand; so it is but a meer exhaling of vapores out of the fog of philosophical termes & notions, that thereby the truth may be more darkened. We are not obliged by any Law of God, to explaine or interpret these mysteries of Salvation, according to these Notions, which men explaine after their own pleasure, knowing no Law, constraining them to follow either one man or other, in the arbitrary sense, which they put upon these termes. But as to the present • rgument, no answer can be given, untill it be known, what is the true meaning of these words formally just. Possibly he will understand hereby the same, that others meane by Inherently just, & so indeed do all the Papists: And if so, we can answere by saying, That no orthodox man thinketh or saith, that in this sense, we are made formally just by God's act imputing Christ' righteousness; but by Holiness, wrought in us by His Spirit. And as to that righteousness, which is imputed, whether it be called the Formal, or the Material cause of our justification, it is but a nominal debate, having no ground, or occasion, in the Word of God, by which alone we should be ruled in our thoughts & expressions, in this matter. Nor do they, who say, we are formally just by Christ's righteousness, say, we are formally just by God's Act imputing that righteousness; But by the righteousness it self imputed by God & received by faith. Nor do they say, that men become formally sinful by the like act of God, imputing Adam's sin unto his posterity, but by Adam's sin imputed: though God's Act be the cause of this effect, it is not the effect it self. Adam's sin imputed doth constitute the posterity sinners, that is guilty & obnoxious to wrath: so Christ's righteousness imputed doth constitute beleevers Righteous.

Obj. 19. pag. 175. If justification consists in the Imputation of Christ's righteousness, partly in Remission of sins, then must there be a double formal cause of justification, & that made up & compounded of two several natures, really differing the one from the other. But this is impossible, Ergo. Ans. (1.) This Argument is founded upon another School-nicety, or notion, viz the Simplicity & Indivisibility of Natural formes: & this Philosophical Notion is here adduced to darken the mystery, we are treating of. It were a sufficient answere then to say, That the Minor, though it be true in natural formes; Yet will not necessarily hold, in the privileges of Saints, which may be single, or compounded, as the Lord thinketh meet to make them. And can any reason evince, that the Lord cannot conferre & bestow, in the grand privilege of justification, moe particular favoures than one? Can He not both pardon sins, & accept as, & declare to be Righteous? Can He not both free the beleever from the condemnation of hell, & adjudge him to the life of glory? or cannot these two be conceived as two things formally distinct, though inseparable? (2.) But I shall not say, That Imputation of Christ's righteousness is a part of justification; But rather that it is the ground thereof, & necessarily presupposed thereunto. Nor shall I say, that Remission of sins is the forme, or formal cause of justification; a pardoned man, as such, not being a justified man. It is true, pardon of sins doth inseparably follow upon, & is a necessary effect of our justification, & a certaine consequent of God's accepting of us, as righteous in His sight, upon the account of the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us & received by faith. I grant also that justification may be so described, or defined, as to take in that Effect, without making it thereby a formal part thereof, when strickly considered. (3.) But he will have Remission of sins to be the whole of justification, & nothing more included therein, or conferred thereby, abusing to this end (as we heard above) Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. Where the Apostle is citing the words of the Psalmist & is not giving us a formal definition of justification; nor saying, that justification is the same with Remission; nor that Remission's the formal cause of justification: but only is proving, that justification is not by our works, as the ground thereof, & that by this reason, Because that would utterly destroy free Remission, which is a necessary Effect & consequent of Gospel-justification, & cannot be had without it; in order to which justification, he there asserteth expresly an Imputation of righteousness: Now, an Imputation of righteousness is not formally one & the same thing with Remission of sins; nor can Remission of sins be-called a righteousness, or the Righteousness of God, or of Christ: yet the Man is a blessed man, whose sins are covered, because that man is necessarily covered with the righteousness of Christ, whose sins are covered: for Imputation of righteousness & free pardon do inseparably attend one another. Nor is it to the purpose to say. That pardon is a passive righteousness, though not an Active righteousness; for all righteousness, rightly so called, is conformity to the Law, & that is not a passive or Negative righteousness, which may be in a beast, that transgresseth no Law, & consequenly hath no unrighteousness.

Obj. 20. pag. 176. If such Imputation be necessary, in justification, this necessity must be found either in respect of the justice of God, or in respect of His Mercy, or for the salving or advancing of some other attribute. But there is no necessity in respect of any of these. Ergo. Ans. (1) This same man tels us, that there is a necessity for the Imputation of faith, as our Righteousness, not withstanding of all that Christ hath done; and why may he not grant the same necessity for the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ? will it satisfie him, that we found the necessity of Imputation of Christ's Righteoufness on the same ground? (2) Though we should not be in case to assigne the real & just ground of this necessity; yet, I judge, it should satisfie us, that the Lord, in His wisdom & Goodness, hath thought fit to appointe and ordaine this methode & manner of justification; & so far should we be from disputing against this Truth, with such Arguments, & from rejecting of it untill we be satisfied, as to the grounds of necessity requiring this, that we should receive it, close with it, and embrace it with all thankfulness, as a Mystery of Love, free Grace & wisdom, that Angels may wonder at. (3) Yet, accrding to the Scriptures, we may say, that the Truth & Justice of God require this: for His judgment is alwayes according to truth Rom. 2: 2. and it would be an abomination in His eyes to justifie one every way wicked. Therefore, if He pronounce a person righteous, in His sight, which He doth when He justifieth a person, that person must be a Righteous person: but when no man can be justified, or pronounced Righteous, as being inherently Righteous Psal. 130: 3. & 143: 2. all, who are justified, must be clothed with an Imputed Righteousness: for God must be just, even when he justifieth him, which beleeveth in Jesus Rom. 3: 26.

In reference to the justice of God, he saith, That there is nothing at all necessary to be done either by God himself, or by man, about justification of a sinner, by way of Satisfaction to the justice of God, since that one offering of Christ of himself upon the cross. Ans. We plead not for Imputation, upon any such account: nor do we see the least ground to think, that this should derogat any thing from the full & compleat Satisfaction of Christ, made to justice, or from the price, laid down by Him, as if this Imputation were required, to supply some thing wanting there: Yea our doctrine of Imputation doth rather confirme & establish the same, it being an application of the Sponsor's Surety-righteousness, or payment & Satisfaction unto the debtors, in order to their Absolution & freedome from the sentence. Though the Surety hath paid the creditor; yet the Law may require, that when the debtor is charged or challenged for the debt, the payment of his Surety be instructed & made manifest unto the judges: And yet it will not hence follow, tha • the Satisfaction or payment, made by the Surety, was defective and insufficient.

He further saith. That God can as well and as truely pronounce that Man righteous, that wants a literal or legal Righteousness (especially supposing▪ he hath another Righteousness, holding any Analogy or proportion thereto) as he may account any Mans uncircumcision circumcision Rom. 2: 26. Ans. That the Lord may deal with one uncircumcised, that keepeth the Law, no less than if he were circumcised; and so thereby declare, that He valueth not outward circumcision so much, as the jewes were ready to dream, who questieneth? But what is this to the business in hand? shall we therefore think, that the Lord, whose judgment is according to truth, shall account any Righteous, who have no righteousness? Shall we think, that the Righteous judge shall pronounce & declare him to be Righteous, who is not so? (2.) He may think to warde this of by his parenthesis; But, I pray, what is that other righteousness, that holds any analogy or proportion to the righteousness, required by the Law of God? Is that the single Act of faith? Sure, that must hold a very unproportionable proportion & a poor analogy unto Obedience to all commands of God! I need not take notice of that word legall righteousness literally so called; for he hath many such of little other use, than to amuse the Reader, & darken the matter (3.) If by this proportionable righteousness, he mean the righteousness of Christ, which may be said to hold an analogy to the righteousness of the Law, which man was obliged to performe, which possibly he understandeth by a legal righteousness literally & properly so called, he speaketh truth, & yeeldeth the cause; for that is it, we contend for.

But afterward he seemeth to tell us, what he meaneth by analogical righteousness, saying So may God, with as much righteousness & truth, pronounce, & call or account a man righteous, that is not strickly, properly or literally, such, if he hath any qualification upon him, that any way answereth, or holdeth proportion, in any point, with such a Righteousness, as he should do, in case this man had this legal righteousness upon him, in the absolutest perfection of the letter. Ans. And who may not see the folly of this Reddition, to inferre this from the Lord's calling Iohn Baptist Elias & the like? Will he make the Lord's pronouncing sentence, in judgment, as a righteous judge (as He doth in the matter of justification) to be such a figurative speach, as when Iohn Baptist was called Elias, because he had some resemblance to Elias, when he came in his Spirit & power? Will he be accounted a righteous judge, upon earth, who in judgment should pronounce that man righteous, who, in stead of the righteousness he should have had, hath only one poor qualification upon him, that some way or other holdeth proportion with it, in any point? If so, it will be a great question, if ever any wicked man can be condemned, seing it will be rare to finde one, that hath never all his dayes done some thing, that answereth to the Law, in some poor way or measure, as to same one point or other. Yea, if we might drive this further, it might be made probable, that hence it would follow, that all the world should be justified even in the sight of God. But enough of this, which is too too gross. Yet wo heare not what that qualification is.

He saith, when God pronounceth a man righteous, it is sufficient to beare out the justice & truth of God, if his person be under any such relation, & condition, as belongeth to a legal righteousness, or which a legal righteousness would cast upon him. Ans. What before was called a Qualification, is here called a Relation, or condition; & these seem not to be one & the same thing: But what if that Relation, or condition have no foundation, how shall the Lord, upon that account, pronounce such a person righteous? or, though it be not founded upon a legal righteousness, performed by the mans self in his own person, yet may it not be founded upon a Surety-righteousness imputed?

But what is this? He addeth, Now, one special privilege or benefite belonging to a perfect legal righteousness, is to free the person, in whom it is found, from death & condemnation, & he that hath his sins forgiven him, is partaker with him in the fulness of this privilege, is as free of condemnation, as he Ans. But he hath not yet proved, that any man is pardoned, without the Imputed righteousness of Christ: & beside, righteousness bringeth with it, as a special privilege or benefite, right to the promised Inheritance of Glory: But a pardoned man, as such, hath not this Right, nor yet can challenge it, as was showne above. Moreover, if God pronounce a Man righteous, because he is pardoned, then the man must be pardoned, before he be justified; for in justification he is declared & pronounced Righteous, & not made such: & if he be pardoned, before he be justified pardon is not the forme of justification, nor the whole thereof, as he saith, but rather something antecedent thereto.

What in fine he saith, is but what we have often heard viz That forgiveness of sins, is a true & compleat righteousness, in the kind, a passive righteousness, as absolute & perfect in the kind of it, as any Active righteousnest: And for him that hath once sinned, there is no other righteousness applicable to him, but only this, which for all other ends, purposes, advantages, privileges what som ever, is as offectual as the active righteousness it self could be. Ans. (1.) No Scripture calleth pardon of sins a righteousness (2.) A passive righteonsness is no righteonsness, as we lately made appear. (3.) That another righteousness, even the positive Surety-righteousness of Christ, is applicable unto a sinner, hath been hithertil evinced. (4.) pardon, as such, can give no Right to the reward, promised to obedience; & therefore cannot be as effectual, as an active righteousness, to all Ends, purposes, Apvantages & privileges.

Obj. 21. Chap. 20. That, which having been dhne, in our own person, could not have been our justification, nor any part of the righteousness, by which we could have been justified, cannot be made our justification, nor any part of it, by Imputation from another. But such is the righteousness of the Law, pretended to be imputed from Christ. Ergo &c. Ans. (1.) We do not call the righteousness of Christ our justification; nor do we say, that it is made our justification or any part of it, by Imputation unto us: nor yet do we make it a part only of the righteousness, by which we are justified; for His righteousness is the whole of that righteousness: Nor by His Surety-righteousness imputed to us, do we understand only His Active obedience to the Law. (2.) He here Supposeth that we say, there is nothing imputed to us, in order to our justification, but Christ's Obedience to the Law, without His Satisfaction by Suffering: And thus we see, the maine pilla • s of this Argument are weak, & its whole foundation being sandy, it cannot stand.

He confirmeth the Major thus. If a personal fulfilling of the Law could have been no justification, nor part of justification to us, certainly an Imputative fulfilling of it could not have been either. The Imputation of a thing from another cannot adde any strength to it, above a personal acting, yet the Nature of Imputation is only to supply the defect of personal performance, & therefore cannot exceed it. Ans. Though obedience to the Law cannot availe us, now we are sinners, even though it were perfect (which is in effect a supposition of what is impossible yea & self contradictary, & therefore can lay the foundation of no truth, in an Argument) yet it could have availed Adam, while standing, & us in him. (2.) The Righteousness, which is now imputed, is not the Righteousness of a sinner; & so cannot be called the same with that Rightoeusness, which is supposed to be done by us, who are sinners: for the Righteousness in the supposition had been no righteousness at all, not being compleet & perfect. Now, who seeth not, that the Imputation of a perfect righteousness hath other strength & vertue, then that hath which is personal & Imperfect? (3.) The Imputation of an Obedience, perfect & compleet, can availe such, as are recocciled by the death of Christ, when personal obedience, suppose it never so full (if the supposition could be made) cannot availe such, as are under God's curse because of sin already committed.

He confirmeth the Minor thus, Man being once fallen & made obnoxious to condemnation, can never be recovered againe by ten thousand observations of this Law. Ans. Though the observation of the Law, could it now be done by fallen man, which is impossible, cannot availe unto justification; yet, as is said, it could have availed man, while standing: & man remaining still under the obligation, it is his debt: & seing it is now impossible for him to pay this debt, his Surety must pay it for him, & the Surety's payment must be reckoned on his score.

Obj. 22. That which men are not bound by any Law, or command of God, to do, in their own persons, for their justification, cannot be imputed from another to any such and. But men are not bound, by any such Law, to observe the Law, for their justification. Ergo &c. Ans. The Major I distinguish thus▪ That which men neither now are, nor never were bound to do, in their own persons for their justification, by any Law, or command of God, cannot be imputed from another, to any such end; this is granted: but the assumption speaketh only of what men now are obliged unto; & so the Argument is inconcludent. That which men, though once obliged unto, in their own persons, in order to justification, yet now are not obliged unto by the Law of God, cannot be imputed from another, to any such end: this is false. Let us hear his proof. Because (saith he) Imputation is found out & ordained by God to supply personal defects: But where there is no Law, there can be no personal defect. Ans. Imputation is not found out & ordained by God, to supply the want of that, which men are now obliged unto by the Law of God; but to supply what once they were obliged unto, & is not yet done: and the reason is, because the Law, being not abrogat by the breach thereof, continueth in force to oblige to perfect & Exact Obedience; & every violation thereof is a sin before God: & because it must be satisfied, even as to this, ere any can think to enjoy the reward promised to perfect obedience; & no man can satisfie the demands of the Law by himself: therefore every one, who would have the Reward, & partake of Life, must have a perfect obedience imputed to him to the end, that, without any infringing of the Law, the sinner may be-justified, & the Law established.

To the Minor I only say, That albeit no Man be under any command of God, now to observe the Moral Law perfectly, that thereby they may be justified, the Lord having now provided another way, in the Gospel which all, to whom it is revealed, are bound to take: Yet all, out of Christ, & who have not yeelded obedience unto the Gospel, are still under the old covenant, being not as yet brought in into the New: & so, while they abide there, have no other way, whereby to expect justification, but the old way, hold forth in the old covenant, viz. Perfect Obedience, which is now become Impassible: for till they beleeve in Christ, they are still in Nature, & are not translated into the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, though, as to such as hear the Gospel, there is a command to beleeve in Jesus Christ, to the end they may be justified: But as to such, as either hear not the Gospel, or hearing it would not yeeld obedience thereto, they have no other way, whereby they can expect justification, but doing of the Law Rom. 2: 13. & that is also a desperat & Impossible way, when the Law is already now broken. The meaning of these words Rom. 2: 13. The doers of the Law shall be justified, is not, what he imagineth pag. 184. viz. That God will accept, justifie, & save only such, who out of a sincere & sound faith to wards Him by His Christ, address themselves to serve & please Him, in a way of obedience to His Lawes: for this sense of the words keepeth no correspondence with the scope of the Apostle there, nor with the Circumstances of the place.

Obj. 23. If God requires only faith of men to their justification, then He imputes this faith unto them there-unto. But God requires only faith to justification. Ergo &c. Ans. (1.) The conclusion is not directly the thing, that is now in question, but another question, of which hereafter in due time. (2.) The Minor is false to some of his own party, who joine works with faith. (3.) The Major is denied; for though God require faith of men to their justification; Yet that faith is not imputed unto them viz. as their Righteousness. It may be, he meaneth no more by the word Impute here, but to accept of it, when performed, according as it is prescribed: and indeed his proof annexed can evince nothing else; because (saith he) to impute unto justification, & to accept unto justification are nothing differing at all, in sense & signification: Now if God should require faith of Men, & only faith to their justification, & not accept it thereunto, he should make a bargaine, & not stand to it: for hereby it is manifest, that to Impute faith unto justification, is but to accept it, in order to justification, in the place, & for the end, which God hath fixed to it, & required it for; that is, to be a Mean & Instrument, in the business, & to be the way of Interessing us in the Righteousness of Christ, the sole Righteousness for which, & ground upon which, we are justified. This then being the meaning of his Major Proposition, for any thing that yet appeareth, his whole Argument is but a meer sophistical evasion. (4▪) It is true, God requireth of us only faith, as an Instrument & mean to lay hold upon the Righteousness of Christ, in order to our justification: but this is so far from proving that therefore there is no necessity for the Righteousness of Christ, that, on the contrary, it establisheth that truth more firmly: for the faith, that is required unto justification, is not a bare historical faith, but such a faith, as carrieth the beleever out of himself, to seek a Righteousness in Christ, & declareth his full Satisfaction therewith, & his resting thereupon, in order to his Acceptance with God, & being justified & absolved from the sentence of the Law, under the conviction of which he was lying. (5) The scope and drift of this Objection is to separat these things, that God hath most firmly and manifestly conjoined, viz. God's Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, and our Receiving that gift of Righteousness by faith, and the atonement through faith. But, as was shown above, the Scripture holdeth forth the necessity of both, and what God hath conjoined, let no man separate.

To this he saith. If the Righteousness of Christ be that, which is imputed, & not the faith, that is required of them, then may this Righteousness be Imputed to this end, before, yea & without the faith of any man; for this faith adds no vertue, or value to that Righteousness. Ans. This being God's free Constitution, His will should serve us for a Law; and in stead of too curious enquiring, whether this might be, or not be without the other, or before the other, we should rest satisfied with God's Method; & therein carry more like Christians, than in making such objections against His express determinations. What though it were granted, that God might, if it had so pleased Him, impute the Righteousness of Christ unto sinners, before, or without their faith; will it therefore follow, that now faith is unnecessary; or, if faith be asserted to be necessary, that therefore the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness must be denied? Why? what ground can be given for such fictions? Nay, will not this be as strong against the objecters, if Christ made full Satisfaction to Justice, what necessity is there for the Imputation of faith unto Righteousness? Thus we see, the objecter must either turne fully Socinian, or reject this way of argueing.

But he will not rest satisfied with the good pleasure of God, in this matter; for he addeth pag. 186. If the will & pleasure of God be to make no Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, but upon the Condition of faith interveening, then it is evident, that this Righteousness is not imputed unto justification, to any man, because the Condition of faith must necessarily interveen, so that if this Righteousness of Christ were imputed unto men, yet it must be only towards justification, not unto it; for faith hath the next & most immediat connexion therewith. Ans. Not to trouble our selves with that fonde & fooli • distinction betwixt towards & unto, which rather renders the Adversaries Cause desperat, & himself faine to shelter himself under such fig leaves, to cover his nakedness, than evidenceth any apparent probability of a real ground of Scrupling here. We say, That the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, which is God's Act, hath as immediat a connexion with justification, as Faith hath, which is our Act: for there is no priority or posteriority here, as to time; for whensoever a Man beleeveth, in that same instant, Righteousness is imputed; and in that same Instant, the beleever is justified; We cannot say, a Man is a beleever, and yet hath not the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him, or is not justified; as we cannot say, a Man hath the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him, and yet is not justified. Nay, the very Argument will conclude as well, that the Imputation of Righteousness hath a more neer connexion with justification, than faith hath; for we may likewise say, though a man beleeve, yet without imputation, cannot be justified. But the truth is, all such argueings are but the Cavils of men, seeking to darken that, which they cannot destroy; & are meer sophismes, unbeseeming Christians, in such a concerning business.

Then (saith he further) faith doth not take hold of the Righteousness of Christ Imputed; but first takes hold of it, & then the Imputation followeth & then a man may have the Righteousness of Christ upon him by faith, & yet not be justified by it. Ans. Though faith at first doth not take hold of the Righteousness of Christ, already imputed; but of the Righteousness of Christ hold forth in the Gospel: yet faith may leane to that Righteousness imputed, and rest upon it (2) We assert no such Conditions, as this argument would say are the Conditions understood by our Adversaries, that is, such Conditions, as are like a price, that may be, for some time, in the buyers hand, before the bargane be made; and may also be paid down some time before he obtaine the purchase. We owne only such consequential conditions here, as are but the means and Methods appointed of God, for such and such ends, & which have an immedial connexion with the end here intended. And therefore, we neither say, nor imagine, that a man may have the Righteousness of Christ, or Faith, & yet not be justified; for in the very moment, as was said, that a Man acteth true Gospel-and so justifying faith, he hath the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him, and is justified: Every priority in order of Nature doth not conclude also a priority, as to time; far less can a man be supposed to have the Righteousness of Christ, without God's Act of Imputation. But Finally all these Argueings returne upon his own head; for when he saith, that faith is Imputed for Righteousness, meaning by faith our act of beleeving, he must also say, that a man may beleeve, and yet not be justified, untill his faith be Imputed unto Righteousness, by God, whose work alone this is: and his reply to this will relieve us.

Obj. 24. That which was Imputed to Abraham for Righteousness, in his justification, is imputed to other beleevers also. But the faith of Abraham was imputed to him for Righteousness. Ergo &c. And for proof of all, he referreth us to what he hath said Chap. 2. upon Rom. 4. Ans. We shall not here anticipat the consideration of that place, and of this Argument founded there upon; seing afterward we will have a fitter occasion to speak hereunto.

Obj. 25. Here is his last argument, which he largely prosecuteth Chap. 21. pag. 188. &c. and it would seem, that it is here adduced againe (for we had it once, if not oftner before) that he may take occasion to vent his mind against the Imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity. Thus he Argueth. If the Righteousness of the Law be not imputable, or derivable, in the letter and formality of it, from one mans person to another, then cannot the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to any man, in justification. But the former is true, therefore▪ &c. Ans. What may be answered unto this Argum. the Reader may see in the foregoing Chapter. Object last & I shall not here repeat, but go on to take notice of what he saith to that objection, which he moveth against himself, and proposeth thus, If the transgression of the Law be imputable from one Mans person to another, then may the Righteousness of the Law be imputed also. But the former is hence evident, because the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity.

He first excepteth against the Major, and denieth the Consequence thereof, and giveth reasons of his denial. 1. There is (saith he) no such Emphatical restraint of the guilt and punishment to the transgressour, as there is of the reward to the performer of obedience: for Gal. 3: 12. the very man that hath done them shall live by them; which is no where said of the Transgressour. Ans. But all this is loose reasoning: for as the Law saith, God will visite the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children, unto the third and fourth Generation; so it saith, that He will shew mercy to thousands of them that love Him, and keep His Commandements: and here the one is as Emphatick, as the other. (2) As he readeth Gal. 3: 12. that the man that doth them, shall live in them; so we read Ezek. 18: 3. the soul that sinneth, it shall die. and Gal. 3: 10. Deut. 27: 26. Cursed is every one, that abideth not in all things, which are written in the Law to do them; which words do Import as emphatical a restraint, as the other. But of that Gal. 3: 12. we have said enough above, we might also mentione that, which was said to Adam, in the day thou eats, thou shalt die, which seemeth to have no less an Emphatick Import.

But 2. he mentioneth this difference. Sin (saith he) is ever greater, in ratione demerity, than obedience is, in ratione meriti: Adam might by his transgression, merite condemnation to himself and posterity, & yet not have merited by his obedience Salvation to both; because, if he had kept the Law, he had only done his duty. Luk. 17: 10. & so had been but an unprofitable servant. Ans. All this saith nothing, where a Covenant is made, promising life to the obeyer, as well, as threatning death to the transgressour. Albeit Adam could not be said to have merited life, by his obedience, in way of proper and strick merite; yet in way of merite expacto, he could have been said to have merited; for the reward would have been reckoned to him, not of grace, but of debt; and there would have been ground of boasting and glorying. Rom. 3: 27. & 4: 2, 4. How beit he had done but his duty, when he had obeyed to the end; yet the condescending love of God, promising the reward to perseverance in obedience to the end, was sufficient to found this. Whether Adam had merited Salvation to all his posterity, if he had kept the Covenant to the end, or not, is not our present question to enquire j this we know, that by one man sin entered into the world, & death by sin, & so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. Rom. 5: 12. And upon the other hand, this we know, that Christ was made sin for His, as a publick person, and all His promised Seed and Children are made the Righteousness of God in Him. 1. Cor. 1: 30. 2. Cor. 5: 21. and those are sufficient for our purpose.

3. He saith. The Imputableness of the transgression of the Law rather overthroweth the Imputation of the obedience of it, than any wayes establisheth it: for the more Imputable, that is, punishable, the transgression is, the less imputable, that is rewardable, is the obedience of it. Ans. This is very true, when we speak of the same man, as of Adam, in both: for he could not both be a Transgressour, and a Final Observer of the Law; and so both obedience and Transgression could not be imputed to himself, Let be to any other; & the Imputation of the one did quite evacuat the other. But what maketh this meer shift to his present purpose, which is to show (if he could) that the Righteousness and obedience of the Second Adam, the Lord from heaven, is not as imputable to His Spiritual Seed & Issue, as the Sin and Transgression of the first Adam, who was of the earth earthy. 1. Cor. 15: 47. was imputable to his Natural Seed.

Next, he cometh to the Minor, and denieth the Imputation of Adam's sin; and this seemeth to be his maine buliness, wherein he complieth with the Socinians, and others. Let us hear him, first (saith he) the Scripture no where affirmes either the Imputation of Adam's sin, or of the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. The contrary is sufficiently proven above; & all his reasons cannot evince what he saith. He tels us, that neither is the phrase, nor manner of such speaking any wayes agreable to the language of the Holy Ghost: for still in the Scriptures, wheresoever the word, imputing, is used, it is only applied unto or spoken of something of the same persons, to whom the Imputation is said to be made; & never to or of any thing of anothers. Ans. Though it be true, that some things are said to be imputed, in Scripture, unto persons, which are, or were theirs, before the Imputation: (though that Instance of faiths being imputed to Abraham Rom. 4. which he adduceth, doth not belong to this head, as shall be evinced in due time) whether it be good, or evil, as 2. Sam. 19: 19, Act. 7: 60. where this Imputation is deprecated. So 2. Chron. 24: 22. Gen. 30: 33. Psal. 106: 31. Yet it is also true, that we read of an Imputation of Something, that did not belong to, or was not possessed by the person, before the Imputation was made; as when Paul desireth Philemon, to impute to him what Onesimue was oweing; and that he would reckon both the debt and the injury, whereof Onesimus might beguilty, upon his score, and require it of him. Philem. vers 18. Thus do Sureties take upon themselves what formerly was not theirs; and so make that imputable to themselves, which formerly was not so, as we seen Gen. 43: 9. & 44: 32. and the Sureties payment or Satisfaction, according to what he voluntarily undertook, is according to Law and equity, imputable & to be imputed unto, or reckoned on the Score of the debtor, to the end he may be dealt with, by vertue of that imputed payment & Satisfaction, as if he himself had made the payment, or given the Satisfaction. And this is the very Nature & End of this Imputation; not that the person, to whom the Imputation is made, should be accounted one, who had that before the Imputation was made; but that the thing Imputed may become his, to whom it is imputed, and he thereupon be dealt with, as now an owner & possessor of that thing by Imputatio • .

Secondly, he saith, When a thing is said simply to be imputed, as sin, folly or righteousness, the meaning is not to be taken concerning the bare acts of things; as if to impute sin signified to repute the man to have committed a sinful act, but to charge the guilt or demerite of sin upon his head, of purpose to punish him for it. Ans. This is true of such things, as are either really or falsly by injustice supposed to be in the person, before that imputation be made. But notwithstanding hereof, there is, as we have seen, & as all acts of Suretiship do further cleare, an imputation of what was not the persons before, whereby the thing it self, that is imputed, is legally made over unto them, & reckoned upon their score, & thereupon they are dealt with, as being now possessed of that, which is imputed; as when a person voluntarily becometh Surety for another, as Paul for Onesimus, Iudah for Benjamin; first the debt it self is made their & reckoned upon their score, & then they willingly undergo the consequences thereof, that is, the payment or punishment.

Thridly pag. 198. he cometh home to the point, saying. The expressions (i.e. of Christ's Righteousness & of Adam's sin) are unknown to the Holy Gost in Scripture. Ans. This is but the old exception of Bellarmin de Iustif. lib. 2. chap. 7. & of the Socinians; See Volkel do Vera Relig. lib. 5. pag. 564, 565. who, upon this same ground, reject several other fundamental points, as the Trinity & others. But we have already shown Scripture-proof enough of this matter; & himself in the following words granteth, that there are expressions in Scripture, concerning both the Communication of Adam's sin, & of Christ's Righteousness, that will fairly enough bear the terme of Imputation. So that all the difference betwixt him & us is about the sense of the word.

Now, we come to the matter. He speaketh to Rom. 5▪ 19, giving this for the only meaning thereof, that the demerite or guilt of Adam's sin, is charged on his posterity, or that the punishment ran over from his person to them, i a maine part of which punishment lyeth in that original defilement, wherein they are all conceived & borne, & whereby they are made truely and formally sinners before God. Ans. But, if that sin of Adam be imputed, in its curse & punishment, the sin it self must be imputed, as to its guilt; else we must say, that God curseth & punisheth the posterity, that is no wayes guilty, which to do suiteth not the justice of God, the righteous Governour of the world. We do not say, (as he supposeth, when he setteth down our sense of the words) that that sinful act of eating the forbidden fruit, in the letter & formality of it (an expression that on all occasions he useth, & whose sense, is not obvious, but needeth explication, & is excogitated meerly to darken the matter) & as it was Adam's own personal sin, is imputed to the posterity: but it is enough for us, to say, with the Scripture, that by Adam's disobedience, his posterity became guilty; & that all sinned in him; & therefore death passed on all, & that guilt was by that one sin to condemnation Rom. 5: 12, 15, 16, 18, 19. & so that the posterity sinned legally & originally, though not formally, because not existing in Adam actually, but legally & originally; & became thereby obnoxious to the punishment threatned, that is, death both in body & Soul, here & hereafter: Whence it is manifest, that punishment being relative to sin, such as are punished because of sin, must be sinners, & judged to be sinners & so guilty, before they be punished for sin, Adam being the Head & Root of Mankind, & God entering into Covenant with him, as such, & therefore with all his posterity in him, when he broke the Covenant & transgressed, all Mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, being comprehended with him in the Covenant, became actually partakers of that guilt, so soon as they did partake of Nature actually; & being really guilty when existing, they were justly punished. But if this guilt were not imputed to them, they could not be justly punished for it.

On the contrary, he thinks they might be justly punished for that sin, though not guilty thereof: & he laboureth to establish this upon three pillars. 1. The demerite (saith he) & sinfulness of that sin which had so many aggravations, and in this regard, was beyond the sin of devils, that Adam had the estates of all his posterity in his hand, & knew, that if he sinned, he should draw all their souls after him into the same perdition. Ans. But if by Adam's having the estates of all his posterity in his hand, this truth be not included, that his sin should become their sin, & they should be looked upon as guilty thereof, & chargable therewith; how could he know, that by his sin heshould draw the souls of all his posterity after him into the same condemnation! And how could they be punished for that same guilt, if it was not some way theirs, by the just & righteous Judge & Governour of the world? The posterity can no more be justly punished for the great & hainous sins of their progenitors, than for their lesser sinnes, if they have no interest in these sinnes, nor partake of the guilt thereof: But as to Original sin, the Scripture giveth the Sin, as the ground of the punishment, & maketh the one to reach all, as well as the other, telling us Rom. 5: 12. that by one Man, sin • ntered in to the world, & death by sin; & so death passed upon all Men, for that all have sinned; or, in whom all have sinned. See vers 19.

2. The Narrownese or scantisness of Adam's Person, who could not beat that fulness of punishment, which God might require for that great sin; & we cannot think, that God should sit down with loss. Ans. This is his second pillar. But neither is it sufficient; for God could have punished Adam condingly for his sin: but when the posterity is punished for that sin also, that sin must be theirs. Though for great crimes, as Treason & the like, the Posterity suffe • eth, when the guilty is forfeited I yet the posterity are not properly punished for that sin; nor can be said to be so; as we are punished for Original sin, because it is ours, & we sinned in Adam.

3. His 3d. & maine pillar is, the peculir & near relation of the posterity of Adam to his person; for then they were in it, &, as it were, a part, or some what of it; so that Adam was us all, & we were all that one Adam, as Augustine speaketh; & the whole generation of mankind is but Adam, or Adam's person, expounded at large. Ans. This is sufficient for us; for it will hold forth the Covenant relation, wherein Adam stood, as representing all his posterity; & so they were as well in him, & a part of him, in his sin, as in his punishment: which is all we desire, for hence it appeareth, that all sinned in that one Adam, as well, as they were all punished in him.

Then he tels us, that all these three are jointly intimat R •• . 5: 12. Where first there is the demerito, Imported, when death is said to enter; & the scantiness of Adam's person, when it is said, to have passed upon all men; & the relation of his posterity to him, in that all are said to have sinned in him. Ans. But the maine thing, which he denieth, is there also imported, when it is said, that all men sinned in him, or became guilty of his sin: for thereby it is manifest, that only they had an interest in his person, but that they had such an Interest in & relation to his person, as so stated, & as standing in a Covenant-relation to God, that they sinned in him, or became guilty of his sin, & therefore suffered with him the demerite thereof. Whence it is evident (howbeit he seemeth confident of the contrary pag. 207.) That the Imputation of Adam's sin, or of his sinful Act as sinful, or as it was a sin; & not of the act as such (for that himself faith once & againe, was directly & efficiently from God himself, & therefore was good) is the ground, or cause of punishment, that cometh on his posterity.

But he saith pag. 208. If any Imputation be in this case, it is of every mans own sin, in Adam; for is was Adam alone that sinned, but all sinned in him: It is not said, that Adam's sin is Imputed to his posterity; but rather that his posterity themselves sinned in Adam. Ans. If he wil stand to this, we need not contend with him, about the word, Impute; this expression of Scripture comprehending & plainely holding forth all that we would say. And if he will grant as much, in reference to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, as is here said of Adam, who was the type of him that was to come, he must, I judge, retract all that he hath said, against the same.

What followeth in that Chapter, being but founded upon what is already mentioned & examined, needeth not here againe be repeated or expressed, & considered.

Thus we have taken notice of all, which this voluminous Adversary hath said, upon this matter, both against the Truth, & for his own Errour: & no doubt, he hath scraped together all that he could finde, giving any, seeming contribution unto the Notion, which he hugged; & hath laboured after his usual manner, to set of with a more than ordinary measure of confidence, & with an affected pedantrie of language, supplying, with bombast expressions, the want of reality of truth & solidity of reasoning. What remaineth in that book, concerning the Imputation of faith, in opposition to the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ shall be examined, when we come to the second part of our Text, & to speak of the matter of justification. And as for other things, we may take notice of them elsewhere.

CHAP. XIII. M. Baxter's opinion, Concerning Imputation, examined.

THere being so frequent mention made, in Scripture, of Imputation of Righteousness; or of Righteousness Imputed; & of Christ's being our Righteousness; or of our being Righteousness, or Righteous in Him, & the like, many, that even plead much against the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, maintained by the orthodox, must yet yeeld to it, in some sense or other; at least in such a sense, as may, in their apprehensions, not cross their other Hypotheses & Dogmes: Yea & sometimes grant this Imputation in that sense, at least in words, which overthroweth or weakeneth all their Disputations to the contrary. Schlightingius, in defence of Socinus against Meisnerus pag. 250. will grant, That Christ's Righteousness may be called & accounted ours, in so far, as it redoundeth to our good & righteousness, & is the cause of our justification. And Bellarmin, will also say (de just. lib. 2. cap. 10.) That Christ is said to be our Righteousness, because He satisfied the father for us; & so giveth & communicateth that Satisfaction to us, when He justifieth us, that it may be said to be our Satisfaction & Righteousness.

Mr. Baxter, though he seemeth not satisfied with what is commonly hold by the Orthodox, anent the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; yet will not professe himself an Enemie to all Imputation; but on the contrary, saith, he owneth it in a right sense: And it is true, men have their own liberty, in expressing their sense & meaning of Truths; & where there seemeth to be some considerable difference, as to words & expressions; yet there may be little, or none upon the matter. And it is not good, I confess, to make real differences of these, that are but verbal; nor is it good to be so tenacious of our own expressions, as to exaggerat the expressions of others, whose meaning may be good, because not complying with our own, in all points,

Let us therefore enquire after Mr. Baxter's sense, & see wherein he really differeth from us, in this matter. In his late Treatise of justifying Righteousness against D. Tully. The first part (as the Title page sheweth) is of Imputed Righteousness, opening & defending the true Sense, & confuting the false. Here then belike we shall finde his meaning, as to this question.

In his preface to this book, he giveth us his sense, in these words, That Righteousness is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted Righteous, because for the merites of Christ's total fulfulling the conditions of his Mediatorial Covenant with the Father, by His Habitual Holiness, His Actual perfect Obedience, & His Sacrifice, or Sati • factory Suffering for our sins, in our stead, freely without any merite, or conditional act of mans, God hath made an act of oblivion & Deed of Gift, pardoning all sin, justifying & Adopting & giving Right to the Spirit & Life eternally to every one, that beleevingh accepteth Christ, & the gifts with, & by, & from Him; & when we accept them, they are all ours by vertue of this purchased Covenant-gift. But this, I Judge, cannot give satisfaction, for upon the grant of the Act of Oblivion, (as he calleth it) which, in his judgment, is extended to all Mankind, no man in particular can be called or accounted Righteous, or have Righteousness imputed to him, more than another; & so upon this account, all are equally Righteous, & have equally Christ's Righteousness imputed to them, that is, no man hath it. As for these Effects, pardon, justification, Adoption, & Right to the Spirit & to Life, they cannot be called the Righteousness of Christ; no more than the Effect can be called the cause: And though they become ours, when we accept them, or rather when we accept of Christ; yet upon that account meerly, it can not be said, that the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, & no otherwayes: for that is nothing but the Socinian Concession formerly mentioned, & it cannot Satisfie the orthodox. The questin is about the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, & the Answer given is concerning the Effects thereof given to us; But these Effects are not the Righteousness of Christ; nor are they to be called a Righteousness; nor are they in Scripture so called, unless we say with Ioh. Goodwin, that Righteousness Imputed is nothing but free justification. Yea these Effects must presuppose a Righteousness in the persons receiving them, either Inherently, or by way of Impu • ation: for God will justifie no man, or declare no man to be Righteous, who is not Righteous: And concerning this Righteousness is our question: And Mr. Baxter giveth us nothing here for this, unless it be our beleeving: & this is that which Servetus, Socinians & Arminians say.

In opposition to this, which he calleth a short & plaine explication of Christianity, he setteth down what others say, as necessary to go in to our Christianity; & so tels us, that according to them, we must say, That Christ was habitually & actually perfectly Holy & obedient, imputatively in our particular persons; & thath each one of us did perfectly fulfill that Law, which requireth perfect habites & act: in and by Christ imputatively; and yet did also in & by him suffer ourselves imputatively for not fulfilling it, & imputatively did ourselves both satisfie God's justice, and merite heaven; and that we have ourselves imputatively a Righteousness of Perfect holiness & obedience, as sinless; & must be justified by the Law of Innocency, or works, as having ourselves imputatively fulfilled it in Christ. And that this is our sole-righteousness: & that faith it self is not imputed to us for Righteousness, no not a meer particular subordinat Righteousness, answering the conditional part of the new justifying Covenant, as necessary to our participation of Christ, & His freely given Righteousness. As touching the latter part of this discourse, about the Imputation of Faith, & its being called our particular subordinat Righteousness, it is true, Several of the Orthodox have appeared against it, & we shall also speak our judgment of it hereafter. But as to the former part (which is only pertinent to our purpose now in hand) I know not, if ever any Orthodox person uttered his minde, after this manner: Yea, I wote not, if Antinomians themselves have at any time expressed themselves, in all points, as is here set down. But be it so, that they have thus expressed their meaning, & that these expressions, here set down, are not meer Consequences & Inferences, drawn by Mr. Baxter himself, from their opinions & assertions: yet Mr. Baxter cannot but know, that the Orthodox are against them, in these assertions, as well as he: & to me it appeareth no faire, to set down these words, as containing that opinion, which all must hold, who cannot fully embrace Mr. Baxter's owne judgment; as if there were no Medium betwixt the Socinian or Arminian judgment, on the one hand, & the Antinomian opinion on the other hand; whileas he cannot but know the contrary. Nether is this a •• t & sure way to cleare up the true sense of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, at least, that sense, which we owne.

In the Book pag. 24. he againe setteth down his own judgment, or sense of Imputation, which he taketh to be the true healing middle way; Part whereof is as followeth. That as Christ suffered in our stead, that we might not suffer, and obeyed in our Nature, that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification; and this in the person of a Mediator and Sponsor, for us sinners; but not so in our persons, as that we truely, in a moral or civil sence, did all this in and by him: Even so God reputeth the thing to be, as it is, and so far Imputeth Christ's Righteousness and Merites and Satisfaction to us, as that it is reputed by Him the true Meritorious Cause of our justification; & that for it God maketh a Covenant of Grace, in which he freely giveth Christ, pardon and life to all that accept the gift, as it is; so that the Accepters are by this Covenant and Gift, as surely justified and Saved by Christ's Righteousness, as if they had obeyed and satisfied themselves. Not that Christ meriteth, that we shall have grace to fulfill the Law ourselves, and stand before God in a Righteousness of our own, which will answere the Law of works, and justify us; but that the Conditions of the Gíft, in the Covenant of Grace, being performed by every penitent Beleever, that Covenant doth pardon all their sins (as God's Instrument) and giveth them a Right to life eternal for Christ's merites. As to this though it may seem faire & a far advancement: yet I shall crave leave to say these few things against it.

1. When he saith, That Christ suffered in our stead, I would know, in whose stead it was? Whether it was in the stead of some select persons, or in stead of all? If in the stead of some select persons only, then these select persons, must have another Interest, in the death of Christ, than all others; & it being done in their stead, must needs be accepted in their behalfe, as it was undergone for them, & in their stead & place: & if it be accepted in their behalfe, they must necessarily be freed from Suffering, after God's Methode; & that upon the account of Christ's Suffering in their stead; and if so, must not that Suffering of Christ, in a Law-sense, be accounted theirs, and imputed unto them, & they as really & effectually freed from what they were under, and obnoxious to, & made partakers of was purchased thereby, as if they had suffered all that, in their own persons? If it be in stead of all, then all must, upon the account of it, be delivered from Suffering, which cannot be said; or not one shall be delivered from Suffering, meerly upon the account of it, but upon the account of some other thing Interveening, which he calleth, in the following words, the New Covenant, & the performance of the Conditions thereof: And if so, all Christ's Sufferings in our stead, will be but a Suffering for our good, as say the Socinians.

2. When he saith, That we might not suffer, is that meaned eventually viz. That none of us should ever be put to suffer the penalty? or is it only meaned potentially, that is, that it might be possible, that we should not suffer? If the former be said, then either all of us shall be saved, or the us must be restricked to the Elect. If the Latter be said, then this dying in our stead, is really but a dying for our good, which the Socinians grant.

3. When he saith, & obeyed in our Nature, this, in our Nature, must either be the some with in our stead, which he mentioned before; or some thing different, if the same, then it seemes, when he said, Christ suffered in our stead, his meaning only was, that Christ suffered in our Nature. And will not all Socinians grant, that Christ Suffered thus in our stead, that is, in our Nature? If different, I would know, why he putteth such a difference betwixt Christ's Suffering and His obeying, seing both belonged to that Law (as he speaketh in the foregoing words) which was His Covenant Conditions; and both were Satisfactory and Meritorious, though the one more primarily Satisfactory, & the other more primarily meritorious?

4. When he saith, That Christ obeyed in our Nature, that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification, I would ask, if this end did, or could flow from, or follow upon Christ's Obedience, meerly because it was performed in our Nature? Had we no other Interest, or ground of Interest in it, or in Him, but that it was performed in our Nature? or did all the Benefite & Advantage, that we received, or are to receive thereby, flow from it meerly upon this account, that it was performed in our Nature?

5. As to this end of Christ's obeying viz. that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification, I suppose his meaning is, that this perfection of obedience might not be required of us, in order to justification: but yet he doth not say (as he should) that this was our debt; and that Christ paid this perfect obedience as our debt, in order to life: for if he shall say this, then it will follow, that this payment must, in Law-sense, be imputed to those, for whom it was paid. How ever these words do plainely insinuat, that howbeit Christ obeyed in our Nature: that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification; yet notwithstanding an Imperfect Obedience might be accounted necessary to our justification; and thus the New Covenant be supposed to be of the same kind and Spece with the old; and Christ be supposed to have obeyed, only that the termes of the Old Covenant might be abated, as to the rigour of perfection of obedience required.

6. That Christ Obeyed and Suffered in the person of a Mediator & Sponsor, (as he saith) that is, that person God-Man, who was Mediator and Sponsor, did obey & suffer, is very true; but notwithstanding hereof, yea so much the rather, he obeyed and suffered, as a Publick Person, that is, for others, and not for Himself personally considered. And therefore those, for whom He thus Obeyed and Suffered, must, in a just and consequent sense, be accounted as Obeying & Suffering in Him, that is, there was such a Relation betwixt this Mediator, or Surety, and those, for whom He was a Mediator and Surety (in the purpose & designe of God appointing Christ hereunto, & in the purpose & designe of Christ undertaking, and actually performing what He undertook) as gave them fundamentally another Interest in His Obedience & Suffering, then others had, or could have, to & for whom He was no Mediator & Sponsor.

7. Whence Christ may be said to have Obeyed and Suffered legally, in the person of, and as representing others; that is, in the construction of the Law & Law-giver, not for Himself, but for others, in whose Law-place He did substitute Himself, undertaking their debt, in order to their Redemption. And though Beleevers, who now come to have an actual Interest in Christ, cannot be said to have done all this in and by Him, that is, as by their delegat and Servant (as Mr. Baxter else where expresseth it) yet they may be said to have done it in and by Him, Civilly, juridically or legally, as the debtor is by Law said to have Satisfied the Creditor, in and by the Surety, who yet physically paid the debt by himself only, but legally in the person of the debtor, the debtor and Surety being in Law-consideration, but as one person, in so far as, they concurre in, and are both obliged by, one and the same Obligation; just as the heir succeding in jus defuncti, is eatenus repute & said to be una & eadem persona with him; whence it is evident, that one payment made by either must be accounted as made by both, and doth in effect dissolve the whole obligation; and the consequently the debtor is as effectually & justly absolved from all charge or danger of Law, upon the account of that debt, as if he had paid the money out of his own purse. But whether the terme of Morally, or Civilly, or Legally, or the like, be most apposite, is of no great weight to occasione a debate, especially seing the thing it self is so well known to all, who know what it is to have a friend paying their debt, or Satisfying the Creditor for them, and in their behalfe; and thereupon bringing them out of prison. Though I know, the case of pecuniary debts doth not in all things quadrate with our case; yet it is sufficient to explicat what we are now upon.

8. We grant, That God reputeth the thing to be, as it is; and therefore it is very true, that God reputeth Christ to have obeyed and suffered, as being in the Law-place of others, and as making Satisfaction for them; and them, for whom He satisfied, to be in another manner in Him, than any others whatever.

9. He addeth, & so far imputeth Christ's Righteousness, as that it is reputed by Him, the true Meritorious cause of our justification. But it was reputed and estimate so to be, before this Imputation; for it was accepted as such: therefore Imputation must denote something more, than this Reputation, even a reckoning of it (as it were) now upon their Scoce, and accounting it theirs, or them to have a full, special and actual Interest therein, in order to their justification and absolution from the charge of guilt and death brought in against them, whereby they are accounted and reckoned to be Righteous, because of that Imputation, & therefor pronounced such in justification: so that now it is the objectum formal • , or the ratio formales objectiva of our justification.

10. When he addeth & that for it God maketh a Covenant of Grace, if those words mean, that in this also Christ's Righteousness is said to be imputed, then, it seemeth, it is equally imputed unto all Adam's poste • ity: for with him, all are comprehended within this Covenant. But this were as much as to say, it is imputed to none in particular. Moreover, it may be thought that this is explicative of what went immediatly before: & so Christ's righteousness shall be repute the true Meritorius Cause of our justification, in that it was the Meritorious cause of the Covenant of Grace: now hereby the immediat ground of justification will be the Gospel-righteousness, he speaketh of, that is our performance of the conditions of the New Covenant of Grace; & Christ's Merites, Satisfaction & Righteousness shall be only a remote ground. But we shall show hereafter, how groundless it to say. That Christ procured the New Covenant by His Merites & Satisfaction.

11. He saith, in which (i.e. Covenant of Grace) He freely giveth Christ, pardon & Life, to all that accept the gift, as it is. That all these are holdforth in the Covenant, & that such as receive Christ, receive pardon and Life, is true. But what is that, to accept the gift, as it is? & what is meaned by this gift?

12. He addeth, so that the accepters are by this Covenant & Gift as surely justified and saved by Christ's Righteousness, as if they had obeyed & Satisfied themselves. But this is not by vertue of any immediat of that Righteousness unto them, whereby they are looked upon as Righteous in the sight of God; but by vertue of faith, whereby the gift is accepted, that is offered in the Covenant, which faith is indeed immediatly imputed to them according to him, & reputed their Gospel-righteousness, & they thereupon are reputed Righteous, & so justified, as such: for the Righteousness of Christ is only imputed, in that it is reputed the meritorious cause of the New Covenant.

13. Though Christ hath not merited, that we shall have grace to fulfill the Law ourselves &c. Yet he will say, that Christ hath merited, that faith shall be the Condition of the New Covenant, & consequently, that we may stand before God, even as the great Law giver, & so before His Law also, in that Gospel-righteousness (as he calleth it) of our own, which will justifie us.

14. In end, when he saith, the Covenant of grace doth pardon & give right to Life for Christ's Merites, I suppose (because of what is already observed) it is only upon the account that Christ's Me • ites have purchased this Covenant; & not because they become our Immediat Righteousness, whereupon we are justified & have pardon: & he should rather say, conforme to what went before, that this Covenant doth Pardon & give Right to Life, for faith, our Gospel-righteousness, the condition thereof.

These are my Exceptions against this supposed healing middle way; & the grounds why I cannot acquiesce therein, as the right way. He tels us againe pag. 45. Note 3. That it is ordinarily agreed by Protestants, that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us, in the same sence, as our sins are said to be imputed to Him. And to this I also heartily acquiesce; & hence inferie. That as Christ was made sin by that Imputation, so we are made righteous by vertue of this Imputation: as our sins were laid on Him (as the sins of the people were laid on the scape goat, the type) so His Righteousness is put on us, as He came in our Law-place, so we come in His: As our sins imputed to Him were the immediat procuring cause of His stripes & punishment or suffering; so His Righteousness imputed to us is the Immediat procuring cause of our justification &c. As Christ was repute legally or juridically, though not inherently, a sinner, because of this Imputation of our sins to Him, & therefore dealt with, punished & chastened, as if He had been a real sinner, because He stood in our Law-place; to His Righteousness being imputed to us, we are repute legally & juridically, though not inherently; Righteous, & thereupon are dealt with, justified & accepted &c. as if we had been really Righreous, because now standing in His Law-place. So that if Mr. Baxter will stand to this, that ordinarily protestants agree unto, I am fully Satisfied: & had he done so from the beginning, many of his discourses would have been forborne: And whether he, or others who owne what protestants agree unto, be to be reckoned among the self conceited wranglers, as he speaketh in the following page, indifferent men may judge: & I conceive, if he would yet stand to this, he should alter that, which he gave us, in the fore-mentioned words, as the only healing middle way; For that middle way (as he calleth it) giveth us a far other sheme, than can be drawn out of this, wherein protestants are commonly agreed as is obvious.

He tels us Chap. 2. (where he cometh to state the question) pag. 51. that we must distinguish of Imputation, & giveth us six senses thereof; five whereof are such, as I know not, if even Antinomians did owne them. They are these. 1. To repute us personally to have been the Agents of Christ't Acts, the Subjects of His Habites & passion, in a physical sense. I know not, who in their wits would affirme this: & to me, it is not a fit way to end, or clear controversies, to raise so much dust needlesly, & imagine senses out of our owne heads, as if they were owned & maintained by some, what is the 2? Or to repute the same formal relation of Righteousness, which was in Christ's Person, to be in ours, as the Subject. But this is only a consequent of the foregoing 3. (saith he) or to repute us to have been the very Subjects of Christ's Habites & passion, & the Agents of His Acts, in a Political, or Moral sence (& not a physical) as a man payeth a, debt by a Servant, or attornay, ordelegate. If this be the only meaning of his Political & Moral sense, I suppose no man will owne it either: for no man will say, That Christ was our Servant, Attornay, or Delegate. The 4. is but a consequent of this; and consequently, (saith he) to repute a double formal Righteousness to result from the said habites, acts & passions, one to Christ, as the Natural Subject & Agent; & another to us, as the Moral, Political or reputed Subject & agent (& so His formal Righteousnese not to be imputed to us in it self, as ours, but another to result from the same matter. This is too Philosophical for me to owne, or follow. The 5, is, or else that we are reputed both the agents & Subjects of the matter of His Righteousness, morally, & also of the formal Righteousness of Christ himself. All these are but the effuvia of a braine floteing & swimeing in ill digested Philosophical Notions & School dregs, & contribute nothing to the clearing of Gospel-Truth, which hath little or rather no affinity with aery Philosophical Notions, but tende manifestly to the darkening of the same. But now, when all these Philosophical Notions & Relations are at an end, & we can proceed no further, where is that Imputation, which is legal, & plaine to every ordinary Man viz whereby the Satisfaction made to a judge & Governour for a crime committed, by the delinquen'ts friend; or that payment & Satisfaction made to the creditor, for the debtor, by a friend Interposing, is in Law-sense accounted the delinquent's & debtor's; & he as really & effectually delivevered out of prison therefore, as if he had made Satisfaction in his own proper person, or had paid the summe out if his own Substance? If any Philosopher, after Mr. Baxter's manner here, should, with such Philosophical Whimseyes, (I call them so, for they are no other in this case) laboure to disprove any such Imputation, & say, it must be in one of those five senses &c. would not any countrey man smille at this▪

But now let us see Mr. Baxter's sixt sense, wherein he granteth the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. Or else (saith he) by Imputation is meant here, that Christ being truely reputed to have taken on the Nature of sinful Man, & become an Head for all true Beleevers, in that undertaken Nature & office, in the person of a Mediator, to have fulfilled all the Law imposed upon him, by perfect Holiness & obedience, & offering himself on the cross a sacrifice for our sins, voluntarily suffering in our stead, as if He had been a sinner (guilty of all our sins) as soon as we beleeve, we are pardoned, Iustified, Adopted, for the sake & Merites of this Holiness, obedience & Penal Satisfaction of Christ with as full demonstration of divine Iustice, at least, & more full Demonstration of His wisdom & Mercy, than if we had suffered our selves what our sinnes deserved (that is, been damned) or had never sinned. And so Righteousness is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted or reputed Righteous (not in relation to the Precept, that is, innocent or sinless, but in relation to the Retribution, that is, such as have right to impunity & Life) because Christ's foresaid perfect Holiness, Obedience & Satisfaction, meritedour pardon & Adoption and the Spirit; or merited the New Covenant, by which, as an Instrument, Pardon, justification & Adoption are given to Beleevers, and the Spirit to be given to Sanctifie them; and when we beleeve, we are justly reputed such, as have right to all these purchased gifts.

As to this I shall only note a few things (1.) Christ's fulfilling of the Law imposed on Him, doth not hinder, but that He paid our debt, & so came in our Law-place, & substitute Himself in our room, to do what we should have done & to suffer what we should have suffered according to the Law, in all the essentials & Substantials of that punishment: for had He not done this, He could not be said to have suffered in our stead: for he only suffereth in the room & stead of another, who suffereth what that other should have suffered. If one be condemned to suffer death, another that suffereth only Imprisonment for his delivery, cannot be said to suffer in this stead, but onely for his cause & good, as the Socinians say, Christ suffered for us. (2.) Christ not only suffered in our stead, as if he had been a sinner & guilty, but as sinner legally & juridically guilty, having sins imputed to Him, though He was most free of all sin inherently, and knew it not: & the reason is manifest; for otherwayes Divine justice should not have shined forth in His sufferings, it being no Demonstration of justice to punish one, who neither inherently, nor Imputatively & legally, is or can be accounted & reputed a sinner. (3.) Wee cannot, with right, be reputed Righteous, except we be either inherently righteous, or righteous by Imputation; & so legally, juridically, & in Law-sense righteous, by vertue of the Imputation of the Surety-righteousness of Christ, our Sponsor. (4.) Righteousness must properly respect the Commands & Prohibitions of the Law, & but secondarily the Retribution, if not most Improperly; as unrighteousness is in reference to the Law, as commanding or forbidding, & very improperly attributed to any in reference to the punishment threatned. And therefore, if we be accounted Righteousness, it must be in relation to the precept, at least, in the first place: Nor can we be accounted Righteous, in reference to the Retribution, that is, have a Right to Impunity & life, in the sight of God, who judgeth & reputeth according to equity & right, unless we be first accounted Righteous, in reference to the precept; for this is the only just & legal foundation of the other. (5.) Upon this it doth not follow that we are Innocent or sinless inherently, far less, that we never transgressed; but on the contrary, it clearly saith, that we were sinners; but now are legally, or juridically innocent & sinless by the Imputation of the side jussorie Righteousness of Christ; & therefore are not obnoxious to the penalty, or to punishment; but have right to Impunity & life. (6.) When he speaketh of what Christ merited, he expresseth himself dubiously, not being positively clear, whether Christ merited our pardon &c. or the New Covenant: & the disjunctive particle Or, saith He did not merite both, in his judgment: but before, we heard him plainly affirming, that Christ merited the New Covenant, & consequently He did not purchase pardon, Adoption & the Spirit to any immediatly, but only mediatly, in purchasing the Covenant, which promiseth these to such, as performe the Conditions thereof. (7.) By this way, Beleevers are repute such, as have right to all these purchased gifts, not immediatly by vertue of Christ's Merites & righteousness, imputed to them & bestowed upon them, but by vertue of their being inherently Righteous with that Gospel-righteousness, faith, which is the potestative Condition of the Covenant, & is now imputed to them, & accounted their Righteousness, according to his judgment.

Speaking afterward pag. 55. of Christ, as an Head & Root, he tels us, that He was no Natural Root or Head; which is undeniable; Yet He was a Super-Natural & Political Head. But he saith, He was not actually such an Head to the Redeemed, when He obeyed and suffered; but as an Head by Aptitude, office, power & Vertue. Ans. It is true, as to such, as were not then Beleevers, He was not a Supernatural Head actually, that is, by communicating actually Physical and supernatural influences of Spiritual life: Yet He was, as to all given to Him, actually a Political Head, or an Head in a Political sense, that is, by God's Appointment, and His own voluntary undertaking, He obeyed & Suffered for them, & in their stead; paying their debt answering for all that the justice & the Law did require of them, and so purchasing all Grace & Glory for them, to be certainely bestowed in due time. In this respect, that must be denied, which he addeth (n. 12.) Therefore they were not Christ's members Political, when He obeyed & dyed: for they may as well be said, to have been then His members Political, as some, not yet within the sold, but that were to be brought in, & were to hear His voice, were by Himself called His sheep Ioh. 10: 16. Whence, I pray, come the I • fluences, whereby they are made to beleeve, if not from Him, as their Political-head, or Surety-head, standing ingaged for them? But possibly the ambiguous use of the word Political may occasione his mistake here.

A Natural Head (saith he n. 14.) being but a part of a person, what it doth, the Person doth. But seing a contracted Head and all the members of his Body contracted, or Politick, are every one a distinct person, it followeth not, that each person did really, or reputatively what the head did. Nay, it is a good consequence, that if he did it, as an head, they did it not (numerically) as head or members. Ans. Passing the Impropriety of the expression contracted head, whereby, it is like, he meanes a Conventional Head. I say, Though a Conventional Head and all the members of that Body, be every one a distinct person Physically; Yet considered as such, they are all but one person Politically & in Law-sense: & so in Law-sense & Politically (as all lawyers know, & even Men of Common sense can acknowbedge) every distinct Physical person is supposed to have done what their Political Head & Representative hath done, as such. And though it be a good consequence, that if the Head did it, as an Head, they in their in their Physical persons did it not: Yet it were a ridiculous Consequence, to say, They therefore, as Political Members of that Political conventional body, did it not viz Politically (not Physically, or numerically.

Christ (saith he n. 15.) suffered & obeyed in the Person of the Mediator, between God & Man, & as a subject to the Law of Mediation. Ans. Though He suffered in the Physical Person of the Mediator; Yet because Suffering & obeying as a Mediator & Surety. He Suffered & obeyed, as a Political Head, & in a Political person. (2.) Though He was Subject to the Law of Mediation; Yet by vertue of that same Law of Mediation, He was subject to the Law, under which we were, both as to its Duty & Penalty: for Suffering & obeying, as a Mediator & Surety, He, in Suffering & obeying, did pay out debt, for He came into our Law-place.

Christ may be said (saith he n. 16.) to suffer, in the person of a sinner, as it meaneth His own person, reputed & used as a sinner, by His persecutors; & as He was one, who stood before God, as Undertaker, to suffer for mans sins. Ans. Seing He was one, who stood before God, as an Undertaker for sinners; & not only to suffer for mans sin, did he not suffer as a sinner (not inherently, but) legally & juridically? and did He not represent and stand in the room of sinners, as their Political Head & Representative? These things can not be handsomly, with any shew of reason, contradicted, or denied. Nay, himself addeth (n. 17. pag. 56.) that Christ suffered in the place & stead of sinners, that they might be d • livered, though in the Person a Sponsor. Whence we see, that though He suffered in the person of a Sponsor. Physically taken; Yet He suffered in the person of others, Politically & legally, because He suffered as a Sponsor, in their stead, that they might certainely & eventually be delivered, & not possibly only.

But then (n. 18.) he cometh to an Accomodation, saying, When we are agreed that the person of the Sponsor & of every particular sinner are diverse (if the word Person be here understood in a Physical, or Numerical sense, & the word sinners be understood of the Elect only, I agree) and that Christ had not suffered, if we had not sinned: (true) & that he as a Sponser, suffered in our stead, & so bore the punishment; which not He, but we deserved (adde also, & obeyed, & I agree: If any will here, in stead of a Mediator, or Sponsor, call Him our Representative, & say, that He suffered even in all our persons reputatively, not simpliciter, but secundum quid, & in tantum only, that is, not representing our persons simply & in all respects, & to all ends, but only so far as to be a Sacrifice for our sins, and suffer in our place and stead, what He suffered, we take this to be but lis de nomine. And why is not His obeying also added? But againe, if He suffered, as a Mediator & Sponsor, in our place & stead, He must needs have been our Political-Representative, according as we use to speak and understand these termes; & so must have suffered in all our persons reputatively, so far as was necessary to our Redemption & Salvation, & for more we enquire not. And seing this is what the orthodox assert, Mr. Baxter is much to be blamed, for troubling the church so long by his opposition hereunto, & his own new Notions.

He proceedeth (n. 19.) Christ did not suffer, strictly, simply, absolutly, in the person of any one Elect sinner, much less in the millions of Persons of them all in Law-sense, or in God's esteem; God did not esteem Christ to be, Naturally, or as an absolute Representer, david, Manasseh, Paul, & every such other sinner, but only a Mediator, that suffered in their stead. Ans. Till we understand what is meant by these termes, Strickly, Simply & Absolutly, we cannot know well what to say to this. We grant, He suffered in the person of no Elect sinner, so as to become David, Manasseh &c. Yet, when He suffered in their stead, as Mediator & Surety, both in Law-sense, & in God's esteem, He did represent them; & did & suffered what He did & suffered, as a Surety for them, & as representing their Persons, in a Law-sense & Politically, simply & absolutely, to all ends necessary for their Redemption & Salvation.

He addeth (n. 20.) God did make Christ to be sin for us, that is, a Sacrifice for our sins, & one that by man was reputed, & by God & Man was used, as sinners are & deserve to be. Ans. Christ could not be made a Sacrific for sin, till He had the guilt of sin laid upon Him by Imputation, as the Sacrifices of old had typically. His being reputed such, & handled as such by man, is of no consideration here: And by God He could not be used, as a sinner, or as sinners are & deserve to be, unless our sins had been first caused to meet upon Him, & imputed to Him, to the end, He might properly be said to Suffer & become a Sacrifice for sin. We say with him (n. 23.) that God did not suppose or repute Christ to have committed all, or any of the sins, which we all committed; Nor to have had all the wickedness in His Nature which was in ours; nor to have deserved what we did deserve; nor did in this proper sense impute our sins to Christ. For indeed this had not been in a prope sense, to impute our sins to Him, but plainly to confound His Physical person with ours; & to speak thus, I should account to be horrid blasphemy: Yet it may be & must be said, that Christ, being made sin for us, & made to suffer for sin, in the room of sinners, had their sins laid upon Him; & so, was a sinner, not Inherently but legally by Imputation; that is, had the guilt of our sins, in order to punishment, imputed to Him, & He put to suffer for that guilt, or because a sinner by Imputation. And when the Scripture saith, that God made Christ sin for us 2 Cor. 5: 21. & Laid on Him the iniquity of us all, Esai. 55: 6. It is as emphatick (& to me more) as to say, God did impute our sin to Christ, which he some-way excepteth against (n. 23. pag. 57.)

He addeth (n. 26. pag. 58.) Though Christ suffered in our stead, and in a large sence, to certaine uses, and in some respects, as the Representer, or in the persons of Sinners: yet did He not so far represent their persons, in His habitual Holiness and actual obedience, (no not in the obedience of His Suffering) as He did in the Suffering it self. He obeyed not in the person of a sinner, much less of millions of sinners, which were to say, in the person of sinners, he never sinned. He suffered to save us from suffering; but He obeyed not to save us from obeying, but to bring us to obedience: yet His perfection of obedience had this end, that perfect obedience might not be necessary in us to our justification and Salvation. Ans. Seing Christ was appointed Mediator & Sponsor to take on mans debt and come in his Law-place, what reason can be given, why He should not, as well be said to represent them, in the paying of the one part of that debt, as in the paying of the other? We were under the Law and obliged to performe perfect obedience, in order to the obtaining of the reward promised; and because of sin we were under the Curse. Now when the Surety come to pay our whole debt, He did as much, and as well represent us, in paying of and in performing obedience, as in Suffering. And why may we not say, that He obeyed in the juridical and Law person of a sinner, as well as that He suffered? Though I should not use such improper and unusual expressions, as Mr. Baxter here doth; yet I must tell him, That Christ's obeying in the person of a sinner, saith no more than that, He being the person representing sinners, His obeying was and is repute, in Law-sense, their obeying. He Suffered, it is true, to save us from suffering of the Curse of the Law; But Mr. Baxter will not say, that He suffered to save us from all Suffering: He obeyed, it is true, to bring us to obedience, as He died also for that end, that we might haue the Sanctifying Spirit bestowed upon us: yet notwithstanding He obeyed to save us from obeying viz. after that manner, that we were obliged to obey under the old Covenant, that is to obey perfectly, or never enjoy the crown, and to obey for that end, that we might enjoy the crown, as the legal reward of and due debt for our labour. And seing Mr. Baxter granteth in the following words, that Christ's perfect obedience had this end, that perfect obedience might not be necessary in us to our justification; why may he not say, that to certaine uses, and in some respects, Christ obeyed, to save us from obeying? Or why will he not say, that He obeyed for us, that we, who could not obey of our selves, might be repute to have obeyed perfectly in Him? This is all we desire.

He saith next (n. 27.) It was not we our selves, who did perfectly obey, or were perfectly holy, or suffered for sin, in the person of Christ, or by Him: nor did me (naturally, or morally) merite our own Salvation by obeying in Christ: nor did we satisfie God's justice for our sins, nor purchase pardon or Salvation to ourselves, by our suffering in and by Christ. Ans. However, Christ doing all this for us, as our Sponsor and Surety, we are so taken-in in a Law-sense, that the same is imputed unto us, and we enjoy the fruits thereof, pardon and Salvation; no less than if we had done and suffered all in our own physical persons.

As to what he saith (n. 29, 30.) it is nothing to the purpose (and therefore I shall not set down his words) for we are not here speaking of Relations and Accidents, physically, or metaphysicall rather considered, which cannot pass from one Subject to another: nor do we speak of Christ, while speaking of the Imputation of His Righteousness, physically considered, but politically & legally, as a Sponsor and Surety some way representing us. I assent to him, that the meaning of this Imputation is not, That we ourselves, in person, truely had the habites, which Christ had, and did all that Christ did, and suffered all that he suffered, as by an Instrument, or legal Representer of our persons, in all this, meaning that we in our physical persons should have done all this, by Him, as our physical Instrument. But why He addeth here, or legal Representer, unless he meane thereby that which elsewhere he hath expressed to be, as our delegat, or Servant, I know not. And however it seemeth not to me appositely here annexed, if ingenuous and plaine dealing be designed. But there is another sense, in which he will yeeld to Imputation, & he thinks there cannot be a third. Let us hear what this other sense is.

That Christ's Satisfaction (saith he) Righteousness and the Habites, Acts & Sufferings, in which it lay, are imputed to us, & made ours, not rigidly in the very thing it self, but in the effects and benefites. Ans. But if he shall yeeld to no other Imputation, than this, he shall grant no Imputation: for that Imputation, as to effects, is no Imputation at all: unless the meritorious cause be imputed, in order to the receiving of these Effects, there is nothing imputed; for they Effects are never said to be imputed. There is therefore a Third sense, wherein neither Christ's Righteousness, that is, His Habites, Acts & Sufferings are said to be physically translated, and put in us, or upon us; nor are they said to be Imputed to us meerly in their Effects; as Socinians say; but wherein Christ's Surety-righteousness, consisting in His Obedience & Suffering, is in a Law-sense, made over to beleevers, & put upon their score, & now accounted theirs; & they, because thereof, accounted Righteous, legally and juridically; and have therefore the Effects bestowed on them. This being so obvious, I wonder that Mr. Baxter cannot see it. When a debtor is lying in prison, for debt, and a friend cometh & Satisfieth the creditor for him by paying the summe, in his place & stead; the Law doth not impute that payment to the debtor meerly in the effects; but imputeth the payment it self, not in its Physical acceptation, as if it judged that he was the man, that in his own Physical person, told the money with his own hands, & brought it out of his own purse, as the other did, but) in its legal force, vertue, & efficary, unto him, & accounted him, in this Legal sense, to be no more a debter unto the creditor; & therefore one that hath right to his liberty, & must therefore be set free from prison. So, in our case, the Righteousness of Christ, in a legal sense, as to its efficary & vertue, is made over to the Beleever, & he thereupon is accounted Righteous, and no more a debtor, and therefore free of the Penalty. Further, Although he say, that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us in the Effects; Yet he knoweth, that that is (in his judgment) but very remotely; and that really these effects are more proximely the effects of Faith, which he calleth our Gospel-righteousness; and that the Immediat effect and product of Christ's Righteousness is the New Covenant; and this New Covenant being made with all Mankind (as he thinketh) Christ's Righteousnes is, in this immediat Effect, imputed to all flesh, Reprobat, as well as Elect. And this is, in part, cleared from the words Immediatly following, when he saith, In as much, as we are as really pardoned, justified, Adopted by them, as the Meritorious Cause by the Instrumentality of the Covenants Donation, as if we ourselves had done & suffered all that Christ did. For this Instrumentality of the Covenant includeth the performance of the Condition thereof, i. e. faith; & this Faith is properly imputed for Righteousness, as he saith: And therefore, as the Covenant is the Effect of the merites of Christ; so pardon and Salvation must be the Effects of Faith; and the Effects of Christ's Righteousness only, in that he did procure the Covenant, which conveyeth these to us, upon Condition of our performing of this faith, which is therefore called, by him, our Gospel-Righteousness.

He giveth us next foure wayes (n. 31. pag. 60.) wherein the Lord is said to be our Righteousness (an Expression that doth emphatically & more than sufficiently express the meaning of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness) 1. In that (saith he) He is the meritorious cause of the pardon of all our sins, & our full justification, Adoption & Right to glory: & by His Satisfaction and Merites only our justification by the Covenant of Grace, against the Curse of the Law works, is purchased. Ans. He cannot be said, by him, to be the Meritorious Cause of pardon, &c. But in as far as He is the Meritorious cause of the Covenant, in which these benefites are promised, upon Condition of faith, our Gospel-righteousness, which properly and only is our Imputed Righteousness, according to him; and so Christ is our Righteousness, in meriting that faith shall be repute our Gospel-righteousness in order to our obtaining of Pardon and Right to glory. But moreover, where is our Righteousness? For Pardon is no Righteousness; neither is justification, Adoption, or Right to Glory properly a Righteousness; But do presuppose a Righteousness, after which we are enquiring, and cannot finde that Christ is made to be that to us; and consequently, either faith must be it, or there is none.

The other senses are 2. In that He is the legislator, Testator & donor of our Pardon & justification by this new Covenant. 3. In that He is the Head of Influx, King & Intercessour, by whom the Spirit is given to Sanctifie us to God, & cause us sincerely performe the Conditions of the Iustifying Covenant. 4. In that He i • the righteous judge & justifier of Beleevers by sentence of judgment. Ans. All these three will make the Father to be our Righteousness, as well as the Son: for He is legislator; He draweth to the Son & sendeth the Spirit to Sanctifie us, & He judgeth by the Son & justifieth. (2.) But none of these, nor all of these give us the true Import of that glorious Name, according to the true scope of the place Ier. 23: 6. of which we have spoken above.

In like manner (n. 32.) he giveth us four senses of these words, we are made the Righteousness of God in Him. The 1. is, In that, as he was used like a sinner for us (But not esteemed one by God) so we are used like innocent persons, so far as to be saved by Him. Ans. As He was used by God like a sinner, so was He legally accounted a sinner, otherwise God would not have used Him as a sinner. Therefore if we be used like innocent persons, we must be in God's esteem, legally & juridically innocent, through Christ's Righteousness imputed; & so must be saved by Him. The 2. is, In that through His Merites, & upon our union with Him, when we beleeve & consent to Hi • Covenant, we are pardoned & justified, & so made Righteous really, that is such, as are not to be condemned, but glorified. Ans As I said, neither pardon, nor justification maketh us Righteous, but suppose us to be Righteous; and therefore, in justification we are declared & pronounced Righteous, & thereupon pardoned. Moreover, all our Righteousness, that we have, in order to justification & pardon, is, according to Mr. Baxter, our Faith, which is, & is reputed to be, our Gospel Righteousness; & is said to be properly Imputed to us: & thus Christ suffered in our stead, that our faith might be accounted our Righteousness. Though pardon will take away condemnation yet (as we have cleared above) more must be had, in order to Glorification. His 3. & 4. are. In that the divine Nature & Inherent Righteousness are for His merites. In that God's justice & holiness, truth, wisdom & mercy are all wonderfully Demonstrated, in this way of Pardoning & justifying of sinners by Christ. Ans. This last hath no ground, as the sense of the words; And as for the. 3. Before he make it the sense of the place. 2 Cor. 5: 21. he must say, That Christ was a sinner inherently (which were blasphemy) for otherwayes that beautiful correspondence, that is betwixt the First & the Last part of the verse, must be laid a side, contrary to the manifest scope of the place.

He tels us (n. 36. pag. 61.) It is an errour, contrary to the scope of the Gospel, to say, that the Law of Works, or of Innocency, doth justifie us, as performed either by our selves, or by Christ: for that Law condemneth & curseth us; & we are not efficiently justified by it, but from, or against it. Ans. I shall not say, that we are justified by the Law of works efficiently; yet I hope, Mr. Baxter will not say, that upon the fall, that Law, or Covenant was quite abolished & annulled; & if it was only disp • nsed with, in order to the admitting of a Surety, which it did not provide▪ or give place to, in its primitive Institution, we may saifly say, That it must be satisfied both as to the commands, & as to the penalty, ere we can escape wrath & obtaine Life: for this Law said (as himself confesseth pag. 63.) Obey Perfectly & Live, sinne & dye. And though it condemne & curse us sinners; Yet it hath nothing to say against our Surety; nor against any clothed with His Surety-righteousness, whereby all the demands of this Law and Covenant were Satisfied.

Hence he inferreth (n. 37.) Therefore, we have no Righteousness, in Reality, or Reputation formally ours, which consisteth in a conformity to the preceptive part of the Law of Innocency: we are not reputed Innocent; But only a Righteousness, which consisteth in Pardon of all sin, & right to Life (with sincere performance of the condition of the Covenant of Grace, that is, true faith) Ans. If by formally ours, he mean Inherently ours, I grant what he here saith: but I deny it, if by formally ours, he meane that, by which we may be denominated formally Righteous: for by Imputation we have a Righteousness, whereby we are formally righteous, legally & Juridically; & this Righteousness must needs consist in conformity to the Lawes commands. It is true, we are not repute inherently Innocent; Yet we are repute non-sinners legally; & hence cometh our Pardon & Right to Life, which of it self is no Righteousness, but the Result of a Righteousness. So that with him Beleevers have no Righteousness, in order to justification, but faith, the Gospel Righteousness, as was said above, & this he saith here in effect, & yet more plainely & fully pag. 64.

He addeth (n. 38. pag. 62.) our Pardon puts not away our guilt of fact or fault, but our guilt of and obligation to punishment. God doth not repute us such, as neversinned, or such, as by our Innocency merited heaven; but such as are not to be damned but to beglorified, because pardoned & Adopted, through the Satisfaction & merites of Christ. Ans. Though pardon, as pardon, will do no more, than he here granteth; Yet Righteousness & justification presupposing Righteousness will take away the Reatum culpae; not as if it would make us such as never sinned, for that is Impossible; but because by Righteousness imputed, we are now reputed sinless Legally, that is, not guilty of the fact in order to punishment, & this must be, that we may not only not be damned, but may be glorifeed, according to the Constitution, that said, Obey perfectly & live. And though now every pardoned man shall be glorified; Yet that is not meerly and formally upon the account of Pardon; but because no man is pardoned, till he have the compleet Righteousness of Christ, consisting in obedience and i • Suffering, imputed to him, whereby beside pardon, he obtaineth a right to glory.

He cometh to cleare the matter of Imputation of Christ's Righteouss, by the Imputation of Adam's sin, which is a good Medium, the Apostle going before us herein Rom. 5. And though he saith somethings (n. 41. p. 65.) wherewith I am not Satisfied, yet I passe, because not much to our present purpose, & come to (n. 42. p. 66.) where he saith, As Adam was an head by Nature, & therefore conveyed guilt by Natural Generation: so Christ is a Head (not by nature, but) by Sacred contract, & therefore conveyeth right to pardon. Adoption and Salvation, not by Generation, but by Contract, or Donation. So that what was to be Naturally in Adam, seminally and virtually, though not personally in existence; even that it is, in order to our benefite by Him, to be in Christ by contract, or the New Covenant, virtually, though not in personal existence, when the Covenant was made. Ans. As Adam was an Head by Nature, so was he by Covenant; and as Christ is an head by Covenant, so is He an Head by supernatural Influences, and conveyeth His blessings by Regeneration, as well as by Covenant; And therefore what was to be Naturally in Adam, seminally and virtually, though not personally in existence, that is, to be in Christ by supernatural Regeneration virtually. And as his Effects of Adam's fall are conveyed by Natural generation, so that we are made partakers thereof actually, by actual partaking of our Natural being; so the Effects of Christ's Righteousness are conveyed by Spiritual Regeneration, & we are actually made partakers thereof, when we partake of this Spiritual being.

He proceedeth (n.43.) They therefore that look upon justification, or Righteousness, as coming to us immediatly by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us, without the Instrumental Intervention, and conveyance or Collation by this deed of Gift, or Covenant, do confound themselves, by confounding and overlooking the causes of justification. That which Christ did by His merites, was to procure the New Covenant. Ans. Though the Instrumental Intervention of a Covenant be acknowledged; Yet Righteousness must come to us immediatly by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; For His Righteousness imputed is our Righteousness, and is only that Righteousness, whereby we become formally Righteous in order to justification. The difference lyeth here betwixt us: Mr. Baxter thinketh, tha • Christ's Righteousness is imputed, in that it purchased the New Covenant (and consequently is euqlly imputed to all; for the Covenant, with him, is equally made with all) and in and through the new Covenant, which conveyeth pardon and life to such, as performe the conditions thereof, i.e. beleeve, & so are inherently Righteous, these benefites are bestowed; & so Christ's Righteousness is not the immediat ground of our justification and Right to Glory; but our own Personal Righteousness, Faith, called our Gospel-righteousness: Christ's Righteousness is only the immediat ground of the Covenant, being the Meritorious cause thereof; & the immediat ground, whereupon our faith is so far advanced. But our judgment is, that though Christ convey the blessings purchased covenantwayes, yet the Covenant it self is not purchased by His Merites; & the way of conveyance is this, that He first by His Spirit worketh the soul up to faith in Christ, & then communicateth Christ & His Righteousness unto the beleever; & upon that immediat ground of Christ's Imputed Surety-righteousness, whereupon they become Righteous, in the sight of God, they are justified, pardoned & receive a right to the Crown. And though the difference here may appear to be but small, yet to me it is such, that by Mr. Baxter's way, the whole frame of the Gospel is changed; & such, as hold it, do in my judgment, not only confound, but alter the causes of justification. If that, which Christ did by His Merites, was to procure the New Covenant, what was there in Adam, that can be said to answere this, or hold correspondence with it? With us, the Parallel runneth smoothly and clearly, thus. As by vertue of first Covenant, whereof Adam was the head, engaging for all his Natural Posterity, so soon as they partake of Nature, & thereby become actual members of that Political Body, partake of Adam's guilt, or breach of the Covenant, which is imputed to them; & there upon share of the consequences thereof, as immediatly resulting therefrom, to wit, the corruption of the whole Nature, Privative & positive, wrath & the curse &c. This himself asserteth pag. 34. So by vertue of the Second Covenant, whereof Christ, the Second Adam is Head, engaging for all His Spiritual posterity, they, so soon as they come to partake of His spiritual Nature, & so become members of His mystical body (which is by a Phisical, supernatural operation, conveyed morally and Covenant wayes, according to the Good pleasure of His will, & according to His wisdom, who doth all things well & wisely) are made partakers of Christ's Righteousness, which is imputed unto them; & thereupon do share of the Consequences, which do immediatly result theref • om, viz. of justification, pardon, Adoption & Right to Glory.

He addeth (n. 44.) Though the person of the Mediator be not really, or reputatively, the very person of each sinner (nor so many persons as there are sinners, or beleevers) yet it doth belong to the person of the Mediator, so far (limitedly) to bear the person of a sinner, and to stand in the place of the persons of all sinners, as to bear the punishment they deserved, & to suffer for their sins. Ans. We do not imagine, that the Physical pe • son of the Mediator is, either really or reputatively, the Physical person of each sinner. It is enough for us to say, that the Mediator is an Head, Surety & publick person; and so, that He & Beleevers are one legally and juridically. And we judge also, that it belongeth to the person of the Mediator, being Surety, to Satifie for the whole debt of these, for whom He is Surety: & therefore must not only so far stand in the place of sinners, as to Suffer for their sins, & bear the punishment they deserved; But also give that perfect obedience, which they were obliged unto, and were not able to performe, or pay.

He granteth (n. 45. pag. 67.) that Morally it may be said, that Christ's Righteousness was given to us, in that the thing purchased by it was given to us, as the money, given for the ransome of the Captive, may besaid morally to be given to the captive, though Physically it begiven to the Conquerour. But neither this similitude, not yet the other, of a mans being said to give anothe • so much money, when he giveth him the land, bought therewith, do not come home to the point in hand: for there is a neer & closs union betwixt Christ & Beleevers, which union is not supposed in these cases. Next Christ was in our Law-place, and undertook to do what He did, as our Surety; neither is this supposed in the cases proposed; & againe, the benefite here following viz. Justification &c. doth presuppose us to be Righteous, & consequently we must have a Righteousness imputed, because we have none of our owne; for we may not admit Faith to that high dignity. We have mentioned more apposite & fit Similitudes above.

I cannot assent to what he saith (n. 47. pag. 68.] That Christ is less improperly said to have represented all mankind, as newly fallen in Adam, in a general sense, for the purchasing of the universal gift of pardon & life, called the New Covenant, than to have represented, in his perfect holiness and sufferings, every beleever, considered as from his first being to his death. For of His representing all mankind newly fallen in Adam, I read not in the Scriptures: nor yet of His purchasing the New Covenant. Whether these be not additions to the word of God, let Mr. Baxter (who oft chargeth others herewith) consider. Nor do I know, what Scripture warranteth him to say. pag. 69. That Christ, the second Adam, is in a sort, the root of Man, as Man, as He is the Redeemer of Nature it self from destruction; Nor what truth can be in it, unless he think to play upon the word, in a sort.

He seemeth to come neerer us, when he saith (n. 48. p. 70.) The summe of all lyeth, in applying the distinction of giving Christ's Righteousness, as such in it self, & as a Cause of our Righteousness, or in the causality of it; as our sin is not reputed Christ's sin in it self, and in the culpability of it (for then it must needs make Christ odious to God) but in its causality of punishment. So Christ's material or formal Righteousness is not by God reputed to be properly and absolutely our own in it self as such, but the causality of it, as it produceth such & such effects, Ans. How Christ's Righteousness should be the cause of our Righteousness, if we speak properly, I know not; for we are here speaking of Righteousness, in order to justification, & in this case, I know no other Righteousness, but Christ's Surety-righteousness, imputed to us, and bestowed upon us: & it is improper to say, that Christ's Righteousness is the cause of it self, as given to us. But it may be, he meaneth, that it is the cause of our Faith; & this I grant to be true, but I deny, that this faith is our Righteousnese, whereupon we are justified, or the ratio formalis objectiva of our justifications. When we mention the Imputing of Christ's Righteousness, we mean the Righteousness of Christ it self, not Physically, but legally & juridically, & that is its worth or legal causality; not as it produceth, but in order that it may produce such Effects. Our sin is reputed Christ's legally, in its demerite of punishment, or in its reatus culpae, that He might be legally thereby reus culpae and yet He was not odious to God, because it was not His Inherently, but only legally & by Imputation.

Mr. Baxter in his following Chap. 3. fearing, that by all that he had said, he had not made the state of the controversie plaine enough to the unexercised Reader, goeth over it againe, in a shorter way, that he may make it as plaine, as possibly he can. And yet, I judge, (such is my dulness) that he never made the matter more obscure, at least, to the Unexercised Reader, nor possibly could, than he hath done here; for if any man, how understanding so ever shall understand his Expressions, let be the matter by them, that is not very well versed both in Aristotles Logicks or Metaphysicks, and the termes thereof, and in justinian's Lawes and the termes thereof, I am far deceived. He that would understand this plaine discovery of the Question, must understand what Relations are; what Reatus culpae & poenae; what poena damni & sensus; what cessante capacitate Subdut, what pro-legal Righteousness; what quoad valorem & quoad ordinem conferendi, & rationem comparativam, What is Terminus & fundamentum in relations; what is Titulus & fundamentum juris; what causa fundamenti & donationis, & the like: And if all Unexercised Readers shall be able to understand this, I doubt: And sure I am, many a poor soul, that understands nothing of these termes, gets grace of God to understand the thing, better than all this explication (how plaine so ever it be called) shall ever make him do. And if this be the plainest way, that Mr. Baxter can chose to make us understand this so necessary and fundamental a truth, I shall never choose him for my Teacher, as to this. It could therefore tend o no edification, at least unto his Unexperienced Readers, (whose edification, I judge, should be sought by us all, in handling of this matter) to fall upon any examination of, or debate with him about what he hath here said, seing it would necessarily end in a debate about logical and Law termes; which I shall rather leave to others, who have delight therein. And beside, the matter it self, delivered by him in more plaine & intelligible termes, (as I judge) both to exercised & more unexercised Readers, is already examined.

Notwithstanding (as we have seen) his opinion be different from what the orthodox do commonly hold, in this question; yet Chap 4. he stateth the question, against which he purposeth to disput, so as he may be sure, none of these will oppose him: yea and it may be doubted, if Antinomians themselves will contradict him; for thus he proposeth what he denieth. That God did so impute Christ's Righteousness to us, as to repute, or account us to have been holy with all that habitual holiness, which was in Christ, or to have done all that He did, in obedience to His Father, or in fulfilling the Law; or to have suffered all that He suffered, & to have made Satisfaction for our sins, & merited our own Salvation & justification in & by Christ; or that He was, did, suffered & merited all this strickly in the person of every sinner, that is saved. Or that Christ's very individual Righteousness, material or formal, is so made ours in a strick sense, as that we are Proprietors, Subjects or Agents of the very thing it self simply and absolutely, as it is distinct from the effects; or that Christ's individual formal Righteousness is made our formal personal Righteousness; or that, as to the Effects, we have any such Righteousness imputed to us, as formally ours, which consisteth in perfect Habitual and Actual conformity to the Law of Innocency; that is, that we are reputed perfectly holy and sinless, and such as shall be justified by the Law of Innocency, which saith, perfectly obey and live, or sin & dye. And the more to secure himself from all opposition from the orthodox, 〈◊〉 proposeth this Law (which is but equitable) to all that will answere him (I suppose he meaneth the Arguments that there follow) that he must keep to his words, & not alter the sense by leaving any out. I shall therefore be none of his Opposites here on these termes, but shall consider what he saith elsewhere.

CHAP. XIV. How Christ is our Surety, and what Mr. Baxter saith, as to this, is examined.

OUr Lord Jesus being called a Surety in the Scriptures, may give us much satisfaction and clear light, anent the Doctrine of the Imputation of His Righteousness, if prejudice and Love to our own particular hypothesis do not blinde us. The Apostle tels us Heb. 7: 22. that Iesus was made a Surety of a better Testament (or Covenant, rather) and though the greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , rendered Surety, be only in this place found in the N. Testam. yet that can give no colourable ground of Exception against the true & Native import of the word, and the truth, thereby hold forth, seing one sentence of divine Revelation should captivat our faith & judgment, as well as Twenty, otherwise all divine Revelation, though never sooft reiterated, will hereby at length come to be questioned. And beside, the word properly signifieth a Surety, Cautioner, Praes, Sponsor, fide jussor: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is sponsio, expromissio, fidejussio: hence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sub fide sponsionis trade, as it were, to deliver into hands, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 spondeo, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fidejussio, Vadimonium, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fidejussor, vas, sponsor: and whether the word come from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 prope, or from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 appropinquo, or from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in manibus, the same import and signification is hold forth; and the conjunction and neerness betwixt the Sponsor, or Surety, and the person for whom He is sponsor, with the ends, for which he engageth himself, who is a Sponsor, is manifestly hold forth; for the word Importeth one, who of his own accord engageth for another, taking upon him, the Cause and Condition of that other, & promising to do or pay what the other was obliged unto, or to see it done, and, thus engaging and promising, becometh the just & legal debtor for what he hath engaged, and obliged unto the performance. And this sense is both obvious and generally received by all men; which should Satisfie us, as to the acceptation of the word here, untill it be demonstrat, that of necessity it must be taken in a peculiar & distinct sense, in this place; which yet the scope and circumstances of the place will not admit; but rather confirme the usuall and generally received signification & Import of the word.

This is also confirmed by the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which hath many significations, all, or most, of which, as some think, may be reduced to two general heads: one is of mixing things together, or agreeing things or persons together, by compacts, Merchandice, pledges, or Caution. Hence it signifieth to become Surety Gen. 43: 9. & 44: 22. Prov. 11: 15. & 6. 1. & 17: 18. & 22: 26. Psal. 119: 122. as also to oppignorat, or give in pledge Neh. 5: 3. 2. King. 18: 23. Esai. 36.8. Iob. 17: 3. Hence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , arrabon, a pleage Gen. 38: 17:20. & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fidejussion, sponsio, pignus, suretiship, & a pledge. 1. Sam. 17: 18. 2 King. 14: 14. This word then denoteth the Conjunction & Mixture, that is between a Surety, & him for whom he is Surety; for the word signifieth to mix or mingle together, so that they become hereby one person in Law; & an engaging. Ier. 30: 21. to shew, that the Surety standeth engaged to performe what he hath promised, & become Surety for, having 〈◊〉 stricken hands, as it is rendered Prov. 22: 26. Whence we see that there is a neer and closs Union betwixt Christ and Beleevers; so as they (to speak so) become one person in Law; for a Sponsor, as such, standeth engaged with and for the debtor, as if they were both but one; for the Surety maketh himself the debtor; & the Creditor may pursue either of them for payment, and when payment is made by the one, both are free of the obligation: so that if the Surety pay the debt, the creditor cannot reach the Principal debtor. These things are clear and universally known and received. And hereby, we see how Christ, being a Surety, and Beleevers become one person, in Law-sense; so that as He did voluntarily engage for them, and put Himself in their Law place; so His payment and Satisfaction is accounted theirs, and justice cannot reach them, for that, which He, as their Surety, hath paid.

But Mr. Baxter, in his book ag. Doct. Tully. pag. 108. in answere to the first objection, which he there moveth, tels us, That when Christ is thus called the fidejussor of a better Covenant, it seemeth plaine, that it is God's Covenant, as such; and so God's sponsor, that is meant. And for this he citeth Grotius & D. Hammond, in their Annot. Ans. This is the very same answere, that Socinians give, with whom both Grotius & Hammand do too well agree: and it is not much for Mr. Baxter's honour, nor for the credite of his cause, that he will forsake all the Orthodox, and embrace rather the Socinians, & such, as joine with them, than abandon what he thinketh contributive to his Hypothesis. Whether Christ was at all a Surety, upon God's part, or not, needeth not here be discussed; some Orthodox being of the judgment, that He was, as we see in Mr. Gillespie's late Piece Chap. 21. others thinking, that He was not, as may be seen in D. Owen's book of the Doctrine of justification by faith. It is Sufficient against Mr. Baxter & the Socinians, to prove, that He was a Surety and Sponsor for man to God; & this is aboundantly made good by what both these forementioned Authors have said, in the books mentioned, that more needeth not be added. But what doth Mr. Baxter mean by God's Covenant? He can meane nothing here, but God's part of the Covenant; & so make Christ only a Surety for that part. But what ground is there for this in the Text, or context? The Apostle is proving, that Christ's Priesthood (which respecteth not God towards man, but man towards God; for every Priest is ordained for men in things to God, that he may offer both gifts and Sacrifices for sin Hob. 5: 1.) is more excellent than the levitica, He being made a Priest by oath, & a Surety of a better Covenant, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & therefore his suretiship & His Priesthood must both respectmen, & the things of men to God; or the one should not be a fit Medium to prove the other; nor should there be any Coherence in the words; Vnless, with the Socinians, we should pervert the Nature of Christ's Priestly office, & make it to be for God, in things pertaining to Men, contrary to Heb. 5: 1. and all the use of Priests from the beginning; as they do, when they make Christ's Priesthood to consist, in His making effectual to us the promises of God; or in his effectual Communicating to us the good things, promised to us of God; from which Mr. Lawson doth not much differ, when he saith (as Mr. Baxter citeth his words) That a Priest doth undertake to procure from God both the confirmation and performence of the Promises to the people; & to that end mediats between both.

He saith next, That Calvin seemeth to Intimate that, which he thinketh is the truth, viz. that Christ is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of God's Covenant, from the Sacerdotal appropinquation, mentioned vers 19. But no such thing appeareth in Calvin's Comment. And that appropinquation, mentioned vers 19. is the people their privilege now under the New Testam. He tels us further, that Marlorat and others by Sponsor mean a Mediator. And it is true, that the Sponsor here is a Mediator: But that the word Sponsor here shall denote nothing else, than what the word Mediator signifieth, I shall not readily beleeve, without clearer grounds, than any I see yet adduced; for I cannot think, that the Apostle would make use of a word, which no where else he useth, & which is no where to be found in the N. Test. but here, in a sense, that it is never found to have, neither in Scripture, nor in the common use of men. And how-ever; Yet it must be granted, that He is such a Mediator, as is a Priest, & so must offer Sacrifices to God for men, & therefore must as well be a Mediator and Sponser on mans part, as on God's. He saith, that Pareus on the place, calleth Christ a Sponsor of the Covenant, quia novum foedus sanguine & morte sua obsignavit. But for answer, he may read the same author on Chap. 8: 1. saying, est & Sponsor foeder is spondens Deo populi nomine fidem & obedientiam, non verbis modo sed & victimis. And thus he distinguisheth a Sponsor from a Mediator.

Mr. Baxter granteth (pag. 109.) that a Mediator is not of one, but doth some what on the behalf of both parties: but addeth. That as Mediator, He is, Hath, Doth, Suffereth, Meriteth, Satisfieth, so as the Representer or Person of such a Beleever, as that every such person is supposed in Law, to have Been, Done, Suffered, Merited, thus in and by the Mediator, is neither signified by this, or any other Text. Ans. Though this cannot be said of a Mediator, who is only a Mediator, strickly so taken, & no more; yet it may be said of him, who not only is a Mediator, but also a Sponsor and Surety, as we have several times explained it. He addeth 2. They that distinguish of a Natural & Political Person, do but darken the case, by an ill expressed distinction, which indeed is not of two sorts of persons, but between Reality & Acceptation, taking person properly for a Natural person: It is one thing to be such a person; and another thingh to have the Act, Passion, Merite &c. accepted for that other person: And this latter signifieth either, 1. That it was done by the other person raediatly, as being a chiefe cause acting by his Instrument. 2. Or that it was done for that other Person by another; the first is our denied sence, & the second our affirmed sence. Ans. And I think (such is the discordance of Mens apprehensions) that his explication darkeneth what is clear enough by the distinction given. His Reality & Acceptation, is, in our case, as darkning a distinction, as the others, if not more, and is against the Common sense of the Law, & the plaine Common sense and understanding of men, when speaking of Law-matters. Who doth not understand how the Suretys payment is really, in the sense of the Law, the payment of the debtor, & not meerly accepted for him? If the payment were purely accepted, neither could it be said, that the Surety was anteriourly obliged, nor that the Creditor might not refuse that payment, neither of which can be affirmed. As for the first sense of his Acceptation, we owne it not, more than he: & the second is true, but not full & plaine, being only general; nor is it, as thus generally expressed, any sense of his Acceptation: for when two persons are obliged for a summe conjunctly & severally, & the Creditor may distress either for the whole; when one payeth the whole, he may be said to pay for the other; & yet Common sense will not Suffer us to say, that his payment was only accepted for the other.

He tels us afterward, that Sponsors & Sureties with us, are of several Sorts, & that they, who lay all upon the very name of a Surety, as if the word had but one signification, & all Sureties properly represented the Person of the Principal obliged person, do deal very deceitfully. Ans. But there is no remedie against some Mens censures. Some will possibly think, that his dealing is not faire, to speak, in the Answere, of Sureties representing the principal debtors, when the Objection, as himself set it down, speaketh only of their being one person in Law sense; & these two are not every way the same; every one that representeth another, is not his Surety, or Sponsor; nor doth the Surety, in every case, represent the Principal debtor; neither is he said so to do. But, sure, it is plaine dealing to take the word Surety, or Sponsor, in that sense wherein it is alwayes taken by Men that use it, untill he demonstrat, that of necessity it must have a peculiar sense, in this matter, & in this place; and it is not faire, to object deceitful dealing to us, in this, untill he hath first discovered the deceit. He reckoneth up, three or foure various things, in which persons may become Sureties, as Debt, Punishment, Duty, & the like; But to what purpose, I know not. Doth he think, that we make Christ such a Surety, as agreeth in all things with every Surety, among men? We know, there never was, nor never will be such a Surety, as our Lord Jesus is: A Surety, notwithstanding, we acknowledge Him to be; because He is so called; & in what respects He is a Surety, we know from the Scriptures, where that is aboundantly declared, & not from the simple name of a Surety: The name tels us, that that must be said of Christ, which agreeth to all Sureties, or is commonly acknowledged to agree unto them; & that is, that they, in so far as they are obliged, or have obliged themselves, whether before or after the Principal Debtor stood obliged (for this maketh no difference as to the obligation Instit. fidejus. & ff.eod. l. & II.) are one person in Law-sense with the principal Debtor; so that their payment & Satisfaction is acknowledged in Law, as the payment & Satisfaction of the Principal Debtors. His Novices, that look into Calv. Lex. Iurid. for Fidejussor & Sponsor, will finde nothing contrary to this; Yea they will finde, that fidejussor dicitur, qui pro alio fidem suam obligat, & fide sua, id est, periculo suo esse jubet, quod alius debet; & that, fidejussor proprie decitur debitor; & that even fidejussor conditional is nomine debitoris continetur; & fidejussorem proprie esse debitorem fere omnes tradunt, quia jura eum plerumque appellant debitorem. The same is to be seen in Spigelius. As for that, which Mr. Baxter addeth, that fide juffor non est conveniendus, nisi prius principali debitore Convento, it neither altereth the case, nor was it universally so, but only in some certaine cases, as he migt have read in the same place. So that it still holdeth true, that the Sponsor & the Debitor are one person in Law; & that so, that if the Debitor pay, the Sponsor is free; & if the Sponsor pay the Debitor is free. See Instit. lib. 3. Tit. 30. quibus modis tollitur obligatio & l. 13. § si. fide jussor; D. de Acceptil. Where it is said, that the debitor is liberat, if the Sponsor give only that, which is called, solutio imaginatia.

There must be (saith he) some what more than the bare 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , once used of Christ, as Mediator of Gods Covenant; or the name of a Surety as now used among men, that must go to prove, that the Mediator & the several sinners are the same legal Persons in Gods account. Ans. What he meaneth by God's covenant, he would do well to explaine. That the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used of Christ, as Mediator, if he take this as reduplicatively, he should prove. When he saith, the Mediator & the several sinners are the same Legal Persons, it is ambiguously uttered, & no clear Declaration of our minde. But as to the thing, we would faine know a reason, why we may not take this word, in its common acceptation among men, seing there is nothing in Scripture to the contrary? yea, though this greek word be but here only found; yet, as we saw, we have an hebrew word of the same Import, several times used in the old Test; & the whole matter, that we seek after, clearly held forth thereby, if the places be but lookt into

To put a close to this, we would call to mind that five fold Law-identity & sameness, that is betwixt Christ the Surety & Sinners, for whom He satisfied, mentioned by worthy Mr. Rutherfoord, in his Treatise of the Covenant part 2 pag. 251. which are these.

1. Though Physically the Surety & the Debtor be two different Men; yet in Law they are one & the same Person, & one & the same legal party, & the same object of justice, who so in Law pursueth the Surety, doth also pursue the Debtor.

2. The Debt & Summe is one; not two Debts, not two Ransomes, nor two Punishments; nor two Lives to lose, but one.

3. It is one & the same Solution, & Satisfaction; there cannot in Law-justice come another Reckoning, Dying, & payment asking, after the Surety hath payed.

4. There is one & the same Acceptation, upon the creditor's Part; if he accept of Satisfaction in the payment made by the Surety, he cannot but legally accept of the Debtor, & cannot pursue him in Law, but must look upon him, as no debtor &c.

5. It is one & the same legal effect. Christ crucified in the Spirit & risen againe 1. Tim. 3: 16. & we in Him, as in the Meritorious Cause, are legally justified.

Mr. Gillespy in his late piece Chap. 21. hath several things, which will both cleare up & confirme what is said; we shall mention only a few, pag. 373, 374. He tels us, [that 3. Suretiship imports not only a voluntary obligation for another person, but also union of parties, & Assumption of the Condition of that person, in the lawes sense; so that the Surety & debtor are but one party in Law: therefore say the Iurists, fidejussor proprie dicitur debitor. Christ, by His Suretyship did not only take out Natures upon Him, but He took our condition upon Him. He put His name in our Bond, that the Law migt reach Him for our debt. 4. It imports a Communion betwixt the debtor & the Cautioner, whereby as the debt of the Principal debtor, becometh the debt of the Surety & affecteth him; so also the Satisfaction & Payment of the Surety & his Discharge & Reliefe, becometh the Satisfaction, Discharge & Reliefe of the principal Debtor, Christ's Suretiship imports not only an Union of Parties & Conjunction of interests & Condition with His People; but also a Communion with Debtful broken Man, resulting from His Bond of Suretiship; whereby as upon the one part our Debt becometh His intirely, as the jurists say of all Sureties, Singuli, in solidum tenenter; so upon the other part His Satisfaction & Discharge become ours 2. Cor. 5. last Gal. 3: 13. 5. It imports a Commutation, Surrogation, or Substituting of one in the room of another; & soo Christ was substitute in our stead & room, as Iudah was in Benjamin's. 1. Pet. 2: 21. Rom. 4. last & 5: 8. Gen. 44: 33.] So pag. 381. His Assert. 5. is [Christ the Surety & broken man the Debtor are one in Law, but not intrinsecally one Esai. 1. They are legally one or in the Lawes sense one; because by a legal Substitution & surrogation, Christ having put His name in the Beleevers Bond, by the Law▪ He is in his place, & the beleever is put in Christ's law-place; so that by a legal act, the Surety 〈◊〉 the broken man: therefore Christ, being made Surety, saith, I am the broken man, all my friends debts be upon me, my life for their life, my soul for their souls Gal. 4: 4, 5. Ioh. 1 • : 8. Gen. 44: v. 3. Asserts Neither the creditor, nor the Law can exact Satisfaction from both the Surety & the Debtor; but the Surety having paid all & Satisfied, the broken debtor can say, I have paid all, I am free; he may plead, my friend & Surety hath done all for me, & that is as good in fore, in the court of justice, as if I had paid all in mine own Person. Gal. 3: 13. Rom. 4: last, 1. Pet. 2: 24. The debt, that Christ paid, is our very debt, & the beleever can say, when Christ my Surety was judged & Crucified for my sins, then was I judged; & what would you have more of a man, than his life? Esai. 53: 6, 7, 8.] So thereafter pag. 422. he saith [Among men usually, Sureties & Debtors enter into one & the same Bond with the Creditor; but here Christ's single bond lyeth for all Psal. 89: 19. here Christ our Surety hath changed Bonds & obligations with us, & putteth out our name, & putteth in His own, in the bloudy Bond of the Law, that the Debt, Satisfaction & Curse may be upon Him alone Gal. 3: 13. Esai. 53: 5. • Among men, the Creditor hath it in his choice, which of the two he will seize upon, the Surety, or the debtor, as he seeth it best for his Satisfaction: but it is not so here, for the Lord, the Creditor hath declared, that He will take Him to Christ for all; & hath Determined, that all the Satisfaction shall be made by Him: and Christ the Surety is content that it shall be so, and that the poor broken Creature shall go free, and no execution of the bloudy Bond of the Law shall passe against him, he being a bankrupt creature, which hath obtained a liberation, as where there is cessio bonorum Psal, 89: 19. Heb. 10: 7. Rom. 8: 1. Esai. 53: 6. 3. Among men, usually the Principal Debtor is first conveened for the debt, before the Surety be pursued: But it is not so here, the curse of the Law, and the execution of the bond thereof doth not first strick upon us, and then afterward upon Christ, to seek from Him what it cannot finde in us: But the Lord, the Creditor, having astricked Himself to the Cautioner, the Law stricks first upon Him, and can never come to strike against the Beleever, unless it should not finde compleet Satisfaction in our Surety, which is Impossible Esai. 53: 8. Gal. 3: 13. 4. Among men the debtor is the Principal Bondsman, and his obligation and Bond is the Principal obligation; & the Sureties obligation is but an accession to it, for strengthening the Security: but here the Surety is the Principal debtor; and by His Bond of Suretiship, He hath changed the Nature of the Beleevers Bond and Obligation, and put His own name in it, so as He is become the Principal Debtor. His Suretiship hath swallowed up the Debtor's Obligation to satisfie justice, the Surety being the Head and Husband of the poor broken Debtor Rom. 7: 4. and having changed the Bond of Satisfaction. and put out our Name, and put in His own, whereby He hath transferred the debt upon Himself, as Principal Debtor Heb. 10: 7.—9. Among men, usually the broken Debtor's Name stands still in the Bond, even after the responsal Surety hath interveened: But here Jesus, the Surety of the New Covenant, when He put in His own name, He puts out our names, that the Law might reach Him, and might not at all reach us. He wrote Himself the sinner legally, and wrote us Righteous persons. 2 Cor. 5: 21. Ier. 50: 20.]

CHAP. XV. Mr. Baxter's Answers to some of our Argum. for Imputation, examined.

MR. Baxter, in his book against D. Tully proposeth some Objections, that he may make answere unto them, according to his own Grounds: Though some things, here repeated in his answers, have been already considered by us; yet we shall examine briefly his answers, as here given.

His answere to the first Objection hath been examined, in the foregoing Chapt. The 2. is this. Christ is called tht Lord our Righteousness, & He is made Righteousness to us, & we are made the Righteousness of God in Him. 2 Cor. 5: 21. & by the Obedience of one many are made Righteous. He answereth to this 〈◊〉 . And are we not all agreed of all this? But can His Righteousness be ours no way, but by the foresaid personating R • presentation. Ans And will not Socinians; who overturn all the foundations or Christianity, and ought not be called, or accounted Christians, say the same, as to the Scripture-expressions? are we therefore agreed with them in judgment? or is there no difference betwixt us: His not agreement in the words, but in the sense of Scripture, that maketh a true agreement (2.) Christ's Righteousness may be, and is Ours another way, than by that Personating and Representating, which he stated, as the butt of his arguments & another way also, than he proposeth as his own judgment, as we saw.

He rels us next, how Christ is our Righteousness, & how His obedience maketh us Righteous, in his judgement, in 8 or 9 particulars. 1. Because the very Law of Innocency, which we dishonoured & broke by sin, is perfectly fulfilled & honoured by Him, as a Mediator, to repaire the injurie, done by our breaking it. Ans. The Law, which the Devils dishonoured & broke by sin, was perfectly honoured & fulfilled by the Angels, who stood; is therefore their Righteousness to be called the devils? But he will say; They obeyed not, as Mediator; True: But then the ground of Christ Righteousness, becomning ours, must be some other thing, than His honouring that Law by fulfilling it, which we dishonoured by breaking. But he saith, Christ repaired the injurie, done by our breaking it True; yet 〈◊〉 there be no more, that will not make His Righteousness ours; because, as is obvious, ere this be, we must have an Interest therein; & this obedience must be performed by Him, a our Mediator & Surety, undertaking & Satisfying the demands of the Law for us, & in our stead.

2. In that (saith he) He suffered to satisfie justice for our sin. Ans. Neither is suffering, as such, Righteousness; Nor could He satisfie justice for our sin, in & by suffering, if He had not done it in our stead, & as one Person with us in Law. If Titius steal from Sempronius a 1000. Pound; & Maevius givius Sempronius a 1000. Pound upon some distinct account. Sempronius receiveth no satisfaction, for what Titius stole from him, but if he come & give it for Titius & he be satisfied there-with, then there is a Law Union & oneness betwixt Titius & Maevius, whereby the Satisfaction given by Maevius, becometh the satisfaction of Titius.

3. He saith, in that hereby He hath merited of God the Father all that Righteousness, which we are truely the Subjects of, whether it be Relative or qualitative, or Active; that is, our right to Christ in union, to the Spirit, to Impunity & to glory, 2. the grace of the Spirit by which we are made holy, & fulfill the conditions of the Law of grace: we are the Subjects of these, & he is the Meriter; & the Meritorius Cause of out life is well called our Righteousness, & by many the material Cause (as our own perfect obedience would have been) because it is the matter of that merite. Ans. That Righteousness, which he saith here Christ hath merited, is not that Righteousness unto justification of life, as the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5: 18. And which we have by the Obedience of Christ, made ours by Imputation vers 19. whereof we are here speaking, & in respect of which Christ is said to be our Righteousness (2.) Our right to Christ is not our Righteousness, in order to justification; nor is our Right to Impunity & Glory that Righteousness, but a consequent thereof (3.) In respect of the Graces of the Spirit, which follow justification, & do not preceed it, Christ is called our Sanctification: & Mr. Baxter knoweth, there is a difference betwixt Righteousness & Holiness. (4.) The Meritorius Cause of our life is well called our Righteousness. when it is Imputed to us & put upon our score, as the Ground of our justification & Absolution; & upon this account only is it by many called the Material Cause.

4. And also (saith he) Christ's jntercession with the Father still procureth all this, as the fruit of His Merites. Ans. Of Christ's procuring our holiness we make no Doubt: but that upon this account, He is called our Righteousness, is denied: for this is not His Obedience & Righteousness, whereby we become Righteous unto justification of life.

5. And we are related (saith he) as His members (though not parts of His person, as such) to Him, that thus merited for us. Ans. if we be related to Him, as members, in order to our partaking of His Righteousness & Merit • s, we must be parts of His legal Persons though not of His Physical Person • for by Members here I suppose, he meaneth Members of His Mystical body or members of His Ransomed & Redeemed body: And head & Members here make one Political body, & become one Political Person, or one in Law-sense.

6. And (saith he) we have the Spirit from Him, as our Head. Ans, This is but what what was said before in the 3. place. And this Spirit is given for holiness: but Christ is our Righteousness, as well as our Sanctification; & it is of His being Righteousness, that we are speaking.

7. And he is our Advocat (saith he) & will justifie us, as our judge. Ans. His being our Advocat, is the same with His Intercession spoken of in the 4. place. (2.) The Father will judge us, & justifie us by Him; therefore God the Father shall be our Righteousness, as well as Christ; & consequently shall have merited all for us, by His blood & Sufferings, & that in a more principal manner, according to this Reason.

8. And all this (saith he) is God's Righteousness, designed for us, & thus far given us by Him. Ans. But all this is not that Righteousness, which God hath designed for us, in & through Christ, in order to our justification; nor that Righteousness, by which we become formally Righteous in Law-sense; & thereupon are justified & pronounced Righteous in the sight of God; for this is Christ's Surety-Righteousness, imputed to us, & none else can be it.

Lastly saith he. And the Perfect justice & holiness of God is thus glorified in us, through Christ. And are not all these set together enough to prove, that we justly owne all asserted by these Texts. Ans. It remaineth to be cleared, how the Perfect justice & holiness of God can be said to be glorified in us, through Christ, if Christ's Righteousness & Satisfaction be not imputed to us & accounted ours, & Christ & we be not looked upon, as one Person in Law: for all that is wrought in us, is far from being answerable to the Perfect justice & holiness of God, because of its Imperfection. And because Mr. Baxter doth not grant the Imputing of Christ's Surety-righteousness (which is only answerable to the Perfect justice & holiness of God) unto us, in all that he hath here said, he cannot be said to owne all, that is asserted by these Texts.

The 3. object, is. If Christ's Righteousness be ours, then we are righteous by it, as ours; & so God reputeth it, but as it is. But it is ours 1. by our Union with him. 2. by his gift, & so consequently by God's Imputation. To this he answereth. 1. That he hath told before, in what sense it is ours, & in what sense not. Shortly here he giveth us his mind againe, saying. It is truely Imputed to us, or reputed, reckoned, as ours; but not in their sense, that claim a strick Propriety in the same Numerical Habites, Acts, Sufferings, Merites, Satisfaction, which was in Christ, or done by Him, as if they did become subjects of the same Accidents; or as if they did by an Instrumental second cause. But it is ours, as being done by a Mediator, in stead of what we should have done, & as the Meritorious Cause of all our Righteousness & Bonefites, which are freely given us for the sake thereof. Ans. This is but what we heard, when he was clearing the state of the question; & there (Chap. XIII.) we shewed, that his sense was not satisfying: for in his judgment, as we found, there is no Righteousness truely ours, in order to justification, but our Faith, which he calleth our Gospel-righteousness, which by Christ's Merites is advanced to this dignity of being the potestative Condition of the New Covenant, wherein pardon & Right to life is promised upon Condition of Faith; & so faith is our Immediat Righteousness, in order to the obtaining of these favoures; & Christ's Merites have only procured them remotely, in procuring this Covenant. But we hear no mention made by him of any such Imputation, as whereby Christ's fide jussory or Surety-righteousness is really made over and Imputed to Beleevers, that they thereby may become formally Righteous, in the sight of God, and be justified as such, & so pardoned and have right to life, immediatly upon the account of this Surety-righteousness made theirs. Nor hear we any clear ground laid down by him, whereupon Christ's Righteousness can be called Ours, & we thereupon be reputed of God legally Righteous, & dealt with as such. We hear of Benefites bestowed because of His Merites; But we hear not that Pardon and Right to Glory are made the Immediat result and effect of Christ's Merites & Righteousness, but only mediat, by the Interveening of the New Covenant, whereby our Faith, the condition thereof, called our Gospel, Personal Righteousness, is made the Immediat cause of our possessing these benefites; whereby he giveth occasion, at least, to judge, that he maketh our faith the Immediat procuring & Meritorius Cause of Pardon and Right to life. However between his way, & that, which he here rejecteth (which we also reject, neither asserting, that Christ was our Instrumental Second cause: nor claiming a strick propriety in the same Numerical Habites &c. which were in Christ, as if we became Subjects of the same Accidents, speaking of what Christ did & suffered, in a Physical sense) we know, & owne a Midway, whereby Christ's Obedience & Suffering, considered not Physically, but legally & juridically, are transferred & communicated unto us, not as Physical accidents, from one Physical subject to another, but in a Law & juridical sense. And though this Imputing & communicating of Christ's Surety-righteousness cannot be explained by, nor appear consistent with Logical or Metaphysical Notions, applicable only to Physical Entities, & as considered as such (to wich Mr. Baxter in all his Explications of this matter, doth so frequenily laboure to restrick us, contrary to all Reason, Yea and to Common sense) Yet we must owne it for a truth, knowing that these fundamental truthes, recorded in Scripture, and held forth to us only by divine Revelation, stand in no need of Aristotle's learning, in order to their being Savingly understood & practified: And that Law-termes are more fit, to help us to some understanding in this matter, which is hold forth in Scripture, as a juridical act, than Metaphysical termes; and yet we see no ground to say, that this matter, whereof we treat, must, in all points, keep even a resemblance unto Iustinian's modes, knowing that it is a divine Mystery, and unparallelable.

He saith 2. He that is made Righteousness unto us, i • also made wisdom, Sanctification, & Redemption to us, but that sub genere causae Efficientis, non autem constitutivae; We are not the Subjects of the same Numerical wisdom and Holiness, which 〈◊〉 Christ, plainly the Question is, whether Christ or His Righteousness Holiness, Merites and Satisfaction, be our Righteousness constitutivly, or only efficiently. The matter and forme of Christ's personal Righteousness is ours, as an efficient cause; but it is neither the neerest matter, nor the forme of that Righteousness, which is Ours, as the subjects of it, that is, it is not a Constitutive cause, nexly material, or formal of it. Ans. (1.) It is true, He, who is made Righteousness to us, is also made Sanctification, &c. and that He is made Sanctification by being an Efficient cause: but it will not follow, that He must be also the Efficient cause, and no other of our Righteousness, which is of a far other Nature, and is no Inherent inwrought thing, as is Sanctification. (2.) It is true, we are not the Subjects of the same numerical Wisdom and Holiness, which is in Christ, neither can we be, if they be considered Physically: but yet we can be Subjects of the same Numerical Righteousness, Legally and juridically considered; & thus we are to consider it here, & not Physically, however Mr. Baxter, ad nauseam usque inculcat this; for we consider it, and must consider it, as a Surety-righteousness; & we know that that same Individuat payment and Satisfaction, made by the Surety, is in Law-sense the Debtor's, and imputed to him, as the ground of his liberation from trouble and distress, at the hands of the Creditor. (3.) Hence we see, that Christ's Surety-righteousness, consisting in His Obedience and Sufferings, is that whereby we are constituted Righteous in the sight of God, in a legal sense: and need not enquire, whether it be the neerest matter, or forme or both, of our Righteousness: for these Metaphysical termes have no place here, though Mr. Baxter can never hold of them. We are made Righteous in a Law-sense, & not Physically, by Christ's Imputed Righteousness, and upon this account, it is ours legally: & it is folly, to enquire for Physical matter, and forme or Constitutive causes of Moral or juridical Beings, or Effects, as Phylosophers do, when speaking of Physical, or of Metaphysical beings.

He saith 3. If our Union with Christ were Personal (making us the same person) then doubtless the accidents of his person would be the accidents of ours: & so not only Christ' Righteousness, but every Christians, would be each of ours. But that is not so, nor is it so given us by him. Ans. We acknowledge no Union with Christ, making us the same person with Him Physically (& it seemeth Mr. Baxter will understand it no otherwayes) But we acknowledge an Union legal, Political, & foederal, whereby we become one person juridical, in Law-sense: and as to this, Mr. Baxter's accidents have no substantial place or Consideration.

The 4. Object is, you do seem to suppose, that we have none of that kind of Righteousness at all, which consisteth in Perfect Obedience & Holiness; but only a Right to Impunity and Life, with an Imperfect Inherent Righteousness in our selves. The Papists are forced to confess, that a Righteousness we must have, which consisteth in a Conformity to the preceptive part of the Law, & not only the Retributive part. But they say, it is in our selves, and we say, It is Christ's Imputed to us. Thus he proposeth it, but if I were forming the objection, I would say, That Mr. Baxter Supposeth, we have no Righteousness at all, in order to justification, beside our Act of Faith: for as for his Right to Impunity and life, it is no Righteousness: & beside, I hope he will not say, that that is given before justification; & of a Righteousness preceeding (in order of Nature, at least) justification, we are speaking, & enquireing after it.

What he answereth to this Objection, in the first place, because it only concerneth Papistes, & their Misapprehensions, in the matter, I passe. But 2. he saith, If any of them do, as you say, no wonder, if they & you contend: If one say, we are Innocent, or sinless, in reality; & the other, we are so by Imputation, when we are so no way at all, but sinners really, & so reputed. Ans. If by Innocent, or sinless, he mean such, as never sinned, never Man, Protestant or Papist, dreamed of such a thing. If by these termes, he meane such, are now not guilty legally, of the charge brought in against them; this we acknowledge, and must acknowledge, or we know not, how any shall ever be justified; for God will not pronounce sinners, as such, really and legally to be righteous, His judgment being according to truth: & therefore because we have no righteousness within us, whereupon we can be pronounced not guilty, we must have a Righteousness imputed to us, even the Surety-righteousness of Christ. But Mr. Baxter, it seemeth, will not understand, what this legal non-guiltiness is; & yet in matters among men it is very clear and manifest. If Paul had fully Satisfied, according as he undertook, Philemon, for the wrongs and injuries done him by Onesimus; If Onesimus had been convented before a judge for these same crimes and Injuries, & had produced the Satisfaction made by his Surety Paul, & accepted by the creditor Philemon, would not the judge have had ground in Law & equity, to pronounce Onesimus not guilty, & therefore not to be punished, according as was libelled against him? And yet though Onesimus had been pronounced Innocent, that is, not-guilty, as to Crimes and Injuries alleiged against him, in this case, in a legal sense, it would not follow, that he had never committed these wrongs; nor had the evincing of that been necessary to his Absolution and justification. His Legal Innocency or Righteousness, by vertue of the Satisfaction made by his Surety, now judicially accounted & reputed his, being Sufficient. These things are plaine to such, as will but open their eyes: but all the world cannot make them plaine to such, as will understand nothing, but what is cast into Aristotelian Metaphysical Mould. Were it not lost laboure for any to enquire, what is the Matter & Forme of this legal Righteousness of Onesimus? Whereof is it constitute? How came Paul's righteousness to be his, and so one accident to go from subject to subject? whether was Paul's satisfaction the Efficient, or Constitutive cause of Onesimus his Innocency, or non-guiltiness, and the like?

The 5. Object is, How can God accept him, as just, who is really & reputedly a sinner? This dishonoureth His Holiness and Justice. To this he saith. Not so: cannot God pardon sin upon a valuable Merite, & Satisfaction of a Mediator? & though He judge us not perfect now, & accept us not, as such; Yet. 1. Now he judgeth us holy. 2. And the members of a perfect Saviour. 3. And will make us perfect and spotless, and then so judge us, having washed us from our sins, in the bloud of the Lamb. Ans. All this giveth no satisfaction to the objection; for the objection speaketh of acceptance in Justification, & consequently of that acceptation, that preceedeth Sanctification. (2.) It is true, God can & doth pardon sins; but meer pardon of sins is not justification, the person must be accepted, as righteous; and yet by Mr. Baxter's way, the man hath no righteousness, to ground such a judgment and acceptation: and God's judgment being alwayes according to truth, the justified man must be righteous, that he may be accounted & accepted as Righteous, in Justification. Therefore either Mr. Baxter must grant, that he is Righteous through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ; or that he is Righteous inherently by his faith, or by his fulfilling of the Conditions of the New Covenant; for there is not a third: or that he is prononnced Righteous without a Righteousness.

The 6. object. Thus you make the Reatus culpae not pardoned at all, but only the Reatus poenae. To this he saith 1. If by Reatus culprae be meaned the Relation of a sinner, as he is revera peccator, & so to be reus is to be revera ipse qui peccavit, then we must consider, what you meane by Pardon: for if you mean the nullifying of such a guilt (or Reality) it is impossible; because necessitate existentiae, he that hath once sinned, will be still the person that sinned, while he is a person, & the relation of one that sinned will cleave to him. It will eternally be a true proposition, [Peter & Paul did sin.] But if by pardon you mean the pardoning of all the penalty, which for that sin is due (damni vel sensus) so it is pardoned; & this is indeed the Reatus poenae; not only the penalty, but the dueness of that penalty, or the obligation to it is remitted and nullified. Ans. The nullifying of the Reatus culpa physically or metaphysically is indeed Impossible; for it will be alwayes true, that such & such persons did sinne: but this Reatus culpae may and must be nullified legally and juridically, otherwise never shall man be justified: for in justification this Reatus culpae is declared to be taken away; for the man is declared non reus, & accepted as not-guilty, or Righteous; not physically, or Metaphy • ically, but legally: a man must be legally Righteous before he be justified, according to equity; & he cannot be legally Righteous, as long as the Reatus culpae doth legally remaine; for a man legally guilty, is not legally Righteous. Now, Mr. Baxter must yeeld to this, or he shall destroy his own ground, and take away all pardon, as well as justification: for as it will be eternally true, that Peter & Paul did sinne, & so were rei culpae; so it will be eternally true, that punishment was due unto them, that is▪ they were rei poenae: & therefore, if because it will be eternally true, that Peter & Paul sinned, therefore the Reatus culpae cannot be annulled; so because it will be eternally true, that Peter & Paul were obnoxious & liable to punishment, therefore also the Reatus poenae cannot be annulled. But the truth lyeth here, that though neither the Reatus culpae nor poenae can be annulled physically, or metaphysically, that is, so taken away, as if they never had been; yet both are taken away legally & juridically, and a pardoned man is legally and juridically non puniendus, & thus the Reatus poenae is taken away: and a justified man is legally and juridically, not-guilty of the offence charged against him, & thus the Reatus culpae is taken away. As it is inconsistent with pardon, to say, that the person pardoned doth legally remaine obnoxious to punishment, though it will be eternally true, that he is the man, that did contract that dueness & onbnoxiousness: so it is inconsistent with justification, to say, that the person justified is legally chargable with the offence, though it will be eternally true, that he is the man, that did contract that guilt & sin.

He saith. 2. Therefore if by Reatus culpae, you meane an obligation to punishment for that fault, this, being in deed the reatus poenae, is done away. So that we are, I think, all agreed de re; & de nomine; you may say, that the Reatus culpae is done away or remitted, or not, in several senses; in se it is not nullified, nor can be, but as dueness of punishment followeth that is pardoned. Ans. The Reatus culpae is the ground of the obligation to punishment, & not the same with Reatus poenae; it is a being chargable with such a crime & offence; and this, as we said, much be as well done away, in a legal sense, as the obligation to punishment: Nay, in our case, the obligation to punishment cannot be taken away, untill first this chargableness with the sin be removed. The Lord will not declare that man non-obliged to punishment, who remaineth legally and Juridically reus culpae & chargable with the crime. And so long as we differ herein, we are not agreed de re, nor de nomine. The Reatus culpae, in se, is as well nullified, in a legal sense, as the Reatus poenae; and neither the one, nor the other can be otherwayes nullified. But I see, Mr. Baxter is so for pardon, as to destroy all Justification, or he thinketh that Pardon and Justification are all one thing, and by both nothing is taken away, but the obligation to punishment; and thus the pardoned and justified person is still chargable with the sin; & the obligation to punishment is taken away, where the charge of guilt remaineth: and thus God is supposed to justifie a person, that is not justifiable, except by an iniquous sentence. Yea, hereby we have the Socinian pardon owned, but not the orthodox pardon: for the Socinian-Pardon can well consist with this chargableness of guilt, because they acknowledge no Satisfaction, to remove the Reatus culpae: but the orthodox pardon doth presuppose the removal, in a legal sense, of the guilt or chargableness of sin, and is a Native consequent thereof: for because of Satisfaction made by the Surety, Christ, and the same now imputed to the sinner, and made his, guilt is taken away, & he is no more chargable with that guilt, but looked upon as Righteous; and therefore all obligation to punishment is actually removed, & he is no more obnoxious thereto in Law, being rectus in curia.

Object. 7. You have said, that though we are not personally, but seminally in Adam, when he sinned, yet when we are persons, we are persons guilty of his actual sin. And so we must be persons, that are partakers of Christ's actual Righteousness, and not only of its effects, as soon as we are beleevers; for Christ being the second Adam & publick person, we have our part in His Righteousness, as truely, and as much, as in Adam's sin. His answere to this is long. He saith. 1. Our Covenant Union & Interest supposeth our Natural Union & Interest, & it is an adding to God's word & Covenant, to say, that He Covenanted, that Adam should personat each one of his posterity, in God's Imputation, or account, any further than they were naturally in him, & so that his innocency or sin should be reputed theirs, as far, as if they had been personally the Subjects & Agents. Ans. If the Covenant Union & Interest supposeth the Natural Union & Interest, then there is a Covenant Union and Interest here to be considered: and therefore it can be no adding to God's word or Covenant, to say, That Adam did personat each one of his posterity foederally, as well as Naturally: Yea, to deny this, were a corrupting of truth, & a denying of all Covenant-Union & Interest. Whence it is manifest, that in a Federal or legal sense, we must needs say, that Adam's Innocency, or sin is reputed ours, as far as if we had been personally (not physically, but legally) the Subjects & Agents. If Mr. Baxter shall prove, that the Foederal Union & Interest, which he saith is superadded to the Natural, will admit of no other Consideration of the posterity Interessed, than what is physical & Natural, & followeth upon the Natural Union, he shall then lay a ground for what he would say here, but till then he shall but beat the aire; & when he hath done that, he shall destroy what he hath granted, viz. all Foederal Union & Interest: for a Foederal Union & Interest will ground a foederal & legal Consideration of the persons interessed; as well as a Natural Union and Interest will ground a Natural and physical Consideration of the same persons. And Mr. Baxter's not adverting to this, confoundeth all; for hence it is, that he will have all things here considered only physically, and according to Aristotle's notions, with which we have nothing to do, while speaking of a Foederal Union and Interest, and of what followeth thereupon. This being premitted, we may quickly dispatch the rest.

The person of Peter (saith he) never was in reality, or God's reputation, the person of Adam (nor Adam's person the person of Peter) but Peter being virtually & seminally in Adam, when he sinned; his person is derived from Adam's person; & so Peter's guilt is not numerically the some with Adam's, but the accident of another Subject, & therefore another accident, derived with the person from Adam, & from neerer parents. Ans. All this is only true, in a physical Natural sense; but notwithstanding, if we consider Adam and his posterity, in a legal & foederal sense, as we must, if there be (as is granted) a foederal Union & Interest, then all runneth in another channel. The person of Peter is foederally and legally, in the person of Adam; yea God reputeth them both to be one Federal person: and the person of Peter was thus actually in the person of Adam, and not virtually and seminally: for these notions have no place here. And hence Peter's original guilt is numerically the same with Adam's: and in this sense Peter had as neer a Relation to Adam, as Abel had; for here Adam is considered, as the Head & Center, and all his posteri • y, as equal members of this Political & Foederal Body, and as Lines coming equally from the same Centre.

He addeth. The fundamentum of that Relation (of guilt) is the Natural Relation of the pe • son to Adam (& so it is relatio in relatione fundata) The fundamentum of that Natural relation is Generation, yea a series of Generations from Adam to that person. And Adam's Generation being the communication of a guilty Nature with personality, to his Sones & Daughters, is the fundamentum next following his personal fault & guilt, charged on him by the law. So that here is a long series of efficient causes, bringing down from Adam's person & guilt, a distinct numerical person & guilt of everyone of this later posterity. Ans. 1. The fundamentum of that relation of guilt is more properly & proximely, the foederal relation of the person to Adam, than the Natural relation: and the fundamentum of this foederal relation is not Generation, but the free Ordination and Constitution of God. (2) What he meaneth by these words, and Adam's generation being the communication of a guilty nature with personality to his Sons and Daughters, is the fundamentum, next following his personal fault and guilt, charged on him by the Law, I do not know: If his meaning be, that the Communication of a guilty Nature, by the peccatum originale originatum, is the fundamentum of the following personal fault and guilt, by reason of the peccatum originale originans; that is, if he say, that the corrupted Nature is the ground of the Imputation of Adam's transgression, it is not consonant to truth, nor to what himself said above pag. 34. against Placeus. But if he meane, that Adam's Generation being the communication of a guilty Nature, is the fundamentum, that next followeth his personal guilt, charged on him by Law, I must say, I do not understand what he would be at, though the words seem to express some such thing. But the truth, that I shall lay down, is this; That all Adam's posterity, being federally in him, sinned in him, and fell with him, in his first transgression; by vertue whereof, when they come physically, by natural Generation, to partake of his Nature, they are first, in order of Nature guilty of Adam's transgression, and then have a corrupt Nature communicated, as a punishment and consequent of the other; & this Corrupt Nature being sin, hath its own guilt attending it also. (3) Though this long series of Efficient causes be requisite to the production of a distinct numerical person from Adam's person, in a physical and natural sense; yet every one of these physically distinct numerical persons do immediatly derive from Adam their legal and foederal personalities, that is, these same persons, considered foederally, are equally and alike neer to Adam, their federal Head and Representative: And therefore the guilt of Adam's sin cometh from him immedratly to each one of them, foederally considered; and is consequently, the same numerical guilt: and all this is founded upon their Federal Union with, and Interest in Adam.

He saith. 2. And it is not the same sort of guilt, or so plenary, which is in us, for Adam's act, as was on him; but a guilt Analogical, or of another sort, that is, he wes guilty of being the wilfull sinning person, & so are not we; but only of being persons, whose being is derived by Generation from the wilful sinning persons (besides the guilt of our own inherent pravity) that is, the Relation is such, which our persons have to Adam's person, as makes it just with God to desert us, and to punish us for that & our pravity together. This is our guilt of original sin. Ans. (1) Hereby that original sin, whereof we are speaking here, viz, Adam's breach of Covenant, seemeth quite to be taken away: for not only is it said, that original sin, as in us, is another sort of thing, than what it was in Adam; and so not only not the same numerically (as he formerly said) but not the same specifically: but moreover it is said to be only an Analogical guilt: yea in end it is made just nothing; for it is said, that we are guilty of being persons, whose being is derived from the wilfull sinning persons, and this is no guilt at all; no mans simple being, let it be by generation from the most prodigiously guilty and wicked persons, that can be, can be imputed to him for guilt; for his receiving a being is contrary to no Law. And beside, when he addeth by way of Explication, that the Relation is such, which our persons have to Adam's person, as makes it just with God to deserte us, he must either make the simple Relation to be the guilt, or the ground of guilt, and its Imputation. The Simple Relation, without some guilt following it, and founded upon it, cannot make it just with God to desert us &c. For sin only can do this, & that Relation is not sin. If he say, That guilt is Superadded, & upon this account, it is just with God thus to punish. I would ask, what is this guilt: It is not Adam's sin, but some analogical thing, which Scripture knoweth nothing of, and Reason can give us no account, whence it came. He cannot say, that it came from Adam's sin, for if we be federally united to & Interessed in Adam (as we are, & as he confessed we were) and if upon that account we be reputed guilty, the same Individual guilt, which was on Adam, must be upon us; and if our guilt be of another sort, he must give us another Adam, from whom that other analogical sort floweth. The Scripture saith, that we all sinned in Adam Rom. 5: 12. which were not truth, if his individual sin were not ours, or if ours were of another sort, and only analogical. But this is the fruit of Mr. Baxter's casting all these things in Aristotle's mould. But moreouer (2) It hath a foule aspect towards Pelagianisme, to make our guilt another, than Adam's, because that Adam was the wilful sinning person, and so are not we: for this is to confirme the Pelagians, who say, that that sin was only Adam's, because he was the only wilfully sinning person, & we had no will therein.

3. He saith. And this guilt cometh to us by Natural propagation, and resultancie from our very Nature so propagated. Ans. It is true, we come to be actually charged with this guilt, & to have it imputed to us, when we partake of our beings by Natural Generation or propagation; and that because of our federal Union with & Interest in Adam; and exclusive of this, it cannot be said to come to us by resultancy from our very Nature so propagated: for the guilt of all Adam's after-Transgressions should as well be said to come to us, after this manner, as the guilt of that one Transgression & Disobedience, of which only the Scripture maketh mention Rom. 5.

He cometh next to consider our contrary Interest in Christ, & tels us 1. Our persons are not the same as Christ's person (nor Christ's as ours) nor ever so judged or accounted of God. Ans. Physically this is true; but it is not true legally: for when he came in the Law-place of the Elect, & become Surety for-them, they and he became one person in Law. He saith 2. Our persons were not Naturally seminally & virtually in Christ's person (any further than He is Creator & Cause of all things) as they were in Adam's. Ans. Adam was a natural Head, our Lord is a Spiritual & Supernatural Head: & as to this, we willingly grant a difference; but both were Federal Heads & Publick Persons, & their agreement in this satisfieth us. He saith 3. Therefore we derive not Righteousness from Him by Generation, but by His voluntary donation and contract. Ans. We derive it from Him by Regeneration; that is, as we partake of Adam's guilt, when by Generation we partake of a Natural being; so we partake of Christ's Righteousness, when by Regeneration we partake of a spiritual being in Him. And there is no new formal contract made here anent, but what is sutable to the Nature of this privilege, in order to its conveyance. He saith 4. as He became not our Natural parent, so our persons, not being in Christ, when He obeyed, are not reputed to have been in Him naturally, or to have obeyed in & by Him. Ans. We say only (and we seek no more) that Christ was our Federal Head; and our persons Federally (not physically) were in Christ, when He obeyed: we are reputed to be in Him not Naturally, but Foederally, and so to have obeyed in & by Him.

He saith 5. If Cbrist & we are reputed one person, either He obeyed in our person, or we in His, or both; if He obeyed, as reputed sinner, in the person of each sinner, His obedience could not be Meritorious, according to the Law of Innocency, which required sinless perfection; & He being supposed to have broken the Law in our person, could not so be supposed to keep it. If we obeyed in His person, we obeyed as Mediators, or Christ's. Ans. Aristotle's Notions, to which Mr. Baxter, contrary to all sense & reason, will have this whole matter restricked, in its explication, are the cause of all this ridiculous Confusion. But for answere, I say, Christ & we are reputed one person, not physically, but in Law-sense & federally; & therefore both he obeyed; as taking on our Law-place, & coming in to our Law-condition: and to say, that therefore His obedience could not be Meritorious, is ridiculous: as if forsooth His coming into our Law-place, would make Him to be supposed, to have broken the Law, in His physical person, as if one would say. The Surety cannot pay the debtor's debt, because by coming in to his Law-place, he becometh a bankrupt. Himself saith, that Christ suffered in our stead; & this cannot be in our Physical stead, but in our Law-stead; now will it not as well hence follow, that He suffered as a sinner▪ & then, how could He, who suffered, as being supposed to have broken the Law, make Satisfaction for us; or how could His death be Meritorious? Thus indeed good service shall be done to the Socinians, but bad service to the Truth. Finally, we obeyed, as Federally in Him, & yet were no Mediators, or Christ's, but redeemed Saints; as the debtor satisfied the Creditor, in Law-sense, when his Surety did it; and yet became no Surety thereby.

He saith 6. But as is oft said, Christ our Mediator undertook in a middle person to reconcile God and Man (not by bringing God to judge erroneously, that He, or we were, what we were not, or did whas we did not, but) by being, doing and suffering for us that, in His own person, which should botter answere Gods Ends & Honour, than if we had done and suffered in our persons, that hereby he might merite a free gift of pardon & life (with himself) to be given by a Law of Grace, to beleeving penitent Accepters. Ans. I doubt there be one word here said, to which a Socinian will not subscribe. But for answer, I say, Christ our Mediator so undertook, in a middle physical person, to reconcile God & man, that He became our Surety, & came in our stead & Law-place, to do and suffer what we were obliged unto by the Law: and when God judged Him to be, and to do thus, He judged not erroneously, but truely, according to His own gracious Appointment, and Ordination, making Him a Publick person, representing all such, as He gave Him to save. We have shown elsewhere, that Christ merited something else, than a Law of Grace, to Convey a free gift of pardon & life upon New Conditions, otherwise His death could not be called a Ransome, a Redemption, or a price; nor could He be said to have died in the stead of any person, or to have born their Iniquities, or the punishment thereof; far less to have been made sin for us. But more of this hereafter.

Object 8. As Christ is a sinner, by Imputation of our sin; so we are Righteous by the Imputation of His Righteousness. But it is our sin it self that is Imputed to Christ. Therefore it is His Righteousness it self, that is imputed to us. To this he saith. 1. Christ's person was not the subject of our personal relative guilt, much less of our habites, or acts. 2. God did not judge Him to have been so. 3. Nay Christ had no guilt of the same kind reckoned to be on Him, else these unmeet speaches, used rashly by some, would be true, viz. That Christ was the greatest murderer, Adulterer &c. and consequently more hated of God, for God must needs hate a sinner, as such. Ans. (1) Mr. Baxter will understand nothing here, but according to his Philosophical & Metaphysical Notions: & in this sense, we may grant him all that he saith: And yet adde, That Christ was the legal, juridical, and federal subject of our guilt; for our sins did meet together on Him, and He was made sin (2) and God doing all this, could not but judge Him to have been so. (3) Christ inherently had no guilt neither of the same kind, nor of any other: but that our very sins were imputed to Him, & reckoned upon His score, must be granted, or we must deny, His dying or satisfying in our stead; & so plainely embrace Socinianisme (4) Those speeches are but unmeet to such, as mistake them, as Mr. Baxter doth here, who supposeth that their meaning is, That He was the greatest sinner Inherently (which were indeed blasphemy, but far from their thoughts) for he inferreth, that consequently he must have been more hated of God; while as God's hatred (if we take it not for meer punishing of sin) is only against such, as are inherently sinners. What saith he moreover?

To be guilty of sin, as we are, is to be reputed truely the person, that committed it. But so was not Christ; & therefore not so to be reputed, Christ was but the Mediator, that undertook to suffer for our sins, that we might be forgiven, & not for His own sin, really or justly reputed. Ans. No man saith, that Christ was guilty of sin, as we are, that is, Inherently. But if He undertook to suffer for our sins, unless we turn Socinians, in expounding this sentence, we must say, that the guilt of our sins was laid upon Him, otherwise He could not suffer for them, in our place & stead; & we must say, that He, so suffered for them, as that all they, in whose stead He suffered, should certainly be forgiven; & not have a bare may be of forgiveness, by a New Covenant, offering the same upon new termes. What next?

Expositors (saith he) commonly say, that to be [made sin for us] is but to be made a [Sacrifice for sin] so that Christ took upon Him, neither our numerical guilt of sin it self, nor any of the same species, but only our Reatum poenae, or debt of punishment, or (left the wranglers make a verbal quarrel of it) our Reatum culpae, non quâ talem, & in se, sed quatenus est fundamentum Reatus poenae. Ans. Yet some Expositors will say more, and that in full consonancy with the Scriptures, as Esai. 53: 6. And however, all we say, is hereby sufficiently confirmed; for if He be made a sacrifice for our sins, our sins must necessarily be imputed to him, as the sins of the people were typically laid upon the Sacrifices: and therefore Christ must have taken on Him, not physically but legally, our very numerical guilt, without which he could not be accounted reus poenoe, or obnoxious to our punishment. What he meaneth by the reatus culpae qua talis, & in se, he would do well to explaine: If his meaning be, that Christ was not legally accounted guilty, this is denied; for then he could not have been a Sacrifice for our sins, to have died in our stead. Wrangling is not good: Yet Turpe'est Doctori, &c.

He addeth, And so His Righteousness is ours not numerically, the same Relation that he was the subject of, made that Relation to us; nor yet a Righteousness of the same species as Christ's is given to us at all. Ans. Though Christ's numerical Righteousness be not ours physically; yet that same is made over to us legally: as it is one & the same Individual payment, that is made by the Surety, and made over in Law unto the debtor. And therefore what he addeth is to no purpose. But (saith he) His Righteousness is the Meritorious cause & reason of another Righteousness or justification, (distinct from His) freely given us by the Father & Himself by His Covenant. Ans. Righteousness and justification are not one and the same, more than the cause is the same with the Effect. As Christ's Righteousness is the Meritorious Cause of our Justification, so it must be legally made ours, in order to our Justification, otherwayes we cannot be accounted Righteous, and legally free of the Charge, brought in against us. And this is not granted us by a Covenant with new Conditions, in Mr. Baxter's sense, as hath been evinced already. Therefore he is in a great mistake, when he concludeth, that they that will not blaspheme Christ, by making guilt of sin it self, in its formal relation to be His own; & so Christ to be formally as great a sinner, as all the Redeemed set together; & they that will not overthrow the Gospel, by making us formally as Righteous, as Christ, in kind & measure, must needs be agreed with us, in this part of the controversie. For we have shown, how far we are from Blasphemy, & how groundless his Insinuation is, founded only on his Physical or Metaphysical acceptation of things here, which we understand only legally and juridically, according to all right and reason. And as for subverting of the Gospel, it is one of our choise grounds of Reason against his way, because by it the Gospel is indeed changed, and the true and native Gospel-way of Salvation is indeed removed, and a Sociniano-Armintan Gospel substitute in its room, which is daily more and more confirmed, by books coming out, wherein Mr. Baxter's grounds are owned, and more Socinianisme & Arminianisme vented, than Mr. Baxter himself hath yet had the confidence to express in his own books; witness Mr. Allens discourse of the two Covenants, ushered in with Mr. Baxter's preface; and others of that kind much commended, and cryed up by Mr. Baxter.

9. Object. When you Inferre, that if we are reckoned to have perfectly obeyed in and by Christ, we cannot be againe bound to obey ourselves afterward, nor be guilty of any sin: you must know, that it is true, that we cannot be bound to obey to the same ends, as Christ did (which is to redeem us, or to fulfill the Law of works) but yet we must obey to other ends viz. in gratitude and in love to God, and to do good, and the like. Though I think the objection is not so favourably proposed, as it might be, seing that end to Redeem should not here be mentioned; for though it was the end of Christ's coming in to our Law-place, yet it cannot be said to be properly the end of that Obedience, he performed, while he was in our Law-place, proximely. Let us see how ever, what he saith to it. 1. Hence (saith he.) it clearly followeth, that Christ obeyed not in each of our persons legally, but in the person of a Mediator, seing His due obedience & ours have so different ends, and a different formal-relation (His being a conformity proximatly to the Law, given Him, as Mediator) that they are not so much as of the same species, much less numerically the same. Ans. I think rather, that hence it clearly followeth, that Christ did indeed obey the Law, as it was the Condition of the Covenant of works, in each of the Elect's person legally: for though His Obedience and ours now, after faith, have far different ends; yet His Obedience, as Obedience to the Law of works, had the same end that our Obedience should have had by that Law, viz. the fulfilling of the same, in order to the obtaining of a Right to Life; and if not, to lose all. The Law, given Him as Mediator, taken in its latitude, is not the Law, whereof the objection speaketh; for it speaketh of the Law of works, under which Adam was, and all his posterity in him, and under the breach of which we lay. And Christ's obeying, in the person of a mediator, doth not hinder His representing His own legally; for He was such a Mediator, as was a Sponsor and Surety, and came in our Law-place, and undertook our debt. Therefore, though Christ's Obedience to the special Law, given to Him, as Mediator, was not of the the same kind, with the obedience, required of us; yet the obedience He performed to the Moral Law, in our place & stead, and as our Surety and Sponsor, was the very same debt, we were oweing.

He saith 2. Either this Obedience of Gratitude, is a duty, or not; if not, it is not truely obedience, nor the omission sin: If yea, then that duty was made a duty by some Law: And if by a Law, we are now bound to obey, in gratitude, (or for what ends so ever) either we do all that we are so bound to do, or not; if we do it (or any of it) then to say, that we did it twice, once by Christ & once by ourselves, is to say, that we were bound to do it twice, & then Christ did not all, that we were bound to, but half. Ans. We distinguish betwixt the Law, as the Condition of the Covenant of works; and as a Rule of Obedience: A duty may be duty now, as required by the Law still in force, as to its commanding regulating power, and yet not be a part of the Condition of the Covenant of works, wherein we had failed, which Christ fulfilled, by giving perfect obedience to that Law, as the Condition of Life, to which we neither did, nor could give perfect Obedience: and all our Obedience now, though commanded by the same Law, is no fulfilling in whole, or in part, of the Condition of the Covenant of works; and therefore can not be said thus to be done twice, but once, and that by Christ alone. He addeth, But what man is he, that sinneth not? Therefore, seing it is certaine, that no man doth all, that he is bound to do by the Gospel (in the time & measure of his faith, hope, love, fruitfulness &c.) it followeth that he is a sinner, and that he is not supposed to have done all that by Christ, which he failed in, both because he was bound to do it himself, & because he is a sinner for not doing of it. Ans. As there is a difference betwixt obedience to the Law, and the performing the Condition of the Covenant of works; so there is difference betwixt sin or failing in Obedience, and Violation of the Condition of the Covenant of works: as our Obedience now is not the performance, so our sinning is not the Violation of the Conditions of the old Couenant. Beleevers performed the Conditions of the Covenant only in Christ, which they could not do in themselves; and therefore their sins now, though transgressions of the Law, are not counted Violations of the conditions of the Covenant of works, under which they are not.

He saith 3. Yea the Gospel bindes us to that, which Christ could not do for us, as to beleeve in a Saviour, &c. Ans. And what then? were these part of the Conditions of the Covenant of works? If they were, Christ hath performed them, for He gave perfect Obedience; and thereby hath freed us from that obligation. If they were not, neither can they now be required, as part of that Condition.

He saith 4. The truth, which this Objection intimateth, we all agree in, viz. That the Mediator perfectly kept the Law of Innocency, that the keeping of that Law might not be necessary to our Salvation (and so such Righteousness necessary in ourselves) but that we might be pardoned for want of perfect Innocency, & be saved upon our sincere keeping of the Law of Grace, because the Law of Innocency was kept by our Mediator, and thereby the grace of the New Covenant merited, and by it, Christ, Pardon, Spirit & Life by Him freely given to beleevers, Ans. The truth expressed in the Objection, is very far different from this Sociniano-Arminian Scheme of the Gospel, which we have had often times proposed to us by Mr. Baxter, but never yet confirmed; nor do we expect ever so see it confirmed. We have also, at several occasions, given our reasons against it, and need not therefore here repeat, or insist upon it.

Last object. The same person may be really a sinner, in himself, and yet perfectly Innocent in Christ, and by Imputation, How or upon what occasion, this objection is used, Mr. Baxter doth not show, and therefore we cannot certainely know the true meaning and Import thereof. In one sense it may be very true, and yet in another sense it cannot be admitted. It is true, in this sense, The same person may be Inherently a sinner, and yet legally Innocent, through the Imputation of the Surety-righteousness of Christ. But it cannot be admitted in this sense, The same person is legally Innocent in Christ by Imputation; for this were a Contradiction. What saith Mr. Baxtor to it? Remember (saith he) that you suppose here the person & Subject to be the same Man; & then that the two contrary relations, of perfect Innocency or guiltlesness, & guilt of any (yea much) sin can be consistent in him, is a gross contradiction. Ans. There is no contradiction, unless the matter be ad idem: & here it is not so; for he may be guilty Inherently, as to himself, and yet innocent legally, as to his Surety. But if both be understood of a person, legally considered, I grant, it is a Contradiction; for he, that is legally Innocent, cannot be legally guilty, in so far as he is legally Innocent, whether the Charge be particular for one sin, that is brought in against him, or for moe, or for all.

He saith 2. But if you meane, that God reputeth us to be perfectly Innocent, when we are not, because that Christ was so, it is to Impute error to God. Ans. This cannot be their meaning: for they know, that God reputeth no man to be other-wayes, than he is. But yet it must be said, that God reputeth Beleevers, who have the Righteousness of Christ imputed to them, Innocent, as to the Violation of the Covenant of works, I mean, legally Innocent, and so, not guilty of the charge of sin, & death upon that account, brought in against them; for they are so, being justified; & therefore there is now no condemnation to such Rom, 8: 1. & none can lay any thing of that Nature to their Charge vers 33.

He addeth, But He (i. e. God) doth indeed first give, & then Impute a Righteousness evangelical to us, in stead of perfect Innocency, which shall as certainely bring us to glory. Ans. That God doth indeed Impute, that is, give & put upon our score an Evangelical Righteousness, that is, the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ, revealed in the Gospel, in stead of our perfect & personal Innocency, which we neither had, nor could attaine to, & which shall certainely bring us to glory, being the Meritorious Cause thereof. But Mr. Baxter's sense hereof is a manifest Perversion of the Gospel: for thus he senseth it. And that is, He giveth us both the Renovation of His Spirit (to Evangelical obedience) & a Right by free gift to pardon & glory, for the Righteousness of Christ, that merited it, & this thus given us, he reputeth to be an acceptable Righteousness in us. Ans. Now that this is a clear perversion of the Gospel is manifest from these particulars (beside several others else where touched) (1) Hereby the Covenant of Grace is changed into a Covenant of works, only with a Mitigation of the Conditions. (2) Christ's Surety-righteousness is not Imputed to us, neither as our legal Righteousness, nor yet as our Evangelick-righteousness; for at most it is only granted to be Imputed, as to its Effects. (3. We have no other Righteousness hereby properly imputed to us, but our own Inherent Righteousness. (4) Christ is hereby made of God unto us Righteousness, by being made of God Sanctification to us. (5) Hereby the immediat ground of our Pardon & Right to Glory, is not Christ's Surety-righteousness, but our own Inherent righteousness. (6) Christ hereby me • ited neither Pardon, nor Glory to be granted, as the Immediat fruites of His merites; but He only merited the New Covenant, wherein these favours are offered upon new Conditions. (7) Thus Christ is made only a far off Mediating person, procureing new and easier termes (which yet are as Impossible to us, till we be renewed by grace, as the old) but no Redeemer, or Surety, suffering and obeying in the room and stead of any. (8) Thus are we justified by our own works of Evangelical Obedience (9) God is made hereby to repute a Right to Pardon & Glory, & our Imperfect Evangelical Obedience, to be an acceptable Righteousness, & the all of our Righteousness: all which are against the Gospel of the Grace of God, revealed to us in the Scriptures, as hath partly been discovered already, & will further appear by what will hereafter come to be spoken unto.

CHAP. XVI. Mr. Baxter's Further opposition to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness examined.

WHat Mr. Baxter's opinion is, about the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, in order to our justification, we have hitherto been enquireing; & though, in his book against D. Tully, while he is giving an historical relation of the Controversie, he plainely enough declareth, that he is of the judgment (as to the maine) with Iohn Goodwine: yet he there (as we have heard) so stateth the question, against which he disputeth, as the Orthodox will not owne it; wherein he dealeth not so ingenuously with us, as Mr. Goodwine did. He will not deny, that there is a midway betwixt the Socinians, Papists & Arminians, on the one hand, & the Antinomians on the other; though the Middle way, which he hath se • down in his Confess. pag. 152 153. &c. seemeth to me not be the just & orthodox way, but to incline more unto the Socinians &c. for all the Imputation, which he seemeth to owne, is nothing else, than what Papists, Socinians & Arminians, will subscribe unto: for (beside what we have seen & examined above Chap. XIII. & XIV.) in his book against Mr. Cartwright pag. 179. he hath these words. I have still acknowledged the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, sanosensu. And what found sense is, he tels us in a parenthesis, that is (saith he) 1. per Donationem ejus fructus and 2. per adjudicationem justitiae nobis inde promeritae, that is to say, by giving us the fruits thereof & 2. by adjudging to us Righteousness, thereby purchased: which two seem to me, to be but one, the last being comprehended in the first: & so all the Imputation by him granted, is only in respect of the fruits thereof, which are given. And will not Papists, Socinians & Arminians yeeld unto this Imputation: Nay doth not Bellarmine come a further length, in the words formerly cited?

Mr. Baxter in his Catholick Theol. part 2. of Moral morks, giveth us here & there, while speaking of other things, without any apparent Connexion (choosing this way rather, than to give us his whole sense of that matter, in one place together, which might have been some' ease to such, as were desirous to know the same: but I know, he is at liberty to follow his own wayes & methods) some hints of his mind; and that rather of his dissatisfaction with the orthodox, and their manner of expressing their Thoughts & Conceptions, in this matter, than any full & positive declaration of his own Thoughts about the question. We shall, having seen & examined his own judgment, shortly here examine what he is pleased to say, in one place or other of that Book, so far as we can finde, & may be done without repetition, against our doctrine.

Only we shall premit some few of his own words, in the Appendix to the Premonition p. 2. whereby we may see, how small the difference would appear to be; & how little cause he had to write so much against the Orthodox, as he doth. He there saith. [14. No man is saved or justified, but by the Proper Merite of Christ's perfect obedience; Yea and His habitual holiness & Satisfactory Sufferings, advanced in dignity by His Divine Perfection: 15. This Merite, as related to us, supposeth that Christ, as a Sponsor, was the Second Adam, the Root of the justified, the Reconciling Mediator, who obeyed perfectly with that Intent, that by His obedience, we might be justified; & who suffered for our sins, in our room and stead; & so was, in tantum our Vicarius poenae, as some phrase it, or Substitute, & was made a curse for us, that we might be healed by his stripes; as He was Obedient, that His Righteousness might be the reason, as a Meritorious Cause, of our justification, which Supposeth the relation of an Undertaking Redeemer in our Nature, doing this, & in our stead, so far forth, as that therefore, perfect obedience should not be necessary to be performed by ourselves. And Righteousness therefore is Imputed to us, that is, we are truely reputed Righteous, because we, as beleeving members of Christ, have right to Impunity & life, as merited by His righteousness, & freely given to all penitent beleevers. And Christ's own Righteousness may be said so far to be Imputed to us, as to be reckoned & reputed the Meritorious cause of our Right & justification, as aforesaid.] One might think the difference now to be little, or none; but all this is but Sutable to what is already examined, and what might here further be animadverted upon, will occurre hereafter.

He beginneth Sect. 8. n. 119. to speak against the Doctrine of Imputation, taught by the Orthodox. I shall yeeld to him, that Christ's personal Righteousness, Divine or Humane, Habitual active, or Passive, is not given to us, or made ours, truely and properly, in a Physical sense; as if the same were transfused in & upon us. Yet, the same, being imputed to us, is made ours, more than in the meer Effects: for according to the Gospel methode, beleevers, being by Faith interes • ed in Him, have an Interest in His Surety-righteousness, as to its vertue, force and efficacy, or as the cause, and that morally and legally; so that Christ and beleevers are one person in Law. No • do we hereby say; That Christ's Merite & Satisfaction are reput • d by God, to be inherent in us, or done by us, in our own proper persons; or that in a sence Natural we did all these things ourselves, or that God judgeth us so to have done, or that all the Benefites of Christ's Righteousness shall as fully and Immediatly be ours, as if we bad been, & done & Suffered, merited and Satisfied, in and by Christ. But we say, that Christ being a Surety, & putting himself in our Law-place, & putting (as it were) His name in our Obligation, being thereunto Substitute by, and accepted of the Father, His Satisfaction & obedience, being performed by Him, in our Law-place, as a Surety voluntarily taking on the obligation, is accounted, in Law and justice, to be ours, who beleeve in Him, to all ends and uses, that is, in order to justification, pardon, and Right to Glory; and that, as effectually, as if we our selves, in our own persons, had done and Suffered all. When Mr. Baxter confoundeth and jumbleth these together, as if they were the same, he neither befriendeth Truth, nor us.

Nor will it follow from our assertion, (as he suppseth n. 123.) that then we could need no Pardon: for though he, who is reputed to be Innocent, by fulfilling all the Law, in his own physical person, be reputed never to have sinned by Omission, or Commission; & consequently to need no pardon: yet he, who is a transgressour, & consequently hath forfeited all right to the Reward, & is obnoxious to the Penalty, hath need of a Remission, through his Suretie's making Satisfaction; & of a new Title to Glory, through his Suretie's Obedience. So that the Non-necessity of Pardon will no more follow from our doctrine of Imputation, than from our doctrine of the Satisfaction of Christ, whatever Socinians think, who plead as vehemently from free Remission against this, as Mr. Baxter doth, upon the same ground, against Imputation.

But when any say, that Christ's Sacrifice satisfied for all our sins, that they may be forgiven; & His Righteousness is Impu • ed, that we may also be accounted just, he thinketh, (n. 122.) that this is but either ambiguity; or the fore-detected gross contradiction. And why so: for (saith he) if by justice, they meane reputed sinlesness, or perfection, then these two cannot stand together; for he that is supposed a sinner is supposed not sinless, or perfect; & he that is supposed sinless, cannot be supposed pardonable. Ans. By justice, or being accounted just we mean Righteous, or rectus in curia, in order to the Reward promised: and when full obedience is imputed to this end, we do not say, that God reputeth such sinless, that is, such as, in their own physical persons, gave perfect obedience; for such indeed need no pardon: but that now God reputeth them such as are Righteous, and have Right to the Reward, through the perfect Righteousness of Christ Imputed: and this carrieth no shew of Repugnancy to pardon of sins, through the Satisfaction of Christ.

But (n. 123.) he tels us, that some think to avoid the Contradiction by distinguishing only of the moments of Nature, & double respect of the same Mans Actions, saying, that we are first in order of Nature supposed to be sinners & pardoned, & then to be such, as moreover need the Reputation of Innocency, or Righteousness, which is added to pardon. What necessity there is for this curious distinguishing of Order & Priority, whether in respect of Nature or of Time, I do not yet see. And whether we say, we are first pardoned, & then reputed Righteous; or first reputed Righteous, & then pardoned (which would seem most rational of the two) it is all one to Mr. Baxter, who equally argueth against both. But though I see no necessity of asserting any of these orders (Save that though the first thing, that a wakened sinner is pardon & freedom from the Curse; Yet it is more rational to say, the Reatus culpae first taken away, and not the Reatus poenae) yet I see a necessity of asserting both the Imputation of Christ's Satisfaction, in order to our pardon; & of His Obedience, in order to our obtaining Right to the Inheritance (and both these Mr. Baxter comprehendeth in justification, as we shall hear) or of both His Satisfaction and obedience, or of His compleat Surety-righteousness, in order to our obtaining compleat justification, & its Effects, or consequents, Remission of sins & Right to the Crown. But saith Mr. Baxter 1. He that is pardoned of all sins of Omission & Commission, is accounted Innocent & Righteous, as to any guilt of punishment, either of sense or loss. Ans. True he is accounted Innocent, or Righteous, as to guilt of punishment of sense; yea or of loss, in so far as it is a punishment, or belongeth to the punishment threatned. But he is not accounted Innocent, that is, one that hath never sinned; or one that hath never lest right to the reward: & therefore beside this pardon, he must have a Righteousness, in order to the Reward promised. He saith 2, He that is after accounted Innocent & just from his first being to that houre, is judged never to have needed Pardon. Ans. But by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, there is no such account made, as if the man were reputed, or accounted one, that never sinned, from his first being to that hour; but that now hath as good right to the Reward, as he could have had, if so be, he had never siuned, not only from his first being to that hour, but from the first to the last moment of being. We need not then notice what followeth, when he saith. And so they make God come with an after act, and condemne His own foregoing act of errour & injurie; or at least to contradict it, and in the first instant to say [I pardon this sinner] & in the second to say, [I now repute him one, that never sinned, nor needed pardon] for, as we have seen, the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness hath no such Import.

He tels us (n. 125.) of some, that say, that the Law, since the fall, obligeth us both to obey & to suffer, & not to one only; else a sinner, bound to suffer, should not be bound to obey. Therefore Christ must do both for us. And this would seem to be a very Innocent assertion, & consonant to truth: yet he saith, This is too gross for any man to utter, that ever know what Law or Government is. Ans. And I had thought, that it had been too gross for any Christian to have denied this, who would not outstripe all the Antinowians, that ever were: for if it be thus, one of two must follow; either that now after the fall, Adam & all his posterity are loosed from all obligation to obedience to the Law of God; or that they are not under the curse. Neither of which, I suppose Mr. Baxter dar say: But, what saith he: do they mean, that as to the same act & time, the Law bindeth us to obey and suffer; or for diverse acts and Instants of time? Ans. In regard that, since the fall, nothing can be done, in perfect conformity to the Law, both may be said. Do they mean (saith he further) that the Law bound man both to perfection, & to suffering for perfection, or to suffering for sin? Ans. We are speaking of the Lawes obligation now, since the fall: & it is certaine, that because the Law is now broken, we are obliged to suffer; & that, because of that constitution, do & live, no man can have life, untill that Law be perfectly obeyed: but because this is Impossible for man, therefore it must be done by his Surety. He querieth againe, did the Law binde Adam, to obey & suffer, before he sinned? Ans. No. Did it binde him (saith he againe) both to obey & suffer for his new sin, the next Instant? Ans. What himself addeth is a sufficient answere to this, viz. That it did binde him to suffer for his old sin (adde, & also for his new sin) & yet the obligation to obey for time to come remained. But all this is beside the purpose; for the maine thing is not yet noticed by Mr. Baxter viz. That Adam by his sin was obliged to suffer, & that yet there was no way for him to come to the promised Crown, but by perfect obedience to that Law: & that therefore neither he, or any of his posterity, can enjoy life, untill their Surety fulfill that Law for them, or undertake to do it: as they cannot be freed from Suffering, untill their Surety suffer the penalty for them, or undertake to do it. We need not speak so unaptly, as he supposeth we do, that is, say, that the Law commandeth lapsed man, not to have sin, or imperfect man, to have been perfect; for we know, that were to binde to an Impossibility in Nature; for sin existent cannot but be existent. But this we say, That by vertue of that Law & constitution, there was no way for lapsed man, to enjoy the Reward-promised, but by yeelding perfect obedience unto that Law; and as this was Impossible in Nature; so was it impossible for lapsed man to enjoy the Reward, & therefore the Lord provided a Surety, who should yeeld perfect obedience unto that Law; & this perfect Obedience is made over unto the Beleever, & put upon his score, as well as the Sureties Sufferings are. But saith he, if Christ's perfect Obedience and holiness be imputed unto them from their first being, then they are reputed not lapsed, nor sinners from the beginning, & so not pardonable. Ans. There is no necessity for such a Reputation; for this is not the end of that Imputation: It is Imputed, in order to their obtaining a Right to the Reward, which was lost; & by vertue hereof, they do obtaine the Reward, as certainly, as if they had never sinned.

Others (he saith n. 126,) would come neerer the matter, & say, that we are reputed Righteous, as fulfillers of the Law; & yet reputed sinners as breakers of the Law: & that though there be no medium in Naturals betwixt light & darkness, life & death; yet there is betwixt a breaker of the Law & a fulfiller of it, viz. a Non-fulfiller; & between just & unjust, that is, not just. • Ans. I Finde Wolls bius in his Compend. Theol. Lib, 1. Cap. 30. § 15. full & plaine, as to this, who, in order to prove, that in justification, there is a Remission, or Abjudication of sins, & Imputation or Adjudication of a perfect Righteousuess: & that though these two benefites be the same, as to Time & Subjects; yet they are really distinct, both as to their proper definitions, their proxime Causes, & proper Effects: & in clearing of the difference, as to their definitions, he tels us, that there is a difference betwixt not just & just; not just & unjust; not unjust & just: & that not just & just are contradictory; that unjust & just are partly privative, & partly contrary; & that not just, & unjust; & unjust & just are diverse: as also, that unjust & just are not immediatly contrary; for there is Medium betwixt them viz. Innocent, who is such an one, as is neither unjust, nor yet just: and that though now these two do not differ, as to Subjects; yet of old they did; for Adam in Paradise, before he fell, was innocent, but was not just; for he was to obtaine this by perfect Obedience. Now. what saith Mr. Baxter to this?

He saith, this is meer darkness. As it seemeth all things are, that agree not to his Notions. But why? There is (saith he) a Medium negative in a person, as not obliged, but none between positive & private, in one obliged as such, A stone is neither just, nor privatively unjust, nor a man about a thing never commanded or for bidden him. But what is this to the matter? God's Law is presupposed: we talk of nothing, but Moral Acts. The Law forbideddeth omissions and Commissions; both are sin. Ans. Though there be no medium betwixt positive and privative, in a person obliged, as to particular acts commanded, or forbidden; yet there is a Medium, in such a person, in reference to the Reatus poenae, & meritum praemii. In reference to every moral act, Adam was either just, or unjust, i. e. either one, that obeyed, or one that transgressed; but in reference to the punishment threatned & to the Reward promised, before he fell, he was neither unjust, that is, one that was a Transgressour, & reus culpae & poenae nor was he just, that is, one that had purchased the Reward; but was in his way thereunto: & himself saith little less (as I judge) in his premonit p. 19. saying [3. But that Law giving life eternal only to obedience to the end of his time of trial, he merited not that life by Initial obedience. This was Initial Imperfect Righteousness, wanting perseverance; but not a Medium between just & unjust, except as just signifieth the merite of life by persevering Righteousness to the last. And so, I never denied, but in a disobliged Subject, there is a Medium: Adam was not bound to do a yeers work the first hour; & so was neither just, nor privatively unjust, as to the future yeers work; but as to what he was presently obliged unto, he was either Righteous, or a sinner.] Here upon the matter, is almost all I desire, or say. When a command is given to a person, to run so many miles in an hour, & a Reward is promised in case he do it, & a punishment threatned, in case he do it not; while he is running, as to his present acting, he is not disobedient, but obedient; & so, in so far is just, & not unjust; yet in reference to the Reward, he cannot be called just, untill he hath finished the course, in the time appointed. So Adam, while standing, though he sinned not, yet he had not merited the Reward. Mr. Baxter replieth 1. He merited what Reward he had, viz. the Continuance of his blessings first freely given. Ans. That was not all the Reward, which was promised, whereof we are speaking; for Adam was not yet in Patria: & howbeit himself was not clear, as to this, when he wrote his Aphorismes; yet afterward, in his Book against Mr. Cartwright, pag. 19. he tels us, he became convinced hereof. 2. He raiseth dust to darken the aire by saying. That it is yet unresolved, what that was, by which Adam must merite Immutability & Glory: whether 1. Once obeying or Consent to his full Covenant. 2. Or once loving God. 3. Or conquering once. 4. Or eating of the tree of life. 5. Or persevering in perfect obedience to the end, that is, till God should translate him. But this dust falleth to the ground, when he addeth. That this last is most likely. And indeed it were much of his concernment, to prove, if he could, that all that was required of Adam, by vertue of that Covenant, was only one single act of obedience: for then his Notions about just & unjust, as to Adam, would have some ground: but till this be done, all he hath said is to no purpose.

3. He saith, That he maintain • th, as well as we, that Christ hath not only satisfied for sin, & merited pardon; but also merited immutable Glory. Ans. But we say further, that He merited pardon & Immutable glory, not by His death & sufferings only, but by His whole Surety-righteousness, consisting in Active & Passive Obedience, whereby He paid our whole debt. But he willeth us to consider. 1. That Adam's not doing that which was to merite glory, was sin of Omission, and to pardon that Omission is to take him as a Meriter of Glory. 2. Therefore it must be somewhat more, than he forfeited by that Omission and his Commission, which cometh in by Christ's merite above forgiveness. 3. That Christ merited all this by his active, Passive & habitual Righteousness, by which he merited pardon. 4. That it was not we, that merited in Him, but He to give it to us only, in the termes of a Law of Grace. Ans. (I) To pardon that Omission in Adam, was not to take him, as a Meriter of Glory; but only to take him, as one that was free of the obligation to punishment for that Omission. It is false then, to suppose or say, that one pardoned, as such, is taken to be one that never sinned; for the contrary is manifest; & to take Adam, as a Meriter of Glory, is to take him for one, that never sinned; yea, & for one, that fulfilled his course of obedience; which can never be supposed of a pardoned man, as such. (2) That by Christ's Merites the Elect obtaine more, than what Adam forfeited (to speak so) I shall easily grant; but notwithstanding thereof we stood in need of more, than of meer forgiveness, even of a Right to what Adam lost the expectation of; and in order to this, the Law was to be fulfilled (3) I yeeld the 3d. (4) Though we need not say, that we Merited in Him, yet we say, That Christ merited, as a Publick Person, representing His own, & as a Sponsor and Surety, coming in their Law-place, and taking on their whole debt, both as to punishment deserved, and Duty required. And I see no warrand to say, that Christ only merited to give it to us, only on the termes of a Law of Grace: for this would make Him no Sponsor, or Surety, nor to stand in the room of any (which yet he granteth n. 130.) but only hold Him forth, as a third unconcerned person, no wayes related to them; & like a man buying a Bond or Obligation from a Creditor, whereby he may be in case to distress the debtor, and call for payment in his owne way and time. Whereby the whole tenor of the Covenant of Redemption, between Jehovah & the Mediator, is altered; the Mediator's Place & Relation to those, for whom he died, is changed; His Righteousness of Active and Passive Obedience is made to have no necessary respect unto the old Covenant & Man's Obligation. He is supposed to have merited & bought all for Himself immediatly: He is supposed to have died for all: & that the New Covenant, or Caw of Grace is wholly of Him. To none of all which, I can assent.

He saith next (n. 127.) that some come neerer & say, that to punish and not reward are all one; & so the respect, that sin hath to the deserved punishment needed Pardon and Satisfaction; but our deserving the Reward needed Christ's perfect obedience to be Imputed. What saith he to this? He granteth, that there is some what of truth here; but (saith he) there are errors also that lye in the way; and so he willeth us to remember 1. (without a 2. or 3.) that man can have nothing from God, but what is a meer gift, as to the matter, though it be a Reward, as to the Order & Ends of Collation. Ans. True; what then? And in this case (saith he) punishment is damni, as well as sensus; & so the loss of the Reward is the principal part of hell, or punishment, Ans. That there is poena damni, as well as sensus, I grant; but I am sure, the punishment, threatned to Adam, was more than the meer want of what was promised; otherwayes we must say, that Adam was punished before he fell; because even while he stood, he had received the Reward promised; so that poena damni is some other thing, than the meer want of the Reward; even the want of that, which man had already in his possession, together with the hopes of what was promised. The faithful, yet living, are not pof • essed of the Reward of Glory; yet it may not be said, that they have the principal part of hell, being delivered there from. So that all this is but loose Sophistrie from the word loss. What more? So that (saith he) if Christ's death hath pardoned our sins of Omission, we are reputed to have done all our duty. Ans. Passing the Impropriety of speach here, we say, that it is manifestly false, as appeareth from what is said. And if so (saith he again) we are reputed to have merited the Reward. And. This is also false, as is shown. And if he pardon our sins (saith he more-over) as to all punishment of sense & loss, he pardoneth them, as to their forfeiture of heaven, at a gift, if not as a Reward. And. Neither can this be granted; for there is more required to the taking away of the forfeiture of heaven, if by this nothing else be meaned, than a giving of a Right to heaven, whether as a Gift, or as a Reward, than to the taking away of all punishment, whether of Sense, or of Loss, as such: as for example, when a King covenanteth with his own Servant, whom he hath already advanced to great honour & dignity, and promiseth him far greater honour, if he will work one day to end, in sueh an Imployment; & if not, threatneth to deprive him of all he hath, & to cast him in prison, untill he die: This servant faileth & performeth not the condition, and therby hath both forfeited what he was in hope of, and what he had, and is now obnoxious to perpetual Imprisonment: when the King's own Son goeth to prison for some time, to make Satisfaction, and thereby deliver the Servant from perpetual Imprisonment, he doth not thereby deliver him from his loss, so as to give him a right to the far greater honour promised: though he deliver him from the punishment of constant Imprisonment: Yea it may be a doubt, if he thereby procure his restauration to his former state: but in order to this, and to the end, the servant may get the Reward promised, beside his going so long to prison in the servants room & stead, that he may be delivered from the punishment, he must also, in his room & stead, performe that daies work.

We say that Remission of sin is a consequent, or at most, but a part of justification; because a man may be for-given, & yet not reputed never to have broken the Law. To put away guilt, and to make one Righteons, are two things. This is most clear; yet Mr. Baxter saith (n. 128.) Still confusim. Which is wonderfull; where, I pray, must the confusion lye? Is it in this, that we say, Remission of sin; is, at most, but part of justification? Doth not himself say as much hereafter (n. 208.) when he saith, that our first constitutive justification, is in its (own Nature, a right to Impunity, & to life, or glory? Now this Right to Impunity, is the same with Remission; but a Right to life, or glory is something more. Is it in this, that we say, a man may be forgiven, and yet not reputed one, who never broke the Law? That, I am sure, can be no confusion and contradiction: for it is a contradiction to say, that a man is pardoned, and yet reputed one, that never broke the Law; for pardon is of a breach of the Law. What saith he, to make out this alleiged Confusion? Guilt (saith he) is either of the fault, as such, or of the punishment, & of the fault only as the cause of punishment: If all guilt, both culpae & poenae, were done away, that person were reputed positively righteous, that is, never to have omitted a duty, or committed a sin.] Ans. But do we say, That pardon taketh away the Reatus culpae, in it self? His own following words, may partly be our answer. But indeed (saith he) when only the Reatus poenae (& culpae quoad poenam) is done away, the Reatus culpae in se remaineth. And this Christ himself never taketh away, no, not in heaven, where for ever we shall be judged, once to have sinned, & not to be such, as never sinned. Where is now the Confusion Mr. Baxter spoke of? But yet, I suppose, he is in a mistake, when he saith, that the Reatus culpae cannot be taken away; for it must be taken away, legally, or there shall be no justification, though it can never be taken away Metaphysically; & the same may be said of the Reatus culpae it self, seing it will alwayes be true, that they did once deserve punishment, & are not such, as never deserved punishment.

He addeth (n. 129.) that, which to him, is the Core of our errour, [That we • hink, we must be justified in Christ, by the Law of Innocency, which justified Christ Himself: & that we are quite, or washed simply from all guilt of fault as well as Obligation to Punishment.] But neither of these do we say, as hath been frequently shown. We are justified by the Law of Grace, & by faith; yet we say with Paul, that the Law is not made void by faith, but established: the Law of Innocency must be fulfilled, but it is not fulfilled by us, but by Christ; & His Righteousness is Imputed to us, and received by faith; and we thereupon are justified, & receive Remission, and Right to Glory. We do not say. That Adam's Law meant, do this by thyself, or by Christ, & thou shalt live: yet we say, that that Constitution of God, do this and live, must as well be established, as this; Cursed is every one, that continueth not in all things written in the Law and that, as by vertue of this Christ our Surety was to die the cursed death; so by vertue of that, He was to fulfill all Righteousness.

He 〈…〉 next (n. 130.) that the truth, which we grope after, and must reconcile us all, is as followeth.] As if all the Reformed divines almost had been hither to but groping after the truth, like blinde men groping for the wall; and he and possibly two or three moe, had their eyes opened to see the truth. His discourse here is too long to be rehearsed, that it may be examined; a few observes upon it may suffice. (1) He saith, Christ, in His sufferings did stand in the room of sinners, as their Sponsor. Ans. Then His Satisfaction to justice must, in due time, be reckoned on the score of such, in whose room He suffered. Why will he not say this also of Christ's Obedience; seing both were performed by Him, in His estate of Humiliation, & as the Surety of the Covenant? Was He not made under the Law, as well as under the Curse? And was He not made of a woman, given and born to us? But neither can we say, That Christ stood in the room of all sinners, as he supposeth. (2) We saith. That Christ acquired a Right first to Himself of giving out the purchased benefites, to sinners, by a new Law, viz. by what He suffered & did. Ans. This is denied, as not yet being confirmed; and it destroyeth His being a Sponsor and Surety, and saith, He was not born to us, nor died for us; but to and for Himself, And yet I deny not, that Christ hath gote all power, and is the General dispensator of the blessings of the Covenant purchased. (3) He saith, Had Christ antecedently done all, that He did in our person, & we in Him, in Law sense, the thing its self, with its inseparable consequents & effects, had been all ours, ipso facto. Ans. There is no necessity for this; seing Christ was not thereunto appointed by us, or conjunctly obliged with us, in the first Covenant; but after we were broken, did, of His own accord, put His Name in our Obligation, and came in our Law-place, & so was made sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him. (4) He speaketh of these benefites being given us, upon termes & Conditions. But we shew before, and here-after will have occasion to do it more fully, of what Nature, these termes and Conditions were; and that they are not such, as He meaneth. (5) He saith. What is given by the New Covenant, we have title to upon this account, because it was purchased by the perfect merite & sacrifice of Christ; & so given us by Him, and by the Father. Ans. According to Him, the Right, that is had thus, is but remote & common to all, even to such as perish; & therefore can hardly be called a Right; but the only Right is had, is by our performance of the termes and Conditions: for he saith (n. 137.) that Glory is given as a Reward for our beleeving, and performing the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace. (6) He saith, we deserved punishment & Christ was punished in our stead, that we might be forgiven: we had forfeited life by sin, & Christ merited life for us by His perfection. Ans. And why will he not say, that Christ did this last, as well as the first, in our stead, seing hereby the freedom of the Gift can no more be weakened, than pardon by the other. What followeth hath been spoken to already.

He granteth (n. 132.) That not to punish, & to reward are different: yet he saith, not to have the Gift is to be punished; & so, non-donari here is puniri materially: & that it is the same Righteousness of Christ, which meriteth our Impunity, quoad damnum & sensum, & which Meriteth our Right to the Gift of life, both sub ratione doni, as a Gift, & sub ratione Condonations, as a forgiveness of the forfeiture, & of the poena damni: And then addeth, That so there is here no room for the conceite, that Christ's Death was only to purchase pardon, & His Righteousness: to merite life] Ans. We have said before, that we need not be so curious here in distinguishing, if both be granted to make up a Compleat Righteousness, to purchase both, we have all we desire: and from what hath been said formerly, it is manifest, that both are requisite; & Mr. Baxtor granted as much before, as we see in the foregoing paragraph Note 6. Nor saith Mr. Baxter any thing here, to invalidate what we have said. Sure, not to have this Gift was no punishment to Adam, before he sinned, what-ever it might be said to be after his sin. Nor is forfeiture of that properly, which a Man never had, neither in Right, nor in possession: And therefore Adam could not be said properly (nor we in him) to have forfeited glory; but only that blessedness and felicity, wherein he was created, and that Righteousness, that was concreated: So that beside the taking away of this forfeiture, there will be a Righteousness of Obedience requisite, according to that Constitution, do this & live, in order to the obtaining of a Right for us unto the life of Glory. And to this he assenteth in end, when he saith, That the same Merites of Christ's Active & Passive & Habitual Righteousness, do causo our Glory. For we do not separat them: Nor need we curiously enquire, whether Christ's Suffering were first Satisfactory, & then Meritorious; & His Obedience first Meritorious, and then Satisfactory, as he speaketh: it being sufficient to us, that both made up a compleat Righteousness performed for us, by Him, as our Surety, coming in our Law-place, whereby justice was satisfied, and life merited. Nor need I say (as he supposeth n. 135. too many hold) That heaven is our Reward, for our perfection of Holiness and Obedience in and Christ; more than that pardon is our Reward for our Satisfaction in & by Christ. Yet as Christ satisfied as a Sponsor, in the stead & room of sinners, as he confessed; so it may be said, that Christ obeyed, as a Sponsor, in their room & stead: & that as the one was requisite for purchase of pardon; so the other was requisite for purchase of Glory: and that as we must be Interessed in the one, imputed to us & received by faith, to the end we may be pardoned; so we must be Interessed in the other imputed to us, and received by faith (both being Integral parts of one compleat Surety-righteousness) to the end, we may have a Right to Glory. Nor can I say with him (Ibid.) That eternal life is ours, by Christ's free Gift as a Reward to Christ, for His own Merites: for then, we could not say, that Christ suffered properly in the roome of any, as their Sponsor; and this would take away that fundamental relation betwixt Christ & the Chosen ones, that were given to Him of the Father; and for whose sake He sanctified Himself & was made a Curse, & made under the Law, and became the Father's Servant, and was made a Surety Blessings came through Christ, as the appointed Mediator, not from Him, as the principal Donor (speaking of Him, as Mediator) The blessing of Abraham cometh on the Gentiles, through Iesus Christ Gal. 3: 14. The God & Father of our Lord Iesus Christ, blesseth us with all spiritual blessings, in Christ, according as He hath chosen us in Him; & hath predestinat us unto the Adoption of Children, by Iesus Christ; & hath made us accepted in the Beloved Ephes. 1: 3, 4, 5, 6. It is God, who saveth us according to His mercy, by the washing of Regeneration, & the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which He shed on us abundantly, through Iesus Christ, our Saviour, that being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs, according to the hop of eternal life Tit. 3: 5, 6, 7. Christ is the way to the Father Ioh. 14: 6. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself 2 Cor. 5: 19. Yet it is true, that Christ is now exalted as King and Prince, and giveth the Crown of life, Revel. 2: 10. as the great Administrator and Executor of His own Testament; yet not as if He had purchased all these things firstly, or primarily to Himself, and were now become the Sole or Principal Donor: for this doth overturn the tenor & forme of the Covenant of Redemption.

He tels us (n. 141.) That Christ's Righteousness is made ours, as our sinnes were made his. Which is all that we desire. We grant that Christ never had the Reatum culpae, in it self: & he saith, that sin was Imputed to Him, as to the punishment deserved, that is, He assumed the Reatum poenae. But sure, the Reatus poenae, being a dueness of punishment, because of sin, He could not come under this Obligation, unless the Reatus culpae had been Imputed to Him, not in it self physically, but juridically, in ordine ad poenam. And accordingly we must have the Righteousness of Christ, in order to its Effects; and this is more, than to have the meer Effects themselves, as he saith: & we shall grant to him, that we have it not, in the relation of a Meritorious cause to all uses; if he will grant to us, that we have it, in the relation of a meritorious Cause, to those uses, which God accepted it for; & hath assigned to it in the Gospel; as he seemeth to grant ibid.

Though we do not assert such an Imputation, as he calleth the rigide sense thereof (n. 142.) whereby God is supposed to repute us to have done that in & by Christ, which we never did by Him: yet we see no reason, why we may not say, that God judged Christ, to be the publick legal person: yea himself in the appendix to his Premonition, yeeldeth that Christ may be called, our Vicarius poenae, or Substitute; And when we say, He is a Publick legal person, we say not, that He is as many persons, as there be redeemed sinners in the world, as Mr. Baxter speaketh; but that He was such a publick legal person, as did represent in Law all that were given to Him, as their publick Head & Surety. And what he saith (n. 143.) of the various sorts of Sureties (some of which are very Impertinent, as the 3 • for no man calleth an Agent a Surety; & the 5. for no man calleth a pay-master, who is the debtors Instrument, servant, or delegat, a Surety) doth not much help him, seing there are no such Sureties among Men, nor no manner of Suretyship, that can quadrat with Christ's Suretiship, in all things: and therefore it is to no purpose to say, Christ is not such a Surety, as is among men, in this, or that, or in the other respect, therefore He is no Surety at all. He is such a Surety, as is not in all things like Sureties among men; & yet in some things, every sort of Surety among men, may carry some resemblance to Him. See for this Mr. Gillespie's late piece on the Covenant of Redemption; where the Reader will finde much Satisfaction in this matter.

I finde no more spoken to the Doctrine of Imputation, in this place, by M. Baxter, that calleth for any particular Notice: for we say not, as He hinteth ibid. that Christ was our Instrument, or Delegate: yet we may say, He was our Surety, that did all in our legal person: for He did substitute Himself in our Law-place, & in so far suffered, in the Law-person of beleevers, as well as in their Nature.

We come next to Sect. 9. pag. 73. Where Mr. Baxter proposeth an objection, that those of his minde do use viz. If we had fulfilled all the Law reputatively by Christ, as our legal person, we could not be bound to further Obedience to it. This is founded (if it be directed against the Orthodox, & not meerly against the Antinomians) upon the mistake of the true meaning of these words, as our legal person & Reputatively. When we speak of Christ's being our legal person, we mean His becoming our Surety, and putting His name in our Bond, and satisfying the Law, as our Surety, in our room & stead: and that therefore, all His own, being now united to Him by faith, are dealt with, as if they had fulfilled the Law themselves; Christ's fulfilling of it, being now imputed to them, and received by faith, unto the ends, for which it was ordained; that is, to be accounted theirs, and reckoned on the • score, in order to the obtaining of the Reward promised to Adam, on Condition of perfect obedience. This being so, it is manifest, that hence it will not follow, that beleevers are not now bound to obedience to the Law.

What saith he we answere hereunto? That we are not bound to obey to the same ends, as Christ; that is, for Righteousness, or justification, or Merite: but in gratitude. It is true, Beleevers are not now bound to obey the Law, for that end, that Adam was obliged to, that not being now possible, and the Lord not requiring it, for that end & purpose, that we should purchase the reward of life to ourselves thereby, & have a Righteousness, whereby we may be justified, by the Righteous judge, and purchase or merite to ourselves the Reward: but, among other ends, to declare our Thankfulness unto God, & to set forth His Glory. What saith he to this answere?

He judgeth it to be a yeelding of the Cause, & ignorantly to destroy our own, for 7 or 8 reasons. 1. This is to say, that when a Man is reputed to have fulfilled all the Law; yet it is to be reputed unfulfilled, as to certain ends; as if he fulfilled all the Law, that fulfilled it not to all due ends. Ans. This is, as if one should reason from our saying, that Christ bore the whole Curse, and yet beleevers are not freed from Fatherly chastisements; that this is to say, That he bore all the Curse, that did not bear it under all Considerations, & as to all effects, that might passe under other Considerations, & accordingly be endured for other ends & Advantages. (2) Beleevers are reputed in Christ to have fulfilled the Law, in order to the obtaining of the Crown; and in reference to that, to have fulfilled the Law to all due ends, but not to have done it in themselves, or in their own Natural persons. Nor is the fulfilling of it by their Surety imputed to them, to exeem them from under the Authority of God & of His Law; far less particularly to exeem them, from testifying their Love & Gratitude, by endeavouring after Obedience to the Law, upon Gospel-Principles, & Grounds, & upon Gospel-motives, & for Gospel-ends.

2. Or (saith he) as if the Law obliged one man to fulfill it twice over, for the same lefes time; once simply, & in all its obligations, & another time for other ends. Ans. This is denied; neither followeth it from what we say. Because we cannot fulfill the Law once, to which we were obliged; there-for must Christ fulfill it for us, to the end we may enjoy the promised Reward: And His fulfilling of it for this end, doth not make us Law-less, far less exeem us from Obedience for other Gospel ends, to which Adam in Innocency was not obliged. Or 3 (saith he) as if the Law required any more than absolute perfection, Ans. We do not say, that it doth: But all our Obedience, with all the superaddition of new ends, is most Imperfect. 4. Or (saith he) that absolute perfection had not been in Christ's holy Obedience. Ans. Neither doth this follow-from what we say, more than from what himself saith; Yea not so much: for he maketh our Gospel-Obedience, a perfect Righteousness, which we may lean to, & plead for our justification & Salvation upon.

Or 5. (saith he) as if there were any Obedience, whose end is not Righteousness & justification, against the charge of the contrary disobedience. Ans. This is but vanity, for neither is it denied, nor is it any thing to the point; because the Righteousness spoken of is a perfect Righteousness, answerable to the Covenant of works, as the condition of life: And who ever performe Obedience, with such an eye & designe, & for such an end, shall in end meet with a sad disappointment, be their diligence & attainments what they will. 6. (saith he) And is not gratitude an end, & a thing commanded by the Law? If we obeyed perfectly in Christ, we were perfectly thankful in Christ. Ans. It will only follow, that we were perfectly thankful in Christ, in order to the obtaining of the reward; but not so, as if we in our own persons, were no more obliged to endeavoure thankfulness.

7. (saith he) But if they say, That Christ fulfilled the Law only made to Adam for us, & not his own Law of Grace, & therefore, that he obeyed for us only to the ends of that Law. Sure this is the thing that himself will say, or he must say, that Christ fulfilled no Law for us, in our stead. But what answereth he? If the ends (saith he) & matter of that Law be fulfilled by us in Him, our Obedience to any other must be needless; for he that is supposed never to have sinned, needeth not use any meanes for pardon or remedie. Ans. We say not, That the Law was fulfilled by us, in Him; but that He fulfilled the Law, as a Surety, willingly putting His Name in our obligation, & undertaking our debt: And from the Imputation of this to us, it will never follow, that we are thereby, or can be, supposed never to have sinned. What next? By this rule (saith he) Christ only fulfilled the Law for Adam & Eve; & for us only as we were in them, which is only virtually, & not actually at all, but not at all for us, according to any obligation, that ever fell upon our persons. How proveth he this? For 1. (saith he) we were never personally bound to perfect, personal, perpetual Obedience, as the Condition of life for that Covenant, as to the promise & condition, ceased before any man was born. Ans. That Covenant, I grant, ceased to be the way to life, as it was to Adam at first; because it became a thing impossible; yet, as Adam fell under the Curse of that broken Covenant, so did all his posterity fall with him & in him: hence when his posterity come to be existent persons, they are Children of wrath, & are under the Curse of that Covenant; and all their Actions, afterward committed, are further sins & violations of that Covenant: for we may not think, that Adam, after his first sin, was not in case to violat that Covenant any more: And though before any man was born, the new Covenant, or Gospel was promulgat; yet, notwithstanding thereof, all men were born under the Curse of the first Covenant, and were never delivered from under that, untill they closed with the termes of the second Covenant, or Covenant of Grace. But he saith 2. All the duty in the world, which we are bound unto, is to be done for Euangelical ends, for recovery, grace & unto gratitude. Ans. And was not Adam before the fall also bound unto gratitude? But he possibly meaneth gratitude for Redemption, yet he hath proved, that all the world, Heathens, I meane, & such as never heard of the Gospel, are obliged to Gratitude, upon the account of Redemption: or that all, that is required of them, is to be done for Gospel ends. But in all this, I am little concerned, who see no necessity of restricking Christ's obedience so.

8. He saith. That we see not, that our own answere implieth the truth, of what he and others assert; and is the same which they give but our cause is uncapable of. What then saith he & his? We say (saith he) that Christ did indeed most perfectly obey the Law of Innocency, so far for us, & in our stead (though not in our persons) as doing that, which we should have done & did not; & hath merited for us a better Covenant, which obligeth us not at all to obey for the ends of the first Covenant viz. that our perfection might be our Righteousness, or the Condition of life; but only to obey for the ends of the New Covenant, for the obtaining & improving of recovering grace & Salvation by Christ freely given us, which we ourselves must do, or perish. Ans. (1) If Christ obeyed for us, and in our stead, I see not, why he may not be said to do it, as our Surety, and so in our Law-person, seing, according to our Common discourse, the Surety & Principal debtor are one person in Law. But about ambiguous termes, we need not debate. It is of greater moment to differ, as to this, that he thinketh the us compr • hendeth all persons, Elect & Reprobat. (2) That Christ did merite the New Covenant, is no where said in Scriptur • ; & yet this is all, that Mr. Baxter here mentioneth, as merited by Him. (3) I think, he is as much concerned, as we are, to loose his own difficulties, formerly proposed: for. 1. How can He be said, to have fulfilled all the Law for us, that did not fulfill it to all due ends? 2. Can the Law require more than absolute perfection? 3. Was not absolute perfection in Christ's holy Obedience? 4. Is not gratitude an end required in the Law of Innocency? 5. If Christ fulfilled only the Law of Innocency, did he not fulfill the Law for Adam & Eve only, or for us, as in them &c. Let him answere these himself, and he shall help us.

Next (n. 190.) he bringeth some in saying. That we may as wel say, that man must not die, because Christ died for us; as not obey because Christ obeyed for us, & then tels us, that we strangely use their reason against ourselves, & know it not. But what if this be his mistake? Let us hear his reason. For we say (saith he) that we must die, because we did not perfectly either obey the Law, or suffer all its penalty, by Christ, as our legal person; but he suffered only to satisfie justico in tantum, to this end, that man himself suffering death & temporal afflictions, & obeying the Law of grace, might be saved from all the rest of the punishment. But if we had so fulfilled the Law, as afore said, by doing or suffering, we could not have died, or suffered the least affliction, as a penalty; for all punishment, in the essence of the relation is for sin. Ans. Though I had rather say, That Christ Suffered & Obeyed for His own, & in their stead, as their Surety, willingly undertaking the debt, that they were under, than that we Suffered & Obeyed in Him: yet it may be, they who speak so, are far from that meaning, that Mr. Baxter putteth on their words: & when they call Christ our legal person, they mean no more, than that he was a Surety, or a publick Person. (2) Though he suffered not to deliver His own from temporal death; yeth he did bear the Curse, & satisfied Vindictive justice, and left nothing of that for them to suffer: & what chastisements they meet with, yea & death it self is made to work together for their good.

He bringeth them in againe (n. 190.) saying. It is more Inconvenient to say, that Christ was perfect in our person, than that He satisfied in our pe • son, & we by Him] And here possibly the same mistake is but continued. But, as he taketh it up, he thinketh that hereby the Gospel is subverted. Ans. The whole dependeth upon the Explication of these words, in our person. Mr. Baxter thinketh that these words, in our person in a Law sense, import, that we payed all in Christ, as a man payeth a Summe of Money by his servant, whom he sendeth to carry it; or some such thing. And if this be not their meaning, who use this expression; all this outcry is to no purpose; and is only a fighting against his own imagination, & a meer striving about words: yet he granteth, that we may fitly say, that Christ suffered in the person of a sinner; but he bids us mark the sense, saying 1. Suffering as penal belongeth to a sinner as such; but Satisfaction is an effect of Christ's Suffering, which resulteth not from the meer suffering, nor from the person of a sinner; but from the will & Covenant of God, made to that excellent person, who was God & perfect man, Well, what next? 2. Note 2. (saith he) that it is not any other mans person, that we mean, that Christ suffered in, but His own. Ans. And no man ever dreamed, that He either did, or could suffer, in any other man's physical person. But seing He was made sin for us, & so died in our room & stead, why may He not be said to have died in our Law-person? If a pledge, or hostage, suffer for those he standeth for, may not he be said to suffer in their Law-person? If a Surety be put in prison for the debtor, may he not be said to suffer in the debtor's Law-place, & in his person in Law-sense? He addeth. And we mean that He took upon Him the person of a sinner; in as much as He consented to suffer for sin. Ans. This is good, & we accept of it cheerfully in tantum, for it explaineth to us, in part, the meaning of these words, He made Him sin for us▪ And so (he addeth) personating here is not meant beco • ing any other mans person in Law-seuse; so as that other legally suffered what he did; but it is only his own persons becoming a sufferer, in the stead of sinners, for their sins. As the Apostle saith. He was made sin for us; that is, so far by Imputation, as that he undertook to suffer what sinners suffer, & for their sins. Ans. But when Christ came in the Law-place of sinners, & did substitute Himself, in their room, & suffered what they were obliged to suffer; sure, He took on their person, in a Lawsense, & they, for whom He suffered, can be said, in His, & in His Fathers designe, so far legally to have suffered, what He suffered, as never to be made to suffer the same themselves.

But he seeth, that this is but a wordy Controversie; & therefore to free the matter of ambiguity of words, he (pag. 77.) addeth several things, as 1. That as we hold, that Adam was the Natural Root or parent of Mankind; so also that Christ was the foederal root of all the saved, & in several respects (though not all) a second Adam. Ans. We hold, that Adam was not only the Natural Root, but he was also the federal Root of all mankinde: for the Covenant was made with him, and with all his posterity in him: and hence it was, that all sinned in him, & fell with him, in his first transgression. Rom. 5: 12. 1. Cor. 15: 20, 21.

He addeth. 2. Adam was but one single Natural person, nor did God (by err • ur, or arbitrary reputation) esteem or account Him to be any other, than he was. None of our persons were distinct persons in Adam, nor those persons, that now they are. Therefore we were not so personally in him, at his fall. But all our persons are in time & mediatly by our progenitors derived lineally from him, not as having been persons existent in him, but being persons caused remotely by him. Ans. Adam, it is true, was but one single Natural person, in a physical sense; yet in a Law-sense, as he was constitute the federal Head & Root, we were all that one Adam, or he was us all, representing all; & so did God esteem, or account him, not by errour, but by a Right Reputation, founded on His own Constitution. (2) None of our physical persons were distinct persons in him, yet our legal persons were in him, when he represented us all, as a federal Head. (3) We know, that our physical persons were only seminally, or virtually in him; & we grant also, that to be only virtually in Adam is terminus diminuens, as to personal inexistence; but I know not, how we could be personally in-existent in him, even when existent in a physical sense. But all this taketh not away that federal inexistence, whereby, in a Law-sense, we were in him, as our federal Head & Root. But, it seemeth, Mr. Baxter doth not acknowledge this, because he maketh our Natural relation to Adam to be the only reason of out partaking of his sin. We do not deny our Natural Interest in Adam, but we superadde to it this federal Interest. He saith. It is our Natural relation to Adam, supposed in God's Law, which is the reason of our participation in his sin & not any will or judgment of God, without or beyond our Natural Interest; for else it should be God, most properly, who by His arbitrary Imputation, should either make us sinners, or repute us such, when we are none. Ans. I have granted, that we have a Natural relation to Adam, but I adde, that that is not the sole ground or reason of our participation in his sin; but the federal relation, with the Natural relation. And hence it doth no way follow, that God doth properly make us sinners, or repute us such, when we are not, by His arbitrary Imputation: for this Imputation, being founded upon this double preconstituted relation, cannot be called meerly arbitrary; nay, nor could it be so called, though it were said to be solely founded upon this federal relation, more than when it is said to be grounded upon the Natural relation. Though in another sense, it might be so called as well, when said to be founded on the Natural, as when said to be founded on the federal Relation, God being the free Author & Constitutor of both.

3. He addeth. So Christ is, though not the Natural, yet the federal Adam & Root of Beleevers: When he satisfied & merited, we were not in Him, either as in Adam seminally, as in a Natural Generator, nor as existent persons; nor did God falsly so repute us to be. But He was then the Cause (materially) or had that virtus effectiva, which would justifie & Sanctifie & Glorifie us in due time. Ans. Christ, it is true, is no Natural; but a federal Root; & so keepeth Correspondence with the first Adam, a federal Root. (2) It is true also, we were not in Christ, when He satisfied, as in Adam, seminally, as in a Natural Generator: but yet the Elect were in Him, in a more noble & supernatural manner, as given of God to Him, & as undertaken for by Him, when He did substitute Himself in their Law-place, & became their Surety. (3) If Christ had only been the material cause, as having that virtus effectiva, how could He be called their federal Head? or how could they be said to be chosen in Him, before the foundation of the world? It was the nature of sinners (saith he) though not a sinful Nature, which He assumed: But that Nature, which He undertook, was existent in His Individual person, & no other individual person was existent in His existent personal Nature. What then? So that (he addeth) when we say it was the common Nature of Man, we mean only specificè▪ that Nature which is of the same species with all other mens, but not that which existed individually, in any, but himself. Ans. Notwithstanding of all this, Christ was a federal Head, & a Publick Person, undertaking for, and therein representing all those, that were given to Him to save; and this his following words confirme, when he saith. But it was individual persons, in whose stead, or place Christ suffered, & whom He undertook to justifie, sanctify & save, & gather into an holy Society to that end; & to that end, He undertook & performed His office, & merited all this by His perfect Righteousness; so that hereby He made Himself a federal Head & Root of an holy society (His Church) & when ever any person doth beleeve, & is united federally to Him, he then receiveth the effects of that, which was before in Christ, as a virtus effectiva. Ans. But Christ, being a federal Head to His own, whom in due time, He was to bring in to an holy Society, beleevers receive the effects of that, which was in Christ, as such a federal Head; which is more, than as a virtus effectiva, & Importeth His Obligation, as a Surety, to work these effects, & speaketh out His representing of them, as a publick Person, and paying their debt, according to His Undertaking, in the Covenant of Redemption.

Thereafter (pag. 78.) from this, That the Law made to Adam did not assigne Christ to this office, nor oblige Him to suffer for sinners, according to it, & that therefore He suffered not by that obligation, which bound us to suffer, but by the obligation of His own consent, he inferreth, that the Law of works took not Christ for the Civil, or legal person of Beleevers, more than it made Him such. Ans. But this consequence is denied; for when a debtor is lying in prison, a friend, who was not formerly obliged, undertaking to satisfie the Creditor & making satisfaction, is by Law taken for the legal person of the debtor, who is accordingly dealt with, as if he himself had satisfied the Creditor.

In the 4, 5. & 6. places, he tels us, That beleevers, receiving Christ Himself, receive title to His Grace, Spirit & Glory, & are personally & actually His Subjects &c, and have a right to all His conferred benefites; which right followeth not Immediatly to them from what Christ did, or suffered, but from the Covenant of grace; & therefore they have no right before the time, nor any, but on the Conditions specified in the Covenant. Ans. (1) Though they have no full, compleat, actual right, untill such time, as is condescended upon; yet by vertue of the compact betwixt Jehovah & the Mediator, wherein the Mediator undertook particularly, for those given unto Him, these may be said to have a real fundamental right, though that right be not subjected in them, nor pleadable by them, before the time appointed; yet a Right, or something equivalent (for I will not strive about words) must necessarily flow from Christ's Satisfying for them, and paying their debt, according to His Undertaking. As, when it is contracted, that the Eldest daughter of the marriage shall have such a summe of money, when she cometh to be married, or to be of such an age, that daughter hath another right unto that summe, than any other daughter hath, & that fundamentally from the contract & Agreement, though before the time designed, her right be not such, as she can plead it in Law, in order to the possessing of the summe (2.) Therefore the right, that Beleevers have, floweth from the Compact, & Christ's Suffering according to compact, though it be conveyed by the Covenant of Grace, & their possession of the Benefites be immediatly therefrom; as that daughters right to the summe is properly from the contract, though her actual possession according to the contract, be from her Marriage, or coming to that age. Though beleevers right to the actual possession of the benefites be so conveyed; & as to the conveyance, some be granted absolutly, as faith (as himself will confess) some upon condition of faith, that is, in that order, & according to that Methode, that faith shall preceed: Yet, in respect of God, their right to all is absolutly purchased by Christ; & so in a sense theirs, though not subjected in them, nor pleadable by them, till the time appointed come. This whole scheme of Mr. Baxter's seemeth to me to be founded upon, and to flow from his Notion of Universal Redemption, whereby he will have Christ to have died in the room & stead of all; which (to me) is in the room & place of none; & to have purchased the New Covenant, a Common good to all, whereby all that would performe the New Conditions, should have right to the benefites, as having obtained the same, by their performance of these proper Conditions; anteriour to which, there was no difference at all betwixt them & others; but this Scheme and the ground thereof I cannot owne.

7. He tels us, that as none, till he was a person, could be a person guilty of Adam's sin, nor when he was a person any sooner, than he was also guilty of his own inherent pravity, & none that had the use of reason was guilty of either, or both these only, without the guilt of his own actual sin. So none till he be a beleever is related, as a member of a perfectly Righteous Saviour; & that is done no sooner (in time) then he hath the inherent righteousness of his personal faith & federal consent, & that obligeth him to the further active Righteousness of a holy life. Ans. The Protas • s & Apodos • s seem not to agree, for as upon our personal existence, we become persons guilty of Adam's sin, & that before (as to nature, though not as to time) we have inherent pravity; because this is an Effect, Consequent & Punishment of the former: so upon our faith, which is our personal existing grace, corresponding to our personal existing in Nature, by our Natural being, should follow, as answering to this Imputation of Adam's guilt, the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness: but in stead of this, he mentioneth nothing, but a Relation as a member of a righteous Saviour; which (according to the comparison) should correspond to our relation to Adam, which is, in nature, before our partaking of his sin. (2) As answering to our inherent pravity, he should have named our justification, Adoption &c. as the effects of the Imputation of Christ's Righteous • ess; in stead of this, he nameth the Inherent righteousness of our personal faith & federal consent; thereby Importing that this federal consent is posteriour to our Relation; while as I suppose, he will say, that our Relation is upon the condition of our federal consent: Not to mention here his errour (hereafter discovered) of making faith to be considered here, as our personal Inherent Righteousness. Then he tels us. That all these three conjunct (though not coordinat) make up the total Righteousness of a Saint. viz. 1. our Relation to Christ, in Union, as to a perfectly Righteous Head, who fulfilled all Righteousness for us, to merite our justification (which is called Christ's Righteousness imputed to us, as being thus far reputed ours) 2. our penitent beleeving consent to his Covenant, which is the condition of the foresaid relation to Christ. 3. And our Sanctification. Ans. (1) Here we see, that Righteousness made the second Righteousness, which yet is the condition of the first; as if our Inherent pravity were the condition of the Imputation of Adam's sin to us (2) our Relation to Christ is not one & the same with the Imputation of Righteousness to us; no more than our relation to Adam is the same thing with the Imputation of his sin to us. (3) Thus we see, by asserting the cause, viz. our relation to Christ, he taketh away the effect viz. the Imputation of His Righteousness, as being no distinct thing: as if one should say, we are related to Adam, a sinful Head, who broke the Law for us; & this is called Adam's sin imputed to us, as being thus far reputed ours. But yet Christ's fulfilling all Righteousness for us (if that for us, were understood in the Scripture sense, and not according to the Socinian, or Arminian gloss) would abundantly ground the Imputation, we plead for, and that as a fruit of our Relation to Christ. Passing what he saith 8, as not worth the noticeing.

We come to see, what he saith 9. & lastly. Proposing this objection to himself, if Christ's person be given us, then His personal Righteousness is given us with it. He replieth thus. Yes, as His person is; He is not given us as proprietors & Lords, to become our own, at our dispose; nor is his person made one Person with each, or any of us. His person is not turned into ours, nor ours into his. Ans. This is all to no purpose; for no man, in his wits, either said so, or dreamed so, at any time. As the husband (saith he) is not the person of the wife, nor the King of each Subject: but as one, that hath a Great, wise, learned, Bountiful, Holy King or Husband, hath also his Greatness &c. as they have him, that is, as his perfections for their good, as far as his relation bindes him; but not as if his enduements were removed from him to them, or falsely reputed to be in them, or his person to be their persons: so here as we have a Christ, so we have a perfect Righteous Christ given us to be our federal head, when we beleeve; and the Righteousness, which is not in us, but in Him, is ours so far as to be for our good, as far as His office & Covenant do oblige Him. Ans. This savoureth of making Christ's dying for us, to be nothing else than His dying for our good, as Socinians say: and if it import more, (as it doth in truth) he cannot but see, that his simile here, hath nothing of a similitude in it; for the objection speaketh of Christ's person given to us, not as a great, wise &c. King is given to his Subjects; but as the Surety is given to the debtor, i.e. as one, whose payment of the debt, must be reckoned on the score of the debtor, in order to his liberation out of prison. He addeth. So that a Righteous Christ and therefore the Righteousness of Christ, are ours, relatively themselves, quoad jus beneficii; so as that we have right to these benefites by them, which we shall possess: and for the merites of His Righteousness, we are conditionally justified and saved, before we beleeve, and actually after. Ans. All this jus beneficii is but remote; for in the foregoing pag. he told us, as we heard, that this right doth not flow immediatly from what Christ did and suffered, but from his Covenant of Grace: and I think, he should have said rather from their performance of the condition: for the Covenant conveyeth no title, but conditionally, he knoweth, and therefore can give no title or Right, untill the condition be performed; upon the performance of which, the conditional Title becometh actual. And further, there is no more here said than what a Socinian will say; and particularly Sclightingius pro Socino. cont. Meisnerum pag. 250. whose words we cited above towards the beginning of our XIII. Chapter.

CHAP. XVII. Reasons enforcing the practice of the Truth, hithertill Vindicated.

WE have now, at some length, as the Lord was pleased to help, essayed to vindicat this noble & fundamental Truth, of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, in order to the obtaining of this life of justification; and ere we proceed, I judge, it will not be amiss to press the practice of this Truth, & the hearty & practical embracing thereof, by several Arguments & Considerations: for it will not be enough for us, to know the Theory, and to be orthodox in our judgments, as to these Necessary & soul-concerning truthes; but we must also practise them, that it may appear, we do beleev them in very deed, and that we beleeve them with the heart; & this will be the best way to be kept orthodox, and stedfast in the truth.

I shall therefore propose a few Considerations, moving to the practice of this so necessary & concerning a Truth. As

1. This way of justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, the Mediator & Surety, is a way, thath hath the testimony of both Law & Prophets, confirming it; & is now more clearly revealed & manifest under the Gospel dispensation, than it was formerly. Rom. 3: 21, 22. But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law & the Prophets, even the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of Christ, unto all, & upon all them that beleeve. And the same Apostle tels us Rom. 1: 16, 17. That he was not ashamed of the Gospel▪ for it is the Power of God unto Salvation to every one that beleeveth &c. And what is the ground & reason of this: for therein (saith he) is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, the just shall live by • aith. This then must be a very sure & saife way, being thus attested & witnessed by all, that are worthy of credite, in this matter & a way, that is one & the same, as to its substance, both before the Law, under the Law, & now under the Gospel, though it be now more clearly unfolded & explained, since the coming & exaltation of the blessed Mediator, than it was before His coming; when it was darkly revealed & shadowed under the Mosaical Ceremonies & Observances. None need to feare a Miscarrying, or a disappointment, in following of this way, which even the Law it self, or the Mosaical observances did point forth, in the daily & yeerly Sacrifices, pointing forth the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, & on which the offerers were to lay their hands, before they were to be offered up, in token of their devolving & laying their sin & guilt upon the same, as the the type of that one & only acceptable Sacrifice, that was to come in the fuluess of time, & was to satisfie justice for their sinnes; & to shew forth, & declare their faith, relying thereon, & expecting acceptance there through, as we see Levit. 1: 4 & 3: 2. & 16: 21. And a way, which also the Prophets, or the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, did testifie, and bear witness to, when it testified before hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 1 Pet. 1: 10. &c. So Peter, in his Sermon to Cornelius, told him Act. 10: 43. that to Him, (i.e. to Christ) gave all Prophets witness, that through His Name, whoso ever beleeveth in Him, shall receive Remission of sins.

2. It is the way, which all the Ancients took, & found to be a saife & sure way; & therefore it should be to us a way, worthy of all acceptation. Abraham beleeved God, preaching to him the Gospel; & the object of his faith, or the summe & substance of the Gospel, that is, the Righteousness of Christ, was imputed to him; & thereby he was justified: so doth Paul clear the matter to us Rom. 4: 1, 2, 3. What shall we say then, that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found &c. for if Abraham were justified by works, he hath to glory, but not before God: for what saith the Scripture? Abraham beleeved God, & it was counted to him for righteousness. And if we enquire, what this was, which Abraham did beleeve? or where in was it, that he beleeved God? Paul tels us Gal. 3: 8. That it was the Gospel. And the Scripture fore-seeing, that God would justifie the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, in thee shall all Nations be blessed. Now, though these words, in thee shall all Nations be blessed, be not expressly repeated Gen. 15. where it is said, that Abraham beleeved God, & it was imputed to him for righteousness: Yet this was the chiefe & principal part of that promise of multiplying of his seed; & was therefore both before this time mentioned together with that promise Gen. 12: 2, 3. & twice there-after to wit. Gen. 18: 18. & 22; 17, 18. And further, this is called the Covenant, which God made with the fathers Act. 3: 25. and therefore it must have been the chiefe thing, which Abraham's faith did fix upon, who is therefore called the Father of the faithful, as being the Father of many nations, Rom. 4: 16, 17. And this is the sure promise, that is made sure to all the seed, & must be laid hold on by faith. Rom. 4: 16. And upon this account, Abraham is said to have seen the day of Christ, & to have been glad Ioh. 8: 56. And as Abraham took this way; so did others take it, before him: such as Abel, who by faith offered unto God a more excellent Sacrifice, than Cain; by which he obtained witness, that he was righteous. Heb. 11: 4. And Enoch, who pleased God by Faith: and Noah, who became heir of the Righteousness which is by faith. Heb. 11: 5, 6, 7. So David under the Law, describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth Righteousness, without works &c. Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. Psal. 32: 1, 2. This then being such a paved way, we must close with it, and seek after no other.

3. This way is by getting or putting on a Righteousness, with which God will be well pleased, and with which alone, he is & will be satisfied; for it is called the Righteousness of God Rom. 3: 21, 22. And the Righteousness, which is of God by faith Phil. 3: 9. as being not only a Righteousness, which God hath found out, who knew best, how to bring about the Salvation of his chosen ones, to his own glory, & which alone will be acceptable to Him; but, as being also the Righteousness of one, who is God, even of Jesus Christ, God-man, the Saviour & Cautioner, and this is made over to beleevers, & imputed to them, and they receive it by faith, that it may become theirs, and they may stand before justice clothed with it, & thereby answere all that Law, & justice can say against them, or lay to their charge. Can sinners finde out & fall upon a Righteousness, more excellent in it self, or more pleasing or satisfying unto God, & whereupon a distressed soul pursued by justice and the • errours of the Lord can with more confidence rest and relye, then this is, which is the Righteousness of God; the Righteouness wrought by him, who was and is the Fathers equal, God over all, blessed for ever, and is Lord, our Righteousness Ier. 23: 5. & is made of God to us Righteousness 1 Cor. 1: 30? What can sinners invent, that can once be compared here-with? Can any thing; which they themselves can do, yeeld more ground of Peace & Confidence? No certainely.

4. This way demonstrateth both the Justice & Mercy of God, & so a way wherein the Lord hath given a great demonstration of his wonderful Grace & Mercy: and a way also, wherewith justice is fully satisfied. This the Apostle doth fully declare Rom. 3: 24, 25, 26. being justified freely by his grace, through she redemption, that is in Iesus Christ. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his Righteousness to declare I say, at this time his Righteousness, that he might be just, &c. And this should commend it higly unto us, that when neither Angel's, nor men, could have found out a way, how Mercy & Grace might have shined forth, in the Salvation of poor sinners; & with all how Justice should have had satisfaction, the Infinite Wisdom of God, hath found out this way, whereby Justice and Mercy are no more, as it were, at odds, but concurring to the justification of a poor sinner. Whatever way else we take, should we with these Micah. 6: 7. come before the Lord, & bow ourselves before the high God, should we come before him with brunt Offerings, with calves of a yeer old. It were all in vaine: He would not be pleased with thousands of rams nor with ten thousands of rivers of oil. Should we give our first born for our transgression & the fruit of our body, for the sin of our Soul: What would that avail? It could be no Satisfaction to Justice: the Lord would not be just, in justifying such sinners.

5. The sad disappointment, that such, as took another course to the end they might be justified & Accepted, have met with, should be as an hand upon the margine to us, to beware of tradeing in the footsteps of their folly, lest we fall into the same pit of ruine. We read Rom. 9: 31, 32. that Israel, which followed after the Law of righteousness, did not attaine to the Law of righteo • sness; Wherefore? because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law; for they stumbled at that stumbling stone. They were at much paines to follow after the Law of Righteousness, thinking thereby to attaine unto Righteousness, & so to be justified; but after all their paines & travail, they did misse their mark, & came short of what they projected: They would not take the way of Faith, they would not by faith lay hold on Christ, and put on His Righteousness, but they stumbled at that stumbling stone; they sought after a Righteousness, by their own works, which they supposed were the works of the Law, but were not so indeed; for they sought after the Law of Righteousness, but as it were by the works of the Law: And therefore they could not reach their intended end, how confident so ever they were in their way. So againe Rom. 10: 3, 4. it is said of them for they being ignorant of God's Righteousness, & going about to establish their own Righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the Righteousness of God; for Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness, to every one that beleeveth. They would not follow God's way, nor submit to that Righteousness, which is twice here called the Righteousness of God; but in the pride of their heart, would set up & establish their own Righteousness, and make it stand on its feet, and therefore would not be beholden to Christ, & to his Righteousness, nor look to him by faith, who was the end of the Law for righteousness, to every one that beleeveth: and so they lost all. This sad example should cause all look about them, & beware of intertaining a prejudice at the Gospel-way of Justification.

6. From this Instance, we may also take notice of another Consideration, to wit, That to refuse this Gospel-way of Justification argueth intolerable pride of heart, & haughtiness of minde: It is observed of the Jewes here, that they would not submit themselves unto the Righteousness of God; they would not bow so low, nor humble themselves so far, as to deny their own Righteousness, & condescend to take on Christ; but in their pride & stoutness of heart, they thought, though the bricks were fallen, they should build all up againe with their own hewn stones, & so they went about to underprop & set up their own Righteousness, that it might stand. And what an intolerable thing is this, for beggers & dyvours to be so proud of nothing, & to refuse to accept of & be satisfied with the payment of a Cautioner? As then we would not have this guilt of contemning in the pride of our hearts, the way that the Wisdom of God hath found out, & the Righteousness of God, let us not refuise our own Salvation, & stand out against this established, sure & approven way of taking on Christ's Righteousness.

7. We may take notice of another Consideration here, to move us to close with this only way, to wit, That the refuising of this way, as it argueth ignorance both of the worth, & of the excellency & of the necessity of this way of Justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ; so it argueth a rooted prejudice against Christ, and the way of justification through him, & a judicial stroke of wrath from the Lord upon such, as wilfully & pertinaciously refuise this Gospel way: for it is said of the jewes here, Rom. 10: 3. that they were ignorant of God's Righteousness: And Chap. 9: 32. that they stumbled at that stumbled stone, they brake their necks on that, which was the only meane of saving them, & that in the righteous judgment of God, according to what was foretold Esai. 8: 14, 15. where it is said, that the Lord of hosts, who would be for a Sanctuary to his own, should be for a stone of stumbling, & for a rock of offence; for a gin & for a snare & many among them shall stumble & fall, & be broken, & be snared & be taken. And this is further confirmed by that which Peter saith 1. Pet. 2: 7, 8. but unto them, which be disobedient, the stone, which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner. And a stone of stumbling & a rock of offence, to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient, whereunto also they were appointed. The consideration of this should cause all look about them.

8. It is also considerable, that such as will not submit themselves unto this Righteousness of God, have no way to betake themselves unto; no course that they can follow, in order to their Justification, but that, which is peremtorily rejected of the Lord, & condemned in his word; that is, the way of their Owne Works. These Jewes, who would not submit themselves unto the Righteousness of God, could fall upon no other course, but the establishing of their own Righteousness: And there is no other way mentioned in Scripture but these two, either by Works, or by Faith; that is, either by the Righteousness of Christ, or by our own Righteousness; hence the Apostle doth alwayes oppose these two to other, & by disputing against the Law, our Works, or our Righteousness according to the Law, he establisheth and confirmeth the true & only way, through the Righteousness of Christ; & by pleading for this, he destroyeth the other, and as there are no third way distinct from both, so there is no commixture of both, to make up a third, in apart agreeing with both: for grace & works cannot agree to gether to make one composition. Rom. 11: 6. So that what ever different Wayes, and Modes or Methodes, men excogitate in this matter, if they step aside from the pure way of grace, the way of Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, they must of necessity close with that way, which is through Works, & against which Paul hath disputed so much, in his Epistles. Now what madness is it, to embrace such a way, in whole, or in part (& if in part, it must also be in whole, for as is said, grace and works will not mixe) against which the Apostle hath argued so much, both in his Epistle to the Romans, & to the Galatians?

9. This way of Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ is the only way to Peace & Reconciliation with God; as the Apostle concludeth Rom. 5: 1. Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Iesus Christ. Peace with God standeth only upon this foundation, to wit, Justification by Faith; that is, Justification through the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us by God, & received by faith. People may dream of obtaining Peace & Reconciliation another way; but they will be miserably disappointed, for, as we said above, justice can be no other way satisfied & till iustice be satisfied, there is no Reconciliation, no Peace. What a miserable case then are persons in, who will not submit unto this way? They may frame a way to themselves, and be very Zealous in it, as the Jewes had a Zeal of God Rom. 10: 2. & be at much expense of duties & toile therein, as the Pharisee, who fasted twice a week, and yet attaine to no Peace or Reconciliation with God. All then, who are desireous of this blessed Peace, must choose this way, and close with it heartily, and this should be a strong enducement unto them thereunto. We should remember what Paul said 2 Cor. 5: 18, 19, 21. God hath reconciled us to himself by Iesus Christ & that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, but how was this: See vers. 21. for he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. This, even this only, is the way to Peace & Reconciliation with God, and who ever take a way, different from this, or will not cordially close herewith, must resolve to abide in that estate of enmity, whereinto they are by Nature.

10. This way of Justification, as it is the only way of Peace & Reconciliation with God, so it layeth the ground of solide Joy & Rejoyceing in hope of the glory of God & of Glorying in tribulation also, as Paul informeth us. Rom. 5: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Being justified by faith, through Jesus Christ, we have through him, accesse by faith, in to this grace wherein we stand, & rejoyce in hope of the glory of God; & not only so, but we glory in tribulations also, knowing that tribulation worketh patience, & patience experience, & experience hope, & hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts &c. Men may, I know, promise to themselves much Peace, Joy and Consolation, in their own false way, & may also deceive themselves, as the Pha • isee did, when he thanked God, he was not like the publican: but how had will the discovery of the deceite and cheatry prove in end? God's way is the only way, that will yeeld all these desirable things, in truth & reality: and therefore we would do well, to follow this way alone.

11. Moreover this way of Justification will only lay the sure & unfailing foundation of true Holiness and Sanctification, and hence are the most spiritual, convincing & moving Arguments unto the study of holiness, only to be taken; as we see the Apostle clearing it in his Epistle to the Romans Chap 6. & 7. & 8. having laid down, in the preceeding Chapters, as a sure ba. sis thereunto, the only Gospel-way of Iustification. Men may think, that the pressing of Justification by our own works should prove the most effectual Meane & Perswasive unto the real study of holiness, & a most infallible Argument to set people awork to follow holiness with all their might: But experience sufficiently proveth that all such, who by their doctrine lay more or less of their weight upon their owne works, in their Justification, are so far from outstriping others in the spiritual exercise of true holiness, that for the most part the very contrary is too too manifest: and howbeit Adversaries to Gospel-Justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, object to the Asserters thereof, that thereby they are Enemies to the study of holiness, & give way to laziness & negligence▪ in that exercise; yet, not only is their alleigance groundless, seing we press holiness upon the same grounds, that the Apostle doth, who oft times meeteth with this objection, in his way of declaring & pressing the Gospel-way of justification: but also experience showeth, that such as have fled to Christ, for Righteousness, have another way of Communion with God, in all holy conversation; & their walkeing in all the wayes of God; hath a spiritual lustre & heavenly beauty, being compared with the walk of others, strangers in practice, and in opinion, to the Gospel-way of being Justified through Faith in Christ.

12. Whoso ever reject this truth, and do not accepte of this way of justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, received & leaned to by faith, do interpretativly say as much, as that Christ is dead in vaine: for the Apostle tels us Gal. 2: 21. that he did not frustrat the grace of God; for if righteousness come by the Law, then Christ is dead in vaine. thereby teaching us, that the crying up of the Law, & the Righteousness thereof, and urging people to seek after a Righteousness, by which they may be justified, in their Obedience to the Law, is a real frustrating of the grace of God, & a declaring that Christ is dead in vaine: and consequently, whoever seek after a Righteousness, consisting in their personal obedience to the Law, & will not accepte of, nor heartily & practically close with the Gospel-way of justification, through faith in Christ, do really frustrate, so far as in them lyeth, all the grace of God, manifested in, & brought to light by the Gospel, where this noble way of recovering sinners is revealed, & more clearly & fully explained, than it was formerly. And it is a saying upon the matter, that Christ hath died in vaine: for if he died not to satisfie for sinners, after he had finished his course of Obedience, & so to make up a compleat Righteousness, which might answere all the necessities of sinners, lying under the sentence of a broken Law; and having no way, without Christ, to obtaine the Crown of life, but by perfect & personal Obedience to the whole Law, which was & is to them utterly impossible: If, I say, Christ died not for this end, he died in vaine; & all such, as will not heartily imbrace this way, do on the matter say, he died not for this end; & so, as far as they can, they make him to have died in vaine.

13. This Consideration might also have force with us, that what Paul taught, as to this matter, he did also practise, & sweetly complye with; thereby casting us a copie, in his own practice: for thus he speaketh Phil. 3: 8, 9. Yea doubtless & I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledg of Christ Iesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, & do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, & be found in him, not having mine own Righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness, which is of God by faith. So Gal. 2: 16. knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ; even we have beleeved in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ &c. If therefore, we would be sure in this matter, we must take this course, which is so corresponding in all points, with the Gospel-doctrine, in this matter. Therefore who ever would expect to have it going well with them for evermore, must resolve upon this course, to be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ, and get on that rob of Righteousness, which is had through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith.

CHAP. XVIII. Some of the duties of such, as live the life of Justification, proposed.

IN the last place, we shall mentione this Use of the Truth, formerly cleared & confirmed, in reference to such as have attained unto this life of justification, through faith, which every one may readily see, That it is the duty of such, as are made partakers of this life, to beware of such things, as may & will provoke the Lord to anger; & will be unsutable for them, who are thus graciously advanced to such an high State & Privilege of grace; & to minde such duties, as do most suite such, as are so highly advanced, and so greatly obliged to him, that hath thus called them effectually, by his grace, and hath wrought up their hearts unto a full compliance with the Gospel-contrivance of free grace. Many such particular duties might here be mentioned: but I shall only pointe at a few, to which others may be reduced.

1. Such, as live this life of Gospel Justification, should beware of intertaining thoughts of pride, or of boasting of any thing, they have freely and graciously received▪ and particularly, they should guard against boasting in this matter, that they are preferred to others, and brought out of a state of death, when others are left yet to lye thereinto. This whole matter is so contrived, and so wisely framed, that no ground of boasting, either before God, or man, may be left unto Man; but that every one may celebrate the praise of Free Grace. Therefore Justification is not by works, or by our obedience to the Law; for then the justified man, being justified upon the account of his own works, or of the works of righteousness, which he hath done, should have ground of glorying, though not before God, yet before Men; as having by his own sweating, working & doing, obtained that, which others by their laziness, negligence & not doing, have come short of. Paul tels us this expresly. Rom. 4: 2. If Abraham were justified by works, he hath to glory, but not before God: and this is further confirmed vers. 4. Now to him, that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. So that if Justification were by works, Justification it self, & all the Consequences thereof should be due debt unto the worker, and his reward: and so, as the hireling may boast of his labour, when he gets his hire & reward; so the justified man, if justification were by the works of the Law, might boast of his own paines & diligence, as having received but his reward, and that which was due to him of debt, and not of grace. But now, that all mouthes may be stopped, & no flesh might glory, or have ground of boasting, in themselves, and before others, the Lord hath contrived a far other way of justification, to wit, by Faith alone, whereby the Man goeth out of himself, renunceth all his own Righteousness, prosesseth himself poor, naked & miserable, & a plaine dyvour, and utterly non-solvendo, & layeth hold on a compleet & alsufficient Righteousness, in Jesus Christ; and so hath no ground of boasting or glorying even before men: for it is nothing that is in him; or that he doth, that is that Righteousness, upon the account of which he is Justified; but only the Righteousness of Christ without him. It is not his faith, not his works, nor his Righteousness; but Christ's Righteousness is equally imputed to all beleevers, to the weakest beleever, as well as to the strongest; and so the strongest beleever hath no ground of boasting before the weakest. Where is boasting-then? (saith the Apostle Rom. 3: 27.) It is excluded by what Law? Of works? nay; but by the Law of faith.

2. Upon the other hand, let all such glory in the Lord, and in his free grace & gracious workings; Let them say, when they reflect on this matter, not unto us Lord, not unto us, but unto thee be glory, seing the matter is so contrived, as that all the justified may see, that God may only have the glory of all, & that none ought to share with him; that he alone should weare the crown; & all his glorified ones should most cheerfully cast their crownes down at his feet. But of him (saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 1: 30, 31.) are ye in Christ Iesus, who of God is made unto us Wisdom, Righteousness, & Sanctification & Redemption: that, according as it is written, he that glorieth, Let him glory in the Lord. Christ is made all things unto & for his people, & they have all of God through him, that no flesh should glory in his presence, as it is said vers. 29. Let all such therefore, as are made partaker of this rich & honourable Privilege, comply sweetly & cheerfully with this designe of God, to have God alone exalted, and the mouth of all flesh stopped, that he who glorieth, may alone glory in the Lord.

3. Let such as are thus advanced, minde the great duty of holiness, and of growing in grace, and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ; The way of faith is not to make void the Law, but it doth establish it Rom. 3: 31. as Christ is made of God unto is Righteousness, so is he made Sanctification. As he is Priest to reconcile us to God, and become Righteousness to us, so is he a King to cause us walk in the Lord, & to subdue our spiritual enemies, and so become Sanctification to us. It is the language of the flesh & of corruption, to argue from this Change & advancement unto a liberty to sinne. Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? will the flesh object. But the Apostle answereth. Rom. 6: 2. &c. God forbid, how shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? It is repugnant to the nature of that state, whereinto now they are bro • ght, to give way to sin: Therefore the justified should minde what they are called to, & what new grounds, new advantages, new helps, new encouragements they have unto holiness, that they had not before, all plainly & fully set down by Paul Rom. 6. & eise where.

4. How should they commend & cry up the free grace of God, and that love that visited them, when they were lying in their blood, and no eye pityed them. They were ungodly & without strength, yet Christ died for them Rom. 5: 6. and the Lord did justifie the ungodly, even them, who had no righteousness of their owne, nor nothing to commend them unto him, Rom. 4: 5. Yea where sin abounded, grace did much more abound Rom. 5: 20. Not only had they nothing more then others to commend them unto God, but even they had less, and • et God through free grace set his Love upon the less worthy; for, saith Paul (1 Cor. 1: 26, 27, 28.) ye see your calling, Brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world, to confound the wise; & God hath chosen the weak things of the world, and things which are despised hath God chosen, and things which are not, to bring to naught things which are. That no flesh should glory in his presence. Should not the thoughts of this raise their wondering, & cause them speak to the commendation of the rich and free grace of God?

5. Let such as are brought into this state of life, wherein they have peace with God, and are reconciled to Him, through Jesus Christ, carry as persones no more strangers unto him, & as forraigners, but as now madenigh by the blood of Jesus; & therefore let such remember, that through him, they have an access by one Spirit unto the Farher, being now fellow-citisens with the Saints, and of the houshold of God Ephes. 2: 13, 14, 18, 19. Rom. 5: 2. Therefore should improve this advantage, both for their own good and for the good of others; & should exercise communion & fellowshipe with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ & so walk with him. as agreed with Him, & have their conversation in heaven. Hath the Lord brought them into his houshold, yea & admitted them to his presence, that they may kisse his hand, & stand before his face continually, in the lower chamber of presence; and should they carry as yet estranged from him? Is He at peace with them, and should they have jealous thoughts of him? Is He reconciled unto them, and should they carry, as keeping up some grudge against Him?

6. Such should account this state, whereinto now they are brought, their only blessedness here below. Even as David (saith Paul Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8.) also describeth the blessedness of the Man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works; saying, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sinnes are covered: blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin. Here is the poor self-condemned sinners blessedness, that he hath a righteousness imputed to him, who had none of his owne, and who thereupon hath his iniquities forgiven, covered, & not imputed. And such as are made partakers of this blessedness, should account it their happiness, that how ever it be with them, as to outward things in the world, yet they are now brought within the Covenant, and are covered with the mantle of Christ's Righteousness and have all their iniquities covered, cast into the midst of the sea, so that they shall never be reckoned upon their score.

7. This should be aground for them of glorying in the Lord, in the hardest condition, they can be into in the world; being thus justified, they should glory in tribulations knowing that they can suffer no loss o • disadvantage thereby, but on the contrary reap much good and advantage; for tribulation worketh in such as are thus justified, and at peace with God, patience, and patience experience, & experience hope, & hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost. Ought they not then to carry under all oppressions, persecutions, hard usages of men, upon the account of owning Christ & his Interest, as persons that are upon the gaining hand, and reaping much spiritual advantage, being now brought through grace into such a state of life? And how would they hereby glorify God in the world?

8. The consideration of their present state of life, should cause them triumph, in the midst of all difficulties & temptations, that they shall meetwith in their way, as knowing, that the life of justification, whereof now they are made partakers, shall continue: and that it shall end in the life of glory; for whom the Lord justifieth, them he also glorifieth. Rom. 8: 30. Who shall then lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? It is God that justifieth: who is he that condemneth? Who shall then separat such from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or persecution, or distress, or famine, or nakedness, or perill, or sword? Nay in all these things they are more then conquerours, through him that loved them: Rom. 8: 33, 34, 35, 37. Hear how Paul concludeth that matter for himself & others vers. 38, 32. for I am perswaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor Powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God: which is in Christ Iesus, our Lord. Should not therefore such carry, as persons that cannot be made miserable? How much doth the Apostle insist on this, and cleare it from this ground Rom. 5: 9, 10. saying, much more then being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him, for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God, by the death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And againe vers. 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life, by Iesus Christ, our Lord. There being then a sure ground of confidence & assurance of life & of compleet salvation, laid in justification, all such are called to rejoice in hope of the glory of God Rom, 5: 2. And to have confidence in the Lord, that he will perfect what he hath begun & to rest assured, that all they, which receive abundance of grace, & of the gift of righteousness, shall reigne in life by one Jesus Christ. Rom. 5: 17.

9. Yea particularly, the consideration of their many sinnes should not discourage them, or cause them despond: for being now justified, all their bygone sins are pardoned, & shall not be by the Lord laid to their charge againe, however the memory of them may humble them, & cause them run to the fountaine of the blood of Jesus; & all their future sins shall be pardoned, according the Gospel grounds, & after the Gospel-methode, so that they shall not prejudge them of their promised possession of glory and life everlasting. Now the free gift is of many offences, unto justification Rom. 5: 16. There is a sure way laid down, in the Gospel, whereby all their sins shall be taken away, and the very body of death shall be killed more & more dayly, so that they shall not finally perish, what ever Satan, & body of death within shall do, to prejudge them of the promised inheritance. Hence the Apostle inferreth from his foregoing discourse Rom. 8: 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to then, which are in Christ Jesus.

10. Such as are thus justified, should follow the example of Paul Phil. 3: 7, 8, 9. and so account such things less for Christ, which formerly were gaine yea & count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ, Jesus, their Lord, yea & account them but dung, that they may win Christ, and be found in him; Here should their heart & delight be: about this should their whole occupation be, to win and gaine Christ more, to know him & the power of his Resurrection and the followshipe of his sufferings, & to be made conformable unto his death vers. 10. that hereby Christ may be their gaine, their glory, & their all. How jealous should they be of their deceitful hearts, that nothing be admitted, to share of the glory due to Christ, or to possesse any of that room in the heart, that is due to him? He should have the throne, for He is well worthie of it: And whatever cometh in competition with him, be it within us, or without us, should be rejected that He alone may be exalted in our souls.

11. Such as have been made partaker of this royal life of justification, through a Crucified Christ, laid hold on by faith, should labour to keep this doctrine pure both by word & deed, so far as they can, that 〈◊〉 grace of God, that so eminently shineth forth therein, may not be darkned by mens erroneous apprehensions; & that so much the rather, that Satan without & corruption within many, are so far at enmity with this doctrine of the grace of God, that they laboure by all meanes, either more directly, or more indirectly to perver • tit, & to presse for a mixture of works upon one consideration, or other, in this matter, which it will not admit: and that because, it is so crosse & contrary to the corrupt inclinations of Man, who is so proud of nothing, that he will not be beholden to Christ for less and for more, and for all. We see Paul was most jealous in this matter, and most zealous for the truth, & therefore on all occasions did assert & vindicate it, as we may see especially in his Epistle to the Galatians, where he did so zealously withstand Peter Chap. 2: 14. and immediatly did state the question, vers. 16. saying, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ, even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ & not by the works of the Law &c. adding vers. 18. that he for his part, would not build againe the things, which he had destroyed, & so make himself a transgressour. Nor would he vers. 21. frustrate the Grace of God.

12. Finally all such, as have by faith laid hold on Christ, & his righteousness, and are by faith justified, and so made partaker of this life through faith in Christ, must resolve to abide in Christ by faith, that life may be preserved, and by new acts of faith dayly on Christ, get as it were new breath, that their life may be continued, and thus live continually the life of justification by faith, & by faith take their new sinnes to Christ, that they may be done away in his blood; for the Righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, the just shall live by Faith; But of this we are to speak more hereafter.

CHAP. XIX. Of the Life of Justification, as to its continuance.

WHen it is said, that the just shall live by faith, there is a State pointed forth, & a Condition intimated, that is not momentany, & of short continuance, but such a condition, or change of state is hold forth, as is of a lasting Nature; not only because Life doth connote some permanency, for a longer, or for a shorter time; but chiefly because this Scriptural axiome saith, especially as else where applied by the Spirit of the Lord, that the just▪ or justified man, hath through faith a life, in the worst of times, & that he is made partaker of that privilege of life, which shall prove lasting & continueing, to the end, a life, that is keeptin, fed & nourished by Faith. Having spoken therefore of this life of Justifi on, as begun; that we may more fully explaine the nature of it, we must speak a litle of it also, as continued.

But first, we must premit some things to shew, what that Justification is, of the continuance of which we here speak; and what we do not hereby understand, when we speak of the continuance of the Life of Justification.

1. We do not speak here of Justification, which Antinomians tell us, is from Eternity; for that can be nothing, but God's eternal Purpose to justifie; and which cannot more be called Justification, than his eternal purpose to Condemne the Reprobate, & to save the Elect, can be called condemnation & Salvation: and we can no more say, That there was a Justification of any man from Eternity, than that there was a Condemnation, or Salvation of men from eternity; we must distinguish betwixt God's Purposes, & the Effects, which he hath purposed: His purposes are indeed eternal: but the Effects or Events purposed, have their being in time, according to the Season, meane and Methode, when & whereby God hath purposed to effectuate them. And sure we are, that Justification, whereof the Scripture speaketh, is a relative change wrought in Man, in time, when and not before, he laith hold on Christ by Faith, according to the tenor of the Gospel.

2. Nor do we meane here, that Justification, which the same Antinomians, call only declarative in this life: for the true Gospel Justification is a real Relative Change, whereby the beleever is brought out of a State of Wrath and Judgment: where they were lying under the Curse of the Law, and the sentence thereof, unreconciled to God, and enemies to him, having their sinnes lying upon then, according to the sentence of the Law, & therefore strangers to God's favoure & countenance, and so without God & without Christ; & brought into a new State of Peace, Pardon, Reconciliation & Friendshipe with God, of which we spoke above Chap. V. We cannot then look upon the Iustification, mentioned & explained in the Scriptures, and of which we have hitherto spoken, as a meer Declaration to the beleevers Conscience of what God did from Eternity; as if the admittance into favoure, and Pardoning of sinnes, were nothing but his Declaration to their consciences, that they were accepted from eternity, & had pardon from eternity: a notion, sure, that hath no feeting or foundation in the Scriptures.

3. We do not here speak of that, which some call Baptismal Iustification, & whereby they say, all Infants baptized are justified; & which they must yeeld to be such as can & doth meeth with a final & total intercision, yea & amission, as to many; & so be quite of another nature, from that which adult beleevers partake of, from which there is no final or total Apostasie to be granted, according to the Scriptures. But we owne no such Justification of all baptized Infants.

4. Nor yet do we here speak of that, which others, being more wary, must owne, as consequentially following upon their opinion of Baptismal Regeneration of all baptized elect infants, to wit, a Baptismal Iustification of all baptized elect infants, it being certain, that there can be no Regeneration, without a corresponding Justification: for as such a Regeneration is not clearly revealed in the Scriptures, so, were it granted, no Actual Justification, but only a Seminal & Potential Justification could be hence inferred; because such as the Regeneration is said to be, by such as maintaine this opinion, such must the Justification be; but this Regeneration, which is thus owned, is only said to be Initial, Seminal, or Potential, & is distinguished from Actual Regeneration (See D. Burges of Baptismal Regeneration. pag. 14, 15▪) As concerning the justification of Infants, though we cannot say, that there is no such thing, yet, as the knowledge of the way of the Lords effectuating it, doth not much concerne us; so the Scriptures are spareing in speaking of that Subject; Sure, the Lord hath a way of uniteing their hearts to Christ, and of justifying Regenerating & Saving such of them, as die in their Infancy, & belong to the Election of Grace; though we cannot distinctly understand, & determinatly explaine the manner how. It is more of our concernment to enquire after & know the way, how adult persones come to partake of these Privileges.

5. We do not here speak of that Justification, which some call a Iustification of the cause, and distinguish from that, which they call, a justification of the person: for that is but the justification of a person falsly accused, as to some particular, as David was frequently accused of many things, by his Adversaries, of which he was Innocent, laying to his charge crimes, he knew not, about which he was in case (as we finde he did several times in his Psalmes) to appeal unto God, the righteous Iudge, being conscious to himself of no guilt in the particulars alledged, & knowing his own innocency, in the sight of God, who knew all things: Such was the matter of that question, concerning Job's sinceritie so much agitated betwixt him, & his friends, in the book of Iob, and at length decided in Iob's favours, by God himself; for though this was not, concerning one or a few particular acts, but concerning his whole deportment, and concerning his State before God, upon the account of his deportment, and the Lord's dispensations with him; yet it was a justification of his Cause, rather than of his Person; for in the justification of our Persons, we have to do immediatly with God, and not with man; and the question was properly about a matter of fact, to wit, whether he had been a real beleever, or an hypocrite, though such a matter of fact, as meerly concerned his whole State.

6. Nor do we here speak of that justification, even as to our state, which is before men, or in the judgment of men, which oft proceedeth upon mistakes and unsure grounds; as the now-mentioned instance of Iob's friends evidenceth: and so varieth, according to the various judgments & apprehensions of men, yea and of the same Man, at several times, according as the grounds, whereupon he judgeth, are to him clear, or dark: Neither is this sentence or judgment of men, who are but fallible, and judge by outward appearance, not being able to see into the heart, and judge how matters are there, alwayes according to truth; even though according to that judgment of Charity, which the Law of God requireth: Nor is it Constant and equable.

7. Nor do we speak of that Iustification, whereof the Apostle Iames speaketh Chap. 2. which is not the justification before God, whereof the Apostle Paul speaketh, in his Epistles; but the evidencing, proving and demonstrating thereof, by effects and works obvious to the eyes of others and demonstrative of the cause; Those I grant will oft admit of an intercision, through Temptation, and the prevalency of Corruption, and so the cause or true justification may, as to this manifestation, he eclipsed, though not in it self.

8. Far less do we here speak, of a groundless, fancied & supposed justification, whether in the apprehension of deluded persons themselves, or of others: for this is no true Iustification, but a meer delusion, as to themselves, and a conjecture, as to others: and the sooner this be quite cast away and renunced, the better.

9. Nor do we here speak of that Iustification, which is in the court of mans own conscience, or as it is there, and opposed to that Iustification, which is in God's court; for it is certaing, this Iustification, which is said to be in the court of conscience, is but a manifestation of the other unto the mans conscience, and is some times had, & sometimes missed; sometimes it is more clear, some times more dark, and therefore can be oft repeated and reiterated, and intended and remitted; yea and some may for a long time if not their whole life time be wholly without it, Walking in darkness without all light, as to this; some may once get a cleare sight thereof, and never see more of it, till nigh the landing in eternity, & yet all this while, the Iustification, which is in the court of God, remaine fixed, invariable, and without any interuption.

10. By Justification here, we meane not that, which some call a Particular justification, and do distinguish it from an Universal Iustification: by this understanding an universal pardon of all sins past and committed, and by the other understanding a particular pardon of this or that sin, that is committed, after the man hath been universally pardoned and accepted of God; and now pardoned after a new act of faith in Christ: Though it be needless to debate, whether this Particular Pardon can be called a Iustification, or not; yet it is certaine, it is not that Iustification, whereof Paul speaketh so much, and explaineth, in all its causes, in his Epistles; nor that Iustification, which connoteth a change of State before God, and the translation of a person out of an estate of Enmity into an estate of Favour and Friedshipe, in reference to which there must be a juridical sentence, passed in the favours of the man, through the impured Righteousness of Christ, received by Faith: while as this posterior act of pardon of a particular transgression, is rather a Fatherly act pardoning the failing of his Son & receiving him againe into his Fatherly embracements.

11. Nor finally, do we here speak of that sentence of Absolution, that shall be pronunced, at the last day; for, howbeit that may be called a Iustification; yet it is not that Iustification, whereof we are now speaking, & it doth not make such a change in the state of such, as are thereby absolved, as this doth; and therefore, in respect of this, it is rather a publick Declaration and Manifestation, before Angels and Men, of their Iustification, or being in a Iustified state, who shall be adjudged unto eternal life; than any Iustification connoteing a change of state, seing none in that day will be justified but such as have been here partakers of this Iustification, whereof we speak, they who have been in heaven will need none, & such as have been in hell will expect none; & none of the living, who have not by faith laid hold on Christ, will hear any other sentence, then, depart from me, ye cursed.

12. The justification then, whereof we here speak, is That change of state before God, which such are made partakers of, as lay hold on Christ by faith, through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, whereby they are brought into an estate of Favour & Reconciliation with God, who were before under his Wrath & Curse; and upon which they have all their iniquities, whereof they are guilty, actually pardoned; are accepted of, as Righteous, and pronunced such through the Surety-Righteousness of Christ imputed to them; and freed from the sentence & Curse of the Law, under which they were lying.

That we may cleare the nature of this life of Justification, as to its continuance, we shall lay down these few Propositions.

Propos. 1. Justification denoteth a State, wherein the beleever is brought, a real change, as to state: as a man accused of some crime, & keeped in prison till he be tryed, & examined by an assise, is really changed, as to his Law state, when cleared by an assise, and pronunced not guilty, and so absolved as to that, whereof he was accused, and set at liberty, he is now a free man, in Law: much more is there a great change in a mans Law-state, when before he was guilty of death, lying bound in fetters, keeped unto the day of execution, and now getteth a free Remission of all, when of a Man of death he is made a free liege, as there is a change in a mans state, and Relation, when he is made an Adopted son, so is there a new state, wherein the sinner is brought, when he is absolved from the sentence of the Law, and declared a Righteous man. Sanctification, Regeneration and Glorification, do all of them hold forth a new real State, whereinto he is brought, who is made partaker thereof; so Iustification with Adoption held forth a new relative state, which is also real as real, is opposed to what is false, or imaginary. Hence is it, that a beleever is justified even while he is sleeping & not acting faith; as a person remaineth in a married state, though not actually consenting unto the match, the consent once granted enstateth the person in that new Relation.

Propos. 2. This new state of Iustification is continueing & permanent; not in this sense, that God reneweth & frequently reiterateth the enstating of them into this new relative state; but in this sense, that once justified alwayes justified; they are fixed & preserved in that state: as Adoption is a permanent state, because once adopted alwayes a child of God. Hence it is called a grace, wherein me stand Rom. 5: 2. It is a state of Reconciliation and Peace wherein we stand. It is no fluctuating state, wherein one may be to day & be out of it to morrow, and againe brought into it. The ground of this sentence is fixed, lasting and permanent, to wit, the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ: once clothed therewith, never naked or spoiled thereof againe; the gifts and calling of God being with out Repentance Rom. 11: 29. The foul's union with Christ through faith, is lasting and abiding: once in Him, alwayes in Him, once a member of his mystical body, & married to him, as his spouse, and alwayes so, for he must finally present all such holy & without spot • , or wrinkle, or any such thing Ephes. 5: 27. Faith whereby the knot is made, and the marriage consent is given, remaineth, as to its root and habite, Christ prayeth, that it fail not. Luk. 22: 32. They are keeped by the power of God through faith unto Salvation. 1. Pet. 1: 5. All the arguments proving Perseverance of the Saints, which we cannot here summe-up, do confirme this.

Propos. 3. Hence Iustification is a State, that is not Interrupted and broken off, and renewed and reiterated againe: as it cannot be quite taken away and annulled: so neither can it be broken off for a time, so as for that time, they should be in a non-justified state: the marriage once made is not broken; the sentence once pronunced is not recalled; sinnes once pardoned by God, are not laid againe to his charge. The Spirit that once spoke peace & said, Son be of good cheer, thy sinnes are forgiven thee, will not be againe, a Spirit of bondage unto fear Rom. 8: 15. If Iustification could at any time be th • s interrupted, Adoption behoved to be interrupted with it, and so a childe of God behoved to be for that time a childe of the devil. The Scripture speaketh not of any such relapse into the state of Nature & Sin. And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Iesus & by the Spirit of our God 1. Cor. 6: 11. once brought out of Nature never reduced into that state againe: No more new Iustification, than new Adoption; once quickened, never againe brought into a state of death in trespasses & sins Ephes. 2: 1, 5. for such are then brought into a saife state, being quickened together with Christ; as Christ being raised from the death, dieth no more, death hath no more dominion over him Rom. 6: 9. so they, who are planted with him, in the likeness of his Death and Resurrection, may alwayes reckon themselves dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God, through Jesus Christ vers. 4, 5, 11. Hence there is no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8: 1. They are not under the Law, but under grace Rom. 6: 14. And this holdeth true, notwithstanding of after-sins; for if after-sins, & remanent sinnes and corruption, could break of this relation, and make an alteration in this state, no man should be said to be one day in a justified state: for the best of men falleth seven times a day in sin, and no man can say, that he is free of sin: there being no perfection here, there could be no state of Justification, & consequently no state of Adoption, and Reconciliation: if after-sins could break of this Relation, or Relative State, a beleever could not be said to be partaker of any of the privileges attending this state, for one day to end. New sins indeed call for new Remissions, but these new Remissions are fatherly pardons, and not such a sentence of absolution, as the person had at first, when translated out of the Rate of Death into Life, for then the person was not a reconciled Son: but now he standeth in a state of Reconciliation and Sonshipe, & his new pardons are the pardons of a Father, granted to a Son; as we see Psal. 89: 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. If his children forsake my Law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, & keep not my commendements; then will I visite their transgression with the rod, & their iniquity with stripes: never the less my loving kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my fatihfulness to fail: my Covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing, that is gone of my lips. So 1 Ioh. 1: 8, 9. If we say, that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, & 2: 1, 2. My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not and if any man sin, we have an Advocat with the Father, Iesus Christ the righteous▪ And he is the Propitiation for our sins. Psal. 103: 3, 8, 9, 12, 13. Who forgiveth all thine Iniquities. The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger & plenteous in mercy: he will not alwayes chide, neither will he keep his anger for ever, as far as the east is from the West, so far hath heremoved our transgressions from us: like as a Father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him. So this state remaineth firme and unbroken, notwithstanding of the various changes, which are in their apprehensions concerning it; these may alter many a time in one day, But the Lords thoughts are not as our thoughts: nor are his wayes as our wayes, Esai. 55: 8, 9. His sentence & judgment remaineth the same, how alterable so ever ours be. He is in one minde, though we be in many.

Propos. 4. Hence also it is manifest, that Iustification is an Instantaneous act; that is, it is not a work, that is carried on by degrees; but a sentence pronunced by the Lord, the Righteous Judge, once for all: Though hereafter they still need renewed pardons, & so, may have moe sinnes actually pardoned this yeer, than they had the last yeer; yet Justification, as relating to their state, is no progressive work: We hear not of a grouth in Iustification, as we hear of a growth in Sanctification; for as for that word Revel. 22: 11, he that is Righteous, let him be Righteous still, or, let him be justified still 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will not import a growth or progress in Iustification, but a continuance in that state: beside that others read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : So Ar. Mont. The complut edition, as also the Syriack & Arabick Versions. This relative change, that is made in Iustification, is like the relative change, that is made in Adoption; now the act of Adoption is an Insantaneous act, and not a work, that is carried on by degrees, nor doth it admit of a grouth, so that an adopted childe of God can not be more the adopted childe of God this yeer, than they were the last yeer; though the sense and clear Perception of the one and of the other may & doth admit of degrees, & is not so full & clear alwayes at the first, as it may be afterwards.

Propos. 5. Hence it followeth, That justification is equal in all; that is, that all who are justified, are alike justified; none more than others; as none are more Adopted than others, speaking of these, who are made partaker of the privilege: None can be said to be more a son, than another; so none can be said to be more justified, than another, who is also justified; the Lord's sentence absolveth all equally from all their sins, who beleeve; and admitteth them all equally into a State of Favoure and Reconciliation; They equally passe from death unto life, they have equally peace with God, they have all an equal imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, or a share therein, none more or less then others, though the faith, which laith hold on the Righteousness of Christ, be not a like strong, in all; for it is faith in the same kinde in all, and the promise is to the kind, and not to the measure or degree of faith. It is no where said, that we are justified by a faith of such a measure or degree; but by faith; importing that how weak so ever saith be, if it be faith of the right kinde, it inte • esseth a soul in Christ, & in his Righteousness, whereupon he is justified. It is true, one may have many moe sins pardoned, than another. Yet both being Pardoned & Iustified, they are equally absolved from all, that could be laid to their charge; he that was the greater sinner, is not more liable to the Law, then he who was the least offender; for the sentence of Pardon or Absolution doth equally free both from all hazard of Condemnation; as when two persons are pardoned, the one whereof hath committed many crimes worthie of death, the other but one, they are both equally pardoned, freed from prison, and from the sentence, and set at liberty: So also when two persons are pardoned, the one whereof hath a greater debt remitted, the other a lesser, they are equally pardoned, the one is not more discharged, though discharged of more, than the other, but both are alike discharged of all their debt, & freed from all trouble of Law upon the account of their debt. So in Iustification, all who are justified, how great so ever the difference be among them, as to the sinnes, whereof they were guilty, are alike justified, because alike freed from the accusation and curse of the Law; & alike made partakers of the Privileges of Persons pardoned; have alike interest in the Favoure of God, & Right to glory. As to what difficulty may arise from the consideration of after sinnes, we shall speak to that afterward.

Propos. 6. The State of Iustification is perfect at the first, or Iustification is perfect and compleet to all ends and uses; This is clear from what is already said: for if Iustification be not an act & privilege, that admitteth of degrees, or of increase; and doth not grow more and more dayly, it must be perfect at first, or adequate to all ends and purposes, for which it is appointed, or have that perfection that is competent to it. It is true, it is not so perfect, as that it can never be out of sight; or as if the sense & feeling of it might not grow or become greater; nor yet is it so perfect & compleet, as it thereby the justified person were freed from all sin, or all the consequences of sin in this life, for it is not hereunto appointed, nor granted for these ends. But in these respects, and for these ends, it is may be said to be perfect. (I) That all their former sins are pardoned, how many & how hainous so ever they have been, for then all their sins are cast into the depths of the sea, Micah. 7: 19. & are not found. Ier. 50: 20. In those dayes, & in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquitie of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none, & the sins of judah, & they shall not be found, for I will pardon them whom I reserve. He taketh away all iniquity Hos. 14: 2. Then he imputeth no iniqui • y Psal. 32: 2. but covereth & forgiveth sins, without exception. Rom. 4: 7, 8. Thus he redeemeth Israel from all his iniquities Psal. 130: 8. He forgiveth their iniquitie, & remembereth their sin no more Ier. 31: 34. Heb. 8: 12. & 10: 17. He cast: all their sins behinde his back. Esai. 38: 17. Hereby is remission of sinnes, without any exception. Rom. 3: 25. Mat. 26: 28. Mark. 1: 4. Luk. 3: 3. Act. 2: 33. & 5: 31. & 10: 43. & 26; 18. Eph. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. He forgiveth all trespasses Colos. 2: 13. and forgiveth all iniquity Psal. 103: 3. (2) These sins once pardoned & blotted out, and cast behinde God's back, are not againe laid to the charge of the justified persons: once forgiven alwayes forgiven: It is true, Satan may renew the charge, and use false summonds against the Beleever; & it is also true, that aftersins may waken feares, & bring old sins againe to remembrance, & the Lord may let them see their former debt, not to charge it upon them, but to bring them on their knees, to humble them the more, & to cause them cry for, and seek out new extracts of the Pardon received: yet the sinnes that God once pardoneth, he never writteth down againe upon the score of Beleevers, as if he had recalled the former pardon granted, for he remembereth their sin no more Ier. 31: 34. Heb. 8: 12. & 10: 17. And for future sins by vertue of their State, they have access to seek for pardon and have ground. (3) The Righteousness of Christ, which is a perfect Righteousness, is fully and perfectly communicated and imputed; so as thereby they become the Righteousness of God in Christ 2. Cor. 5. last. He is their whole Righteousness, in order to Iustification, and wholly their Righteousness, as made of God Righteousness unto them. Ier. 23: 6, 1. Cor. 1: 30. And with this Righteousness, they are wholly & perfectly covered, to expect it as found & hid there Phil. 3: 9. & are made Righteous Rom. 5: 19. & 10: 4. (4) They are now wholly Reconciled unto God, and have Peace with Him; and not by halfes, or in some certain respects only, as if in other respects they were still Enemies, or in a state of Enmity: Being justified by faith, they have Peace with God Rom. 5: 1. once they were enemies but now they are reconciled vers. 10. by Christ they have now received the Atonement vers. 11. once alienated & enemies in their mindes by wicked works, but now reconciled Col. 1: 21. once a far off but now made neer Ephes. 2: 13. the enmity being staine. vers. 16. No more strangers or forreigners now, but fellow citizens with the Saints, and of the houshold of God vers. 19. Then is the Lord pacified toward them, for all that they have done Ezek. 16: 63. (5) They are compleetly translated, into a new Covenant state, not halfe the children of Saran, and half the children of God; not halfe in Nature and halfe in the state of Grace, not half translated & halfe not Ephes. 2: 13, 19. Col. 1: 21. not halfe quickened with Christ, and halfe not Ephes. 2: 5. They are not now halfe without Christ, or aliens from the common wealth of Israel, or strangers from the Covenants of promise, &c. Ephes. 2: 12. There is a perfect change, as to their state 1. Cor. 6: 11. (6) They are secured as to final Condemnation, There is no condemnation for them Rom. 8: 1. being beleevers, they shall not perish, but have eternal life Ioh. 3: 15, 16. He that beleeveth is not condemned vers. 18. See also Ioh. 3: 36. & 6: 47. They are passed from death unto life Ioh. 5: 24. 1. Ioh. 3: 14. being discharged of all guilt of eternal punishment, which formerly they deserved by their sinnes. And all this holdeth good, notwithstanding of their after sins; which (as we shall shew) do not annull, or make any such breach upon their state of Justification; It is true, these sins must also be Pardoned, & will be Pardoned; but yet when they are pardoned, their Justification, as to their state, is not hereby more perfected, as to these respects formerly mentioned: It holdeth good also, notwithstanding of what shall be at the great day; for that will put no man in a new Justified state, who was not Reconciled to God before. It is true, there will be many additions, as to the Solemnitie, Declaration, Consequences & Effects thereof, in that day, but not withstanding hereof the state of Justification here as to what respecteth its grounds & the essential change it maketh, together with the Right, that beleevers have thereby unto all, that in that day they shall be put in possession of, is perfect, & may be said so to be.

Propos. 7 By what is said, it is manifest, how & in what respects this life of Iustification differeth from the life of Sanctification. (1) Sanctification maketh a real Physical change: Iustification maketh a Relative change. And thereby they come to have a new State or Relation, unto the Law, & unto God the judge. (2) Sanctification is continueing work, wherein beleevers are more & more built up daily. Iustification is an act of God, or a juridcial sentence, Absolving a sinner, & pronunceing him free of the charge, brought in against him, and not liable to the penalty. (3) Sanctification is a grōwing and increasing work, & admitteth of many degrees; & is usually weak, and small at the beginning: Iustification doth not grow, neither doth it admit of degrees; but is full & compleet & adequate unto all ends here. (4) Sanctification is ever growing here, and never cometh to full Perfection before death: Justification is perfect & adequate unto all ends; as we shewed. (5) Sanctification is not alike in all; but some are more, some are less sanctified: But Iustification is equal in all; none being more justified, then others. (6) Some measures & degrees of Sanctification, which have been attained, may be lost againe: But nothing of Iustification can really be lost; for we are not here speaking of the sense and feeling of Justification, which frequently may be lost; but of Justification it self (7) Sanctification is a progressive work; Iustification is instantaneous, as was shown. (8.) Sanctification respecteth the Being, Power & Dominion of • in, in the beleever, and killeth, subdueth and mortifieth it: Iustification respecteth its guilt & demerite, & taketh away guilt and the obligation to punishment, or obnoxiousness to the paying of the penalty. (9) In justification, a man is accepted upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ, imputed to him; and received by Faith: But in Sanctification, grace is infused, and the Spirit given to perfecte holiness in the fear of God. (10) In Iustification, there is a right had unto life, and unto the rich recompence of reward, upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed, whence they are said to have passed from death to life: But in Sanctification they are made meet to be partakers of the Inheritance of the Saints in light. (11) Unto Iustification nothing is required but faith in Christ, whereby the soul may become united to Him, & have a right to his benefites: But unto Sanctification, all the graces of the Spirit are requisite, and all the exercises of the same; all diligence is required, and an adding of Vertue to Faith, of Knowledge to Vertue, of Temperance to Knowledge, of Patience to Temperance, of Godliness to Patience, of Brotherly kindness to Godliness, & of Charity to Brotherly kindness, 2 Pet. 1: 5, 6, 7.

Propos. 8 Hence it followeth also, thar there is no ground to assert a first & a second Justification, as Papists do, meaning by the first an Infusion of an inward Principle or Habite of Grace, which is no Justification, nor part thereof, but the beginning of Sanctification: and by the Second, another Justification, which with them is an Effect or Consequent of the former, having good work, which flow from the foresaid infused principle of grace & love, for its proper & formal cause. This Justification, they say, is by works, where as the former is by faith; and yet this second, they make to be an Incrementum, an increase of the first; and for this they say, the church prayeth, when she saith, Lord increase our saith, hope & charity. Concil, Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 10. whereby we see, this Justification, whereof they say Iames speaketh, Chap. 2. is manifestly nothing else, but the very grouth of Sanctification: and so they know no Iustification at all, distinct from Sanctification: wherefore we need say no more against the same, it being Justification, formerly explained, which we treat of, and not of Sanctification, whereof they seem only to speak, when they mentione Iustification; and indeed this their Iustification, which is true Sanctification, admitteth of various and different degrees; & of this, they may imagine not only a first and a second, but according to the various degrees thereof a third and a fourth yea a Tenth & Twentieth, if they please. The Scripture, it is true, maketh mention of twosold Iustification, one by the Works of the Law, & another by Faith: but it asserteth with all, that these are inconsistent, and that no man living can be justified the first way, by the works of the Law. Mr. Baxter, beside the difference he maketh, betwixt Justification as Begun, and as Continued, in reference to the different conditions, required to the one, and to the other, imagineth a twosold Iustifieation, or two Iustifications, or (as he saith against D. Tullie pag. 167.) rather two parts of one, yet in his last Reply to Mr. Cartwright pag. 46. he maketh them as distinct, as are the two lawes he speaketh of, & the first, he saith, is by God the Creatour, the second by Christ the Redeemer and in order to the vindication & clearing of this, he speaketh much of a twosold Righteousness In his writtings against Mr. Cartwright pag. 70. giving us several (to the number of thirteen) differences, betwixt them; making the one to consist in out Non-obligation to punishment by the Law of works, because of its dissolution upon Satisfaction made by Christ: to be without us, in the merite & satisfaction of Christ; to be in substance the same with Pardon; to be opposite to that guilt, which sin in general procureth; to be but the tantundem of what the Law required, to justify us from a true Accusation, that we by sin deserve death &c. And the other to consist in our Non-obligation to the far greater punishment; to be within us & done by us, to consist in innocency or notguiltiness; to be opposite to that guilt, which one particular sin procureth; to be the idem required in the new Law; to justifie us from a false Accusation, that we have not performed the Conditions of the new Covenant &c. all which to examine is not my present purpose: only I shall say, as to this two sold Justification, that it is an explication of the matter, which we have not in Scripture, which, I judge, should only regulat both our Conceptions & Expressions, in this affaire: and what ever pleasure men may take, to give way to their Luxuriant phancies; yet it will be safest for us to follow the threed of the Word, and to speak of this mysterie, according to Revelation, and not according to our Apprehensions: And of all men, I judge, Mr. Baxter should be most averse from creating new Termes, Words & Expressions, in these divine things, who expresseth himself so angry-like (especially in his later writtings) in words, which to some may seem to favour little of sob • iety or of modesty, against such as contend about words; when it may be, they are but defending the received orthodox doctrine from his new Notions and Expressions, as being Censorious, dividers, Word-souldiers, & I know not what. But, as to the matter in hand; & in particular, as to this second Iustifica • ion, or rather first (for it is supposed to be first in order of nature, if not in time also) which is founded upon our Innocency, or performance of the Conditions of the new Covenant, Faith, Repentance & New Obedience & so is a declaring of us Righteous because of our inherent Righteousness, I shall only say these few things. 1. That I finde not this new Iustification explained, expressed, nor so much as hinted by the Apostle, in all his discourses and disputes about this subject, though he hath spoken very much of Iustification, and on all occasions did vindicate & clear up the gospel-truth thereanent. If it be said, That all this is sufficiently hinted, & more then hinted by the Apostle, when he tels that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness. I answere. What the proper meaning of this Expression is, shall be shown hereafter, where it shall also be manifested, that the Faith here said to be imputed, is not our act of Faith, but Christ, & his Righteousness laid hold on by faith, or the object of Faith held forth in the Gospel, & received by Faith. And for answere to this, I judge it sufficient to say, That the Apostle is manifestly there speaking of that other Iustification, which we owne, for the only Iustification, hold forth in the Gospel, whereby Remission of sins is had, & Peace with God, through a Righteousness without, & of that Iustification, which taketh away all glorying, both before God & man, and wherein God is hold forth to be & laid hold on by Faith as one, that justifieth the ungodly, and of that Justification, which is from the Accusation of the Law; by all which & many other Particulars, observable in the Apostles discourse there, it is undeniable, that he is speaking of that other Iustification, which we asserte. If it be said, That all this is sufficiently imported, when Faith is made the Condition of Justification, & we are said to be justified by faith I answer. What way Faith is the Condition of Justification, & is so to be called, shall be seen afterward: only I say, that what the Scripture speaketh of this, can give no ground for a new & distinct Justification, because this new Iustification is rather a Iustification of Faith, or of the Beleever because of his faith, & purely upon the account of his Faith; for it is a sentence of judgment, pronunceing the man to be a Beleever, because he is so; & his faith to be right Faith, because it is so; than any Iustification of him by faith. Not to mentione this, that together with faith, as the Condition, Repentance & New Obedience is joyned; & then there must be a Iustification of works, or of the man by, yea & because of works, which cannot be imported by being Iustified by faith, because that is alwayes opposed to Iustification by works. Beside, that even in mens courts there are not two distinct sentences of the judge, required in deciding of a Controversie, depending upon the clearing of a Condition; one anent the truth, of the Condition, & the other anent the thing depending upon that Condition; but the Condition being instructed to be performed, the one sentence is given out; much less is this requisito here, where we have to do with God, who knoweth whether the Condition be performed, or not; and needeth not, that we instruct the same against the Accusations of Satan, or of the world in order to his information. Moreover, there is but one Accusation here brought in against the man, from the Law, & from the Righteous Iudge, to wit. That he is a sinner, & therefore a son of death: & therefore there is but one sentence requisite: for as for that Accusation, that the person hath not performed the Condition of the new Covenant, neither will the Law-giver, or judge, nor can the Law bring it in against a Beleever: and what Satan, the accuser of the Brethren, or what a blinde or prejudged World, or what a mans own blinde & deceitful heart shall or can herein do, is of no consideration, in reference to a Iustification, which is before God, & in his sight. But 2. Against this twofold Iustification. I would say, that all that is mentioned, concerning Gospel Iustification, in Scripture, agreeth but to one, & the very contrary thereof must be attributed to the other new-coyned Iustification, according to his own explication thereof: the one is by faith, the other is for faith; the one is by faith alone, withour works, the other is because of Faith & Works too; the one is an act of God's free Grace, the other is an act of pure Iustice; the one is of a sinner, and of an ungodly person, the other is of a Righteous man, as such, & because such; the one taketh away all boasting and all gloriation even before men; the other not; the one maketh the reward of free grace, the other of due debt; the one is because of a Righteousness without us, the other because of a personal inherent Righteousness; The publicans language, God be merciful to me a sinner suiteth the one best; The Pharisees language, or some thing like it, God, I thank thee, I am a beleever &c. suiteth the other best; In the one the one the man can plead no innocencie, in the other he can & must plead himself not guilty, in the one, the sinner must say with David Psal. 143: 2. enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified; in the other, he may and must say, enter into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight, I shall be justified. Other things or this Nature might be mentioned, but these are sufficient. 3. This New Justification must of necessity be a justification of conscience, or in it, or terminated in it; because it is not before God, or in his sight, where the world, or the deceived heart the chiefe accusers here, do not compear to accuse, & Satans accusing them before God can cause no trouble to them, untill he come, as an Accuser, before conscience, & give in false summonds there. And therefore it is not the Justification by Faith, treated of in Scripture: as himself proveth in his Confession Chap. 8. pag. 189. &c. 4. This will make way for moe Iustifications, than two; for as faith must be justified so must Repentance, so must also Works, & Perseverance in them to the end: If it be said, that all these make but one compleet Condition, & therefore give ground but to one sentence. I answer: Then no man can have this sentence pronounced upon him, to wit, to be one, that hath performed the Condition, until he hath persevered unto the end, & finished his course, & this being the first Iustification, at least in order of Nature before the other, a man must be dead before he be justified from the Law, yea or with this Iustification: and yet we hear of Iustification in this life. Further, this will make way for moe Justifications, upon this account, that it is a declaration of the man to be what he is indeed, & to have what he hath indeed; & so, as hereby tho man who hath true saving faith, must be justified upon that account, so the man, that hath but an historical faith, must be justified in so far, in comparison of him, that is a meer infidel, and may plead his own cause, so far, even before God's tribunal; so may the man, that hath but a legal Repentance, in respect of him, that hath none at all; & the man, that performeth Works materially good, though not in a right manner, in comparison of him, that doth not so much, & himself tels us pag. 8, ag. Cartwright of a, 3 sold Accusation, 1. that we are not beleevers. 2. That we are not true beleevers, 3. that we are •• lifidians; & that accordingly, there must be several wayes of justification, 5, This will lay the ground for God's multiplying, or frequently reiterating of one & the same Iustification; for Iustification presupposeth alwayes an Accusation, & seing neither God, nor the Law, will ever accuse a Beleever of being no Beleever, only Satan, & the world, & his own Misguided Conscience it; now, if the Accusation of these or of Satan alone (as he seemeth to insinuat p. 81. & else where, against Mr. Cartwright) be enough to lay the foundation of such a Iustification, then as oft, as this Accusation is renewed, (& how oft that may be, who can tell?) must the Lord reiterat his sentence of Iustification, and pronunce the man a true Beleever: and it will not be sufficient to say, that it will suffice if the Lord manifest to the Mansconscience, that he a beleever; for why shall that be sufficient now, more than at the first? and if this take away the necessity of reiterating the sentence, it will also say, that there was no necessity for pronuncing the sentence of his being a beleever at the first. None need to say, that this same may be alledged against our Iustification before God; for the Iustification, we only owne, is in reference to the Accusation of the Law, & of Justice & of God the Righteous Judge, under whose Curse the sinner lyeth, until he be justified, & when he is once justified through faith in Christ, he is no more troubled with their Accusations; for neither God, nor Law, nor Gospel accuse a Beleever of being an Unbeleever & under the Curse againe, whatever Satan, & his own misguided conscience, or others may do. 6. He groundeth his twosold Iustification p. 93. & 94. upon a twosold Covenant with distinct conditions & a twosold Accusation for non-performance of the one, & of the other. But thus, as he shall make us to be justified by the old Covenant of works, & that by the principal justification, an absurdity, that he frequently loadeth our opinion with; so he maketh all the justification which is according to the new-Covenant to be upon & because of our own personal Righteousness; which is also repugnant to the whole Gospel. We do not performe the conditions of the first Covenant, and all the liberation from the Curse of that Covenant, under which we are by Nature, is through the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, & received by faith: and the Gospel or new-Covenant revealeth no other way of Justification to us. As for the distinct accusations, we have said enough already. Neither the Lord, nor his Law do ever accuse a Beleever of not being a beleever, & as for Satans or others accusations of this kind, a well informed conscience from the light of the word; & of the Spirit, clearing up the work of faith, in the soul, & the true & real works of a lively faith, will be sufficient to quiet the beleever, & stop the mouth of all these Accusers; without the fiction of a new & distinct Justification, whereof the Scripture is silent.

But Mr. Baxter in his last reply to Mr. Cartwright explaineth, the matter far otherwayes, telling us pag. 46. and forward. That the first justification is by God, as Rector, only by the pure Law of works, as Creator: the other by God in Christ, as Redeemer & Rector of the Redeemed world. The first is conditionally past upon the whole condemned world & that without any condition in man, whether faith or works: & so it is both absolute & conditional. In the first the Father first condemned his Son, as it were (see pag. 52.) & after satisfaction given justified first him, as Sponsor, & then the world for his sake: thus God forgave those all the debt, who yet perish by taking their fellow servant by the throat. Here is a justification both absolute & conditional; Here is pardon & no pardon: Here is a justification of all the Reprobat: Here is a justification of persons not in being & prior to & without all faith. This therefore is not the justification, whereof the Scriptures speak, as himself proveth, in his Confession.