PErfection is one of the Doctrines of the Quaker, that there is a ſtate of perfect ſeparation from ſin in this life; That it is not onely poſſible for a man to keep the whole Law of God, but that every true Chriſtian doth attain it; That the work of Chriſts Redemption does conſiſt in this to bring men up to ſuch a ſtate, to be free not onely in regard of the guilt, but the inhabitaton of ſin, ſo that it is not indeed ſo much pardoned, as aboliſhed. There are no mean Doctors in the Schools have gone before them and taught us, that though there remain that which is fomes peccati (to uſe Auguſtines expreſſion); yet not that which is peccatum in the regenerate after Baptiſme, and conſequently the righteouſneſs which they through Chriſt (or grace) perform (the Quaker chooſes to call it Chriſts Righteouſneſs) being perfect, does not onely conſtitute them juſt in the ſight of God, but enables them to ſtand before the Throne of Gods juſtice, and ſo juſtifyes them and ſaves them. They now who are read here in the Controverſies between us and the Papiſts, may gueſs how far theſe friends are like to be ſupported; and that they are not therefore to be put off, as ſome think, with ſleighting and contempt onely. For my part, I will confeſs it is not the deſigne of theſe Papers to endeavour ſo much a refutation of any Party, as to build up others in that Truth which Errour on all ſides leanes upon. Omne falſum innititur vero. And as the beſt Phyſitians have been noted ſometimes to take very great regard to the ordinary receipts of old women and the meaneſt perſons: ſo will it become the modeſt Divine, to endeavour rather to diſcover and ſift out that Truth which lies in his Adverſaries meaning, then to expoſe, and ſhame their Opinions.

Before I come to my preſent ſubject, it is neceſſary that I ſet a little out of my way, which may elſe engender diſpute, in my laſt paper. It is about pardon of ſin, which I take to be the effect, not formal Reaſon of juſtification. Pardon (ſayes Mr. Bradſhaw) is neither the whole, nor any eſſential part of juſtification, but onely a contingent effect of it. Treat. of Juſt. c. 8. That a man muſt repent and believe (which is to perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace), in order of nature, before he be pardoned, is out of queſtion. That God accounts the perſon a performer who is ſo, ariſes of neceſſity, becauſe his judgment is alwayes according to Truth. Now when Gods accounting a man Righteous according to the Covenant (which is all one with his accounting him a penitent Believer, or performer of the condition) is juſtifying him as I ſay there, and pardon followes this, it appeared to me that Remiſſion muſt not be the form it ſelf, or part, but the effect of juſtification. And it is true remiſſion is the effect, and no part of this juſtification: But there may be ſome other or further juſtification then this. To avoyd needleſs difference therefore with Brethren, I muſt diſtinguiſh juſtification. Juſtification we agree to be a forenſical act oppoſed to the laying any thing to a mans charge whereby he may be condemned. Who ſhall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect? It is God that juſtifieth. Now there is a double charge, the charge of the Law, that we are ſinners, and ſo condemnable for violation of it: And the charge of the Goſpel that we have not performed the remedying condition which God requires of us for the eſcaping that condemnation. Though it be an acquittal of us from the latter charge is that juſtification which every man is ſo much concerned to provide for, as that which depends upon the plea of what himſelf does, and the acquittal of us from the former, depends onely on the plea of what Chriſt hath done for us, which can hardly ſuffer any debate I think before our Judge: yet will I not deny but juſtification may be taken ſo comprehenſively as to contain in it our diſcharge from the Law alſo There is a juſtification then in regard to a particular charge, the charge of the one: or a univerſal juſtification againſt all accuſation, or the charge of both. As we muſt anſwer the charge of the Goſpel by denying that charge, and pleading our performance: we anſwer the charge of the Law by confeſſing it, and pleading Chriſts ſatisfaction; that is we acknowledge that we areguilty and have deſerved Death, but yet that we are not condemnable becauſe we are pardoned by the Law of Grace, through the Meritorious Righteouſneſs and Sacrifice of Chriſt Jeſus, ſuppoſing ſuch a Charge can find place before our Law-giver. Our Faith and Repentance is our Righteouſneſs in regard to the Goſpel: but pardon of ſin, together with this righteouſneſs, may go both into Vniverſal juſtification. I cannot indeed but ſay ſtill, that that juſtification which is particular in regard to the Goſpel Charge, ſeemes to me to be the juſtification which St. Paul and James mainly intend, if not altogether; for when the one ſayes we are juſtified by Faith, and the other by works alſo, and both prove it from one and the ſame Text, that Abraham believed, and it was imputed to him for Righteouſneſs: I pray what elſe can juſtification be with either, but Gods imputing evangelical obedience to a perſon for Righteouſneſs, that is Gods accounting of him righteous upon his believeing repenting, or performing the condition of the Goſpel? That the Apoſtles Righteouſneſs without Works, and Pardon, is not the ſame (and conſquently that the one is a probation and not a deſcription of the other as I noted upon reflection), muſt be granted by thoſe who make both theſe to be parts of our juſtification, for ſuch is the nature of parts to be diverſe one from another. Haec eſt natura partium ut unum corpus diverſa componant. Boethius. de Conſ. l. 3. p. 3. Again Quod a qualibet re diverſum eſt, id non eſt illud a quo intelligitur diverſum. It muſt be alſo confeſſed by me, that the diverſity of two things, as the cauſe and effect, does not hinder thoſe things to be parts of another third which is the compoſitum of both: and conſquently that Gods juſtifiying us by this Righteouſneſs (that is by Faith or Evangelical Obedience without the Works of the Law), and then pardoning us, as the effect of that act, may both make up the compoſitum of Vniverſal juſtification. You ſee how tender I am of perſiſting in any miſtake, wherein I have or may prejudice others. I doe not find that the Scripture does denominate or pronounce any one righteous or a juſt Man from one end to the other, upon any other account then his doing Righteouſneſs, yet will I not quarrel with any that ſay, we are made righteous alſo by forgiveneſs; and that the delivery of us from ſin, from the Law, and condemnation by it, is Juſtification: Though really I am apt to think, that this work is to be attributed rather with the Apoſtle, to our Redemption. Compare Epheſ. 1.7.2 Cor. 5.19. Rom. 3.24. with other places. And ſo I come to my point, of Perfection. Only I muſt adde this Corollary. Simpliciſſimum nobis videtur ſi dicamus, fidem juſtiſicare, quia credenti ſua ſides imputetur ad juſtitiam. Fides antem ad juſtitiam imputari dicitur, quia Dens illum qui viva fide in Chriſtum credit pro juſto habet & reputat, cum a paena peccati liberans, & ad vitam aeternam acceptans, propter Chriſti mortem & obedientiam.

It is to be acknowledged, that there are, and may be very many Scriptures eaſily preſſed by the Quaker and Papiſt for the ſervice of their Doctrine, ſo that there is no doubt but thus much is proved; that it is our duty to be as perfect as they would have. Every ſin is forbidden, and every good thing that is ſo by the Law of innocency, is commanded. But it is one thing to know what is our duty, and another what will be accepted of God in our performance. Our duty is one thing, and what we can, or doe attain to, another. God brings not his ſcales under the Covenant of Grace, that our works ſhould have their full weight, but his touchſtone expecting they be right, that they proceed onely from a ſincere heart, and then he accepts them upon the merits of Chriſt Jeſus. Nay indeed the Duty of the Goſpel is one thing, and the Condition of it another.

The words perfect and perfection in ſeveral places of Scripture, may receive an interpretation according to the purpoſe unto which they are applied. As many as are perfect, let us be thus minded. By perfection there, I apprehend ſuch a degree of knowledge, as the ſtrong Chriſtian is ſuppoſed to have other-where in oppoſition to the weake, who underſtanding not their liberty by the Goſpel were ſcandalized about indifferent things, and ſo could not walk up to the ſame rule. Not that I had already attained (ſayes the ſame Apoſtle hard by) or were already perfect. In the one verſe of the ſame Chapter he is perfect, in the other he is not; wherein yet there is no more real difficulty then this, that a man may in one thing be ſaid to be perfect, who in another is imperfect, which Auguſtine ſhewes in the fifteenth chapter of his ſecond book, De peccatorum meritis & remiſſione.

Indeed that Father in that book and in another, De ſpiritu & littera, hath the luck to treat induſtriouſly on this matter. Alia eſt quaeſtio (ſayes he) utrum eſſe poſſit homo in hac vita ſine peccato: alia utrum ſit? It is one queſtion, whether it be poſſible for a man to attain to ſuch perfection as to live without ſin? and another, whether there be any that doe? For the former queſtion, he diſtinguiſhes of what is poſſible by Grace: And what is poſſible by our own Strength. To hold, that any man by his free will onely without grace is able to keep all Gods commandements and be without ſin, is that grand Pelagian Doctrine againſt which he ſets his face, and deteſts it: But that it is poſſible to attaine this by grace, or the ſpecial aſſiſtance of Gods Spirit, he thinks it beſt (it ſeemes) to grant. He thinks it not fit, not ſafe, to ſay any (or all) of Gods Commandements are impoſſible. Beſides, where God vouchſafes his grace, the work (he pleads) is to be aſcribed to him unto whom nothing is impoſſible. For the ſecond queſtion, whether there is or ever was any man upon earth (Chriſt onely excepted) that does, or did attain hereunto (how great a meaſure of grace ſoever it be which he has or had), he is peremtory in the denyal, as full in his proof from Scripture, there being ſeveral things (he ſayes) which are poſſible, and yet never ſhall be in the World.

There is no doubt now but in the diſpute between the Quaker and us the terme perfection is underſtood alike. It is a perſection they hold in reference to the whole life, that a man ſins not. And if any in the diſpute do carry the matter ſo high againſt them, as to deny what they contend for, to be poſſible, they may if they pleaſe chooſe more warineſs from St. Auſtine, for the Quaker aſcribes not to themſelves, but to the Spirit, the life, the power, or to Chriſt within, all that they doe. On the contrary ſide, if theſe Friends will not be content with what is allowed them, that our duty reaches ſo far as not to ſin at all (and conſequently to be perfect as the Saints in Heaven, that is, to be in our kind as God in his, is perfect), and that it be not denied (when we cannot grant) that this our whole duty is poſſible through that ſpirit by which I hope ſome of them are lead: but they will go on further to ſay, that themſelves are ſuch as have attained, and that every one who does not attain to the ſame pitch, to wit, to live without ſin, cannot be in a ſtate of Grace and Salvation, I ſhall think it time to ſend them, if they be learned, to the ſame Father and Books, for their reproof and ſatisfaction. As for my thoughts farther of this impoſſibility, and what diſtinction is here wanting, you may ſee (p. 12. & 19.) in my firſt paper of Election.

It is common indeed for the Scripture to ſpeak of men and women as perfect. Mark the perfect Man. Noah was a perfect man. Job a perfect man. The good Kings are ſaid to walk before God with a perfect heart, when yet their failings are recorded in the ſame chapter. It is leſs wonder, to have onr duty ſet forth in this manner. Thou ſhalt be perfect with thy Lord thy God. Let us go on unto perfection. Walk before me and be perfect. Thou ſhalt love the Lord with all thy heart, with all thy ſoul, with all thy ſtrength. Thy Will be done in Earth as it is done in Heaven. Be followers of Chriſt. And as his was, ſo muſt our converſation be in the world. There is no man hath a ſenſible knowledge of himſelf, but he perceives dayly how far his duty is above his performance. I am not ignorant neither, how ſome Texts may be drawn out of their ſence, where the place muſt give them a right conſtruction. by one Offering (ſayes the Apoſtle) Chriſt hath perfected them that are ſanctified: But we are not to conceive that at once therefore he perfects mans ſanctification. I deny not moreover, but the end of Chriſts manifeſtation in the fleſh, was to redeem us from iniquity, to deſtroy the Works of the Devil, to reſtore us out of ſin and unrighteouſneſs, and preſent us unto God, as a peculiar People, Purified by Faith, Zealous of good Works, Holy and without blame, Entire and wanting nothing, Perfect and compleat in all the Will of God. I will not cite here thoſe abundance of Texts which are at my pens end, leaſt it ſhould engage me to a particular diſcourſe concerning them. It will ſuffice in the general that we diſtinguiſh of the time, and of the perfection which is to be underſtood in ſuch ſeveral places.

I do remember when the Donatiſts are pleading, many of the ſame and the like Scriptures for their Church and ſeparation, this is one anſwer the Orthodox offer them. There are duo tempora Eccleſiae (ſay they) quae nunc eſt: & qualis erit. Illa divina Teſtimonia quibus commendatur eccleſia cum malorum commixtione hoc tempus ejus ſignificat qualis eſt in praeſenti ſaeculo; & illa teſtimonia quibus commendatur non habere commixtos malos, illud ejus tempus, qualis venturo ſaeculo in aeternum futura eſt! See Breviculi collationum cum Donatiſtis. I ſhall ſay the ſame here. There are two Times or States of the Church. The ſtate of this preſent life, and the ſtate of the life to come. We doubt not but Chriſt hath purchaſed for his Church and People ſuch a ſtate as is to be without ſin, as well as without miſery: But this ſtate which is compleating alway, muſt not be expected to be compleated till the other life. When Chriſt ſhall preſent her to his Father, a glorious Church then ſhall ſhe be, without ſpot or wrinkle, or any ſuch thing: but while ſhe is but a gracious Church, that is, while ſhe is in this life, ſhe ſhall not be without her wrinkles nor her troubles. We ſhall reconcile the Scripture very well, if when it ſets forth every man as a ſinner, that ſtands in need of remiſſion every day, we refer ſuch Texts as ſpeak indeed of perfect freedom, unto the ſtate of the life to come.

In the firſt place then, there is perfectio viae, or patriae; viatorum, or comprehenſorum, to uſe the terms of the Schools. A perfection belonging to the ſtate while we are in the way, as travellours: or a perfection belonging to the ſtate when we ſhall get home, or to our Countrey, or to ſuch as have already attained, in St. Pauls terms, I hope the Quaker that diſputes with us about Perfection, will acknowledge a difference in regard of attainment between the two eſtates of Grace and Glory. And if that perfection which conſiſts in a freedom from all ſin does remain for the Reſt above, I ſee not who the man is, that can free himſelf from all ſinful imperfection, in this World. I preſs forward (ſays the Apoſtle) if by any meanes I might attain unto the Reſurrection of the Dead. Such a Perfection belike as that in Heaven is his duty, but he can by no meanes here attaine unto it.

In the next place then, that Perfection which belongs to the ſtate of this Life is to be conſidered in the kind, and in the degrees of it. There is a Perfection of the kind: and of the degree. I do not find any of theſe friends in their writings do take Perfection for a ſuperlative Word; They acknowledge degrees in their Perfecton, that one hath more of the light and life then another. There are Fathers, young Men, and Children in Grace, as St. John ſpeaks. The Child hath a perfection of parts, that is, hath all its Members, as well as the growen man, but not at the fame maturity. Now I would faine know of the judicious among this ſect two things in my way. The one, whether that degree of Holineſs which is attained by any man, is not the duty of every man? The other, whether he that fails in the leaſt of what is his Dudy, does not ſin? The rule is but one to all: and ſin is any want of conformity to that Rule. However in this, we may both come to an accord. They will yield to us, that there is a perfection of de ree which they have not attained, or that there are more degrees ſtill to be ſought, ſo long as they expect another ſtate above in Glory: And we do not deny to them that perfecttion in its kind, which every man (we hold as well as they) does, and muſt attaine unto, that is ſaved. The great difficulty will be onely in a right underſtanding of what kind of perfection it is, which is to be agreed upon by both.

In the way for the underſtanding whereof, I muſt lay down this note, that when the Scripture ſpeaks of any good man or woman that fears God, or walk righteouſly; it is all one in Holy Language as the being Perfect is. Noah is ſaid to be a juſt Man and perfect and one that walked with God. Job a man perfect and upright, and one that feared God and eſchewed evil. To be a juſt Man then, a righteous man, a man that fears God, is in Scripture to be a perfect man: and to be a perfect man is to be a juſt man, a righteous man, one that fears God and eſchews evil. They are terms I ſay aequivalent in Scripture account. Bleſſed is the Man that walketh not in the Council of the ungodly, nor ſtandeth in the way of Sinners. The man that walketh not in the Council or way of the wicked, is the perfect man in other places of the Pſalmes. It is a full deſcription, that we have of Zachary and Elizabeth. They were both Righteous before God, walking in all the commandements and ordinances of the Lord blameleſs. Now if theſe friends will be contented with ſuch a Perfection in its kind as was in Noah, in Job, in Jacob, in Abraham, in the good Kings, the Prophets, in the Church of Corinth (1 Cor. 2.6.) Coloſſe. (Col. 1.28.), in Zachary and Elizabeth, and is indeed in every man and woman once Converted, differing nevertheleſs in degree one above another, then ſhall we and they in the end be lead to a perfect accomodation.

There is in the laſt place therefore, a double kind of that Perfection which belongs to the ſtate of this life. A Perfection according to the covenant of Nature: and a perfection according to the Covenant of Grave. When God made his Creatures, he appointed an order for them, in reference to which they are all ſaid to obey the Law of their Creation. Man being endued with a reaſonable Soul muſt have the knowledge of this Law, ſo far as concerns his part in it, and conſequently his reaſon alone could direct him every thing whatſoever (except of poſitive inſtitution) he was to do in order to that end unto which he was Created. Upon this does ariſe the Law of Nature, which when he was to obſerve as the condition of his Happineſs and Gods favour, or the continuance of both, that law muſt be alſo a Covenant, and that is the Covenant of Nature or Works. This Covenant being broken, and we rendred too impotent for it, it pleaſed God for Chriſts ſake to vouchſafe another, wherein he propoſes his favour and life upon lower Terms as is ſuitable to our falen ſtate. Now as a conformity to the Covenant of Nature is mans Righteouſneſs, and when there is no flaw therein his Perfection according to that Covenant: ſo a conformity to the terms of Grace is our righteouſneſs according to this Covenant; and when there is nothing wanting in our coming up fully to thoſe terms (as if there be, it will not ſerve our turn), it muſt be our perfection. And here then is that Perfection upon which we are to be reconciled. Not a perfection which conſiſts in doing every thing in the Earth we are bound to do: but a perfection that notwithſtanding our many failings, is not wanting in coming up to the Terms which God accepts for Righteouſneſs to everlaſting Salvation, in the Covenant of the Goſpel. There is a Righteouſneſs of God declared or ſet forth under the new Teſtament in oppoſition to Works (which I have mentioned in my Paper of Juſtification, and explained to my content in my laſt paper of the Covenants), and it is according to this Righteouſneſs, the World is to know, that the Scripture ſpeaks (N B), when it makes Noah, Job, Daniel, Zachary or any other, juſt men, righteous men, and perfect men in the ſight of God: When elſe, there is no fleſh before the infinite Holineſs that is clean, or that could be juſtified and ſtand in judgment.

Hear O Houſe of Iſrael, is not my wayes equal? When the wicked turneth from his wickedneſs and doeth that which is lawful and right be ſhall ſave his Soul. This is ſaid to be equal with God. If we confeſs our ſins, he is faithful and juſt to forgive us our ſins and cleanſe us from all unrighteouſneſs. Not onely merciful, but juſt. In like manner, God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love which ye have ſhewn towards his Name. Again, it is a righteous thing with God to recomperce to you who are troubled reſt when Chriſt ſhall be revealed from Heaven. Henceforth there is laid up for me a Crown of Righteouſneſs which the Righteous God ſhall give me. If God, it ſeemes, from ſuch Scriptures as theſe, ſhould put no difference between the penitent ſinner and others, he would not be righteous according to that righteouſneſs which is aſcribed to him in theſe and the like places, although if he ſhould deſtroy the world for one tranſgreſſion, we could not accuſe him of wrong in the ſenſe of ſome others. Of what value then that notion about this Righteouſneſs of God which after many years thoughts I have offered, in the ſaid two former papers (p. 26.27. &c. of the one: p. 7.8 &c. of the other) I leave to Time (when it hath brought the ſame light into ſome other more authoritative pen, that is to forget from whence it came) to make the diſcovery, and improvement. I will adde but thus much more, by way of ſurpluſage to it. Juſtitiam in Deo ſacra Scriptura ſaepe nominat condecentiam bonitatis ipſius, ut Scholaaſtici lequuntur. & Deum juſtum vocat, quum facit ea quae congruunt ejus ſapientiae, aequitati & benignitati.

There is no man ſinneth not, ſayes Solomon, in his Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple. This he enlarges in his Eccleſiaſtes. There is not a juſt man upon Earth, that doeth good and ſimmeth not. The Apoſtle to the Romans confirms this out of the Pſalmes; There is none that doeth good, no not one. St. James likewiſe gives his Suffrage. In many things we offend all. And St. John is yet moſt poſitive. If we ſay we have no ſin we deceive our ſelves, and the truth is not in us. On the other ſide, He that committeth ſin (ſayes the ſame Apoſtle) is of the Devil. He that is born of God keepeth himſelf that the wicked one toucheth him not. Whoſoever is born of God doeth not commit ſin: For his Seed remaineth in him, and he cannot ſin, becauſe he is born of God. St. Auguſtine I remember in ſeveral places of his Books does lay ſome two or three of theſe Texts together, and offers us this ſolution. That which is born of God (ſayes he) ſins not. Which is as much as to ſay, There is that which is born of God in the true Chriſtian, and that which is not born of him. In other terms, no man is regenerate but in part, or ſanctified but in part. Not as if one faculty was ſanctified, and not another: But there remaines the principle of Corruption, together with the principle of Grace which is infuſed, that is both fleſh and Spirit, in the ſame perſon: And whatſoever proceeds from the one cannot be ſ • n, as whatſoever proceeds from the other cannot be otherwiſe. I will adde, According to the prevalency there is of any of theſe two principles in the ſoul, ſo is the perſon to have his denomination. The Apoſtle therefore ſpeaking of himſelf when he did the evil he would not, it is no more I (ſays he) that does it, but ſin that dwelleth in me. If it be not be then that does it, the perſon being denominated from the will, and more generally prevailing part) is ſaid to ſin not. And this I-take it, after Auſtive, is ordinarily received by Divines. Nevertheleſs, that which I propoſe here from what is ſaid, ſeems to me to be more clear and weighty. There are ſome Texts ſay that all men are ſinners, and others that the regenerated do not ſin, and the blood of Chriſt cleanſeth us from all ſin. I diſtinguiſh then of ſin. Sin is the Tranſgreſſion of a Law, and as there is a twofold Law, ſo is there a twofold Tranſgreſſion. There is the tranſgreſſion of the Law of Works: Or the tranſgreſſion of the Law of Faith Every man upon Earth does ſin againſt the Law of Works, in leaving undone what it requires, or doing what it forbids in Thought, Word or Deed, even continnually; but there is no man ſins againſt the Law of Grace, ſo, as to leave undone what that requires as the condition of life, who is ſaved. It is true, that as all Power is committed to the Son, the Law of Nature is put into Chriſts hands to be commanded by him, which together with remedying Grace, are parts of his Law. Diſtinguiſh therefore between ſinning againſt one or other Precept of Chriſts Law: and ſinning againſt it as a conditional Covenant, by nonperformance.

It will be for profit, yet, to multiply the ſame matter. If thou will enter into Life (ſays Chriſt) keep the Commandements. Neithe Circumciſion nor uncircumciſion availeth any thing (ſays the Apoſtle) but Faith working by love in one place, but a new Creature in another, but the keeping the Commandements of God in a third. Do we make void the Law through Faith? No, we eſtabliſhed it. That the Righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the fleſh, but after the Spirit. The Doers of the Law ſhall be juſtified. It appears by multitudes of ſuch Scriptures as theſe, that the Law, or commandements of God are to be kept or fulfilled; that the fulfilling them is required as neceſſary to the perſon juſtified, and conſequently as the condition (which is all one) of pardon and life. To help us out here therefore, we muſt diſtinguiſh after our more ſober and beſt Divines; The Law of God may be conſidered rigidly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : or not rigidly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, with condeſcention to human frailty, according to the meaſure in every one of the gift of Chriſt, or according to our Model, ſtrength or grace in this Life, & that degree of performance formance God which requires of us, preciſely in the new Covenant, to the obtaining Salvation. It is in the latter the mild the gracious, not in the former the rigid ſenſe, that ſuch Texts are to be interpreted; that the Law or Commandements are fulfilled; and that the obſervation is made neceſſary to the juſtified and ſaved. That is, I ſay again, not according to the model of our ſtate of innocency, but faln eſtate; not according to the Rigour of the Law, but Equity of the Goſpel; not according to the tale of Brick or preſcript of Do this and live, but according to Gods merciful acceptation of what we do through the meritorious obedience and oblation of Chriſt Jeſus. I muſt bring this yet more home. As the Law is taken for the Law moral or Law of Nature, the matter of the Commandement, is the ſame (I have ſaid) in the Law of Chriſt, Grace and Goſpel, as in the law of Works: onely this materia praecepti, this matter required, may be conſidered as materia abſoluta, or conditionata, as our duty, or as the condition of Salvation. There is no man keeps the Commandements of Chriſt ſo as never to faile in any thing of his duty: But every Child of God keeps them ſo as they are made the condition of Life in the new Covenant. When a man then performes the Covenant, he muſt be judged Righteous according to that Covenant. As there is nothing lacking in that performance to the Terms, he is Perfect; and as he is Righteous and Perfect, he ſins not; that is, he failes not of what is required to the performance of the contition. When St. John therefore ſpeaks of ſinning not, we may obſerve how he counterpoiſes committing ſin with being Righteous or doing Righteouſneſs in the ſame Chapter. The true Chriſtian ſins not ſo as oppoſes his being Righteous, he commits not ſin, as is contradictory to doing Righteouſneſs. He is Righteous now we know, or doeth Righteouſneſs, onely in regard to the Covenant of Grace, and he ſins not accordingly, in regard to this Covenant; that is (as I ſum all up), failes not in the performance of the condition. He performs not materiam abſolutam, the whole duty, but he performes materiam conditionatam, the whole condition of the Goſpel.

By the way here, when the calm Proteſtant will grant to the Papiſts ſuch a fulfilling of the Law as does conſtitute a real true righteouſneſs, and that which is perfect or entire according to the covenant of grace, and ſo accepted of God unto Life: and the moſt violent Papiſts will grant to the Proteſtant that this righteouſneſs nevertheleſs (ſuo modo perfecta, non omni prorſus caret peccato, ideo que ex hac parte perfectu non eſt) is not without all Sin, but doeth both faile in the degree which the Law exacts, and is intermingled with many at leaſt venial tranſgreſſions, ſo that it cannot abide Gods diſtrict judgment according to the Law of works, without need of Chriſts merits & Gods mercy, who does not ſee an agreement in the purpoſe and mind, where there-is yet ſo much variance in the words and pens of thoſe that contend about thoſe matters? That Juſtification is a diſpute of the like nature and iſſue, I doubt not; and it is an excellent pretty book of Mr. Bradſhawes on that ſubject, yet does he ſeem to me, not to have touched this main thing, which I have noted once and again in my former papers to be that, the want of the notice whereof hath ſet the Papiſt and us together by the ears, and the underſtanding whereof will as preſently heal our Controverſies: to wit, That it is not by the Law of works, but by the Law of Grace that we are judged, when we ſtand before Gods Bar for Juſtification. There are but two things to be pleaded (ſayes that worthy Authour) by an accuſed perſon. Either that he hath not committed the fault: or that he hath ſatisfyed for it. No mortal (ſays he) can deviſe any other medium whereby ſuch a perſon ſhould be juſtifyed. Our practical Divines do accordingly thunder againſt ſelf Righteouſneſs upon this foundation. If we ſtand on our own Righteouſneſs (ſay they) then muſt we be able to ſatisfy God for our former ſins, and cleanſe our hearts for the time to come ſo as to be perfect in his ſight. But this is a miſtake. That there is a righteouſneſs of ours that we muſt not wholly caſt away in our Juſtification, appeares from the Pſalmiſt, when he tells us by the rule of contrarys, that it is the righteous and the righteous onely, that ſhall ſtand in Judgment. There is a third plea therefore, which is the onely true plea which muſt be brought, and made good or we periſh; and that is, not that we are faultleſs or perfect according to the law of works (either in our ſelves or another): but that we are juſtifyable by the covenant of mercy as performers of the condition, and that this righteouſs though imperfect is acceptable through the merits of our Redeemer. For the buſines then of Satisfaction, it muſt be treated a little otherwiſe then Mr. Bradſhaw does it, and others, that is, not to be made the matter, or formal reaſon, of that righteouſneſs that juſtifyes us (let me ſay, the whole matter or formal reaſon, for I may be out elſe on the otherſide ſeeing Chriſts merits, our faith or evangelical obedience, and pardon have all their proper parts and office in it): but it muſt be underſtood mainly to ſerve the honour and juſtice of God, as Rector and Law giver, in regard to his dealing with us otherwiſe then according to the Law of our creation as elſe he was bound: for upon this ſcore were the ſufferings of Chriſt penall, and undergone in our ſtead, to wit, that by meanes of death for the redemption of us from the tranſgreſſions of the firſt Covenant, a new Law or Covenant might be brought in, according to which we are to be judged. And when it is at that bar we muſt ſtand, we eaſily know both what that righteouſneſs is which muſt be pleaded, and for whoſe worthyneſs ſake (ſo inconſiderable otherwiſe as it is) it ſhall be accepted unto remiſſion and life everlaſting.

To return, the Apoſtle ſpeaking of the Law does tell us, that he that breakes but one of the commandements is guilty of all; and the reaſon he renders is, becauſe he requires that one, that required the reſt. The meaning is, God gave his whole Law to man for a Covenant, and if one part onely be tranſgreſſed, the condition of that covenant is broken as well as if all were tranſgreſſed. For otherwiſe, he that hath layen with a woman is not therefore to be accuſed for mnrder; nor he that hath ſworn an oath, is therefore guilty of theft. We muſt underſtand the like in reference to the Law of faith, or covenant of grace, and its obſervation. Let a mans ſins be what they will, ſo long as the condition be performed, he may according to this Law be judged no tranſgreſſour. In the one, a man hath committed no theft no adultery nor idolatry, and yet in the ſenſe of the Apoſtle he is guilty of all, In the other he hath bin an idolater, an adulterer, a thief (ſuch were ſome of you but you, are juſtified), and he is guilty of none. The reaſon in both I ſay is, the condition ſtill in the one is broken, but performed in the other. As we diſtinguiſh of the Law, Quâ faedus, & Quâ regula: ſo may we of the performance, Sub genere officii, & Sub genere conditionis. Though we fail in our Duty, we fulfill the Condition, as have ſaid already.

To this purpoſe, it is not to be forgotten what is ſaid of David, that his heart was perfect, that he kept Gods Commandements, and that he ſinned not but in the matter of Uriah. And how I pray was that? Do not we read of Davids Paſſion, his Lying, his Numbring the people, his dealing with Mephiboſheth? was there no ſin indeed that David did commit beſides this? what makes him then complain ſo much, that he was born in Iniquity, and that his ſins were more than the hairs upon his head? I anſwer, there are ſins conſiſtent with ſincerity, and inconſiſtent with it. Sins inconſiſtent with ſincerity are breaches both of the Law of Works, and Covenant of Grace, and that ſub ratione conditionis: Sins conſiſtent with it, are tranſgreſſions indeed of the Law, but ſub hac ratione, no breach of this Covenant. Davids ſins of the firſt ſort were very many, and his acknowledgments pious and true: Davids ſins of the latter ſort was but only in that matter, and otherwiſe it is ſaid that he ſinned not. To be clear as I goe, even for that matter, As I have diſtinguiſhed between the breach of our duty, and the condition; or of the preceptiue part of the law of grace, and the conditional: So muſt I diſtinguiſh this breach of the condition, into that which may be pro tempore, making the puniſhment ſo far due, as that God may cut off the Sinner and damne him: or elſe final alſo, making it peremptorily and remedileſly due, which will be ever executed by him. There is a ſin unto death, and a ſin not unto death, ſays the Apoſtle. A ſin againſt the Holy Ghoſt. Whatſoever inſtance there may be, in which ſuch a ſin hath been committed, as in the obſtinacy of the Jews againſt Chriſt, that rather than they would believe, they would impute his Miracles to the Devil, the general nature of this ſin does lye in this, that it is ſuch, as is inconſiſtent with, and excluſive of the performance of the terms which are required unto pardon and life. The Spirit and New Teſtament are one, and this is to ſin (N. B.) againſt the New Teſtament. De peccato ad mortem quoniam non expreſſum eſt, poſſunt diverſa ſentiri; Ego autem dico id eſſe peccatum, fidem quae per dilectionem operatur deſerere uſ que ad mertem, Concerning the ſin unto death, becauſe it is not expreſſed, divers things may be thought of it; but I ſay that ſin is this, to deſert (or never come up to) that faith which worketh by love, unto death. Auguſtine. De Cor. & gra. c. 12. It muſt be demanded then, what ſhall we think of David in the matter, wherein he is accounted to have ſinned? I ſay that David (according to our Brittiſh Divines in the Synod of Dort) in that preſent ſtate, could not have been ſaved, if he had died: but God having Elected David, provided Repentance for him, that he could not dye in that eſtate. There is a ſin therefore which is inconſiſtent with ſincerity of heart, or the terms of grace, at preſent; or ſuch a ſin, or ſins, which are excluſive of it. This I ſaid in other words but now. The latter only are ſins unto death. The breach of the Covenant of grace ſub ratione conditionis is that ſin, and when final, that alone which is unpardonable. I reaſſume, that whatſoever ſins conſequently, they be which any man commits, if they be not ſuch as are incompatible with Sincerity, Repentance, and Faith, they are fins againſt the Law, and our pardon is purchaſed: but they are no breach (ſub hac ratione, I muſt intend ſtill) of the Law of Grace, no ſin unto death, or no ſin as can hinder the perſon from being judged as righteous by that Law or Covenant, and to be accepted accordingly unto everlaſting Salvation.

And now Sirs! Behold here a kind of Heaven opened to you, I mean to you who are the Children of God, and fear his Name, where all your ſins and iniquities are removed, and where every one of you are righteous and perfect and ſin not. For this is the benefit and fruit of Chriſts Death and Redemption, that he hath delivered you from that Law which you break, and would condemn you for every breach; and he hath brought you under a new Law, the Law of Grace, which requires nothing of you, but what ſub rat one Conditionis you do keep, for he gives his holy Spirit herein, to enable you to the performance. So that, it is not only your ſins are done away, that is not imputed, or forgiven (The Iniquities of Judah, it is faid, ſhall be ſought for, and not found), but this Covenant hath nothing to lay to your charge. And you that were ſometimes alienated, hath he now reconciled in the body of his fleſh, through death, to preſent you holy and unblameable, and unreprovable in his ſight, if ye continue in the Faith, grounded and ſetled, and be not moved away from the hope of the Coſpel. And thus we are come to our period. We grant a perfection which Divines call Evangelical to the Quaker, that is an integrity of heart and life which the Goſpel requires of every man that ſhall be ſaved. If theſe Friends will have more (who have not underſtood perhaps before, how much indeed this is, and what truly they impugne), then they muſt come to that our Divines call Legal righteouſneſs or perfection, which is to live ſo, as never to break any of Gods precepts, both ratione officii, & conditiouis; and if they will maintain this, either that they have it (or have attain'd it) in themſelves, or that it is neceſſary to others unto ſalvation, I ſhall tenderly offer them theſe enſuing Arguments, Reaſons, or Conſideratious for reclaiming them from ſo deſperate an opinion.

In the firſt place, Be it known, that in the Dioſpolitan Councel, An. Do. 415. this was one of Pelagius errours which was there Condemned. Filios Dei non poſſe vocari, niſi qui omni modo abſque omni peccato fuerint effecti. That they cannot be called Gods Sons, who are not in all regards, without any manner of ſin. Which errour alſo Pelagius himſelf there retracted.

In the ſecond place it is worthy our knowing, what was the ground or reaſon of his conviction. becauſe it is like that the ſame conſideration or argument may prevail upon one or other (and more then ſo) of this Sect, that have but the like rational judgments. Nono fatetur filios dei poſſe vocari illos qui quotidie d • cunt dimitte nobis debita noſtra, quod & utique veraciter non dicerent, ſi eſſent omnino abſque peccato. To the nineth Article, he confeſſes that they may be the Sons of God, who ſay daily, forgive us our Treſpaſſes, which verily they could not ſay, if they were altogether without ſin. The Fathers of that Council urged this upon him, that if none could be born of God that were not altogether perfect, then muſt none of Chriſts Diſciples be his Children; for how could they pray to him to forgive their debts, if they had no ſin to be forgiven? How could they pray daily for pardon, if they were any day without tranſgreſſion? Nathaniel was one of the Diſciples of whom it is ſaid, he was without guile, and conſequently as perfect as any Quaker dare preſume of himſelf; and yet Nathaniel as well as Peter, and Peter as well as any other true Believer, are taught by theſe words of their Lord, that they have need of daily forgiveneſs. It is ſufficient to this Argument, if that Prayer be held but a pattern, and no form, as ſome will have it; ſo long as they do not I hope, yet think they may ſcratch it out of their Bibles, becauſe they leave it unſaid.

In the third place, this opinion is againſt the uniform, conſtant ſtream of Gods word, and the writings of holy men, which ſtill run thus, that we are ſinners, that we muſt all repent, and that we muſt always be renewing our repentance, in making our Prayers, Confeſſions, Supplications, Doing our Almes and other good works, and reſting on Chriſt for grace and pardon. Without this ſuppoſition, the whole courſe of our Religion as Chriſtian, will ſink for want of a foundation. Theſe things write I to you, that you ſin not; and if any man ſin, we have an Advocate with the Father, who is a propitiation for our ſins, and alſo for the ſius of the world. There is our ſins, St. John's ſins, that need an Advocate as well as the world. When Ezekiel is picking out three of the moſt holy men that ever were (which inſtance Auguſtine alſo uſes) he names Daniel, Noah, and Job. Of Noah we have the record of Moſes, that he was overtaken. Of Job, we have his own acknowledgment. If I juſtifie my ſelf, my own mouth. ſhall condemn me; if I ſay I am perfect, it ſhall prove me perverſe. Of Daniel, we have a whole Chapter where he is praying and confeſſ:ing his ſin (as himſelf ſpeaks) and the ſins of his people. What is man (ſays Eliphaz) that he ſhould be Clean, and he that is born of a Woman, that he ſhould be Righteous? Behold he putteth no truſt in his Saints, and the Heavens are not clean in his ſight; and how much more abominable and filthy is man, who drinketh Iniquity as water? We are all unclean (ſays the Church, ſutably to this in Iſay) and all our Righteouſneſſes are as filthy raggs. There is one Text moſt full, as moſt common, not to be omitted, which is that of David. Enter not into judgment with thy Servant, for in thy ſight ſhall no man living be juſtified. This is applied by the Apoſtle againſt juſtification by the deeds of the Law. If there is, or ever was, any meer mortal on Earth that lived altogether without ſin, then muſt this Text be falſe; then may ſome men living be juſtified in his ſight, though he enter into diſtrict judgment with them; then may ſome fleſh living be juſtified by works; then muſt ſalvation alone by Chriſt, and the Doctrine indeed of the whole Goſpel come to the ground. For,

In the fourth place, as this is againſt ſeveral particular Texts before named, and the general current of the Scripture and holy Writers: So is it directly againſt the very drift of what the Apoſtle delivers to the Romans and Galathians. It is common for men to alleadg a few ſcattered Scriptures againſt any opinion which yet is true, and we Anſwer thoſe Scriptures: but if an opinion does croſs any one Text, and much more any Epiſtle in the very ſcope and purport of it, ſuch an opinion muſt be left, or all will come to naught. It is manifeſt now that Paul in thoſe two Epiſtles is ſetting forth the Doctrine of juſtification by Faith, through our Redemption by Chriſt Jeſus. For the making this good, he firſt ſhews that all men whatſoever ſtands guilty before God of the breach of his Law. This he moſt induſtriouſly proves of the Gentiles in one Chapter; of the Jews in another; and in the third, What then (ſays he) are we better than they? no, in no wiſe, for we have before proved both Jew and Gemile, that they are all under ſin. Upon this Medium, he argues, that no man therefore, either Jew or Gentile can be juſtified by the Law, for then they ſhould be doers, and not breakers of it. From this truth, that they cannot be juſtified by the Law, it follows that there muſt be ſome other means of their juſtification. And this he declares (as the great concern and Goſpel he has to deliver), to be by Faith, through the Redemption that is in Chriſt Jeſus. This is the ſum of his doctrine and arguing. We may if you will for our advantage put more together. If we are juſtified through Chriſts Redemption by Faith, when none of us have performed the condition which was required of us to our juſtification by the Law of our Creation, then muſt our juſtification be of grace or favour, as being not elſe due. And if this grace is obtained or purchaſed for us through Chriſts Redemption, then is God righteous, though he accepts of us (ſeeing it is for Chriſts ſake) without that condition. And if he is righteous in his accepting any without that condition, there muſt be ſome other procured by Chriſt, upon which he accepts them, ſeeing all are not accepted, notwithſtanding Chriſts Redemption. That other is Faith, as the initium and foundation of all other duty, that is Faith working by Love, even that Love which fulfils the Law, and is ſhed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghoſt given to us, as Auguſtine that great aſſertour of grace ſtill ſpeaks. From hence does there appear that Righteouſneſs of God which is ſet out in oppoſition to our Righteouſneſs by the Law, and mentioned before in its due place; which indeed is nothing elſe but this grace it ſelf, even the goodneſs, kindneſs, favour, or merciful condeſcention of God to poor Sinners, in accepting us as Righteous upon other terms, then thoſe which the Law of our Nature requires, and it were but moſt juſt we ſhould have performed. Which as he grants for Chriſts ſake, ſo does he by his Spirit work in thoſe that are his choſen, that all the glory of their Salvation may be due to him only. Now the perfection of the Quaker does quite over-throw all this which the Apoſtle teaches; and in ſhort terms, it were all one for them to ſay, Sir, we deny your Argument, and your Reaſoning. We are of opinion that all men do not break the Law of God, but that ſome are perfect in a Righteouſneſs, anſwering the Law, and therefore we have no need of any ſuch grace, or Chriſts Redemption (that is of any from Chriſt as without), or other terms, whereby we ſhould be juſtified and ſaved. The Righteouſneſs of God, or the Righteouſneſs of Faith you ſpeak of in oppoſition to Works, is below that of ours, which we build upon for our Salvation.

In the fifth place, This opinion is not conſonant with the Ʋniverſality of Redemption. There are no greater patrons of univerſal grace than the Quaker. This is the excellency of his ſtrength, the Ruben of his notions. But if Chriſts Redemption lye altogether where they place it, in the bringing men off from Sin and Unrighteouſneſs unto Holineſs and Perfection, even ſuch as to live without ſin in this world, then cannot Redemption be univerſal: for the moſt of men remain in their ſins, and are never converted; and thoſe that are, reach not to ſuch a pitch as this is; and conſequently, inſtead of Chriſts having Redeemed all the World, or whole Man-kind, there are but very ſew Redeemed, and indeed none at all. I muſt confeſs I do not think that the Quaker alone is in the dark about this matter. Yet theſe men I count here, are moſt of all out. They look upon the work of Chriſts Redemption to be the work of Chriſt within; ſo they ſpeak, and ſo they think altogether, and then wilfully confound Sanctification and Redemption; whereas Sanctification is a ſeparation of perſons from the world, and muſt be of ſome only, that is the Elect (ſuppoſing Election): but Redemption is of all man-kind, according to the Catechiſme, and the Scripture all over. That which Chriſt hath done for us without, and in the fleſh, is for all. He was put to death in the fleſh; his Death was for all. He taſted Death for every man. But what he does for us within, what he does in the Spirit, that is peculiar, and not alike to all; and the one muſt not be confounded with the other. It is worth our asking therefore, what Redemption and its immediate fruit to man-kind is? and this hath been diſpatcht in my paper about Redemption. The introduction of a new Covenant, and other terms for man to live by, is the main. The Quaker now does place Chriſts Redemption in bringing us up to theſe terms, the performance whereof is indeed our Goſpel-perfection; but he is here ſo miſerably out, that he both miſtakes the terms, or this perfection, as if it were no leſs then the fulfilling every jot of the Law it ſelf; & alſo contradicts himſelf in the beſt tenent he has. For how ſhall the grace of Chriſts Redemption be univerſal, if it be placed in that which is not univerſal? How ſhall Chriſts death be for all, if the great and immediate effect of it, be that which only belongs to the Elect? On the other hand, our Divines we call Orthodox, do generally ſtumble upon this ſame ſtone, in their denyal of Chriſts Redemption to be univerſal. It is not ſufficient to them for the holding Chriſts Redemption to be univerſal, that he hath procured that all may be ſaved, if they believe and repent, which are our new terms; unleſs he hath procured alſo that they believe and repent. But it is the Elect only do believe and repent, and therefore they hold the Redemption only of the Elect. Theſe men (how many of them ſoever they be) have not yet learned to diſtinguiſh the conditien from the perfermance; and that Chriſts Redemption does lye in procuring the condition, not perfermance, for the world. They know and will ſay that there is another condition required of us by the Law of our Creation, and if man may be juſtified without that, then muſt there be grace in the grant of this. And this grace they are then to underſtand more, is that grace which is ſo magnified in the (ofpel, the grace that came by Jeſus Chriſt as the Law by Moſes, the grace it ſelf of our Redemption. Let the Quaker then know it is not Chriſts bringing man up to the terms of God, but his bringing down God to the terms of man (that is, to ſuch as are ſutable to his falne eſtate), wherein the great work he hath done for us, is to be fixed. And let theſe Orthodox know the ſame likewiſe, that it muſt be therefore his procuring ſalvation upon our Faith and Repentance; and not Repentauce and Faith for our Salvation, which is the direct and immediate effect of his Redemption. But what? Is not our Believing and Repentance then the fruit and purchaſe of Chriſts death? Be not offended Sirs, our Faith and Repentance are a fruit of his Spirit. the work of our Sanctification, and proceeds from Election. See my reaſons in p. 29. of my firſt paper.

In the ſixth place. It ſeems to me, that the want of more light to diſcern between truth and truth, is the occaſion of perſiſting to theſe Friends in their errour, and to us in our oppoſition. It is true what we ſay, that no men but ſin; and it is true what they ſay, the Regenerate ſin not: The Scripture ſays both. The Child of God ſins not, ſo as that ſin hath dominion over him when he ſins. The prevailing intereſt of his Soul is for God above the fleſh and the world, and ſo long he is right in Gods ſight; right, Righteous, or Perfect, according to the Law of Crace; although there be a thousand things wherein he might do more good, or leſs evil than he does, and ſo is imperfect, unrighteous, and a manifold ſinner according to the Law of work. The truth is, there is ſomething here at the bottom, which theſe men ſee, and our common Proteſtants do not ſee, which makes them think they ſee more than we, and more than they do ſee. It is this. that there can be indeed no juſtification of any, but according to ſome Law, where we can plead that we are innocent, or that we have kept that Law, and that perfectly, ſo that we are Righteous according to it. This being ſeen, they come on too faſt, that they ſin not; before they have learned to diſtinguiſh between Law and Law, Righteouſneſs and Righteouſneſs, Juſtification and Juſtification, Sin and Sin. They ſin not, they are Righteous, and by that Righteouſneſs I muſt ſay with them (where they have our Divines on the blind ſide) are juſtified, to wit, according to the Law of Faith, or as they are judged at the Throne of Grace; but they do ſin, they are Unrighteous, and no fleſh living can be juſtified according to the Law of Works, or at the bar of the Ten Commandements. When the Apoſtle argues againſt juſtification by the Law, he proves none can be juſtified by it, becauſe all do break it. Thoſe that will follow truth ſhall argue as ſtrongly; if we be ju •• ified by grace, then we muſt be righteous and perfect, according to the Law of it. The Orthodox are quite out that will have any juſtified without a Righteouſneſs that is perfect according to the Law that juſtifies him (to wit, in regard to the conditional, though not the preceptive part of it). The Quaker is quite out that will have this Righteouſneſs perfect according to the ten Commandements which does not juſtifie him. The lover of Truth and Mediocrity will have every man have the Righteouſneſs of a perfect heart for his juſtification, and yet no man be juſtified but by the grace of God, through the Redemption which we have in Chriſt Jeſus. There is pardon of ſin, and juſtification; theſe may be diſtinguiſhed, not divided. Pardon refers to the law of works; juſtification to the law of Faith, or the Goſpel. For this cauſe (ſaith the Apoſtle) he is the Mediatour of the New Teſtament, that by means of death for the Redemption of the Tranſgreſſions that were under the firſt Teſtament, they which are called may receive the promiſe of eternal Inheritance. The firſt Covenant originally is that of Nature, and the firſt Teſtament belonging to the Jew, repreſented that firſt Covenant, and the Tranſgreſſions for which Chriſt ſhed his blood, are our ſins only againſt that Covenant: If there be any body ſins againſt the new Covenant, there is no Redemption for ſuch. We have a pardon then in reference to the law of works, but we are juſtified in reference to the law of Faith. To wit, If we are accuſed as Tranſgreſſors of the Law, we may confeſs it that we are guilty, and plead our pardon through Chriſts Redemption; but if we are charged as Tranſgreſſors of the law of grace, we muſt not plead our ſelves guilty but righteous, and ſuch as perfectly come up to the terms required in the Goſpel, or elſe we are gone. It is true, Chriſt hath purchaſed forgiveneſs, but it is upon condition. Pardon is of the Tranſgreſſions of the Law, but this condition is of Righteouſneſs according to the Goſpel, and our juſtification lyes in the performance of the condition.

In the ſeaventh place, This Opinion, inſtead of leading theſe friends to the Spirit and the Life as they ſpeak, does lead them from both, and bring them back to the letter, and the fleſh, and miniſtration of death. To underſtand this, The Apoſtle we know does diſtinguiſh between the Letter and the Spirit. The Letter killeth, the Spirit giveth Life. This diſtinction is expreſſed otherwhere by the Law of the Spirit of life, and the Law of ſin and death. The Law of Faith, and Law of Works. The Covenant of Nature, and Covenant of Grace. The Law of Works is call'd the Letter, as having been writ in ſtone, and is the miniſtration of death, the Law of ſin and death, or that which killeth, becauſe there is none but break it, and ſo are guilty of fin and death by it. The Covenant of grace is the Law of Faith, that being the condition of it; it is the Law of the ſpirit of life, or the miniſtration of life for the contrary reaſon, becauſe we are enabled through grace or this ſpirit, to the performance of this Law, ſo as to be Righteous according to it, and live by it. The juſt man ſhall live by his Faith. And unto the Law of the ſpirit of life, is added, in Chriſt Jeſus, becauſe it is he hath procured this Law for us, which is indeed the great benefit of our Redemption. Now while the Spirit is given us for the performance of the condition of this Covenant, (it being the New Teſtament, not the Law which is the miniſtration of the Spirit) it is a great miſtake in theſe Friends to expect ſuch help from it, as to perform the condition of the Covenant of Nature, or Law of Works. The Spirit indeed does help us, but it is to keep his own Law, the Law of the Spirit, and that Law whereby we may have life. If we do look to fulfill the Covenant of Nature, we muſt return to our original Righteouſneſs, and our free will which we loſt in Adam, and that is to go from the Spirit to our ſelves who are but fleſh. But what? Is not the Law of God the rule of our lives? and does not the Spirit of God lead us according to rule, and bring us to a conformity to his law? I anſwer no doubt of it: but that is a conformity ſo far as reaches the fulfilling the terms of the Goſpel, but not thoſe of Works. The law of grace does require a ſincere walking before Go! in all his Commandements, and the Spirit of God does certainly help us ſo far as we ſin not againſt that ſincerity, or ſin, no ſins inconſiſtent with theſe terms: but the ſpirit is not given to bring us up to the terms of the Law, and that we ſhould not ſin at all. What ſhall we ſay that Abraham as pertaining to the fleſh hath found? By the fleſh we are to underſtand works as appears in the next verſe: and ſo is the ſpirit oppoſed to the fleſh, as it is oppoſed to the law of works. If we ſeek therefore for a Righteouſneſs by our works, that is according to that law, we ſhall find what Abraham did, as pertaining to the fleſh. We ſhall find no ſuch matter. O ye fooliſh Galathians (ſays the Apoſtle) having begun in the ſpirit, are ye now made pe • fect by the fleſh? The Galathians belike who had received the doctrine of grace by Paul, were come to be ſeduced to the opinion that they muſt keep Moſes Law, or elſe they could not be ſaved; and this is their ſeeking to be made perfect by the fleſh. The fleſh and nature are Synonymous terms, and as in reſpect of thoſe who were Jews by Nature, the works of the Law, as given by Moſes are called fleſh: ſo muſt the works of the Law, as a Covenant by Nature, be fleſh in reſpect to the reſt of man-kind. If the Quaker then is come to ſeek life by ſuch a following his light as muſt anſwer the Covenant of Nature it ſelf; that is by a perfection as is without ſin againſt the Law, he is plainly under the notion of the ſpirit, brought at laſt to the fleſh for what he ſeeks.

In the laſt place, It is an ancient ſaying that he who looks but one thing is eaſily miſlead. It ſeems that theſe Friends do apprehend that our doctrine which oppoſes perfection does ſerve for the boulſtring up men in their ſins, and lull them into ſecurity, that though they live and dye in their wickedneſs, they muſt be ſaved; and this being taught eſpecially among us Proteſtants, who believe that we are juſtified by Chriſts Righteouſneſs without works, does appear very deſtructive to many ſouls, which makes them out of an intention which we may ſuppoſe zealous for godlineſs, and the promotion of a good life, to fall on our Divines with ſo much tragical exclamation as they do on this point: When in the mean time they neither have conſidered what our Divines do ſay that removes all ground for any ſuch abuſe; nor what indeed are the conſequences of their own doctrine, which under Pelagianiſme, Donatiſme, and the like names, hath been ſo often exploded, as utterly intolerable in the Church of God. For their conviction in both theſe, I would not in the way have them ignorant what doctrine it was Paul Preached, and upon which the like conſequences was faſtened by ſome perſons at that time, that if grace abounded, they might therefore live in ſin: It is but the ſame doctrine of Gods abounding free grace, mercy, and forgiveneſs through Chriſt to poor Sinners that our Divines do bring againſt the doctrine of perfection (ſetting the unſound ſenſe of imputed Righteouſneſs aſide), which Paul Preached, and pleaded againſt thoſe who would bring in the works of the Law for their juſtification. And when theſe Friends have pondered the Apoſtles anſwer to what was alleadged againſt him, there will need but little more to be ſaid by us here unto the ſame. There are two things particularly our Divines teach. The one is, that notwithſtanding grace be imperfect in this life, there is no man may ſin for all that, in any the leaſt thing whatſoever: That is, though our holineſs be imperfect, yet is it our duty to be perfect, and we are ſtill to be preſſed to go on to perfection. The other is that a ſtate of grace will not ſtand with any ſin in dominion. That is, that whoſoever does willingly and wilfully live in any known ſin without Repentance unto death, he cannot be ſaved. And what is the reaſon then, when theſe two things are ſtill taught, that theſe men ſhould charge the Orthodox with that conſequence which they do ſo effectually diſclaim? Let them look into any practical Books of ours, and ſee if obedience, which is univerſal, be not given as the chief note ſtill of an upright man, and of that Faith which is ſaving? And what would they themſelves now ſay more? If this rather, without ſome 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (as ſo far as human frailty, according to the ſeveral complexions, circumſtances, and temptations of perſons, by infinite goodneſs and wiſdom will be allowed) be not more ſtrict than can be borne. Will it not indeed ſuffice that a man is upright before God in his deſires and endeavours after perfection, that is the having reſpect to all his commandments, unleſs he alſo be perfect, and his works overtake his will? What then ſhall become of the generation of the moſt juſt? Let us ſee when this one inconvenience they apprehend as conſequent to our doctrine is wiped off, whether the ſeveral inconveniences that follow their doctrine doe not require more heed.

Firſt then, where they ſay our doctrine does lead men into ſecurity, remiſneſs of life, neglect of their duty, a ſinfull courſe: how muſt their doctrine hurle men into deſpaire, and lead them by that to the caſting off the whole care of God and their ſouls altogether? There is no meanes under Heaven ſo likely to bring a man to give up all, as to make him deſperate. If it will not ſerve a man for his acceptance with God that he is ſincere in his deſires and endeavours of walking before him, unleſs he attain to perfection, or to a life that is wholy without ſin in this world, then muſt the heart of the moſt holy and mortified man upon earth be quite broke and diſcouraged for ever. There is mercy with thee (sayes David) that thou maiſt be feared, If God were nor good and merciful to conſider mans frailty, to pardon his ſhortneſſes and imperfections, and bear with him, we ſhould not fear him, that is worſhip or ſerve him, for it were to no purpoſe to go about it, ſeeing we could never pleaſe him. Alas! that theſe folkes did but know what they do, when they bring in ſuch doctrine, who themſelves muſt tremble to be judged by it. O ye fooliſh Galathians! who hath bewiched you, that you ſhould depart from that comfort and peace which ſome of you I believe ſometimes had in believing and tru • ting on Chriſt altogether for your pardon and reconciliation with God, that you ſhould be brought now to the works of the Law, and theſe terms, that if you do them you ſhall live in them? Is there any indeed of you think that you are able, and doe continue in all things that are written in the book of the Law, or in all things that are written in the tables of your hearts to do them? And are you ignorant that upon that account, and that alone, that none do, or are able to do ſo the Apoſtle tells you, As many as are of the works of the Law are under the curſe? Alas Sirs! what mean you, when we are under the miniſtration of the New-Teſtament, which brings the Spirit and liberty (where the Spirit is there is liberty), and righteouſnes (for by the law of faith the Chriſtian hath a righteouſneſs to plead and to be juſtified by) and ſo life, you ſhould be ready to return into a Jewiſh or Natural bondage, to ſeek for it from that onely which can bring death, and is the miniſtration of ſin and condemnation?

Secondly, I wiſh, into whatſoever conſequence our doctrine may lead ſome of our people, that your doctrine does not lead your people into ſome evils more ſecret and ſpiritual, but much more deadly to the ſoul, then our ordinary ſins are. When we ſhall ſee a perſon (ſuppoſe ſome Youth of either Sex) as ſoon as they are but wrought over to your party, be ready immediately to look on all the reſt of people at a diſtance to a neglect, nay even to a contempt of the moſt grave, ſerious, holy of profeſſours which they before converſed withall, and ſo talk to them as if they knew nothing ſtreight in compariſon of them, but as men altogether in the dark without light or life were to be ſeparated from, till they arrive to their attainment, or higher ſtate. I know not what you your ſelves may ſay at ſuch a ſight, nor what ſome others may think who paſſe it by with a ſmile or jeſt at the folly, or elſe with wrath, ſcorn, and indignation at the inſolence, and infinite preſumption: but I for my part muſt profeſſe it, as to my own ſoul, to be a matter of a very deep, ſad, and afflictive apprehenſion, to behold ſuch a novice falling into the condemnation of the Devil. Alas! what is it if the Devil himſelf were again in his firſt ſtation that he would ſay, but I am now in that Seraphical ſtate, as is above all Cherubims, Thrones, Dominions, Angells, Archangells. I am like God, and none of theſe are like to me. If pride, if Spiritual pride, if the moſt damnable pride, to be proud of Gods grace, which conſiſts in ſuch a monſtrous overweening conceit of a mans ſelf as this, that he is perfect (and in one too who hath ſcarce broken the ſhell yet in Religion), to the neglect, deſpiſing, continual cenſuring, and ſetting at naught of others, be no evil, then may the prudent, the ſober, and pious amongſt you who are beſt able to ſee, and to mourn for the miſcarriages of your ſect, have leſſe reaſon to fear the tendency of this doctrine of Perfection: But if it be the way of Chriſtians to be humble, to look on themſelves as vile, as nothing, to live altogether on dependance upon God, each man in lowlines of mind eſteeming of others better then themſelves, then will it be your duty to have more care of what you are to rebuke, and of what you are to teach. Leaſt that which is lame be turned out of the way, and that which is weak be deſtroyed.

Laſt of all, There is the danger, that exceeding danger in the very entainment of this opinion, that I am afraid at my heart it cannot conſiſt (if prevalent) with the grace of God, and juſtification of a ſinner by Chriſt. It is a high text, that of the Apoſtle. Behold I Paul ſay unto you that if you be circumciſed Chriſt ſhall profit you nothing. Circumciſion was a bond to the keeping the whole law, and if the Galathians upon the opinion that the Law muſt be kept for their juſtification were circumciſed, they are like as it ſeemes here to bring themſelves into that condition as to ſtand or fall by it. Let them look to it then, if they break but one of the commandements, to the whole whereof they are debtors, the bond is forfeit. The like inſtance is that we have in the Jews themſelves. God had given them his Law, which was indeed to direct them in a holy life; but the chief end of it was through conviction of ſin to drive them to God for his pardon and grace, which was to be received through the promiſe, by their Faith. Now the Jews being ignorant of this end, look to the Law only for Righteouſneſs, and are loſt. I am really afraid at my very heart Sirs, leaſt your caſe be the very ſame in effect with theſe. You have the Goſpel Preached, and if you accept of your pardon through Chriſt there is no more required, but the walking ſincerely before him, and acknowledging him your Advocate if you ſin, and you may be ſafe; but you have taken up an opinion that the whole Law muſt be kept, that you muſt live without ſin, and unleſs you come up to this pitch, you cannot be ſaved. What is here then, I ſay, but ſuch an Opinion as that of the Galathians, and ſuch an eſtabliſhing of your own Righteouſneſs as the Jews was; only with this difference indeed in both, that it is more. For the Righteouſneſs of the Law, as given by Moſes, was not thought by them ſo ſtrict as we know it to be, as given by Nature. And if they ſhall ſtand for their lives upon theſe terms, who is not apprehenſive of the danger of ſuch Doctrine? For I teſtifie again to every man, that whoſoever of you are juſtified by the Law, ye are fallen from Grace. I remember when Feſtus had brought Paul out to Agrippa, and he had opened and pleaded his cauſe before him, Agrippa ſaid unto Feſtiu, This man might have been ſet at liberty, if he had not appealed to Caeſar. If theſe Friends, being at the Bar of the Goſpel, would ſtand to that grace we have there, they might be freed by courſe with other honeſt Chriſtian folks, through the Redemption which is in Chriſt Jeſus. Who hath any thing to charge upon them? But if they will appeal from thoſe terms under which we are brought by Chriſt, unto their perſection, which is the terms of the Law, to be judged by that; what can we ſay elſe, but they have appealed unto Caeſar, and to Caeſar muſt they go. Unto your perfection you have appealed, and when you ſhall be found imperfect, as all fleſh living muſt be, what ſhall become of you before the great Tribunal of God? O Lord! Thou ſeeſt mans fooliſhneſs, and knoweſt his danger. If any of theſe poor people are indeed upon ſuch a precipice, as my Soul fears for them, deliver them, ſave them from it, bring them to a right mind, that they may not depart from thy grace, to go to their own Ciſterns. They went to the Wells, and there was no Water; they returned with their Veſſels empty, and were aſhamed. We have a ſingular preſident in Job. A man may wonder ſometimes why God ſhould deal ſo ſeverely with that Saint. It was not perhaps without cauſe. Job was a holy perſon, and he knew it, he ſtood upon it; and it is poſſible he might by that temper of his, be one who in the eſtabliſhing this Righteouſneſs of his own, was apt to forget to ſubmit to the Righteouſneſs of God, and that this was the very ſecret cauſe which makes him have need of ſo ſufficient a courſe to be taken for reducing him out of that danger. Friends! Let me ſpeak to you here in thoſe words which Eliphaz did to his Friend. Surely you have ſpoken in my hearing, and I have heard the voyce of your words, ſaying, We are Clean without Tranſgreſſion; we are Innocent, neither is there Iniquity in us. Let me then ſpeak to you in the words alſo of God. Who are theſe that darken Counſel with words without knowledge? I humbly beſeech the Lord, that what is offered here unto you, to the like end (ſuppoſing the end of the Lord to Job, herein to be ſuch), may be received with the like effect. That you may ſay, Behold we are vile, what ſhall we anſwer thee? we will lay our hands on our mouths. Once have we ſpoken, but we will not anſwer; yea twice, but we will proceed no further.