THE LIFE OF JUSTIFICATION OPENED. Or, A Treatise grounded upon Gal. 2. 11. Wherein the Orthodox Doctrine of Justification by Faith, & Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, is clearly expounded, solidly confirmed, & learnedly vindicated from the various Objections of its Adversaries. Whereunto are subjoined some Arguments against Universal Redemption. By that Faithful and Learned Servant of jesus Christ Mr. JOHN BROUN, sometimes Minister of the Gospel at Wamfrey in Scotland.  JER. 23. 6. In His days JUDAH shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is His name whereby He shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. justificatio est Articulus stantis & cadentis Ecclesiae. LUTH. 
Printed in the Year. M.DC.XCV.   

THE PREFACE TO THE READER.  
IT is the true wisdom of a Christian to understand aright and with a spiritual eye to discern the great difference between the Law and the Gospel, the Covenant of Works and that of Grace, the Legal and Euangelical Justification, the ignorance whereof is the great Cause of most errors this day among professed Christians. When our blessed Saviour came into the world, he found flowing out of this bad fountain a multitude of Heresies in the Jewish Church, deceived by the Pharisees, blind Leaders of a blind People, erecting & establishing their our Righteousness before the throne of God. And it is certain that our Lord Jesus Christ was rejected of the Jews, because they could not believe their own unrighteousness, misery & condemnation by the Law, nor be made to seek in the Messiah his Sufferings & Satisfaction the true expiation of sins and a complete Righteousness, sufficient to eternal happiness. Certainly they understood not the promises of the Prophets, especially that of Isaiah Chap. LIII. neither looked they to the end of the Ceremonial economy & Law which was to be abolished, 2 Cor. 3. 13. Of this Judaical error we have a clear example in the Apostle Paul, before his conversion a Pharisee, & by his great Masters well instructed in the letter of the Law. For he looking upon himself, and not understanding the nature of the Law in its Spiritual meaning, was in his own eyes no sinner, but a just man, living, and having a right to pretend a sentence of Justification before God upon the account of his works according to the Law. But when it pleased God to reveal his Son to his soul, he could count all things but l●ss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ, and desire only to be found in him, not having his own 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. 8, 9 And so became a great example of all true Converts & Believers, & his Conversion a Demonstration of this Euangelical Doctrine, that no man is Justified by his works, but by the Righteousness of Christ imputed & by Faith received & applied.  
No doubt, Christian Reader, but this doctrine is the whole scope of the same Apostle in his Epistles to the Romans & Galatians. For having proved both Jews and Gentiles to be all under sin, & supposing consequently that by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in the sight of God, he showeth, that all elected sinners coming short of the glory of God, must be justified freely by his grace through the Redemption which is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be our Propitiation through faith in his blood, so that all boasting may be excluded; which cannot be, if a man could be justified by his works. Yea the Apostle Chap. 4. gives a Demonstration of this doctrine out of the examples of Abraham & David, to whom after conversion, Righteousness is imputed & sin pardoned by faith in the promise. In his Epistle to the Galatians, he likewise presseth this Doctrine against the heresy of judaizing Ministers, who would have mingled the Law with the Gospel, and rejects their sentence as another Gospel worthy to be Anathematised, with every one who teacheth it, though even an Angel from Heaven; since he saith upon the matter, that Christ is dead in vain, as we see Chap. 1. 8, 11. Chap. 11. 21.  
How happy were the Church in these days, if the Doctrine of Gospel-Justification did continue pure, & could be propagated & transmitted to the following ages! But it is too manifest that the Christian Church, by Heathenish & Jewish errors upon the one hand, & by Pelagian infusions on the other, hath lost a great deal of her primitive sincerity & purity. Certainly the Roman Superstitions, tending only to the establishing of humane Righteousness in God's sight, are clear demonstrations of a corrupted doctrine, yea of that Apostasy of the latter times so oft soretold by the Apostle Paul. For we see that Popery is wholly erected upon a Judaical & Pelagian Righteousness, proceeding from the bitter root of the Heathenish freewill, whereby the corruption of Nature is denied, sin excused, the faculties of Nature, as sufficient to all good works, asserted; especially when they are sustained by a sufficient grace given to all men for obtaining eternal happiness. But this great error, worthy of the Apostles Anathema, was abominable in the eyes of our Protestant Fathers: and therefore the Doctrine of a contrary Gospel-Justification was the greatest reason of separation, especially when they heard the trumpet from Heaven sounding and crying, come out of Babel, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. And herein we must admire the wonderful providence of God, that the Protestants did aggree in this point of Justification, even when their minds were distracted about the Doctrine of the Lord's Supper: and it is known how careful the Lutherians are, even to this day, in following the Doctrine of their Master in this great Article.  
But alas! it is a sad & lamentable thing, that Arminians (being fomented by the Kings of France & Spain as the immediate way to introduce Popery, saith Wilson in his History of Great Britain pag. 119.) when they adopted the Pelagian grounds, did forsake the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, because they could not join this great mystery of the Gospel with the opinions of Universal Grace & Redemption, as appears in the writings of Episcopius, Curcellaeus, Limburgh, and others, filled not only with Arminian, but also with wicked Socinian errors against the Divinity & Satisfaction of our Saviour Jesus Christ. And how could it be thought, that those books should have been accepted & approved by Reformed Divines & Churches, as we see they are in our neighbouring Kingdom of England? O what errors in that Nation are observed & complained of before by Honorius Reggius in his book de Statu Ecclesiae Britannicae, errors tending even to the ruin of the Protestant Cause! And what shall we say of the latter books, written by Bull, Parker, Sherlock, and others, against the principles of Reformation, expressed hitherto with great agreement in all the Confessions of Reformed Churches. Yea even those who were purer in appearance, pressing the moral duties & practical doctrine of piety (I mean the followers of that famous Minister Mr. Richard Baxter) did corrupt the true Doctrine of Justification, because they adopted Universal Grace and Redemption. For suspending such an Universal Redemption as Conditional, upon the virtue of Faith, taught, that Justification is depending upon this virtue, and consequently that a man by Faith, as a virtue, must be justified: and because Repentance should be acknowledged as a Condition of eternal happiness, beside the virtue of Faith, therefore they imagine that Justification may be suspended even upon Repentance; so that we must believe, that Justification is not only by Faith, but also by Repentance.  
But, O my Brethren, ye are out of the way, ye have left your first love! Remember therefore from whence ye are fallen, and repent, and do the first works! Remember the former days and years! Remember your former Divines at the beginning of the Reformation, jewel, Whitaker, Perkins, and other glorious stars once shining in your Country! Remember the Apology of your Church against that harlot of Rome, written by that most excellent Divine J. jewel B. of Salisbury, & approved of your Fathers! Remember your Confession aggreeing with all the Confessions of Reformed Churches, and confirmed in the days of Q. Elisabeth An. 1562. by a Synodical decree; yea by the Parliament of your Kingdom! Remember the former ages, when the Doctrine of Anselm & Bradwardine Archb. of Canterbury against Pelagianisme sounded & obtained in your Churches! Yea Bradwardine his book de Causa Dei opposed to the Cause of men defended by Pelagianisme, printed first in this age An. 1616. in the days of King james, who himself was a great Adversary to Arminian tenets, by the care and study of George Abboth a worthy successor of that great Divine, because he loved the Doctrine of Grace, and could not endure that Arminian errors should infect the Church of England, to that time depending only upon the grace of our Saviour Jesus Christ.  
But what great iniquity is it now to neglect this grace, and, leaving the principles of Protestant Religion, to rely upon, and trust to our own works for Salvation? My Brethren, how think ye to mingle the Law with the Gospel? the Righteousness of Christ with your own? your faith, depending alone upon your Saviour, with your works? What will ye say, when you will die, & this weighty case of Conscience comes to be resolved, how shall my poor, guilty & sinful Soul be justified before a Righteous God? How can ye thus prepare the way to return, and lead your followers back again unto Babylon? What fellowship hath Righteousness with unrighteousness? or what communion hath light with darkness?  
Yet glory be to God in the highest, who hath reserved by his grace many Protestant and Learned Divines against all these and the like errors. And hence we have the learned Labours of the worthy J. BURGES, J. OWEN. A. PITCAIRN and other eminent Divines, worthy to be remembered in all ages. And to those great Doctors we may very warrantably add the worthy Author of the following Treatise Mr. JOHN BROUN, whose praise lives deservedly in the Churches, and whose light did for a considerable space shine here in our Low-countrieses, when through the iniquity of the times, he was because of his zeal, piety, faithfulness and good Conscience obliged to leave his native Land. Yet was he not idle: for while he was here he wrote, with a great deal of wisdom, against the Philosophers of this time, who would subject the Scriptures to Philosophy, setting up humane Reason for a Rule of Scripture-Interpretations. Moreover, he was known in our Churches by his Books of the Perpetual Morality of the Sabbath, written with a great efficacy of Arguments, and approved by Fr. Spanheym, that worthy and most famous Divine of our age; besides what other Treatises he wrote in English. But we have here his work of Justification as a Posthumus, full of Wisdom, Doctrine and Piety. The Author had committed the care of it to his very intimate and dear acquaintance, the Reverend and Learned Mr. JAMES KOELMAN, who, while he was alive, had the care of it at the press: but before the work was perfected, he was called home to his Master's joy, after he had faithfully served God in his generation. And I being now desired to prefix the accustomed Ceremony of an Epistle to this excellent book of Mr. JOHN BROUN, I undertook it most cheerfully with all my heart. For I must give Testimony to the Reverend & Learned Author of this work, that he wisely expounds the mysteries of Justification according to the Doctrine of the Gospel, & the principles oft he Reformed Churches: that he confirms the expounded Doctrine with efficacious arguments able to stop the mouths of all Adversaries; that he prudently dissolves all their vain oppositions; that he shows himself a true Christian Minister, and a Scribe well instructed by the Holy Spirit unto the Kingdom of God. And therefore this excellent book was worthy to be printed, to be esteemed and loved amongst the best Treatises upon this great and weighty Doctrine of Justification. I need say no more, the work will speak for itself, and the Judicious Readers owned experience will testify that it is written in the Demonstration of the Spirit & Power, profitable for Doctrine, Reproof, Correction, Instruction in Righteousness and Consolation of penitent souls. I pray the God of all grace, that he would give the Readers the Spirit of Wisdom and of a sound mind, that having the eyes of their understandings enlightened, they may know what are the great mysteries of Redemption, and may be sound in the Faith in order to this fundamental point of Justification here expounded and vindicated, with this full persuasion of mind that the Reformed profession is the true way of Salvation, able to save a sinner eternally, according to the Covenant of Grace revealed in the Gospel.  
MELCHIOR LEYDECKER. S. S. Th. D. & Prof. Dabam Ultraj. 1 Apr. 1695.  
P. S.  
Atque haec quidem ego Britonum Sermone, ut potui. Si quid commissum est culpae adversus linguae genium, id condonandum Belgae est. Conari & imitari exterorum linguam, eruditis haud vulgarem, satis erat. Interim si Latino Sermone uti licuisset, pluribus Doctrinam Ecclesiae Reformatae de Gratia & Justificatione explicuissem, ut forte horum animum moverem, qui prima Principia ipsius Euangelii a Paulo ad Romanos, ad Galatas, ad Ephesios demonstrata neglexerunt, ac deseruerunt. Nunc sufficiat ex Confession Anglicana quosdam Articulos notasse, in quos digitum Praefatione intendebam, uti habentur in Corpore & Syntagmate Confessionum fidei, quae in diversis Regnis & Nationibus, Ecclesiarum nomine fuerunt Authenticè editae: Haec enim ibi medium habet locum, quod cum caeteris accurate conveniret. Utinam tali haberetur hodie veneratione, quali fuit habita antiquitus, quando decretis Publicis, Politicis & Ecclesiasticis fuit sancita & roborata! Sic ergò habent Articuli, quos in Anglicum Sermonem versos exhibemus.  
X. Of freewill. 
This is the condition of man after Adam's fall, that by his own Power, and good works, he cannot convert, and prepare himself to Faith, and calling upon God. Wherefore without the grace of God, which is by Christ preventing us, that we may will, and to operating, while we will for doing works of Piety, which are acceptable, and well pleasing to God, we can do nothing.  XI. Of Man's Justification. 
We are only reputed Righteous before God, for the merit of our Lord and Saviour jesus Christ by Faith, not for our works and merits. For which cause the Doctrine of our being justified by Faith alone, is most wholesome, and full of consolation, as it is explained in the Homily about man's justification, at more length.  XII. Of Good Works. 
Good works, which are the fruits of Faith, and follow the justified, although they cannot expiate our sins, or endure the severity of Divine justice; Yet they are pleasing, and accepted by God in Christ and necessarily flow from a true and lively Faith; So that plainly by them a vive faith can be known, as a tree can be judged by its fruit.  XIII. Of works before Justification. 
Works which are done before the Grace of Christ, and the influence of his Spirit, since they do not proceed from the Faith of jesus Christ, are not at all acceptable to God; neither do they merit the grace, which many call congruous. Yea, because they are not done according to Gods will and command, we doubt not, but they have the nature of sin.  XVII. Of Predestination, and Election. 
Predestination to life, is the eternal purpose of God, whereby He, before the settling of the foundations of the world, by his Counsel hid indeed as to us, Immutably decreed, those whom he had chosen in Christ out of mankind should be delivered from the curse and destruction, and (as vessels made to honour) brought to eternal Salvation by Christ. Hence those who are gifted with this notable favour of God, are called in due time, according to his purpose, His own Spirit working, they obey by Graces call, are justified freely, are Adopted to be the sons of God, and made consorme to the Image of his only begotten Son jesus Christ, they walk holily in good works, and in end, by the mercy of God, they come to eternal happiness. As the pious consideration of our Predestination, and Election in Christ is sweet, pleasant, and full of ineffable consolation to the truly Godly, and to those, who find in themselves the efficacy of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the deeds of the flesh, and members, which yet are upon the earth, and by force drawing the mind to things above, both because it does much establish, and confirm our Faith of obtaining eternal Salvation, as also because it vehemently kindles our love toward our good: So it is a very destructive precipice to curious and carnal men, and who are destitute of the Spirit of Christ, to have always the sentence of God's Predestination proposed to their view, whereby the Devil either presses them to despair, or into equally pernicious security of a most impure life. Thereafter, the Divine Promises most be so embraced, as they are generally proposed to us in the holy Scriptures, and the will of God, which we have expressly revealed in God's word, is to be followed by us in our actions.   
Atque hi quidem sunt Ecclesiae Anglicanae de Gratia & justificatione Articuli, convenientes utique cum aliarum Ecclesiarum, praesertim Ecclesiae Scoticanae doctrina, ●ti ex hujus Confession Art. III. VIII. XII. XIII. manifestum est.   

THE LIFE OF JUSTIFICATION, Through faith, cleared, from Gal. 3: 11. For the Justice shall live by faith.  

CHAPT. I.  
The Introduction; & the text (the ground of this following discourse) opened-up.  
THe Doctrine of justification 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 vain & fruitless Digladiations, & Disputes about a thing of naught; seeing in this lieth the Ground of all our Hop, peace, & Eternal Salvation; & a Mistake or Error, as to the Theory in this matter, followed with an answerable & corresponding practice, (I mean 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 our 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 abundantly 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 streams of this wholesome Fountain 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 error 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 main, 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 & Minds of others; and also the Staggering and Shaking of not a few, may be called to mind with grief and sorrow; Not to mention the bold attempt, made by Socinians, to overturn 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 Remedy, and had not effectually dispelled these Clouds: And he had no small advantage of the corrupt jews, who had a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge, 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 & Governors, and in her Nonage 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 shadows, 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 shadows, the jews, 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 find the Apostle Paul (who was especially stirred up, & immediately 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 controversy to the full; & not only handling it in reference to the immediate 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 days, & none at present, who will contend for the Observation of the ceremonial Law, in the sense, & for Ends, urged by the jews, & 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 adays, plead for justification by the observation of the ceremonial Law, as did the jews, against whom Paul Disputed, is, in my judgement, 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 cried-up 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 Main & Essentials of justification, as also about inferior & subordinat Questions, in so far as they depend upon, or are influenced by the Main, will be found to be, upon the matter, one & the same, whether managed of late or of old: For different Terms & 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 wisdom in inspireing His Amanuenses so to write, as not only to refel the Error, in all its Circumstances & Branches, as it was then broached, to the darkening of Gospel-light; but so also as the Truth might remain full cleared, confirmed & saifguared against all the assaults of Satan, in all time coming, by whatever Instruments, & under whatsomever new Notions, Distinctions, Terms of art, Expressions and pretences, the same may come 〈◊〉 be attacked: So are we to acquaint ourselves 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 maintain the same, & fortified against all new Assaults; or, rather, old Assaults renewed, howbeit managed by seemingly new weapons, & new filled 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 Inferior Controversies may be the more easy) may therefore be sufficient to such, at least, whose Edification and Instruction we mostly Intent hear; that is, Such, as are not in case to improve what is written of Controversies, in Scholastic & abstruse terms. And, I judge, who ever handle this Controversy, in such terms only, or mostly, as are above the reach of ordinary Christians, who are herein as much concerned, as others, miss that mark, which they should mainly aim at, that is, Edification & Instruction of such, whose high concernment this is; & who have most need to be plainly 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 & relief; & to be led away from Christ, the only peacemaker, through the slight of Satan, & the deceitfulness of their own heart; & through Ignorance of, or Misinformation about the true Gospel-way of Justification & peace with God; whereby their Ease & Relief may prove more deadly, than was their Distemper & Disquiet. As therefore, I Judge, this concerning Truth cannot be made plain enough; so I think, the less use be made of Philosophic or Scholastic terms (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; seeing, 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 clear the matter, at least to me.  
The Apostle (that we may in short clear 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 justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of jesus Christ; he bringeth another Argument from Scripture, after he hath again repeated the one half 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 explain what is meaned by that word, justified; 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 justified by the Law; & so, maketh no exception of any what somever, no not of the holiest mere 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 clear this one thing. That there is no justification by the works of the Law; so as no colour or show of evasion might be left unto any. Rom. 3. 20. he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by or out of the works of the Law; as also Gal. 2: 16. And Rom. 3: 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without the works of the Law; they having no consideration therein. Rom. 4: 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 signify 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 clear, 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 jews 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 preceding 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 Romans, is rendered by asserting, That Paul's Disput runneth only upon the observation of the Ceremonial Law; seeing now the very Subject of the debate is taken away from us. And, if matters be so, I would fain 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 cut to answer all the otherwise unanswerable Arguments of the Apostle against Justification by works, but yet it is such, as cannot yield satisfaction.  
He addeth, in the sight of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is the same, upon the matter, with that expression Rom. 3: 20▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in His sight; whereby we understand, what justification this is, whereof the Apostle speaketh; even; justification before God's Tribunal, in His Court, who is the Supreme & 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 always denieth to be by works, & asserteth always to be by faith, in opposition to works. As for a justification of ourselves against the false Accusations of Satan, the unjust Surmises of our own treacherous Hearts, & misinformed Consciences, & the groundless Alleigances of men, judging not according to truth, but according to their own mis-apprehensions (whereof Jobs 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 fruits 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, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; to show, That the Argument was irrefragable, & that the truth thereby was certain, & 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 certain 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. verse 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 God's 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 only ground of the life of justification: so that believers their living by faith, saith, their faith layeth hold on the Righteousness of God, revealed in the Gospel, as the only ground of their life.  
As to the passage itself, it is cited our of Habakuk chap. 2. vers 4. where the Prophet being told vers 3. that howbeit sometime would pass, ere the promised delivery should come; Yet it would come; & that therefore he & all the People of God, should wait for it, & live in the certain 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 divers, we need not mentione) the meaning is this, That such, as will not, in faith & patience, wait 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 means, 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 believers, will wait 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 thorough, 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, & believers; & his saying of them, that they shall live by their faith (for we need not own 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 inquire anxiously into this matter, seeing 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 satisfy us, as to its pertinency, though we should not satisfy all by proprosing our thoughts concernin it. ● Conceive, the ground may be this, That this being a general truth, & universally true, that even believers, 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 & Kernel of them all, to the end they may be supported, Strengthened. Upheld, & carried thorough Difficulties, Distresses, Darknesses, Temptations & the like, without fainting, or doing what is unbeseeming a living Believer, in the day of trial; so that their whole life, even unto the end, is keptin & 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 attain 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 decays, 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 believer, 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 believers 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 believers 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 Truths, 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 writings about this matter, is very careful to clear 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 copy 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 find, 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 bias, 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 itself, in boasting & glorying before men.  
From this we may premit, in short, the consideration of these Three things, to prepare our way unto the clearingup of the Gospel-Doctrine in this matter.  
First. That there is a corrupt bias 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 affair: 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 Ambassadors for Christ, after the example of the Apostle, so to preach forth the Grace of God, in this mystery, & to explain the same, as corrupt Nature within, & such without, as are biased 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 Errors & 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; & affirm, 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 proneness 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 pains (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 vain; or that the Spirit of the Lord would have left that Doctrine so fully cleared, wherein our works are so expressly 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 believe & 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 Means of understanding any thing of Salvation, through a slain Saviour; but even amongst the Jews, 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 believeth 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 possess, etc. 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 gain; for he saith, they were gain 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, & Publicans & Harlots are preferred, as being willing to renounce themselves & their own righteousness more, than such Legalists & justiciaries, who confide in something, which they themselves do, & have attained.  
V. This is also manifest from the great difficulty of prevailing 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 find they out, under which they think to shelter themselves from the wrath of God? How many fig-leaves do they sow together, that they may cover the shame of their nakedness withal? And at what cost, pains & charges are they, in seeking to establish their own Righteousness? And all to fortify 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, & find relief, if it can yield 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 & profane, 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 aught 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 entertain 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 error, 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 ways 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 ways, & with what tendeth to set forth His Glory. It is marked of the jews, that they stumbled at that stumbling stone, Jesus Christ, who was the end of the Law for righteousness, to all such as believe Rom. 10: 4. & 9: 32. They had such a prejudice at Christ, & at the way of Salvation through Him, that they broke their necks upon Him, who only was the rock of Salvation.  
II. The innate darkness of men's minds, 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 ways & doings; nor are they acquainted with the holy & righteous Nature of God, nor with the nature of His Laws & Commandments etc. 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 err, in this matter of justification, do entertain 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, Judgement, 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 etc. 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 pass, ordinarily (as is to be seen among Papists) that such as are most for works, in justification, shape the Law according to their mind, & curtail it, as did the Pharisees of old, that it may look more conform to their works, when their works are no way conform 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 etc. & 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 Merits & Satisfaction; & that the whole of our Salvation is so contrived, as Man may be abased, & Christ only exalted.  
III. A vain conceit, that all things in Religion must be just as we apprehend them to be; & our blind, corrupt & biased Reason & Understanding must be the Supreme judge & Determiner of all these Mysteries. Hence the Socinians downright say that 〈◊〉 the Scripture say what it will, & how oft it will, they are to believe & 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 plainly lay down this ground; Yet in stead of conforming their judgements 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.  
IU. 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 own 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 vain & groundless high conceit, 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 answer for one of them, nor stand, if God should enter into judgement with them, & strictly 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 jews 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 pains & labour, to establish their own, & to cause it stand. Proud man would work, & enjoy the reward of his labours, & 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 earned & purchased the crown of life with his own hands & industry.  
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 ruin; & 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 itself 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, seeing blinded & unmortified Man is not in case, to be cast in its mould, nor willing to embrace it, until he be broken, & broken over again.   

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 Ambassadors, & 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 pains, & 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 Margin, 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 verse 22.) & come to Him (as it is verse 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 jeremiah 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 righteousness 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 judah should be saved, & Israel should dwell saifely: And it is further said, that His spouse should wear her husband's 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 chargeable herewith.  
I. To say, That all works are not excluded in justification; but such only as are done by the mere 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 expressly 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, expressly 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 add Fuel 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 days 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 mean only the Ceremonial Law, it is manifest from what is said, that hereby Self & Man shall be much exalted, when justification is made to be by, & according to the works of the Moral Law. If they mean thereby the Judicial Law, than 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 mean all the Law, that was given to the jews, than 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 only 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 days 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 only excludeth such works, as are accompanied with a conceit of merit, & none else: for he excludeth all works, without any such Distinction, even the works of Abraham, (who, doubtless, was far from any such fond conceit, 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 balance of commutative justice, or would merit 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 merits; so that merit is inseparable from them. And shall we think, that Paul Phil. 3: 9 meaned, by his own righteouness', only such works, as he expressly 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 itself, 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 itself, & not in the Lord? for though it were granted, that faith were the gift 〈◊〉 God yet that would not sufficiently keep down pride, seeing 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 itself, 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, seeing even then he was a believer, 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 plain, that if justification were upon the account of Gospel works, that God should not then be said to justify the ungodly; seeing 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 enjoined 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 sighed no man living should be justified, to wit, if God should enter into judgement with him. Why should job 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 gain 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 only 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 judgement with thy Servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, seeing, even though God should enter into judgement 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; o Lord, who shall stand? seeing, 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 judgement, & to plead for his justification, & absolution, upon the account of his performing all the condition required: And would not vain 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 Merits of Christ, which are the Principal Righteousness, answering the demands 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, conform to the New Covenant, & the Condition thereof, he will soon boast, & account his justification not of free grace but of due debt, conform 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 only hath he a right unto Christ's Merits, but unto justification itself; this being called the proper condition of the New Covenant, wherein justification, Adoption etc. 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, conform to the Covenant, to present unto God where-upon to seek & expect the reward of debt, according to the covenant? And so much the rather should we abstain from such expressions, in this matter, that we find 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 Principal Righteousness; so it will have this fair & plausible ground to do so; to wit, That upon our own Righteousness, we are Immediately 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 itself, & we thereupon immediately 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 only thing required of us, in order to our Interest in Christ, & actual participation of the benefits of His Redemption, & of justification in the first place, according to the Gospel method: 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, & withal deny, that it is an instrumental Cause, or that it is to be considered, in the matter of justification, as it layeth hold on Christ, & His Righteousness. (2.) To say, that the very act of faith, or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 chief & only immediate, 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 benefits thereo●: & withal (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 perform, 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 & kind with the Old, only its Conditions are a little altered, & made more easy; & 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 immediate 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 plain gratification of proud Self, & the laying down a ground for vain 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, yielding 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 itself, 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 only Righteousness, where upon we may expert, according to the Gospel justification & absolution, etc.  
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 cross the arguings 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 believer, he should have had, whereof to glory, though not before God, as saith the Apostle Rom. 4: 2. And verse 3. he proveth that he was justified by faith, & that after he had been a believer; for that passage, Abraham believed God, & it was imputed to him for righteousness, was not spoken of & at his first believing; & so cannot be properly meaned of his First justification only; but some years 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 we 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, grief, Anxiety, Legal Repentance, etc. are either Dispositions, Preparations, or Conditions of justification, or Meritorious thereof by way of Congruity; as if there were a certain & 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 stir 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. IU.  
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 clear 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, & explain the truth, about Gospel-justification, in his Epistle to the Romans; where in the first place, he convinceth all of Sin, both jews & Gentiles Chap. 1. & 2. & 3. concluding verse 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 jews & Gentiles; that they are all under sin. And again verse 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, found to be sin & iniquity before God; & therefore to be so far from bringing any relief unto him, that thereby his anxiety is made greater, & his case more desperate.  
III. The way of Gospel-justification is so contrived, & the wakened man (whom God is about to justify) 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 jer. 23: 6. And all His must say, That in the Lord, they have righteousness Esai. 45: 24.  
IU. Nothing, that precedeth 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 terrors & works of the Law upon their Spirits, shall certainly be justified; & experience proving, that several, who have had deep convictions & Humiliations, have, with the dog, returned to their vomit, & become afterward worse than ever, doth also confirm this. So that, after the deepest legal Humiliations & works of Terror & 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 terms & 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 mere 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 preceded it. They must be first accepted through Christ, before their works of holiness can be accepted. The whole Gospel doth most plainly 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, etc. 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 judgement is always 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 judgement; for if He should enter into judgement, with any that liveth, they should not be able to stand before His judgement 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 itself a plain solemn Declaration of the Believers Sense, Conviction, & Acknowledgement 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 believeth 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 man's Righteousness, that it is a plain & open declaration, that he hath no Righteousness, but must go to Christ for a Righteousness. And so far is the believer from reflecting on it, as his Righteousness, & from daring 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 remedy, ventureth, with a peradventure, he may be saved so, & that how ever he can but perish. How far, such a soul, that is fleeing to Christ for refuge, is from conceiveing any ground of boasting in himself, is sufficiently plain, & 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 storm of wrath, & to be saved from the Curse: And though the soul, in the mean 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, until he landed him in Christ, in whom was all fullness, & he found he was complete, & through whom he obtained that delivery from wrath, which he was seeking after, merely 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 Intent not (as we hinted at the beginning) to touch upon, far less to discuss at length, all the many & perplexed controversies, that are moved, both of old & of late, by men of different Principles & persuasions. 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 satisfy ourselves, 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 clear, that justification is not by the works of the Law: for the clearing of justification by faith will enforce that of itself. 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 Error, which he setteth himself so peremptorily 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 always true, that first & last, the just liveth by faith; faith beginneth, & faith carrieth on this life, until the justified man be glorified.  
The Apostle (that we may come to speak something to clear 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 persuading those Galatians to believe; & 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 interpret this life, of eternal life; & this would make the Apostles argument very obscure; we must therefore understand it of a life begun here, which shall certainly 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 job. 3: 5. not only by the Spirit, which may import Sanctification, but also by Water, which may import justification, wherein iniquities are pardoned, & the Soul is washen from its guilt, through the blood of Jesus Christ, represented by the Water in Baptism. Thus are they also put into a new state, being delivered from the Power of darkness, and translated into the Kingdom 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 sins being pardoned: for, because of sin hath Satan, as a jailor, had power over them, as so many prisoners, but sin being taken away, in their justification, they are loosed from his bonds, 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 sins, etc.  
2. Hereby they are brought into a State of Salvation, and being out of harms 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 verse 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 sins, 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 jesus. And all such, as are in Christ Jesus, are justified; as the Gospel cleareth. And again more clearly, verse 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 blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. And again, verse 17. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one, much more they, which receive abundance 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 reign in the life by one jesus Christ. So likewise, verse last. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by jesus 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 sins 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 blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. In & by justification is this forgiveness of sins, whereby they are made partakers of a redemption. See Col. 1. 14. Where the same is asserted by the Apostle.  
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, etc. 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 threatened 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, sin-revenging 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, etc. A person guilty of death, and lying in chains, 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 hour 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 seeing 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 always lying about the neck of the poor sinner, the Curse and wrath of God, as oft as he sinneth. And add 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 misinformed Conscience can bring forth the Law, and terrify therewith a true believer, by charging, him with the transgressions thereof, even after these transgressions are pardoned; but this is unjust and illegal; and the believer 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 unbeliever 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 slain 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 minds 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 lie, 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 lieth 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 Enemy, even all the outward favoures he enjoyeth in the World; how great and glorious soever 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 soever 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 we 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 more places. O! what a life is here, when a poor self-condemned sinner standeth before the Judge, the righteous Lord, & hath his sins charged upon him, and the Law brought forth, cursing every transgressor, 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 Believers, 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, Effeminate, Abusers of themselves with mankind, Thiefs, 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 themselves 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 mouths are stopped, and they are become guilty, Rom. 3: 19 They know and acknowledge that they have sinned, and come short of the glory of God verse 23. & so can expect nothing, but death & destruction, if the Lord should enter with them in judgement, and mark iniquity, Psal. 130: 3. & 143. 2. Yet, the judgement of the Lord being always 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 justify the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 17: 15. And seeing 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, jer. 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 jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that believe. 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 believe on Him, that raised up jesus our Lord from the deed. verse 24. This is the free gift by grace, which is by one man, jesus Christ, that hath abounded unto many, Rom. 5: 15. This is that abundance of grace, and gift of righteousness, which believers receive, whereby they reign in life, by one jesus Christ, verse 17. And that righteousness of one; by which the free gift come upon all believers, unto justification of life. verse 18. And the obedience of one, by which many are made righteous, verse 19 And that righteousness, through which grace reigneth unto eternal life by jesus 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 God's righteousness, to which the Jews 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 believeth, 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 attain 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 gain 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 demands 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, Sinking, 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 benefit, 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 Sons 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 Sons, 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 lie in the womb of this comprehensive Privilege, show 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, jer. 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, jer. 31. 1. Then have they written upon them the name of Christ's 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 Family, 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 fullness 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 jerusalem, & 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 Foreigners but fellow-citizens with the Saints, and of the household 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 abraham's seed, they are heirs according to the promise, Gal. 3: 29. & these promises they do inherit, Heb. 6. 12. What a life hath the Son and heir of a great King, when he may look upon the many great Dominions & Kingdoms 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 thorough 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 heir 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 obtain mercy, & find 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 certainly 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 & Enlargement of Spirit & now they have the Spirit of prayer & Supplication, whereby they can call on God, as their Father in Christ; because they are Sons, 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 Sons 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 believer may welcome all the Dispensations of God, & receive them, as out of the hand of a tenderhearted Father; & say, Thus & thus doth my Father unto me; this is the hand & working of a Father about me: This how sharp so ever it seem to be, yet is the effect of tender love, & floweth from the heart & bowels of a kind & compassionate Father to me.  
6. Their justification saith, They are translated out of nature, & delivered from that death, under which they did lie formerly, unable to perform 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 believe, & 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 ourselves, but the gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. This believing 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 believers have 2 Cor. 4: 13. for now, in order to the effectual producing of this grace of faith in the Soul, their minds 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 minds 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 joh. 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 clear, 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 Majesty? 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 mystery, and this is a prime part of the mystery, and in this mystery 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 threatening of the Law, which is just and righteous in all points; and such, as have nothing to defend themselves by from the threatened death, unto which they are obnoxious; nor any thing, whereby to make Satisfaction to the demands 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 sins, 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 believing on the Son of God, hath everlasting life, joh. 3: 36. And they, who were in a manner condemned already, yet, by believing on Him, are not condemned, yea have eternal life, joh. 3: 15, 18.  
2. What a mystery 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 justify the wicked Prov. 17: 15. And whose judgement is always 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 styled, and so is He held forth, as the object of faith, Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth 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 dictates of this, pretend an Inconsistency here; and therefore will rather pervert the whole nature of Gospel-justification, than yield to the Spirits Revelation of the matter. Hence it is, that they say, a person cannot be justified by God, until 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, seeing God is a God of righteousness, and it is a sure and certain thing, that His judgement is always 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 lieth the truth & the mystery. Such as are really and truly 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 judgement of God, such, as in themselves are Ungodly, are considered as clothed with the perfect righteousness of the Mediator, Christ, that Head & public person, which free grace putteth on them, & they receive & stand under by faith; and so are justified & declared to be righteous by God, whose judgement 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 Transgressors of the Law shall be Absolved and Justified; & yet the Law established, which threateneth death to Transgressors, 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, tells us expressly, 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 verse 30. that He was one God, who would justify the circumcision (or Jews) by faith, and the uncircumcision (that is, the Gentiles) through faith; high 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 mystery, Transgressors of the Law are justified, upon the account of what their Mediator, and Surety, their public person & Representer did & suffered, for Satisfaction to Law, Justice & the Lawgiver; & by what He did & suffered, the Law is more established, than 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 deceit found in His mouth, 2 Cor. 5: 21. Esai. 53: 9 And because it was violated by sinners, & the Curse threatened was due, therefore, He did also satisfy 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 threatening 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 & Lawgiver 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, seeing every man and woman is guilty before God, and is come short of the glory of God? The mystery lieth 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 yielded, 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 virtue of the personal union with the Godhead was, as to itself, either in Patria, and in possession of the State of blessedness; or in a capacity thereto, without working therefore: And it is certain, that therefore His being made under the Law, was for His own 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 God's 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 Transgressors 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 sorrows, 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 Christ's 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 notwithstanding obliged to perfect obedience. It is unreasonable to think, that Adam, by his breach of the Law, was exemed & delivered from any obligation to obey the Law; sin doth not, neither can, dissolve that obligation; otherways, the best way of being freed from the Laws of God, or Man, were to break them, & cast them at our heels. We then being transgressors, & 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 inherit the promised reward; but must also make Satisfaction, for the Violation of the Law, to the end we may escape God's Curse & wrath, threatened 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 Christ's 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 Christ's Righteousness, or compleet obedience, was first imputed to us; or if the Scripture gave any ground to say so, there might be some colour 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 Christ's 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 believer 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 believers have the benefit of both; for as they receive the grace of God, & the gift by grace, & abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness; so they shall reign 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 Christ's Satisfaction taketh not away the necessity of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness & obedience; as some do say, who think, that because we have full pardon of all sins, by virtue 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 yielded 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 judgement 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, merely because of Pardon, be said, or be accounted to have all that was required. Upon Pardon, it is true, he is as much exemed 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 pain 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 complete 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 & complete 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 complete 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, etc. 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 Christ's whole Surety-righteousness: and these two, to wit, pardon of sins, and the Right to the Inheritance, flowing from the Imputation of Christ's 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 Sons, 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 preceding 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 Christ's 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 sins and Right to the Inheritance, etc. By the Imputation of both, or of this complete Surety-righteousness of Christ including both, believers are pardoned and adjudged unto life. Hence our pardon and justification are often ascribed unto Christ's death, not as distinctly considered, or as excluding His Righteousness & obedience; but, among other reasons, because that was the completing Act of His obedience; and to which all the rest preceding had a respect, as to that, which should complete 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 complete 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 Christ's 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 Murder, he cannot be said to be thereby a righteous man, or to have obeyed the Law, forbidding Murder, 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 Christ's obedience be not imputed to us, no proper Righteousness is, or can be said to be imputed to us. Yea (6) If Christ's 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 length, 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 mystery here to be noticed, That a Righteousness, that is not ours inherently, but Christ's, 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 ourselves, and it had been properly inherent in us. Socinians, Papists, Arminians & others, who will not subject their reason unto this mystery, and give credit 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 believe and perform 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 itself; for this they expressly deny; nor yet the Effects themselves, for we no where read of Imputed Justification, Adoption, Pardon etc. which are the Effects. Yea, it is not enough to them to deny this Imputed Righteousness; but in contempt & scorn, they call that, which we name an Imputed Righteousness, a putative Righteousness, as if it were a mere 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 believers, or freely given unto them, so that they are dealt with by God, as Righteous Juridically & legally, or as possessors of such a complete & 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 & certainly be bestowed upon them, in God's appointed time & method. This is the Truth, which the Gospel holdeth forth, to the solid peace, joy & comfort of Believers; 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 sins 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 sorrows, & 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 ourselves & inherently sinners; & being in Him by faith are dealt with as Righteous. The manifest scope of the place, & the plain 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 loins, & 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 merely in its Effects, for its Effects are not truly Imputed, neither can be said to be so; for that natural contagion & corruption of Nature, which is truly propagated to the posterity, & all actual transgressions, 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 sins, 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 virtue 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 themselves was punished therefore. So are Believers, 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 verse 12. & forward to the end, may satisfy any as to this whole affair, who will yield 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 expressly 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, because all did sin; 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 Believers 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 jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many, etc. And so he goeth on to show what & how great things believers receive from Christ, with no less, Yea rather with much more of a certainty, than the Posterity of Adam were interessed in what he did: and therefore, as judgement was by one to condemnation; (saith he) so the free gift is of many offences unto justification; & if by one man's offence, death reigned by one, much more they who believe or receive abundance of grace, & of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one jesus Christ. And as the offence of one Adam was imputed unto all, & thereby guilt & judgement came upon all, making them liable to condemnation: So by the righteousness of one Jesus Christ, imputed to all, that receive this abundance 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 verse 19 for as by one man's disobedience, many were made sinners; & so were guilty, & made liable to judgement & 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 verse 21. he addeth as sin hath reigned unto death, even so grace must reign, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by jesus 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 public 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 public 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 public person, representing all, whom the Father had given to Him, & for whom He had undertaken, & for whose sake He sanctified Himself joh. 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 Captain of their Salvation, vers 10. He is also made & called the Head of the Church, which is, His body & fullness 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, & Believers are members; Thus there is a closely & mystical union betwixt Christ & Believers; 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 & Believers, 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 public person & a Representative; as also for asserting of this Imputation; because Believers 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 satisfy him for this debt, or for what he could crave of Onesimus; as we see Philem. verse 18, 19 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee aught, 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 pursuit 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 volume of they book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will; o 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, & fulfil all Righteousness, Mat. 3: 15. as also to pay the penalty, to make Satisfaction to Justice, by becoming a Curse, & suffering Griefs, Sorrows, Bruising, Mockings, & the cursed death of the Cross: for all this He did willingly & cheerfully. I have (said He) a baptism to be baptised with, (meaning His death) & how am I straitened (or pained) until it be accomplished Luk. 12: 50. He laid down His life, that He might take it again; & no man took His life from Him, against His will; but He laid it down of His own accord joh. 10: 17, 18. And as Christ did really & actually perform 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 Satisfaction 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 otherways 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 layeth dwon his life for His sheep, His sheep must not die & 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 Ransom is expressly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Tim. 2: 6. Many more arguments might be here adduced, for confirmation of this Truth; but I shall satisfy myself at present, with these few & plain 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 desperate 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 merely metaphorical) because they cannot see, how justice & mercy both can with joint hands concur 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 jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in His blood, to declare His righteonsness, etc. And again, to declare His righteousness, that He might be just, & the justifier, of him, which believeth in jesus. Here is a free grace triumphing; & yet Justifice declared and manifested; God declared to be just, and His righteousness manifested; & yet sinners and believers justified freely by grace. So Eph. 1: 7, 8. There is a Redemption through the price of blood; & yet a free pardon of sins, according to the riches of God's grace, wherein He hath abounded towards us, in all wisdom & prudence. But if it be enquired, wherein appear to this mercy and freedom of grace, in our justification, seeing there was a Satisfaction made to justice, for all the sins 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 threatening, 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 joh. 3: 16. (3) Was it no Act of Sovereign 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 Sovereign Grace, that God should provide all this remedy for a few, whom He did choose for Himself out of free Grace and Love, and gave away to Christ, to be 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; seeing this very faith, including an Union with and a marriag-consent unto Christ, is, in itself, a favour nothing, in a manner, inferior to the pardon of all our sins, & 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 merits, is also the free gift of God, Ephes. 2: 8? If these particulars will not abundantly say that we are saved in justification by grace, & by the exceeding riches of God's 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 themselves 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 abundantly 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 again, and to raise himself from the dead; & knowing withal, 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 labours from the Father, whose Servant He was, in this affair. 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 again. 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 Himself a sacrifice for sin, Heb. 9: 14, 28. That He should bear our grieves, & carry our sorrows▪ 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 cut off out of the Land of the living; have strokes upon Him, & make His grave with the wicked; be bruised & be put to grief, 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 grievous torments, immediately in his soul, Mat. 26: 37, 38. & 27: 46. Luk. 22: 44 joh. 12: 27. And pains in his body, Mat. 26. & 27. Chapters. That He should die, and that He should die the Shameful, 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 itself, and to the pains 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 demands, & made a perfect & complete 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 Baptism, Mat. 3: 17. & again at His Transfiguration, Mat. 17: 5. The sword of Justice was awakened against Him, though He was God's fellow, Zech. 13: 7. And did abate Him nothing of what was due. The Lord Jesus gave himself for us, an offering and a Sacrifice to God, for a sweet smelling savour, Ephes. 5: 2. He is a perfect High Priest, continueing for ever, having an unchangeable Priesthood, 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 Sacrifice first for His own sins, & 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 Lord's 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 sins Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. And all sins must be forgiven to us, or our Redemption should not be perfect, nor we saved; for one sin would ruin us for ever; because if the Lord should mark iniquity, & enter in to judgement, 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 acquit & 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 sins, 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 pass 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 jesus Christ, unto all, & upon all them that believe. where upon it followeth, verse 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 jesus Christ, whom God hath setforth to be a propitiation, through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins, that are past. Yea, the forgiveness of sins 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 sins 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, until 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 sins. Paul tells 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 verse 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, burr 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 only ground of our justification; because faith is required of us, in order to our justification, and 〈◊〉 (as they say) itself 〈◊〉 to us as our Righteousneiss; upon the account of which we are justified. They suppose, that if Christ's Righteousness be imputed to a person, & he thereupon acquit & pardoned of all his sins, that person must be righteous, pardoned & Justified, whether he believe, or not; & the Righteousness of Christ must be his, before he believe, 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? until 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, feign 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, tells 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 believe. And notwithstanding of this; he tells us, that this Righteousness is by faith of jesus Christ, & imputed to all that believe, exclusive of others Rom. 3: 20, 21, 22. And again he tells us, that as we are justified freely by bis grace; yet it is through the Redemption, that is in jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in His blood vers 24, 25. And again verse 26: as God is declared in this matter to be just; so is he the justifier of him only, that believeth in jesus. Moreover vers. 27. he mentioneth the Law of faith, as opposite to the Law of works, in that it excludeth boasting; & concludeth again verse 28. That a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law, and verse 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 (saith 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 believed in jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ. And to point 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 & point 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 satisfy 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 attain 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 plain 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 repair 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, fleeing to the Righteousness of Christ, as his only refuge, & resting there, doth proclaim 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 affirm. That Christ hath purchased the whole of our Remission: and Repentance, whatever Papists say, hath no interest herein; nor hath it any merit withit, whether ex condigno, or ex congruo, to procure Remission, & the Favour of God, or Reconciliation with Him; but it is only required in its own place, to accompany faith, & to follow upon it, as a suitable & 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 etc. 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 & confirm 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 precedeth faith, whereby the sinner layeth 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 withal he must have a sight & sense of his sins, & a hatred thereof, as also a purpose firm & fixed, to turn from them unto God, as also an Endeavour after new obedience. Yea, we find sometimes, Repentance pressed, as including faith in it; as when pressed in order to pardon & acceptance with God: Sometimes again it is mentioned together with faith, as being inseparable therefrom. (3.) As the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, and the justification of believers thereupon, doth not put them in such a case, as they shall sin 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 sins, 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 sins, without a true exercise of Repentance towards God, these perpetually accompanying other: yet we must not think, that Repentance considered by itself, 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 public 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, seeing there is no coming to the Father, but by the Son. joh. 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 justification. And he who graciously did provide this Righteousness for us, might also, without the least derogation from the freedom and glory of his Grace & Favour, as appoint the means, Method & way, how he will have us made partakers of the benefits 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 lieth 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 tenor 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 firm 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 solemn and formal stating of a person in Favour & reconciliation with God, and in pardon of Sins; so Adoption is a Solemn and formal stating of a person in a Right to glory and to all the Privileges of Sonship 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 itself, 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, solemnly and formally placed in a state of pardon & Reconciliation, & into a state of Right & Interest in the Privilege of Sonship. As the producing of the cautioners payment, in judgement, 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 Seizing, but the ground thereof; So the Imputation of Christ's merits and obedience is not the formal & legal Conveyance of Right to the Inheritance of glory, and glorious Privileges of Sonship; but is the ground thereof, upon which necessarily followeth adoption, which is, as it were, the Believers Infeosment and Seizing, 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 Believers 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 believers 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, seeing all pardon supposeth sin: but he seeth not sin so, as to punish and condemn 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 etc. 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 sins, 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 answer to this I say (1.) They advert not, that some of themselves do expressly 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, plain 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 plain 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, seeing we do not these things ourselves, in our owned 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 annul & 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 amiss; but He should judge amiss, if He should judge, that we did what Christ did. Our meaning is this, that the Believer, 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 itself, or of that Righteousness, which is imputed; whileas we only say, That Christ's Righteousness is the meritorious cause of our justification, Adoption etc. 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. etc. And who seeth not, that it must be so, seeing 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 suches 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 reason against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. But Paul doth clear 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 days 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 find, that He draweth arguments, pressing unto holiness, from the very nature of their Gospel-justification, & of their State by virtue 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 fountain, & 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 & foil, run & work for the prize, as the hire & ways of our work; yet upon more Spiritual & Gospel like grounds; and by Arguments more suitable to the state of the justified, who only are in case to perform 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 itself; 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 find 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 GOODWIN.  
WE shall now proceed unto another use, & mentione another way, how this Truth, That believers in Christ attain unto a life in justification, aught 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 cheat 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 lean to by faith. If they lean 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 lean unto faith itself, which is called for only to interest 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 himself wholly unto Christ, for Righteousness, Life & Salvation: for faith is the Man's looking to Christ, as the stung Israelite in the wilderness did look unto the brazen serpent joh. 3: 14, 15. and saying, as it is Esai. 45: 24. In the Lord have I righteousness: and it is the believers 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 joh. 1: 12, and receiving of the Atonement in Him, & through Him. Rom. 5: 11. and of abundance of grace & of the gift of Righteousness. Rom. 5: 17. Therefore it is called a believing on His name. joh. 1: 12. & on Him, whom the Father hath sent etc. joh. 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 clear afterward) to receive Christ, and His Righteousness; & consequently to carry the Man out of himself, that he may find & partake of that all 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 lean, & upon the account of which they may expect justification. Faith, in this matter, is as the eye of the Soul●, that, seeth not itself, but looketh out to another. Beside, this would overturn 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, & lean to Him, & to His Righteousness: for with the rob of His Righteousness must they alone be clothed, & in Christ alone must they be found; & they must think of standing before God, having on His Righteousness, that God imputeth unto Believers, & which they receive by faith, in order to their justification.  
I know, this doctrine is not savoury to many, now adays, & as Papists, Socinians & Arminians do oppose themselves with all their Industry & learning unto this doctrine of the Imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ; so there are now a days, 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 join in this: 〈◊〉, & argu● against this Imputation, which the Orthodox have owned and do own.  
Before I come to consider the chief (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 plain & clear to such, as are concerned therein. As to our Grounds, I shall first begin 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 verse 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 verse 22. & on His righteousness; for in Him they shall be made to look for it, & that in rich abundance: 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 abundantly hold forth by the word strength; but a righteousness made over over Believers, & which they own as theirs, and rest upon.  
It is too narrow & scanty an Interpretation, to limit this justification, to the Lords vindicating of His people's 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 seeing there is an Invitation going before to them, to lay hold on the Lord Messias by faith, according to the Gospel Method; and upon this followeth their glorying in the Lord conform 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 jesus Christ. For, as the expressions are more emphatic; so all the circumstances of the Text, point 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 only 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 own.  
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 etc. 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 bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim 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 profess 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 own 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 john Rev. 19: 8. helpeth us to understand the meaning of this Expression, when he saith. And to her was granted, that the should be arrayed in white Linen, clean and white: for the fine Linen is the Righteousness of Saints.  
Against this Testimony; the forenamed Author Io. Goodwin. pag. 130. etc. maketh some Exceptions. as 1, These Expressions (says he) concern the jews only, 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 limit this to the jews, 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 mind to make Christ only a temporal deliverers, as the jews 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 herself 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 suit the Church; because the Church is at all times and always clothed with Christ's Righteousness, being justified in Him Ans. This one answer 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 believers was really, in some measure answerable to that more dark dispensation, made partaker of these Saving and Spiritual benefits, 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 point 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 plain 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 withal hereby the signification and Import of that fine-linen 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 return of the jews, 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 showeth, in his comment on the place) and of this new Bride it is said, that she is arrayed in fine linen, clean and white; and this linen is explained to be the Righteousness of Saints, or justifications of Saints, the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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 jews, 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 clean 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 baptised 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 Baptism, 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 Baptism.  
Thirely a 3 passage is jer. 23: 5, 6. Bohold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a Righteous Branch, and a King shall reign & prosper, and shall execute judgement & justice, in the earth. In his days 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 reign 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 own; 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 own 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 communicate that Satisfaction 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 merits are imputed unti us, as if we ourselves had satisfied. De justif. lib. 2. cap. 10.  
Fourthly, add to this jer. 33: 15, 16. where, as junius & 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 Style & name of the Church, they willcon tribute not a little to our present purpose. And this, wherewith she shallbe called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS: 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 own, 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 herself, & were ungodly, & had all her Righteousness from her husband, & would appear before God in no righteousness, but in her husbands. So that she would own 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 joh. Goodwin 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. Aus. Though this be not said, in so many words & syllabs, yet that same is said in a more clear, convinceing & emphatic manner: so that he, who seeth not this lying in these words, must be more blind 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 own, 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 child 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, seeing 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 believers receive & own Him, as such, & rest upon His righteousness alone by faith.  
He excepteth 3. The plain & direct meaning is, that He shall be generally acknowledged & celebrated by his people of the jews, as the great author & procurer of that righteousness, or justification in the sight of God, upon which abundance of outward glory, peace & prosperity should be cast upon them, Ans. (1.) That this is not to be restricted to the jews, is manifest, seeing it is spoken of the Gospel times, when the righteous Branch shall be raised up unto David, & a King shall reign & prosper. (2.) It is too carnal an Interpretation, to think, the text speaketh only of such a justification, as is followed with abundance 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 linked together; yet they are formally different. (4.) Wherein standeth this righteousness & justification? He tells 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 & essential 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 confirm his Interpretation, he tells us, 1. That the Imposition of name upon either thing or person, often notes the quality, or proprity in either, or same benefit redounding from either, answerable thereunto, as Esai. 9 his name shall be called wonderful, 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 benefit redounding there from; who seeth not how little this can satisfy? But (2.) be it so, that this name shall denote some benefit, 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 tells us 2. That it is familiar to attribute the Effect to its Cause, or Author, by a verb 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, seeing a Righteousness we must have, ere we be justified; and a Righteousness of our own we have not; and therefore must have one imputed to us: and what Righteousness can suit us better than His, who is THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS?  
He tells us 3. That by Righteousness is meaned that justification, which standeth in Remission of Sins: 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 always 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: & seeing 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 mere 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 favour, distinct from the preceding, & 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▪ seeing 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 clothe thee with change of raiment. Here by a vision is signified to the prophet, how the Lord would at length be reconciled to His Church, & bring her in to His favour again, that her service might become acceptable to Him, which now was wholly defiled, and so defiled, that even their High priest, who should wear 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 enemy, had no small advantage against them: and the way is set down in borrowed terms, which are in part explained. First the Lord caused to take away the filthy garments from the High Priest; and this is more plainly 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 completed, it is added, & I will clothe thee with change of raiment. Some, it is true, would refer this to Sanctification; but others unto justification. Iunius' 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 raiment, importeth some suit of apparel, that is not for ordinary wearing, but kept for solemn times, & so may well import the Saints wedding or Marriage-suite: & that which is added in the following 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 GOODWIN.  
HAving seen, what countenance the Old Test. giveth unto the Truth, we are asserting; & vindicat some of these passages from the Exceptions of john Goodwin. We come next to search for confirmation of this truth, out of the New Test. and I shall here begin 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 jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe. But if men would disput against this truth, they should except against whole Chapters, in that Epistle; and disput against the very scope & design, yea and all the Arguments of the Apostle, who, in the first part of that Epistle, is about to clear and confirm that, which he setteth down Chap. 1: 17. as the sum of the whole Gospel, and clear demonstration of its being the power of God unto Salvation etc. 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 itself, because it is revealed to faith; & it is called the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of jesus Christ; & so not faith itself. 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 believe.  
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 & signify 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 jews & Gentiles to be; & is such a Righteousness as is requisite to such, as would be justified in God's sight verse 20. & cannot be had by man's doing the deeds of the Law, by which is the knowledge of sin, & which therefore rendereth their case more desperate; & such a Righteousness, as is had by faith, & which is unto all & upon all them that believe verse 20, 22. and such a Righteousness, as is manifested without the Law verse 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 believe.  
3. He saith. Hereby is mea●t that way, method & means, 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 & means 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 Satisfy 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 only 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 believe.  
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 lie under; but did also yield a perfect obedience thereunto; that so He might make up a full & complete 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, threatened to Transgressors, be not only freed from the Curse, but receive the rich Recompense of reward; yet the law is not made thursdays & void, but is rather established & confirmed in its full force, both as to its Commands & Sanction.  
john Goodwin excepteth 1. There is no necessity, that by the Law, in this-place, 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 & jews were convinced of sin, & had their mouths stopped, & were become guilty before God verse 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 verse 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 jews 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 design of the Gospel, which who dar once have the least thought of? The Law here doth plainly signify that, which was the Rule of Righteousness and of Obedience, & was publicly given unto the jews 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 inquire what he should do to be saved; & said, he had observed all these etc. As to his reasons, they have no force: for. 1. The jews had a zeal for the whole Law, but not according to knowledge, & went about to establish their own Righteousness, which was not in mere 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 affirm, that the Law is therefore said to be established by faith, because faith compasseth & attaineth that righteousness, which the Law sought after, & could not attain. 2. The Moral Law may in this sense be said to be established; because faith purgeth the hearts of believers, & 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 attain? It would seem to be nothing else but Holiness and Sanctification: and if so, the two make but one: and therefore I answer 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 main 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 verse 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 cashiering 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 threatenings of the Law are by the doctrine of faith declared not to be in vain, 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 writing of Moses, with those other books, which together with the writings of the Prophets, make up the entire body thereof, as it was used verse 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 & agreeable 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 contained in the one, than what was contained in the other? especially seeing 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, seeing 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 again? 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 man's 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 preceding 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 mean a Righteousness consisting of such, or of such an obedience to the Law, as hath an absolute & perfect agreableness to every man's 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 seeing 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 Believers turn, where else will the believer find 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 man's condition respectively, than the perfect obedience & Righteousness of Christ! Let such believe 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 sins 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; seeing it is obvious enough, that Righteousness is one thing, and pardon of sins is another distinct thing. No man will say, that a pardoned thief, is a Righteous man; for that were as much, as to say, He was never a thief. 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 chargeable 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 confer upon him the privileges, belonging to persons truly righteous. Ans. This is true, if we speak of a person, who is truly Righteous, antecedently unto this Imputation; as the sinner is supposed to be truly 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 jezabel would have Noboth killed as a Malefactor, she first by injustice and indirect means, 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 confer 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 believeth?  
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 preceding 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 preceding 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 expressly in this join 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 only here confirming, but also illustrating this whole matter, from the Imputation of Adam's Sin unto his posterity; & after many various and emphatic expressions, used there-anent from verse 12. and forward, he saith here verse 19▪ for as by one man's 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 clear to us the comparison thus, That as by Adam's Sin & disobedience, it came to pass, that all men were condemned and died; so by Christ's righteousness and obedience it came to pass, that they wero absolvod, and did live: for Christ by His own Righteousness and Obedience, by virtue of the decree of God, did penetrate the heavens, there to reign for ever, and there he begot eternal life and everlasting blessedness both to Himself, and to His. How alien this is from the whole of the Apostle's discourse, needs not be declared, seeing there is not one word giving the least hint of the Apostle's design 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 pass, that all mankind, that are procreate of him after that guilt, is obnoxious to death: so Christ by His Righteousness purchased to Himself eternal life; whence it cometh te pass, that who ever are procreate 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 verse 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 itself, 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 john Goodwin excepteth pag. 142. etc. 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 mean 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 Believers 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 turn these words vers 12. 〈◊〉 not in whom; but because, or whereas, which the Ethiopic 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 Arabic turn thus, seeing 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 preposition 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, seeing that matter is sufficiently cleared by the orthodox, writing against the Socinians; and we have also spoken of it against the Quakers.  
Again 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 Remedy 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 Remedy with the disease; as that withal & chiefly, 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 & complete, is imputed unto Believers, 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 justified, 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 chiefly consisted in his sufferings. Ans. By the obedience of Christ unto the Law of Mediation, strictly so taken, as distinguished from His obedience to the Moral Law, believers 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, seeing 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 betwixt 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 Remedy 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 Remedy 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 james, that he who offendeth in one, is guilty of all? jam. 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, showeth, that the death of Christ is not understood exclusively; for by His death, exclusiuly considered, we cannotbe 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 agony 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, seeing His being made under the Law, belongeth to His state of humiliation, as the Apostle tells us Gal. 4: 4.  
He excepteth further, 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 certain it is (said he) that that justification or Righteous-making, whereof the Apostle speaketh verse 19 is the same with that, which He had spoken of v. 16, 17, 18. Now that Righteousness verse 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 etc. 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 verse 16. is not free forgiveness, but is that, which is opposite to judgement, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, guilt is not the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation; but tendeth thereunto; so neither is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 itself, as he saith else where; for the text saith, that the free gift is of many offences unto justification; as judgement or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was antecedent to condemnation. (4.) So then, the true meaning is, that the free gift of Righteousness hath respect unto many sins, 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 abundantly 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 point 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 recompense 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 demands of the Law, the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the jus & right of the Law, which consisted in yielding 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 itself in our body, that he might justify us, & be propitious unto us, and that so he might fulfil 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 Goodwin excepteth p. 145. etc.  
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 truly believe in Christ, do in part perform, and desire and strive to perform 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 verse 1. There is therefore now no Condemnation to them, which are in Christ jesus (2.) all that measure of Sanctification, which the Saints through Grace attain unto here, cannot be called a fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law, the Law's 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 believers, 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 suitable effect of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh, as the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 answer the demand of the Law, which we did lie under: Christ performed both, to the end the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or jus & right of the Law might be fulfilled 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 immediately preceded 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 Believers, 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 believer, according to the great variety of their several conditions, callings, & relations stand bound to perform, it cannot be said to be fulfilled in them, by the imputation of Christ's righteousness: for every believer 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 complete Righteousness, that can Satisfy the demands of the Law, where shall believers get a compleet Righteousness? Shall their poor imperfect obedience, wherewith themselves are not satisfied, but complain much of, and mourn for, be a more perfect & complete 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Lawgiver was satisfied there with, & accepted of it, in the behalf of all the chosen ones, & all their defects & sins, in their various conditions, callings & Relations, were done away by the Satisfaction made by Christ: so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 complete 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 jews, to whom he specially addresseth himself, in all this disputation's, 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 jews, who were obliged to the observation of other Laws. 4. The Imputation of the observation of the Moral Law would not have served for the justification of the jews, who were under the transgression of, other Laws. Ans. It wi●● satisfy us, if by the Law here be understood, that universal Rule of Righteousness, which God prescribed unto men, & that certainly is the Moral Law, whereof, as to the jews, 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 virtue of the Second command. And thus both the Exception, & all the Reasons confirming it, vanish: for (1.) we take not the Law here so narrowly, as to exclude the other laws, which God gave to the jews, seeing they are all reduced there unto, & comprehended thereunder. (2.) Paul is here mainly writing for Information of the Gentiles, the Church of Rome; & though there might be some jews 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 Laws, as appendices thereof. (3.) The Moral Law, thus taken, if observed, could have justified even jews, 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 jews & 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 prophesied 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 strain 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 abundantly upon those that believe. Ans. (1.) To take the Law here for the mere writings of Moses, & then to Interpret the fulfilling thereof, as is here done, is to exclude the witnessing of the Prophets, which Paul expressly 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 verse 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did properly Signify jus, right, or Law of the Law, now I pray, what is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this jus, right, of Moses' writings? And how is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 o● Righteousness fulfilled? (6.) What then can be meant by the weakness of Moses' writings? 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' writings 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 fulfil Moses' writings, but also all the predictions & prophecies, many of which are else where to be found, than in Moses' writings. Yet to fortify this Audacious & groundless Interpretation.  
He tells us 1. That this Interpretation (as far at least, as concerns 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 etc. as the cause or means 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 clear & explain, 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 plain perversion of the true meaning of the words.  
He tells us. 2. In this Interpretation the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 joh. 15: 11. & that your joy might be full, or fulfilled, that is, might be abundant and full in all points, and upon all considerations. So Luk. 22: 16. until it be fulfilled in the Kingdom of heaven, that is, perfected.  
He tells 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 Laws 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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 Satisfy the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 tells 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, seeing 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 infer? 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 hithertil seen neither peer nor peep: pardon of sins hath no affinity with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 writings of Moses. Ans. Neither is Righteousness & justification one & the same thing, as we said above, nor are the writings 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 expressly 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 appear 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 possessors there of by faith, laying hold upon it) But Israel (as it followeth verse 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) verse 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 Aethhiopic 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 perform completely the commands of the law. Wherefore? Because the law doth not justify, but only is by faith, which perfecteth the accomplishment thereof. And we may further notice here, that what the Apostle, when speaking of the Jews, 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 jews▪ calleth by faith, in opposition to the works of the law. What excepteth Mr. Goodwin?  
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 form of righteousness and holiness, which the law called for, will not this satisfy? But the matter is plain, Their fault was, that they sought after a righteousness, by their own obedience to the law; & neglected that righteousness, which the Gentiles attained by faith, viz. the Righteousness of Christ, at whom they stumbled, verse 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 design 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 attain unto a Righteousness of their own, 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 believeth, Rom. 10: 4.  
2. He faith, neither Calvine, nor any other restaine the law to the Moral law. Ans. Nor do we so restrain 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 limit this to the Moral law only, for the jews 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 Christ's Righteousness, nor would they submit thereunto.  
4. He saith, The righteousness of the Moral law alone, suppose they should have attained to it by believing, 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 laws, 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 certainly saved; & the Imputation of this Righteousness had made them up.  
Lastly, he saith, The clear sense is, that the law of righteousness is justification itself, or righteousness simply and, indefinitely taken, which the jews seeking to attain to by the works of the law, that is, by themselves, & the merits of their own doings, and not by faith in jesus Christ's, lost God's favour and perished in their sins. Ans. (1) That the jews sought after justification by the merits of their own works, otherwise than merits are included in all works, is not manifest, in this place. (2) Otherways this may pass for part of the sense, for by faith he understands the act of faith itself, as our righteousness, & not the Righteousness of Christ, which faith layeth hold on, or faith as laying hold on & receiving a Surety-righteousness, which is here imported, when the contrary is expressed of the jews, & 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 clear the main thing in doubt; but all is to prove, that by the law of righteousness, Righteousness is meaned; which is not denied: & withal 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 jews, and showing 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 God's 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 righteousness to every one that believeth. There is a Righteousness here called God's Righteousness, which is opposite to, & inconsistent with men's own 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 labours 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 law's design, 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 yielding perfect obedience, hath brought forth a righteousness, in which the law hath its End, And Christ is this, to every one that believeth, the righteousness being made over unto them, who believe, and by faith lay hold on him; which, because the Gentiles did, they therefore attained to this righteousness, Rom. 9: 30.  
Mr. Goodwin, pag. 137. etc. excepteth several ways, 1 There is (saith he) no colour of Reason, that by the law here should be meaned precisely & determinately the Moral law; because the jews never dreamt of justification by this law only, but chiefly by the Ceremonial law. Besides, verse 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, Leu. 18: 5. Ans. The first part of this Exception hath been often answered: we take not the Moral law so precisely & determinately, as not to include, as parts or appendices, all other laws given by God. And the last part of this Exception will say nothing, unless he think, this law is precisely & determinately 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, seeing 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 ways agreeable to truth, that the Righteousness of Christ imputed to believers, should be called; the end of the moral Law, for no Law, considered simply as such, is any cause or means of justifing a person, than by the observation of itself; & 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 likelihood 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 maintain, 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 seeing the Apostle saith expressly, 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 & accomplishment, Now this Righteousness of Christ being imputed to believers, they are thereupon justified, & the Law is satisfied. And though the Law because it was weak throw 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 satisfy for its violation, & yield perfect obedience unto its commands; & so fulfil 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 itself, can be any cause or means of justifying a person, otherwise than by the observation of itself; & 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 complete 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 itself, 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 itself, 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 behalf, & for the behoof 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, & wherein 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, etc. Because the law, by convinceing men of sin, and exacting of them a Righteousness, which it doth not enable them to perform; & again by threatening & 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 forborn to have added it. But as for the interpretation itself, 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 plain and full exposition of the place: for there is mention made here of a Righteousness of God, which the jews 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 miss their end: for this righteousness, which they were seeking after▪ & which they could not attain unto, by all their own acts of obedience; that is, a righteousness, that was a perfect obedience & conformity to the law, & withal 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 complete and perfect obedience, which the law did principally require (what ever other accidental ends it might have had, or the lawgiver in promulgating it, & accompanying it with other things, as to the Nation of the jews) because for this end was the law, as a law, given by the lawgiver, 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 only attained by what Christ did and suffered, the jews, 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 pass, because he layeth no weight on it himself) The plain & direct meaning is, that the law, that is, the whole Mosaical dispensation was for that end given by God to the jews, 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 sins, that so they might believe 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 answer 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 believeth; & so to the Gentiles, as well as to the jews; whereas this gloss limiteth & restricketh all to the jews. (2) There is nothing here, keeping correspondence with what is said, verse 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 jews. (4) If Christ made an atonement for sins, & was to be bele●ved in accordingly, by such as would be justified, than 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 Believers, & received by faith, in order to justification, as the whole Gospel declareth.  
He laboureth to confirm this gloss with two reasons, 1. Because the jews 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 point 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 vain; even the Righteousness of God, which will sufficiently clothe all believers, 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. etc. To which we may add verse 29. & 31. Which will help to clear the matter. That no flesh should glory in His presence: but of Him are ye in Christ jesus, 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, jer. 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, than He is said to be made Wisdom, etc. 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. the Servant, Cap. 5. And of Volkel. De vera Relig. Cap. 21. p. 566. And it standeth upon this only 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 God's 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 tells us, That Christ is said to be made all these to us; because he was the cause of all these; & because God, by his means, made us wise & holy, & will at length redeem us. Bellarm. condescendeth to tell us, that He is said to be our Righteousness, because He is the efficient cause thereof. But how that is, he doth not explain: But Bellarm. next answer 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 communicate 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 Tautology. And others, who will not yield 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 than it should be the same with Sanctification, & so there must needs be here a Tautology; & withal no perfect enumeration of the several great things, we stand in need of, & Christ is made to be unto us of God: & seeing 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 Righteousness wrought in us, we should be justified by virtue 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 precedeth & followeth the words under consideration; for than he who glorieth might glory in himself, & not in the Lord alone. 4. All these particulars here mentioned, we must have or find in Christ, as the Ae●●●opik version hath it, & each, according to its Nature. And withal we must be made partakers & possessors of them all, according as the Nature of the benefit 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 find 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. Christ's 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 otherways 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 means, by way of merit 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 means thereof, by way of merit: for he will have Christ to be all these particulars to us, one & the same way. (2) This differeth little from the answer of Schlightingius cont. Meisnerum, p. 250. who saith, It is enough that Christ's 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 means, by way of merit, of our justification, till we have a Righteousness; that is, He must be the sole Author & Means 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 justify 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, than 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, than it must either be Christ's 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 Christ's 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 confirm 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 seeing 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 merit justification; & why not also glorification? Is not this to overturn th● 〈◊〉 Gospel▪  
He addeth. 2. Righteousness or justification, which Believers have in or by Christ, is still attributed unto His death & Sufferings, & never to His active obedience. Ans. But he hath forgotten what is said, Rom. 4: 25. Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again 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 ofttimes heard.  
Except. 3. This will not say, That Christ's 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 Christ's active obedience, but for the Imputation of Christ's 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 placing 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 justification is nothing but Remission of sins, is not yet proved. (4.) We have hea●d Paul say, That by the obedience of one (ay 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, verse 18, 19 Concerning the reconciliation of a sinful 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 sinful world of His own chosen ones to Himself, and Pardoneth their sins, 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 sins 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. Goodwin laboureth to darken it with his Exceptions, pag. 164. etc. 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 sins 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 itself. And Esaias tells 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 sins to Christ, that it abundantly confirmeth it: for there was a real imputation of the guilt of the sinner upon the Sacrifice, as is expressly said, Leu. 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 sins, 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 signify their rolling of their guilt over upon the expiatory Sacrifice, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 sins of believers 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 believers 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 own, have Christ's Righteousness imputed to us, and bestowed upon us; and upon the account thereof are dealt with as legally righteous. We do not speak of Christ's obedience only; but assert the Imputation of His Sufferings too. Nor do we say, that we are hereby made formally Righteous, if the term 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 Christ's 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 preceding 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 Rhetoric, to make probable in the lowest or lightest degree. Ans. We plead not solely for the Imputation of Christ's active obedience, as is said; but for the Imputation of His whole Surety-righteousness. And though these words in Him, that denote Believers 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; seeing we have not a Righteousness of our own, we must have a Righteousness made over to us: and seeing 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, verse 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. Host 4: 8. Ans. Though it be true, that the Hebrew words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do sometimes signify sin, & sometimes, an offering for sin: yet the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth always 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of sin: & the chald-paraph calleth it an Expiation Targ. jonath. & 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 itself, 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 term of Righteousness, is very agreeable 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: & seeing 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 Christ's 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 believers obtain by the Sacrifice of Christ, is not only Righteousness of God's 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 justification, which Believers obtain, 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 judgement is according to truth, as a sufficient ground, whereupon to pronounce such, as in themselves are ungodly, to be Righteous, & so to justify them.  
He alleigeth 4. That by the grammatical construction & dependence 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 answer 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 Christ's 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, in respect 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 expressly of the Sufferings, & sometimes more expressly 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 Christ's Righteousness.  
THere are other passages of Scripture, beside these mentioned, in the preceding chapter, and against which I find no Exceptions made by Mr. Goodwin, in the forecited Book, which yet do with no small clearness and fullness of evidence plead for the truth, which we own, to wit, The Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Believers, in order to their Justification. These we shall not insist upon, but only mentione in short; seeing 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 believeth, 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 sign 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 believe: 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 might be no essential difference betwixt the way of justification of Father and Children. The Aethhiopic Version may serve for a commentary, and he had circumsion, a sign of his righteousness, which He gave him, and the sign 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 believe on Him, who raised up tesus, our Lord, from the dead, who was delivered for our offences, & was raised again 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 itself, or our act of believing; for what is said to be Imputed, is promised to be Imputed upon condition of faith, or our believing on Him, who raised up jesus our Lord. So that it must be the Righteousness of Christ, consisting in His Mediatory work, which He undertook & performed for His own: for it is added, that He was delivered for their offences; that is, He was delivered unto the death, to make satisfaction for their sins; & He rose again, 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 certain, that the Apostle doth not speak of any Imputation of the righteousness of Christ; but assert, that the faith or credit, we give God, because He hath called jesus Christ, our Head, from death to eternal life, shall be accounted unto us, in the place of righteousness; just as faith, whereby Abraham gave credit 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 believe, 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 & rising, in the place, and for 〈◊〉 good of His people, that they might be justified. And further, if it were faith itself, 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. Again, That, which is Imputed, must be a Righteousness without works, verse 6. but if faith itself 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 believeth unto Righteousness, & with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation. The Apostle had been before verse 4. telling us, That Christ was the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth; & 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 jesus, & shalt believe in thine heart, that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved; which he proveth in the 10. verse, now cited; & therein showeth, how by this believing that God hath raised the Lord Jesus from the dead, Salvation is brought about; viz. That by believing with the heart, a Righteousness is obtained & received: and this righteousness must be Christ's, 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 itself is not Salvation, but the way thereto, and the mean thereof; so faith itself is not the Righteousness, but the way thereunto, and the mean or medium thereof.  
5. Gal. 2: 21. I do not frustrate the grace of God; for if Righteousness come by the law, Christ is dead in vain. 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 plain terms, to frustrate the grace of God, & to say, that Christ is dead in vain. And if we look back to verse 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 jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 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 Believer in Christ.  
7. Gal. 4: 4, 5. But when the fullness 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 sons. 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 withal receive the Adoption of sons, 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 plain from the one end assigned, that he might redeem them, who were under the law, or under the law's curse. The end therefore here being twofold, viz. Deliverance from under the law, and receiving the Adoption of sons; the Cause must have a subtableness thereunto; and say, That this complete 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 Aethhiopic 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 Recompense of glory, which is the thing hoped for; that which we intent, will be equally confirmed; for if Justification be immediately 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 ourselves; and therefore must be the Righteousness of Christ's, unto whom faith carrieth forth the soul, & of whom he spoke, verse 4. Saying, Christ is become of none effect unto you, who soever of you are justified by the law. If glory be here immediately intended, we may see, that the Apostle, to persuade the Galatians, not to seek after a Righteousness by the law, tells 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 jesus Christ, etc.  
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 explain it. We see, what was the main thing Paul designed, in opposition to what he once intended and sought after: what he did formerly look upon, as gain, and was hot in the pursuit 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 judgement, he persisted, accounting all but dung, that he might win Christ, & have Him for all his gain. 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 verse 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 showeth, ●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 ourselves, 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 Christ's.  
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 confirm 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 Christ's Righteousness, Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwin.  
THe truth concerning the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, hath been hitherto asserted from Scripture; & several of these passages have been vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. Goodwin, a main 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 judgement 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 judgement before God, unless we be endued with a perfect Righteousness. Ergo, etc.  
Against this he excepteth, pag. 192. Chap. 7. saying, That the consequence of the former proposition is not good. And so doth Bellar. answer the justific. 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 judgement. 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 virtue of this pardon, he is freed from the punishment, due to the transgressors 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 Christ's death & Sufferings, cannot be had without the Imputation of the death & Sufferings of Christ unto the Believer: & so hereby one half 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 Believer, 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, etc.  
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 merit hereof, communicated to them in the free pardon of their sins; and so need not the imputation of His active obedience. Ans. (1) We plead not for the sole Imputation of Christ's active obedience; but for the Imputation of all, that He did and suffered, for & in the room & stead of His own. (2) Where are Christ's mere Sufferings, as distinguished from His obedience, called a righteousness? or how can mere 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 merit of Christ's passive obedience is communicated unto us, the meaning must be one of these two; either that itself is properly made over & imputed to us; or only in its effect, free pardon of sins. If this latter be said, Then no other Imputation is granted, than what Socinians will yield unto: & how can it be said to be Imputed, as to its Effects, when itself is not Imputed, in order to the partaking of these effects? If the former be said, then there is something, that is in itself imputed, & not merely in its Effects. And if Christ's 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 sins is the whole of justification; or that a pardoned man is, 〈◊〉 ipso, that he is pardoned, a righteous man; or that a pardoned man, merely as such, hath right to the recompense 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 merit; and than it is true, that every one is justified by the Righteousness of another, that is, by the merit of the righteousness of another, or 2. by way of form; & so it is altogether untrue; for that Righteousness, where with a man is formally made Righteous, is always a man's own by donation & Possession. Ans. (1) When a man is justified by the merit 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 yield to (2.) If the righteousness, whereby one is formally justified, be his own by donation & possession, & no other possession be thereunto requisite, than we may be said to be formally justified by the righteousness of Christ: for we affirm, that Believers are possessed thereof by God's free donation and Imputation: & thus the whole is granted; for notwithstanding hereof, that same righteousness, which is made over to the Believer, by free donation & Imputation, is Christ's 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 sins, whereby he will have us formally justified, is not so in us, as Faith and Repentance are in us: And through God's Imputation and Donation, the righteousness of Christ may be the Believers, when it is received by faith, as well as Remission of sins: for, to speak in his own language, that which is given unto man by God, may truly and properly be called his own. (3) That remission of sins is formal justification, will never be proved: and seeing he will have Remission of sins to be the pure Effect of Christ's 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 again for our justification?  
Arg. 3. If Believers have a true and real communion with Christ, then is his Righteousness theirs by imputation. But the former is true, etc. 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 believers 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 chief 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 Believers are one Spirit; as the Union betwixt the principal debtor and the Cautioner; and betwixt the public 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. etc. 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 brain, or the proper functions & operations of the head, made the brain 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 always upon four ●eet: and as these Similitudes come short of expressing the Union and Communion, that is betwixt Christ and Believers; so they are not appositely here applied: for neither is the end of the Union and Communion between the Head and the Feet, that the brains 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 nearer to our business; for though the Husband's 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 Marriage, the Woman was in a base condition, yet being matched with on honourable person, she partaketh of his honour; and being, before the marriage, a person in debt, her Husband's 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 chargeable 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 creditors.  
Except 2. The Major wanteth reason; for there is no colour of truth in it, that that Union and Communion, which believers 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 Christ's Surety-righteousness be so imputed to believers, as that it becometh theirs; so that they, merely 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 Believers 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 public person or Surety, might stand for them, & be accepted on their behalf. 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 fulfil 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, etc. And sure, if Christ's obedience to the law, was not necessary in respect of Himself, it must have been performed upon the account of Believers; and that principally and mainly for their Justification and Salvation; and therefore for this end, that it might be imputed unto them. Against this, pag. 197. etc. He,  
Except. There are divers other ends, reasons and necessities to be assigned hereof. Ans. This is not the main 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 chief, & as peculiar to Him, as Mediator & Surety, standing in the room of His people, who did mainly 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 Believers: 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 Christ's 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 Belief to their Doctrine: And himself confirmeth this in the following words, saying. It is a truth of general acknowledgement, 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 & awful in their attention to the things, which are taught by them, citeing Mat. 2●: 32. joh. 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 Child 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 Sons. 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, joh. 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 sins 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 satisfy 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; seeing 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, seeing 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 preceding, and deserveth no further answer.  
5. It was (saith he) a means of continueing His person in the love and complacency 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? joh. 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 atonement 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 & separate 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 sin: as it is not possible, that the glorified now in Heaven can break the Laws, 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 particular 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 otherways be but holy and without sin; and so a sinless and holy Sacrifice. And withal we would take notice, that the Actions of the Mediator, were the Actions of the person, and not of either of the Nature's alone; & therefore must not be looked upon, as the Actions of a mere 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 itself 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 virtue 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 virtue 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 virtue 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 fulfil it for others; & not to fit and qualify 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 confirm 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 conform 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 virtue 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 again & say, that His meaning is not, that there was an absolute necessity, that he should keep the law, upon the same terms, every ways, which now He hath done, as that He should perform 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 until 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 seeing 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 ourselves, 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 qualify 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 sins, 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. etc. An Highpriest; 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 qualify him to be a Sacrifice here on earth; much less can it be proven, that it was necessary to qualify him for his Priesthood 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 perform 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, joh. 4: 34. Ans. So took He pleasure and delight to Suffer: He had a Baptism to be baptised with, and how was he straitened, 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 remain to be fulfilled by us. But the former is true. Ergo, etc. The force of the Argum. lieth 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 undergo the punishment for us, but did also yield 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. etc. Against the Minor, upon these grounds. 1. If the meaning (saith he) be, that we, who are believers, are debtors to the law in perfection for our justification; it is false. But as for these, that believe 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 Believers, 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 seeing 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 Unbelievers (ans such are all by Nature) seeing it is confessed, that they ere under this obligation, than 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 believe 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 public Person, by believing in him, they receive this, and have it made over unto them.  
2. If the proposition (saith he) meaneth, that Believers 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 Believers, 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 itself, 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 dependence upon the law by justification accrueth unto us by means of our dependence 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 seeing we ourselves 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 law's 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 law's 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 yield 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 believers, saith not, that there was no obligation upon mankind both to suffer and to obey, in order to justification, anteriour to Christ's 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) Than 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) God 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 threatened, 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 fulfil 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 threateneth death to the transgressors, 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 threatened, 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 yielded thereunto by the confirmed Angels. And though the suffering of the penalty in laws 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 laws, which promise a Reward to the observers, as well as threaten a punishment to transgressors: 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 yield 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 perform what was commanded, ere he can have the promised reward, he is not put to fulfil the law twice: for his punishment was but Satisfaction to one part of the law, or to threatening; 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, etc. The ground of this Argument is, that justification is the pronouncing of a person righteous, & justification being God's act, the person justified must be righteous, ere God can judge & pronounce him to be such; for the judgement of God is always 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 determinately of such a tale of righteous acts, as Christ performed unto the Moral law, is not absolutely necessary: for in reference to the jews, 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 complete 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 jews 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 Supreme Law giver.  
Except 2. Neither is it so absolutely true, that there is no perfect Righteousness to be found, beside Christ's. There is a Righteousness in the law as absolute & complete. 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, seeing 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 complete Righteousness to consist in Remission of sins. And yet, it is certain, 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 Thief 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 threatened in the law against such transgressors; 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 Transgressor. 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 plain 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 strictly so called, could have, as the Love, Favour, acceptation and approbation of God. Ans. If we speak of Remission of sins, in itself, and abstractly considered, this is also false: for though a pardoned man be freed from the punishment, due to Transgressors; yet, as merely pardoned, he hath no right to Reward, promised to the perfect observers of the law: Notwithstanding hereof, we grant that the man pardoned of God hath all these high and great privileges; but not by virtue of his mere 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 acknowledgement 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 acknowledgement 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, threatened for disobedience. 2. saith he. He cannot be said to have all this sins fully forgiven, who is yet looked upon, as one that hath transgressed, either by Omission, or Commission, & intended to be dealt with all as such. Ans. Though he, whose sins 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 Transgressor; yet neither can he be dealt with, upon the account of his Remission, as one that hath yielded perfect obedience, & did never transgress. Wherefore, seeing 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 physician, 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 merely Moral, or Political. There is no Medium betwixt light and darkness, or the habit 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 Transgressor; 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, etc. That these words, do this and live, contain 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 perform perfect obedience. And as the one is imputed to the Believer, so must the other be Imputed also, in order to his complete Salvation.  
Against this he excepteth, pag. 216. etc. 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 fulfil 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 always 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 Christ's 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 Christ's 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 show the necessity of the Imputation of both.  
Arg. 8. That Righteousness, which God accepteth on our behalf, is the Righteousness imputed to us in justification. But the Righteousness of Christ is that Righteousness, which God accepteth on our behalf, Ergo, etc.  
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 Ishmael; & 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, Christ's Sufferings were accepted, receive an unspeakable benefit & 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 Christ's active obedience denied; but also the Imputation of His death and Sufferings; and no more is granted, than what Socinians will yield unto. (2) The Imputation, we plead for, is not such as maketh God to look upon these Sufferings of Christ, as if Believers had personally endured them: but such, as maketh God to look upon them, as the Sufferings of Christ, as Surety, Head & Public 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 Believers, 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) Christ's 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 Syllogism is good, and no Paralogism, what ever he supposeth.  
Arg. 9 If Christ were a public Person, standing in the place or stead of all those that should believe 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, etc. Sure, if Christ was a public 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. etc. 1. The publickness of Christ's person, or His standing in the place of those, that should believe, 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, etc. 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 suchlike, can be reckoned. His after rambling discourse upon this mistake, is not worth the noticeing: And who seeth not, how vain 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 public persons may do many things, which cannot be said to be imputed to the debtors & persons represented: but these things are not done by them, as such public persons & Sureties, but in another capacity. And it is folly hence to infer, that therefore the Sureties payment of the debt cannot be said to be imputed to the debtor; or that wherein the public person was a public 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 seeing in Christ's death, we hav● remission of sins, we cannot be said, for the same sins 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 candid Interpretation; for it hath no repugnancy, or dissonancy to Scripture expression, to say, that the Sufferings of Christ are looked upon as the believers sufferings, when they are imputed to him; not as if God should think, judge or conceive, that the believer, 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 otherways, 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 Gospel-way.  
Except. 3. The publikeness of a person, who negatiats the affairs of others, doth no further, nor any other ways, interest those, whose affairs 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 miscarrying, or his wisdom & faithfulness, in the right managing, are no ways 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 affair is negotiated, it being sufficient, that the persons represented be interessed in the transaction itself, in reference to an interest in the issue in the same affair managed: and the transaction itself 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 public affair entrusted to Him, as a public person, undertaking for, and representing all His Children, be not imputed unto them: yet the business itself, with which He was entrusted, 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 benefits & advantage thereof.  
Except. 4. It is not altogether so solid or sound, as is supposed, that Christ stood in the place & stead of those, that should believe 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 believers, 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 public 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 employed in, they carry a special advantage in them for Believers; & were in a particular manner designed for their good, & were subservient to that main design.  
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. etc.  
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 believe 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 blood became the blood of God, and all He did and Suffered was the deed & Suffering of Him, who was God.  
Arg. 11. If we may truly be said to be dead & crucified with Christ, to be quickened & have risen again with Him, etc. then may we truly be said to have fulfilled the law with Christ; & consequently that should be imputed to us. But the former is true, Ergo, etc. These expressions point forth the closely union, that is betwixt Christ and Believers, & thereupon their Interest in what He did and suffered, as Mediator, Surety & public person, to the end they may have right to, and possession of the great benefits, purchased and procured by Him. So they hold forth Christ's suffering, dying, rising, etc. as a public person in their room & in their stead, & as their Representative: so that it is reckoned 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 Christ's fulfilling the law; yet they sufficiently hold forth that, which by parity of reason will enforce this, as well as the other: for they point forth Believers 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 Christ's sufferings; for we are said to be dead with Christ; & therefore not Christ's 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 otherways, than if we had done it ourselves; 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 ourselves. But he supposeth, there is a difference, as to this, betwixt Christ's dying & His fulfilling the law, saying, When the Scripture saith, we are dead etc. 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 than we might be said, to have satisfied for & redeemed ourselves: 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 itself 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, etc. But that believers have such an Interest in Christ's death, as being the death of their Surety, Redeemer, Head, Husband and public person, that they receive the benefits & advantag●● thereof, no less really & effectually, than if they themselves, in their own persons, had died & 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 clear; 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 itself, & 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, verse 19 in & through the virtue of Christ's death & crucifixion, in which he had such an Interest, that he accounted himself, as it were hinging-on the cross in & with Christ; & did so rest upon that by faith, & own that Sacrifice alone, that he & Christ, as it were, were become one person; & he owed his being dead unto the law only 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 Christ's quickening & rising again 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 died & rose again, as a public person & Surety; & that Believers have so near an Interest in His Mediatory work, & so closely an union with the Mediator, that they are as one person in law; so that they are really made partakers of some of the fruits 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 signify 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 again; or else the new life itself wrought in us. Ans. That the Apostle is not here speaking of a mere 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 jesus: Nor doth that, which he saith, invalidate the meaning, which we give; for that effect, or inwrough quickening is spoken of, as flowing from Christ's dying & rising, & from their Interst in His dying and rising, & their union with Him in all that, as being one person in law with Him; & so as virtually rising with Him, and now sitting with Him, who is their common Head & Representative All which doth abundantly confirm 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 fulfil the law, after such a manner? Ans. The expressions already mentioned do sufficiently evince this union and communion, that believers have with Christ, in His mediatory work, which is a solid ground of Imputation of the same unto them, as the foundation of their partaking of the benefits flowing therefrom: for there cannot any show 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 whilst he liveth, cannot be justified other ways, than by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. But every man (Christ excepted) is a sinner, etc. Therefore, etc.  
He excepteth, pag. 219. etc. If there be no other means of justifying, the condition of the whole world is hopeless; 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 truly believe in jesus Christ, being not under the law, but under grace, are not liable to condemnation for their daily sins, 1 joh. 2: 1, 2. Ans. True, but what then? How come they to be under grace, & not under the law? Is is not by virtue 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 & Advocate? 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 Christ's death did procure 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 answer 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. Goodwin, against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Justification, Answered.  
HAving in the foregoing Chapters proved, both from Scripture & Reason, That Christ's Righteousness is imputed unto Believers unto justification; & having vindicated such of them, as were excepted against by Mr. Goodwin; 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. etc. 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 & falsehood 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 according 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 plain 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 & indefinitely & in a way of a General & Universal conclusion, without imposeing any necessity there, or else where, to limit or distinguish upon it; for men to interpose by distinctions & limitations, to overrule the express meaning of the words, is to usurp authority over the Scriptures. Ans. I grant, to adhibite distinctions or limitations, which the Scripture giveth no warrant 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 usurp 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 preceding discourse of the Apostle from Chap. ay: 18. & forward, & particularly Chap. 3: 19 Where the Apostle closeth his discourse, tending to evince both jews & Gentiles 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, verse 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; seeing this is the only native conclusion, that floweth from the premises; seeing by their own personal works they can be justified before men; & seeing 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, verse 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, verse 24? If this general sense were the true meaning, what ground was there for that verse 27. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? no, by the law of faith? Would Justification by Christ's obedience give ground of boasting? And what ground were there for that objection verse 31. Do we then make void the law, etc. & 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 mean 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 itself to every ordinary Reader, that it must needs argue a desperate design, together with unpasralleled 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 inferior 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 answer 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 sobriety should reach us, to search for God's mind, in the expressions He hath thought good to use, for signifying of His mind. These, against whom the Apostle here wrote, & whose error, 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 Apostle should have spoken to such a thing? (2) Paul giveth not the honour, due to the works of Christ's, unto any thing of an Inferior Nature, no not to faith, whatever this Author, misunderstanding the Apostle's mind, & perverting his words, would make his Reader believe, as we shall have occasion to show hereafter. This Author setreth Christ and Faith at variance, whileas the Apostle every where showeth their agreement & indissoluble union. (3) Taking faith, in this Author's 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 Christ's obedience. So that the question betwixt him and us, is, whether Christ and His obedience, or Faith of a far inferior 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 justification, for the works of the law, as performed by Christ, his indefinite expression would have been, as a snare upon men, to cause them pass over the great things of their justification. 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 maintain, but by new and unheard-of fictions. What great things of justification could, I pray, Paul's expressions cause any pass 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 near unto the jews, 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 plain terms asserted in the Scriptures. Did not Paul say expressly 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 jews; & 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 again 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, etc. Is it not hence clear, that they rejected Christ, and would not own 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 jews 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 own 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 proclaimed Christ to be the end of the law for Righteousness, to every one that believeth, 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. etc. 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 merit 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 mere slander 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 oppugn, or exclude the other, because the meritorious cause imputed, made over to and reckoned upon the score of believers, 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, seeing it may be either, as the terms shall be explained, which men are at freedom to do, according to their own mind, when they apply them unto this matter, which hath so little affinity with Effects merely Natural, unto the causes of which these terms are properly applied: though I should choose rather to call it the formal objective cause, if necessitated to use here philosophik terms. (3) That to call Christ's whole Righteousness either the Material or Formal cause of justification, is to overthrow the merit of it, is said, but not proved: It is not these philosophical terms 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 terms, as explained by the orthodox, doth overthrow the merit 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 ways 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 ourselves 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 immediately, 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 ourselves, do, the same word in the original, which vers 5. is rendered we, is rendered we ourselves, verse 3. What poor shifts are these, which men take to support a desperate 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 only clear 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 expressly, & this by consequence, unless the work 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, etc. 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 ourselves (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 verse 7. cleareth; & the Mercy, mentioned, v. 5. comprehendeth all other subordinat causes & means, 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 merit of Christ's Righteousness in justification, but overthrow the formality of it. And why so? Because (say't be) it is impossible, 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 vain talk, & a reasoning from terms of art, or philosophical notions taken improperly, to the same taken most properly & strictly; 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 term 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 verse 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 jews. Again, 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 verse 21. was nothing a Schoolmaster to Christ, but the ceremonial part of the law, verse 24. (2) To be under the law, is not only to be under the law's obligation, but chiefly to be under the laws 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 Sons, 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 always 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 Christ's 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 itself; for faith is made only a Means of the derivation of it upon men; but the body & substance of the Righteousness itself 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 merely 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 satisfy him, & therefore he saith. I. This sanctuary hath been polluted, & the horns 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 mainly 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 jews 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, & bind guilt more upon them. But it did not so to Christ, who yielded perfect obedience. We might also demonstrate this from the Apostles following discourse, if it were necessary; but we said enough of this, in answer 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 lie 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 writings 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 people's 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 yielded. 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 always 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. etc. (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 plain 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 righteousness imputed unto us, or made ours by Imputation, but the righteousness which is by Christ in the Gospel, is the gift of many offences. Ergo, etc. The Major he thus confirmeth. That righteousness, which extends unto a man's 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 man's justification, by the forgiveness of sins. Ergo, etc. The Major of this, he thus proveth. Because a legal or perfect righteousness doth not proceed to justify a man's person by way of forgiveness of sins; but is of itself intrinsically & essentially a man's justification ●t yea such a justification, with which forgiveness of sins, is not compatible: 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 righteousness excluded all sin, & all guilt of sin from his person.  
To all which I ans. (1) The Major propos. of the two Syllogisms, is true only of a perfect righteousness, wrought by ourselves, 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 ourselves: 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 verse 18. & that, by which many are made righteous vers 19 & therefore is called the gift of righteousness, verse 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 believer 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 ways 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 needlessly 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 assign 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 justify 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 man's 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 mere 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 knows, or speaks of, the forgiveness of sins, or acquitting from condemnation. For both according to Scripture, and the native import, and universal usage of the word, justification denoteth a constituting legally and declaring solemnly 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 merely 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 complete 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 tells us, that we have the like description of this Righteousness, 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 plain perversion of the scope of the meaning of the words: for verse 21. the Apostle is giving the ground & reason of what was said verse 19 & showing how this Reconciliation & Non-Imputation of sin is founded, & what is the special ground thereof; as appeareth by the particle for verse 21. for He hath made Him sin, etc. He saith, This is most plain, Act. 13: 38, 39 where forgiveness of sins is immediately 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, justify, not to signify the giving or bestowing of a complete positive righteousness; but only an acquitting 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 complete, positive Righteousness; but that it signifieth a declaring & pronouncing of a person to be righteous: & therefore presupposeth this giving or be stowing of a complete Righteousness; for the man, whom God declareth & pronounceth to be Righteous, must be Righteous; & seeing he hath no Righteousness of his own, he must have his Sureties 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, etc. 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 mere suspending of the sentence of condemnation; & while the Process is under trial, 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 mere 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 transgressors: 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 expressly 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 mere pardon. But in our case, when the Lord justifieth the Believer, He not only declareth him not liable to the punishment, due to transgressors 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, & showeth, with what confidence, some men, once in love with their own darling conceit, can abuse the most plain passages of Scripture: for what can be more plain & full against our Adversaries, than is this Text? The Apostle is here showing, upon what ground he desired to stand, in his appearing before God, & expressly 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 expressly mentioneth, calling it, that which is through the faith of Christ, & again, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith. By which he cannot mean the act of faith, for that is his own righteousness, all which he renounced; for it was conform to the law & commandment, 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, seeing true faith in Christ carrieth the soul out of itself 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 plain, 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 confirm 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 Believer. Ans. (1) To be found in Christ, who is the public 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 elsewhere 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 & determinately 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 God's 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 Believers 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) affirmatiuly thus, but that, which is through the faith of Christ, etc. Here is not the least jot or title of any Righteousness, he should have by Imputation, no nor of any Righteousness by or through that 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 man's 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 own & countenance, even the righteousness of God, which is in faith, i. which cometh, & accrueth, 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 itself, even the Righteousness, that is without a man, & is derived unto him from another, viz. from Him, who is God, & on whom faith layeth hold, that is, Jesus Christ, in whom alone the Apostle was seeking to be found.  
Fiftly, Chap. 7. pag. 88 etc. 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 mean of applying & bringing home the Surety-righteousness of Christ, he maketh it the very formal righteousness itself, 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 mean by faith? do they not mean their believing 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 self 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 justify, 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 man's 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 itself, 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 virtue 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 itself to Christ for refuge; and as laying hold on His Righteousness as only sufficient; and as receiving, embracing, 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 acknowledge faith, to justify 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 chief and principal Interest, that the Surety-righteousness of Christ hath, in the business? This therefore must be looked upon, as inconsistent with his only design, 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 mean 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 Inferior Mean, 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 justification 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 pass in account with him for such righteousness, but his command and Covenant for believing, and the obedience itself of believing, will both become void, & of none effect, the entire benefit 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 Cou. & in the matter of justification, it hath it from God's 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 assign 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 believing 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 kind, 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 conform 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 immediately, 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 vain, 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 mean, 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 wear the Crown, & bear 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 believing, & believing itself shall be vain. 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. etc. 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, than there is no Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. But the former is emphatically true from this place. Ergo, etc. Ans. This, upon the matter, is but what Socinus said lib. 3. cap. 3. viz. That one man's deed can no more be the deed of another, than one man's death, or pain can be the death or pain of another: & that in deeds of the law, the deed itself 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 man's 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 Suretyship & 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 paid 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 itself, 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 nonpayment, than if he himself had laid down the full Sum.  
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 Supreme God and Lawgiver, & 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 ordain 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 show, 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 Believers 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 Supreme Lawgiver & 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 believing: & 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 paid 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? Again, 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, etc. 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 meerman, only for himself, according to his obligation, can be now made over to another by faith; for no man over dreamt of such a thing. But enough of this frothy 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 cross 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 Goodwin, examined.  
MR. john Goodwin 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 Believers 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 etc. 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 leveled only against the Imputation of Christ's Obedience; yet it equally wageth war 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 despair, & 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 falsehood, 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 complete legal righteousness requireth a punctual through-obedience unto all things in the Law, in reference to each man's place & Calling. Ans. But we may distinguish the proposition thus. That righteousness, which will not furnish all believers with every specific & individual act of obedience, which is required of them, in their places & Stations, i.e. Is not made up of, nor expressly & 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 specific & numerical Act, required of them, nor yet was infinitely transcending & exceeding the obedience of all men whatsomever, in all their distinct and particular occasions, Relations, places, & Callings, & brought more glory unto God, the Lawgiver, and was a fuller proclamation of the holiness of the Law and of the Lawmaker, and acknowledgement of His Authority; and with which the great Rector of the world and Lawgiver 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 confirm the Minor, he tells us of duties of Servants, Masters, husband's wives, judges etc. 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 Complete, for He fulfilled all righteousness. Mat. 3: 15. He was, dureing His life, holy, harmless, undefiled, and separat from sinners, Heb. 7: 26. He knew no sin 2. Cor. 5: 21. No man could convince Him of sin. joh. 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 fulfil 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 Lawgiver, and to the repairing of that loss, and to the recovering of that Glory, which was wronged by man's 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 Supreme Lawgiver was fully Satisfied. And, Sure, every unprejudiced person may easily see and be convinced, that this perfect and complete obedience of Christ is moreable to furnish believers 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 believers 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? Whence we see, that whatever show 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 itself. 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 Lawgiver and Supreme 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 answer 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 public person, appointed of the Father to represent all the chosen ones, & did, in their place & room, fulfil the law, in all points, according as was required of Him, by the Supreme Lord Rector & Lawgiver; & this perfect & complete Obedience is made over to all those, who are His; & not one part to this particular Believer, 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 threatened, but its equivalency, he saith. 1. That in these words, Thoushalt die the death, there is no necessity to mean precisely & determinately eternal death, according to the letter. Ans. If that was not threatened 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. God's meaning there was not, to threaten eternal death in one kind, 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 threatened to man. And whether eternity be of the Essence of the punishment, threatened 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 threatened death to man, he know, that if that threatening 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 Supreme God? All the reason he giveth, I find to be this. That God accepteth on any man's 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 answer 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, answer to, & correspond with that, which every believer was obliged unto? What reason is, or can be given for the one, which will not hold for the other? The answer he hath given, is no answer unto this. Perfect obedience was required of all by the first Covenant, & Christ did perform perfect obedience for all His own; & 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 conceive himself as great in holiness, as jesus Christ himself etc. 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 clear 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 injury 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 sum 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, given-in against him by the creditor. So when the believer 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 answer the charge given-in against himself, and in reference to his own particular case & necessity. Hereby the believer 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 conceit ourselves 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, & believers as the Members, which is the ground of this Imputation & communication, He saith pag. 113. 1. Christ & Believers 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 etc. 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 public Head & Representative, must be imputed unto them, who are of His Body, & were undertaken for & represented by Him.  
He saith, 2. Though the benefit of what the head doth, be communicated to the whole body; yet what the head doth, is no ways 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 & public Representative. And in this matter, we look upon Christ, as such an Head.  
Against the Marriage Union betwixt Christ & Believers, mentioned as another ground to clear 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 itself, but a fruit thereof; so the right, which a believer 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 Believers 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 dowry 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 believing, 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 wives, 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 believer must take heed of assuming the glorious rob of His Righteousness to himself, otherways than in the benefit and comfort of it. Ans. All that is the husband's becometh the wives 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 maintenance, and to the paying of her debt; and his honour becometh hers, to the exalting of her to a Suitable state of honour; even so must Christ's Righteousness become the Believers, that his debt may be paid, 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 otherways for the justification of his people, He doth not impute this Righteousness of Christ for that end. But God hath provided otherways for this end. Which he thus prodeth. He that is completely justified by having his sins forgiven, is justified without this Imputation. But a believer is sufficiently justified before God by the forgiveness of sins. Ergo. Ans. Though a person justified is pardoned, yet justification includeth more, than mere 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 seeing 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 men's Sayings, wherewith I purpose not to meddle here. He citeth again 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 design 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 confirm 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 for the whole, which yet is no unusual thing in Scripture; and might be admitted here, even in this matter, without any absurdity; seeing 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 worse 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 half 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 worse 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 again 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 Man's Sins, 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 expressly, that there was a gift of Righteousness also imputed; yet he said it expressly 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 Righteousness 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 again to it, in the next objection.  
He addeth further 4. That if we thus separat and divide the benefit of Christ's Active and passive Obedience, in justification, 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 benefit of both, whileas the whole Effect floweth from the whole cause, both Christ's Active & His passive obedience making up one complete Surety-righteousness; and so producing one whole blessedness to believers, 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 profit us; and therefore we assert the Imputation of both, as one complete 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 again 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 immediate Effects, respectively ariseing and flowing from them severally.  
Lastly. He tells 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 divers and opposite consideration. Ans. We make the Imputation 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 complete Cause, viz. the Surety-righteousness of Christ, so the Effect is one complete 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 divers or opposite things.  
Obj. 4. Chap. 12. Pag. 136. etc. That which dissolveth and taketh away the necessity & use of that sweet evangelical grace of Adoption, cannot hold a straight 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 infer for confirmation of the Minor? Now (saith he) this being the direct & proper end, use, office, purpose & intent of Adoption, to invest a believer with a capacity with heaven; it follows, 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 complete & 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 complete 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 formal pardon, or Right to Impunity, but is, when Imputed, the ground and cause of justification, wherein the Believer is solemnly brought into a state of freedom 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 Believer is, as it were, solemnly enfeoffed of the Inheritance. Here then is nothing in vain; 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 believer. So that his following discourse is mere froth and vanity: for, as God may appoint more means for the same end, as He pleaseth; as His promises, oath & Sacraments to confirm the faith of believers; 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 solemn Collation of that Right to the believer, or the solemn stating of him in that Right; as justification properly is no Mean to or Cause of pardon and Acceptation of Sinners, but rather the solemn bringing of them into or placing of them in that state of peace, Pardon and Reconciliation, who believe 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 & expressly excluded by the Lord from that office & work, is set up with it, to bring the same end to pass, or to serve in the same place and office: yet is there not the least colour 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 vain: 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 believer, he receiveth the Effect and▪ Fruit of that purchase viz. an Actual Right to glory, & is solemnly infeofed (as it were) thereof. What ignorance & folly would it discover in a man, to say, That the legal installing of a man by public seizing & 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 possess the same, the price laid down is of no use? would not every one smile at such Nonsense? And yet so reasoneth this learned Adversary, who will have the Righteousness of Christ laid by, which is the only price and purchasing Merit of our Right to Heaven; or the Grace of Adoption, whereby the believer becometh legally (as it were) infeofed of the Inheritance. It is vain, 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 believer 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 & complete Righteousness of the Law imputed to him, standeth in need of no Repentance. Ans. This Consequence is utterly false, as was showed 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 believers, 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 Believers 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 main 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 sins to be no sins, 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 believers 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 believers; so that they sin no more, Both which are most false.  
But what will he say of Faith, which he will have imputed for Righteousness, seeing 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 intrinsically & formally; or as if God, in this Imputation, either gave or accounted unto faith any power or privilege to justify, 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 virtue 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 judgement of God should not be according to truth; or upon his believing 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 believer 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 design. (4) If faith be accepted for that, which is justifying in its own Nature, & by virtue 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 remains 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 mean 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 explain it.  
Obj. 6. Another argum. he prosecuteth pag. 149. etc. 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 perform 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, than Christ died in vain; 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 merely upon this false ground, Because the Righteousness of Christ's life imputed had been a Sufficient, & every ways a complete 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 conceit ourselves as righteous, as Christ was, is rather to mock, than to worship. Ans. This expression to conceit 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 conceit ourselves 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 immediately, that all our after actions should be sinless; but to this end rather, that we may have actual pardon of by past sins, & of future sins too, after the method 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 complete, as the Righteousness of the Law; & so can leave as little place for Remission, as what we plead for; and therefore to obviate this, he tells us. That when faith is imputed, another thing is imputed▪ then the righteousness of the Law itself, 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 perform 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 mean 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 man's justification, place is left for inherency 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 complete righteousness; & consequently inconsistent with pardon, because it shall hereby become a complete inherent Holiness & Righteousness.  
Obj. 8. Chap. 15. pag. 153. etc. Whoseever is perfectly righteous, or as righteous as Christ is, in him God can see no sin. But every believer (saith this opinion, which we impugn) is as perfectly & completely righteous, as Christ himself is. Therefore etc. 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 believes, 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. etc. 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 allegiance; 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 add other works of obedience, do turn 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 plain 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 corn, 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 own. 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, seeing 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 own & personal; & did not admit of a Surety. Thus these two Covenants are not confounded by us, but kept manifestly distinct; & we cannot own their Gospel-way of justification, as being a way to bring us back again to the old Covenant of works, with a mere pretext of some ease, as to the Conditions, or Terms.  
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 believe 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 four 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 own, & so I leave it.  
Obj. 10. Chap. 17. pag. 158. etc. That for which Righteousness is imputed to those that believe, cannot be imputed to them for righteousness. But the Righteousness of Christ is that, for which righteousness is imputed to those that believe. 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, than it is not only not true, but impossible, that the Righteousness of Christ should be the Righteousness of a believer. But the former is true Ergo etc. 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 justification for Righteousness in the first Argument, thus. That for which believers are justified, cannot be imputed to them for righteousness, But the Righteousness of Christ is that for which believers are justified. Therefore etc. 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 believer for righteousness, in his justification, than the meritorious cause of his justification is imputed. But that cannot be imputed. Ergo etc. 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 form of that, whereof it is Efficient— It is an Inviolable Law amongst the four kinds of causes, Material, Formal, Final & Efficient, that the two former do only ingredi composition, or effectum, & are parts rei constitutae; & that the two latter are always extrinsical, & stand without. Ans. All which is but vain argueing, grounded upon this palpable mistake, that justification is a physical Effect, like the whiting of a wall; (which is the example, whereby, he illustrats the matter) & therefore he thinketh, that these terms 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 terms 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, seeing every one hath liberty to explain, in what sense he useth these terms, in this matter; & I should rather choose to use the term (if such like terms 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 form applied unto, or put upon the matter, & the matter or subject itself, where unto this form is applied; Not only because, according to his own argueing, one thing cannot be both matter & form 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 form 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, thou 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 myself, I may as well be conceived to have wrought that Righteousness, by which the whole world is justified. Ans. This is but a mere sophism, founded upon a mistake: The consequence is false, & the proof thereof standeth only upon this rotten bottom. 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 ourselves; whileas the true meaning of Imputation is this. That the Righteousness of Christ is made over by grace unto Believers, & reckoned upon their score, where by they are dealt with now, no other ways, 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 paid for the Redemption of so many captives, is imputed to each of the captives, in order to his own 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 righteousness of Christ imputed to us, we obtain justification & Salvation; but do not merit 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 Believers.  
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, than I am reputed before God, to have wrought that righteousness in Christ. But this is false etc. 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 judgement 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 etc. As if we had done it ourselves, or it had been ours, without & before any Imputation. Hence the believer 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 sin 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 sins, as to their guilt, being caused to meet on Him. Whence it came to pass, 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, than 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 add 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 Believers, who now by faith are in Christ, & of His Body, are accounted & reputed to have suffered in Christ, their Head, Surety & Public 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, until 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 Believers 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 etc. 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 yielding perfect obedience to the Law of God, & in answering all the demands of the Law, in the behalf of His own. And so, though the Law doth not justify us, because we are sinners; yet neither can the Law now condemn 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 violate the Second of the Moral Law, which became not Him to do, who came to fulfil 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 believers, whether of Jews, 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 sins imputed to Christ, the same manner. But this is not so. Ergo. The Minor he proveth thus If the sins of Men be imputed to Christ, than 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 Believers, 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 truly & really a Transgressor 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 truly sinned, were to look upon Him, as deserving in Himself what was inflicted upon Him; & that God's judgement is always according to truth; & that Christ knew no sin in Himself, but was made sin, as having the guilt of our sins 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, than 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 than God should show us no grace or favour in our justification. (Rom. 4: 4. with Rom. 11: 6) But if any favour be showed, it is only in this, that He reputeth us worthy to be justified, or puts a worthiness upon us for justification; whereas the Scripture expressly 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 yielded, 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 ourselves, 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 merit 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 merit & 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 judgement 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 ourselves, & 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 mere exhaling of vapores out of the fog of philosophical terms & notions, that thereby the truth may be more darkened. We are not obliged by any Law of God, to explain or interpret these mysteries of Salvation, according to these Notions, which men explain 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 terms. But as to the present argument, no answer can be given, until it be known, what is the true meaning of these words formally just. Possibly he will understand hereby the same, that others mean by Inherently just, & so indeed do all the Papists: And if so, we can answer 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 itself 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 itself. Adam's sin imputed doth constitute the posterity sinners, that is guilty & obnoxious to wrath: so Christ's righteousness imputed doth constitute believers 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 forms: & this Philosophical Notion is here adduced to darken the mystery, we are treating of. It were a sufficient answer then to say, That the Minor, though it be true in natural forms; 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 confer & 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 believer 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 form, 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 certain 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 strictly 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 expressly 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 becalled 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 tells 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 satisfy 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 assign the real & just ground of this necessity; yet, I judge, it should satisfy us, that the Lord, in His wisdom & Goodness, hath thought fit to appoint and ordain this method & manner of justification; & so far should we be from disputing against this Truth, with such Arguments, & from rejecting of it until 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 judgement is always according to truth Rom. 2: 2. and it would be an abomination in His eyes to justify 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 believeth 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 & complete 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 confirm & establish the same, it being an application of the Sponsor's Surety-righteousness, or payment & Satisfaction unto the debtors, in order to their Absolution & freedom 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 truly 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 Man's 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 jews were ready to dream, who questieneth? But what is this to the business in hand? shall we therefore think, that the Lord, whose judgement 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 ward 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 legal 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 perform, which possibly he understandeth by a legal righteousness literally & properly so called, he speaketh truth, & yieldeth 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 strictly, 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 infer this from the Lord's calling john Baptist Elias & the like? Will he make the Lord's pronouncing sentence, in judgement, as a righteous judge (as He doth in the matter of justification) to be such a figurative speech, as when john 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 judgement 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, seeing it will be rare to find one, that hath never all his days 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 woe hear not what that qualification is.  
He saith, when God pronounceth a man righteous, it is sufficient to bear 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 man's 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 benefit 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 fullness 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 benefit, right to the promised Inheritance of Glory: But a pardoned man, as such, hath not this Right, nor yet can challenge it, as was shown above. Moreover, if God pronounce a Man righteous, because he is pardoned, than 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 form 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 & complete 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 some ever, is as offectual as the active righteousness itself 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 etc. 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 main pillars 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 add 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 avail 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 & virtue, then that hath which is personal & Imperfect? (3.) The Imputation of an Obedience, perfect & compleet, can avail such, as are recocciled by the death of Christ, when personal obedience, suppose it never so full (if the supposition could be made) cannot avail 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 again 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 avail unto justification; yet, as is said, it could have availed man, while standing: & man remaining still under the obligation, it is his debt: & seeing 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 etc. 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 satisfy 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 yielded 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 Impassable: for till they believe 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 believe 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 yield obedience thereto, they have no other way, whereby they can expect justification, but doing of the Law Rom. 2: 13. & that is also a desperate & 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, justify, & 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 Laws: 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, than He imputes this faith unto them there-unto. But God requires only faith to justification. Ergo etc. 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 join 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 bargain, & 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 mere 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 believer 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 virtue, 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 turn 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, than it is evident, that this Righteousness is not imputed unto justification, to any man, because the Condition of faith must necessarily intervene, 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 immediate connexion therewith. Ans. Not to trouble ourselves with that fond & fooli● distinction betwixt towards & unto, which rather renders the Adversaries Cause desperate, & himself fain 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 immediate 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 believeth, in that same instant, Righteousness is imputed; and in that same Instant, the believer is justified; We cannot say, a Man is a believer, 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 near connexion with justification, than faith hath; for we may likewise say, though a man believe, yet without imputation, cannot be justified. But the truth is, all such arguings are but the Cavils of men, seeking to darken that, which they cannot destroy; & are mere sophisms, 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 lean 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 bargain be made; and may also be paid down some time before he obtain the purchase. We own 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 arguings return upon his own head; for when he saith, that faith is Imputed for Righteousness, meaning by faith our act of believing, he must also say, that a man may believe, and yet not be justified, until 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 believers also. But the faith of Abraham was imputed to him for Righteousness. Ergo etc. 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; seeing 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. etc. and it would seem, that it is here adduced again (for we had it once, if not oftener 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 man's person to another, then cannot the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to any man, in justification. But the former is true, therefore▪ etc. 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 Man's 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 transgressor, 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 Transgressor. Ans. But all this is loose reasoning: for as the Law saith, God will visit the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children, unto the third and fourth Generation; so it saith, that He will show mercy to thousands of them that love Him, and keep His Commandments: and here the one is as Emphatic, 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 Emphatic 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, merit 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 threatening death to the transgressor. Albeit Adam could not be said to have merited life, by his obedience, in way of proper and strike merit; yet in way of merit 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 inquire 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 public 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 ways 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 Transgressor, 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 mere 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 main buliness, wherein he complieth with the Socinians, and others. Let us hear him, first (saith he) the Scripture no where affirms 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 tells us, that neither is the phrase, nor manner of such speaking any ways agreeable 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 another's. 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 virtue 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 Imputation.  
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 demerit of sin upon his head, of purpose to punish him for it. Ans. This is true of such things, as are either really or falsely 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 Suretyship do further clear, an imputation of what was not the persons before, whereby the thing itself, 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, judah for Benjamin; first the debt itself is made their & reckoned upon their score, & then they willingly undergo the consequences thereof, that is, the payment or punishment.  
thirdly 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 Ghost in Scripture. Ans. This is but the old exception of Bellarmin de justif. 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 term 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 demerit or guilt of Adam's sin, is charged on his posterity, or that the punishment ran over from his person to them, i a main part of which punishment lieth in that original defilement, wherein they are all conceived & borne, & whereby they are made truly and formally sinners before God. Ans. But, if that sin of Adam be imputed, in its curse & punishment, the sin itself must be imputed, as to its guilt; else we must say, that God curseth & punisheth the posterity, that is no ways guilty, which to do suiteth not the justice of God, the righteous Governor 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 merely 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 threatened, 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 demerit (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, & chargeable 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 & Governor of the world? The posterity can no more be justly punished for the great & heinous sins of their progenitors, than for their lesser sins, if they have no interest in these sins, 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 verse 19  
2. The Narrownese or scantisness of Adam's Person, who could not beat that fullness 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 suffers, 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. & main pillar is, the peculir & near relation of the posterity of Adam to his person; for than 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 tells 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 main 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 demerit 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 & again, 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 man's 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 will stand to this, we need not contend with him, about the word, Impute; this expression of Scripture comprehending & plainly 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 again 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 Error: & no doubt, he hath scraped together all that he could find, 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 pedantry 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 yield 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 (the 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 profess himself an Enemy 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 exaggerate the expressions of others, whose meaning may be good, because not complying with our own, in all points,  
Let us therefore inquire 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 showeth) is of Imputed Righteousness, opening & defending the true Sense, & confuting the false. Here then belike we shall find 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 merits 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 Satisfactory Suffering for our sins, in our stead, freely without any merit, or conditional act of man's, 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 virtue 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 judgement, 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 merely, it can not be said, that the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, & no otherways: for that is nothing but the Socinian Concession formerly mentioned, & it cannot Satisfy 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 joh. 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 justify 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 believing: & this is that which Servetus, Socinians & Arminians say.  
In opposition to this, which he calleth a short & plain explication of Christianity, he setteth down what others say, as necessary to go in to our Christianity; & so tells 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 fulfil that Law, which requireth perfect habits & act: in and by Christ imputatively; and yet did also in & by him suffer ourselves imputatively for not fulfilling it, & imputatively did ourselves both satisfy God's justice, and merit 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 itself is not imputed to us for Righteousness, no not a mere 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 judgement 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 mind, after this manner: Yea, I wot 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 mere 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 fair, to set down these words, as containing that opinion, which all must hold, who cannot fully embrace Mr. Baxter's own judgement; as if there were no Medium betwixt the Socinian or Arminian judgement, 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 clear up the true sense of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, at least, that sense, which we own.  
In the Book pag. 24. he again setteth down his own judgement, 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 truly, in a moral or civil sense, 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 Merits 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 fulfil the Law ourselves, and stand before God in a Righteousness of our own, which will answer the Law of works, and justify us; but that the Conditions of the Gíft, in the Covenant of Grace, being performed by every penitent Believer, that Covenant doth pardon all their sins (as God's Instrument) and giveth them a Right to life eternal for Christ's merits. As to this though it may seem fair & 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, than 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 behalf, as it was undergone for them, & in their stead & place: & if it be accepted in their behalf, they must necessarily be freed from Suffering, after God's Method; & 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, than all must, upon the account of it, be delivered from Suffering, which cannot be said; or not one shall be delivered from Suffering, merely upon the account of it, but upon the account of some other thing intervening, 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, than 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, than it seems, 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, seeing 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, merely 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 Benefit & Advantage, that we received, or are to receive thereby, flow from it merely 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, than it will follow, that this payment must, in Law-sense, be imputed to those, for whom it was paid. How ever these words do plainly 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 terms 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 Public 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 & design of God appointing Christ hereunto, & in the purpose & design of Christ undertaking, and actually performing what He undertook) as gave them fundamentally another Interest in His Obedience & Suffering, than 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 & Lawgiver, not for Himself, but for others, in whose Law-place He did substitute Himself, undertaking their debt, in order to their Redemption. And though Believers, 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 concur in, and are both obliged by, one and the same Obligation; just as the heir succeeding 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 term of Morally, or Civilly, or Legally, or the like, be most apposite, is of no great weight to occasione a debate, especially seeing the thing itself 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 behalf; 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, & therefore 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 posterity: 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 immediately 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 immediate 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 Merits, 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 Merits & 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 hold-forth 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 virtue of any immediate of that Righteousness unto them, whereby they are looked upon as Righteous in the sight of God; but by virtue of faith, whereby the gift is accepted, that is offered in the Covenant, which faith is indeed immediately 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 fulfil 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 justify us.  
14. In end, when he saith, the Covenant of grace doth pardon & give right to Life for Christ's Merits, I suppose (because of what is already observed) it is only upon the account that Christ's Merits have purchased this Covenant; & not because they become our Immediate Righteousness, whereupon we are justified & have pardon: & he should rather say, conform 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 tells us again pag. 45. Note 3. That it is ordinarily agreed by Protestants, that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us, in the same sense, 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 virtue of this Imputation: as our sins were laid on Him (as the sins of the people were laid on the escape 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 immediate procuring cause of His stripes & punishment or suffering; so His Righteousness imputed to us is the Immediate procuring cause of our justification etc. 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 forborn: And whether he, or others who own 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 forementioned 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 tells 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 own them. They are these. 1. To repute us personally to have been the Agents of Christed Acts, the Subjects of His Habits & passion, in a physical sense. I know not, who in their wits would affirm this: & to me, it is not a fit way to end, or clear controversies, to raise so much dust needlessly, & imagine senses out of our own 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 Habits & passion, & the Agents of His Acts, in a Political, or Moral sense (& 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 own 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 habits, 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 itself, as ours, but another to result from the same matter. This is too Philosophical for me to own, 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 brain 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 airy Philosophical Notions, but tend 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, & plain to every ordinary Man viz whereby the Satisfaction made to a judge & Governor 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 delinquents & debtors; & he as really & effectually delivevered out of prison therefore, as if he had made Satisfaction in his own proper person, or had paid the sum out if his own Substance? If any Philosopher, after Mr. Baxter's manner here, should, with such Philosophical Whimsies, (I call them so, for they are no other in this case) labour to disprove any such Imputation, & say, it must be in one of those five senses etc. would not any country man smille at this▪  
But now let us see Mr. Baxter's sixth sense, wherein he granteth the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. Or else (saith he) by Imputation is meant here, that Christ being truly reputed to have taken on the Nature of sinful Man, & become an Head for all true Believers, 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 believe, we are pardoned, justified, Adopted, for the sake & Merits of this Holiness, obedience & Penal Satisfaction of Christ with as full demonstration of divine justice, at least, & more full Demonstration of His wisdom & Mercy, than if we had suffered ourselves what our sins 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 Believers, and the Spirit to be given to Sanctify them; and when we believe, 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 only 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 otherways 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.) We cannot, with right, be reputed Righteous, except we be either inherently righteous, or righteous by Imputation; & so legally, juridically, & in Law-sense righteous, by virtue 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 threatened. 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 etc. or the New Covenant: & the disjunctive particle Or, saith He did not merit both, in his judgement: but before, we heard him plainly affirming, that Christ merited the New Covenant, & consequently He did not purchase pardon, Adoption & the Spirit to any immediately, but only mediately, in purchasing the Covenant, which promiseth these to such, as perform the Conditions thereof. (7.) By this way, Believers are repute such, as have right to all these purchased gifts, not immediately by virtue of Christ's Merits & righteousness, imputed to them & bestowed upon them, but by virtue 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 judgement.  
Speaking afterward pag. 55. of Christ, as an Head & Root, he tells us, that He was no Natural Root or Head; which is undeniable; Yet He was a Supernatural & 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 & Virtue. Ans. It is true, as to such, as were not then Believers, 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 certainly 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 & died: 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 joh. 10: 16. Whence, I pray, come the Influences, whereby they are made to believe, if not from Him, as their Political-head, or Surety-head, standing engaged 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 seeing a contracted Head and all the members of his Body contracted, or Politic, 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 means 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 virtue 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 man's sins. Ans. Seing He was one, who stood before God, as an Undertaker for sinners; & not only to suffer for man's 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 handsomely, with any show 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 delivered, 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 certainly & eventually be delivered, & not possibly only.  
But then (n. 18.) he cometh to an Accommodation, saying, When we are agreed that the person of the Sponsor & of every particular sinner are divers (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 (add 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 again, 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 terms; & so must have suffered in all our persons reputatively, so far as was necessary to our Redemption & Salvation, & for more we inquire not. And seeing 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, absolutely, 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 terms, Strickly, Simply & Absolutely, 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 etc. 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 emphatic (& to me more) as to say, God did impute our sin to Christ, which he someway excepteth against (n. 23. pag. 57)  
He addeth (n. 26. pag. 58.) Though Christ suffered in our stead, and in a large sense, to certain 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 itself. 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 man's 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 perform 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 have 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 seeing 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 certain 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 ourselves, might be repute to have obeyed perfectly in Him? This is all we desire.  
He saith next (n. 27.) It was not we ourselves, 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) merit our own Salvation by obeying in Christ: nor did we satisfy 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 metaphysical 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, truly had the habits, 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 mean 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 plain dealing be designed. But there is another sense, in which he will yield 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 Habits, Acts & Sufferings, in which it lay, are imputed to us, & made ours, not rigidly in the very thing itself, but in the effects and benefits. Ans. But if he shall yield 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 Habits, Acts & Sufferings are said to be physically translated, and put in us, or upon us; nor are they said to be Imputed to us merely 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 believers, & 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 sum, in his place & stead; the Law doth not impute that payment to the debtor merely in the effects; but imputeth the payment itself, 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, virtue, & efficary, unto him, & accounted him, in this Legal sense, to be no more a debtor 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 & virtue, is made over to the Believer, & 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 judgement) but very remotely; and that really these effects are more proximely the effects of Faith, which he calleth our Gospel-righteousness; and that the Immediate 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 Righteousness is, in this immediate Effect, imputed to all flesh, Reprobat, as well as Elect. And this is, in part, cleared from the words Immediately 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 merits 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 four ways (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 Merits 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, etc. But in as far as He is the Meritorious cause of the Covenant, in which these benefits 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 find 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 & Intercessor, by whom the Spirit is given to Sanctify us to God, & cause us sincerely perform the Conditions of the justifying Covenant. 4. In that He i● the righteous judge & justifier of Believers by sentence of judgement. 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 Sanctify 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 jer. 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 Merits, & upon our union with Him, when we believe & consent to Hi● Covenant, we are pardoned & justified, & so made Righteous really, that is such, as are not to be condemned, but glorified. Ans Asdruball 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 merits. 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 otherways 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 tells us (n. 36. pag. 61.) It is an error, contrary to the scope of the Gospel, to say, that the Law of Works, or of Innocency, doth justify us, as performed either by ourselves, 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 dispensed 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 & obtain Life: for this Law said (as himself confesseth pag. 63.) Obey Perfectly & Live, sin & die. And though it condemn & 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 mean 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 Law's 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 itself is no Righteousness, but the Result of a Righteousness. So that with him Believers have no Righteousness, in order to justification, but faith, the Gospel Righteousness, as was said above, & this he saith here in effect, & yet more plainly & 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 & merits 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 merely 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 clear the matter of Imputation of Christ's Righteous, 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 pass, 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 benefit 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 immediately 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 merits, was to procure the New Covenant. Ans. Though the Instrumental Intervention of a Covenant be acknowledged; Yet Righteousness must come to us immediately 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 lieth 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 perform the conditions thereof, i.e. believe, & so are inherently Righteous, these benefits are bestowed; & so Christ's Righteousness is not the immediate ground of our justification and Right to Glory; but our own Personal Righteousness, Faith, called our Gospel-righteousness: Christ's Righteousness is only the immediate ground of the Covenant, being the Meritorious cause thereof; & the immediate ground, whereupon our faith is so far advanced. But our judgement is, that though Christ convey the blessings purchased covenant-ways, yet the Covenant itself is not purchased by His Merits; & 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 believer; & upon that immediate 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 judgement, not only confound, but alter the causes of justification. If that, which Christ did by His Merits, was to procure the New Covenant, what was there in Adam, that can be said to answer this, or hold correspondence with it? With us, the Parallel runneth smoothly and clearly, thus. As by virtue 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 immediately resulting therefrom, to wit, the corruption of the whole Nature, Privative & positive, wrath & the curse etc. This himself asserteth pag. 34. So by virtue 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 ways, 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 immediately result therefrom, 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 believers) 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 & public person; and so, that He & Believers are one legally and juridically. And we judge also, that it belongeth to the person of the Mediator, being Surety, to satisfy 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 perform, 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 ransom of the Captive, may besaid morally to be given to the captive, though Physically it begiven to the Conqueror. But neither this similitude, not yet the other, of a man's being said to give another so much money, when he giveth him the land, bought therewith, do not come home to the point in hand: for there is a near & closely union betwixt Christ & Believers, 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; & again, the benefit here following viz. Justification etc. doth presuppose us to be Righteous, & consequently we must have a Righteousness imputed, because we have none of our own; 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 believer, 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 itself from destruction; Nor what truth can be in it, unless he think to play upon the word, in a sort.  
He seemeth to come nearer us, when he saith (n. 48. p. 70.) The sum of all lieth, in applying the distinction of giving Christ's Righteousness, as such in itself, & as a Cause of our Righteousness, or in the causality of it; as our sin is not reputed Christ's sin in itself, 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 itself 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 itself, 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 itself, 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 demerit 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 controversy plain enough to the unexercised Reader, goeth over it again, in a shorter way, that he may make it as plain, 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 Aristotle's Logicks or Metaphysics, and the terms thereof, and in justinian's Laws and the terms thereof, I am far deceived. He that would understand this plain 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 terms, gets grace of God to understand the thing, better than all this explication (how plain so ever it be called) shall ever make him do. And if this be the plainest way, that Mr. Baxter can choose 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, seeing it would necessarily end in a debate about logical and Law terms; which I shall rather leave to others, who have delight therein. And beside, the matter itself, delivered by him in more plain & intelligible terms, (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 strictly 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 strike sense, as that we are Proprietors, Subjects or Agents of the very thing itself 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 & die. And the more to secure himself from all opposition from the orthodox, 〈◊〉 proposeth this Law (which is but equitable) to all that will answer 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 terms, 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 blind us. The Apostle tells us Heb. 7: 22. that jesus was made a Surety of a better Testament (or Covenant, rather) and though the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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, seeing one sentence of divine Revelation should captivat our faith & judgement, 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: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is sponsio, expromissio, fidejussio: hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sub fide sponsionis trade, as it were, to deliver into hands, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spondeo, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidejussio, Vadimonium, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidejussor, vas, sponsor: and whether the word come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prope, or from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appropinquo, or from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in manibus, the same import and signification is hold forth; and the conjunction and nearness 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 Satisfy us, as to the acceptation of the word here, until 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 confirm the usual and generally received signification & Import of the word.  
This is also confirmed by the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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, Merchandise, 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. job. 17: 3. Hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, arrabon, a pleage Gen. 38: 17: 20. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidejussion, sponsio, pignus, suretyship, & a pledge. 1. Sam. 17: 18. 2 King. 14: 14. This word than 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. jer. 30: 21. to show, that the Surety standeth engaged to perform what he hath promised, & become Surety for, having 〈◊〉 stricken hands, as it is rendered Prov. 22: 26. Whence we see that there is a near and closely Union betwixt Christ and Believers; 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 Believers 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 answer to the first objection, which he there moveth, tells us, That when Christ is thus called the fidejussor of a better Covenant, it seemeth plain, 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 answer, 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 credit of his cause, that he will forsake all the Orthodox, and embrace rather the Socinians, & such, as join 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 judgement, 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 abundantly 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 mean 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, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & therefore his suretyship & 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; Unless, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of God's Covenant, from the Sacerdotal appropinquation, mentioned verse 19 But no such thing appeareth in Calvin's Comment. And that appropinquation, mentioned verse 19 is the people their privilege now under the New Testam. He tells 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 believe, 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 however; 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 man's 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 Believer, 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, strictly 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, Merit etc. accepted for that other person: And this latter signifieth either, 1. That it was done by the other person raediatly, as being a chief cause acting by his Instrument. 2. Or that it was done for that other Person by another; the first is our denied sense, & the second our affirmed sense. Ans. And I think (such is the discordance of men's apprehensions) that his explication darkeneth what is clear enough by the distinction given. His Reality & Acceptation, is, in our case, as darkening a distinction, as the others, if not more, and is against the Common sense of the Law, & the plain 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 merely 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 own it not, more than he: & the second is true, but not full & plain, being only general; nor is it, as thus generally expressed, any sense of his Acceptation: for when two persons are obliged for a sum 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 tells 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 remedy against some men's censures. Some will possibly think, that his dealing is not fair, to speak, in the Answer, 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 plain dealing to take the word Surety, or Sponsor, in that sense wherein it is always taken by Men that use it, until he demonstrat, that of necessity it must have a peculiar sense, in this matter, & in this place; and it is not fair, to object deceitful dealing to us, in this, until he hath first discovered the deceit. He reckoneth up, three or four 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 abundantly declared, & not from the simple name of a Surety: The name tells 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. jurid. for Fidejussor & Sponsor, will find nothing contrary to this; Yea they will find, that fidejussor dicitur, qui pro alio fidem suam obligat, & fide sua, id est, periculo suo esse jubet, quod alius debet; & that, fidejussor proprie decitur debtor; & 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 certain cases, as he might have read in the same place. So that it still holdeth true, that the Sponsor & the Debtor are one person in Law; & that so, that if the Debtor pay, the Sponsor is free; & if the Sponsor pay the Debtor is free. See Instit. lib. 3. Tit. 30. quibus modis tollitur obligatio & l. 13. § si. fide jussor; D. the Acceptil. Where it is said, that the debtor is liberat, if the Sponsor give only that, which is called, solutio imaginatia.  
There must be (saith he) some what more than the bare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, once used of Christ, as Mediator of God's 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 God's account. Ans. What he meaneth by God's covenant, he would do well to explain. That the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 mind. But as to the thing, we would fain know a reason, why we may not take this word, in its common acceptation among men, seeing 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 looked 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 & Sum is one; not two Debts, not two Ransoms, 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 ask, after the Surety hath paid.  
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 etc.  
5. It is one & the same legal effect. Christ crucified in the Spirit & risen again 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 clear up & confirm what is said; we shall mention only a few, pag. 373, 374. He tells us, [that 3. Suretyship imports not only a voluntary obligation for another person, but also union of parties, & Assumption of the Condition of that person, in the law's sense; so that the Surety & debtor are but one party in Law: therefore say the jurists, fidejussor proprie dicitur debtor. 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 might 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 & Relief, becometh the Satisfaction, Discharge & Relief of the principal Debtor, Christ's Suretyship 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 Suretyship; whereby as upon the one part our Debt becometh His entirely, 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; & so Christ was substitute in our stead & room, as judah 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 intrinsically one Esai. 1. They are legally one or in the Law's sense one; because by a legal Substitution & surrogation, Christ having put His name in the Believers Bond, by the Law▪ He is in his place, & the believer 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. joh. 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 believer can say, when Christ my Surety was judged & Crucified for my sins, than 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 lieth 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 bloody 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 bloody Bond of the Law shall pass 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 convened 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 find in us: But the Lord, the Creditor, having astricked Himself to the Cautioner, the Law strikes first upon Him, and can never come to strike against the Believer, unless it should not find 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 Suretyship, He hath changed the Nature of the Believers Bond and Obligation, and put His own name in it, so as He is become the Principal Debtor. His Suretyship hath swallowed up the Debtor's Obligation to satisfy 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 putteth 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. jer. 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 answer 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 answer to the first Objection hath been examined, in the foregoing Chapt. The 2. is this. Christ is called that 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 Representation. 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 judgement? 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 judgement, 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 repair the injury, 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 injury, 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 satisfy justice for our sin. Ans. Neither is suffering, as such, Righteousness; Nor could He satisfy 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 therewith, 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 truly 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, & fulfil 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 merit. 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 preceded 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 Merits. 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 Advocate (saith he) & will justify us, as our judge. Ans. His being our Advocate, is the same with His Intercession spoken of in the 4. place. (2.) The Father will judge us, & justify 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 own 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 own all, that is asserted by these Texts.  
The 3. object, is. If Christ's Righteousness be ours, than 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 again, saying. It is truly Imputed to us, or reputed, reckoned, as ours; but not in their sense, that claim a strike Propriety in the same Numerical Habits, Acts, Sufferings, Merits, 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 showed, that his sense was not satisfying: for in his judgement, as we found, there is no Righteousness truly ours, in order to justification, but our Faith, which he calleth our Gospel-righteousness, which by Christ's Merits 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 Immediate Righteousness, in order to the obtaining of these favoures; & Christ's Merits 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 Believers, that they thereby may become formally Righteous, in the sight of God, and be justified as such, & so pardoned and have right to life, immediately 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 Benefits bestowed because of His Merits; But we hear not that Pardon and Right to Glory are made the Immediate result and effect of Christ's Merits & Righteousness, but only mediate, by the Interveening of the New Covenant, whereby our Faith, the condition thereof, called our Gospel, Personal Righteousness, is made the Immediate cause of our possessing these benefits; whereby he giveth occasion, at least, to judge, that he maketh our faith the Immediate 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 strike propriety in the same Numerical Habits etc. 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, & own 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 which Mr. Baxter in all his Explications of this matter, doth so frequenily labour to restrick us, contrary to all Reason, Yea and to Common sense) Yet we must own it for a truth, knowing that these fundamental truths, 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-terms are more fit, to help us to some understanding in this matter, which is hold forth in Scripture, as a juridical act, than Metaphysical terms; 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, Merits and Satisfaction, be our Righteousness constitutiuly, or only efficiently. The matter and form of Christ's personal Righteousness is ours, as an efficient cause; but it is neither the nearest matter, nor the form 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, etc. 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 inquire, whether it be the nearest matter, or form or both, of our Righteousness: for these Metaphysical terms 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 inquire for Physical matter, and form or Constitutive causes of Moral or juridical Being's, or Effects, as Philosophers 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 otherways) 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 ourselves. 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 ourselves, 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 preceding (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 Papists, & their Misapprehensions, in the matter, I pass. 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, dreamt of such a thing. If by these terms, he mean 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 judgement 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 virtue of the Satisfaction made by his Surety, now judicially accounted & reputed his, being Sufficient. These things are plain to such, as will but open their eyes: but all the world cannot make them plain to such, as will understand nothing, but what is cast into Aristotelian Metaphysical Mould. Were it not lost labour for any to inquire, what is the Matter & Form 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 Merit, & 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 blood 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 precedeth Sanctification. (2.) It is true, God can & doth pardon sins; but mere 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 judgement and acceptation: and God's judgement being always 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, than we must consider, what you mean 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 always true, that such & such persons did sin: 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 Metaphysically, 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 remain; for a man legally guilty, is not legally Righteous. Now, Mr. Baxter must yield 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 sin, & 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 lieth 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 remain 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 chargeable 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 mean 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 see 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 chargeable 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, until 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 & chargeable with the crime. And so long as we differ herein, we are not agreed the 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 otherways 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 chargeable with the sin; & the obligation to punishment is taken away, where the charge of guilt remaineth: and thus God is supposed to justify 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 chargeable 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 believers; for Christ being the second Adam & public person, we have our part in His Righteousness, as truly, and as much, as in Adam's sin. His answer 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, than 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 federally, 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 air; & 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 nearer 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, than all runneth in another channel. The person of Peter is federally 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 near a Relation to Adam, as Abel had; for here Adam is considered, as the Head & Centre, and all his posterity, 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 Sons & 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 mean, 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 virtue 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 immediately derive from Adam their legal and foederal personalities, that is, these same persons, considered federally, are equally and alike near to Adam, their federal Head and Representative: And therefore the guilt of Adam's sin cometh from him immedratly to each one of them, federally 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 wilful 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 wilful sinning persons, and this is no guilt at all; no man's 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 desert 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 etc. 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 moreover (2) It hath a foul 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 confirm 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 resultancy 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, & tells 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 & Public 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 suitable 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 federally, 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 answer, 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 answer God's Ends & Honour, than if we had done and suffered in our persons, that hereby he might merit a free gift of pardon & life (with himself) to be given by a Law of Grace, to believing 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 truly, according to His own gracious Appointment, and Ordination, making Him a Public 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 Ransom, 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 itself that is Imputed to Christ. Therefore it is His Righteousness itself, 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 habits, 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 speeches, used rashly by some, would be true, viz. That Christ was the greatest murderer, Adulterer etc. 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 add, 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 plainly embrace Socinianism (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 mere 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 truly 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 terms. 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 itself, 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 explain: If his meaning be, that Christ was not legally accounted guilty, this is denied; for than he could not have been a Sacrifice for our sins, to have died in our stead. Wrangling is not good: Yet Turpe'est Doctori, etc.  
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, otherways 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 itself, 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 controversy. 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 choice 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 Socinianism & Arminianism 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 cried up by Mr. Baxter.  
9 Object. When you Infer, that if we are reckoned to have perfectly obeyed in and by Christ, we cannot be again 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 fulfil 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, seeing 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, seeing 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 truly obedience, nor the omission sin: If yea, than 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, seeing it is certain, that no man doth all, that he is bound to do by the Gospel (in the time & measure of his faith, hope, love, fruitfulness etc.) 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 Covenant. Believers 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 binds us to that, which Christ could not do for us, as to believe in a Saviour, etc. 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 believers, 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 certainly 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 more, or for all.  
He saith 2. But if you mean, 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 otherways, than he is. But yet it must be said, that God reputeth Believers, 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 Rome, 8: 1. & none can lay any thing of that Nature to their Charge verse 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 certainly 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 attain to, & which shall certainly 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 immediate ground of our Pardon & Right to Glory, is not Christ's Surety-righteousness, but our own Inherent righteousness. (6) Christ hereby merited neither Pardon, nor Glory to be granted, as the Immediate fruits of His merits; 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 terms (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 Controversy, he plainly enough declareth, that he is of the judgement (as to the main) with john Goodwin: yet he there (as we have heard) so stateth the question, against which he disputeth, as the Orthodox will not own it; wherein he dealeth not so ingenuously with us, as Mr. Goodwin 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. etc. seemeth to me not be the just & orthodox way, but to incline more unto the Socinians etc. for all the Imputation, which he seemeth to own, 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 tells 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 yield unto this Imputation: Nay doth not Bellarmine come a further length, in the words formerly cited?  
Mr. Baxter in his Catholic 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 ways & 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 judgement, shortly here examine what he is pleased to say, in one place or other of that Book, so far as we can find, & 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 Merit of Christ's perfect obedience; Yea and His habitual holiness & Satisfactory Sufferings, advanced in dignity by His Divine Perfection: 15. This Merit, 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 truly reputed Righteous, because we, as believing members of Christ, have right to Impunity & life, as merited by His righteousness, & freely given to all penitent believers. 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 Suitable to what is already examined, and what might here further be animadverted upon, will occur hereafter.  
He beginneth Sect. 8. n. 119. to speak against the Doctrine of Imputation, taught by the Orthodox. I shall yield to him, that Christ's personal Righteousness, Divine or Humane, Habitual active, or Passive, is not given to us, or made ours, truly 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 mere Effects: for according to the Gospel method, believers, being by Faith interes●ed in Him, have an Interest in His Surety-righteousness, as to its virtue, force and efficacy, or as the cause, and that morally and legally; so that Christ and believers are one person in Law. No● do we hereby say; That Christ's Merit & Satisfaction are reputed by God, to be inherent in us, or done by us, in our own proper persons; or that in a sense Natural we did all these things ourselves, or that God judgeth us so to have done, or that all the Benefits of Christ's Righteousness shall as fully and Immediately be ours, as if we bade 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 believe 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 ourselves, 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 transgressor, & consequently hath forfeited all right to the Reward, & is obnoxious to the Penalty, hath need of a Remission, through his Sureties making Satisfaction; & of a new Title to Glory, through his Sureties Obedience. So that the Nonnecessity 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 Imputed, 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 mean reputed sinlesness, or perfection, than 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 show of Repugnancy to pardon of sins, through the Satisfaction of Christ.  
But (n. 123.) he tells us, that some think to avoid the Contradiction by distinguishing only of the moments of Nature, & double respect of the same Man's 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 complete Surety-righteousness, in order to our obtaining complete 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 threatened. 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 hour, 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 condemn His own foregoing act of error & injury; 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 tells 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 divers 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 Law's obligation now, since the fall: & it is certain, that because the Law is now broken, we are obliged to suffer; & that, because of that constitution, do & live, no man can have life, until that Law be perfectly obeyed: but because this is Impossible for man, therefore it must be done by his Surety. He querieth again, did the Law bind Adam, to obey & suffer, before he sinned? Ans. No. Did it bind him (saith he again) both to obey & suffer for his new sin, the next Instant? Ans. What himself addeth is a sufficient answer to this, viz. That it did bind him to suffer for his old sin (add, & also for his new sin) & yet the obligation to obey for time to come remained. But all this is beside the purpose; for the main 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, until their Surety fulfil that Law for them, or undertake to do it: as they cannot be freed from Suffering, until 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 bind to an Impossibility in Nature; for sin existent cannot but be existent. But this we say, That by virtue of that Law & constitution, there was no way for lapsed man, to enjoy the Reward-promised, but by yielding 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 yield perfect obedience unto that Law; & this perfect Obedience is made over unto the Believer, & 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, than 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 virtue hereof, they do obtain the Reward, as certainly, as if they had never sinned.  
Others (he saith n. 126,) would come nearer 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 Find Wolls bius in his Compend. Theol. Lib, 1. Cap. 30. § 15. full & plain, 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 benefits 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 tells 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 divers: as also, that unjust & just are not immediately 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 obtain this by perfect Obedience. Now. what saith Mr. Baxter to this?  
He saith, this is mere 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 threatened & to the Reward promised, before he fell, he was neither unjust, that is, one that was a Transgressor, & 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 merit 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 years work the first hour; & so was neither just, nor privatively unjust, as to the future years 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 threatened, 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, until 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 Aphorisms; yet afterward, in his Book against Mr. Cartwright, pag. 19 he tells us, he became convinced hereof. 2. He raiseth dust to darken the air by saying. That it is yet unresolved, what that was, by which Adam must merit 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 virtue 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 maintaineth, 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 merit 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 merit 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 terms of a Law of Grace. Ans. (ay) 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 Merits the Elect obtain more, than what Adam forfeited (to speak so) I shall easily grant; but notwithstanding thereof we stood in need of more, than of mere 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 yield the 3d. (4) Though we need not say, that we Merited in Him, yet we say, That Christ merited, as a Public 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 warrant to say, that Christ only merited to give it to us, only on the terms 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 ways 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 own 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 immediately: 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 nearer & 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 lie 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 mere 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, threatened to Adam, was more than the mere want of what was promised; otherways 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 mere 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 Sophistry 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 speech here, we say, that it is manifestly false, as appear 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 moreover) 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 Employment; & if not, threateneth to deprive him of all he hath, & to cast him in prison, until he die: This servant faileth & performeth not the condition, and thereby 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, perform that day's 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 wonderful; where, I pray, must the confusion lie? 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? Gild (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 itself? 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 itself, seeing it will always 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 error, [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 &c. and that, as by virtue of this Christ our Surety was to die the cursed death; so by virtue of that, He was to fulfil 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 blind men groping for the wall; and he and possibly two or three more, 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; seeing 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 benefits, 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 goat 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; seeing 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 benefits being given us, upon terms & Conditions. But we show before, and hereafter will have occasion to do it more fully, of what Nature, these terms 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 merit & 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 terms and Conditions: for he saith (n. 137.) that Glory is given as a Reward for our believing, 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, seeing 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 conceit, that Christ's Death was only to purchase pardon, & His Righteousness: to merit life] Ans. We have said before, that we need not be so curious here in distinguishing, if both be granted to make up a Complete 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, whatever 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 Merits of Christ's Active & Passive & Habitual Righteousness, do causo our Glory. For we do not separat them: Nor need we curiously inquire, 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 complete 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 complete 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 Merits: for then, we could not say, that Christ suffered properly in the room 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 jesus Christ Gal. 3: 14. The God & Father of our Lord jesus Christ, blesseth us with all spiritual blessings, in Christ, according as He hath chosen us in Him; & hath predestinate us unto the Adoption of Children, by jesus 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 jesus 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 joh. 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 & form of the Covenant of Redemption.  
He tells us (n. 141.) That Christ's Righteousness is made ours, as our sins were made his. Which is all that we desire. We grant that Christ never had the Reatum culpae, in itself: & 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 itself 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 mere 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 rigid 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 public legal person: yea himself in the appendix to his Premonition, yieldeth that Christ may be called, our Vicarius poenae, or Substitute; And when we say, He is a Public 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 public legal person, as did represent in Law all that were given to Him, as their public 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 paymaster, who is the debtor's Instrument, servant, or delegat, a Surety) doth not much help him, seeing there are no such Sureties among Men, nor no manner of Suretyship, that can quadrat with Christ's Suretyship, 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 find much Satisfaction in this matter.  
I find 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 believers, as well as in their Nature.  
We come next to Sect. 9 pag. 73. Where Mr. Baxter proposeth an objection, that those of his mind 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 merely 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 believers are not now bound to obedience to the Law.  
What saith he we answer hereunto? That we are not bound to obey to the same ends, as Christ; that is, for Righteousness, or justification, or Merit: but in gratitude. It is true, Believers 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 merit to ourselves the Reward: but, among other ends, to declare our Thankfulness unto God, & to set forth His Glory. What saith he to this answer?  
He judgeth it to be a yielding 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 believers 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 pass under other Considerations, & accordingly be endured for other ends & Advantages. (2) Believers 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 fulfil 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 fulfil the Law once, to which we were obliged; therefore must Christ fulfil it for us, to the end we may enjoy the promised Reward: And His fulfilling of it for this end, doth not make us Lawless, 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 perform Obedience, with such an eye & design, & 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 means for pardon or remedy. 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 violate 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, until they closed with the terms 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 mean, & 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 answer 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, seeing, according to our Common discourse, the Surety & Principal debtor are one person in Law. But about ambiguous terms, 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 merit the New Covenant, is no where said in Scripture; & 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 lose his own difficulties, formerly proposed: for. 1. How can He be said, to have fulfilled all the Law for us, that did not fulfil 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 fulfil the Law for Adam & Eve only, or for us, as in them etc. Let him answer these himself, and he shall help us.  
Next (n. 190.) he bringeth some in saying. That we may as well say, that man must not die, because Christ died for us; as not obey because Christ obeyed for us, & then tells 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 satisfy 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 public 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 itself is made to work together for their good.  
He bringeth them in again (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 paid all in Christ, as a man payeth a Sum 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 fight against his own imagination, & a mere 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 mere 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 man's person, that we mean, that Christ suffered in, but His own. Ans. And no man ever dreamt, that He either did, or could suffer, in any other man's physical person. But seeing 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 becoming any other man's 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 Father's design, 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 Controversy; & 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 mankind: 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 error, 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 & mediately 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 error, 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 superadded 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 judgement 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 add, 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 merely 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 Believers: 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 falsely so repute us to be. But He was then the Cause (materially) or had that virtus effectiva, which would justify & Sanctify & Glorify 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 men's, but not that which existed individually, in any, but himself. Ans. Notwithstanding of all this, Christ was a federal Head, & a Public Person, undertaking for, and therein representing all those, that were given to Him to save; and this his following words confirm, when he saith. But it was individual persons, in whose stead, or place Christ suffered, & whom He undertook to justify, 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 believe, & is united federally to Him, he than 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, believers 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 public 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 assign 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 Believers, 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 satisfy 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 tells us, That believers, receiving Christ Himself, receive title to His Grace, Spirit & Glory, & are personally & actually His Subjects &c, and have a right to all His conferred benefits; which right followeth not Immediately 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, complete, actual right, until such time, as is condescended upon; yet by virtue 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 sum of money, when she cometh to be married, or to be of such an age, that daughter hath another right unto that sum, 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 sum (2.) Therefore the right, that Believers have, floweth from the Compact, & Christ's Suffering according to compact, though it be conveyed by the Covenant of Grace, & their possession of the Benefits be immediately therefrom; as that daughter's right to the sum is properly from the contract, though her actual possession according to the contract, be from her Marriage, or coming to that age. Though believers right to the actual possession of the benefits be so conveyed; & as to the conveyance, some be granted absolutely, as faith (as himself will confess) some upon condition of faith, that is, in that order, & according to that Method, that faith shall preceded: Yet, in respect of God, their right to all is absolutely 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 perform the New Conditions, should have right to the benefits, 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 own.  
7. He tells 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 believer is related, as a member of a perfectly Righteous Saviour; & that is done no sooner (in time) than 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 Protases & Apodoses 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 etc. as the effects of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; 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 error (hereafter discovered) of making faith to be considered here, as our personal Inherent Righteousness. Then he tells 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 merit our justification (which is called Christ's Righteousness imputed to us, as being thus far reputed ours) 2. our penitent believing 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, than 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 dreamt 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 binds 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 believe; 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 etc. 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 benefits by them, which we shall possess: and for the merits of His Righteousness, we are conditionally justified and saved, before we believe, 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 immediately 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, until 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.  
Reason's enforcing the practice of the Truth, hithertil 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 judgements, as to these Necessary & soul-concerning truths; but we must also practise them, that it may appear, we do believe them in very deed, and that we believe them with the heart; & this will be the best way to be kept orthodox, and steadfast 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 believe. And the same Apostle tells 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 believeth etc. 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 than must be a very sure & saife way, being thus attested & witnessed by all, that are worthy of credit, 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 fear a Miscarrying, or a disappointment, in following of this way, which even the Law itself, or the Mosaical observances did point forth, in the daily & yearly 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 satisfy justice for their sins; & to show 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 testify, and bear witness to, when it testified before hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 1 Pet. 1: 10. etc. So Peter, in his Sermon to Cornelius, told him Act. 10: 43. that to Him, (i.e. to Christ) gave all Prophet's witness, that through His Name, whoso ever believeth 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 believed God, preaching to him the Gospel; & the object of his faith, or the sum & 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 believed God, & it was counted to him for righteousness. And if we inquire, what this was, which Abraham did believe? or where in was it, that he believed God? Paul tells us Gal. 3: 8. That it was the Gospel. And the Scripture foreseeing, that God would justify 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 believed God, & it was imputed to him for righteousness: Yet this was the chief & 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 thereafter 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 chief 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 joh. 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 etc. 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 believers, & imputed to them, and they receive it by faith, that it may become theirs, and they may stand before justice clothed with it, & thereby answer all that Law, & justice can say against them, or lay to their charge. Can sinners find out & fall upon a Righteousness, more excellent in itself, or more pleasing or satisfying unto God, & whereupon a distressed soul pursued by justice and the terrors of the Lord can with more confidence rest and rely, than this is, which is the Righteousness of God; the Righteouness wrought by him, who was and is the Father's equal, God over all, blessed for ever, and is Lord, our Righteousness jer. 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, yield more ground of Peace & Confidence? No certainly.  
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 jesus 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, etc. And this should commend it higly unto us, that when neither Angels, 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 year old. It were all in vain: 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 margin to us, to beware of tradeing in the footsteps of their folly, lest we fall into the same pit of ruin. We read Rom. 9: 31, 32. that Israel, which followed after the Law of righteousness, did not attain 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. They were at much pains to follow after the Law of Righteousness, thinking thereby to attain unto Righteousness, & so to be justified; but after all their pains & travail, they did miss 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 again 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 believeth. 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 believeth: and so they lost all. This sad example should cause all look about them, & beware of entertaining 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 mind: It is observed of the Jews 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 again 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 beggars & dyvours to be so proud of nothing, & to refuse to accept of & be satisfied with the payment of a Cautioner? As than 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 jews here, Rom. 10: 3. that they were ignorant of God's Righteousness: And Chap. 9: 32. that they stumbled at that stumbled stone, they broke their necks on that, which was the only mean of saving them, & that in the righteous judgement 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 Own Works. These Jews, 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 always 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 Ways, 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 mix) 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 jesus 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 justice 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 Jews had a Zeal of God Rom. 10: 2. & be at much expense of duties & toil therein, as the Pharisee, who fasted twice a week, and yet attain 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 jesus 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 solid Joy & Rejoicing 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, access by faith, in to this grace wherein we stand, & rejoice 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 etc. 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 deceit and cheatry prove in end? God's way is the only way, that will yield 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 preceding Chapters, as a sure ba. sis thereunto, the only Gospel-way of justification. Men may think, that the pressing of Justification by our own works should prove the most effectual Mean & Persuasive unto the real study of holiness, & a most infallible Argument to set people a-work 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 own 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 allegiance groundless, seeing 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 ways 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 accept of this way of justification, through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, received & leaned to by faith, do interpretatiuly say as much, as that Christ is dead in vain: for the Apostle tells us Gal. 2: 21. that he did not frustrate the grace of God; for if righteousness come by the Law, than Christ is dead in vain. 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 vain: and consequently, whoever seek after a Righteousness, consisting in their personal obedience to the Law, & will not accept of, nor heartily & practically close with the Gospel-way of justification, through faith in Christ, do really frustrate, so far as in them lieth, 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 vain: for if he died not to satisfy for sinners, after he had finished his course of Obedience, & so to make up a complete Righteousness, which might answer all the necessities of sinners, lying under the sentence of a broken Law; and having no way, without Christ, to obtain 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 vain; & all such, as will not heartily embrace 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 vain.  
13. This Consideration might also have force with us, that what Paul taught, as to this matter, he did also practise, & sweetly comply with; thereby casting us a copy, 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 knowledge of Christ jesus 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 jesus Christ; even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ etc. 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 unsuitable for them, who are thus graciously advanced to such an high State & Privilege of grace; & to mind such duties, as do most suit 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 point at a few, to which others may be reduced.  
1. Such, as live this life of Gospel Justification, should beware of entertaining 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 lie 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 sweeting, working & doing, obtained that, which others by their laziness, negligence & not doing, have come short of. Paul tells us this expressly. 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 itself, & 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 pains & diligence, as having received but his reward, and that which was due to him of debt, and not of grace. But now, that all mouths 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, professeth himself poor, naked & miserable, & a plain 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 believers, to the weakest believer, as well as to the strongest; and so the strongest believer 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, seeing 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 wear the crown; & all his glorified ones should most cheerfully cast their crowns down at his feet. But of him (saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 1: 30, 31.) are ye in Christ jesus, 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 design 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, mind 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 sin. Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? will the flesh object. But the Apostle answereth. Rom. 6: 2. etc. 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 brought, to give way to sin: Therefore the justified should mind 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. & else 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 pitied them. They were ungodly & without strength, yet Christ died for them Rom. 5: 6. and the Lord did justify the ungodly, even them, who had no righteousness of their own, 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 than 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 people no more strangers unto him, & as foreigners, 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 Farther, being now fellow-citisens with the Saints, and of the household 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 household, yea & admitted them to his presence, that they may kiss 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 sins 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 own, 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 peril, or sword? Nay in all these things they are more than conquerors, 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 persuaded, 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 jesus, our Lord. Should not therefore such carry, as persons that cannot be made miserable? How much doth the Apostle insist on this, and clear it from this ground Rom. 5: 9, 10. saying, much more than 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 again vers. 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by jesus 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 Rome, 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 reign in life by one Jesus Christ. Rom. 5: 17.  
9 Yea particularly, the consideration of their many sins 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 again, however the memory of them may humble them, & cause them run to the fountain 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 daily, 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 gain 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 gain 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 gain, 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 possess any of that room in the heart, that is due to him? He should have the throne, for He is well worthy 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 darkened by men's 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 labour by all means, either more directly, or more indirectly to perver●tit, & to press for a mixture of works upon one consideration, or other, in this matter, which it will not admit: and that because, it is so cross & 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 immediately 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 jesus Christ, even we have believed in jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ & not by the works of the Law etc. adding vers. 18. that he for his part, would not build again the things, which he had destroyed, & so make himself a transgressor. 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 daily 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 sins 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 axiom 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 explain the nature of it, we must speak a little of it also, as continued.  
But first, we must premit some things to show, 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 justify; and which cannot more be called Justification, than his eternal purpose to Condemn 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, mean and Method, 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 mean 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 believer is brought out of a State of Wrath and Judgement: where they were lying under the Curse of the Law, and the sentence thereof, unreconciled to God, and enemies to him, having their sins lying upon then, according to the sentence of the Law, & therefore strangers to God's favour & countenance, and so without God & without Christ; & brought into a new State of Peace, Pardon, Reconciliation & Friendship with God, of which we spoke above Chap. V. We cannot then look upon the justification, mentioned & explained in the Scriptures, and of which we have hitherto spoken, as a mere Declaration to the believers Conscience of what God did from Eternity; as if the admittance into favour, and Pardoning of sins, 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 justification, & whereby they say, all Infants baptised are justified; & which they must yield to be such as can & doth meeths with a final & total intercision, yea & amission, as to many; & so be quite of another nature, from that which adult believers partake of, from which there is no final or total Apostasy to be granted, according to the Scriptures. But we own no such Justification of all baptised Infants.  
4. Nor yet do we here speak of that, which others, being more wary, must own, as consequentially following upon their opinion of Baptismal Regeneration of all baptised elect infants, to wit, a Baptismal justification of all baptised 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 maintain 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 concern 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, & determinately explain the manner how. It is more of our concernment to inquire after & know the way, how adult people come to partake of these Privileges.  
5. We do not here speak of that Justification, which some call a justification of the cause, and distinguish from that, which they call, a justification of the person: for that is but the justification of a person falsely 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 find he did several times in his Psalms) to appeal unto God, the righteous judge, being conscious to himself of no guilt in the particulars alleged, & knowing his own innocency, in the sight of God, who knew all things: Such was the matter of that question, concerning Job's sincerity so much agitated betwixt him, & his friends, in the book of job, 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 immediately with God, and not with man; and the question was properly about a matter of fact, to wit, whether he had been a real believer, or an hypocrite, though such a matter of fact, as merely 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 judgement 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 judgements & 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 judgement 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, always according to truth; even though according to that judgement of Charity, which the Law of God requireth: Nor is it Constant and equable.  
7. Nor do we speak of that justification, whereof the Apostle james 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 itself.  
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 justification, but a mere 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 justification, which is in the court of man's own conscience, or as it is there, and opposed to that justification, which is in God's court; for it is certaing, this justification, which is said to be in the court of conscience, is but a manifestation of the other unto the man's conscience, and is some times had, & sometimes miss; 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 clear sight thereof, and never see more of it, till nigh the landing in eternity, & yet all this while, the justification, which is in the court of God, remain fixed, invariable, and without any interruption.  
10. By Justification here, we mean not that, which some call a Particular justification, and do distinguish it from an Universal justification: 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 justification, or not; yet it is certain, it is not that justification, whereof Paul speaketh so much, and explaineth, in all its causes, in his Epistles; nor that justification, 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 again into his Fatherly embracements.  
11. Nor finally, do we here speak of that sentence of Absolution, that shall be pronounced, at the last day; for, howbeit that may be called a justification; yet it is not that justification, 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 public Declaration and Manifestation, before Angels and Men, of their justification, or being in a justified state, who shall be adjudged unto eternal life; than any justification connoteing a change of state, seeing none in that day will be justified but such as have been here partakers of this justification, 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 clear 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 believer is brought, a real change, as to state: as a man accused of some crime, & keeped in prison till he be tried, & examined by an assize, is really changed, as to his Law state, when cleared by an assize, 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 man's 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 man's 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 justification 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 believer 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 justification 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 always justified; they are fixed & preserved in that state: as Adoption is a permanent state, because once adopted always 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 again 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 again; 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, always in Him, once a member of his mystical body, & married to him, as his spouse, and always 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 habit, 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 hear summe-up, do confirm this.  
Propos. 3. Hence justification is a State, that is not Interrupted and broken off, and renewed and reiterated again: 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 pronounced is not recalled; sins once pardoned by God, are not laid again to his charge. The Spirit that once spoke peace & said, Son be of good cheer, thy sins are forgiven thee, will not be again, a Spirit of bondage unto fear Rom. 8: 15. If justification could at any time be th●s interrupted, Adoption behoved to be interrupted with it, and so a child of God behoved to be for that time a child 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 jesus & by the Spirit of our God 1. Cor. 6: 11. once brought out of Nature never reduced into that state again: No more new justification, than new Adoption; once quickened, never again 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 always 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 sins 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 believer 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 judgements; if they break my statutes, & keep not my commendements; then will I visit 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 joh. 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 Advocate with the Father, jesus 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 always 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 firm 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 ways as our ways, Esai. 55: 8, 9 His sentence & judgement remaineth the same, how alterable so ever ours be. He is in one mind, though we be in many.  
Propos. 4. Hence also it is manifest, that justification is an Instantaneous act; that is, it is not a work, that is carried on by degrees; but a sentence pronounced by the Lord, the Righteous Judge, once for all: Though hereafter they still need renewed pardons, & so, may have more sins actually pardoned this year, than they had the last year; yet Justification, as relating to their state, is no progressive work: We hear not of a growth in justification, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not import a growth or progress in justification, but a continuance in that state: beside that others read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: So Ar. Mont. The complut edition, as also the Syriack & Arabic Versions. This relative change, that is made in justification, 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 growth, so that an adopted child of God can not be more the adopted child of God this year, than they were the last year; though the sense and clear Perception of the one and of the other may & doth admit of degrees, & is not so full & clear always 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 believe; and admitteth them all equally into a State of Favour and Reconciliation; They equally pass 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 than 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 kind 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 kind, it inte●esseth a soul in Christ, & in his Righteousness, whereupon he is justified. It is true, one may have many more sins pardoned, than another. Yet both being Pardoned & justified, 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, than 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 worthy 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 justification, all who are justified, how great so ever the difference be among them, as to the sins, 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 Favour of God, & Right to glory. As to what difficulty may arise from the consideration of after sins, we shall speak to that afterward.  
Propos. 6. The State of justification is perfect at the first, or justification is perfect and compleet to all ends and uses; This is clear from what is already said: for if justification be not an act & privilege, that admitteth of degrees, or of increase; and doth not grow more and more daily, 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. (ay) That all their former sins are pardoned, how many & how heinous so ever they have been, for then all their sins are cast into the depths of the sea, Micah. 7: 19 & are not found. jer. 50: 20. In those days, & in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity 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 Host 14: 2. Then he imputeth no iniquity 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 iniquity, & remembereth their sin no more jer. 31: 34. Heb. 8: 12. & 10: 17. He cast: all their sins behind his back. Esai. 38: 17. Hereby is remission of sins, 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 behind God's back, are not again laid to the charge of the justified persons: once forgiven always forgiven: It is true, Satan may renew the charge, and use false summons against the Believer; & it is also true, that after-sins may waken fears, & bring old sins again 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 sins that God once pardoneth, he never writeth down again upon the score of Believers, as if he had recalled the former pardon granted, for he remembereth their sin no more jer. 31: 34. Heb. 8: 12. & 10: 17. And for future sins by virtue 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 justification, and wholly their Righteousness, as made of God Righteousness unto them. jer. 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 halves, 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 minds by wicked works, but now reconciled Col. 1: 21. once a far off but now made near Ephes. 2: 13. the enmity being stain. vers. 16. No more strangers or foreigners now, but fellow citizens with the Saints, and of the household 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 half the children of Saran, and half the children of God; not half in Nature and half in the state of Grace, not half translated & half not Ephes. 2: 13, 19 Col. 1: 21. not half quickened with Christ, and half not Ephes. 2: 5. They are not now half without Christ, or aliens from the common wealth of Israel, or strangers from the Covenants of promise, etc. 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 believers, they shall not perish, but have eternal life joh. 3: 15, 16. He that believeth is not condemned vers. 18. See also joh. 3: 36. & 6: 47. They are passed from death unto life joh. 5: 24. 1. joh. 3: 14. being discharged of all guilt of eternal punishment, which formerly they deserved by their sins. And all this holdeth good, notwithstanding of their after sins; which (as we shall show) do not annul, 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 Solemnity, 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 believers 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 justification differeth from the life of Sanctification. (1) Sanctification maketh a real Physical change: justification 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 believers are more & more built up daily. justification 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 gronwing and increasing work, & admitteth of many degrees; & is usually weak, and small at the beginning: justification 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 showed. (5) Sanctification is not alike in all; but some are more, some are less sanctified: But justification is equal in all; none being more justified, than others. (6) Some measures & degrees of Sanctification, which have been attained, may be lost again: But nothing of justification 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 itself (7) Sanctification is a progressive work; justification is instantaneous, as was shown. (8.) Sanctification respecteth the Being, Power & Dominion of ●in, in the believer, and killeth, subdueth and mortifieth it: justification respecteth its guilt & demerit, & 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 perfect holiness in the fear of God. (10) In justification, there is a right had unto life, and unto the rich recompense 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 justification nothing is required but faith in Christ, whereby the soul may become united to Him, & have a right to his benefits: 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 Virtue to Faith, of Knowledge to Virtue, 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, that 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 Habit 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. Council, Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 10. whereby we see, this Justification, whereof they say james speaketh, Chap. 2. is manifestly nothing else, but the very growth of Sanctification: and so they know no justification 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 justification; and indeed this their justification, 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 justification, 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 justifieation, or two justifications, or (as he saith against D. Tully 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 laws he speaketh of, & the first, he saith, is by God the Creator, the second by Christ the Redeemer and in order to the vindication & clearing of this, he speaketh much of a twosold Righteousness In his writings 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 merit & 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 etc. 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 justify us from a false Accusation, that we have not performed the Conditions of the new Covenant etc. 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 affair: and what ever pleasure men may take, to give way to their Luxuriant fancies; yet it will be safest for us to follow the thread of the Word, and to speak of this mystery, according to Revelation, and not according to our Apprehensions: And of all men, I judge, Mr. Baxter should be most averse from creating new Terms, Words & Expressions, in these divine things, who expresseth himself so angry-like (especially in his later writings) in words, which to some may seem to favour little of sobriety 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 justification, 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 find not this new justification 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 justification, 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 tells that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness. I answer. 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 answer to this, I judge it sufficient to say, That the Apostle is manifestly there speaking of that other justification, which we own, for the only justification, hold forth in the Gospel, whereby Remission of sins is had, & Peace with God, through a Righteousness without, & of that justification, 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 justification, 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 justification is rather a justification of Faith, or of the Believer because of his faith, & purely upon the account of his Faith; for it is a sentence of judgement, pronunceing the man to be a Believer, because he is so; & his faith to be right Faith, because it is so; than any justification of him by faith. Not to mentione this, that together with faith, as the Condition, Repentance & New Obedience is joined; & then there must be a justification of works, or of the man by, yea & because of works, which cannot be imported by being justified by faith, because that is always opposed to justification by works. Beside, that even in men's courts there are not two distinct sentences of the judge, required in deciding of a Controversy, 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 judge, 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 Lawgiver, or judge, nor can the Law bring it in against a Believer: and what Satan, the accuser of the Brethren, or what a blind or prejudged World, or what a mans own blind & deceitful heart shall or can herein do, is of no consideration, in reference to a justification, which is before God, & in his sight. But 2. Against this twofold justification. I would say, that all that is mentioned, concerning Gospel justification, in Scripture, agreeth but to one, & the very contrary thereof must be attributed to the other new-coined justification, according to his own explication thereof: the one is by faith, the other is for faith; the one is by faith alone, without 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 justice; 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 believer etc. suiteth the other best; In the one the one the man can plead no innocence, 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 judgement with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified; in the other, he may and must say, enter into judgement 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 chief accusers here, do not compear to accuse, & Satan's accusing them before God can cause no trouble to them, until he come, as an Accuser, before conscience, & give in false summons there. And therefore it is not the Justification by Faith, treated of in Scripture: as himself proveth in his Confession Chap. 8. pag. 189. etc. 4. This will make way for more justifications, 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 justification, 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 justification: and yet we hear of justification in this life. Further, this will make way for more 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 though 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 mere 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 tells us pag. 8, ag. Cartwright of a, 3 sold Accusation, 1. that we are not believers. 2. That we are not true believers, 3. that we are ●●lifidians; & that accordingly, there must be several ways of justification, 5, This will lay the ground for God's multiplying, or frequently reiterating of one & the same justification; for justification presupposeth always an Accusation, & seeing neither God, nor the Law, will ever accuse a Believer of being no Believer, 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 justification, then as oft, as this Accusation is renewed, (& how oft that may be, who can tell?) must the Lord reiterate his sentence of justification, and pronunce the man a true Believer: and it will not be sufficient to say, that it will suffice if the Lord manifest to the Mansconscience, that he a believer; 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 believer at the first. None need to say, that this same may be alleged against our justification before God; for the justification, we only own, is in reference to the Accusation of the Law, & of Justice & of God the Righteous Judge, under whose Curse the sinner lieth, 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 Believer of being an Unbeliever & under the Curse again, whatever Satan, & his own misguided conscience, or others may do. 6. He groundeth his twosold justification 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 perform 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 Believer of not being a believer, & as for Satan's 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 believer, & 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 otherways, 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 passed 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.   

CHAP. XX.  
The state of justification remaineth, notwithstanding of after sins, & punishments.  
FOr further clearing up of this life of Justification, as to its Continuance, we shall remove two objections, that may seem to stand in the way of the truth, hitherto cleared. For it would seem, that Justification is not such a continueing uninterruptible state, as it was said to be, upon this double account, first. That the sins, which Believers, who are justified, do commit, especially such as are of a more heinous & crying Nature, do break off this state of favour & reconciliation, seeing they deserve, even the least of them, God's wrath & curse, & so expose the sinner unto the just revenges of God; which seemeth not to be consistent with a state of Justification. And then secondly as their sins deserve God's curse & wrath, so the many sharp & sore afflictions, which they are made to lie under, both are effects of the wrath of God, & fruits of the Curse, & also would say, that that state is such, as can be broken off, or at least, is not perfect, as it was said to be.  
Now for clearing of the truth, formerly asserted, & vindicating of the same, from these two Objections, to which all others may be reduced, we shall propose some few things to consideration.  
1. None will say, that every sin of infirmity & weakness, which believers commit, doth or can cut them off from the state of justification; for than they should never remain one day to end in that state; for no man liveth, that sinneth not, & the Righteous fall seven times a day; if the Lord should stricklymark iniquity, no man should stand; even the best of their actions are defiled with sin, and they cannot answer for one of a thousand. So that either it must be said, there is no state of justification, or that it is consistent with sin in the justified: Justification, though it take away all the guilt of by paft sins, and free the believer from that obnoxiousness to the wrath & curse of God which they were formerly under; yet it preventeth not all future sins, not doth it put the believer into a perfect sinless state; nay nor doth it kill any one sin, as to its being, but only taketh away the guilt, offensiveness & the obligation to punishment, or the reatus poenae, whereby the sinner is bound over unto the Penalty.  
2. As for such sins, as we may suppose, if committed, would ipso facto, as they say, forfeit the transgressor of the state of Justification, & destroy all interest in Christ, in the Covenant of grace, & so transfer them into their former state of Nature, while they were under the Curse; as being sins, inconsistent with a state of Grace & Reconciliation with God; such as the sin against the Holy Ghost, or of full & final Apolstasie: as for such sins, I say, the faithfulness of God, Mediation of Christ, & the Operation of the Spirit of Grace, are, as it were, engaged, to keep the justified from falling into them; as all the Arguments, proving the perseverance of the Saints, do abundantly evince.  
3. Though every sin, being a transgression of the Law of God, which still remaineth in force to oblige the believer, as all others, unto obedience in all points, doth, in its own nature, deserve God's wrath & curse, according to the threatening & penalty of the Law: yet these sins do not annul the state of justification, nor interupt it (1) because notwithstanding thereof, all their former sins, of which they were pardoned, remain pardoned, & do not bring them again under the curse, & their Right to the Inheritance remaineth fi●me, through Jesus Christ. (2) Because all these after sins were virtually pardoned, & their obligation to the suffering of the penalty upon the account of these, virtually removed, in their justification; for therein was there a legal security laid down & given, that all future sins should not actually bring them under the curse, or into the state of condemnation: & this is much more, than what was before their actual closing with Christ, & being thereby brought into an estate of justification, for though it may be said, there was sufficient security laidin in the Covenant of Redemption betwixt jehovah & the Mediator, concerning the Non-perishing of the Elect; Yet this security was hid & under ground, lying in the unchangeable purposes of God; in the Father's Election of them, & giving of them to the Son to be redeemed; in the Son's undertaking for them, & in due time becoming sin & a curse for them, & so taking on their debt, & making full & compleet satisfaction therefore; And this fundamental & remote Right, (as it may be called) could not be pleaded by themselves. But after they have closed with Christ, and are brought into a state of justification, their Right appeareth above ground, and the security is laid open in the Covenant of Grace, whereby they are in case to plead their virtual pardon, to be made actual, & the promises to be made good, according to the Gospel terms, & after the Gospel-method. And thus. 3. Not only doth the law's threatenings speak to them, as showing what the jure only they may look upon us due unto them, & not declaring what shall eventually befall them, or that eventually they shall fall under the eternal curse; for in a sense, that is true even of all the elect not yet justified, as was said; but they have a legal ground & Right in the Covenant of Grace, securing them from Condemnation, & they have accless & ground in Law to plead this Right & so to plead for actual Pardon in the terms, & according to the method of the Gospel: I do not say, that the justified while lying in sin, without making application to jesus Christ, & acting faith on him, in order to pardon, have ground to plead for actual pardon, for that is repugnant to the Method of the Gospel, requireing new acts of faith, in order to new acts of Pardon, I mean the implicit acts if faith (to speak so) in reference to daily infirmities & unseen sins, & the more explicit acts of faith, in reference to grosser sins, seen & lamented: But they have ground to plead for grace to discover their sins, to humble them for their sins, & to excite their soul to renewed acts of faith in Christ, and thereupon to expect, according to the Gospel method, Remission; and to plead for it, in the merits of Christ, unto which they have a sure Right. Therefore 4. New sins cannor annul the state of justification; because not only are believers secured that de eventu, they shall not come into Condemnation for these sins; but even as to any legal dueness of punishment, that new sins may bring them under, there is a sure & saife remedy at hand, the blood of Christ that taketh away all sin, to which they are called to go that they may wash their souls there by faith, and be clean, & be delivered from guilt.  
4. For further clearing of this, we could consider, that there is a difference to be put betwixt Sin, in order to its direful effects, considered in itself, and considered, as it is in the justified. Though sin, in itself is always mortiferous, and exposeth to the curse and wrath of God, having a malignant demerit constantly attending it: Yet it is not so, being considered, as it is in the justified: for as poison, is always deadly in itself, & working towards death; yet it is not so, as in a person, who hath received a sufficient antidote. Though every act of felony in itself make obnoxious unto death, according to the Law; yet some acts, as committed by one, who can read, will not have that effect: so the believer is antidoted by the Covenant of Grace, that howbeit sin remain still deadly, in its own nature; yet as to him, it cannot produce these effects.  
5. Though after sins, in a justified person, may have, before they be pardoned, very sad effects, in reference to Comfort, or comfortable improvement of their Privileges & Advantages: yet they cannot disinherit them, or put them from their Right: Though leprosy did deprive the leper of the comfortable enjoyment and use of his own house; yet it did not destroy his right: though the miscarriages of the prodigal son did incapacitate him for any present enjoyment of his interest in his Father's affection; yet they did not destroy his Sonshipe Luk. 15: 17. So though sins, not yet washed away, in such as have been justified, may and will certainly prejudge them of many comfortable Advantages, which they might otherways have; yet they do not take away their Sonshipe, nor their Right to the Inheritance of sons.  
6. Though after sins, not yet pardoned through faith, do and will stir up Fatherly Anger & Displeasure against them, who are justified, and become his Adopted children; Esai. 54: 7, 8. Yet they bring not justified man under pure judicial wrath, and under the Curse and Law-anger, so as God is no more their Father, but hath cast them out of his family, & fatherly favour. It is one thing to be under the frowns & gloomes of an angry Father: & another thing to be under the severe aspect of an angry judge.  
7. It is considerable also. That through grace, and the Lord's great love and wisdom, after-sins are so far from destroying their State and Right to the inheritance, that upon the contrare, they are ordered to the Justified man's good, and further establishment in grace; not that sin itself hath any such natural tendency; but it is by accident to sin, which is so ordered by the wise disposal of a loving Father, making all things work togerher for good, and thus counter-working Satan without, & Corruption within, making that, which Satan had designed to their ruin and destruction, contributo to their good & advantage, by giving them fresh occasion, of exercising Humility & Repentance, & of Renewing their gripping of Christ by Faith, & of Watching more with Diligence hereafter; as also hereby they are put to search & examine themselves, to try their Rights & Securities, & thus to make their calling & election sure, to their further establishment & comfort in the Holy Ghost.  
8. Thus we see whatever present alteration after sins, not yet taken to Christ, to the end they may be pardoned through his blood, do, or can make, as to the present Condition of the justified; yet their State remaineth firm, & unshaken; for thereby they fall not again under the old Covenant; nor under the sentence thereof, nor under pure Law wrath, pure Justice & the Curse of a broken Covenant; but being under Grace, & not under the Law, they are secured as to Condemnation Rom. 8: 1. & as to the loss of the favour & friendship of God Rom. 8: 35, 39 for not only is the guilt of Original sin, & of all their preceding Actual sins taken away, through faith in Christ, when they were justified, but there is a sure way condescended upon betwixt Jehovah & the Mediator, how their after-sins shall be Pardoned, & taken out of the way, & the same method and way is declared in the Gospel, & made sure by the Covenant of Grace: and by their being in the Covenat, they have a right unto the promises thereof, and ground to press for the performance; & so for Remission, & for all things requisite thereunto, or following thereupon; yea they have a sure pledge of Remission already, to wit, the actual Pardon of what is past, and their past Justification; that is a comforting & strengthening word Rom. 5: 9, 10. much more than being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him; for if when we are enemies, we were reconcile ● to God, by the death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life & so is that Rom. 8: 32. He that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all: how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?  
9 We may add, That if sins, afterward committed, could take away Justification, than they should also take away Adoption, & Regeneration; & so the justified man, should by after sins, not only become an unjustified man; but also the child of God should become again the child of the devil, & the Relation should be quite broken off, & he, who was borne again, should return unto his former state of black Nature: & thus there should be a second, & a third, yea & multiplied Regeneration; whereof the Scripture is silent, nay it clearly depones the contrary.  
10. And if it be enquired, how it cometh to pass, that after sins may not, at least, gradually impair the State of Justification, as sins do impair and weaken Sanctification? I answer (and this may further help to clear the business under hand) The reason is manifest, from the difference, that is betwixt these two blessing and benefits; justification is an act of God, changing the Relative-state of a man, and so is done and perfected in a moment: Sanctification is a progressive work of God, making a real physical change, in the man; whence sin may tetard this or put it back, but cannot do so, with the other, which is but one single act, once done, and never recalled, the gifts and calling of God being without repentance Rom. 11: 29. In justification we are merely passive, it being a sentence of God pronounced in our Favours; in Sanctification, as we are in some respect patients, so are we also Agents, and Actors, and thus sin may retard us in our motion, and as it evidenceth our weakness for acting, so it produceth more weakness. Moreover Sin and Holiness are opposite to other, as light and darkness, & therefore, as the one prevaileth, the other must go under, and as the one increaseth, the other must decress. But there is no such Opposition betwixt sin, & pardon, which is granted in Justification. And whereas it may be said, that sin expelleth also grace Meritoriously: yet that prejudgeth not the truth in hand, for it can expel grace meritoriously no further, than the free constitution of God hath limited: and so though it can and oft doth expel many degrees of Sanctification; yet it cannot expel & make null the grace of Regeneration; or the Seed of God, so no more can it expel or annul Justification; because the good pleasure of God, hath secured the one & the other & made them both unalterable.  
By these particulars, we see how the first doubt is removed out of the way; we shall next speak to the Second, which is concerning afflictions, & Punishments, which are the fruits and deserts of sin, and seem to be part of the curse or penalty threatened in the first Covenant: To which we need not say much to show, that notwithstanding hereof, the State of Justification remains firm, and unaltered. These few things will suffice to clear the truth.  
1. Though all affliction, and suffering be the fruit & consequent of the breach of the Covenant by Adam, the head of mankind; for if he had stood, and the Covenant had not been violated, there had been no Misery, affliction, Death or Suffering: and though in all, who are afflicted in this world, there is sin to be found; And though it cannot be instanced, that God ever brought an afflicting or destroying stroke upon a Land or Nation, but for the provocations of the People, yet the Lord may some rhymes afflict outwardly or inwardly, or both, a particular Person, in some particular manner, though not as provoled thereunto by that persons sin, or without a special reference to their sin, as the procuring Cause thereof; as we see in job: and as Christ's answer, concerning the blind man joh. 9: 3. Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents (that he was born blind;) but that the works of God should be made manifest in him, giveth ground to think.  
2. Though it doth oftener fall out, that God doth afflict, Punish and Chasten his people even because of their sins, as well as other wicked persons; yet the difference betwixt the two is great, though the outward Camitie may be materially the same: To the godly, they flow from Love, are designed for good, are sanctified, and made to do good, they are covenanted mercies; but nothing so to the wicked. They are mercies to the one, but curses to the other; They speak out love to the one, but hatred to the other; They are blessed to the one, but blasted & cursed to the other; They work together for good to the one, but for evil to the other: and all this notwithstanding, that the outward affliction & calamity that is on the godly, may be double or treeble to that, which is upon the wicked: Yea there is mercy and love in the afflictions of the Godly, when the prosperity of the wicked is cursed. Whence we see, that all these afflictions cannot endanger or damage their Justified state.  
3. Though the Lord may be wroth & smite in anger his own people, chasten & punish them in displeasure; yet, this wrath & anger, is but the wrath and anger of a Father, and is consistent with fatherly Affection in God, and therefore cannot be repugnant to a state of Sonshipe in them. Prov. 3: 11, 12. Heb. 12: 5-8. Psal. 89: 30 33, 34. Revel. 3: 19  
4. In all these afflictions, that seem to smell most of the Curse, and of the death threatened, and are most inevitable, such as death, etc. there is nothing of pure vindictive justice to be found in them, when Justified persons are exercised with them: for Christ did bear all that, being made a curse for them, and as to this, the Lord caused all their iniquities to meet together upon him: He drunk out the cup of Vindictive anger, and left not one drop of the liquor of the Curse of the Law, for any of his own to drink: He alone did bear the weight of revenging justice; and there is nothing of this, in all that doth come upon believers; So that the very sting of death is taken away, & the sting of all these Afflictions is sucked out, and now they are changed into Mercies & Blessings. 1 Cor. 3: 21, 22. Therefore we must not think that they contribute the least mite unto that Satisfaction, which justice required for sins, & Christ paid down to the full; & justice was fully satisfied with what he paid down: nor must we think, that God will exact a new satisfaction for sins, or any part thereof, of the hands of believers, after he hath received a full satisfaction from the Mediator Christ, & did rest satisfied therewith. The afflictions and Punishments then, that the godly meet with, being no parts of the Curse, nor of that Satisfaction that justice requireth for sin, nor flowing from vindictive justice; but being rather fatherly chastisements, mercies & means of God, can do no hurt unto their state of justification; nor can any thing be hence inferred, to the prejudice of that glorious state.  
5. But it is said, Pardon and Justification is one thing, and a man is no more Justified than he is Pardoned; and Pardon is but the taking off of the obligation to punishment, and consequently of punishment itself; and seeing punishment is not wholly taken off, but there remaineth some part of the curse, or of the evil threatened for sin, and will remain until the resurrection, it is clear, that pardon is not fully compleet, not consequently Justification so long as we live. But for answer, & to clear up the matter in hand more, we say (1) Pardon of sins is not adequatly the same with Justification, nor the whole thereof, but at most a part, or rather a partial effect in justification, the person is constituted Righteous, and declared such, and thereupon hath his sins pardoned, and a Right to the purchased reward; and he is thus made & declared Righteous, through the Mediators Surety-Righteousness, imputed to him, and laid hold upon by faith. (2) When a person is justified, he is at once and for ever freed from the punishment due from the Law & from vindictive justice, for the broken Covenant: & the Obligation to punishment required by vindictive justice, is taken away and dissolved; Christ having fully born that Punishment, and satisfied that demand of Justice, they, in & through him, are delivered from the Curse, and the maledictory sentence. (3) Hence all their sufferings & afflictions here, being no part of the Curse, nor of Satisfaction to divine vindictive justice, nor of the Condemnation threatened, how ever they be materially evil, and Fatherly Chastisements or Punishments; yet are no effects of Law-vengeance, nor parts of vindictive Punishment: and so cannot give ground to infer an imperfect Pardon, or an imperfect Justification. (4) Nor must we call them any part of the Punishment, threatened by the Law, remaining yet unremoved; for that would make them parts of the Curse; and yet Mr. Baxter Confess. p. 125. conceiveth it fittest to say, that believers are freed from the curse, & are not under it, and addeth his reasons there: And the consequence is clear, because, what the Law threateneth, as such, belongeth to the Curse; for the Law saith, Cursed is every one, that continueth not in all things, which are written in the book of the Law to do then, Gal. 3: 10. Deut. 27: 26. And therefore every Punishment, that is a punishment of the Law, must be part of the Curse; So if the Punishments, or Afflictions, that the Godly are now under, be part of the Curse, that is yet remaining unremoved, or of the Punishment (as Mr. Baxter there p. 124. saith) it will inevitablie follow, that believers are yet under the Curse, and not wholly delivered there from; and as to these outward afflictions, many of the truly Godly shall be more under the Curse, then several of the wicked: and if they be under any part of the Curse, how can they be pronounced Blessed? how can they be said to be Redeemed from the Curse of the Law? how can Christ be said to have been made a curse for them; how shall their sufferings not be a part of Satisfaction to Vindictive justice? Shasl not they be in part Satisfiers for themselves? Shall not they then be beholden to Christ, only in part? How shall then these Afflictions flow from love, run in the channel of love, and workout their good, through grace & love, if they be any real & formal parts of the Curse? Shall not the curse then be a part of the blessedness of the Saints, and of their bequeathed portion, which they may own as theirs, as well as they may own life! Shall not the curse, or a part of the curse, separate from the Love of God, and of Christ? What, I pray, will, if that do it not; and yet the Apostle tells us Rom. 8: 33. etc. that afflictions cannot do it, nor death itself. How can any part of the curse work for us a far more exceeding & eternal weight of glory? and yet Afflictions do that 2. Cor. 4: 17. The curse will not conform us unto Christ; yet afflictions will, and do Rom. 8: 29. (5) Even as to the remnants of the body of death, that cause the godly to groan, and cry out. Miserable man etc. if we consider them, as an Affliction, we cannot say, that they are a remanent part of Law-vengeance, of Law-punishment, or of the curse, threatened in the Law; for than they should be effects of God's hatred towards the Persons, & of pure vengeance and of juridical, & judicial Wrath & Anger, and were not capable of Sanctification to their spiritual advange; and Believers, upon this account, could not be said to be delivered from the Law, and dead to that, wherein they were formerly held, as they are Rom. 7: 6. for they, who are under the Curse, and under such an especial part or Effect thereof, cannot but be under the Law, and that, as a cursing Condemning Law. Gal. 3: 10. Nor could the Apostle infer, as he doth, after the mentioning of the sad wrestle, that the godly have, with the body of death. Rom. 7: 15. etc. that there is now therefore no Condemnation to them, that are in Christ Rom. 8: 1. for this would not follow from their being really & properly under such a great part of the Curse. Sure, this cannot but be derogatory unto the perfect Satisfaction made by Christ; seeing hereby there is, in some measure, a Satisfaction made unto the justice of God: and it was the end of Christ's suffering & satisfaction, to deliver his people from the curse of the Law, in whole, and in part, & from that penalty threatened in the Covenant of works. Christ was made a curse for us, and thereby did redeem us, not in part only, but wholly, from the curse of the Law: and this penal Law Mr. Baxter must understand pag. 127. Confess. or he speaketh not to the purpose. Nor can I say with him ibid. p. 119. that every threatening is it in one sense, & the execution in another, that is commonly called the curse of the Law: for the execution of the Law upon any person, is inconsistent with lovingkindness towards that person; but so is not every threatening, nay nor the execution thereof upon believers, as we see Psal. 89: 30, 31, 32, 33. Nor could these executions of threatenings be said to flow from Love, contrare to Revel. 3: 19 Heb. 12: 6. Prov. 3: 12. for there is no fatherly Love, in executing of the Curse.   

CHAP. XXI.  
Justification is by Faith: what this Faith is, & how it is wrought.  
HAving thus spoken unto, & laboured to clear up the Nature & some causes of this life of ●ustification; we come, in the next place, to speak to the following part of the Text. Where the way, how this life of justification is brought about and attained, is pointed forth, when it is said. The just shall live by faith. Faith, we see, is here mentioned, as that which interesseth us in this privilege of life. Whence we see  
1. That no man is made partaker of the life of Justification, before Faith; or that until souls exercise faith, they are without this life of Justification. Some talk of a Justification from Eternity; & thus confound Justification with God's love of Election; or with God's decree & purpose to justify. Some speak of Justification of all, in the death of Christ; but neither is this to be admitted, if we speak of actual Justification; It is true, Christ did, when he laid down the full price of Redemption, conform to the Eternal compact betwixt Jehovah & Him, make an absolute & actual purchase of all those, that were given to him to be saved, & did buy & purchase all the Favours, Blessings & Privileges for them, which were afterward to be actually bestowed, in the time, & after the way & method, condescended upon by Jehovah & the Mediator: (I am here speaking of such as came to have a being, in the world, after Christ had in the fullness of time, come & laid down the price; & not of those; who lived before, when Christ's death & Satisfaction had only a Moral being, & yet full efficacy to produce the same saving effects on believers:) and though in this respect, all the Elect may be said to have been virtually justified, when Christ laid down the actual price, and was justified from all the charge of their debt, that was laid upon him (as in some sense, it may be said, that all the Elect were virtually Justified in Him, when he undertook to make satisfaction for their debt) yet there is no actual Justification before Faith; according to the Scriptures that speak of justification, of adoption, & of Sanctification by Faith, showing that these Benefits & Privileges follow Faith, as to their actual being, though they were from eternity decreed, as was also Glorification, & were actually procured by Christ's death: in which respect, as also in respect of Christ's undertaking or substituting himself in the room of sinners, they may be said to have been virtually, Sanctified & Glorified, even then. It is true, that before Faith, the justification actual of the Elect is every way secured, & all things tending thereunto are concluded & firmly laid, & all the other anteceding causes are existent, before Faith, for Christ is appointed & substitute Mediator; Christ hath accepted & undertaken the work of Mediation; He is come in the fullness of time, & hath laid down the full price; The Father is satisfied with the price paid. The Father laid upon him the iniquity of all the Elect, & He hath born it, & made full satisfaction, therefore he is accepted of the Father, as Head of the Elect justified & possessed of glory, so as they may be said to be risen with him in heavenly places, to wit virtually, & meritoriously; & all this before faith, Thus God was in Christ, reconciling the Elect world unto himself, not imputing trespasses unto them, because he imputed them to Christ & made him sin, who know no sin & this before the word of Reconciliation, ministered by the Ambassadors of Christ, hath wrought them up unto God by faith. 2 Cor. 5: 18, 19, 20. And this I think was more, than what Mr. Baxter saith confess. pag. 225, 226. to wit, that he was providing a sufficient remedy for the pardon of it, if they would accept of it freely given; for the world here spoken of is the world of the Elect, though he think otherways ibid. & the Lords not imputing their sin unto them, was more than his not dealing with them, according to the desert of their sin, but in mercy, for as yet many of them had not a being, and so were not capable of being dealt with, according to the desert of their sin; but it importeth, what is more emphatically expressed thereafter vers. 11. to wit, that God was laying their sins on Christ ' and making him sin, as to its demerit, or guilt, for them, that they might in due time be made the Righteousness of God in him.  
Yet notwithstanding of all this, actual justification & Reconciliation is not before 〈◊〉, as is clear from many passages of Scripture, asserting our justification, life to by faith, Rom. 1. 17. & 3. 28. & 9: 1. Ephes 2: 8. Gal. 2: 16, 20. Add it cannot be said, to evite the force of these & the like Scriptures, that this is to be understood only of justification, as to our feeling, sense & apprehension: for the case, which the Apostle proveth all to be into before justification, in his Epistle to the Romans Chap. 1. & 2. & 3. is such as cannot consist with a justified state, as to be under sin, Rom. 3: 9 to have their mouth stopped & be guilty before God vers. 19 But it is manifest, that many, who are now not under the Law, nor under sin, but delivered from under both yet may & do want the sense & feeling of their justification, & doubt thereof. And beside this crosseth the whole scope of the Apostle, in proving justification by faith, which is to evince, that justification is not by the works of the law, or the works of Righteousness, which we do; so that the justification, whereof the Apostle speaketh, cannot be by works, but by faith alone; but the manifestation of justification to our sense & consciences, can well be by works, as james showeth & proveth Chap. 2. Works can contribute unto this, but not unto that justification, whereof the Apostle speaketh, in his Epistles to the Romans & Galattans & which is justification in the sight of God.  
That justification is not before faith, is manifest from the condition, which the Scripture telleth us, such are into, who have not yet believed; for if that condition be such, as is inconsistent with a state of justification & Reconciliation, there can be no justification before faith: now the Scripture telleth us, that such as believe not, are condemned joh. 3: 18. dead in trepasses & sins, children of wrath, Ephes. 2: 1, 2, 3. Without Christ, & without God in the world, & strangers from the Covenants of promise Ephes. 2: 12. have made God a liar, 1 joh. 5: 10. cannot please God Heb. 11: 6. By all which, & many like passages, that might be cited, it is manifest, that before faith, there is no real justification, Faith is required in order to adoption, & Remission of sins, and therefore must be before justification joh. 1: 12. Act. 10: 43. Gal 3: 26. Act. 13: 38, 39, of 26: 18. But enough of this, seeing M. Baxter hath abundantly confuted it, in his Confess. pag. 229, etc.  
Some move this Objection. If we are justified by faith, than faith is in order before justification; & consequently the act is before the object, whereas on the contrary, the act depends upon the object, & not the object upon the act, Thus Bellarm● de justif. lib. 1. c. 10. disputeth against the assertion, that maketh the special mercy of God to be the object of justifying faith: wherein the ground of the whole debate, lieth in a mistake of that special mercy of God; and whatever mistake may be, at least as to expression, in the assertion, which Bellarmine opposeth; yet Bellarmius Opinion can no way be owned, who doth so defend the object of faith, as that he maketh justifying faith to be nothing but Historical Faith. Learned & grave Mr. Norton, in his Orthodox Evangelist Ch. 14. p. 314. in answering this objection, distinguisheth betwixt the being of justification & our being Justified; or betwixt justification in abstracto i. e. without the receiving subject thereof, & in concreto i. e. together with the believer, The first, which signifieth Remission of sins and Righteousness to Acceptation prepared, though not yet conferred upon the Elect, he saith, hath a being before Faith and so the object is before the act: though the ather be after faith. But I conceive there is no great necessity of this, for answering of the argument, if any should propose it, to evince justification before faith; and Bellarm. adduceth it not, to this end, as we saw; for I see no ground to assert justification to be the object of justifying faith, as if in order to justification, we were called to believe, that we are justified, and that our sins are pardoned: (as was said above) And as for this justification, considered in the abstract, which is said to have a being not only in the Purpose of God, but also in the Covenant, between the Father, & the Mediator, & in the Purchase of Christ; not only is it not called justification in Scripture, but also, in so far, as it is the object of faith (as all other revealed truths are) it is of the elect in general, and not of this, or that particular person: so that though justifying faith may believe that God Purposed & Christ Purchased, & the Covenant of Redemption did expressly contain the justification of the Elect; yet it doth not believe, in order to the man's justification, that he in particular so was justified, either in the Purpose of God, or in the Purchase of Christ, or in the Covenant betwixt jehovah & the Mediator; nor is this Faith called for, because this object is not a revealed truth: Yet this same justifying Faith, is of that Nature, as to produce afterward reflecting acts, whereby the man may see his own justification & be persuaded of it, in truth, & hence also be persuaded, that the Lord Purposed to justify him in particular; that Christ Purchased his justification, in particular, and that it was an article of the Covenant of Redemption, that he in particular should be justified.  
2. While it is said, That the just liveth by faith, we see that faith is the way, whereby persons come actually to live the life of justification; and hence it can not itself be the matter of their life: What interest properly faith hath in this affair, must be debated afterward; to wit, whether it be properly imputed as the matter of our Righteousness; or only be to be considered as an Instrument: or as a Condition, & how so?  
3. We see, That this living by Faith proveth that there is no justification by works, in the sight of God; whence it is manifest, that faith here cannot be considered as a work of the Law, or as a duty enjoined by the Law or under any such consideration. (2) That works have no interest as a cause, or condition, with Faith in justification. (3) That the life of justification, as to its continnation is by faith, and by faith, as opposite to works; for the just, (or the man already justified) liveth by faith: This being also questioned, we will have occasion to speak more to it afterward.  
4. While it is said, the just liveth by faith, it is considerable, That this faith in its kind, and not in such, or such measure, is here said to be the mean, whereby persons come to live the life of justification. So that this true Faith, how weak so ever is the only mean of interessing a soul in this privilege of justification. This will give occasion to speak of the object of this justifying faith, which will help to clear the nature of it.  
Our larger Catechism qu. 72. giveth us such a definition or description of justifying faith, that may satisfy us as to most of these difficulties; The answer is this [justifying faith is a saving grace (Heb. 10: 39) wrought in the heart of a sinner, by the Spirit (2 Cor. 4: 13. Ephes. 1: 17, 18, 19) & word of God (Rom. 10: 14, 17.) whereby he being convinced of his sin & misery, & of the disability in himself & all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition (Act. 2: 37. & 16: 30. joh. 16: 8, 9 Rom. 5: 6. Eph. 2: 1. Act. 4: 12.) not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the Gosspel (Ephes. 1: 13.) but receiveth & resteth upon Christ and his Righteousness therein hold forth, for pardon of sin (joh. 1: 12. Act. 16: 31. & 10: 43.) & for the accepting and accounting of his person Righteous in the sight of God, for salvation (Phil. 3: 9 Act. 15: 11.)] And this question is none of these particulars, wherein Mr. Baxter in his Confess. desireth to descent from the said Catechism, as the next Question is; as we shall hear.  
We may hence take notice of these particulars, concerning this faith ', whereby it may be known, & distinguished from what some may mistake for it.  
1. As to its nature, & kind, it is saving; for all such, as have this grace of justifying faith, are in the sure way of salvation; & whatever faith persons may have, if they have not this, they are not in the sure path of life. There is a faith of miracles, both Active & Passive, as we may say, that is a faith to do miracles, and a faith to receive miracles wrought upon them. The first was that which the Apostles had and others, who wrought Miracles; and is to be understood Mat. 17: 20, 21. Luk. 17: 6. The other is that, which some of those had, who received miraculous cures, as the woman Mal. 9: 21, 21. and that Man, who cried out, I believe, help mine unbelief Mark. 9: 24. and the man of lystra Act. 14: 9 and others This in itself considered is not a saving grace. judas had this faith, whereby he cast our devils, and had commission to work miracles with the rest Mat. 10: 8. Luk. 9: 1, 6, 10. So also the Seventy disciples Luk. 10: 9, 17, 19 And how great a privilege so ever this was; yet Christ told them vers. 20. that it was a far greater matter, and much greater ground of joy, to have their names written in heaven, whereby he giveth us also to understand, that these are distinct & different from other, and also separable. Many (saith Christ Mat. 7: 22, 23.) will say to me, in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? & in thy name have cast out devils? & in thy name have done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity. And it is of this Faith, that Paul speaketh 1. Cor. 13: 2. & though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have no charity, I am nothing, Importing that this Faith may be, where there is no saving Christian Love. There is an Historical faith, that is a believing not only of the histories recorded in the word of God; but of the whole Revelation of God's mind there, yet only as things historically recorded, working up the man, in whom it is, unto a voluntary profession of that truth; This, though true in its kind, yet is not saving, seeing many may have this, who are strangers to true saving Faith. Simon Magns believed thus Act. 8: 13. who yet was but in the gall of bitterness & in the bond of iniquity verse. 23. Many believed in the name of Christ, when they saw the miracles, which he did, to whom notwithstanding Christ did not commit himself joh. 2: 23, 24. Christ had many disciples, who professed the truth and yet went back, & walked no more with him joh. 6: 66. This faith, when it cometh no further, is but such a Faith, as devils have, who believe, there is a God, & tremble jam. 2: 19 This is the fruitless, workless Faith, that iames speaketh of jam. 2: 14. that cannot save, & which he calleth a dead faith. vers. 17, 20. a faith that cannot work with works vers. 22. There is a Temporary faith, which (whether we look upon, as distinct from the preceding historical faith, or as an higher measure & degree thereof, the matter is not much) is also different from & far short of this saving Faith, whereby a man cometh to live the life of justification, though it hath some effect wrought upon the affections; this is the stonie-ground that receiveth the sown seed Mat. 13: 20, 21. These are they, who hear the word, and anon with joy receive it, yet have no root in themselves, but endure for a while only; for when tribulation or persecution ariseth, because of the word, by & by they are offended.  
2. Every act of saving Faith, is not the justifying act of faith, or that act thereof, whereby we are Justified before God. Saving Faith hath many several acts, as we may see Heb. 11. Though where ever there are any of the real acts of saving faith, that man hath also acted justifying faith: yet we may look on Justifying Faith, or on the act of faith whereby the soul becometh Justified, as some way distinct from other acts of Saving Faith. Though by saving Faith we come to understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God Heb. 11: 3. not in a mere historical manner, but savingly; yet, that act of saving Faith, is not the Justifying act thereof, to speak so. Though the same Faith by which the Ancients subdued kingdoms, stopped the mouths of Lions, quenched the violence of fire etc. was that by which they were justified, yet these were not justifying acts of that faith; that is, in order to justification, faith acteth in another peculiar manner: Though it be one & the same saving faith, whereby a believer is united unto Christ, in order to answer the Challenges & Accusations of the Law, & to free him from guilt & condemnation, and maketh use of Christ's Right, Strength Support etc. in times of Darkness, Temptations & Difficulties: yet these acts of the same faith are not the same, but may be looked upon as distinct: Faith acteth one way on Christ in order to Justification, & another way in order to Sanctification: Faith acteth one way, when it receiveth in, and another way, when it giveth out, as it were, Faith acteth one way on Christ as Priest, and it acteth another way upon him, as Prophet & as King: yet we would know, that in all these actings of faith, whole Christ is laid hold upon, though more expressly & explicitly, in the uniting act, whereby the soul is married unto Jesus, & thereby becometh one spirit with him. There can be no use making of Christ for any end whatsomever, until the soul be united with himself, and in every act of faith, whereby Christ is made use of, for what ever particular mercy the Believer would have, be it Pardon, Light, Strength, Comfort, or such like, Christ himself is gripped to, & laid hold on; for there is no separating of Him & his favours: yet the Believer, while gripping & laying hold on whole Christ, taketh him up under that Relation, and eyeth that Office; that most nearly answereth to and correspondeth with his present necessity, and pointeth forth that good, which he is now desirous of, & so acteth faith suitablie or putteth forth faith in suitable acts: as for example, when the believer is troubled with conscience of guilt, he runneth to Christ, yet in a special manner he goeth to him, as Priest, & eyeth that Blood, that only can purge consciences from dead works Heb. 9: 14. When he is troubled with Raging Corruptions, & would have them subdued, or would have his hard Rebellious Heart made more soft & pliable to God's will, he goeth to Christ; yet in special manner, he eyeth Christ as a King & acteth Faith upon him accordingly; So when he is troubled with Ignorance, Doubts, and Darkness, he goeth to Christ; yet he eyeth him th●n especially as a Prophet & accordingly acteth Faith upon him. Yet we would know, that when the Believer acteth thus, in this different manner, upon Christ; whether as a Prophet, or as a Priest, or as a King, there is no exclusion, far less any denial of the other offices; which cannot be, because Christ himself, & consequently whole Christ, is always He, to whom the believer goeth, though with a more express, explicit & special application to & usemaking of that office & work of Christ, which most suiteth the believers present necessity. Now, though all these acts of faith, be acts of saving faith; yet they are not all that act of faith which is or may be (for distinctions sake) called, the Justifying act of faith; for this is that act of faith only, which the soul exerteth, in order to Justification, and Absolution from the Curse of the Law.  
3. This Faith is no product of the power of Nature, accompanied with all its advantages, & elevated to its highest pitch, & to the highest measure of accomplishments: Nature, as now corrupted & depraved, not only will not willingly comply with the design of Grace in the Gospel; but it cannot, being nothing but pure enmity to the holy Ways & Counsels of God; all its mindings are of the flesh, and all the minding of the flesh, or the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be Rom. 8: 7. Persons, deluded by Satan, may imagine, & suppose with themselves, that it is so wholly in their power to believe, that they can exerte that Faith, at what time so ever they will: But, howbeit, out of their own mouths such unbelievers stand convinced, & condemned, for their not believing; yet the mighty power of God's Spirit must be exerted, ere they be brought unto a believing frame, or their souls be made to look towards Jesus in earnest, so as to lay hold on him by Faith. Therefore is Faith called the gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. There is the working of the might of God's power requisite unto believing Ephes. 1: 19 Such then, as have not the workings of the Spirit of God, Inclining, Drawing, Persuading & Causing the heart believe, are real strangers to this grace, whatever great Enduements & Gifts, or ordinary effects of the Spirit they may be possessed of.  
The author of a Discourse of the two Covenants (a book recommended to us by Mr. Baxter, in his preface, prefixed thereunto, as a Treatise, which will give us much light, into the Nature of the Gospel) pag. 24. tells us, that man himself, is not wholly passive, in this change, or what goes to the making of it; but is so far active in it, as to denominate what he doth by God's assistance to be his own act. Whereby he sufficiently discovereth an Arminian design; yet so qualifieth his expressions, as may abundantly show, he intendeth to evade. For he will not say, that man is not at all passive, in this change, but only, that he is not wholly passive; and yet he dar not say this confidently, but must add, or what goes to the making of it: and how much he may comprehend under this, who can tell? But if man be not passive, he must be active. How far then is he active? So far, saith he, as to denominate what he doth by God's assistance, to be his own act. That the act of Faith is man's act, is most certain, for it is he that believeth; but the question is, what change is wrought in the soul, by the Spirit of God, before the act of faith be exerted? and what hand man's labours and endeavours have in the infusion of the new Principle, the Divine Nature? Is not the man purely passive, in the receiving of the effect of that creating act, or in the work of Regeneration? That the Lord prescribeth the use of ordinary means, wherein the man is to wait for the free & gracious working of the Spirit is true; but there is no connexion made by the Lord, by any Law or Constitution, betwixt the use of these means, and the gracious work of faith, nor betwixt ordinary Light & Conviction, and the like common effects of these means, and Saving Grace. Yet he tells us afterward, that if man do but what he can do, through the assistance of God's: common providente (in whom we live, & move, & have our being) God is most ready, through his good pleasure, or out of the goodness of his will & pleasure, to work in him, both to will & to do savingly, to carry the work quite thorough. But what Scripture doth teach us this? Sure I am, that Phil. 2: 12, 13. with which he ushereth in this discourse, giveth no ground for this; for that is spoken to such, in whom the work of Salvation is already begun, and who are commanded to work it out, & to say, that the case is the same, is to overturn the whole Gospel, and present us with pure Pelagianism; is there as sure & certain a connexion betwixt man's work of nature & God's gracious works of Grace, as is betwixt the work of grace Begun & Carried on? His adducing afterward p. 25. the commands to make ourselves a new heart, & to repent etc. to enforce this, is but the old Pelagian argument brought again upon the stage, to which I have said what I hope will befound Consonant to the Scripture, in my book against the Quakers. But this man discovereth himself more plainly afterward pag. 28, where after mentioning some acts of men, which cannot be called acts of supernatural grace, he tells us, if men will but go thus far (as they can) out of a real-desire to ●e happy, I should make no question, but that the Spirit of God would yield them his assistance to carry them quite through, in the work of conversion. Beside that connexion, whereof he maketh no question, though the orthodox have hithertil denied it, writing against Pelagians, Jesuits & Arminians, we may observe this, here, That nature can carry the work of conversion quite through, having only the assistance of the Spirit of God; and what difference is there then betwixt Nature & Begun Grace: for begun Grace needeth the assistance of the Spirit of God, to work Salvation quite thorough; and Nature needeth no more? where are then the Infused Habits? Is Regeneration only brought about by assistance? Need they, who are dead, no more but Assistance? If this Author help us to clearness in the doctrine of the Gospel, it must be the Gospel, that only Pelagians, Jesuits, Arminians & Quakers own; but not the Gospel of the Grace of God revealed to us, in the Word; which telleth us of something more requisite unto the Conversion of a sinner, & to the bringing of him to Believe & Repent, than the Cooperation of God's assistance (as he speaketh pag. 25.) & man's endeavours. He tells us pag. 26. that there is a promise of divine assistance to Man, using his ●ndeavours in doing what he may, & can do towards the performing the condition of the Covenant: But he showeth us not, where that promise is to be found: and pag. 17. he talks of an implicit promise; and this he very wonderfully inferreth from the Gospel, that was preached to Abraham: for thus he speaketh, for God in promising blessedness to the Nations through Abraham's seed, therein promised all that was absolutely necessary for him to vouch safe to make them blessed, & without which they could not be blessed. And if so, than he therein implicitly promised to assist the endeavours of men to perform the condition of the promise, without the assistance of whose grace, they cannot savingly believe repent & obey. Whence it would seem (1) that all men, are comprehended within this promise; and (2) That no more is promised in reference to the Elect, than to the Reprobat. (3) That the promise of faith & Repentance, is but a promise of of Assistance. (4) And this promise of Assistance, is not to assist Grace, but to assist Nature. (5) That the promise of Faith & Repentance was but an implicit promise, This is a sufficient taste of this Author's Pelagian-Gospel.  
4. We proceed. This work of the Spirit upon the soul, whereby the man is brought to a closing with, and to a resting upon Christ, is ordinarily wrought by the word: for faith cometh by hearing, & hearing by the word of God Rom. 10: 17. The Lord hath established that great Ordinance of Preaching, for this end; and for this end, he blesseth it unto his chosen ones, we mean not this exclusiuly, as i● the word could no other way be-blessed; for he blesseth, as he seeth good, for this end, the Reading of, & Meditation on the word also; though the grand & special mean be the Preaching; as we see Act. 2: 37, 41. & 8: 26-30. & 26: 18. The Lord, it is true, may send wakenings by his Judgements & by other like Occasions; & may bless the private Endeavours of Parents & friends, by their private Instructions & Admonitions: yet all these are no way prejudicial unto, but rather contribute to the confirming of the privilege of the word, as the Principal Mean & Ordinance, both as leading thereunto, & as receiving strength thereby: for what ever real beginnings the Lord may work so, they have this effect to commend the word more unto these persons, &, in special, the public Administration thereof by his Authorized Ambassadors: so that whatever saving work be wrought, as it is not altogether without the word, some way or other made known; so it tendeth to the further usmaking of the word publicly administered, where it may be had, as Saul, when under that terrible work of God Act. 9 was directed to go to Ananias in Damascus, to understand what he should do, & Cornelius was ordered Act. 10. to send for Peter, to get instruction in the ways of God. And whatever work of Light, Conviction, or Terror, be wrought upon any occasion, that is attended with a contrary effect, is to be suspected, as not of God, nor saving. How dreadful then their Condition is, who have not the word, but are without the pale of the Church, where this word is preached; & their condition also, who, though living within the Church, have this word as a sealed book, needeth not be said.  
5. The condition of soul, unto which the Man is brought by the Spirit, accompanying the Administration of the word, in order to his actual believing, is considerable here; for thereby we will be helped to understand better the Nature and Actings of Faith, whereby only, as a mean, relief is brought unto the soul; and to know what that relief is, and wherein it lieth, that the distessed man is pursueing after, & seeking with earnesness. In order to which, we would know,  
(1) That the Spirit by the Word beareth home Convictions of Sin and Misery, discovereth to the man, how he standeth guilty of the breach of the Law of God, & so chargeth sin home upon him, both Original and Actual, & thereby fixeth guilt upon the Conscience, showing how he hath forfeited all Right to blessedness & life, & how moreover he is under the Curse, threatened to the breakers of the Law, and hath the wrath & malediction of God hanging over him: He is made to see the sins he never saw before, both of Omission & Commission, & the sad Consequences thereof, to wit, how he is obnoxious to the penalty, the insupporrable wrath of the living God. Thus the Spirit convinceth of sin joh. 16: 8, 9 thus he openeth their eyes, & turneth them from darkness to light, in so far Act. 26: 18. thus the secrets of the heart are made manifest 1. Cor. 14: 24, 25. and they become lost in themselves, like a lost sheep, the lost piece of mency; & the lost son Luk. 15: 6, 9, 24. and like one of those whom Christ came to seek & to save Mat. 18: 11. Luk. 19: 10. These are the sinners mentioned Mal. 9: 13. that is, such as are now brought by the work of the Spirit, to see & feel their sinful condition, to know that they are sinners, and that they are in a lost condition.  
2) There is a discovery made of their Inability to relieve & help themselves out of this woeful condition of sin & misery. They are made to see, that nothing in them, or in any other creature, can make satisfaction unto the justice of God & thereby redeem them from the Curse of the Law, and from the wrath of God, that is lying upon them, the sense & apprehension whereof doth now press & pinch them sore. Which maketh them cry out, with these pricked in their hearts Act. 2: 37: & 16: 30. What shall we do to be saved? They see, they cannot keep the Law: & though they could, it would not avail, as a Compensation & Satisfaction to the Justice of God, for the by gone innumerable Transgressions, whereof they stand guilty.  
Whereby we see, that the troubled wakened soul, in this case, is brought to a despairing in himself. He is under the sentence, and he seeth nothing under heaven that can command Peace to his soul; nothing within him, nor without him, beside God, that can bring him out of this Prison, & relieve him from this dreadful sentence, under which he is lying, as a condemned Malefactor: And we see, what is properly the relief, that he would be at, and that he only desireth: to wit, To be freed & delivered from the sentence of the Law, and from the curse of God; & to be brought into a state of Favour & Reconciliation with God, that his sins may be pardoned, he may be accepted of God, as Righteous, & so brought into a State of Peace & Salvation. This is the plaster, that his soul is longing for; this is the only remedy that can relieve him; this is the only good that he can be satisfied with: all the Pleasures, Honours, & Rihes of the world will bring no relief or ease to his distressed soul: And when he findeth tha● this is not to be found in himself, nor in any other Creature, he must look for it, elsewhere. And therefore  
(3) When the Spirit of the Lord is carrying on this work, he, by the preaching of the Gospel, convinceth the man of the reality & truth thereof, & discovereth the Suitablness, Fullness, Satisfactoriness, Glory & Excellency of the remedy, that is hold forth in that Gospel, that hath brought life & immortality to Light, even in the Gospel of the grace of God, wherein is revealed, what Christ God-man hath done & suffered, to satisfy the justice of God: therein is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: There he seeth, that the Father is well pleased with him, & with the Sacrifice, which he offered up for sins, Whence the poor wakened sinner seeth, that his case is not utterly desperate, & that there is hope for him, through Jesus; or at least that it is possible, he may be saved from the wrath to come; & a may be of relief is a great relief: And he seeth, that if that Righteousness & Satisfaction of Christ were made over to him, or he interessed therein, he were well; for that would sufficiently guard him from the wrath of God, and secure him, as to future blessedness. Thus the Spirit, by the word, revealeth the Gospel of Salvation to the end the wakened sinner may see his relief there, & betake himself to the only relief that is held forth there.  
6. Hence we see, that while the wakened sinner is in this condition, his main & only work will be, how he may be interessed in that all sufficient Redemption, & Purchase of Christ, to the end he may be partaker of the Ben●fites, that flow there from, and so be freed from the state of Sin, Wrath & Enmity, wherein he is now ● plunged: And when the Gospel calleth for Faith, in order to this, & he findeth, that it is not in his power to Believe, but that it is the pure gift of God, who must give the new heart, & the heart of flesh, & must regenerate & beget him of new, & so create a new Principle of grace in his soul, to the end he may be brought to act Faith on the offered mediator & Mediation, & accept thereof, as his only Cure & Remedy.  
7. So that, when the Spirit worketh up the soul to believe, he causeth him sweetly acquiesce, in the way of Redemption, revealed in the Gospel, and to count it a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners 1. Tim. 1: 15. and to comply sweetly with the design thereof, in all points: and for that end to close with Christ, and to accept of him upon his offer, and particularly to rest upon him, and his Righteousness, revealed in the Gospel, as the only ground of their hope & peace: This being the thing that their soul longeth after, to wit, how they shall get guilt taken away & they be clothed with a Righteousness, wherein they may with confidence appear before God, the Spirit of God, when working the soul up to a compliance with the remedy, held forth in the Gospel, causeth them accept of Christ, as made of God unto them, Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification & Redemption, and every such soul to say. In the Lord our Righteousness, have I Righteousness. In him alone will I look for Pardon, Acceptance, Reconciliation & life, & on him alone will I roll my debt, & there will I rest, in hope.  
8. Therefore, this Faith, though it bring the soul unto Christ, as the only Redeemer, and is the man's clasping his arms about him, & embracing him, as all his Salvation, & rolling all his weight upon him, yet it looketh to & in a special manner, eyeth the Satisfaction, Merits & Righteousness of Christ; for that is it, which the man mainly now standeth in need of Justice must be satisfied, saith he, my sins must be pardoned, I must be accepted in favour with God, I must have a Righteousness where with my sins may be covered, and the month of justice, of the Law, & of my challenging conscience, may be stopped, & whereby I may have Right to life: and this being held forth in the Gospel, Faith bringeth the soul to a resting on this Righteousness of Christ, that he may be found in Christ, not having his own 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 This is to believe on Christ joh. 3: 16, 36. Act. 16: 31. & faith in his blood Rom. 3: 25. Thus the soul refugeth itself from the storm of wrath, under the wings of Christ, and hideth itself, as it were, in him from the avenger of blood, the wrath of an angry God, purseing for a broken Law. And here, the Man abideth hid in Christ, and eleaveth to him, as being glued to him, and utterly unwilling to be separate from him, or to appear without his garment of Righteousness, which faith fasteneth on the soul; and the man by faith trusteth to this way, and resteth upon it with full confidence, nothing doubting of his safety thereby.  
9 By this we see, how the way of justification by Gospel-faith serveth both for setting forth the Glory of God, the Riches of Free Grace, and for abaseing of Man, as also for securing of Life unto the Believer: for (1) Hereby the Man is convinced of his guilt & declareth himself to be guilty; for he his guilty before God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3: 19 he is made speachless knowing nothing to speak in his own defence, nor no apology to give in, his mouth is stopped, and he can say nothing, but cry out, guilty, I am a child of death, the Lord is Righteous, should he damn me for ever, I must justify him, when he speaketh, and clear him when he judgeth Psal. 51: 4. (2) Hereby the Man pronunceth & sweareth himself poor & bare; he forsaketh all, and renunceth all, that formerly he had any eye upon, or confidence in, counting them loss & dung, as Paul did Phil. 3. He proclaimeth himself Empty, Lost, & Naked, and declareth he hath nothing that he can lean to, within himself. He accounteth all his former Righteousness to be nothing but rotten rags, and filthy rags, and Professeth that he knoweth nothing within himself, wherefore, or whereupon he can expect Reconciliation with the Lord, and to be Accepted of him. (3) Thus all ground, or occasion of boasting, or of glorying before men, is taken away from the believer Rom. 3: 27. & 4: 1. (4) Thus the glorious beauty of free Grace shineth forth. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be of grace. Rom. 4: 16. Grace here appeareth in its own glory, when free grace without us, & contrare to our demerits, doth all, provideth the Sacrifice, accepteth of the same, in their behalf for whom it was offered up, bringeth them to the actual participation of the fruits and effects thereof by working up their hearts to a satisfaction in it & to a resting upon it, & all this freely, out of free Love. It is corruptly said by the fore mentioned Author of that discourse of the two Covenants pag. 42. that Grace appeareth, in the Lord's making Faith the condition of the promise, in that great things are promised upon such a possible practicable easy condition, as faith is, considering the means and assistance promised by God to work it: for this spoileth Grace of its Glory, when Man is looked upon, & said to be the principal author of saith, as he is, upon the matter, said to be, when all that God doth, is but called assistance, and at least the man may challenge, as his own, no small share of the Glory of acting Faith, and of going so great a length in the way to Faith, without any more assistence, than he hath need of, to eat his meat when hungry, and of going on his own feet to the very place, where God stood ready to lend him a hand to help him forward. Not to mentione, how this altereth the whole Nature of the Covenant of Grace, making it nothing but a new edition of the old Covenant of works. (5) It is of faith to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed Rom. 4: 16. When all the business is wrought, as it were, to our hand, and nothing more requisite to interest us, in the noble Effects of all, than our consent, & this also is wrought by the Spirit of God conform to the Covenant of Redemption, can a more ensureing way be imagined? Alas! what ground of Confidence or of Certainty, can the Arminian & Socinian way, followed by the formentioned Author, give to a poor soul? When all is made to hang upon the tottering & inconstant will of man, who hath no more from God, but some common assistances, standing ready to attend him, if he advance so far his alone without them; & when he hath gotten them to day, may run back, & undo all again to morrow, & Apostatise for ever; for this also is a part of that Gospel, that this man will teach us, pag. 135. if we believe Mr. Baxter's Preface. Beside that hereby, no man can win to any solid Peace, or Joy, so long as he liveth; for he is but still performing the Condition of his Justification, and perfecting it by his works; so that till they be at an end, the Condition of Justification is not performed, and consequently no Justification: and it is the main scope of this man's discourse to prove the interest of Gospel-obedience (as he calleth it) as a Condition, as well as Faith, or rather as a part or best part of practical Faith, in the matter of Justification.  
10. Hence we may also see, how erroneous & dangerous that definition of faith as Evangelical, Christian & Justifying, is, which the mentioned Author giveth us pag. 38. to wit, Such an hearty assent & consent unto God's declaration in the Gospel by his Son, concerning Christ himself & his Grace & Favour towards men by him, & concerning their own duty, as causeth a man to expect from God, and to act in a way of duty, according to the tenor of such a declaration, & his own concerns in it. This upon the matter is the very faith of Adam, only Adam heard no word of Christ; & so it is but a Law-faith, & no Gospel-Faith. And again more plainly by way of explication, he saith pag. 39 nor is it a bare belief, that God will for Christ's sake pardon & save, as many as truly repent & amend their lives & become new creatures; unless they so believe all this, as seriously & heartily to repent themselves of their former folly, and to return to their duty in new Evangelical obedience. Not only doth this man take away from Justifying & saving Faith, all that peculiar closing with Christ, & accepting of him, as Redeemer, & all particular & special eye or respect had to his Righteousness & Mediation; but he maketh justification depend on works, as well as on faith, or on works, as the integral parts of practical justifying faith: It is true, Saving faith, cannot but bow & incline the man, in whom it is, to all holy Obedience; But to make these thus to be included in Faith, as the Condition of Justification, is to give us the Socinian justification, & the Socinian Faith, for the true orthodox justification & faith: and if this be the Gospel justification, & Gospel faith which (as Mr. Baxter thinks) this look will help us unto, the Socinians are better acquainted with the Gospel, than the orthodox have been, or are. And to evince this (which is all I need to do here) I shall propose a few of their Assertions concerning Faith, that the Reader may judge what harmony is betwixt this Author & them. The Racou. Catech. cap. 9 de fide tells us, that faith is a Trust in God, whereby we not only confide in him, but also obey him. This is short yet fully the same with our Auther's. Socinus himself dial de justif. f. 11. what is that to believe in his name? It is receive him, to believe his words, to confide in him, & finally to obey him. And in not: in dial f. 25. he tells us, that the faith by which we are justified, doth contain obedience to the commands, not as an effect, but as its substance & form, yea (faith he) it is obedience itself. And again the fid. & oper. f. 60. he faith, I will have nothing else, than to confided the in Christ; and this is done & receiveth its perfection, & as it were, its form, when obedience is yielded unto his commands: So that betwixt justifying faith & good works there is no difference. See him further f. 123. 134. Smalcius de divin. Christ. cap. 14. f. 38. tells us, that faith in jesus Christ is a firm assent unto what he hath said & a confideing truly so called, whereby not only we firmly believe what he hath said concerning us, but we confide in him & adhere to him, (this is much more, than our Author saith) & heart'ly embrace his doctrine as celestial & saving, placing our confidence & hope in him, as such & so great, a King, & as our Priest (fie upon our Author, that is less orthodox, than this Socinian) hanging wholly upon him, with a firm hope to obtain these things, which he hath promised to such as obey him, that is, if we amend our lives, according to his prescriptien, we are confident to receive remission of sins, deliverance from death & eternal life. But you will say, there is no mention made of good works in this faith. See therefore what he saith disp. 6. cont. Frantz de bon. open. Thes. 53, 55, 63, 68 We do not (saith he) consider two parts of faith. Trust in God, & Obedience to his commands, but we distinguish them, as if they were two: for albeit really they may be taken for encthing, & are one, they can be some way distinguished- Obedience is rather the form of faith, or faith itself, than any part of it. And in this, the Arminian Remonstrants in their Confess. cap. 10. s. 1, 2, 3. do homolegate with the Socinians, telling us, that faith comprehendeth all the commands of the Gospel, and that the command of Faith must no otherway be considered, than as by a natural propriety it includeth obedience, and is a fruitful mother of good works: and that faith thus considered comprehendeth a man's whole conversion, prescribed in the Gospel. Socinus is plain Synops. 1. s. 8. and tells us, that the way of justification is the same under both Covenants, seeing in both on God's part was required Remission of sins: & on man's part, Repentance, & Obedience to his commands, which is truly that very faith, that every did, & ever will make man acceptable unto God. And then tells us, that we must beware to make sanctification an effect of justification. These things may show, that this part, at least, of this Author's Gospel is more learned out of the Socinian & Arminian Scholes, than out of the Scriptures: and if we would be guided into this, we may follow other more ancient leaders, than is this Author, whom else where, I suppose, Mr. Baxter calleth Mr. W. Allen.  
11. We would also take notice of this, That when the Scripture saith, the just liveth by faith, or we are justified by faith, the meaning must not be, we are justified by Hope, or we are justified by Love, or we are justified by Patience or by any other Grace: for though all these Graces of the Spirit, may be conceived as springing from one and the same root, & seed of God, which is planted in the soul, in the new birth; and though, we may, by our acute wits, so explain each, as to include the rest, more or less: Yet as divine Revelation is the ground of all our Faith, in this matter, so Scripture expressions, are the best guide to us, in our Expressions & Conceptions about this matter. And as the Scripture doth speak of and name these Graces, as formally distinct, ascribing to each their distinct, and several Operation, End and Use; so we never read, that we are said to be. justified by Love, or by Patience, or by Hope, or any other; but always by Faith. This certanely must instruct us, that Faith here hath a peculiar and singular interest, & must be considered, as looking to Christ, in a different way, from Hop & Love, which also have Christ for their object, or Christ must be the object of Faith, in another manner & under some other consideration, than he is the object of other graces.  
12. It is also considerable, that it is simply said, the just man liveth by faith, or we are justified by faith, and not the just man liveth, or we are justified, by a strong faith, or by a faith continueing to the end: Though it be true, that a true & lively Faith is of that Nature, that it will continue to the end, and will grow; yet we may not say, that only a strong Faith, or a Faith as continueing to the end, is the condition of the Covenant, or of Justification; for hence it would follow, that as no man of a weak, yet true and sincere Faith, could be said to be Justified, so no man could be said to be Justified until his Faith had endured to the end, which is contrary to Scripture, speaking of believers, while in their infancy, as justified & adopted, as partakers of, or at least, as having a Right to the consequences of Justification, such as Pardon, Peace, Glorying in Tribulation, and Comfort etc. The promise granteth Justification and Adoption to Faith, that is of the right kind, & no mention is made of that Qualification thereof, He that believeth is passed from death to life, and shall never die etc. joh. 3: 36. joh. 3: 16, 18. joh. 1: 12. If the meaning of such, as make Faith, as continuing to the end, the condition of the Covenant and of Justification, were this, That Faith as continued in to the end is the Mean of Continuance in the Covenant, and in the state of Justification, they should speak truth: for the just liveth by faith first & last, as by Faith they are brought into the estate, so by faith they are continued therein; Faith maketh the first Union, Faith continueth it: But of this we shall have occasion to speak more afterward.  
13. This faith is not one single act of the soul, nor seated in one faculty, The various things, spoken of it in Scripture, and the various objects it acteth upon, and is exercised about, and the various and different necessities, which believers stand into, with the corresponding uses, which faith serveth for, in these necessities, clear it to be no one single act of the Soul: I would rather call it the act of the whole Soul, than the act of any faculty, whatsomever.   

CHAP. XXII.  
Our act of Faith is not imputed to us a Righteousness.  
Wproceed now to clear, at some further length, several Particulars, touched in the foregoing Chapt. contributing to the explication of our Justification by Faith: The first & great Question anent Faith is, whether it be imputed unto the Believer, as his Righteousness, whereupon he is justified? Adversaries to the truth both Socinians & Arminians do plainly assert, that our faith, or that grace of faith is the very thing, which is imputed to the Believer for his Righteousness. They are all convinced, that the sinner, must be clothed with a Righteousness, some way or other, in some sense or other, ere he can be Justified, for the Lord is Righteous, & will not justify the wicled, that is such as have no Righteousness: and being willing to yield to the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, they substitute, in place of Christ's Righteousness, Faith, properly taken, or our act of Believing, as is it performed by us, in obedience to the Gospel-command. Socinus de Seru. lib. 4. c. 4. Cum igitur etc. i.e. seeing he teacheth, by the example of Abraham that Righteousness is imputed, when can doubt, that nothing else can hereby be under stood, but that we arerighteous before God, because it hath seemed good to the Lord, to account our faith, in place of Righteousness. And thereafter. That faith is imputed unto righteousness, is nothing else, than that faith is accounted to us in place of Righteousness, but not that the Righteousness of christ is imputed to us & cap. 11. Themselves say, that that saith justifieth not by its proper worth, but because it apprehendeth Christ: But that apprehension of Christ of yours, is a mere humane fiction, & a most vain dream. And when we read, that faith was imputed to Abraham for Righteousness, or unto Righteousness, we have no reason to think, that mention is there made of the Righteousness of another, when it is manifest, that he is speaking of his own. In his dial. de Justis. f. 14, 15. he tells us, that faith is by God imputed to us for Righteousness, & he accounteth that in place of Righteousness, faith is in very deed that whereby the Scripture witnesseth that we are justified that is, accounted Righteous before God, & have our sins pardoned. This faith maketh us acceptable unto God unto eternal life. And in not. ad dial. f. 27. Nothing else was said, than that faith is accounted to us of God, & imputed for Righteousness, & that that faith is truly in us, who will deny seeing these words are said to exclude the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness? The Arminians do homologate with the Socinians, in this Arminius himself cont. Perkins. faith expressly, that faith itself is imputed to us & in Praf. ad Hyppolit. this (faith he) is my opinion about justification, that faith, & that alone is imputed unto Righteousness, that by it we are justified before God, absolved from our sins, and accounted righteous, pronounced & declared by God giving sentence from the tribunal of grace. Some blain in for saying, that the act of faith itself, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere is imputed unto Righteousness, & that in a proper sense, not metonymically I say, faith is imputed unto us unto righteousness, for Christ & for his righteousness sake. He owneth the same decls. Sent. ad Ord. f. 65. 66. & in Resp. ad 31. Artic. f. 152-154.  
John, Goodwin in his Treatise of Justification Part. 1. Ch. 2. asserteth the same most confidently from Rom. 4. whose reasons hereafter shall be examied. The same purpose he prosecuteth Part. 2. Ch. 6. answering the arguments of the orthodox against that imputation, which shall be considered in due time.  
Mr. Baxter in his Confess. pag. 18, 19 Excepteth against some words in our larger Catechism & Confession of faith, to wit, that it is denied, that the grace of faith, or any act thereof is imputed for Justification, unless it be thus understood, that our faith is not imputed to us, as being in stead of a perfect Righteousness of Obedience, to the ends, as it was required by the Law of works; nor is our faith the matter, or the meritorious cause of the remission of our sin, or of our right to Salvation. But the meaning of the Assembly is plain enough against that, which is the opinion of Socinians & Arminians, as the words of the Answer to quest. 73. of the larger Catech. make manifest; where it is said (in answer to that Question, How doth faith justify a sinner in the sight of God?) Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God, not because of these other graces, which do always accompany it, or of good works, that are the fruit of it; nor a● if the grace of faith, or any act thereof were imputed to him for his justification (& this is confirmed from Rom. 4: 5. comp. with Rom. 10: 10.) but only as it is an instrument, by which he receiveth & applieth Christ, & his Righteousness. And in the Confess. of Faith. Ch. 11. f. 1. nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, nor any other evangelical obedience, to them, as their Righteousness. Nor is this a determining of a point, expressly against the words of God, as he supposeth; for it is not the bare words, as Heretics interpret them, that is the mind of God, but the true sense & meaning of his words: And in Confessions & Catechisms, I judge that matters should be made plain, and that it were not plain & ingenuous dealing to set down the truth in these expressions, that heretics can subscribe unto, when it is known, they have an exposition of these words contrary to truth: It seemeth that Mr. Baxter will not say, in the explication of the Sacrament of the Lords supper, that the bread is not changed into the body of Christ, lest he seem to contradict express Scripture, which saith, that Christ said of the bread, this is my body.  
But now, as to the matter, I assert, with our Confess. & Catechis. and with all the orthodox against Socinians & Arminians. That faith, considered, as our act of obedience, is not that which is accounted our Righteousness, in order to Justification, nor that, which is properly imputed to us for that end; Nor is that the meaning of the Apostle. Rom. 4. And of this I give these reasons.  
1. The Apostle, in his whole Disput about Justification, opposeth Faith & Works as inconsistent with, yea as repugnant to other: as is notoure; But this could not be, if Faith as our act of obedience were imputed to us, as our Righteousness; for faith, as our act of obedience, is a work, and a work commanded by the Law of God, otherways it should be unlawful, or a work of supererogation. The meaning then of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3: 28. should be this, a man is justified by one dead of the Law, without all works or deeds of the Law; which were a contradiction. And it is certain, that when the Apostle excludeth the works of the Law, he excludeth their from being looked upon, as our Imputed Righteousness; for Adversaries did plead for their interest in justification, as a Righteousness to be imputed to the doers, where upon they might be justified: if then faith as our work, were imputed as our Righteousness, Paul's disput should be, whether all works should be imputed for Righteousness, or one work of faith only: Nor can it be said, that by the Law here, the Apostle understandeth only the Law of Moses, as such, for he is speaking this, even of the Gentiles, who never were under the Law of Moses, and instanceth Chap. 4, in Abraham, who was justified long before the Law of Moses, as such, had a being. And he is speaking of the Law, by which is the knowledge of sin. Rom. 3: 20. & which worketh wrath Rom. 4: 15. which cannot agree to the Law of Moses only.  
2. By asserting, that Faith, properly taken, is accounted our Righteousness, the whole scope & all the Arguments, which the Apostle useth in this matter, should be enervated and contradicted; as a very light view of them might make manifest, and the following Arguments will evince.  
3. Faith, considered as our act of obedience, and as a work of ours, is not that Righteousness of God without the Law, which is witnessed by the Law, and the Prophets: Nor is it that Righteousness of God, which is by the Faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe Rom. 3: 21, 22. Neither Law nor Prophets did bear witness, that faith, as our act & work, was accounted all the Righteousness that was to be imputed to the believer: Nor said, that our act of faith was the Righteousness of God, without the works of the Law. Nor is it imaginable, how faith can be that Righteousness of God, which by Faith is imputed unto all, and put upon all that believe. Shall we think, that the Apostles words have but this sense, That faith is unto & upon them, that have faith; or that faith is imputed by faith? Sure the Apostles words must be so understood, as to import, that the believer hath by his faith something imputed to him, which is distinct from faith, as is obvious.  
4. If faith, as our work, were imputed as Righteousness, how could the Righteousness of God be declared in the justification of sinners, & God be just, when he was the justifier of him, which believeth in Jesus; as the Apostle saith Rom. 3: 26? Is our Believing such a perfect & complete Righteousness, that God cannot but account us Righteous, because of it, & so justify us, as Righteous, upon the account of it? Is it not sick of the same discemper of weakness with other graces?  
5. If Faith, as our act & work, were imputed to us, as our Righteousness, how should boasting be excluded, & all occasion of glorying, though not before God (before whom even Adam, though he had continued in his state of innocency unto the end, could not have gloried) yet before Men, taken away, as it is in the matter of justification Rom. 3: 27. & 4: 2. The Law of works will not exclude boating, & faith, as our work belongeth to the Law of works: and if we were justified by Faith, as our imputed Righteousness, we should certainly have ground of glorying before Men, as well as Adam should have had, if he had stood in his integrity, & obtained the crown by his doing.  
6. If Faith, as our work, were imputed to us for our Righteousness, Justification & the reward should not be of grace, but of debt; as the Apostle expressly affirmeth. Rom. 4: 4, 5. Now to him, that worketh (& he who believeth, in this, which he now opposeth; worketh) is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt; but to him, that worketh not, but believeth (believing then here is opposite to working, & therefore cannot be considered, as a work of obedience in us, but as carrying us out of ourselves, to seek & lay hold on the Righteousness of Christ, without us) on him, that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness; that is, the Righteousness of Christ, which Faith layeth hold on, is counted for Righteousness.  
7. If Faith, as our act of obedience, were accounted our Righteousness, & we were justified upon the account of it, as our Righteousness, God should not be he, who justifieth the ungodly, as he is expressly styled Rom. 4: 5. And the reason is, because he cannot be called an ungodly person, who hath a Righteousness inherent in him, & which is his own, & which the Lord accounteth to him for a Righteousness: he is not unrighteous, whom God accounteth Righteous, & he whom God accounteth Righteous, cannot be called ungodly: so that if God account Faith to us for our Righteousness, putting it up upon our score, as our Righteousness, when God justifieth us as Righteous, by virtue of our faith, or as clothed with faith, as a compleet Righteousness, he cannot be said to justify such as are ungodly. But now, the Scripture tells us, that God is one, that justifieth the ungodly, that is, one who hath no Righteousness inherent in him, upon the account of which the just & righteous God can justify him; but one that must have a Righteousness from without, Imputed to him, upon the account of which he is Justified, and accounted Righteous in Christ, though unrighteous & ungodly in himself; our Faith cannot be said to be imputed to us, as our Righteousness.  
8. If Faith, as our act of obedience, were imputed to us, as our Righteousness, Paul could not say, as he doth Rom. 4: 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputed righteousness without works: for then Righteousness should not be imputed without works; but a prime, special, principal & comprehensive work (for with our Adversaries here, faith is in a manner all works, or comprehendeth them, as we heard, towards the end of the foregoing Chapter) should be imputed, as our Righteousness, & not a Righteousness without works.  
9 Free pardon of sins will never prove the man blessed, unto whom God imputeth Faith, in a proper sense, for his Righteousness; as it doth prove him blessed, unto whom God imputeth Christ's Righteousness, or a Righteousness without works: And the reason is, because faith is no satisfaction to the justice of God; & therefore can not be our Righteousness, upon which we are pardoned & justified. Now the Apostle argueth thus Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. Even a, David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works; saying, blessed are they, whose iniquities are forgiven, & whose sins are covered, blessed is the man, to whom the Lord will not impute sin.  
10. The Righteousness imputed is something distinct from our Faith, & is not our faith itself, for the Apostle saith Rom. 4: 23, 24. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him, but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him etc. If Faith itself were the Righteousness imputed, these words could make no good sense. Shall we think, that the meaning of the Apostles words is nothing but this. Faith shall be imputed if we have faith, or our Believing shall be imputed to us, if we Believe. This looks not like one of the discourses of the Apostle.  
11. The imputation of our Believing, as our Righteousness, cannot ground our Peace with God, not have we by it access into this grace, wherein we stand; nor can we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God; nor glory in Tribulation: for it is obvious, how weak a ground that were for such a great building. But the Righteousness of Christ laid hold on by Faith, can be a sufficient basis for all this Rom. 5: 1, 2, 3.  
12. Faith, as our work of obedience, is not the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which must be imputed to us, as our Righteousness, upon the account of which we are to be justified: as the offence & transgression of Adam was imputed to his posterity, as the ground of death, passing upon them, and of judgement or guilt to condemnation: But is only our receiving of that abundance of grace, and of the gift of Righteousness Rom. 5: 17. But that which is imputed, as the ground of Justification, as Adam's disobedience was imputed, as the ground of their Condemnation, is the Righteousness of the Second Adam, of whom the first was a figure vers. 14, 15, 18, 19  
13. When the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 5: 21. for he made him sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God, in him; his meaning cannot be, that our Faith is the Righteousness of God, or that we are made the Righteousness of God upon that account of having faith: for the Apostle is holding forth here a comfortable commutation, which God maketh betwixt Christ & us, as the ground of that ministry of Reconciliation; to wit; that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them, mentioned vers. 18, 19 And therefore as Christ hath some thing, that was properly ours, imputed to him by God, that is Sin or Gild, which he had not in himself: so we must have something, as the native fruit & effect of that, that is properly Christ's, imputed to us of God, that is, his Righteousness, which we have not in ourselves. And beside, this Righteousness of God is that, whereupon Reconciliation is founded, as is manifest, comparing vers. 19 with 21. But who will say, that our Reconciliation unto God is founded upon our Faith, as if that were our Peacemaker, & our Atonement, & Satisfaction; & as if that were Christ, in whom God was reconciling the world unto himself. Was Christ made sin, that the imperfect grace of faith might be made a compleet Righteousness & become our compleet Righteousness?  
14. When the Apostle saith Rom. 9: 31, 32. That Israel hath not attained to the Law of righteousness, because they sought it not by faith, he must mean a Righteousness, that is distinct from Faith, and therefore he cannot mean Faith itself: for if he meaned faith itself, as our work, the words should have this sense, they sought not Faith by Faith, and therefore they did not attain to Faith. Shall we impute such jejune & insipid expressions to Paul, or rather to the Spirit of God speaking in & by Paul?  
15. The same Apostle tells us Rom. 10: 3, 4. That the jews being ignorant of God's righteousness, & going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God: And by this Righteousness of God, he cannot mean, Faith: for their faith had been their own, & so their own Righteousness, if Faith had been Righteousness: but he must mean the Righteousness of Christ, which faith layeth hold on, for he addeth, for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, to every one that believeth: So that it is the Righteousness of him, who is the end of the Law, that is that Righteousness, unto which they should have submitted themselves by Faith; & it is not Faith itself, but a Righteousness which is had from Christ; who is the end of the Law, & a Righteousness, which is had by Faith, and which every one partaketh of that believeth, as the following words show.  
16. When the Apostle saith Rom. 5: 19 by the Obedience of one shall many be made righteous, doth he mean by that obedience of one, our Faith; & not rather the Obedience of Christ, which is imputed, and whereby we become Righteous? As the disobedience of Adam was not some particular after deed of his posterity, which was imputed to them for their disobedience; but it was the particular fact of Adam, eating the forbidden fruit, which was imputed to all his posterity, and whereby they were constituted sinners: so this obedience of Christ cannot be any act of obedience in us, be it Faith, or what you will; but the acts of Christ obeying the Law, & imputed to us, whereby we become Righteous, & are constituted Righteous in the sight of God.  
17. When Paul said Phil. 3: 9 and be found in him (i. e. Christ) not having mine own righteousness, which it of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness, which is of God by faith, can he mean by this Righteousness, which he was desirous to be foundin, only Faith? If he had meaned Faith, had not that been his own Righteousness? Is not our Faith called our own? If not, why saith james Chap. 2. show me thy faith, & I will show thee my faith. And should not this Righteousness, if his believing had been it, been of the Law? Or is faith according to no Law? If it be according to no Law, it is no act of obedience. Moreover, how could Faith be said to be through Faith? Is Faith a mean to itself? How can Faith be the Righteousness of God, which is by faith? Was not the Apostles scope & desire, to win Christ? And is Faith Christ?  
18. If our act of believing be imputed to us as our Righteousness, than we cannot say. In the Lord have we righteousness, contraire to Esai. 45: 24. in order to a saying, in the Lord we shall be justified, as vers. 25. but rather in ourselves have we Righteousness, in order to this end, for Faith or our act of Believing is in ourselves immediately, and is said to be our Righteousness, Nor can we thus call the Lord our righteousness, contrate to jer. 43: 6. But rather our own act of believing shall be our Righteousness, & trusted to as such. Nor yet could we say, that Christ is made of God to us righteousness. As it is 1 Cor. 1: 30. unless that because by virtue of his mediation, our act of believing is made of God to us Righteousness sure I am the emphasis of the words pointeth out some other thing, as hath been seen.  
19 Is our believing that rob of Righteousness, wherewith the Lord covereth such, as have ground to rejoice greatly in the Lord, and to be joyful in their God Esai 61: 10? Such might as well rejoice greatly in themselves, & be joyful in themselves, & in their Believing.  
20. Is Faith that everlasting Righteousness, that the Messias was to bring in Dan. 9: 24 Doth our act of believing last for ever? Paul hinteth some other thing. 1 Cor. 13.  
21. When Paul saith Rom. 10: 10. that with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, must not this Righteousness be something distinct from believing? If not, we may as well say, that Confession with the mouth is the same with Salvation, for he addeth, & with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation, wherefore, as Confession is but a mean & way unto Salvation, so Believing is but a mean & way unto Righteousness.  
22. Can we with any colour of reason suppose, that our act of believing is that Righteousness of God, which is revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1. 17. Can faith be said to be revealed from itself, & to itself?  
23. Our act of Believing cannot be that Righteousness, whereof Noah become heir Heb. 11: 7. for he became heir of this Righteousness by Faith: & he could not be said to be come heir of Faith by Faith.  
24. Faith is among the works of Righteousness, which we do: and al● these works of Righteousness the Apostle excludeth from an interest in that Righteousness, where-upon we are Justified, as opposite to mercy. Tit. 3: 5. Therefore our Believing cannot be our Righteousness unto Justification.  
25. If our act of Believing be imputed to us for Righteousness, than it alone must be that fine linen, wherein the lambs bride is arrayed; and it must be the fine linen, that is clean and white, for this fine linen is said to be the Righteousness of the saints Revel. 19: 8. But that cannot be because our Faith is not so pure, as that it may be called clean & white linen; the Saints themselves are ashamed of their faith, as being so full of blemishes and imperfections; as also because this favour granted to her to be arrayed in this linen, cometh in after that she hath made herself ready vers. 7. which (as Mr. Durham on the place showeth) is to be meaned of Faith.  
26. All this work about the Imputation of Faith taken properly, for our act of Believing, is made of purpose, to shoot out the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; as is clear by john Goodwines whole disput; & from his very stateing of the question part. 1. pag. 7. saying. But the Question in precise terms is this. Whether the Faith of him, who truly believes in Christ, or whether the Righteousness of Christ himself be in the letter & propriety of it, that which God imputes to a believer for righteousness, or unto righteousness, in his Justification. Now let any judge which of the two hath more countenance in Scripture, when the one, to wit, the Imputation of Faith, is but to be drawn, with any show of probability, from one place of Scripture (and yet how small countenance that giveth to it shall be seen hereafter) and the other is so emphatically expressed, in so many places, both in the Old & New Testament; And which of the two deserve most the name of Righteousness, in order to our Justification: and the Imputation of which of the two is most consonant unto the genius of the Gospel Covenant, which we must suppose to be far different from the Nature & Constitution of the Covenant of Life, made with Adam; & withal, which of the two ways speaketh out most distinctly the riches of the Love & Grace of God, & giveth most sure ground of hope & Confidence unto a poor wakened and distressed Soul; & finally, which of the two is that, which the seriously exercised Christian dar with fixedness of Resolution, Lean the weight of his soul upon, & exercised Christians find to be that, whereupon they Loaning & resting find Peace, & Quietness of Soul?   

CHAP. XXIII.  
Some Arguments against the imputation of Faith, Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwin.  
AFter these Reasons against the Imputation of our act of Believing, drawn from the Scriptures, we come here to Vindicate some Arguments adduced by others to the same end, from the Exceptions of john Goodwin, in his Treatise of justification. part. 2. Ch. 6.  
The first Argum. is thus framed. That which impeacheth the truth, or justice of God, can have no agreement with the truth. This is undeniable. But the imputation of our act of Believing for Righteousness doth so; because than he should esteem & account that to be a Righteousness, which is not. Therefore etc.  
He excepteth against the Assumption & its probation thus. 1. This was in effect the plea of Swencfe●dus, (as recorded by Zanchy Epist. lib. 1. p. 215.) & likewise of the Council of Trent (as Calv. hath observed Antidote. ad Sess. 6. p. 324.) to prove that the word Justification in the Scripture, was not to be taken in a juridical sense to wit for absolution: but in a physical or moral sense, for making of a man compleetly just & righteous. Ans. What Swencfeldus said, I find not recorded by Zanchie in the place cited, in my edition, & if his words be rightly repeeted in the margin, he hath had the same judgement, that Papists have, which is sufficiently known, & with whom none in reason will say we conspire, upon the account of this argument, who but observeth this, (which abundantly discovereth the impertinency of this Exception) That the minor & its Probation speak not of the act of God Justifying, but of his simple act of Estimating or Judging, which must always be according to truth, & therefore we cannot think, or say, that God judgeth, or estimateth that to be a complete Righteousness, which is nothing so. And beside, though Justification itself were here understood: yet it might be said, without any ground of imputation either of Popery or of Swencfeldianisme, that God, who is the just & Righteous Judge, will not absolve a person as Righteous, who is not Righteous, nor pronunce him Righteous, who hath not a Righteousness, as he hath not, who hath nothing but his act of Believing imputed to him.  
Except. 2. Any action conformable to a righteous Law may be & is called Righteousness, as that fact of Phineas Psal. 106: 30. And faith being an obedience to a special commandment (1 joh. 3: 23. 2 Pet. 2: 21. Rom. 1: 5.) it may be with truth, & sufficient propriety of speech, called a righteousness. Ans. But of a particular Righteousness we are not here speaking, nor of a particular Justification of such an act, but of a Justification, as to State, and of a corresponding Righteousness, which must be universal, answerable to the challenge of the Law; and no particular act of Obedience will be accounted such a Righteousness by God, who is Truth & Justice itself, in order to the condemned man's Justification. Beside himself tells us, in end, that this exception is nothing to the purpose; for he doth not conceive, that by Faith, when it is said to be imputed, is meaned an act of conformity to any particular precept of God. And therefore he.  
Excepteth 3. That, which we mean, is this, that God looks upon a man, who truly believeth, with as much grace & favour, & intends to do as bountifully by him, as if he were a man of perfect righteousness. Ans. But this Excepter should have said, that Faith in the letter & formality of it, is imputed; for thus he disputes against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness: and he should have said, that God looketh upon the simple act of Faith, as Perfect Obedience to all the Law: for when we plead for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, he said, that thereby we make God to look upon us, as performing that Righteousness, in our own persons. Neither will he & others understand any other Imputation: and yet we see, how they can speak, when explaining the imputation of faith, that they may think to evite the force of an argument. But (2) though it be true, that God dealeth thus, as is said, with Believers; Yet that can give no ground to think, that he imputeth Faith for Righteousness: because it is not upon the account of Faith, taken as an act of their obedience, that the Lord dealeth so with them, but upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to them, and received by faith. (3) A Justified person is accounted Righteous not inherently but imputatiuly, and is accepted as such, and pronunced such; and therefore must be righteous indeed: for the judgement of God is according to truth: And if nothing be imputed to the justified, but his faith, unto Righteousness, that faith must be accounted to be a Perfect Righteousness; which yet it is denied to be.  
He Excepteth 4. Nothing is more frequent with the best writers, than that God accounts those just, who, in strickness of speech, are not such, but only have their sins forgiven them. Ans. And their ground is good; because they always suppose, that such, as have their sins pardoned, have a perfect Righteousness imputed to them, and received by Faith, without which their could be no Pardon.  
Argum. 2. If faith should be imputed for Righteousness, then should Justification be by workest or by some what in ourselves. But the Scripture every where rejecteth works, & all things in ourselves from having any thing to do in Justification.  
He excepteth. That by works or some what in ourselves may be understood either by way of merit, and in this sense the Consequence of the Proposition is false; or by way of simple performance, & then the Assumption is false, for the Scripture expressly requireth faith, or a work of us, in order to justification. When Faith is required in order to Justification, in way of simple performance, it is not required, as our Righteousness, far less as all the Righteousness, which the Justified soul must have; but only as a mean, or Instrument, laying hold upon, and putting on the Righteousness of Christ, which is offered and imputed, and whereby the believer resteth upon, and wrappeth himself in that Righteousness, as the only Righteousness, wherein he can think to appear before God's tribunal, and thus Faith is not considered as our act, making up our Righteousness, but as bringing in, with a beggar's hand, a Righteousness from without. But when faith or Believing is purely considered, as our work, and as an act of obedience in us, and yet is called our Righteousness, & said to be all that Righteousness, which is had, & is imputed, in order to Justification, it justifieth as a work; & upon the account of it, as something in ourselves, we are said to be justified; & all this in perfect opposition to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness (2) It is but a Popish evasion to say, that by justification by works, the Scripture only meaneth justification by works, that are meritorious; as if either any work of ours what somever could be meritorious; or as if such, against whom Paul disputed, did mean a meritoriousness in their works; or as if the Scripture did not infer merit from every work, that is ours, and that we do to make up a Righteousness by, upon the account of which we might be justified. Saith not the Apostle Rom. 4: 4. Now to him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt, inferring debt & so merit from all works that we do, whereby to patch up a Righteousness, in order to justification? He doth not distinguish betwixt works, that are by way of merit, & other works, but meaneth even such works, as were performed by Abraham; who was far from imagineing any merit is his works. (3.) And sure, if any work be accounted meritorius, in this case, that must be so accounted, which is made the whole of our Righteousness, upon which we are justified; & is said to be the only Righteousness, that is imputed to us, for that end, that we may be Justified. Is not that believing made our Righteousness, & thereby declared to be no less meritorious, than Adam's perfect Obedience would have been?  
Argum. 3. That which maketh justification not to be of grace, cannot stand with the truth of the Gospel. But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness maketh Justification not to be of Grace.  
He excepteth, The Scripture still maketh a perfect consistency of free grace with the condition of saith Eph. 2: 8. Rom. 3: 24, 25. Nay the work of believing is purposely required, that the freeness of his grace might have place Rom. 4: 16. How can a gift be conceived to be more freely given, than when nothing more is required, than that it be received: now believing is nothing else, but a receiving of that righteousness or justification, which God giveth in & with his Son jesus Christ job. 1: 12. Ans. Here are good words, but nothing to lose the argument, for Faith, receiving a Righteousness, or the gift of Righteousness, or the Atonement, or Christ & his Righteousness, is but the instrument (as it were) of the soul, laying hold on, & in law presenting (to speak so) the fidejussorie-righteousness of the Surety, Christ, as the Righteousness, upon the account of which, & for which alone, he is to be justified. But believing, considered in itself, as our work, & made to be our Righteousness, & all our Righteousness, & said to be imputed for our Righteousness, is not considered as a receiving of a gift of Righteousness; (which is distinct from Justification, howbeit he confound them) but really is made a price in our hand, wherewith to purchase the gift of Justification; & the reckoning of this work to us (which is our work) as our Righteousness, in order to justification, maketh Justification not of grace, but of debt, as the Apostle argueth Rom. 4: 4. & maketh our Justification to be of works, & if it be of works, it is no more of grace, as the Apostle asserteth Rom. 11: 6. The consideration of Faith, as the act of the soul, receiving & laying hold upon a Righteousness, or on Christ, & his Righteousness, establisheth the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; but the Imputation of Faith, properly taken doth quite extrude it: & these two are made incompatible by our adversaries; & the one is asserted, that the other may be denied; for which there were no necessity, if Faith were considered, in the Scripture sense, as it ought to be, that is an Instrument laying hold on & bringing in a Righteousness from without, even the Surety-Righteousness of Christ. So that this exception, if it be ingenuous, must overthrow the Position maintained.  
Arg. 4. That which ministereth occasion to the flesh of boasting in itself, is not consonant to the tenor of the Gospel. But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness doth minister occasion to the flesh of boasting Therefore etc.  
He excepteth, Suppose the act of believing, which is so imputed for righteousness, be a man's own work, yet it is so by the mere gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. Phil. 1: 29. 1 Cor. 2: 12. & 3: 6. and this cuttech off all ground of boasting. 1. Cor. 4: 7. Ans. (1) Though there be no true ground of boasting of that, which is freely given; yet the flesh can take occasion therefrom to boast, as the Pharisee did Luk. 18. when yet he acknowledged all to be gives, for he thanked God for what he was not, & for what he did, & so acknowledged all to be given, and all to be given freely. (2) The Apostle saith expressly, that boasting is not excluded by the Law of works Rom. 3: 27. and yet all works are given, & are not absolutely of & from ourselves. (3) Saith not the Apostle expressly. Rom. 4: 2. If Abraham were justified by works, he hath to glory: And yet I hope, Abraham did acknowledge, that all these works of his were of grace, & of God's free gift, and not absolutely & every way his own. (4) The works, required in the old Covenant of works, were not absolutely Adam's own, but were in some sense also given of God; yet by that way of Justification, there had been ground of boasting. (5) Though now there should be no ground of boasting before God; (as neither would there have been ground of boasting before him, by the way of works; for the Apostle addeth Rom. 4: 2. but not before God) yet there is ground laid for boasting before men, when our Believing is made our Righteousness, upon the account of which we are justified & pronunced righteous in order to Absolution from what was brought in against us. (6) Therefore is the way of Justification now so contrived, that man should have ground or colour of ground of boasting, even before men: for all that Righteousness, which is required unto Justification, as that Righteousness upon the account of which they are to be justified, and by which only they are to be declared & pronunced Righteous, is not in them; but in another and imputed unto them; it is the Righteousness of Christ made over unto them of God's free grace, & received by Faith, which receiving hand is also given: so that the Righteousness, upon which all are justified, is one & the same, & is a Righteousness without them; & therefore the flesh hath no seeming occasion of boasting in this matter.  
He excepteth 2. Suppose the act of believing were from a man's self, yet there were no cause of boasting; because that weight of glory is not given to faith for any worth in it, but by the most free gracious & good pleasure of God. If a King for taking a Pin of a Man's sleeve should raise his house, & make him honourable in the State, were it not a ridiculous thing for such a man to brag of the Pin of his sleeve etc. Ans. (1) Can we think, that those, against whom the Apostle disputed, in this matter, did think, that there was worth & excellency in all their works, to merit the exceeding great & eternal weight of glory? did Abraham think so. And yet though we cannot say, that he thought so, Paul not withstanding denieth, that he was justified by his works. (2) If the act of Believing were from a Man's self, & made all that Righteousness, which he is conceived to have when justified, & upon the account of which he is justified, he should not only have occasion, but even cause of boasting before men, notwithstanding of the disproportion betwixt faith & the weight of glory: for it might then be said, that he had made himself to differ; & that he had laid down, out of his own purpose, the whole price, that was required, and so had, according to the terms of the Compact, made a purchase of glory to himself: as the man with the pin in his sleeve, if the Law & Covenant had so stood, that all that gave the Prince a Pin out of his sleeve, shall receive such & such great things; & he only & a few moe were so good merchants, as to give the Pin, when others did not, might well have boasted & said, he had not gotten those great things for nothing, for he laid down the full price, condescended upon by Law & Covenant, and had ground of boasting, at least, before men, though not before the Prince, who graciously condescended to reward so richly such a mean gift. (3) This answer will say, that there had been no ground of boasting, even by the old Covenant of works, though man had keeped the Law perfectly: for even then, it might have been said, that the weight of glory was not given, for the really worth & excellency of perfect Obedience; Perfect Obedience & Holiness having its sufficient reward in its own bosom; for it is a reward to itself.  
But he saith. If men had fulfilled the Law, & been justified that way, there had been some pretence of boasting or glorying in themselves. Ans. And why not also, if faith be now accounted the fulfilling of the Law, and be now imputed to us, as all our Righteousness? Let us see, if the reasons, which he bringeth for the former, will not also evince this.  
His first is this; Because such a Righteonsness had held some proportion at least that should have been given to it Rom. 4. verse 4. God had given them no more, than what they had (at least in some sort) deserved. Ans. But who can tell us, what that proportion, or that sort would have been? And may not also the Righteousness of Faith (which is here supposed to be of ourselves, and not the mere gift of God) be said to hold some proportion, at least in some fort? Yea, may it not, in this respect, be said to hold a greater proportion, viz. that the exerting of the act of Faith now would argue more strength of free will, to that which is good, that Perfect Obedience in Adam; for though we should suppose, that man now had as full a power to believe, if he would, as Adam had to obey, yet it cannot be denied, but there is much more opposition now even within, to that which is good, than there was in Adam; and consequently that the virtue appearing in the acting of Faith, must be conceived as greater, than what could have appeared in Adam's full obedience, who had nothing within to oppose him, or prove a remora in his way? As it would argue more valour for a weak soldier to go a quarter of a mile fight with his enemies in the way, then for a giant to go twenty miles, wherein he should meet with no opposition. But though the proportion were granted to be greater betwixt the reward and Adam's Obedience; than is betwixt the reward & Faith; yet there must be & will be a proportion granted: for majus & minus non variant speciem, degrees make no variation in kind. (2) Can or will it be said, that God had given the perfect obeyer no more, than he had, in some sort at least, deserved, if we should suppose, there had been no promise made of such a reward to obeyers, or antecedently to a Covenant? And if this cannot be said (as it cannot be said, by any I suppose, who seriously consider the matter) than the reward was made such only by God's free Condescension; & God had, in that case, given what they had deserved according to the Covenant made, wherein such a reward was promised to obeyers; and, in justice, bestowing it as a reward upon such, as did fulfil the condition. Now, when Faith is said to have the same place, in the New Covenant, that Perfect Obedience had in the old, and so the same Efficacy & influence in the reward; & withal, it is supposed, that Faith is now no more the gift of God, than Perfect Obedience was under the old Law; is it not as true now, that God giveth no more, than what believers have by Faith (at least in some sort) deserved, by virtue of the Compact & New Covenant, wherein this reward is promised, as it would have been under the old Covenant? And is it not hence also manifest, that the New Covenant is made to be of the same Nature with the Old, and that the reward is as well now of debt, as is would have been by the Old Covenant? Is it not also hence undeniable, that hereby there is a proportion acknowledged, in some sort, betwixt Faith & the Reward? where is then the difference? Let us see, if his next reason will help here.  
Secondly (he saith) because if they had made out their happiness, that way they had done it out of themselves, that is, out of the strength of those abilities, which were essential to their Natures, & in the strickest & most proper sense that can be spoken of, or applied to a creature, their own. Ans. (1) When he supposeth (as we saw in the Exception) the act of Believing to be from a man's self, must we not also say, that the believer making out his happiness this way, doth it out of himself, though not out of the strength of abilities essential to his Nature. (2) I much doubt, if those abilities (if he speak of moral abilities, as he must, or speak nothing to the purpose) can be said to have been essential to man's Nature, for than it would follow, that man, after he lost these abilities (as it must be granted he did, when he fell) was no more a compleet man, wanting something that was essential to his nature. These abilities may be said to have been natural or con-natural to him, considering the state, the Lord thought good to create him in, and so not merely supernatural; but how they can be said to have been Essential to his Nature, I see not. (2) When God gave Adam these Abilities, and thereby furnished him with a sufficient stock; was he not to acknowledge God for all that he did? or was he afterward to act without dependence upon, or influence from God, the first Cause? If not as it is confessed, when it is said to be so only in a sense, that can agree to a creature; and when Faith is here supposed to be from man's self acting in the same dependence on God, and receiving the same influence from him, as the first Cause, may not Faith also be said to be man's own, in as strick & proper a sense as can be spoken of, or applied to a Creature? And even though we speak of Faith, in the orthodox sense, as being the gift of God, yet seeing it floweth natiuly from the new Nature given in Regeneration, & is said to be man's faith, & his act, all this difference will not exclude all occasion of boasting & glorying before men, more than Abraham's works would have done, if he had been justified by them. And yet the Gospel-way of Justification perfectly excludeth all boasting, being so contrived in all points, as that he who glorieth may only glory in the Lord.  
Argum. 5. If Faith be imputed unto us for Righteousness, then are we justified by that, which is Imperfect, & which itself needeth a Pardon; seeing no man's Faith is perfect in this life. But there is no Justification to be looked for before God by that which is Imperfect, but by that, which is Perfect. Therefore etc.  
He excepteth. These words then, we are justified by that, which is imperfect, may either have this sense, that we are justified without the concurrence of any thing, that is simply perfect, to our justification, or that somewhat that is comparatiuly imperfect, may some ways concur & contribute towards our justification. In the first sense the proposition is false, in the later sense the assumption goeth to wreck Ans. This distinction is to no purpose; for it doth not lose the difficulty, in regard that the argument speaketh of a Righteousness, as the formal cause, or as the formal objective cause of Justification, or as that upon the account of which the person is pronounced & Declared to be Righteous, and Justified: and so is leveled against Faith, concluding that it cannot be our Righteousness, or the formal Objective cause of our justification (as it is said and supposed to be by such, as say, that it is imputed to us for Righteousness, for it is made by them to be all the Righteousness that is imputed to us) & that because of its Weakness & Imperfection.  
He addeth, in application of this distinction. The truth is, that the Imputation of faith for Righteousness presupposeth somewhat, that absolutely perfect, as absolutely necessary unto justification. Had not the Lord Christ, who is perfect himself, made a perfect atonement for sin, there had been no place for the Imputation of faith for righteousness, for it is through this, that either we believe in him or in God through him; & it is through the same atonement also, that God justifieth us upon our believing, that is, imputes our faith unto us for righteousness. Ans. This presupposal doth not help the matter; for notwithstanding thereof, Faith itself is made the only Imputed Righteousness; and faith is not considered as an Instrument, receiving Christ's Righteousness; and the Atonement there through, but as a work, making the reward of the Atonement to be of debt, ex pacto, and not of free grace, and so to have a worth & a merit in it. Our Adversaries will not grant, that this presupposed Righteousness of Christ, whereby the perfect Atonement was made, is imputed unto us; for this is expressly denied: and beside, they say, that it was equally made for all, and so is equally imputed to all; so far, as that thereby, all are put into such a state, as, notwitstanding of the former breach made, they may now, upon the new terms of Faith, receive the promised reward. And thus, it is manifest that with them, this imperfect thing, saith is that, for & upon the account of which, they are justified. As for example (that we may hereby illustrate & clear the matter) if we should suppose, that Christ had by his Atonement delivered all from wrath, due for the former transgression of the Covenant, and had put them into the former state, wherein Adam was, before he fell, & procured that God should take a new essay of them, and make promise of life unto them, upon the old terms (as some, who plead for Universal Redemption, say God might have done, had he so pleased, after the Atonement was made) in this case, might it not be said that every person, that should now be Justified, upon the performance of these terms, were justified by the performance of the Condition, as by his own Righteousness; & that this new Obedience were all the Righteousness he had, & declared to have, when justified? & should he not be justified upon the account thereof solely? And was he more obliged unto the Atonement of Christ, than others, who did violate of new these Conditions? And seeing now Faith is put in the same place, and made to have the same Force & Efficacy; shall we not now be Justified by this one act of Obedience, as we would have been, in the other case, by perfect Obedience? And if it be so, is it not manifest, that we are justified by a Righteousness, that is Imperfect, & that all the presupposal of a perfect Atonement, doth not avail? (2) When it is said, that it is through the Atonement, made by Christ, that we believe in him, or in God through him, it must be granted, that Christ hath purchased Faith, & that either to all, or to some, and if to all, then either absolutely, or upon condition if to all, & that absolutely, than all should have faith; if upon condition, we desire to know, what that condition is? If not to all, but to some only, than Christ cannot be said to have died alike for all. (3) as to that he faith, viz. That it is through the same atonement, that God imputeth our faith to us, for righteousness, & justifieth us upon our believing, it being the same that others say, who tell us, that Christ hath procured faith to be the condition & terms of the new Covenant, we shall say no more now, than that we see no ground to asserte any such thing, & here after we shall give our reasons.  
Argum. 6. If faith be imputed to us for Righteousness, than God should rather receive a Righteousness from us, than we from him, in our justification. But God doth not receive a righteousness from us, but we from him in justification. Therefore etc.  
He excepteth by denying the consequence upon these reasons. (1) Because God's imputing Faith for righteousness doth no ways imply that faith is a righteousness, properly so called, but only that God by the means thereof, & upon the tender of it, looks upon us as righteous, yet not as made either meritoriously, or formally righteous by it, but as having performed that condition or Covenant, upon the performance whereof he hath promised to make us righteous, meritoriously by the death & sufferings of his own son; formally with the pardon of all our sins. Ans. All this can give no satisfaction, for. (1) If no Righteousness be imputed to us, in order to Justification, but Faith, and if faith itself be hereby made no Righteousness, than we are justified without any Righteousness at all; & God shall be said to pronunce them Righteous, who have no Righteousness at all; or Justification must be some other thing, than a pronunceing or declaring of a man Righteous. (2) Why have we heard so much above said for Faiths being Righteousness & why have there been so many passages of Scripture adduced to confirm this, particuiarly such as mention the Righteousness of faith, or the Righteousness of God by faith? But it may be, this salvo is added, a Righteousness properly so called: Yet than it will follow, that it must be, at least, a Righteousness improperly so called, and that must be an improper speech, faith is imputed for righteousness, and if that be an improper speech, why is there so much noise made about the impropriety of the speech, when we take Faith for the object of faith, in that sentence, faith imputed unto righteousness? All that great clamor must now recurre upon the excepter, and his followers. (3) If this, which he hath given, be the meaning of these words, faith imputed unto righteousness, let any judge, whether our sense of them, or this be most genuine, & freest of trops & figures, & which of the two is apparently farthest fetched. (4) Faith then, it seemeth, is tendered unto God, & faith being but a Righteousness improperly so called, we tender unto God, in our Justification a Righteousness only, that is improper, & thereupon are declared Righteous, whether properly, or improperly, I know not. (5) If upon the tender of Faith, God look upon us as Righteous, than we m●st be righteous; for we must be what he seeth, & acknowledgeth us to be: And then I ask, whether doth he look upon us, as properly Righteous, or as improperly Righteous? (6) If God look upon us, as having fulfilled the condition of the Covenant, & as Righteous upon that account, than he must look upon us, as properly righteous & faith must be a proper righteousness; or he must say, that Christ hath purchased, that an improper Righteousness shall be the Condition of the Covenant, for we heard, he said, that Christ had purchased, that Faith should be the condition. But the performance of the Condition of God's Covenant must be hold for a proper Righteousness, as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant. And we heard lately, that Faith was truly & properly called a Righteousness, & that it might be so called with truth, & in sufficient propriety of speech, in his answer to the first argument. (7) If we be righteous by faith, & be looked upon, as such by God, having performed the condition of the Covenant, it is not imaginable, how we shall not be, if not meritoriously, yet at least formally Righteous; seeing as Adam by Perfect Obedience, would have performed the Condition of that Covenant, under which he was, and thereby had been both Meritoriously & formally Righteous; so must it be now, in respect of faith, which is made to have the same place, force & efficacy, in the new Covenant, and that through the procurment of Christ, that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant. (8) He saith, we are made meritoriously righteous by Christ's sufferings. But what is the meaning of this? Is this the meaning thereof, that Christ's sufferings hath merited a Righteousness to us? Then hereby nothing is spoken to the point; for we are not now speaking of Christ's Righteousness, but of ours. And again I would inquire, what Righteousness hath it merited unto us? Whether a meritorious Righseousness, or a formal Righteousness (as he distinguishad) or both? Or is the meaning this, That through Christ's merits & sufferings, we have a Righteousness, which is meritorious? If so, I inquire, what is that Righteousness? Whether is it Christ's Righteousness imputed to us, & made ours; or is it our Faith that becometh meritorious? If this last be said, that is granted, which was denied; & Faith must be accounted our meritorious Righteousness. If the former be said, imputation of Christ's Righteousness will be granted, & more than we dar say. (9) He saith, we are made formally righteous, with the pardon of sins: But this is never proved, and it hath been often asserted: And how will he make this a Formal Righteousness, & Righteousness properly so called? Is this any conformity to a Law, in whole, or in part? Did not himself insinuat in his answer to the first Argum. that nothing can with truth, and in sufficient propriety of speech, be called a Righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of God? And sure I am, Pardon of sins is not any such conformity. (10) The sum of this answer is, this Faith is not imputed, as a Righteousness; but it is said to be imputed unto Righteousness, because it is the fulfilling of the Condition of the new Covenant, whereby we come to be made Righteous meritoriously by Christ's death, & Righteous formally with the pardon of sins. And what a wiredrawn, untelligible & self-contradictory sense this is, let every one judge.  
He denieth the consequence. 2. Because, suppose that this inference lay in the bowels of what we hold, that faith were a proper righteousness; yet neither would this argue, that therefore God should receive a righteousness from us, in our justification; for we rather receive our faith from God for our justification, shen God from us, in our justification; though I grant that in a sense a far off, & with much ado, it may (haply) be made a truth, that God receives our faith from us in our justification. Ans. But, sure, though Adam's obedience was originally from God & efficiently, he being the First Cause; yet had Adam been justified, according to that Old Covenant, he had been justified by his own works, & not by the Righteousness of another, bestowed on him by God; so he had been said to have presented his own Righteousness unto God, in order to his justification, and God might have been said to have received it from him, in his justification, or rather, in order thereunto. Now, just so is it here, as to Faith: for faith is our work, & we come with it to God, & he taketh it from us, & thereupon justifieth us, according to our Adversaries opinion, not in a sense a far off, or made with much ado, as he supposeth, but in a sense most plain & obvious.  
He saith lastly. That that imputation of faith for righteousness, which he protecteth, supposeth a righteousness given unto & received by men, because it could not be truly said, that God doth impute faith for righteousness unto any man, except he should make him righteous upon his believing. Now, as it is impossible, that a man should be made righteous without a righteousness in one kind or other; so is it impossible also, that that righteousness, wherewith a man is made righteous in justification should be derived upon him from any other, but from God alone, for this righteousness can be none other, but forgiveness of sins. Ans. (1) How can the Imputation of Faith suppose a Righteousness given, unless the Righteousness be given, before Faith be imputed, seeing what is supposed is always first in order of nature, if not also in order of time? And if matters be thus, sins are first forgiven, and then Faith is imputed. (2) If the supposing of a righteousness will follow, to wit Remission of sins, than there is no answer to the argument, for the argument speaketh of a Righteousness anterior to Justification, and in order there unto. (3) It is again said, but was never proved, that to forgive sins is to give a Righteousness. And I would ask, what for a Righteousness this pardon of sins is? is it a Righteousness perperly so called? But that cannot be, for all such Righteousness consisteth in obedience to the Law: therefore it must be a Righteousness improperly so called, & if so, it cannot be called our formal righteousness, as he said it was. (4) When he saith, we are made righteous in justification, & yet will not grant an Imputed Righteousness, and his Remission of sins is not yet found to be a proper Righteousness, the sense must either be Popish, or none at all.  
I shall not here add other reasons against this Assertion, whereby it might be made manifest, how dangerous this Opinion is, if it be put in practice; & how it tendeth to alter the Nature of the Covenant of Grace: It may suffice at present, that we have vindicated these few reasons against it, & that we have found it, in the foregoing Chapter, inconsistent with the doctrine of grace, in the New Testament & repugnant to the Nature of Justification, as declared & explained to us by the Apostle: and that we shall find it, in the next Chapter, without any footing in the Apostles discourse Rom. 4. which is the only place adduced for its confirmation.   

CHAP. XXIV.  
The imputation of Faith itself is not Proved from Rom. IU.  
THe main, if not only ground, whereupon our Adversaries build their Assertion of the Imputation of our act of Believing, is Rom. 4. where they tell us, the Apostle doth frequently & expressly say, that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness. We must therefore, in order the vindication of truth, vindicate this place from their corrupt glosses; & to this end, we shall first show, that that can not be the meaning of the Apostle, in this place, which our Adversaries contend for; & next we shall examine what they say to enforce their Exposition of the place.  
That the meaning of the Apostle Rom. 4. where it is said Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness: & afterward his faith is counted for righteousness, and faith was counted to Abraham for righteousness etc. is not that Abraham's act of believing was accounted the Righteousness, whereupon he was accepted, & was imputed unto him as a Righteousness in order to his justification; and consequently, that the act of Believing is now imputed to Believers for their Righteousness, as said Servetus, Socinus & his followers, Arminius & his followers, Papists, & others; that, I say, this is not the true meaning of the place, may appear from these particulars.  
1. If the act of Believing be accounted a Righteousness, it must either be accounted a Perfect Righteousness, or an Imperfect Righteousness: If it be accounted for an Imperfect Righteousness, no man can be thereupon Justified; But Paul is speaking of a righteousness that was accounted to Abraham the father of the faithful, in order to Justification, & that behoved to be a perfect righteousness, for all his works, wherein was an Imperfect Righteousness, were rejected: It cannot be accounted for a perfect righteousness, because than it should be accounted to be, what it is not, and this accounting being an act of God's judgement, it would follow, that the judgement of God, were not according to truth; contrare to Rom. 2: 2. The reason is, because our faith is not perfect in itself, there being much dross admixed, & many degrees wanting in it: far less can it be a Perfect Righteousness, seeing a Perfect Righteousness must comprehend full Obedience to the whole Law of God.  
2. The Imputation, whereof the Apostle speaketh, is of some thing to be made the Believers, by the Imputation of God, which the Believer had not before: But this cannot be Faith, or the work of Believing, because Faith is ours before this Imputation; for Abraham believed God, & then followed this Imputation; and vers. 24. it is said, that it (to wit, some other thing, than the act of believing) shall be imputed to us, if we believe: therefore it is not the act of Believing, properly taken, that is imputed, or accounted here.  
3. Faith being antecedent to this Imputation, if the act of Believing be imputed, the word impute, or account here, must not signify to Bestow, Grant or Reckon upon their score; but simply to Esteem, Judge or Repute: and thus Faith, or the act of believing shall be in a believer, and yet not be a Righteousness, till God repute it, to be so: But when God esteemeth, judgeth, or reputeth any thing to be in us, he doth not change it, nor make it something, that it was not before; but judgeth it to be, what it is indeed, for his judgement is according to truth Rom. 2: 2.  
4. This sense & gloss is quite opposite unto, and inconsistent with the Apostles main scope, in the first part of that Epistle, which is to prove, that Righteousness is now revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1: 17. and that we are not Justified by the works of the Law, but freely by grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3: 24, 25. And therefore not through the Imputation of Faith, the act of Believing, or any work of Righteousness, which we have done: for that should not exclude boasting, or glorying; but through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, received by Faith.  
5. That which was accounted to Abraham for righteousness, did exclude all works, and that to the end, that all ground of boasting, even before men, might be take, away vers. 2. & 3. Therefore Faith as a work, or the act of believing can not be it, which is here said to be reckoned or accounted to Abraham for righteousness: for this is a work, and being made the Ground & Formal Objective Cause of justification, can not but give ground of glorving before men.  
6. This gloss maketh the Apostles discourse wholly incoherent; for he saith vers. 4, 5. Now to him, that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt: but to him, that worketh not, but believeth on him, that justifieth that ungodly, his faith is counted for Righteousnese. Now if Faith, properly taken, be imputed, the reckoning shall be of just debt: for to reckon a men righteous, who is righteous antecedent to that act of accounting, is no act of grace, but of just debt: but Faiths being accounted for Righteousness is an act of grace, and therefore it must be the Object of Faith, or the Righteousness, that Faith laith hold on, that is here said to be counted upon the Believers score; and this indeed is no act of just debt, but of grace.  
7. Again, as was said above, if Faith properly taken, or the act of Believing be imputed for Righteousness, God should not be the justifier of the ungodly; nor could Faith act upon God, as such, with truth. And yet the Apostle tells us here expressly, that Faith acteth upon God, as one that Justifieth the ungodly. He who hath a Righteousness in himself is no ungodly man; and God justifying a righteous man; could not be said to justify the ungodly. But if we take faith here, for the object of faith, or for the Righteousness of Christ, which faith fleeth unto, and lay hold on, all is clear & harmonious; for then that man is not a worker, but believeth, & he believeth on God, that justifieth the ungodly, that is one, that hath no Righteousness in himself, but must have it elsewhere, even imputed to him, and bestowed upon him, through Faith; & when he thus heleeveth, or layelh hold on Christ's Righteousness, this Righteousness, which by faith he leaneth to, is counted on his score for Righteousness, & he is thereupon justified.  
8. Leaving what was formerly adduced against this gloss from vers. 6, 7. 8. of this Chapter Chap. XVIII. we shall see what other passages in this chapter will say against it. The Faith that was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness, when he was in uncircumcision, vers. 9, 10. is the same with the Righteousness of faith, which he had, being uncircumcised vers. 11. But this Righteousness of faith is not his act of Believing, nor Faith taken properly, as an act of Obedience; but the Righteousness of the promised seed of the woman, in whom all Nations of the earth should be blessed, embraced by faith: for it is this, and not the mere act of believing, that was sealed by the sign of Circumcision vers. 11. for this Sacrament was a seal of the Covenant; & we know, Sacraments seal the whole Covenant, & all the promises thereof, to such as believe; & never seal our Faith, or the like, to be our Righteousness.  
9 The same, that was imputed to Abraham for Righteousness will be imputed to all believers vers. 11. But that is not the pure act of Believing; for Abrahamt act of Believing was a strong act, and is declared and explained to be such, but every believer, who yet must be justified, hath not such a strong act of faith, as Abraham had: And we cannot say, that some are less, & some are more justified, because the faith of some is weak, and the faith of others is strong: and yet this must be said, if the act of Believing be imputed for a Righteousness, for the Righteousness of one shall be greater than the Righteousness of another: & their Justification must hold correspondence with the ground thereof.  
10. That which was imputed to Abraham, & will be imputed to all believers, for a Righteousness vers. 11. must be a Righteousness, which such have imputed unto them, who do believe; for it is added, that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: Abraham had Righteousness imputed to him, or reckoned upon his score, through faith, while he was uncircumcised, that he might be the Father of Believers, among the Gentiles, to whom also, when they believe, a Righteousness will be imputed, as it was to Father Abraham.  
11. It is again called vers. 13. the Righteousness of faith, & through it, he says, the promise was to Abraham, & to his seed: but the promise is not through faith, as an act of virtue & obedience in us; for than it should be through the Law; but as the promise was made upon the account of the Righteousness of the promised seed, (our faith can not be said to procure, or purchase the promise) so its application is by Faith, laying hold on & gripping to that Righteousness.  
12. If faith properly taken were imputed, it should be made void, & the promise of none effect, & they that are of the Law should be heirs, for faith taken properly, for the act of Believing, belongeth to the Law: & when it is made our Righteousness, it is opposite to the free promise; for what is promised or given upon the account of Righteousness, or any thing within us, is not a free & gracious promise: And when a free & gracious promise is taken away, all the right use of Faith is taken away; & so Faith is made void; for the very essence of justifying faith lieth in looking to, laying hold on & leaning to a free & gracious promise.  
13. The Apostle vers. 15. proveth, that they, who are of the Law, cannot be heirs; & consequently that Faith, or the act of Believing cannot be imputed for Righteousness, as it is our act, done in obedience to the Law; by this reason, because the Law worketh wrath etc. And this also maketh against the Imputation of faith, properly taken, because that is an act of obedience to the Law, & cannot become our Righteousness, being Imperfect, & consequently not conform to the Law, which requireth Perfection in all duties, or other ways threateneth wrath. And if any shall deny this of faith viz. that it belongeth to the Law, they must say, that there is no Law for it, & consequently that not to believe is no sin, for the Apostle addeth, where no Law is, there is no transgression.  
14. The ground of the free promise is that which must be Imputed, and laid hold on by Faith: But that cannot be Faith properly taken, as our act; for then the promise should not be of grace, as it is expressly said to be vers. 16. nor should it be sure, if it depended upon our faith, & not upon that, which faith layeth hold on.  
These things, beside what was mentioned before from this same Chapter vers. 6, 7, 8, 23, 24. may satisfy us, in this matter, and sufficiently evince, that it is not the Apostles meaning, that Faith, properly taken, as our act, or our act of Believing, is imputed unto Righteousness; but that the Object of Faith or the Righteousness of Christ laid hold on, and applied by Faith is that Righteousness which is reckoned upon the believers score.  
Let us now, in the next place, see what the Adversaries say, to make us believe, that Paul saith Rom. 4. That our very act of Believing is imputed to us for Righteousness: & that thus the Apostle must be understood, & not as meaning the object of faith or the righteousness of Christ. The forecited Author john Goodwin of justify. Part. 1. Ch. 2. adduceth some grounds for his gloss, which must be examined.  
His first ground is the letter of the Scripture, that speaks it once & twice yea a third & a fourth time vers. 3, 9, 22, 23, 24. Certanely, saith he, there is not any truth in Religion, not any article of ●he Christian belief, that can boast of the letter of the Scripture, more full, express, & pregnant for it. Ans. We find it only twice said, in express terms, that faith is counted for Righteousness verse. 5. and again vers. 9 that faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness. It is then too widely spoken, when he saith, that there is not any truth in Religion, nor any article of the Christian Faith, that can boast of more full, express & pregnant letter of Scripture; yea even, though it were as oft & as express as he allegeth: but we must let many such confidente expressions pass with him. (2) The question is not touching the letter, or the words; but the true meaning: & if a truth be but once delivered, in the Scriptures, it is sufficient to command our faith; but words never so oft repeated, when corruptly glossed, yield no foundation to faith. We know, what Papists say, of these words, This is my body, which with them is as full, express and pregnant a proof of their dream; as this passage of Paul's is of our Adversaries fancies. And we know what Arrians say of these words My Father is greater than I: And yet their false glosses cannot be embraced for truths, let them boast of express Scriptures, never so much. And what error I pray, or heresy is it, that doth not pretend to the like? Let us see his next ground.  
2. Saith he. The scope of the place rejoiceth in the Interpretation given. I grant indeed, that this is a good rule or interpreting of Scriptures; for it is as a sure thread to lead us through many labyrinths: But, which is the misery, many imagine that to be the scope of the place, which is not so indeed; & thus perverting or mistaking the scope, they must needs pervert all. Yet let us see, how he would make the scope contribute to his Notions. The Apostles main drift (saith he) was to hedge up with thorns that false way of justification, which lay through works & legal performances; & with all to open and discover the true way of justification, that is, to make known what they must do, & what God requireth of them to their justification; & that is (as joh. 6: 28, 29.) faith or to believe in the proper & formal signification, & not the righteousness of Christ, this he required of Christ himself, he requireth our faith in Christ himself, & nos in his righteousness. Ans. Paul's scope is indeed to hedge up all Justification by the Law, or by the works thereof, in subordination to this other, of showing, that in the Gospel, the Righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1: 17. And therefore he cannot speak, for the Imputation of Faith, in its proper & formal signification; for that is a work, commanded by the Law of God; & the Imputation thereof is expressly alleged by our adversaries, to shoot out the Righteousness of God, which is revealed from faith to faith. (2) To say, that the Apostle here only requireth faith in Christ, and not faith in his Righteousness, in order to Justification; is either to divide Christ & his Righteousness, or to give us an Historical Faith, in stead of justifying Faith; that is such a faith in Christ as is the faith of any other truth revealed in the Scriptures, such as the creation of the world: And this is indeed to make a fundamental Alteration, in the Gospel Covenant & to destroy the true Nature of Justifying faith. (3) It is true, the Apostle is withal showing what we must do, in order to our Justification; but this no way impeacheth the interest of Christ's Righteousness, as the formal ground of the Justification of the ungodly; but rather establisheth it: for he showeth, that we are not now Justified by our doing, or working, but by the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, & received by Faith. (4) Though God doth not require of us the performance of the Righteousness of Christ; yet he requireth of is, that we lay hold thereupon, and be covered therewith by faith, that under that rob, we may appear before our judge; for to this end, is Christ made of God unto us Righteousness, and is become the Lord our Righteousness, 1. Cor. 1: 30. jer. 23: 6. And he requireth of us, that we renunce all our own Righteousness, in this affair, & acknowledge the Righteousness of Christ the only Righteousness, upon which we are to be justified, and therefore he willeth us to say that in the Lord have we Righteousness. Esai. 45: 24. He is pleased to add Therefore for Paul to have said, that the righteousness of Christ should be imputed unto them, had been quite beside his scope. Why so? His telling them what was required of themselves, maketh nothing against this, but doth rather confirm it; for when faith is pressed upon us, it is clearly supposed, that the Righteousness of Christ is Imputed, this being the peculiar work of faith, as justifying, to bring in & put on Christ's Righteousness: and so, where our Redemption or Justification by Christ is mentioned, faith (though it be not expressly mentioned) is to be understood, as the Mean or Instrument, whereby the same is applied to us; as also the Redemption & Righteousness of Christ is to be understood, where Justification by faith is only expressed: And as sometimes we find both expressly mentioned; so both are most emphatically comprehended and included, in that expression, now under consideration. Such a glorious & firm connexion is betwixt all these Causes of our Justification, & such a beautiful harmony of grace, that as they cannot be separated, so the deforming, misplaceing or any way altering of any one piece thereof, destroyeth the harmony, & darkeneth the beauty of the whole.  
In the third place he argueth against faiths being here taken Tropically or Metonymically & to this end adduceth these considerations 1. It is not likely that the Apostle, in this great & weighty point, should time after time, in one place after another, without ever explaining himself, through out the whole disputation use such an harsh & uncouth expression, or figure of speech, as is not to be found in all his writing beside, nor in all the Scriptures. Ans. Figurative expressions are neither harsh in themselves, being rather emphatically explicative, and more forcible upon the understanding, as to the uptaking of these mysteries; nor are they strange & uncouth to the Apostle, even in this matter, as might be abundantly evinced, almost as to every expression, used in this matter, or at least, as to such expressions as are about the main parts thereof: Let any read Paul's writings on this subject, here, & his Epistle to the Gallatians & he shall find this true, almost in every Chapter. But it should satisfy us, that the Holy Ghost hath thought fit, to express the matter thus; & that to prevent mistakes, he hath given both here & elsewhere, abundance of clear, plain, and down right expressions, for a supply, as hath been shown above, so as none may mistake, but such as will wilfully step aside to follow their own ways: And it is not fair for such, to object this, who, of all others, make the Scriptures to speak most figuratiuly & tropically, when they have a mind to evade the dint of our arguments from Scripture; of which very many instances might be adduced. It cannot but seem strange to any, who hath read the Scriptures with attention, to hear one with such confidence saying, that the naming of the act for the object is such an harsh & uncouth expression & figure of speech, as is not to be found in all the Scriptures again; when the same man hereafter cannot but, confess that Hop is oft put for the thing hoped for, and is manifest from Rom. 8: 24. Col. 1: 5, 27. & else where & also faith put for Christ Gal. 3: 23. twice, 25. once. This putting the object for the act is a known and common Hebraisme.  
His 2. consideration is this: It is evident (said he) that that faith, or believing, which vers. 3. is said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness, is opposed to works or working vers. 5. Now between faith properly taken & works, and so between believing & working, there is a constant opposition: but between the active obedience of Christ & works, there is no opposition. Ans. It is most true, that in the matter of justification, believing is opposed to working, & that constantly; and therefore he is concerned to look to it, who will have us considering Faith here only in such a way, as it cannot be opposed to, but every way agree with works, as one of them. (2) The opposition betwixt our Righteousness, consisting in works which we do, & the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, consisting, not in his Obedience Active only, (as he mistakingly supposeth all alongs) but in both active & passive Obedience, whereby he gave full satisfaction to the Law, in all its demands, is so Palpable, that it cannot be well dissembled, far less denied.  
His 3. Consideration is, that it is said verse. 5. His faith is imputed to him, where it is evident, that that faith (whatsoever we understand by it) which is imputed for Righteousness is His, that is, some what that truly & properly may be called his, before such imputation be made unto him. Now it cannot be said of the Righteousness of Christ, that that is any man's, before the imputation of it be made unto him: But faith properly taken is the believers, before it be imputed, at least in order of nature, if not of time. Ans. The words vers. 5. are, His faith is counted for, or unto Righteousness. And so whatever be understood by faith it may in some respect, at least, in order of nature, be his, before it be counted for or unto Righteousness, or reckoned upon his score; Yea it must so be, that it may rightly be reckoned on his score: And this is clear of the Righteousness of Christ, which becometh the believers by faith, and is given to him, & bestowed upon him, & so made his, by virtue of his union with Christ through faith: His mistake lieth here, that he taketh these words counted for Righteousness, to be every way the same, with imputing to or bestowing upon a person; while as the formal difference is manifest, though the one includeth the other, & Accounting unto Righteousness doth in this matter, presuppose the Imputation or bestowing of that, which is counted to such an end. Further, why may not his faith, denote the object of his faith, as our hope, or our love may denote the object of our hope & love? And whence then shall there any necessity arise to say, that that object shall be truly & properly called his before the Imputation of it be made unto him, taking this Imputation for bestowing, as he seemeth here to do? but if Imputation be taken for counting on their score it presupposeth their interest in the same, prior in order of nature, (as is said) & that most manifestly.  
In the fourth place he saith. Though we should grant a trope in this place, & by faith, its object should be meaned: Yet it will not follow, that the Righteousness of Christ, should be here said to be imputed, but either God himself, or the promise of God, for it was God be believed vers. 3. Ans. In that promise made to Abraham, & which he believed, the sum of the Gospel was comprehended, as Paul himself teacheth us Gal. 3: 8. And this promise was a bundle of promises, and therefore is called promises, in the plural number Gal. 3: 16, 21. and was the Covenant confirmed of God in Christ verse. 17. & the Inheritance vers. 18. & life vers. 21. which cannot be had without a Righteousness Ibid. even the Righteousness of Faith that was to come, to wit of Christ vers. 22, 23, 24. who is the only mediator vers. 20. and is there expressly called Christ & was to be revealed. Hence they, that have believed in Christ Jesus & are baptised into Christ, and have put on Christ, and are in Christ, & are Christ's, are Abraham's seed & heirs according to the promise vers, 26, 27, 28, 29. And if such be Abraham's seed, Abraham must have been such himself; that Father & Children may be of one Complexion; for the promise, that he should be the heir of the world was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the Law, but through the Righteousness of faith. Rom. 4: 13. that is, through the Righteousness of Christ the object of faith, & who is expressly called Faith Gal. 3: 23, 25. And it is added Rom. 4: 14. for if they, which are of the Law, be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Faith, that may be, Christ, the object of faith, is made void, & all the actings of faith upon him are vain & of none effect, conform to what the same Apostle saith Gal. 2: 21. If Righteousness come by the Law, than Christ is dead in vain. And as this Faith is made void, so the promises of this Faith, that was to come, are of no effect. Therefore the object of Abraham's Faith was Christ, the promised Messiah & that Faith that was to come, and the Righteousness of that Faith. He reckoneth up, in the following words, to very little purpose, the several objects of faith from joh, 3: 16. & 5: 46. & 20: 31. & 8: 24. Rom. 10: 9 1. Pet. 1: 21. joh. 12: 44. 1. joh. 5: 10. And supposeth, that no where Christ's Righteousness is mentioned as the Object. But where ever Faith, or its Object is mentioned, in the matter of justification, Christ's Righteousness is never excluded, more than himself, for as himself was the Cautioner, so his Righteousness was fide-jussry; & faith acting upon one must necessarily act on both, these being inseparable; beside, that elsewhere this is expressly enough mentioned. Yet he granteth, that it is of nearer concernment to the main, to believe this righteousness of Christ than the believing of many other things besides, comprehended in the Scriptures. But why, I pray, if this belong not to the object of justifying faith? He not only will have us believe, that Christ's Righteousness is not reckoned amongst the objects of faith, as justifying; but he will also give a reason, why it is no● so reckoned; to wit, because, though it ought to be & cannot but be believed by that faith, which justifieth, yet it may be believed also by such a faith, which is so far from justifying, that it denyeth this Christ to be the Son of God. Thus some jews gave testimony to his innocency, who yet received him not for their Messiah, not believed him to be God; & this is the frame of the Turkish faith, for the most part, concerning him, at this day. Ans. It is one thing to believe a Righteousness, but it is another thing to believe in it, & rest upon it. The innocency of Christ as man, before men is one thing, but his compleet Surety Righteousness as one that was both God & man, is another thing. Now Justifying faith looketh to, & resteth upon his whole Surety-Righteousness & looketh upon him, as God-Man; Therefore it cannot be thus believed (which is the only right way of believing it) but only by such, as lean to this Righteousness, as the Righteousness of the promised Messiah, & Mediator, God-Man, as Abraham did, and as all his children do: and this is the only Faith, that is Justifying & Saving. It seemeth by this expression, that there is no more to be regairded in Christ's Righteousness, but the mere innocency of a man.  
Fiftly he tells us. That faith, which is here said to be imputed vers. 3. is that faith, by which be believed in God, that quickeneth the dead etc. vers. 17. But the Righteousness of Christ can in no tolerable construction be called that Faith. Ans. That the Proposition is false, appeareth sufficiently from what is said: And these words vers. 17. show, how firmly & fixedly Abraham received, and rested on the promise, and thing promised: but it is not said, that that was imputed to him for his Righteousness; but that which was imputed was the Righteousness of the Faith, that was to come, whereon he believed and rested.  
Sixtly & Sevently he saith, that the faith, that was imputed unto Abraham was that, wherein he was said not to be weak vers. 19 & is opposed to doubting vers. 20. & by which he was fully assured, that he who had promised, was able to do it vers. 21. Ans. This is like ways denied: for the thing that was imputed, was not that act of Faith, but the Righteousness of the Messiah, whom he undoubtedly expected to come out of his loins, as Man, & that even when he had no appearance of an issue: for it is this Righseousness which is the Righteousness of Faith, and is distinct from the act of Believing; for it is said, that it shall be imputed to us, if we believe; which expression could be no way satisfying, if nothing were meaned to be imputed here, but our Believing; for then the sense would be this, we shall be reputed believers, if we be believers.  
Eightly he saith. That which shall be imputed unto us for Righteousness, is said to be our believing on him, that raised up the Lord jesus vers. 24. Ans. This is sick of the same disease with the foregoing: nothing like that is here said, but rather we may see, that some distinct thing is promised to be imputed to us, if we believe on him, that raised up Christ from the deed, which clearly saith, that the Imputation of something to us for Righteousness is promised, when we believe: & shall any man than think, that Believing itself is the thing, which is to be imputed?  
Lastly he tells us, (which is but what we heard before, & is shortly this) That a tropical & metonymical interpretation, turneth Paul's perspicuity into greater obscurity, than any light of the Scripture knoweth well how to re●●eve. Ans. Whatever darkness he conceive herein, Yet others see in these tropical expressions a greater beauty of illustration, & a greater emphasis of strength & signification, than all his Rhetoric is able to darken. The Apostle, not only here, but almost every where, while speaking of this subject, followeth this same manner of expression, Especially Gal. 3. Nor do we say, that the word Faith is here taken simply for Christ's Righteousness; but for Christ's Righteousness laid hold on & applied by Faith; so that what is in one place called the Righteousness of Christ, is in another place called the Righteousness of Faith, & the Righteousness, which is by Faith & through faith: as Christ is called our hope, not simply, but as our hope acteth upon him, as the real & true object thereof.  
He cannot deny, but Faith is sometimes taken for its object, even for Christ; yet he saith. 1. That though the faculty be sometimes put for the object, yet the act seldom, or never. The act or exercise of the grace of hope is never put for the things hoped for, but hope itself is sometimes found in that signification as Col. 1: 5. Tit. 2: 13. N●w that which is here said to be imputed unto Abraham, was not the habit or grace of Faith, but the act. Ans. Neither habit, nor grace, nor act of Faith is here said to be imputed, but the object, which the act may also denote, as well as the habit. And if he limit & restrick this to any particular act, he must say, that Abraham was not justified before ●his time & that after this act was past, it could not be said, that his Faith was imputed to him for Righteousness,  
But 2. he saith. That though it were granted, that as well the act itself, as the faculty or habit may be sometimes put for the object, yet when the act & object have been named together, & the act expressed by an object proper to it, & further something immediately ascribed to this act, under that consideration (all which is plainly seen in this clause, Abraham believed God, & it was imputed to him for Righteousness) in this case to conceive & affirm, that what is ascribed, is neither ascribed unto the act itself, there mentioned, nor unto the object mentioned, but unto a third thing, not once mentioned in the text, is to turn our back upon the text. Ans. Do we not see Tit. 2: 13. where it is said, looking for that blessed hope & glorious appearing of the great God, & our Saviour jesus Christ, that Christ is denominated by the act or habit of hope, and called our hope, and that here both act & object are named together, to wit, looking, looking for our Saviour Jesus Christ? It is true, there is nothing here immediately ascribed to this act; but not withstanding thereof, we see Christ the object of hope, denominated by the act or habit of hope. And whereas it is said that this third thing, the Righteousness of Christ, is not once mentioned, it may suffice, that it is sufficiently included, & clearly enough expressed, when mention is made of Righteousness, & of the Righteousness of faith, & of Righteousness imputed. (2) It is also to be considered, that in that clause, Abraham believed God, & it was counted to him for Righteousness, it is not said, that Faith, or his Believing was counted to him for Righteousness, but that it was counted &c. and that is not his Faith, but the marrow of the Gospel, which God at that time preached unto him, and so there is nothing in this clause, immediately ascribed to this act but a third thing is understood.  
Lastly, he saith, The righteousness of Christ is not the object of faith, as justifying; only the Scriptures propose his Righteousness, or obedience to the Law, as that, which is to be believed; & so it may be termed a partial object, as is the creation of the world, & that Cain was Adam's son. But the object of faith as justifying properly is either Christ himself, or the promise of God concerning the Redemption of the world by him. Ans. (1) Hereby we see, that in stead of a justifying faith, he giveth us a mere historical faith: and indeed such as deny the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, must of necessity substitute a new sort of faith, in room of that, which we own for the only Justifying faith. But though justifying faith contain in it that historical faith, & presuppose it; yet it includeth more, & hath other peculiar actings of soul upon and towards Christ, & his Righteousness (which here we cannot separate, far less oppose to other, as our Adversary doth) in reference to the man's liberation from the sentence of the Law, & the Curse due to him for the breach thereof, now charged home upon him by the Lord, & an awakened conscience: (2) By Christ's Righteousness we do not understand his simple innocency, or freedom from the transgression of the Law; but his whole Mediatory work, in his state of humiliation, as satisfying the offended Lawgiver, & answering all the demands of the Law, both as to doing & suffering, which debt we were lying under. (3) Justifying Faith eyeth him thus, runneth to him & accepteth of him, as he is thus set forth by God to be a Propitiation, through Faith in his blood Rom. 3: 25. and as making Reconciliation, for faith receiveth the atonement Rom. 5: 11. and it receiveth abundance of grace, & of the gift of Righteousness vers. 17. Justifying faith must receive him, as the Lord our Righteousness; & as made of God to us Righteousness. Therefore is this Righteousness of God called also the Righteousness of Faith, or the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that believe. Rom. 3: 22. A Righteousness, which is through the Faith of Christ, or the Righteousness, which is of God by Faith. Phil. 3: 9  
Thus have we examined all, that this Man hath brought by way of Reason (for as for Authorities on the one hand, or other, I purposely wave them in this whole discourse) to prove, that Faith properly taken is imputed for Righteousness & that the tropical sense, commonly received by the orthodox (which we have also chosen to follow, notwithstanding that there is another sense given of the words by some, to evite in part this tropical sense, and by which the Adversaries against whom we here deal, can receive no advantage) is to be utterly laid aside & rejected; & in answering him, we have answered others also, who do but-urge the same things.  
Yet if any should inquire. If the Apostle doth not mean, that faith properly taken is our Righteonsness, & is imputed to us & accounted our Righteousness, why would he say so plainly, that Faith is imputed, or counted for Righteousness. I Answer. The expressions, which the Holy Ghost hath used, should satisfy us, though we should know no reason beside his good pleasure, why he did express the matter so: It is our part, to search into his meaning, according unto the surest rules of finding out the sense of the Scriptures, among which this is to be reckoned as a ●●ite one, not to be rejected, viz. to attend the scope, with the connexion & cohesion of the words as they lie, & contribute unto that scope, together with the common plain & frequently reiterated expressions & assertions of the Spirit of God, in other places, where the same matter is treated of: for to the end, that we may be exercised, in the study of the Scriptures, & in comparing Scripture with Scripture for finding out the mind of the Lord, hath he thought good to express the same matter in divers places, & in various ways, & in some places more plainly, what in other places appeareth more obscure. And it cannot be judged a saife way of interpreting Scripture, to fix upon one expression & give it a sense, or take it in such a sense, as tendeth manifestly to darken the whole doctrine of the Spirit of the Lord, concerning that truth, and to cross the scope, to mat the connexion, and to contradict multitudes of other passages of Scripture. It is not unusual for the Apostle to use several expressions, in a figurative sense. How oft is the word Law taken for obedience to the Law? What sense could be made of Gal. 3: 25. if the word Faith should be there taken properly, & not for its object? as also vers 2, & 5. of that same Chapter. And what sense shall we put upon these expressions. They which are of faith Gal. 3: 7, 9 & as many as are of the works of the Law vers. 10. & upon many such like, if all these words must be taken properly? Nay, how little of this whole matter of Justification is expressed to us, without Trops & figures? which yet do not darken, but give a more special & divine lustre unto the Truths, so expressed. How oft is the word Hop put for its object, for the thing hoped for? And though this might satisfy us herein; yet further, if I might adventure to give a reason of this manner of expression here, ot rather to point forth what this expression should signify & hold forth to us, I would say, That Paul is not handling this Controversy about Justification, in a mere speculative manner; & therefore doth not use such Philosophical & Metaphysical Notions & expressions there about, as some now think so necessary, that without the same they judge themselves not in case to explain the matter to the capacity of the meanest, which would rather have darkened, then explained the matter to the ordinary capacity of Christians, as I judge the way, that some of latetake, in explicating this matter, contributeth much more to the darkening of the same: at least to me: But the Apostle is handling this matter in a practical manner; so as both such he wrote unto, & the Church of Christ to the end of the world, might so understand this necessary & fundamental truth, as to put the same in practice: And therefore doth say, that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness, to show, that it is not the Righteousness of Christ, conceived in our heads, that will save & justify us; but his Righteousness laid hold on, brought home & applied by Faith: that so all might see & be convinced of the necessity of faith, whereby the soul goeth out to Christ, layeth to his Righteousness, and might not satisfy themselves with a Notion of Christ & his Righteousness, never applied by Faith; but be enduced to lay hold on him by Faith, to the end they might have an interest in Christ's Righteousness, the same being, upon their faith, bestowed upon them, and reckoned upon their score. The expression is most emphatic to hold forth, the necessity now of faith, according to the Lord's Sovereign appointment, as if thereby Christ's Righteousness & their faith were become one thing, as being wholly inseparable in this affair, so that it cometh to one, whether by faith, we understand the Grace as acting upon & connoting the Object, or the Object, as acted upon by the Grace of Faith as in that expression, the Righteousness of faith Rom. 4: 13. Faith may either be interpreted to be Christ, as said hold on by faith, & so the meaning will be through the Righteousness of Christ, laid hold on by Faith, & faith may be the same way explained in the following vers. 14. & 16. for if they which are of the Law, be heirs, faith is made void, i. e. if the grand heritage come by the Law & by obedience to it, the Gospel, holding forth Christ to be laid hold on by faith, is made void, as to this end: and again vers. 16. therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace i. e. it is of & by Christ, laid hold upon by Faith, that it might be by grace. Or faith in all these may be interpreted to be faith as acting upon the object, Christ & his Righteousness; & the consequence & force of the words will be found to be the same, whether of these ways we explain the matter. As, when speaking of the israelites stung in the wilderness, it were all one to say, they were healed by the brazen serpent, to wit, looked to; or they were healed by their look, to wit, upon the brazen serpent, for still it will be understood, that all the virtue came from the brazen serpent (or him rather, that was typified thereby) yet so as it was to be looked upon; & that their looking was but an Instrumental mean thereunto, and when a mean thereunto must include the object looked unto. We hear it sometimes said of persons miraculously cured, that their Faith made them whole, while as the virtue came from the object acted upon by faith, as Peter fully explaineth the matter saying Act. 3: 16. And his name, through faith in his name, hath made this man strong. Thus we see, how this matter may be saifly & must be understood, when the virtue and efficacy of the Principal cause is attributed to the Instrumental cause: And yet, lest any should stumble at the expression, & pervert it, as many do, to day, the Apostle abundantly Caveats against this by telling us so plainly & so fully & so frequently, of the Righteousness of God, which is had by faith, & through faith, as we have seen; & never speaketh of a Righteousness had, because of faith, or for Faith; nor saith he, that faith is our Righteousness, while treating of Justification.   

CHAP. XXV.  
Faith is not our Gospel-Righteousness.  
OUr Adversaries, to strengthen their Assertion of the Imputation of Faith, in a proper sense, to the exclusion of the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, have other two Positions, which they own & maintain. One is, that our Faith or our act of believing is the whole of our Gospel-Righteousness: And the other is. That Christ hath procured that it should be so, by procuring the New Covenant, whereof this faith is made the Condition. To this last we shall speak something, in the next Chapter; & of the other here.  
How much Mr. Baxter doth contend, for our Faiths being called & accounted our Gospel-Righteousness, is known. The forenamed Author of the discourse of the two Covenants is very plain pag. 48, etc. where he is explaining, what God's counting Abraham's faith to him for Righteousness is. There he tells us, that he takes it to signify thus much, to wit. That God, in a may of special grace, or by virtue of a new Law of grace & favour, which was established by God, in Christ (Gal. 3: 17.) that is, in reference to what Christ was to do & suffer, in time then to come, did reckon his practical faith to him for Righteousness, that is, that which in the eye of that new Law, should pass in his estimation for righteousness, subordinat to Christ's Righteousness, which procured this grant or Law. And thereafter pag. 40. he tells us, That it is an act of God's special favour, & by virtue of his new Law of grace, that such a faith, as he hath described (that is, a faith taking in all Gospel Obedience, as we saw above) comes to be reckoned or imputed to a man for Righteousness; & through God's imputing it for righteousness, to stand a man in the same, if not in a better stead, as to his eternal concerns, as a perfect fulfilling of the original Law from first to last would have done. Christ's Righteousness being presupposed the only Meritorious Cause of this grant or Covenant. Thereafter pag. 50. he tells us, there are two things, which constitute & make up the Righteousness of the Law of Grace, first, that which consisteth in the forgiveness of sins & 2. the righteousness of sincere obedience: And in inference to both, he saith, faith is imputed for righteousness be virtue of the Law of Grace; for, saith he, faith as practical is imputed to a man for righteousness, as it is that & all that, which is required of him himself by the Law of Grace, to entitle him to the righteousness, which consisteth in remission of sins. And then as to the second he saith pag. 52. That faith is imputed for righteousness, which is practical or productive of sincere obedience, without which proper●y it is not a fulfilling of the Law of Grace, as a condition of the promised benefits, & consequently cannot justify a man, in the eye of that Law: for, as he addeth, there must be repentance, & forgiving men their injuries, & faith must be such as worketh by love, & then he tells us, that Abraham was justified by his works. Jam. 2.  
All which abomination of doctrine, & perversion of the right ways of the Lord, we are not here to examine: It is enough, in reference to the clearing of what is now before us & under consideration; that we see here a plain d●lmeation & explication made of that Gospel, which Mr. Baxter said, this Treatise would lead us into the knowledge of: & which is the very same, upon the matter, with that Gospel, which Socinians & Arminians hold forth, joining herein with Papists, as we saw in part above Chap. XVIII. towards the beginning, & we shall at this occasion trouble the Reader with some more of their expressions, that we may see, that the doctrine, which is now so much cried up, & followed after, is nothing but old Socinianism & so, owned & professed by such, as do not deserve to be called Christians, Socin. de Servat. lib. 4. c. 4, 7, 11. God justifieth the ungodly, but now converted, penitent, & after he hath left off to be ungodly: the justified are not ungodly in themselves, neither are they so called, yea they are not sinners; & which is more, they do not now sin. And so faith & works, that is, obedience to the commands of Christ, as the form of faith, doth justify us before God, & by them through them (per illa, ex illis) he justifieth us. Smalcius' disp. 4. c. Frantzium. Regeneration, all other good works, Love, Prayer, Obedience, Faith, Charity etc. are so far from being effects of justification, that without them justification can no way really exist, for God justifieth no man, but him, who is compleetly adorned with all these virtues ● yea the study of good works & walkeing before God were the cause (though not the chief) of the justification of Noah, Abraham & others, who are said to be justified by faith. Socin. ubi supra de Seru. lib. 1. c. 4. Faith doth not justify by its proper virtue, but by the mercy & go●d will of God, who justifieth such, as do such a work, & imputeth it for righteousness. With Paul, to have righteousness imputed is nothing else, but to have faith imputed, & to be accounted just, faith is so imputed to us, as that because of faith, we, howbeit guilty of many unrighteousness, are esteemed perfectly righteous, or God so dealeth with us, as if we were perfectly righteous who can doubt, that the Apostle meaneth no other thing than that we are not righteous before God, because our works require that, as a due reward, but because it hath so seemed good to the Lord, to take our faith in place of righteousness; so that we receive the reward of grace, by which we are declared righteous before him. More might be adduced for this end, as it might be shown also, how herein the Arminians conspire with them against the orthodox. And as for the judgement of Papists, in this point, it is likewise known.  
It will not be necessary that we insist, in disproving that, which hath been so much witnessed against by the orthodox writing against Papists, Socinians, & Arminians, upon these heads: It will suffice, I suppose, if we give a few reasons, why we cannot acquiesce in the doctrine, proposed by the forenamed Author.  
1. Hereby works of obedience are exalted to the same place, & are allowed the same Force, Influence & Efficacy into Justification, with Faith, whereby all the Apostles disputes for Faith & against Works, & for faith as inconsistent with & exclusive of works, are evacuated & rendered useless; So that the Apostle hath either not spoken to the purpose, or hath not spoken truth: either of which to say is blasphemy. The Apostle argueth thus, we are Justified by faith; therefore we are not Justified by works. This man reasoneth on the contrary, we are justified by faith, therefore we are justified by works; because by a faith that includeth works; as if the Apostle had meaned a Faith that was dead, & had no affinity with works.  
2. Hereby he confoundeth all these duties, which are required of Believers, or of such, as are in Covenant with God, with that which is solely required of them in order to their first entering in Covenant, or into a state of Justification: as ● one should say, that all the marriag-duties, required of such as were already in that marriage state, were conditions of entering into the marriag-state.  
3. Hereby he confoundeth Justification, with Glorification, making all that Faith & sincere obedience, which is required in order to actual Salvation & Glorification, to be necessary before Justification: And thereby must say, that no man hath his sins pardoned, so long as he liveth; but if he be sincerely obedient, he is in the way to a Pardon, & to Justification. He cannot say, that by a practical Faith, he only meaneth such a true and lively Faith, as will in due time produce these effects: for, as that will not consist with his explication of that practical Faith, so it would cross his whole design. The just man in the eye of this new Law, (as he saith p. 49.) is every one that rightly believes, reputes & sincerely obeys, because that is all that it requires of a man himself to his justification & Salvation. Where we see, that with him, Justification & Salvation go together, & have the same conditions, and he that is just must be one, that hath these Conditions; and he who hath not these Conditions is not just in the eye of that new Law; and if he be not just in the eye of that new Law, his faith cannot be accounted to him for Righteousness, nor he Justified.  
4. The man hereby confoundeth the two Covenants, or giveth us a new Covenant of Works, in stead of the Covenant of Grace; for this practical Faith, which includeth all obedience, hath the same place, force & efficacy in the new Covenant, that compleet Obedience had in the old. And this Gospel is but the old Law of works, only with this change, that where as the old Law required Perfect Obedience to the end, in order to Justification & Salvation; this new Covenant of works requireth Sincere Obedience to the end, in order to Justification & Salvation: And so thus we are Justified & saved as really by & upon the account of our works, as Adam would have been, if he had continued in obedience to the end; & this Faith and sincere Obedience is as really, &, to all ends & purposes, as effectually and formally our Righteousness, as Perfect Obedience would have been the Righteousness of Adam: And thus the reward must as really be reckoned to us of debt, & not of grace, as it would have been to Adam, if he had stood: And as fair a ground is laid for us to boast & glory, though not before God, as had been for Adam, if he had contained to the end. The evasion he hath to make all this of grace, saying p. 49, 50. And yet every believers justification will be all of grace, because the Law by which they are justified is wholly of grace, & was ena●ed in mere grace & favour to undone man, is not able to help him; for it was wholly of undeserved grace & love, that God did so far condescend to Adam, & to all mankind in him, as to strick a Covenant with him, a promise of such an ample reward upon his performance of the condition of Perfect Obedience to the end; & yet, notwithstanding this Law was wholly of grace & was enacted in mere grace & favour: for neither was the Lord necessitated thereunto; nor could Adam say, he had deserved any such thing at God's hand, the reward had been reckoned to Adam, if he had stood, of debt, not simply and absolutely, but ex pacto; by reason of the compact: So that we see, the cases run parallel & the Covenant is of the same nature & kind. The difference betwixt the Power granted to Adam, & now to man, to perform the conditions required, is with him, the same upon the matter; for if man will go the length he can & may, he may be sure of God's help to convoy him all the length he should; And what had Adam more? And as for the diversity of the conditions, which then were Perfect Obedience, & now only Sincere, that can make no alteration in the Nature of the Covenant: and beside, I see not, why this Man can not as well say that if man now will go as far, as he may & can, by his own stock of power, unto the performance of Perfect Obedience, God will certainly give him his help to carry him forward; as he saith, that if man will now go all the length he can unto the performance of Faith, Repentance, & new sincere obedience, God is ready & willing to contribute his help to carry him forward thereunto.  
5. He confoundeth the right to, with the possession of life eternal, as to their Causes & Antecedents; for as new & holy Obedience is by us made the way to the possession of the Kingdom: so by him it is made the way or cause of the Right jus to the Kingdom; for he requireth it as antecedent to a man's Justification & first being brought into a Covenant state with God, when he first receiveth the Right to the inheritance; And thus the Inheritance is made to be of the Law, & not of promise, contrare to Gal. 3: 18, for the whole and sure Right thereunto is had by Obedience to the Law, with him.  
I shall say no more to this here, because there is a sufficient confutation of this to be found in Mr. Durham on the Revel. pag. 234. etc. where that digression is handled, concerning the way of Covenanting with God, & of a sinner obtaining of justification before him. And in all such as write against Papists and Sociniant, on this head.  
But if it be asked, may not faith be called our Gospel-Righteousness, & be said to be imputed to believers, as such a Righteousness, without any wrong done to the Righteousness of Christ, which keepeth still its own place of being our legal or pro legal Righteousness? I Ans. Though it be true, that Faith is now required of all that would be Justified; yet I no where find, that it is called our Gospel Righteousness; and I judge it not saife to admit expressions, without warrant of the word, in this tender matter; especially such expressions, as have a manifest tendency to corrupt, rather than explicate the truth, in this particular; as, I judge, will be found true of this expression; for how beit it be said by the Asserters thereof, that Faith, is but a less principal & Subordinat Righteousness; Yet in effect, according to their explication of the whole doctrine (as may be seen by this Treatise last mentioned & answered) it is made the Principal & only Righteousness, that is imputed to us: for Christ's Righteousness, say they, is only imputed, as to is effects, or in its causality. See Baxter against D. Tully p. 70. (just as Suarez said de divin. gr. lib. 7. de sanct. hom. c. 7. §. 39 cited by Mr. Rutherfoord Exercie. Apel. Exerc. I. c 2. pag. (mihi) 64. the merits of Christ are not given to us, that we might be formally justified, but that they may be a price wherewith we may buy a Righteousness, whereby we may be formally justified; as he who giveth a price to another, whereby he may buy clothes, is said to cloth him, not foomally, but effectiuly, morally, as is manifest:) And even as to these effets it dependeth wholly upon Faith, and this Faith is only said to be properly imputed for our Righteousness. And beside, they tell us, that the Righteousness of Christ is alike common to all, to the Reprobat as well, as to the Elect, and so it can be imputed properly to none: And as to its effective ●mputation (as Suarez calleth it) or Imputation, as to its effects or in its causality (as others speak) after that it is offered & held forth to all, & hath the same common effects, unto all, until the condition be performed, that dependeth wholly upon man's performance of the Condition; And as to its antecedent effects, it is equally & absolutely imputed to all; that is, it is imputed to none, but the effects thereof are equally made common to all, in making Salvation possible, & the condition to be faith, and the like: And as to the special effects, (as they may be called) which depend on faith, when one believeth, & so fulfilleth the Condition, he hath thereby a Gospel-Righteousness, or this Faith of his is reckoned upon his score, for a Gospel-Righteousness, & thereupon he receiveth Pardon, Justification etc. Now let any Judge, whether or not these effects are not more the effects (at least more immediately) of their own Gospel-Righteousness, than of Christ's: for Christ by all his Righteousness did purchase these effects to all a like, & that conditionally; and now they themselves by their own personal Gospel Righteousness of Faith, do make an actual purchase of these effects, according to the Covenant, ex pacto. And to say, That Christ did by his merits purchase the New Covenant, doth but confirm, what I have now said, towit, That all that, which Christ procured, was, That all such, as should acquire a Gospel-Righteousness of their own, should be justified etc. And thus Christ died to purchase a virtue & merit to our faith, & that to this end, it should become a Gospel-Righteousness, whereby they might have whereof to boast & to glory before men, at least. Hence we see that Christ's Righteousness might rather be called the Subservient & ours the Principal. And further, (which may justly make Christians ab horre this opinion) Thus this poor convinced sinner, pursued by justice for a broken Law, is called to lean his whole weight of Acceptance with God, & found all his hope of Pardon & Justification, upon his own Faith, or Gospel Righteousness, as the only Righteousness, wherewith he is to be covered, & the only Righteousness, which is imputed unto him; & not upon Christ & his Righteousness, for what Christ did or purchased was common to all, & had only a conditional virtue, which the personal Righteousness reduceth into act, & so must have a principal share of the glory; for as to what Christ did, judas had the same ground of thankfulness & praise, that Peter had, & Peter no more than judas; and thus Peter was to sing the song of praise for his Justification & Pardon, unto his own personal Faith & Gospel-Righteousness. If this be not the Native result of this doctrine, let any put it in to practise (which I shall be loath to advise) & try, whether thereby more of their weight is laid on Christ, or on their own faith: And on the other hand, let any serious & exercised Christian be enquired, & see if their practice agree with this doctrine.  
If it be said, That there is no such hazard, so long as Faith is not considered here as abstracted from its Object Christ, but is considered with a respect thereunto. I Ans. (1) We have seen, what a poor & general respect faith by some of our Adversaries is said to have to Christ, whereby it is made nothing but a mere historical faith & the Author of the Discourse of the two Covenants, p. 31. saith, that even that faith, that had not the Messias in the promise is imputed for Righteousness. (2) As for such as confess that justifying faith hath a special respect to Christ & his Righteousness, we would know, whether it hath this respect, that it peculiarly refugeth the soul there from the storm of wrath, and bringeth in thence Christ's Righteousness, or cartieth the man out to it, that he may lean upon it, & plead the same, as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law? And if this be granted, than it is manifest, that the believer hath no Righteousness, but Christ's Surety-righteousness, where withal he desireth to appear before God, & this is it alone, to which he leaneth, & through which alone he hopeth for Pardon & Acceptance, without the least reflecting act of soul upon his own Faith. (3) But again if so, faith must stand alone, as acting thus in a peculiar manner on Christ, which no work else is fitted to do; & therefore Faith & Works must not be joined together; nor must Faith be considered, in this affair, as comprehending all Obedience in it, as we see, they say. (4) But when Faith is made our Gospel-Righteousness, in whole, or in part, howbeit they say, they consider Faith, as acting on its object Christ; yet it is manifest, that it is then considered with relation to its object, in a Physical, or metaphysical manner, as all acts (specified from their objects) may & must be considered; but not in a theological sense, as required in the Gospel, to bring-in the Surety Righteousness of Christ, & to lean the soul thereupon, as its only Righteousness: for when it is said to be our whole Gospel Righteousness, it is considered as a moral vert●e, & as an act of Obedience in us, constituting us Righteous in a formal sense, according to the new Law, which is hereby fully & in all points performed & obeyed; much more, when works are joined with it, doth it with works put on a far other respect, than to be the hand receiving the Atonement, & the gift of Righteousness.  
But saith Mr. Baxter against Mr. Cartwright p. 179. In regai●d of that justification, which is from the accusation of the Law of works, I say faith is but a condition & no otherwise justifieth, but because it is made that condition by a New-Law, per legem remediantem, & we must be judged by that Law: therefore, when the case is, whether we have performed the conditions of that new law, or not? then faith is materially that Righteousness, by which we must be justified, against all accusations of Non-performance. Ans. (1) I doubt if such as never heard a report of Christ, shall be judged by the New-Law; far less by it alone. (2) God will not call in question a Believers faith, nor accuse him of Non-performance. Nor will the Gospel, or New-Law do it; so that the Believer needs not plead his performance; in reference to a Justification at the tribunal of God. (3) When Faith is made a Condition by a New-Law, & thereby become the believers Righteousness, this Righteousness is the Condition, and is therefore a Righteousness, because made a condition, by that new Law; yea & elsewhere ibid. pag. 106. this Righteousness is said to be compleet & perfect, as all Righteousness must be: we see, what weight is laid upon it. And when there is no other Righteousness properly imputed to us, (for as for that Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, which he would yield to as the only sound sense, it is but what jesuits', Socinians, & Arminians yield to, & we cannot be satisfied with,) who seeth not, how this matter is framed so, as all the weight of the soul must be laid upon this personal Righteousness, especially when it is made another Sort of Condition, than we can acknowledge it to be, as shall be seen afterward; and when it is the immediate ground of our Right to Pardon, Justification, Adoption etc. for Christ's purchase was (to him) general & common, and no more for one, than for another, and to all conditionally.  
If it be said. What hazard is there, so long as Christ's Righteousness is held to be that, which satisfieth for the breach of the Covenant of Works, & is full Satisfaction to justice, and which hath purchased the New-Covenant, and the new easy terms; our Righteousness, in performing the new easy terms, whereby we come to have Right to life & all the benefits purchased by Christ, is no way prejudicial unto that, nor robbeth not Christ's Satisfaction of the least of the glory due to it. I Ans. The hazard still continueth, for hereby 〈◊〉 Gospel Righteousness, be it Faith alone, or Faith & Works together, is made the immediate & sole ground of our Right to the benefits; for what Christ did, was general & common, and He, by what he did, made no particular purchase of any good unto any, but procured the New-Covenant, and the new grant of life upon the easy terms, alike unto all: the satisfaction, which he made unto the Law giver for the breach of the old Covenant, was not as a peculiar Cautioner, for any in particular, but was equally for all, & as much for the damned, as for the saved; So that our Right to the benefits cometh purely & wholly from our performance of the New-Termes, which Christ is said to have purchased. Therefore, though our personal Righteousness hath no interest in purchasing the New Covenant, or in making satisfaction to Justice, unto that end; yet Justice being now satisfied equally for all, and the New Covenant being purchased alike for all, our personal Righteousness is that, which must bear the glory of our interest in the benefits: & the Obligation, where in we stand to Christ, upon that account, is the same that others are under who reap none of the benefits, which we reap by our New Righteousness. And here it is also manifest, that Faith (if that should be made the Gospel-Righteousness alone, without works) in order to the justification of a sinner, is not conceived to act upon Christ, as the Lord our Righteousness, that the soul may put on his Surety-righteousness & thereby answer all challenges of the broken Law: but is conceived as our Work, and as our Performance of the New Conditions, and as such is rested upon, & leaned to; Whereby man, hath ground of glorying before men, in himself, and not in the Lord alone, for all have alike ground of glorying, upon that account, seeing what the Lord did was common to all, and this new personal Righteousness maketh the difference.  
But it will be said, That Christ's Righteousness, being acknowledged to be our only legal Righteousness, whereby we answer the charge of the Law, the asserting of a Gospel-Righteousness, whereby we come to have an interest in that legal Righteousness, can do no prejudice. I Ans. Beside that this maketh two distinct Righteousness as, & the one a mean to obtean another, the one within us a price (ex pacto) for the other without us; and all this in order to Absolution from one charge of the Law brought in against the sinner: hereby, as to us, our personal Righteousness is really made our legal Righteousness, because it is made that Righteousness, whereupon this man, and not the other that wants it, is freed from the charge of the Law: for, according to this way, Faith is not employed to lay hold on Christ's Righteousness, that by presenting that Surety-Righteousness unto justice, the soul may escape the charge, but when the charge of violation of the Law of God is brought in against the sinner, his only relief is his Gospel-Righteousness, which he presenteth, whereupon he pleadeth for Pardon & Absolution, by virtue of the new Covenant, which Christ hath purchased; for should he allege the death & satisfaction of Christ that should give no relief, because that was for all alike, & thereby the New Covenant was purchased where in the Gospel Righteousness (whether Faith alone, or Faith & New Obedience) was set down, as the Condition; and therefore it can stand him in no avail; but he must refuge himself from wrath under the wings of his own Gospel-Righteousness (for he hath no other) and thereupon rest secure, & be confident of his Absolution from all that the Law could charge against him. As, for example, if the Prince's son should by a valuable price, given to the Prince, procure new Terms and Conditions to be proposed to a company of condemned traitors lying in prison: if any one of these were challenged for the old crime, & threatened with the execution of the sentence passed upon that account, it would be of no avail to him, to say, the Prince's son hath laid down a valuable price to buy me from death, because he knew, that he did that for all the rest, in purchasing a New Covenant, & new conditions; but the first & sure course he would take, would be to present his performance of the new conditions, & say, the charge cannot reach me, because I have performed the Conditions of the New Covenant, procured by the Prince's son. This I suppose is plain & clear, & this in our case, would be found to be the only saife course, that poor challenged sinners would take, if they should act according to the doctrine of our Adversaries, to which, (as I said) I should not dar to advise one or other. But really the Gospel-way (which is opposite to this) is plain & saife, if we have but so much humility, as to comply therewith: And a difference may seem small, in the debate, which yet in practice may prove great & of dangerous consequence.   

CHAP. XXVI.  
Christ did not procure by his death the New Covenant, or the terms thereof.  
WE heard what the Author of the discourse of the two Covenants, & what john Goodwin said of this New Covenant. As the foundation of their assertion of the imputation of faith, properly taken, they tell us, that the New Covenant wherein this Righteousness is required, as the condition thereof, is founded wholly in the blood of Christ, so that whatever is required of man by way of condition of his acceptation with God, becomes accepted to that end, upon account of Christ's suffering, Mr. Allen p. 16. & p. 53. 54. saith. Nor doth this, that faith accompanied with obedience is imputed for righteousness, at all derogate from the obedience & sufferings of Christ, in reference to the ends, for which they serve. Because the whole Covenant, & all the parts & terms of it, both promises of benefits, & the Condition on which they are promised, are all founded in Christ his undertaking for us; and all the benefits of it accrue to us upon our believing & obeying, upon his account & for his sake. Mr. Baxter also telleth us, in his book against D. Tully p. 66. That that which Christ did by his merits, was to procure the new Covenant. And elsewhere p. 181, that they were the meritorious cause of the forgiving Covenants, & the like he ●aith elsewhere frequently. The Arminians ground the imputation of faith upon the merits & obedience of Christ Apol. f. 113. And Arminius himself disp. 19 thes. 7. that justification is attribute to faith, not because it is the very righteousness, which may be proposed to God's rigid & severe judgement, howbeit acceptable to God; but because, by the judgement of mercy triumphing over judgement, it obtaineth pardon of sins, & is graciously imputed unto righteousness, the cause of which is both God righteous & merciful, & Christ by his obedience, oblation & intercession. And in his Epistle ad Hyppolet. he tells us, that the word imputing signifieth that faith is not the righteousness itself, but that it is graciously accounted for righteousness, whereby all worth is taken away from faith, except, that which is by God's gracious estimation & that gracious estimation of God is not without Christ, but in respect of Christ, in Christ, & for Christ. Christ by his obedience is the impetrating cause, or meritorious, why God imputeth faith to us unto righteousness. And again in his Artic. perpend. de justif. What fault is it so say, that faith by free & gracious acceptation is accounted for righteousness, because of Christ's obedience.  
But with this assertion, we are not satisfied, for these reasons  
1. The Arminians, who maintain this so confidently, make it the whole of what Christ merited by his death & Satisfaction, saying that Christ by his death did so satisfy the offended party, as he would be favourable to the offender; and so say, that he acquired to the father a jus & a will to enter into a new Covenant with men. See their Confess. c. 8. §. 9 collat. cum Apolog. c. 8. §. 9 and as the learned Voetius inferreth Select. dispp. p. 2. p. 233, 234. it followeth hence, that Christ was not in very deed our Cautioner; that he died not in our room & stead; that he did properly obtain & acquire nothing to us; & that he did not sustain the person of the elect, while he suffered on the cross.  
2. ... that Christ procured no more, but a power or liberty unto God of prescribing new Conditions; and some go so far, as to say, that this liberty was such only, at the Lord might, if he had pleased, have appointed the old way of works again, for the condition; So said Grevinchovius ag. Amesius. But it is true, they yield more, who grant, that he purchased the New Covenant: Yet by this purchase, they can not say, that Christ died to redeem us from our sins from the wrath of God, from a vain conversation, & to save us: And indeed the same person last named, saith expressly, that Christ died not properly to say any one. And what can else be said by such, as make this the whole of what Christ did purchase? And how-rational is that consequence, which the same person hath, when he saith it might so have come to pass, that Christ had had the end of his death, & that no one had fulfilled the new Covenant, & had been saved; for they will not grant, that Christ did purchase faith.  
3. Hence we see, that such as say, that this was all which Christ procured by his Death & Merits, do manifestly spoil us of all the rich Benefits, which Christ hath purchased, as being no immediate fruits of his death; such as Faith, Justification, Adoption, Sanctification, Grace, & Glory, & thus evacuat the whole virtue of the death of Christ: And this do Mr. Allen's words p. 54. import while he saith, that all the benefits of the Covenant accrue to us upon our believing & obeying, upon his account & for his sake: and so they do not accrue to us upon his account & for his sake immediately; but immediately upon the account & for the sake of our Believing & Obeying; only for Christ's sake is this connexion made.  
4. Who ever assert, that Christ hath purchased the framing & Constitution of this Covenant, in its terms & conditions, aught to confirm this their assertion out of Scripture; & till this be done, we are a liberty to deny it, how confidently so ever it be affirmed. It is certain, that such a principal point & ground article of our Religion would not be darkly expressed in the Scriptures, far less wholly passed over in silence, as, for any thing that yet is made to appear, it is: for as for 1. Cor. 1: 30. & jer. 23: 6. which Mr. Allen citeth, any may see how impertinent they are, that we say no more.  
5. If so, than we must say with Papists, that Christ hath procured a worth to our Faith & Obedience, to merit ex pacto, the good things promised unto such, as are believers & obedient: Yea hereby there would be more of merit in our Faith, then in Christ's obedience.  
6. We mnst say, that Christ hath purchased that we might be Justified by an Imperfect Righteousness; For sure, our faith & new Obedience is not perfect even when sincere, they labour of many Imperfections, & have dross & faultiness admixed: As also that he hath purchased, that an Imperfect Righteousness should be accounted & esteemed a perfect Righteousness; & consequently that the judgement of God shnuld not be according to truth: which were blasphemeous & iniquous to imagine.  
7. Thus in effect, Christ should be made the minister of sin, by changing the conditions of the old Law, which were perfect & compleet Obedience, into an obedience far short of that, & thus he must be come either to dissolve the Obligation of the Law, that it should not exact now, what it did exact of old; or to lose us from the Obligation thereof; that we should be in part Law less; neither of which can be asserted; & yet this Position maketh clear way for either, or for both.  
8. Then we must say, that Christ hath purchased such a way of Justification, as leaveth ground to men to glory & boast though not before God, yet before men; for hereby he is made to purchase the renewing of the old Covenant of works, with some mitigation, as to that terms, though with little mitigation, as to the persons; unless we say with these Arminians, that Man is as able to believe & obey sincerely, if he will, as Adam was to obey perfectly: But sure Christ came for a far other end, than to leave man any ground of boasting, or of glorying in himself for his Justification & Salvation, as having made himself to differ.  
9 Then Christ hath purchased a way, whereby man might hold his Pardon, Justification, Adoption etc. more of himself, than of Christ; for Christ by this way cannot be said to have purchased our Pardon, Justification etc. but only that we should have these favoures upon our Faith: or have such & such a reward of our Faith & Obedience; As he, who procureth that a person shall have such a benefit upon condition he perform such a piece of service, cannot be said to have procured that reward; for notwithstanding of this procurement (if it may be so called, which is at best, but a conditional uncertain thing) the person might never have goat the reward.  
10. Then the making of the New Covenant, and the making of it on these terms, should be an act of mere Justice, in God, and not an act of his free Grace, Love, good Pleasure, Will & Kindness: for it is Justice & Righteousness in God, to do that, which Christ hath purchased & procured to be done; though, it is true, it may thus be accounted a mere favour, that it was of God's free will, to enter into such terms of agreement with the Mediator, & to yield to the making of such a condition, upon Christ's purchase. But the Apostle tells us Ephes. 1: 9 that God made known unto us ●he mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in himself. Which mystery of his will is the New Covenant & dispensation of grace in the Gospel; & it is ascribed not to the merits of Christ; but to God's good Pleasure, & to the Purpose, which he purposed in himself. So the saving of such as believe, floweth from the love of God, as well as, & no less than the sending of Christ joh. 3: 16. God so loved the world, that he sent his only begotten son, that every believer in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. So Ephes. 3: 9, 10, 11. the fellowshipe of the mystery was hid in God; & the manifold wisdom of God (which shineth forth in the New Covenant) was according to the eternal Purpose; which he had purposed in Christ Jesus, our Lord. This is ascribed to God's Love joh. 3: 16. & will joh. 6: 40.  
11. I grant, it may be said, that as Christ hath purchased to his own Pardon, Justification, Adoption & Salvation; so, as a consequence of this, he hath purposed the Means, or rather the Application of the means, thereunto, that so the good things purchased may be actually conferred, according to the manner & method condescended upon by Jehovah and the Mediator in the Covevant of Redemption; for He hath chosen us, in himself having predestinate us unto the Adoption of children, by jesus Christ, unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us acctpted, in the beloved, in whom we have redemption, through his blood, the forgiuness of sins etc. Ephes. 1: 4, 5, 6, 7. the chosen ones are predestinated both to the end, & to the means leading to the end●: But this matter is not consistent with their Assertion, who say, that Christ by his death hath purchased Faith & New Obedience to be the Condition of the Covenant, because by their Universal Redemption they leave all at an uncertainty, especially when also they will not grant, that Christ hath purchased Faith itself to any person.  
12. It must be said ... that Christ purchased the terms of the new Covenant. ... and purchased, that God should abolish the Law quite, and not require a conformity thereunto, as our Righteousness, by virtue of the new Covenant, nor exact full Obedience to the Law, from any, in our name; & consequently it must be said, that Christ hath purchased, that the Law giver should wholly pass from that established Constitution, do & live, without any real accomplishment thereof, or requiring the accomplishment thereof from any, on their behalf, to the end, the Lord might be just, when he is the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.  
13. This assertion also stricketh against Christ's being the Surety of the New Covenant: for it is not the work of a Surety, as such, to purchase the Making & Constitution of a Covenant; but to confirm & ratify the same, & to engage for the party, for whom he is a Surety, that he shall perform the conditions, accorded to in the Covenant; & so to establish the Covenant or contract, already agreed unto & constituted.  
14. Thus it should be said, that Christ died rather for graces, than for persons, to wit. That Faith & new obedience may be elevated beyond their ordinare sphere, & exalted to be the Condition of the New Covenant. But the whole Scriptures speak otherwise of Christ's death.  
15. If this were the thing that Christ procured, he could not be said to have Redeemed any, not so have died in the room & stand of any, but only for our good, as say the Sociniant, To purchase a new Covenant, is not to be a Propiltation, an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to ●ear our sins, to Reconcile any, unto God.  
16. Mr. Baxter himself against Mr. Cartwright p. 91. hath these words. And therefore the Performer & the Accepter did themselves (NB.) choose, on what terms it (i.e. Christ's Righteousness) should be applied to us, or be made ours, quoad fructus: And the terms resolved on were the New Covenants conditions, which are now required of us to our participation hereof. These words import some other rise unto this Covenant, than the purchase of Christ.   

CHAP. XXVII.  
How Faith is, and may be called a Condition of the new Covenant, and of Justification, how not.  
IT may be of some use. ... to inquire in what way faith is and may be called a Condition. ... The orthodox never denied, that it may be called a Condition. ... yet with all we must always look upon Faith, as an Instrument, or Instrumental Mean in Justification, because of its being as the hand of the soul to receive, bring-in, grip-to & lay hold on the Righteousness of Christ, as the Righteousness of a Cautioner & of a public person, to the end they might be Justified, Absolved from the sentence of the Law, & Accounted & pronounced Righteous, in the sight of God.  
Upon the other hand, Socinians & Arminians, who cast the whole Gospel in a new mould of their own, deny Faith to be an Instrument, & assert, that it is only a Condition, or a cause sine qua non, as they speak: And this they do, that their doctrine about Justification (which is wholly corrupt) may appear to hang the better together. We heard how they denied the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; & now they must of necessity also deny, Faith to be considered here as an Instrument ● for they know that it was called an Instrument merely upon 〈◊〉 account of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, which it was to apply, to receive, & to put on. They affirmed, that Faith properly taken was imputed unto Righteousness, & by virtue of Christ's merits was accepted of God for a Righteousness, & was so accounted, & now consequentially they must say, that Faith (together with new Obedience, which they also 〈◊〉 & conjoin, as making up one Righteousness) is to be looked upon, us a Condition, or causa sine qua non. Socinus de justis. tells us, that though that obedience, which 〈◊〉 perform unto Christ, be neither the different nor Meritorious cause, of our justification & eternal Salvation, yet it is the caus● sine quation, as they say. The same he saith Synops. justis. 2. p. 14. So doth Volkelius do vera Relig. lib. 4. c. 3. & Smalc, Coner. Frantz. disp. 4. p. 103. So the Remonstrants in their Apologief. 112. Faith (say they) if we consider the matter aright, cannot properly be called an Instrument of justification; nor can the act of believing be an Instrumental action; far less can it as an Instrument be opposed to faith, as an action, Corvin. cont. Tilen, Faith carrieth that respect unto the gift of adoption, that it is an obedience required of God, upon condition of which the gift of adoption is discerned unto the sinner for a reward, faith is not a means, or instrument, but a condition, ordained of God for obtaining of life. Simon Episcop. disp. 22. faith, in this matter, cometh to be considered, not as an instrument apprehending Christ's Righteousness imputed, but as apprehending Christ jesus, by whom that Righteousness is obtained. It cannot be called properly an instrument, but a condition prescribed by, & required in the Gospel-Covenant, without which God will not pardon sin & impute Righteousness.  
Lawyers, as may be seen in Spigely & Calvinilexic. lurid. tell us of various sorts of Conditions; Some Possible, Some impossible; Some certain, some uncertain; Some ... Voluntary conditions, say they, do suspend the whole obligation, until they be performed, Casual (& also necessary) conditions do only prorogue the effect of the obligation, the obligation itself, & its force is instantly perfected. A condition thus taken they usually define, Suspensio, cujus de futuro effectus, vel confirmatio pendet; or futurus eventus pendet: or le●● adposita hominum actionibus, eas suspendens: or Modus qui suspendit actum, donec ca existente confirmetur: or Modus vel causa, que suspendit id quod agitur, donec ex post facto confirmetur.  
They tell us with all, that the word Conditio is some time, in the Law, taken pro Modo, though in many things, these two differ much; and that it is the same with ratio, lex, pactio, pactum, fortuna, status, locus jus, causa; so that it admitteth of various significations: and in which of these significations here definitly to take it, the Scripture giveth no determination; for it is no scripture-expression, in this matter: And if it be said, that the terms used in Scripture, in this matter, such as these, believe, & thou shalt be saved, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe, if thou shall believe thou shalt be saved, & the like, will sufficiently warrant the use of the word Condition; I Answer, So will the like terms of being justified by Faith, and through faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, allow us to call faith an Instrument, which yet our Adversaries, as we have seen, will not suffer us to do. But moreover. We do not condemn the use of the word Condition, in this affair, simply, but allow it, & also make use of it: But this however is manifest, that seeing it is no Scripture word, we are under no Law to receive the word, in that determinate sense, in which the Adversaries use it, & must use it according to their principles: nor are we to conceive of Faith Repentance & new Obedience, as such conditions, as they hold them forth ● be.  
We know, how variously the word Condition is used, in our ordinary language: & how some time, that is called a condition, which is the real price, & worth of the thing given upon that condition; as when a man is willing to quite his house, lands or horse to another, upon condition of so much money, which is the real price, or a valuable consideration: if we should call Faith & Good Works such a condition, the error would be worse than Popish. But Mr. Baxter tells us Apol. ag. Mr. Black p. 39 § 27. that he doth not understand the word de conditione contractus vendition is & emptionis, vel emphyteusis, or any the like, that is proper pretium; but it is the condition purae donation is, but some what partaking naturae sendi, as to some of the benefits. And yet this will not sufficiently clear the matter, especially seeing that natura feudi is not fully explained, and the feud-duties, (whether we look to the first use of these donations; or to perfect practice, or whether we speak of the highest degree, that is, of the Vassalage of dukes, marquises and Earls. ... And some are most personal, being but yearly pensions, which is extinct with the death of the giver, or of the receiver, other divisions may be seen in Craig de feudis lib. 1. Dieg. 10. And as to the way of giving these: though it be said to be by donation; yet the Service required in most, may be very onerous, to speak nothing of such, as are purchased by money, or by excambion; nor yet of such, as are burdened with that, which we call Ward, & Ward & Relief.  
Mr. Baxter ibid., defineth to us, the condition of the Covenant, which he calleth a potestative condition, thus; Actio voluntaria de futuro, a Deo legislatore & Christo Testatore, innovalege, foedere, Testamento requisita, ut ex ejus praestatione, constituatur jus actuale ad beneficium: vel, ut obligationem & eventum suspend at donec praestetur: for (he addeth) ex stipulatione conditionali neque obligatio, neque act to ulla est, antequam conditto even●at; quia quod est in conditione, non est in obligatione. But first, as to the name potestative condition, as opposed by the Lawyers to what is Casual; & as importing that the person of whom that condition is required, hath full power to perform it, if he will, except some inevitable, & unfore-seen impediment fall out, which is not ordinarily supposed; how can any reckon Faith amongst these, unless they grant, that it is as much in Man's power to believe, as it is to one at Rome, to ascend the Capitol, if he fall not sick, or break not his leg? Whereby to all, who are not Pelagians, Socinians & Arminians in this matter, but acknowledge Faith to be the pure gift of God, & wrought by the Spirit, Regenerating the soul & giving an heart of flesh, it may be manifest, that no kind of Conditions, spoken of by Lawyers, who treat only of Compacts, & other Actions, betwixt man & man, can comprehend this matter; whereof we are now speaking. Where is there such an instance, in all the Law, of a person promising to give or to do such or such a Favour, Courtesy, upon condition that he do something, which is not in his power, nor in his will, & which he only who promiseth, can make him able & willing to do? This would either be looked on by them, as an impossible condition, which is next to none, or if the promiser should possibly make him to fulfil, as a casual condition, or rather, as no proper condition at all. If a father should promise his little child an apple, on condition he should touch the Crown of his father's head with his finger, which were impossible for him to do, unless the Father should either stoop so low unto him with his head; or take him up in his arms, that he may reach his head; who would call this a potestative condition? But next, what meaneth Mr. Baxter by this jus actuale? Is this the same with jus in re, as opposed to jus ad rem? this jus ad rem; which yet I suppose, he will not grant, or doth he mean by this. ... But what is a Potential Right? Is it the same with a remote right? and how very far remote must that Right be (if it be at all) which the Reprobat have? And is there no difference as to this Remote & Potential Right, or what way it may be called, which is opposite to an Actual Right betwixt the Reprobat & the Elect, before Faith? It is like, Mr. Baxter will say, there is none, by reason that the Redemption is Universal and for all alike, & so that Right, how ever it be called, that precedeth the Actual Right, is equally common to all, if we mean that Potential Right, which followeth upon the Redemption. But to us, who affirm, that Christ died only for the Elect, & that he took on their debt; & in due time made fall satisfaction, according to his undertaking, these Elect ones for whom Christ engaged, in the Covenant of Redemption, have another sort of right, call it Potential, or what you will, than the Reprobat have: because Christ hath purchased all the blessings, promised in the Covenant, unto them: and he hath a Right keeped, for them, and not for the rest: so that a Right unto all these good things, being purchased by their Lord Redeemer, & Cautioner, and left unto them as his sure legacy, in his Testament, & all so insured, that in due time, according to the method condescended upon, they shall be put in possession of the same, their Right is in Christ's purchase, and they are put in actual Possession of Justification, when they believe; which Faith is also purchased for them: all the benefits they shall enjoy concerning grace & glory are equally by him purchased, & are equally near related unto his merits & death, as to the right, though as to the actual collation, Sovereign wisdom hath appointed an Order, & determining of one, before another, & so hath resolved to give faith, and than Justification etc. And though it be true, that in this case, what is inconditione, non est in obligatione, as to the actual possession; yet we cannot think, but the holy & Just God, having received satisfaction from the Mediator, in behalf of such, for whom it was laid down, is under an obligation (as we may conceive, and speak) unto the Mediator, to cause him see of the travel of his soul, & to give him his seed, and those he purchased, and in due time to call them effectually, & work Faith in them, & then Justify etc. Adopt them etc. & thus bestow all the benefits purchased upon then▪ in the time & method wisely determined. But if Mr. Baxter understand by this jus actuale, that is constituted upon the performance of the condition, a plain, and simple Right unto the benefit, we can acknowledge no such Condition, lest we render the death of Christ void: for in him alone, have we all our Law-title & Right to all the blessings of the Covenant, to Faith, & all that follow upon it.  
That we may put an end to this, we shall first show, in what sense, we cannot admit Faith to be a Condition, & then show in what sense we do admit the denomination.  
As to the first we say. 1. We cannot admit it to be a Condition, in their sense who will have Justification so to depend upon it, as on a Procuring Cause, some way or other meriting, at lest ex pacto or ex congruo as Bellarm, saith that benefit as a Reward: for this destroyeth the Freedom of Grace, that: shineth forth in our Justification; & overturneth the whole nature of the Covenant of Grace, & spoileth Christ of his glory; and doth man to come in, as a sharer in the glory of that purchase.  
2. We cannot admit it to be a Condition, in their sense, who take a new Obedience with it: for this taketh away the special Use of Faith and its special End, in laying hold on & refuging the soul under the wings of the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ; This changeth the nature of the Covenant of Grace, & maketh it a new Covenant of Works, & giveth ground of boasting & of glorying before men; yea & maketh the reward of Justification, and what followeth thereupon, to be of debt, & not of grace: And such a Condition in the Covenant of Grace we cannot own.  
3. We cannot admit it to be a Condition, in their sense, who make it strictly a Potestative Condition; placing it in the power & free will of man, to believe or not, as he will; for as this overturneth the whole Covenant of Grace, and exalteth proud man; so it parteth, at least, the glory of Redemption betwixt Christ & Man; & giveth man ground to sing to the praise of his own Lord, free will; & to say, he hath made himself to differ, & he oweth but half thanks, & hardly so much, to Jesus Chaste, for all that he hath done and suffered, in order to the purchasing of Salvation.  
4. We cannot own it for a Condition, in their sense, who make it, or it & our new obedience together, our Gospel-Righteo●sness, & that Righteousness which only is properly Imputed to us, & Reckoned upon our score, as the Righteousness, upon the account of which, we are Justified: for thus the nature of the Covenant of Grace is changed; God is made to estimate that for a Righteousness, which is no fulfilling of the Law; & Christ is made to have procured, that it should be so; & that his own Surety-Righteousness, should no otherways be imputed.  
5. We cannot account Faith a Condition, in their sense, who ascribe to it or to it with works, the same Place, Use & Efficacy in the new Covenant, that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant of Works: for this maketh the New Covenant nothing but a new Edition of the old; and shooteth Christ, the Lord our Righteousness, far away, who is & should be our immediate Righteousness, that in him we might be found hid, & secured from the dint of the Law-Curse; and with all giveth proud man too palpable ground of boasting, contrare to the whole Contrivance of the Gospel-Covenant.  
6. We cannot own it for a Condition, in their sense, who reject it, and disowne it for an Instrument, or an Instrumental Mean, in our Justification; because they deny that particular and special Use, which it hath, in our Justification, & so pervert its whole Gospel-Nature: It's special use & work in Justification being to lay hold on the Lord Jesus, & his side jussorie-Righteousness, to carry the Man out of himself, as renuncing his own Righteousness, & every thing that is not Christ & his Righteousness, that as poor, empty, & naked he may lay hold on, & rest upon the Surety-Righteousness of the public person & Cautioner, Jesus Christ: for thus Christ & his Righteousness are put by, and he getteth not that rent of glory that is only due to him; & the soul is made to lean upon something beside this Rock of ages.  
7. We cannot admit it for a Condition, in their sense, who will have us hereby to have gotten a legal Title or Right unto Justification & other benefits according. ... following the same; seeing this puts the crown upon Man's head, as having by his deed acquired a jus & Law-right unto these blessings, which become hereby a reward not of grace, but of just debt: We acknowledge all our Right & Title to all the blessings of the Covenant, to be from Christ, the only purchaser; & of him must we hold all, that all may be of free grace, & he, even he alone, may have all the Glory, having redeemed us with his precious blood, & purchased the whole Inheritance, of grace & glory for us.  
8. We cannot account it a Condition, in their sense, who plead for Universal Redemption; because thereby Christ is only made to have purchased something to all alike, & that Conditionally, & no more grace & glory for Peter than for judas, but Peter by his own Pains & Industrie, by his Faith & New Obedience, did purchase the whole personal and immediate Right unto the blessings, which he enjoyeth; and hath received no more from Christ, than what judas had, & so hath no more ground of exalting him for Redeemer, than those have, who perish, seeing what he purchased was common to all, & no more for one in particulur than for another: for this setteth the crown upon man's head, who hath saved himself by his sweeting, pains & labour; and spoileth our Lord Redeemer of his glory.  
9 Nor can we account it a condition, in their sense, who will have the whole or principal part of what Christ purchased to be the New Covenant & the Terms & Conditions thereof; as if Christ had been a Cautioner for none in particular, but had so far redeemed all, as to have brought them into such an estate, wherein they might now work & won for themselves, run & fight for the prize, according to the new Conditions purchased; and so, if they run well, sacrifice to their own net, and burn incense to their own drag, because by their own industry & care in performing the Conditions, now made easier, than they were to Adam in the first Covenant, their portion is fat, & their meat plenteous.  
10. Nor yet can we call it a Condition, in their sense, who will have us look upon it, in the work of Justification, purely as a work of ours & as an act of Obedience to a command; & as such a work, as comprehendeth in it all the works of new Obedience: for thus its peculiar Use of applying Christ, & of apprehending his Surety-Righteousness, is taken from it; & the whole nature of the new Covenant is changed into the old Covenant of works; & Christ's ●idejussorie-Righteousness is not made our immediate Gospel-Righteousness; yea when we are thus justified by Faith, we are justified by works; whereby the whole of the Apost●l's disput is overturned; & we are taught to lean to, & lay our weight upon a Righteousness within ourselves; contrare to the whole scope of the Gospel.  
Upon the other hand, we say, Faith may be looked upon, and called a Condition of the Covenant, and of Justification, in this sense; That Christ having purchased all the good things of the Covenant, all the sure Mercies of David, all Grace, and all Glory, unto the chosen ones, and the Father having promised the actual collation & bestowing of all and every one of these mercies & blessings, so purchased and procured; and Jehovah & the Mediator both, in the counsel of their will condescending on such a method & way of making the ransomed ones the owners of the Blessings purchased, that is, first to give the New Heart and the heart of fless and in effectual calling, work them up to Faith in and Union with Christ and so draw them to the mediator, and cause them accept of him, & wait upon him, and rest there, for life & salvation; and then to Justify, Accept of as Righteous, adopt them, and then work the works of holiness by his Spirit & more, in their soul; and so carry on the work unto Perfection, till grace be crowned with glory: matters, I say, being thus wisely ordered, in the council of heaven, there is a Priority of order; Faith, receiving Christ, and resting on his Surety-righteousness, going before; and Justification following, and a firm connexion made betwixt the two, that who so ever believeth thus, shall be justified, and none shall be justified who believeth not thus: Now, when by virtue of this constitute order & Method, explained & revealed in the Gospel, the Ambassadors of Christ, in obedience to their Injunctions, call upon all, who hear the Gospel, to receive Christ and refuge themselves under his wings, and receive the atonement through his Righteousness, and promise them thereupon, in their Master's name, Pardon, Peace with God, Reconciliation; and acceptance etc. nothing more is here insinuated, than that such a Method & Order is wisely determined, and that there is a fixed connexion made betwixt Faith & Justification; so that who ever would be saved from the wrath to come; & would enjoy God for ever, must come unto God in this way, and according to this method, and must receive his blessings and Favoures, in this order, first believe, and lay hold on Christ and his Righteousness, and then receive Justification etc. Thus we see faith is no legal, Antecedent Condition, no Proper or Potestative Condition; but only a consequent, or Evangelick Condition, or a Condition denoting a fixed and prescribed Order and Method of receiving of the blessings purchased by Christ, with a firm and fixed connexion betwixt the performance of the condition, and the granting of the thing promised thereupon. Thus Christ hath the whole glory of the work; Man is abased, and hath nothing to glory of in himself; The reward is not of debt, but purely of grace; The wisdom and love of God is wonderful and remarkable; All ground of carnal security and self confidence is removed; A plain and powerful ground is laid for ministers, to press, exhort, and obtest to Faith in the first place, with all seriousness and zeal; Full security and ground of confidence of being Justified and Accepted of God upon our believing, is given; The difference betwixt the Covenant of works and the Covenant of Grace, is distinctly observed; The Antinomian mistakes, saying we are Justified from Eternity, or at the death of Christ, or at any time before faith, are manifestly obviated; And all grounds of excepting against, or dissatisfaction with this way, are removed from all such, as will willingly comply with the design of free grace, in the Gospel.   

CHAP. XXVIII.  
How faith is and may be called an Instrument, in Justification.  
COncerning the Instrumentality of faith in Justification, much needeth not be said, howbeit too much hath been written, about it & that to very little edification; so I judge: I am sure, to little use, as to the clearing up of that concerning point of Justification, & the true interest of Faith therein.  
We heard, in the beginning of the proceeding Chapter, how both Socinians & Arminians did disowne faith its being an Instrument, and Papists also before them did plead against it: On the other hand, the orthodox, writing against Papists, Socinians, & Arminians, did unanimously assert Faith to be an Instrument, or to be considered as an Instrument, in the matter of Justification. And few, or none, can be instanced of those, who hold with the orthodox, in all chief Controversies, about Justification, that did impugn, or so much as deny Faith to be an Instrument, in justification; Yea john Goodwin, in his book of justification, doth expressly call it an Instrument in justification.  
It is true, the Scripture no where calleth faith an instrument; & the same being no Scripture expression, there needeth not be much strife about it, nor will there be, among such, as are unanimous, in the main & principal Questions about Justification; or to that, which is only designed & intended by that expression. And though the Scripture doth not use that expression, interminis, yet no man can hence infer, that all use of it, and of the like should be laid aside, nor can such be supposed to add to the Scripture, (as Mr. Baxter hinteth. Apol. against Mr. Blake p. 40.) who call Faith an Instrument; more than he can suppose that himself addeth to the Scripture, when he calleth faith a Condition, or a causa sine qua non, for these are as little to be found expressly, in the Scriptures, as the other. Nor do they, who say Faith is an Instrument, so much plead for the name, as for the thing intended thereby: All expressions, that are not in Scripture, must not be laid aside, in our speaking of divine things▪ for than we must lay aside the word Trinity, Sacrament, Satisfaction & several others: far less must the truth, which we conceive can be intelligibly & usefully expressed by those borrowed words and terms, be laid aside, because the term itself, by which we express our Conceptions of the truth, is not in so many letters & syllabs to be found in Scripture, if so indeed, we had quickly lost a fundamental point of our Religion, and yielded the cause unto the Socinians. If the Scripture may be explained, we may make use of such expressions, terms & sentences, as will, according to their usual acceptation, contribute to make the truths revealed in Scripture intelligible to such, as hear us. And when some terms have been innocently used in Theology, for explication of truths, whether to the more learned, or to the more unlearned, & have p● ssed among the orthodox without control, or contradiction, beyond the ordinary time of prescriptions; it cannot but give ground of suspicion for any, now to remove these old Landmarks, especially when it is attempted to be done, by such means & arguments, as will equally enforce a rejection of many Scriptural expressions: for should all the Metaphorical expressions & sentences, which are in ●ature, be so canvassed, & rejected, because every thing agreeing properly to them when used, in their own native soil, doth not quadrate with them, as used in the Scriptures, in things divine, where should we Land? If these divine mysteries had been expressed to us only in terms, adequatly corresponding with & suiting the matter; how should we have understood the same? Therefore we find the Lord condescending in the Scriptures, to our low Capacities, and expressing sublime & high mysteries, by low & borrowed expressions, to the end, we might be in case to understand so much thereof, as may prove, through the Lord's blessing, saving unto us: And thereby hath allowed such, as would explain these matters unto the capacity of others, to use such ordinary expressions, as may contribute some light & understanding to them, in the truths themselves.  
Now when the orthodox have, according to their allowed liberty, made use of the word Instrument, in this matter, and maintained that Faith was, & was nothing more than an Instrument, in Justification; it is not fair to reject it altogether, because improper, though fit enough to signify what they did intend thereby; & because all the properties, that agree to proper Physical, or artificial Instruments, do not agree to it; and because if the same be strictly examined, according to the rules of Philosophy, concerning Instrumental Causes, it will be found to differ from them. Mr. Baxter himself, writing against D. Kendal. §. 47. tells us, that the thing; which he denieth, is, that Faith is an Instrument, in the strike logical sense, that is, an Instrumental efficient cause of our justification; & that he expressly discla●meth contending de nomine, or contradicting any, that only use the word instrument, in an improper large sense, as Mechanics & Rhetoricians do: So that the question (saith he), is de re, Whether it efficiently cause our justification, as an Instrument? But it may be conceived to have some efficient Influence, in our Justification, not as that is taken simply & strictly for God's act justifying, but as taken largely, comprehending the whole benefit: as actiuly coming from God, & as Passively received by or terminated on us, & that as an Instrument, though not in that proper sense, that Logicians, or Metaphysicians take Instrumental causes, and explain them, in order to physical & natural Effects. We know, that Justification is a supernatural work & effect; and therefore, though in explaining of it in its Causes, we may make use of such terms, as are used about the expressing of the Causes of Natural, or Artificial Works & Effects; yet no Law can force us, to understand by these borrowed expressions, the same proper, & Formal Efficacy, Efficiency and influence, which is imported by these Expressions, when used about Natural Causes & Effects.  
But Mr. Baxter against Mr. Blake §. 5. tells us, what great reasons he had to move him to quarrel with this calling of faith an Instrument viz. he found that many learned divines did not only assert this Instrumentality, but they laid so great a stress upon it, as if the main difference betwixt us & the Papists lay here, And yet any might think, that they had reason so to do, when Papist's on the other hand, laid as great stress upon the denying of Faith's Instrumentality. He tells us moreover, that our divines judged Papists to err in Justification fundamentally, in these points 1. about the formal Cause, which is the formal Righteousness of Christ, as suffering & perfectly obeying for us. 2. About the way of our participation herein, which as to God's act is Imputation, & that in this sense, that legaliter we are esteemed to have fulfilled the Law in Christ. 3. About the nature of that faith, which justifieth. 4. About the formal reason of faith's interest in justification, which is as the Instrument thereof. I doubt not (saith Mr. Baxter) but all these four are great errors. But we neither may, nor can call all errors, which Mr. Baxter calleth errors. We have seen above how necessary truths the two first are, and have explained, in part, the third, wherein I confess, too many (yet not all) of the foreign divines have, as to expression, miss the explication of true Justifying faith & it may be, it was not their design to describe it so, as it might agree to the faith of every sincere, though weak believer: but rather to show its true nature, grounds & tendency, when at its best; & yet what Papists hold, on the contrare, is more false & absurd. But as to this fourth, it seems, that it hath a necessary dependence upon the foregoing; and this to me seems to be the main reason, why our Divines did own & plead for Faith's Instrumentality, in the matter of Justification, viz. because the Righteousness, which they called the Formal, or others the Material Cause thereof, was not any Righteousness inherent in us, as Papists said; but the Surety-Righteousness of the Cautioner Christ, without us: And therefore they behoved to look on Faith, in this matter, otherways than Papists did, and not account it a part of our Formal Righteousness, but only look upon it, as an hand to lay hold on & bring-in the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ; and therefore judged it most fit to call it only an Instrumental Cause. And how ever Mr. Baxter exaggerate this matter, as complying with Papist's in condemning us, as to all these controversies, and think it no wonder, they judge the whole Protestant cause naught, because we err in these, and yet make this the main pairt of the Protestant cause; yet we must not be scared from these truths; Yea, because this point hath such a connexion with the other, concerning that Righteousness, upon the account of which we are to be Justified in the sight of God, we are called to contend also for this, & that so much the rather, that, though Papist's do utterly mistake the Nature of Justification, and confound it with Sanctification; yet Mr. Baxter hath more rational apprehensions there about, and yet will not have Christ's Righteousness to be that Formal Righteousness, upon the account of which we are Justified.  
Yet notwithstanding, we need not own it for such an Instrument, or such an Instrumental cause, as Philosophers largely treat of, in the Logicks & Metaphysics, knowing that the Effect here wrought is no Natural Effect, brought about by Natural Efficient & Instrumental Causes; Only we say, the Scripture affirming, that we are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, giveth us ground to call Faith (if we will use such terms, to express our mind) an Instrument, seeing these expressions point forth, some special interest & influence, that Faith hath in Justification, & no other Influence or Causation can be allowed to it, conform to the Scriptures; but that, which, we express in our ordinary discourse, not in a strike Philosophical sense, by an Instrument. And that so much the rather, that hereby is pointed forth that, which is the main ground & design of using this term, viz. the Application of the Righteousness of Christ, which is made by Faith, as a mean or mids laying hold upon without which we cannot be Justified, according to the Gospel; And though in these borrowed expressions from Causes, metaphysical accuracy be not intended, yet the true meaning & intendment of the users of these terms being obvious, it is but vanity, to raise too much dust thereabout; unless difference about other more Principal Questions, in the matter of Justification, enforce it, as indeed all such as place the Formal Cause or reason of our justification before God in our own Inherent Righteousness, and not in the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us & received by faith, must of necessity deny all interest of faith here, as an Instrument, or as any thing like it; because, having all their Righteousness within them, they have no use for Faith to lay hold-on & bring-in one from without.  
There things may satisfy us, as grounds of this Denomination.  
1. That in justification, we are said to be receivers, & do receive something from the Lord; not only the Passive justification itself expressed by our being justified, but of some thing in order thereunto, as of Christ himself, the Abundance of Grace & of the Gift of Righteousness, the atonement, the word of promise, yea every thing that concurreth unto justification, or accompanieth it, we are said to receive, joh. 1: 12. Col. 2: 6. Rem. 5: 11, 17. Act. 2: 41, & 10: 43. & 26: 18. Heb. 9: 15.  
2. That the only Grace, whereby we are said to receive these things, is Faith: receiving is explained to be believing joh. 1: 12. Act. 2: 41. comp. with vers. 44. we receive forgiveness of sins by faith Act. 26: 18.  
3. That the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, is that only Righteousness, ●pon the account of which we are justified before God, & not any Inherent Righteousness within ourselves, hath been evinced above.  
4. That this Righteousness of the Surety must be imputed unto such, as are to be Justified, or reckoned upon their score; hath also been evinced.  
5. That this Surety-Righteousness of Christ must be laid hold on by us, in order to our justification, hath been shown; & must be granted by all, that acknowledge it to be the Righteousness, upon the account of which we are Justified.  
6. That the Scripture saith expressly, that God justifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by faith & through faith, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith Rom. 3: 24, 25, 28, 30. Gal. 3: 8, & 2: 16. and that even when justification is denied to be by works; So that Faith must have a far other interest in; & must otherwise concur unto our Justification, than any other Works, or Graces; and therefore must be looked upon, as having some peculiarity of interest and influence here, and this peculiarity of interest, can not be otherways better expressed, so▪ as the matter shall be cleared, then by calling it an Instrument. Not as if it did concur to the producing of the effect of justification by any Physical operation, as Physical Instruments do; but as a medium & mean required of us, in order to Justification, according to the free pleasure of God, who disposeth the order & method of his bestowing of his Favours upon us, and the Relation & Respect; that one hath unto another, as he seeth most for his own glory, and for our good; and that such a mean, as concurreth therein, and thereunto, according to what is said, in such a way, as we be can best understand by calling it an Instrument; for we can not allow it to be called any way meritorious, or any formal disposition of the soul or Preparation unto the Introduction of an Inherent Formal Cause of Justification, as Papists say; nor can we allow it to be called such a proper & Potestative Condition, as some would have it to be, as we saw in the foregoing Chapter.  
7. That no real inconvenience can follow upon the owning of Faith for an Instrument, in justification; for Justification is not here taken simply & strictly for that, which is properly God's act, but more largely & complexly, including other things requisite unto Justification, such as the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, which Faith, as the Instrument or hand of the soul, layeth hold on, & bringeth-in, for this end, that the man being clothed therewith, may be acquitted before the Tribunal of God, Pardoned, & accepted of as Righteous. And howbeit it be God, that justifieth, & as to this act of God justifying, Faith hath no real interest or influence; yet the Scripture saying, that God justifieth by Faith, and through faith, we must acknowledge some interest, that Faith hath, in the work & Effect; as when the Scripture saith, that He purifieth the heart by faith Act. 15: 9 the purifying of the heart is God's work, and yet it is said to be done by Faith, which is our work. It is said Heh. 11: 11, that through faith Sara herself received strength to conceive seed & vers. 33, 34. that some through faith subdued Kingdoms, stopped the mouths of Lions, quenched the violence of fire etc. all which were the works of God, & yet while they are said to be done by faith, faith must have had some interest & influence in these effects. So in working faith in the soul, which is God's work alone, the Lord useth the preaching of the Gospel, and ministers, & the people's harkening & listening to what is preached, as means & midses thereunto; though preaching & hearing be men's work, yet God useth them for his ends; and as he sendeth Preachers to preach, & moveth persons to hear, that thereby he may, according to his own will & pleasure, work Faith in then; so he worketh Faith in souls, that he may, thereby Justify them. Nor is it of any weight to say, that if Faith be an Instrument, it must work as an efficient cause, because the Instrumental Cause belongeth to the Efficient; for neither do all Philosophers agree to this, some holding Instruments to be a fifth kind of Cause; nor are we obliged to stand to their prescriptions & rules, especially in these things, that are no natural causes or effects; no man saith, that faith hath the same kind & measure of Efficiency in & towards the effect, justification, that all Instrumental causes, or Instrumental causes so called, have in the Effects, which they concur to the producing of; what efficiency hath an exemplary cause, which some Philosophers reduce to the efficient viz. Keckerman: But that Faith hath some Influence, is manifest from the Scripture, not of itself, it is true, but by the gracious appointment of God; and that this Influence cannot be better & more saifly expressed, than by the name of an Instrument, appeareth to us clear; hereby nothing of the glory due to God, or unto Jesus Christ, and to his Righteousness, is ascribed unto man, nor is any more hereby granted unto Man, than to a beggar, as to the enriching of himself, when it is said, his hand made him rich, by receiving the Purse of gold, that was given unto him: yea hereby is Christ & his Righteousness more fixedly established, in their due place, because faith is considered not as a Righteousness of itself, nor as a part of Righteousness; but purely and simply as an Instrument of the soul laying hold on the Righteousness of Christ, and pleading the same, as the only Formal ground of his justification before God. If it be said, that it were saifer to call it a causa sine qua non. We must first know, what is properly signified thereby, & whether it will help us more, to understand the just & true import of the Scripture expressions about Faith in Justification; for no terms ought to be used, that attain not this end, or have not a direct tendency thereunto; such terms, however we may please ourselves in the invention of their application unto the business in hand, and think we are in case to defend the same against opponents; yet if they do not contribute manifestly to the clearing and explaining of the matter, according to the Scriptures, can only darken the matter: And no reason can enforce us to embrace them, with the arbitrary explications & limitations of the Authors, and to reject or lay aside such, as do more obviously explain the matter, unto all such, as have orthodox apprehensions of the matter; and have given offence to none, nor have been excepted against by any, but such as were not orthodox in the point of justification; & whose erroneous Principles led them to deny, or except against the same. And what for a cause shall we take that, causa sine qua non to be? (which cannot be so explained in our language, as that every one that heareth it, shall be in case to understand, what it meaneth) Such as speak of it, call it causa fatua, and refer to it external occasions, time & place, and such like things, without which the action cannot proceed, as the place wherein we stand, & the time, wherein we do any thing, which have no more interest in, or relation to one action, than another, for all must be done by us, in some time, and in some place: And shall we say, that faith hath no other interest or influence in justification, than the hour of the day, when or the place wherein a minister preacheth, hath into his preaching? Shall we have so mean & low an account of the ordinances & appointments of God, in reference to spiritual ends? Seeing the Lord hath appointed Faith, in order to Justification, we must not look upon it as a causa fatua, or as a mere circumstance, but as having some kindly influence in the effect, by virtue of the appointment of God, & such a connexion therewith, that it no sooner existeth, but as soon justification followeth. Faith than can not be called a mere causa sine qua non. Historical faith & several other antecedents, may be a conditio or causa sine qua non; for no man of age can be justified without it; yet we may not say, that we justified by it, as by saving faith; the same may be said of Conviction & Sense of sin, of some measure at least, of legal Repentance, and of desire of Pardon & of Peace, which yet may be, and oft are without justification. And it may also seem strange, how this causa sine qua non, can be called a potestative condition; or how that, which is said to be a proper Potestative Condition, ex cujus praestatione constituitur jus actuale ad beneficium, can be called a mere conditio or causa sine qua non, seeing it hath such a considerable moral influence in the effect?  
But saith Mr. Baxter against Mr. Blake §. 27, faith cannot justify both as a Condition, & as an Instrument of justification; for either of them importeth the proximam & causalem rationem of faith, as to the effect; & it is utterly inconsistent with its nature, to have two such different nearest causal interests. Ans. When we speak of Faiths justifying, as an Instrument, we consider the physical, or quasi physical way of its operation, and denote only its kindly acting on Jesus Christ, and on his Righteousness which it layeth hold on, applieth, apprehendeth, & putteth on. And when we say it justifieth as a condition, we consider it as appointed of God unto that end, & as placed by Him, in that state & relation unto justification, which now it hath: And either of these can be called the proxima ratio causalis of Faith, according to its different consideration: if justification, (meaning not God's act only, but the complex relative change) be considered in genere Physico, or quasi physico, than the nearest causal interest of faith, is its instrumentality: but if it be considered in genere morali, or legali, than its nearest causal interest is, that it is a condition. As when a rich man bestoweth a purse of gold on a beggar, & requireth that he, in order to the possessing of it, stretch forth his hand, & take it, considering this act of enriching him in genere physico, his hand acteth herein, as an Instrument, apprehending the purse, & taking it to himself: considering this, in genere legali or morali, the streatching forth of his hand, and apprehending the purse is a condition; for so the donor hath determined to give the riches, after such a manner & method, for his own ends, according to his good pleasure. Thus we see, how faith can, in its way, produce one & the same effect of justification, both as an Instrument, and as a Condition, taking these terms, in a large sense, according to the matter in hand.  
Mr. Baxter saith Confess. p. 89. he denieth that Faith is an Instrument of justification, because he dar not give so much of Christ's honour to man, or any act of man's, as to be an efficient cause of pardoning himself. Ans. And he knoweth, that the orthodox do of purpose, call faith an Instrument in justification, in opposition to the Papists, that Christ may wear the honour alone, and man may be abased: & if they have been unhappy, in falling upon the medium to that end; Yet their Intention was honest. But when Faith is called an Instrument in justification, justification is not taken for an act of accepting & pardoning alone; for they knew, that it was God only that accepteth & pardoneth, & that it is he only, who Justifieth; but they took justification in a more comprehensive sense, as including Christ's Righteousness, the only formal ground of justification, in reference to which, Faith is said to act as an Instrument receiving. And this may satisfy such, as will not have the mysteries of God cast in a pure Philosophical mould, because some such terms are used for explications sake.  
Mr. Baxter Confess. p. 95. saith. Such as say, faith justifieth qua instrumentum, the most certainly make it to justify, as an action. And in his postscript, to Mr. Cartwright. Those that make faith to justify, as an Instrument, or as apprehensio Christi, do set up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, which they cry down; for that, which they call instrumentality, is the apprehensive act, & apprehendere & credere are here all one. They contradict themselves in saying, that Paul excludes all works, because faith (say they) justifieth not as a work: for to justify qua instrumentum, or qua apprehensio Christi, is to justify as a work, or as this work. And so this doctrine sets up justification by works & that in an unlawful sense; for it maketh the formal reason of Faiths justifying to be its apprehension, that is, that it is such an action; or its instrumentality, which is an operation.] Ans. This is no new Objection; for Schlichtingius the Socinian Cont. Meisnerum p. 130. did object the same upon the matter. It is true, when we say faith Justifieth as an Instrument, we make it to Justify as an action, taking qua specificatiuè as he himself also must do, when he faith it justifieth as a Condition Potestative, for a potestative condition is some action performed, & himself, as we heard, called it actio voluntaria de futuro. But he knoweth, that when it is said, that Faith justifieth, as an Instrument, the meaning is but more emphatically to show, that it is the Righteousness of Christ, which faith apprehendeth, by which we are justified, & that they, who cry up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, make that the Righteousness, by which we are justified; so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere in their sense, who will have it imputed to us for Righteousness, respecteth immediately the benefit, to wit, Pardon, Acceptation etc. Faith as an Instrument, or apprehension, in our sense, respecteth Christ & his Righteousness immediately, which it receiveth as an Instrument, in order to the benefit, which is had upon the account of Christ & his Righteousness, made ours; In our sense, faith is no more, but as the hand receiving bread, and as the mouth eating it, in order to food & nourishment thereby; in their sense, faith is made the very food & nourishment, or meat itself that nourisheth: When we say, that Faith Justifieth as an Instrument, it is but, as if we said, man liveth by his hands taking meat, and by his mouth eating it; when they say, that faith justifieth as a work, & that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere is imputed for Righteousness, it is, as if they said, the hand & the mouth are the very food, or the meat itself, by which we live and are nourished: we, looking upon Faith as an Instrument, as upon the hand and mouth, as instruments of nourishment, ascribe all the virtue of nourishment unto the meat. They, denying the hand and the mouth to be considered here as instruments, and saying that we live and are nourished by the hand and the mouth, (just as they do, when they make the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere our Righteousness, in reference to justification) ascribe all the virtue of nourishment unto the hand & the mouth, and so set up the hand & the mouth, in the place, that is due unto the meat, and rob the meat, of that power & virtue, that is only proper to it. Yet withal, when we say, that hands and mouth nourish us as Instruments, we do not deny, but in a general sense, our receiving of meat with our hands, & eating of it with our mouth, are conditions of nourishment, importing hereby, that the wise God hath appointed this order and method, giving us hands to receive meat, & mouths to eat it, & a stomach to digest it, in order to the living, and receiving thereby nourishment; only we do not say, they are such conditions, as have all the virtue of nourishment in them. This is but a similitude, and so must halt in some things, as all similitudes do; yet it serveth to illustrate the matter, and to show the difference betwixt our expressions, and the expressions of our Adversaries, in this matter; & how little ground there is so this objection, and particularly how, when we say faith justifieth as an Instrument, we do not withal say, it justifieth, as a work, in our Adversaries sense; And how, when we say, Faith is a condition, we do not withal say, that it justifieth as a potestative proper condition, in our Adversaries sense; as also, how we cannot admit, that faith shall be called no more, than a causa sine qua non; seeing it is so manifest, that eating & digesting of meat hath another influence into nourishment by food, than a mere causa sine qua non hath into any effect.  
Mr. Baxter Confess. p. 95. 96. I must therefore profess, that after long consideration I know no one term, that properly expresseth this nearest & formal interest of faith in justification, but only the term condition, as that is usually taken for the condition of a free gift, & when the Scripture telleth us, how faith justifieth, it is in such terms, as these, if thou confess with thy mouth etc. he that believeth shall be saved etc. In all which, if the conditional if, & the conditional form of the promise, express not a condition, I despair of ever understanding it in this life. Ans. As for the nearest & formal interest of Faith, in Justification, if all other questions touching that fundamental truth of Justification, were satisfyingly determined, & put to an end, there needed not be much controversy; but when as we have seen, the decision of this hath such an interest in the decision of more substantial points, or necessarily attendeth the same, enquiry with sobriety after the truth, even in these lesser things, cannot be condemned; And, on the contrare, receding from, & condemning received terms & expressions, which have an obvious, plain & sound meaning, being taken, according as they have been constantly used, because not quadrating every way with men's new Philosophical and too metaphysical apprehensions & notions, in this matter, cannot but be displeasing. And too much Philophical accuracy in the clearing up of these mysteries, is not the most edifying & saife way of explication. 2. We are not against the use of the term Condition in this matter, knowing that faith may well be called a condition, but the question is in what sense we must take the word, condition: And to say, that it is taken, as commonly used for the condition of a free gift, will not satisfy in our case; because though the gift which we expect by faith, is to us indeed free; yet it is a purchased free gift; & such a free gift, as these who get it, have all the legal title & Right thereunto, through the Ca●tioners purchase & payment, & only come to the possession of it through Faith, according to the wise method & Connexion, made by the Sovereign Lord. Adam's perfect obedience might have been called the condition of a free gift: and we cannot give the same place & power to Faith in the New Covenant, that perfect obedience had in the old; for Adam if he had perfectly obeyed, had goat his reward without any intervention of a Price by a Mediator, purchasing it, but we must hold all our reward solely of Christ, that he may have the glory of all (3) as (if) can denote a Condition, so (by, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) can denote an instrumental cause. Himself tells us somewhere in his Confut, of Ludom, Colvinus, alias Ludov, Molinaeus, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denoteth an efficient cause & we read, that we are justified by faith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And further, though these passages, which he citeth, and the conditional if, and the conditional form of the promise, do indeed express a Condition; yet they do not say, or prove that the term Condition is the only one term, that properly expresseth the nearest & formal interest of faith in Justification; or that the term of an Instrument is no way fit to express this near & formal interest of faith in justification, seeing to be justified by faith, or through faith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (all which the Scripture useth) is as expressive of an Instrumental interest, as if thou believe etc. is expressive of a condition.  
He saith ibid. p. 89. Conclus. 10. That the difference betwixt him & others, is not that he giveth any more to works, than they; but that they give more to faith, than he, & consequently to man: & if he be guilty of equalling faith & obedience too much, it is not by bringing up works too high (to be Instruments of justification, as they make Faith) but in taking down Faith too much, & consequently, in too much abaseing all acts of man. Ans. If he bring up works to Faith, in our Justification, & give a like interest to both, he giveth more to works, than the orthodox will do: And when we call faith an Instrument in justification, we give not so much to it, as they do, who call it conditio potestativa, and give it the same place in the New Covenant, that perfect obedience had in the old, as was seen above: And who ever say this, are so far from debasing man & his actions, that they give him, as much ground of glorying & boasting, as ever Adam would have had, if he had fulfilled the condition, & given full & perfect Obedience: And he cannot but know, that that term, Instrument, was of purpose applied to Faith, in this matter, to depress man, & to keep the crown upon the head of Christ, as it is apt enough to do, if it be but candidely understood, & taken as it is applied, and no further, nor vexed with metaphysical niceties, a way, that might render every borrowed term, whether from arts or sciences, how expressive so ever of our meaning, & explicative of the matter intended, utterly useless. It is true, when he calleth faith only a causa sine qua non, he seemeth to giveless to Faith, than we do, if that term be taken, in its strike sense, as it is by Philosophers taken, who will not have it called a Cause at all, but rather conditio sine qua non: But thus he depresseth it below that place & interest, which is due to all the institutions & appointments of God, as such; for none of them can rightly be called conditio sine qua non, and no more, in reference to that effect & end, for which they are appointed of him; and far less can Faith be said to be only conditio sine qua non, in reference to justification, seeing by the unalterable appointment of the Sovereign Lord, justification so dependeth upon & is connected with Faith, that who ever believeth (to wit, savingly, or with that Faith, which here we only understand) whensoever he believeth, doth immediately pass from death unte life, and is justified. But no man will say, that the effect doth so much depend upon, or is connected with that, which is but a conditio sine qua non, as was before shown, in several Instances: And where is then his Conditio Potestativa? is that but a causa fatua.  
But ibid. Conclus. 9 he tells us, that one main reason, which constrained him to deny that Faith is an Instrument in justification, is because he dar not give so much of Christ's honour to man, or any act of man's, as to be an efficiont cause of pardoning himself. Ans. When we make Faith an Instrument in justification, we make it not an Instrument of the act of pardoning, which is solely the Lords act; but taking justification largely as including the Righteousness of Christ the only ground thereof, we say, that in reference to Christ, & this Surety-Righteousness of his which is imputed, in order to the Lord's justifying & Pardoning of us, faith acteth as an Instrument, apprehending Christ & his Righteousness, & upon that account is to be considered as an Instrument, in the matter of justification: And himself Concl. 11. ibid. saith that he ever held, that it is only faith, that is the receiving of Christ, & that faith being the only receiving grace (wherein no mere moral duty or grace doth participate of its honour or nature) it was therefore by God peculiarly destinated or appointed to the office of justifying, as fittest to the glorying of free grace, & of God Redeemer therein. And if this be the all. (as to the substance) of what we say, or the most of that which we mean, when we call faith an Instrument, what ground was there of differing from his brethren? or what ground was there to fear, that Christ's honour should have been wronged thereby? Sure, while Faith is called an Instrument, as receiving Christ & his Righteousness, in order to justification, Christ is more honoured in that affair, than when our Faith is made our Gospel-Righteousness, & called a perfect Righteousness & so our whole Righteousness (as some) a chief part of it (as others) upon the account of which we are justified.   

CHAP. XXIX.  
What Interest Repentance hath in our Justification.  
IN reference to the clearing of this Question, about the Interest of Repentance in Justification, it will not be necessary to speak much of Repentance itself, the premitting of a few things will be sufficient unto our purpose.  
The Hebrew word, which is rendered repent, is of a general signification for it signifieth to return, whether from a place, or from the distemper of our minds, or from our former courses; & so denoteth a motion or change of the body from one place to another; or of the mind from any purpose, or of the whole way & walk, and in special, it sometime signifieth a change of the whole man to the better, both as to his Mind, Resolution, and Deportment, & thus denoteth a man's turning unto God: And accordingly we read in the New Testam. of the Prodigals coming or returning to himself, or to his right mind & wits; and we hear of Repentance towards God. In the N. Testam. there are two greek words, the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importing such a change, as it attended with after care; the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying such a change, as denoteth afterwit or after thought. Some do so difference these two, as that they say, the last signifieth so to sorrow for what is done, as to amend it, called by the latins Resipiscere & therefore properly is meaned of a good & saving Repentance, wherein the penitent returneth to his right wits, so as to reform & amend what hath been amiss; and the other denoteth properly care, anxiety & solicitude after something done, called by the Latins poenitere, and this may be used in an evil sense, as denoting properly no change of mind or carriage to the better, but simply such a trouble & anxiety for what is done, as maketh them wish, it were not done, whether the thing done was good or evil. But in the New Test. we find not this difference constantly obsérved; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken both in a good sense, for a good Repentance, & saving Mat. 21: 32, 29. and for a common Repentance, that is not saving. Mal: 27: 3. where mention is made of judas repenting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that cometh therefrom, import a good & saving Repentance, except, Heb. 12: 17.  
What this word denoteth, when used of God, either affirmatiuly, or negatiuly, we need not here inquire. It is more for our purpose to consider, that Repentance may be taken in a threefold sense, 1. for a common work of legal sorrow through conviction of hazard, because of sin, whereby the man may rue, be grieved, & be sorrowful for what he hath done, and wish he had not done it, as judas repented of his wickedness. This may be; and yet not be attended with Pardon of sins: And, as to such, in whom the Lord purposeth to carry on the work of Condition, & Humiliation until it come to real Conversion, and an Union with Christ, though it may be called a conditio sine qua non of Justification & Pardon, in such, in regaird that usually, if not always, the Lord premitteth some thing of this, as to some sensible measure, or other, unto his more gracious workings; yet this Common Repentance hath no proper interest in justification, & cannot be called a Condition thereof, far less a Cause, seeing in itself it hath no certain connexion with justification, & though it be an antecedent in the justified, yet it may be, and often is, where no justification followeth, being in many nothing but the sorrow of the world, that worketh death 2. Cor. 7: 10.  
But 2. There is a Repentance, that is only peculiar unto such, as are already Justified & Pardoned, following upon & flowing from the sense and intimation of Pardon expressed by Self-abhoring, Self-lothing, Melting of heart, and Tenderness & the like. so Ezek. 16: 63. That thou mayest remember & be confounded, & never open thy mouth any more, because of thy shame, when I am pacified toward thee etc. So Ezek. 36-25, 26, 27, 28. comp. with vers. 31: See also jer. 31: 19, 20. Neither can this be called, or accounted a Condition of Justification, & Remission, because it manifestly followeth not only Justification, & Remission, itself, but also the sense and intimation thereof; & therefore cannot go before it.  
But. 3. The greatest difficulty is anent that work of Repentance, which is a saving work of the Spirit going a longs with Faith, ariseing from the sense of sin committed, and the apprehension of the mercy of God in Christ, causing spiritual & kindly grief, sorrow and indignation at themselves and their sinful ways; with an hatred of sin & a fixed purpose to forsake it, and to turn to the Lord & this is frequently mentioned in the Scriptures. Now this Repentance may be considered two ways, first as it is in these, in whom the Lord is working a work of Conversion, & whom He is translating out of dearkness in to the Kingdom of his dear Son, and Secondly as it is in such, as are already brought in to a justified state, after new sins committed. As to this last, we will have a fit occasion to inquire afterward, how or what way it is required in reference to Remission & Pardon of after-sins. The first falleth now under consideration, because we are speaking of Justification, which holdeth forth a change of state, as was formerly explained.  
That we may therefore proceed the more distinctly in this Inquisition, we must fi●st take notice of the several senses of the word, or of the terms equipollent in Scripture; and see what is properly denoted there. by. And  
1. Sometime it denoteth most grief, sorrow, or that which is called contrition, or that part of Repentance, as Luk. 10: 33. where it is explained by sitting in sackcloth & ashes. jer. 8: 6.- No man repent him of his wickedness, saying what have I done. Thus it may also be taken 2. Cor. 11: 21.- & that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, & have not Repent of the uncleaness & fornication & lasciviousness, which they have committed. Here, I say, it may be looked upon as mostly denoting this part of Repentance; though not as excluding the other parts.  
2. Some time it denoteth mostly a change of former courses & ways; whether of error, as 2. Tim. 2: 25. If God per adventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; or of Conversation, called Repentance from dead works Heb. 6: 1. So 2. Chron. 7: 14. it is called a turning from their evil ways & from sins Ezek. 18: 21. It was said to Simon Magus Act. 8: 22. repent of this thy wickedness. See Rev. 2: 21, 22.  
3. Sometime it denoteth the whole work of Conversion & turning unto God, Act. 26: 20- that they should Repent & turn to God, where the latter expression is but exegetick of the former. So also Act. 3: 19 Repent ye therefore & be converted: where both expressions denote one & the same thing, the last being explicative of the former Ezek. 18: 30. Repent & turn yourselves. And this is imported by many Synonimous expressions, in the Old Testament, as Seeking the Lord Deut. 4: 29. Turning to the Lord vers. 30. Returning to the Lord. Hos 5: 4. Seeking the face of God 2. Chron. 7: 14. & the like. See also Revel. 3: 19  
4. It is sometimes expressly distinguished from Godly sorrow, & mentionned as a Consequent, or fruit & effect of it 2. Cor. 7: 9- ye sorrowed to Repentance. 10. for Godly sorrow worketh Repentance.  
5. Sometime it is express distinguished from Faith, as Act. 20; 21- Repentance toward God, & faith toward our Lord jesus Christ. Heb. 6: 1. not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, & of faith towards God. So jer. 31: 19 after I was turned (that is wrought up to faith) I repented.  
6. Sometime it signifieth nothing else, upon the matter but a receiving of the Gospel & a believing in Christ, not only Mark. 1: 15. repens ye & believe the Gospel; where the later is explicative of the former, but also in many other places, where Iohn Bapist's ministry is spoken of, the sum whereof is said to have been Repent, for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand Mat. 3: 2. and his baptism was called the Baptism of Repentance Mark. 1: 4 or unto Repentance Mat. 3: 11. See also Luk. 3: 3. Act. 13: 24. Now, that this preaching of Repentance, & Baptism of or unto Repentance, which is said to have been John's ministry, & work, was the preaching of Faith in the Messiah, Paul telleth us expressly Act. 19 4. Then said Paul, john verily baptised with the baptism of Repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him, which should come after him, that is, on Christ jesus. So that, by this Commentary of Paul's, we understand both what was the scope of his Baptism of Repentance, & also what was the meaning of his calling on his hearers to Repent, to wit, to embrace Christ, who came after him, & to believe in him. And by this Commentary, we may understand the purpart of Christ's preaching Mat. 4: 17. from that time jesus began to preach, & to say, Repent; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. And this is called Mark. 1: 14. the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. As also of the preaching of the Apostles & Seventy disciples, when they were sent to say, the Kingdom of God was come, or is nigh unto you Luk. 10: 9 Mat. 10: 7. which is called the Gospel Luk. 9: 6. and Repentance Mark. 6: 12. they went out & preached that men should Repent. By this also we may understand the meaning of these & the like passages Mat. 9: 13- I am not come to call the Righteous, but sinners to Repentance. So Mark. 2: 17. Luk. 5: 32. as likewise of that passage Luk. 15: 7, 10- joy in heaven, over one person, that repenteth: for this is Christ's saving of the man, that was lost Mat. 18: 11. Luk. 15: 4. & 19 10. See also Mat. 11: 20. Act. 2: 38. & 11: 18. & 26: 18. & 20. compared together.  
7. Sometime it denoteth a recovery from some measure of defection, into which persons are backsliden, as Revel. 2: 5. Remember therefore, from whence thou art fallen, & Repent, & do shy first works. So Ch. 3: 3. Remember therefore, how thou hast received, & heard, & hold fast, & Repent.  
8. Sometime it is distinguished from works of Obedience, that follow upon it & flow from it; as Mat. 3: 8. bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, that is fruits suiting or answerable unto a Christian state, or a state of believing in Christ, which before we saw was denoted by John's Baptism. So Luk. 3: 8. & Act. 26: 10.  
9 Sometime it includeth all, that is required, in order to Salvation, upon man's part, as 2 Pet. 3: 9- not willing that any should pert●h, but that all should come to Repentance. So that Repentance includeth all, that is requisite to escape perishing. So Luk. 13: 3, 5- except ye Repent ye shall all likewise perish. So also Act. 5: 31. to give Repentance to Israel, & Remission of sins; where, as Remission of sins may comprehend all the spiritual favours and privileges, which Christ bestoweth, so Repentance may include all the gra●es & blessings, which he bestoweth, in order to the actual participating of these privileges. Thus we may understand it Act. 17: 30. but now commandeth all men every where to Repent, that is, by the preached Gospel, wherever it cometh, commandeth all men to relinquish their courses of vanity & to embrace the Gospel of Salvation, & to walk accordingly. So Luk. 24: 47. And that Repentance & Remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations: which is the short sum of the Apostles Commission, to wit, to exhort to all Christian duties, imported by Repentance; & hold forth all Gospel privileges, as an encouragement thereunto, included in Remission of sins.  
Having premitted these things; in order to the clearing of the question, we would know further.  
1. That the Question is not, whether the doctrine of Papists about Repentance in order to Justification, be to be owned, in whole, or in part? for none now appeareth in the direct owning of their Assertions, who commonly are utterly ignorant of true Justification, as different from Sanctification, as may sufficiently appear by the very naming of their positions for (1) They look upon Repentance as having force & efficacy to expel sin, as light hath to expel darkness, taking Remission to be a destroying of the very being of sin, & expelling of Corruption by contrary gracious Qualities, & inherent Holiness, of which they make Repentance a part. (2) They make Repentance concur, as a material cause dssposing the soul for receiving a gracious Quality, for the expelling of sin. (3) They make Repentance to obtain pardon by way of merit, and (4) by way of Satisfaction. Not to mention (5) their Sacrament of Penance. All which the Reader will find not only rejected; but also shortly & solidly confused by worthy & judicious Mr. Durham in his Comment, on the Revel. in that digression on Repentance. pag. 251.  
2. Nor is the Question, whether the Lord call for Repentance as a duty, at the hands of such as either are to be Justified, or are already Justified? for both these we willingly grant, as being divine truths, richly confirmed in the Scriptures, what ever Antinomians say to the contrary.  
3. Nor is the Question, whether Repentance be a Condition of the Covenant, or not? For if by a Condition of the Covenant, we understand every thing, that is a duty, required of the Covenanters, it is readily granted, as was said, that Repentance is a duty required of such as are really in Covenant with God; but if by a Condition of the Covenant be meaned a duty required in order to the closing of the Covenant, or entering into Covenant, upon the performing of which the Covenant is immediately closed & entered into, this ●s denied; and abundantly confuted by Mr. Durham, in the forecited Digression.  
4. But the Question is, if Repentance hath the same Place, Office, Use & Consideration in Justification, that Faith hath; so that it may be every way as well, & as fully called the Condition of Justification, as Faith is; & so that it is called for in order to Justification, upon the same account, and under the same formality, that Faith is called for. Socinians & Arminians (as we heard above) join Repentance & Faith, in the same Order & Place, & ascribe the same Office Use & Power unto both, in order to Justification. And Mr. Baxter tells us Confess. pag. 37. n. 19 That Repentance is made by God, in the Gospel, a proper Condition of our first general pardon of sin, as well as Faith is. And he layeth down a ground for this interest of Repentance (which, I suppose, will reach to the including of other works also) in the foregoing n. 18. saying, a quatenus ad omne vale● consequentia. If faiths formal interest in pardon be, as it is the Condition of the act of pardon, than whatsoever is such a Condition, must have the same Kind of formal interest, as faith. By the first general purdon of sin here, he meaneth Justification; for with him Remission of sins & Justification is all one thing. And yet afterward pag. 96. Concl. 29. he hath words, which would seem to give some peculiar interest unto Faith; & so contradict what is here said, for he saith, If any say, that seeing faith hath a peculiar aptitude to this office, therefore it must have a peculiar Interest. I answer, so it hath. For I, it doth alone, without (merits, or) any positive Gospel works of obedience (as such at least) procure (as far as belongs to its office) our first full Justification. 2. The love of Christ received, Gratitude etc. are but as modification of Faith, which is called the receiving itself. Though some of them be distinct physical acts, yet all the rest, morally considered, are but as it were, the modification of faith: I mean of that act, which is the acceptance of Christ, & life freely given etc. Now, I suppose, he will grant (as he doth above, as we may see) that Repentance hath not that peculiar aptitude, to this office, that Faith hath; & consequently cannot have that peculiar Interest, as he confesseth: I suppose also, that he will put Repentance, in the same rank with Gospel-Works of Obedience; & consequently it must no more share of that special Interest, that belongeth to Faith, in this office, than they: I suppose likewise, that he will grant Repentance to be but, a Modification of Faith, as well, as Love & Gratitude: and then I would know, how Repentance can be said to be as proper a Condition of Justification, as Faith is? Sure, if it be as proper, it must have as peculiar an interest, for this peculiarity of Interest cannot respect its aptitude merely, but it's designed & appointed state, in that office; otherways the objection, which he moved, and answered, should have this sense, seeing Faith hath a peculiar aptitude to this office; therefore it must have a peculiar aptitude to this office, which were non sense.  
Now that Repentance hath not the same Interest in Justification, that Faith hath, we judge evident from these grounds.  
1. The Scripture tells us, that we are justified by Faith, and that several times, & not only saith it, but proveth it, as we saw above: But it no where saith, that we are justified by Repentance. And reason would require, that such as say, that Repentance hath the same Interest in Justification, that faith hath, should tell us, where it is said, we are justified by Repentance: for when it is thus said of Faith, & no where thus said of Repentance: there must be a vast difference, as to their interest in Justification; unless they can give us some Scripture expressions concerning the Interest of Repentance, equivalent to this, we are justified by Repentance. If it be said. That this is equipollent when it is said, Repent that your sins may be blotted out: & Repentance & Remission of sins are joined together & the like. I answer, Leaving the particular examination of these & the like passages alleged, until afterward, I shall only say this at present. (1) That justification & Remission of sins are not every way the same. Though Mr. Baxter hath several times said it; yet in his Catholic. Theolog. of God's Covenant etc. Sect. XIII. n. 203. he saith our first constitutive justification is in its own Nature a Right to impunity (& this, as he oft elsewhere tells us, is Remission) & to life or glory. Now what is beside a Right to Impunity, also a Right to life & glory, is more than Remission of sins: And therefore the consequence from Remission to Justification cannot stand. (2) In like manner, because it is said Luk. 6: 37- forgive & it shall be forgiven you, it may be inferred, that for-giving of our Neighbour some fault, that he hath done us, is the Condition of our Constitutive Justification, & hath as great an interest in our Justification, as Faith it se●f, and by it we have as really Right to impunity, and Right to life & glory, as by Faith. It is true, Mr. Allen will not think this very absurd, who reasometh from this same passage, not far otherwise. In his discourse of the two Covenants. pag. 52. Yet I suppose, others will: & I doubt, if Mr. Baxter shall make this one & the same thing with Faith, as he laboureth in his Catholic Theol. to make Faith & Repentance one.  
It will be said, when we are said to be Justified by Faith, it is all one, as if we were said to be Justified by Repentance: for Mr. Baxter cleareth, Of God's Govern. Sect. XII. how Faith & Repentance is all one thing. I Ans. (1) if the Spirit of the Lord had but once said, in his word, that we were justified by Repentance, we might then be allowed, to think of such explications, as might make either both one thing, or show, how both hath the same interest in Justification: but when the Scripture never once saith, that we are justified by Repentance, for us to devise such explications, as to make the Scripture speak what it never speaketh, is not fair, nor is it to edification, because it hath no tendency to explain the matter, as expressed in the Scriptures; and is so far from clearing up the truth, that it darkeneth all; for hereby we are taught to understand faith, wherever we hear of Repentance, & Repentance, where mention is made of Faith; so that we may ascribe all to Repentance, that is spoken of Faith Heb. 11. & say, that Repentance is the substance of things hoped for, & the evidence of things not seen etc. (2) Though it is true, the word Repentance (as we have seen) is sometime taken so largely, as to include faith; yet that will not allow us, to say, we are Justified by Repentance, as we are justified by Faith: It is best for us to follow Scripture language: The Scripture expressly denieth, that we are justified by works; & yet Repentance is sometimes, taken in such a large sense, as to include all acts of Obedience; This way than would allow us to sav, we are justified by all works of obedience, (even as to constitutive Justification) as we are by Faith: Yet Mr. Baxter in his Confess. p. 89, 90. putteth a difference betwixt Faith & Evangelick Obedience as to this Constitutive Justification, making the one, like consent to marriage relation, or taking one to be my Captain; & the other like conjugal fidelity & obedience, or obeying the captain, & sighting under him, & tells us, that he no more compriseth all Obedience in Faith, than conjugal obedience in the marriage consent. (3) That Repentance is not the same with Faith in the matter of justification; (in reference to which, we now speak of both) will appear from our following reasons: So that whatever pains be taken to make them one, on other accounts, will be to no purpose, as to our present business.  
2. If Repentance have the same interest in Justification, that Faith hath, than works shall have the same interest with Faith; but this is diametically opposite to all the Apostles disput Rom. 3. & 4. & Gal. 2. & 3. The reason of the Consequence is, because Repentance includeth works, & is a special work & act of obedience itself Mr. Baxter tells Confess. p. 94. That Paul's scope is both to take down Moses' Law (especially its necessity & conceited sufficiency) & the Dignity of legal works (& consequently of any works) & that therefore by works Paul meaneth to exclude only merits, or works, which are conceited Meritorious, or which for the worth of the dead done, should procure Pardon & acceptance with God, without a Mediators blood; & so Paul himself described the works, that he speaketh against. Rom. 4: 4. That they are such as make the Reward to be not of Grace, but of debt. Ans. This is but the same we heard before from john Godwine, and the same answer may suffice. (1) If the scope of Paul had been only to take down Moses' Law; why did he speak so much of the Gentiles, & show how they were all under sin, & therefore must be justified by Faith, & not by the Law, or by works? This had no manifest tendency to that scope. (2) Why brought he in the Instance of Abraham, who was before the Law of Moses? Abraham's not being justified by works, could not prove the insufficiency of Moses' Law thereunto: (3) To think, that the Jews did conceit, that they would obtain Pardon & Acceptance with God, only by their laborious performance of Ceremonies & costly Sacrifices, excluding all Moral acts of obedience, is apparently groundless; contrary to Rom. 9: 30, 31, 32. & 10: 3, 4, 5. & would say, that Paul took not a right medium to destroy that conceit, for his nearest & surest course had been to have shown the nullity of that Law, now under the Gospel; hereby all occasion of further debate being perfectly removed. (4) Paul is so far Rom. 4: 4. from describing the works, that he speaketh of, to be such only as make the reward of debt, that he proveth that Justification cannot be by works, by this medium, because then the reward should be reckoned, not of grace, but of debt, and so telleth us, that all work make the reward of debt: This is a manifest perversion of the Apostles argument: for he saith not, now to him, that so worketh, as to conceit his works meritorious, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt; but now to him that worketh: far less can this be the meaning or construction of the words, now to him, that maketh the reward to be not of grace, but of debt: for what sense is here? And further the meaning of the following words must accordingly be this; but to him that so worketh, as not to make the reward of debt but of grace, his working is counted for Righteousness. While as the Apostle saith a plain other thing. But to him, that worketh not, but believeth on him, that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Sure, working without this conceit of merit, is not believing on him, that justifieth the ungodly, neither are these works counted for Righteousness; for holy Abraham wrought without that conceit & yet he was not justified by works, vers. 2, 3. Nor did David mean, that man's blessedness did consist in the imputation of such works; nor did he describe that blessedness, when he said, blessed are they, whose iniquities are forgiven etc. Consider 1. Cor. 4: 4, Ephes. 2: 9 Phil. 3: 9 Tit. 3: 5.  
3. Repentance hath no instrumental acting on Christ & his Righteonsness, in order to our being justified. But Faith hath this, as was shown in the foregoing Chapter. Therefore Repentance hath not the same Interest in Justification, that Faith hath. It is requisite & necessary, in order to our Justification, that we be clothed with a Righteousness, even the Surety-Righteousness of Christ: and Faith only can lay hold on this & put it on, & not Repentance. Repentance doth not act so upon any thing without a man, to bring it home that it may become the man's Righteousness, it hath other work, & acteth upon another object, upon sin within the man. It is true Mr. Baxter in his Catholic Theol. of God's Government Sect. XI. will have faith rather to be called a receiving cause than an Instrumental, & a medium or dispositive cause of the effect, justification as as received, but not as given. And then Sect. XII. he calleth Repentance a disposit to materiae recipientis too, & a part of the condition of the Covonant. But we think it needless here to distinguish, with him, betwixt, receiving justification, & being Justified, we do not call Faith an Instrument of God's act Justifying, as was said above. If Faith & Repentance be dispositive causes of the effect & causa dispositiva be part of the causa materialis, as he also saith, I suppose, they are not mere causae sine quibus non; as he said elsewhere. But to our business, we have cleared before, how ●aith acteth in the matter of Justification, how it receiveth an imputed Righteousness & laith hold on this Surety-Righteousness of Christ & applieth it, to the end, the accused impeached man may have wherewithal he may stand before the Tribunal of God, & be accepted of as Righteous, in his Cautioner, & through his Cautioners Righteousness imputed to him, & now received by Faith: & though Mr. Baxter do account Faith's accepting of Christ, & life offered on that condition, only its aptitude to the office, & that the formal reason of its office as to our Justification, is its being the performed condition of the Covenant, as he there speaketh; yet that will not invalidat our argument: for (1) Faiths aptitude (as he calleth it) or rather its work & acting in Justification, is not merely an accepting of Christ, & life offered on that condition; but it is the accepting, laying hold on, leaning to, & applying the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, presupposing the accepting of Christ himself. (2) Though it may be said, that the nearest formal Reason of Faith's office, is the Lord's appointment; yet this being too too Philosophical here contributeth nothing to the clearing up of the matter, in order to practice, so neither was Philosophical accuracy the ground whereupon they went, who said, that Faith's interest in Justification, was as an Instrument, but rather their end was to clear the matter in order to Practice; so as poor souls might not fall into mistakes; & this I judge to be the best Theological acuracie, howbeit he should account many such speeches nothing but unintelligible phrases, and such doctrine to contain such senselesness & consequents, as the opening up of would offend, as he there speaketh. (3) It is certain, that Repentance doth not so act on Christ, and his Surety-Righteounsness, in order to Justification, as Faith doth, Repentance, as such is no acceptance of a free gift, far less of a gift of Righteousness, & of an Atonement therethrough; Repentance acteth not thus on Christ: Yea the reason he giveth Confess. p. 39 why Repentance was made a condition of pardon, doth sufficiently show, that it cannot have that interest, that Faith hath. His reason is this. Because without it (Repentance) God & the Redeemer cannot have their end in pardoning us; Nor can the Redeemer do all his work, for which we do accept him: for his work is, upon the pardoning of us, to bring us back in heart & life to God; from whom we were fallen & strayed. This was Christ's work. Therefore the condition, which Christ maketh, are, as if he should say, If you will be saved by me, & are willing that I shall bring you back to God, I will both bring you into his favour by Pardon, and into a capacity of personal pleasing & enjoying of him. Now, our Repentance is our consent to return to God, & the change of our minds, by turning from former sin, that was our idol, & being willing by Christ to be restored to obedience. By this, I say, it is clear, that Repentance hath a more direct aspect upon, & reference to the consequences of Pardon & Justifiction itself; we grant its necessity unto all the ends mentioned, and its necessary presence in such as are Justified; & that its contrare, or positive impenitency, cannot consist with Faith, in such as are to be Justified: Yet that will not give ground to infer, that it hath the same Interest, Influence & Consideration, in Justification, that Faith hath.  
Mr. Baxter In his Confess. p. 39, 40. seemeth to grant this whole Argument, when he expresseth himself thus. This I say, that man may see, I do not level Faith with Repentance, much less (as they charge me) with actual external works of obedience, which in this first remission & justification, I take not to be so much, as existent. What he addeth concerning the Ratio forma●ts, why faith or Repentance have such an interest in our Pardon, to wit, because God hath made them the Conditions of the promise, cannot hinder our conclusion, until first it be proved, that God hath made Repentance such a Condition, we are speaking here of the difference, that is betwixt the two, as to their Nature & Aptitude, which he confesseth to be very great, & also as to their place & use because of the great difference, that is betwixt them, as to Nature & Aptitude.  
4. If the Interest of Faith be not, as it is a work, or inward grace. inherent in the soul, but as such a going out of the soul from itself, & all its own inherent good, and from all external privileges, or what may be called adherent personal good, unto an offered Mediator, that it may embrace him, & lay hold on, and lean to his jussorie-Righteousness; then Repentance cannot share in this Interest with it. But the former is true. Therefore etc. The Conncection may be cleared from what is already said: we are not speaking of that here which Mr. Baxter will have to be the nearest formal reason, nor of that only, which he will have to be its nature & aptitude: but of its Use & proper Actings in this office, in reference to the end, Justification; which are such, as cannot agree to Repentance, as is manifest. Himself tells us in his Confess. p. 89, 90. That he takes Repentance to be to our faith in Christ, as the breaking off from other Suitors & Lovers, & turning the mind to this one, is to Marriage. Whereby we see, that though Repentance be necessarily required, in one that is a believer, and that faith can not be without Repentance; Yet Repentance hath no place in the office of Justification, it hath no plain formal & immediate interest in the receiving of Justification; as that turning to the mind from other Suitors to that one hath no formal interest or place, in closeing the Marriage Covenant, though it be a very necessary prerequisite unto right closing & consenting the marriage Covenant. This giveth ground for another Argument.  
5. As upon the account that a woman hath changed her mind from other Suitors, to one, it cannot be said or inferred, that therefore the Marriage Relation is made up with that one Suitor; which is done only by a formal full & explicit Consent: so upon the account that one is a penitent, it cannot be formally inferred, that that persons is in Covenant with Christ, and is Justified. Because as Mr. Baxter hath told us, Repentance is unto Faith, but as the woman's changing her mind from other Suitors to one, is to the consenting unto the Marriage proposal. And if upon a Persons being a Penitent it cannot be formally inferred, that he is in Covenant with God & a Justified person, than Repentance hath not that interest in Justification, that Faith hath, for upon a man's believing, it can formally & immediately be inferred, that he is in Covenant, and is Justified. I say formally; because consequentially it will also follow, that a Penitent man (meaning one that is truly penitent) is justified, upon this account, that where ever there is true Repentance, there is also true Faith: But as the change of the woman's mind is not formally the making up of a marriage Covenant; So neither is Repentance that, which formally constitutes a man a Covenanter with Christ, and a Justified person, only Faith doth this; as the woman's consent maketh up the marriage-Relation.  
6. I● Repentance hath the same interest in Justification with Faith; then as our Adversaries say, that Faith is imputed to us, as our Gospel Righteousness; so must they say, that our Repentance is imputed to us for Righteousness. But, beside the reasons, whereby we proved above, that Faith was not imputed to us, as our Gospel Righteousness, which will also serve here, mutatis mutandis, we may add this, that there is nothing in Scripture giving the least countenance hereunto, even as to words or expressions.  
7. If Repentance have such an interest in Justification, as Faith hath, than this must either be true of Repentance as begun, or as perfected (I mean as to p●rts) But of neither it can be true; not of begun Repentance, for questionless there are some beginnings of Repentance before Faith; (taking Repentance largely, as it is here taken,) as the woman's change of her mind from other Suitors, is before her closeing a Marriage Covenant with this man & then it would follow, that a man were Justified before Faith; which I suppose will not be said. Not of compleeted Repentance, for that followeth faith; for thus it followeth godly sorrow, 2. Cor. 7: 10. and is expressed by that Carefulness, Clearing of ourselves, Indignation, Fear, Vehement desire, Zeal, & Revenge, mentioned 2. Cor. 7: 11. all which must follow Faith; And repenting Ephraim jer. 31: 19 said, after I was turned, I repented; & after I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed, yea, even confounded etc. This being instructed, & being turned includeth Faith; & the rest, that followed upon it, are expressions of Repentance: and hence it would follow, if only compleeted Repentance be that Repentance, that hath the Interest in justification that Faith hath, a man cannot be said to be justified upon his believing, no not until Repentance be brought to this Perfection; And then Faith cannot be the consenting act, whereupon the bargain is closed.  
8. Repentance can bring nothing in, that can stay, or prove a support unto an awakened soul, pursued with the sense of wrath for the breach of the Law; nor can it present any thing unto God, as a ground, whereupon to be delivered from guilt & wrath, as Faith can do & doth, by laying hold on Christ & his Righteousness, an only sufficient ground, whereupon the poor soul can have hope, and with confidence can expect Absolution: Therefore it cannot have the same interest, in justification. The antecedent is clear, & undeniable, & the Consequence is also manifest; because this interest in the matter of justification must be estimate according to the ground of Hope, that is yielded thereby unto the poor vexed & tossed soul, & the ground of Confidence that is had thereby of Acceptance of God.  
9 To say, that Repentance hath the same interest in justification, that Faith hath, will prove, I judge, dangerous doctrine to many poor wakened sinners; & prove a mean to keep them off the Rock of ages, and at least, a mean to hinder or retard their motion Christ-ward, in order to Peace & Reconciliation with God: for experience teacheth such, as deal with wakened Consciences, that the most of their work oft times is to keep them from resting on something within themselves, in order to Peace, and particularly from relying & resting upon some sort of Grief, Sorrow, or Repentance, which they conceive to be in themselves & to b●ing them unto a cleanly resting upon Christ & his Righteousness, forsaking all other things: And when now they hear, that Repentance hath the same interest in justification that Faith hath, how will they be fortified in their Resolutions, so that all the labour & pains of Ministers, or other Christians may prove much fruitless, unless the Lord come in a wonderful manner, & many others may perish in their presumptuous thoughts, founded on their inward Sorrow & Repentance, as they supposed, because they would never go out of themselves to lean to Christ & his Righteousness. It is true, These of the contrary mind, press not Repentance alone, but Faith & Repentance together. Yet by their way, I find not the right Gospel-exercise of Faith-pressed, that is, faith bringing in an imputed Righteousness, or laying hold on Christ for Righteousness, & refuging the Soul in Him, & resting upon that, as the only & absolutely surest ground of Confident appearing before God, and of expecting Pardon & Peace; but only such or such an act of faith pressed, as being now under the New Covenant in the same place, that Perfect Obedience had in the Old, whereby, as the Old Covenant is but renewed, so the wakened or alarmed sinner is but taught to look after & lean to something within himself, as his immediate Righteousness, upon which he must be justified.  
10. If the Surety-Righteousness of Christ imputed by God, & received by Faith, be only that Righteousness, upon the account of which, the poor sinner is to be accepted of God as Righteous, & to be absolved from the Curse of the Law; As we have above proved it to be; then Repentance cannot have the same interest in justification, that Faith hath; because it neither doth, nor can so lay hold upon this Cautionary-Righteousness, as Faith doth. Or we might frame the argument thus. If Repentance have the same interest in justification, that Faith hath, Christ's Cautionary-Righteousness shall not be the only Righteousness, with which, the soul that is to be justified, must be clothed; because Repentance cannot put on Christ & his Righteousness, as faith doth. But this last cannot be said, for reasons given already.  
11. If Repentance hath the same interest in justification, that faith hath, than even by Gospel justification, there should be ground left to man, to boast, & to glory before men; & the reward should not be of grace, but of debt; contrary to Rom. 3. &. 4. The Consequence is clear, because Repentance acteth not on a Righteousness without us; and can be considered no other way, then as an act of Obedience in man, and so as a work: and Faith by this way goeth under the same Consideration; & is not considered, as bringing-in the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, and laying hold on it alone; (as it is by our way) for both are looked upon as dispositive causes, and as parts therefore of the material cause, and as proper potestative conditions, just as perfect obedience was under the Old Covenant. And whatever difference be acknowledged to be betwixt them, as to their Essence & Aptitude, whereby Faith is said to be an acceptance of the gift formally, Repentance not so, in its averting act (as Mr. Baxter is speaking Cath. Theol. ubi supra Sect. XII. n. 201.) whatever it may be as to other acts: yet they are both made formal Potestative conditions, as is said, & so solely considered, as works done by us: and all such, as was evidenced above, make the reward of debt, & give ground of boasting; because, being our formal works, they are made the immediate & formal, legal ground of our Justification, being made our immediate, formal & perfect Gospel-Righteousness; as was seen above.  
12. Add to these. That if Repentance have the same Interest in Justification, that Faith hath, God cannot be believed on, as the justifier of the ungodly, contrare to Rom. 4: 5. for Faith & Repentance are hereby made the man's personal Righteousness, and Mr. Baxter tells us Confess. p. 46. n. 38. that there is no such thing in rerum natura, as a true Righteousness, which doth not formaliter make the person so far Righteous. Now a Righteous man can not be an ungodly man; that were a contradiction. It is not here enough to say, that the man is ungodly before he be Justified; for in the act of justifying, or while he is a justifying, he is considered, not as ungodly, but as Righteous, yea antecedenter to his being Justified, he is considered as a Righteous man, & is therefore justified because Righteous in himself, having performed the conditions, whereby he becometh personally Righteous. And therefore while he is justified, God doth not justify an ungodly man. But it will be said, that this will as well follow upon our way. I Ans. Not at all, because though we place Faith in priority of Nature, before Justification, yet we make not faith a personal Righteousness; so that while the believer is justified, a man guilty in himself & void of all Righteousness in himself, is justified; so that God justifieth an ungodly man. But it will be said. By our way, the believer is considered as clothed with Christ's Righteousness; & upon that account, cannot be called nor accounted an ungodly man. ay Ans. He is still, notwitstanding an ungodly man in himself, having nothing, wherewith to satisfy justice, or to procure Peace to himself; but what he hath imputed to him, from a Cautioner: And thus God is justifier of the ungodly, in himself; that by his faith proclaimeth himself such & one that is not in case to pay one farthing of his own debt.  
Other Arguments may be brought from our foregoing debate against the Imputation of Faith, in a proper sense, and Faiths justifying as a work, I shall now proceed to examine what is alleged for the Interest of Repentance.  
Obj. 1. Mr. Baxter. In his Confession pag. 37. n. 19 citeth some passages of Scripture, whereby he thinks to prove, that Repentance is made by God, in the Gospel, a proper Condition of our first general Pardon of sin, as well as Faith is. The first whereof is Luk 13: 35. But this I judge is miscited, there being nothing there, that looketh here away possibly it should be Luk. 13. v. 3, 5. & of this place, we will have occasion to speak afterward. The next he citeth is Act. 3: 19 Repent ye therefore, & be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. Ans. But (1) Repent here can not be meaned of the acting of that Repentance, whereof we are here speaking, to wit, of that particular & special grace, which is distinct from Faith, & that because of the exegetical term added, & be converted. So that Repent here can denote nothing else, but a turning from all their sinful opinions & ways, and an embracing the Gospel way of Salvation, that thereby they may be saved for ever. And (2) Neither is the Apostle speaking here of constitutive justification, or of our first general Pardon; but of a blotting out of sins a long time hereafter, to wit, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord, at his second coming, as the following verses show. So that (3) As by this blotting out of sins, all the favours & great rewards of free grace, which the Righteous judge will give in that day, are signified, or comprehended under it, which he mentioned especially, that it might suit the charge of the grievous guilt of killing the Prince of life, which he was laying home upon them; so under the other two terms, of Repenting & being Converted the whole of the duties, required in the Gospel, are to be understood. If it be said. That Repent & be Converted is as much as Repent & believe, & so the Particular grace of Repentance is here understood. I Ans. (1) Than it will follow, that neither are conditions of Pardon here: but both are requi●ed in order to Pardon, at the great day, when Christ shall come again; for the blotting out of sins, here mentioned, is said to be at that time, as the following words clear. (2) This will say only (though it were the true meaning thereof, as it is not) that Repentance is required of those, that would expect of Christ Pardon at his second coming, as well as faith; which we deny not. (3) This Repentance should not be compleet Gospel Repentance, because it is anteriour to Conversion, or to Faith, while as the best part of true Repentance followeth, as we cleared above.  
Obj. 2. He citeth next Act. 2: 38- Repent & be baptised every one of you, for the remission of sins. Ans. (1) This would plead for Repentance alone, without Faith. (2) It would plead for as great an interest for Baptism, as for Repentance: Neither of which can be owned, as true. Therefore the true meaning of the place is, Turn from your former way of seeking slavation, by your own corrupt Imaginations & Superstitions, which led you, out of blind zeal, to crucify the Lord Christ; & embrace the Gospel of Salvation, now preached to you through that Lord, whom ye crucified, that ye may receive Remission of sins, through Faith in him; & be baptised, that you may have the outward sign of your professing of having Remission of sins through him, & a seal of Remission, granted to you, through him. And this may be cleared from the promise subjoined, & ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost, which is no where promised unto Repentance; but unto the faith of the Gospel, and the receiving of Christ therein, & was accordingly bestowed Act. 8: 12. with 15, 17. & 9: 17. & 13: 52. & 15: 7, 8. & 19, 1: 2, 6. And what Peter exhorted then unto, they did vers. 41. And what was it, that they did? They gladly received his word, that is; willingly and cheerfully they embraced the Gospel, and so were added to the Church.  
Obj. 3. He citeth Act. 26: 20. that they should repent & return to God, and do works, meet for repentance. Ans. But here is no mention made of Justification, or of Remission of sins; And who denieth, but people are to Repent, & return to God, & do works meet for Repentance? This is not the thing, that is here in question. If he mean vers. 18. where it is said. To open their eyes, & to turn them from darkness to light, & from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiuness of sins, & inheritance among them, that are sanctified by Faith, that is in me. I Ans. There is no word of Repentance here, but express mention made of Faith. It is true, turning from darkness to light & e. will include Repentance: Yet it is by Faith, that both Forgiuness of sins, & the Inheritance, & Sanctification is had; for by Faith that is in me, may refer to all these three: And though this should be denied; Yet all that could be hence inferred, would amount but to this, That Repentance is necessarily called for in these, who receive forgiuness, and the Inheritance, or would receive them. But all this is nothing to our present question.  
Obj. 4. He citeth in the Margin Luk. 24: 47. And that Repentance & Remission of sins should be preached in his name. And Luk. 15: 7. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner, that repenteth. Ans. This last place maketh no mention of Pardon, or of Justification, & only saith, that Repentance will Include Faith, & doth import the whole Conversion of a sinner unto God, whereof Faith in Christ is the first & chief step. As to the other place, we told before, that by Repentance here is understood all that duty, which is called for in the Gospel, this being a short sum of the whole preaching of the Gospel, & that therefore by Remission of sins all the blessings & favours, that sinners need & are promised in the Gosspel, must be understood. So that this maketh nothing against us: Yea if these two expressions were strictly to be taken, it would give ground to infer, that Repentance alone were the Condition of Remission. But what saith all this to the purpose now in hand? do any of these expressions give the least colour to infer, that Repentance strictly taken hath the same use & Interest in Justification, that Faith hath?  
Obj. 5. Others possibly may urge Act. 8: 22. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, & pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. Ans. (1) If this place prove any thing that way, it will say as much for the Interest of Prayer in Justification, equal to the Interest of Faith; as for the Interest of Repentance. (2) Yea & plead for these only with exclusion of Faith, or at least for the Sufficiency of Repentance & prayer without Faith, which is not here expressly mentioned. (3) But Repent here is taken in a comprehensive sense, as including Faith, its ground & Cause, & whereof it is the expressive evidence, & sensible effect; So that the presence of Repentance in such, as would be Pardoned, may hence be well inferred: which is granted necessary, upon several accounts, but the present question is, whether it hath the same Place, Office & Influence in Justification & Pardon, that Faith hath?  
Obj. 6. It may be, some will f●rther object Luk. 13: 3, 5- except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish: And this likely was the passage, which Mr. Baxter cited in the first place, the printer putting vers. 35. for 3. 5. through a mistake. But I Ans. This place only proveth, what is not denied, to wit. That Repentance is necessarily required of such, as would be saved: And if hence it be inferred, that therefore not only its presence, but its interest is the same with Faiths, in Justification; the Interest of good works & of all commanded duties, may be hence inferred to be the same with Faiths, in justification, because these are as necessary, in order to Salvation, as is Repentance.  
Obj. 7. Prov. 28: 13. He that covereth his sin, shall not prosper; but who so confesseth & forsaketh them, shall find mercy. Ans. (1) If forsaking of sin be here taken strictly for Repentance, & if this place be urged pertinently to the point now in hand, Confession of sin will be made to have the same influence, & will be made more necessary, than Faith itself, which is not here expressly named. (2) Finding mercy is not strictly to be understood of Justification, or of mere Pardon, but is to be taken more largely for Felicity here & hereafter, as being opposed to a not prospering: And so hence can only be inferred the necessity of the presence of confessing & forsaking of sin, in such as would find grace & mercy in the eyes of the Lord, & would prosper in all their ways.  
Obj. 8. Christ is sent, to preach good tidings to the meek, the broken hearted, the mourners, & to such as are under the Spirit of heaviness Esai. 61: 1, 2, 3. Ans. This place indeed proveth, that Christ was anointed to preach good tidings unto the meek, to bind up the broken hearted, to comfort all that mourn, to appoint & give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning & the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; but here, as the Repentance imported is something more than ordinary, as the expressions intimate, so the good, that Christ is here said to be sent to do unto them, is something more than ordinary, to wit, Comfort & Joy in an high measure, which is more than mere Pardon, or Justification; some pardoned & justified may stand in need hereof, being indeed mourners in ashes, & under a spirit of heaviness, notwithstanding of their being in a justified state. So that this place cometh not home to the point now in question.  
Obj. 9 Is not this to favour the Antinomians, who say, that Repentance is needless, and is a mere legal duty, neither to be urged, nor practised under the Gospel. Ans. Though we say, that Repentance hath not the same Place, Office & Interest in & about Justification & Remission of sins, that Faith hath; Yet we give no countenance unto the Antinomian error, because we affirm Repentance to be necessary, in all such as are Justified, and the real beginnings of Gospel Repentance to be also necessary, unto such as are to be justified, I say the beginnings, because I conceive, the principal parts or workings of saving & Gospel-Repentance follow faith, and upon Faith in Christ is the union betwixt Christ & the Believer made, and the man brought into a justified state. Seeing then we press & urge the exercise of Repentance as a constant duty, & require it in all such, as would enjoy Peace & Comfort here, & be saved here after, we yield nothing unto the Antinomians. And against them we urge the same Scriptures, that have now been alleged, & others also, as irrefragable proofs of the necessity of this grace, though to other ends, than to be justified thereby, in such manner, as we are said to be Justified by Faith.  
Obj. 10. Do not our Divines ordinarily say & prove, that Faith & Repentance are Conditions of the Covenant of Grace. I Ans. True, but their meaning is not, that Repentance is the same way a Condition of Justification, that faith is; but that term, Conditions of the Covenant they take largely, to wit, to signify & import the duties required of such, as are within the Covenant of Grace; & not strictly, for Conditions of entering into Covenant; These two are carefully to be distinguished: many things may be called the Conditions of marriage, that is, duties of married persons to other, that can not be called Conditions of making up the marriage Relation, as is manifest; & so is it here. Many duties are required of Believers, that neither are, nor can be called Conditions of Justification, or of entering into Covenant with God.  
Obj. 11. But do not many both in sermons & in writings, even when speaking of Pardon & of justification, join Repentance with faith? Ans. It may be so; but their meaning is not, I conceive, to give an equal share of Interest, Power & Office in & about justification, unto Repentance, with that, which they acknowledge Faith to have, but either their purpose is, hereby to show the inseparable connexion, that is betwixt faith & Repentance, or to show, that they speak of that faith, which is attended with this necessary Grace of Repentance, & doth effectually work the same; or both rather: So that their true meaning is, to give the due privilege & interest unto that saith, which can prove itself to be real & true justifying faith, by effectuating Repentance, never to be repent of; and thus they withal satisfy an Objection, or question, that might be made, if they had mentioned faith alone; for it might be enquired, How shall we know, whether our faith be of the right kind, or not? Now their joining of Repentance with faith, doth shortly answer this question; Repentance being a concomitant, and a fruit of true faith, & more sensibly felt, & obvious to their perception, might be to them a vive & perceptible expression of true & justifying faith.  
Obj. 12. But seeing faith by some is called, that which doth morally qualify the subject to be a fit patient so be justified: why may not Repentance have an equal share in this moral Qualification, with Faith? I Ans. If we should make faith to have no other Interest in justification, than Repentance hath, or may be yielded to have, we may easily grant, that Repentance hath the same & equal Interest with faith: but it is denied, that faith hath no other Interest, but as that, which doth morally qualify etc. drieness in wood may qualify it for the fire, & yet the wood may be long so, before it become the subject of fire; & so may it be with moral qualifications: many a man may be morally qualified to be a fit match for such a woman; or a woman for such a man; & yet the marriage Relation never be made up betwixt them: But this cannot be said of faith, whereby the marriage is made, & the person is actually justified, & not a bare fit patient to be justified.   

CHAP. XXX  
Whether Love, purpose of Obedience, or perseverance be Conditions of Justification.  
BY what is said, in our foregoing discourse, we may know, what is to be answered unto these Questions, so that we need not insist long, in the discussing of them. Some of late lay down for a ground (and hereby give occasion to discuss these and such like questions) that whatever is or may be called a● the Covenant of Grace, is, upon that account, & may be called, the Condition of Justification; thus confounding the whole order of the Gospel, & making all duties, required of such, as are in Covenant, & ordained of God for other ends & uses, to be required as Conditions of entering in Covenant, and to have the same use and end in & unto justification, which faith hath; contrary to express Scripture, saying, that we are justified by faith, & not by works of Righteousness, which we do, and contrary to the whole method of the Gospel, & grounds laid down therein, for an acceptable performance of obedience.  
As to Love, Papisits make it the form (as they speak) of faith, not in itself simply considered, but in order to Justification & Salvation thereby, saying that faith without Love is dead: And it is true, that true & saving faith worketh by Love: and that faith cannot be called Saving or Justifying, which doth not excite unto acts of Love, and many may deceive themselves with a faith, that will not be found, when tried, to be of the right stamp: as the Apostles james teacheth. But yet they put no specific difference, commonly, betwixt this dead faith & faith informed; for both (as to what is essential & intrinsik to faith, which they hold to be an assent unto all things, revealed by the Lord unto men, upon the account of the Veracity and Authority of the Revealer) are one & the same; so as one and the same faith may be sometime dead, when to wit, not working by Love, & sometime lively, when form with Love. But of these things we need not here speak: only we see, that with them, Love is in a manner more necessary unto Justification, than faith; & must be looked on, as a necessary condition thereunto, even as that, without which faith can do nothing. And to confute this here is but vain. seeing it shall serve nothing to our purpose; because with them justification is the very same, we call Sanctification.  
But others, who have more sound and distinct apprehensions of justification, tell us, That love is the condition of justification, because a condition of the Covenant of Grace; as if all the duties of such, as are in Marriage Relations, were conditions of making up the marriage Relation, Others, who distinguish betwixt Faith & Evangelick Obedience, as betwixt consent to a man's Sovereignty, & obeying him, as Sovereign, as doth Mr. Baxter Confess. p. 89, 90. Yet say, that Love is comprised in Faith, and is some degree of Justifying Faith & not properly a fruit of it; because the wills apprehension of a thing good, or earnest willing & accepting it, is the fame with Love; so is the wills Consenting, Electing & accepting; & all this being in Faith, Love must be comprehended in it; Yea they say, that as Love & Faith are propounded in the Gospel, as of the same necessity, so they are necessary in Justification, & concurrent in apprehending Christ. So spoke Mr. Baxter in his Aphorisms. And in his Confess. p. 34, 35. he saith. Though Charity, as it respecteth other objects, is no part of faith, yet as it respecteth an offered Saviour, it is as much essential to faith, to receive Christ with Love, as it is essential to a Saviour (the object of faith) to be good for us; for good as good is received by love. Nor was it ever the Intent of the Holy Ghost, to take faith in Christ, in so narrow a sense, as includeth not Love to him, when it is saving Faith, that is spoken of.  
In reference to all which, we need say but those few following things.  
1. The Scriptures do plainly enough distinguish betwixt Faith & Love, They are reckoned as distinct fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5: 22. Love, joy-faith yea Faith is said to work by love Gal. 5: 6. we hear of the work of faith, and labour of love 1. Thes. 1: 3. we hear of Charity out of a pure heart, & of faith unfeigned. 1. Tim. 1: 5. And the grace of our Lord (saith Paul 1. Tim. 1: 14) was exceeding abundant, with Faith & Love, which is in Christ jesus. We hear of the breastplate of Faith & Love. 1. Thes. 5: 8.  
2. The Scriptures do plainly tell us, that we are Justified by Faith, as we heard, but never saith, that we are justified by love: And sure, as it is best for us, to regulate our expressions, according to the Lord's Revelation of this mystery; so it cannot but be offensive to use such expressions, as not only are not scriptural, but also seem inconsistent with Scriptural expressions: when the Scripture saith expressly & frequently, that we are Justified by faith, and that in opposition to works, and not only saith it, but proveth it, it cannot be justifiable in us to say, that we are Justified by Love; seeing that would at least seem to cross the Apostle's assertion, the force whereof is (as ours abundantly evince against the Papists) that we are Justified only by Faith, & consequently by no other grace: neither by Love, nor by Hope, nor by Patience, etc.  
3. By the Scriptures telling us, that we are Justified by Faith, & never saying, that we are Justified by any other grace, as by Love etc. we are given to understand, that Faith hath other Operations, Uses & Ends, in the office of justification, than Love, or any other grace hath: And therefore to insinuate, that love hath the same Interest & Office in & about justification, that Faith hath, is to deny, or overturn the proper & specific actings of Faith, in order to justification: And, how small a matter soever this may appear to be at first; yet, when it is further prosecuted, or the ground of this searched into, or its design & tendency considered impartially, it will befound of a deeper consequence, & to tend to the alteration of the whole specific nature of the Covenant of Grace, as it is distinct from the Covenant of Works: for though both Faith & Love may & must be looked upon, as acting upon the same object Christ; yet when Faith is conceived as acting no other way, than Love, and both, as potestative Conditions, or as parts of one Potestative Condition, and no other way; it is plain enough, how the special actings of faith, in compliance with the design of God's Wisdom, Grace, and Love in the Gospel contrivance, and thereupon in receiving & resting upon Christ, as the alone propitiating Sacrifice, and on his Surety-Righteousness, as that alone, by virtue of which they are to expect Justification & Acceptance with God, & to receive the Atonement, are laid aside: And the believing soul is supposed not to act on Christ, nor apply Him & his Righteousness in order to the being Acquit from the sentence of the Law, & from the Curse, due for the breach of the same, in that particular manner, that both its case & condition requireth, and the Gospel pointeth forth, and the experience of soul, attaining hereby to Peace, doth confirm.  
4. It is true, there is Love to Christ, in the soul, that believeth, and it must be so; and it is true also, that this Love is called for in the Gospel; but hence it will not follow, that Love is the Condition of Justification, or that every thing, that is present with, or accompanieth faith in justification, hath the same Life, Ends, and Interest in Justification, or the same Influence thereupon, that faith hath; far less will it follow, that that which followeth faith, and whereby faith worketh through all the after-carriage of a Believer, hath the same Place, Power and Interest in & about justification, that faith hath, as we showed above of Repentance.  
5. If by this Love nothing else were meaned, but that Love of desire, that necessarily accompanieth the souls accepting, and closeing with what is good, or offered as good; sure, it would have given no ground of offence to have called it so, & would have been more acceptable, than to have called it otherways, even though speaking strictly, the Love of desire may be called Love, and is a Love, in its own kind: and therefore, I judge, that denomination might have been rather chosen, which would have given no offence, than the other, which to avoid suspicion and offence, calleth for so much waste of words, to render the expression less, noxious, especially, seeing for all that is said, in clearing of the same, all ground of suspicion is not removed, but that some other thing was intended, than that mere Love of desire, that is inseparable from the will's earnest pursuit after, or embracing any good thing offered; especiasly when it is said, That joh. 16: 27. & 14: 21. make Love the antecedent Condition of God's Love & Christ's Love to the person. And that that goeth with Remission and is a Love of Reconciliation; and Reconciliation comprehendeth Remission: At least you will never show out of Scripture, that the procureing God's Love, and the Procuring Remission & Reconciliation have not the same conditions: for hereby it is manifest, that Love, even as distinct from faith (as it is joh. 16: 26 - because ye have loved me & have believed that I am come out from God) is made as formal & full a Condition of Reconciliation & Pardon, & consequently of justification, as faith his; Yea & that both faith & Love are made Conditions procuring God's Pardon & Reconciliation. Thus speaketh Mr. Baxter against Mr. Cartwright pag. 202. But lest any should think, that either of these places cited should prove, what Mr. Baxter allegeth them for, it would be considered. (1) That joh. 14: 21. He is speaking of such, as are already believers & justified, when he is speaking of such as have already Christ's commandemants, & keep them. (2) He speaketh of the Fathers & of his own Love of such, in the future time, which cannot be meaned in reference to his Disciples, unless we think, they were not yet justified, contrary to the very forgoeing verse, & many other passages in that discourse, particularly Chap. 14: 1, & 15: 3, 4, 5, 9 (3) This is meaned of a Love of Manifestation; as Christ's own words added exegetically declare. And I will Love him & will manifest myself to him. (4) This same sort of expression of Love is also to be understood joh. 16. as the whole scope cleareth, this being spoken to persuade them, that they should receive the return of their prayers & should not ask the Father in vain; for such a Love carrieth he towards you (as if he had said) that, in a manner, I need not intercede for you. (5) And so the Love of the disciples here mentioned, is that Love of complacency, which they had in Christ, in abiding still in his Company, and delighting in him, whom they had followed as their Master, all alongs; and the cause from whence this flowed, is added, and have believed, that I came out from God.  
As to the second particular, to wit. Purpose of obedience. M. Baxter in his Aphorisms told us, that as the accepting of Christ for Lord (which is the hearts (Subjection) is as essential a part of justifying faith, as the accepting him for Saviour: So consequently, sincere obedience (which is the effect of the former) hath as much to do in justifying us before God, as (some) Affiance, which is the fruit of the latter. Hereby he would seem to give the same Interest unto actual Obedience, in Justification, that he giveth unto Affiance, which cannot be wanting unto Justifying Faith, yea himself confesseth to be an essential act of Faith, in the margin of these words, Printed with Mr. Cartwrights observations and his Reply pag. 204. But in his Confess. (as we heard above) p. 89, 90. he putteth as great a difference betwixt faith, & Evangelick Obedience, as betwixt the Consent to Marriage Relation, and the conjugal Fidelity & Obedience of a wife to her husband: So that hereby it is manifest, that with him, all Obedience cannot comprised in faith, & so cannot be a Condition with Faith of Justification: and this he saith pag. 90. expressly. So that I do no more (as I am accused) comprise all Obedience in Faith, because I comprise a Love to the Redeemer, & a Consent to be governed by him, than I comprise all Coujugal Obedience & Fidelity of a woman to her husband, in the Marriage ●●venant or Consent, because I comprise in it Love to the Man & a Covenant of fidelity & obedience to the future. His meaning is not then, that actual Obedience is either a part of faith, or hath the same interest of a Condition in Justification, that faith hath. Therefore he tells us more plainly & positively his meaning, as to this, Confess. pag. 38: 39 n. 22. This Covenant (saith he, meaning the Covenant, that a Believer entereth with Christ, as a Saviour, and in him, with the offended majesty (containeth an engagement to future obedience: So that though our first faith be not the same thing with Obedience to Christ- yet in taking Christ for King, it essentially containeth a Resolution & Covenant to obey him. Hereby we see, that a Resolution, Promise, or Covenant to obey Christ, for the future, is essentially included in faith, as justifying, & consequently that this must be as kindly a part of the Condition of Justification, as any thing in Faith. And next, that the ground of this is, because justifying faith, as justifying, doth as kindly & really take Christ for a King, as for a Priest. This is further explained by what he saith immediately before n. 21. The very nature of this saving Faith, is to be a Heart-Covenanting of a Sinner with Christ, as a Saviour- Even as is a Covenant of a woman to her husband, a Soldier to his Commander; a Subject to his Prince, a Scholar to his Master; it is our becoming his Disciples.  
By which we see these things laid down, as truths to be received.  
1. That the souls Covenanting with Christ, or accepting of him, as offered in the Gospel, is like the Covenanting of a woman with her Husband, of a Soldier with his Commander▪ a Subject to his Prince etc.  
2. That as the Woman, Soldier or Subject, Resolve, Covenant & Promise to perform obedience unto the Husband, Commander, or King, so the Sinner, in Covenanting with Christ, doth Resolve, Covenant and Promise to perform Obedience unto Him.  
3. That therefore, this Resolution, Covenanting & Promising to perform obedience, being essential to Justifying Faith, is a formal Condition of Justification, & the meaning of faiths being the Condition of justification must be this, the Man's Resolution, Covenanting & Promising to perform Obedience, is the Condition of justification; or at least this part of faith, as well as others, is the Condition.  
4. And the ground of this is, because Justifying faith, even as justifying, or in order to justification, acteth as directly & expressly on Christ as a King, as on Christ, as a Priest.  
In Answer to which, I shall but briefly say these things.  
1. The similitudes adduced halt in one thing, & that one thing, is all, as to our present business. A woman Covenanting with her husband, and thereby promising obedience, or a Soldier with his Commander, or a Subject with his Prince, presuppose & acknowledge, Power & Strength in themselves to perform the obedience promised, & upon the Supposition & Conviction of this power & ability in themselves to perform what shall be commanded, they willingly & of their own accord, promise to put forth that Power, Strength & Ability of theirs, unto the performance of obedience, that shall be required. But it is not so, in our case, The Sinner, who is now supposed to be about Covenanting with Christ, through the Spirit of Conviction, & Humiliation, is put far from all his natural Pelagian conceits & apprehensions of himself, & of his own abilities; He is now made to see, that as he hath nothing at present, wherewith to Satisfy God, for the sins that are charged upon him; nor to allure Christ, to do for him; unless it be wretchedness & misery, that may move Christ to compassionate his case; so he can do nothing for the future, that can be accepted of God, till he be renewed; He is made to see, that there is a Natural Impotency (I mean not a physical impotency, as if he wanted a soul, or Faculties) in him to any thing that is good, & a pravity of Will, whereby it is impossible, that he can do any thing, conform to the will of God, until he be Regenerated, made willing by an omnipotent Power, & have a new active Principle of life and grace, given unto him, or infused in him, by the Spirit of Jesus.  
2. Whereupon, it is manifest, That a sinner in that plight (& in that Condition we must consider him to be, who is now seeking to be Justified, and to be delivered from the wrath of God for sin) in fleeing to Christ for refnge, cannot be thought to be making any such Promises, or having any such Resolutions, in order to his Justification, and & Freedom from the Curse of the Law; He, that is throughly convinced of his total Impotency, will not think (while he is under the power of these Convictions) of making any Engagements for obedience in time to come: Yea, where any such things really were, it might be feared, that the work of Conviction was not keep enough; and that such, so acting, would not receive Christ freely, as he is offered in the Gospel; but rather came with a price in their hand, a parcel of fair promises for the future, of doing that, which was not in their power. But it will possibly be said. That though there be no express and explicit Engaging & Promiseing here; yet there cannot but be a virtual engageing; as in the making of Marriage, though the woman do not explicitly promise obedience, yet her engagement is included in her acceptance of the person. I Answer. Let us suppose, that the woman is every way as unable to obey her husband, as the sinner, not yet converted, is to obey the commands of God; & that from her husband alone she must receive that, whereby she shall become able: & then see, if her consenting to the match do formally include, even virtually, her engagement to future obedience. I do not suppose, by all this, that the Believer is under no Obligation, or Engagement to Obedience; for as he hath received a principle of obedience, even the new heart, the willing mind, and the renewed faculties; so he is under many Obligations, Promises, Vows & Engagements explicit & virtually, to carry as devouted unto God, in all obedience: but we are speaking here of a person, not yet out of the state of nature, but being under the terrors of the Lord, and Convictions of guilt & misery, is seeking after a Reliete, unto his present case, to wit, how he may be freed from the Curse of the Law, and put in a Justified state, & in Favour with God.  
3. Hence, it is much to be doubted (however it be put beyond all doubt, or disput, with Mr. Baxter) whether Faith, Saving & Justifying, include essentially any such formal Engagement & Resolution unto Obedience; seeing the person, of whom we are speaking, fleeth to Christ, for relief, as one, that is throughly convinced of his own Impotency, Inability to do any thing less or more for his own help, or for pleasing of God. This Resolution unto new obedience is rather included in Repentance (which is distinct from Faith, as we saw above) & so it is mentioned, in the description of Repentance, given in our shorter Catechism.  
4. But it will be said, How then is Christ received by faith, as a King? I Ans. Not to debate that here, which is to be spoke to afterward, (to wit, whether justifying faith, while it is acting, in order to Justification, doth receive Christ, as a King? or rather, (for this is more properly the question) whether a person, under the Conviction of sin & wrath, & seeking for Pardon & Acceptance in & through Christ, doth six the eye of his soul upon Christ as King, or as Priest? Or whether there is that in Christ, considered as a King, or considered as a Priest, that is more suitable unto the present case of the convinced sinner? Or whether, or not, the Person, in the Condition mentioned, seeketh relief rather from Christ, as a Priest, offering up himself, as a Sacrifice giving his blood for a Ransom, to Satisfy the justice of God for sins; or as a King, endued with Authority to subdue sin? And if the question thus were proposed unto the experienced Christians, or unto the persons, in such a Condition, it would, I suppose, receive a very quick answer.) Unto the question now proposed I say, That, though it were granted, that Faith, in order to the man's Justification, did act as well on Christ as a King, as on Christ, as a Priest (which yet cannot be granted; as is already hinted, and shall be cleared afterward) yet it would not follow, that this Faith did essentially include a Resolution and Engagement to future obedience: for it is not here, as in Subjects receiving a person for their King, as was said already, whose Persons or Subjects, have power & ability, & their will (as to these things) in their own hand, & may therefore promise obedience, according as the Relation made up, formally engageth unto; & yet Mr. Baxter ag. Ludiomaeus Colvin. §. 15. saith That this is but to consent to the Relation, or to his Sovereignty, that they may obey him, and Love, honour & obedience come after. But if we should suppose a company of men, lying bound in chains, in dungeons, under the feet of cruel Tyrants & Enemies. & in that case receiving one for their King; would their receiving of him for their King firstly & primarily import a formal engagement, on their part, to obey him? I suppose, it would import some other thing, anteriour to that, to wit, their ready consent, th●t he, by all the power & might he can make, shall lose their bands, and set them at liberty, & put them in the case & condition of free Subjects. Now the case is so here with us, with advantage; for not only, are we in bands, and lying in prison, and so unable to perform any Obedience; but naturally, till a change be made, we are utterly unwilling & averse from performing any acts of Obedience, though it were in our power, so that before we be in case to yield obedience, the whole man must be renewed, Judgement, Will & Affections; when therefore, we, in such a case, receive Christ, as our King, it is firstly & chiefly, that he may make us willing in the day of his power; that he may make us his Subjects, willing & obedient, & ready to do his will; that he may lose our bands, deliver us from the bondage & slavery of sin, bring us out of captivity, & from under the power of Satan, & work in us both to will & to do, according to his good pleasure. These are Acts of Christ's kingly power, these are Benefits, that answer the present necessity of wakened souls: these therefore must be the good things, their souls must seek after, & for these things must they go to him, as King, & in reference to these must they lay hold on Him: So that this is mainly employed in their receiving of Christ, as King. In like manner, when they receive him, as a Prophet they do not come unto him, as other Scholars do to their Masters, bringing a Capacity, a Faculty & an Engine with them for learning, without which all the Master's pains in giving Instructions, & theirs in studying hard, will be in vain: but they come unto him, in the through conviction of their Blindness, incapacity to learn, want of Understanding to perceive the things of God, and to take up the mysteries of the Kingdom: that he may teach them, as never man taught; by giving them an hearing ear, and an understanding Heart, by opening their eyes, to see the mysteries of God & of Christ; that he may so teach, as to write his laws in their heart; cause their hear●● to come to wisdom, & cause them, to know the way, wherein they should walk. It is true, the receiving of Christ as King includeth also their obligation to own him, as such, by receiving his Laws, subjecting unto his Dispensations, etc. And the receiving of him as Prophet, includeth their obligation to acknowledge him for their only Teacher, and to depend on him for their Instruction: But yet I say, as this speaketh out no formal promise or engagement to actual Obedience & actual learning, but rather an Engagement & Resolution to be willing that he may act the part of a Prophet & of a King towards them, and so cause them carry & look like Scholars & Subjects; so the thing that is firstly & mainly in their eye, in their coming to Christ, is that which suiteth their present case, and answereth their present felt necessity, & is an help to their present pinch. What Engagements may be laid upon them by these Relations; or what Resolutions they may have, after they are renewed in the Spirit of their minds, and united unto Christ, unto actual obedience, in the power and strength of the Lord, is not to the present purpose, while we are speaking of what the Soul doth, in order to Justification.  
5. Hence we see, how groundless it is, to say, that a Resolution to actual obedience is a Condition of justification: This we find no where required in order to Justification: This is no where called a Condition of Justification. We are no where said to be Justified by this Resolution. This is inconsistent with the frame of a poor wakened soul, seeking Justification. This would in part make the gift of Justification not free & of free grace, but to be of works or of a Resolution for works; and so would give ground (in part at least) of boasting & of glorying, contrare to the whole frame of the Gospel. And so this would lessen the difference betwixt the Old Covenant of works, and the New Covenant of Grace.  
Having thus dispatched the second particular, we come unto the Third; to wit, to inquire, whether perseverance be a Condition of Justification? And of this we need not speak much, seeing by what is already said, it is apparent how false this is. Every thing, that is required of such, as are Believers, cannot be called a Condition of Justification. It is said, that a Condition suspendeth the obligation, to bestow the benefit promised upon Condition, until it be performed: And so it will hence follow, that, if Perseverance to the end be the Condition of Justification, no man can be justified, until he have persevered to the end; & so no man shall be justified in this life; whereby an end is put to all our present debate, the subject thereof being taken out of the way.  
If it be said. That faith is the Condition of Justification, as it endureth to the end. I Ans. That that faith, which will endure to the end, is the Condition, I grant. But I deny, That Faith is the Condition of Justification, as it endureth to the end, we no where read of Faiths being the Condition, under this reduplication, as enduring to the end; for than it would follow, that no lively faith, how strong so ever, could unite a soul to Christ, until it had endured to the end, and so man upon his first Believing 〈…〉 be never so liuly & strong, can be said to be justified, to have passed from death to life; contrare to all the Scriptures. And this would too much assimilate the New Covenant unto the Old, wherein Adam was to work out his days work to the end, ere he had Right to his wages. Yea & hence it would follow, that in this life, there were none of the fruits of justification to be had, such as Peace with God, Access to God, Glorying in tribulations, Joy & Comfort, contrare to experience, & the Scriptures. Rom. 5: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11. & 8: 35. to the end. Luk. 7: 50. Mat. 9: 2. 2. Thes. 2: 16. Heb. 6: 18, 19 1. Pet. 1: 4.  
So that in a word, from what hath bein said, it is evident, how little ground M. Br. hath to glory in this way of his, and though to an inadvertent person it may appear Plausible, what is adduced for a reason, yet when considered, it will be found fioath and a flourish of words: for be it so, that justifying faith receive whole Christ (which we do not deny: for Christ is not divided: for as there is but one faith, so but one Christ. And I will have occasion to speak more fully to this matter afterward.) Yet what doth Mr. Baxter gain? hath he gained his Peppercorn of Faith or Gospel-obedience to be imputed unto us for Righteousness according to the new law (he should say, the new edition of the Old Covenant, or rather the Old Covenant newly established?) no, by no means: for be it grainted, That justifieing Faith as such respected Christ equally as King and Prophet, as it doth him as Priest (which yet I deny, and shall, without divideing Christ, make it appear) I ask him, how doth it receive Christ Jesus the Lord? Surely he cannot but say, as he is offerred in the Gospel; well then, the Lord, who knoweth what we are, offereth him to us, and makes him to us wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and redemption, so that God in the offer of his Christ as a King, looks upon the sinner in the same capacity to obey him, as in the offer of him as a Priest he is to pay his debt, and that is not only in no capacity but as opposite to such a thing of himself. Hence it as evident that Faith receives Christ as a King not by promiseing or purposeing to obey him, but from a Conviction of its own aversion to purpose to please God, that he by his Kingly Power shall kill the enmity, Conquer the soul, bring it to purpose, as well as practise, work in it to will as well as to do, cast down imaginations, that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God, and bring every thought in captivity to his obedience, so when Faith acts on him as a Prophet, there is in this act neither purpose nor promise, to obey him as a teacher etc. But from a Conviction that the mind is not only void of light, but it is prepossessed with corrupt principles, so that the man that hath nothing but the soul of a man, takes up the whole Gospel Mystery as foolishness. And it is impossible for him, to know these things, since they must be spiritually discerned. I say from this Conviction he receives Christ as his wisdom, as he that shall give him an understanding, to know him that is true; and to make him who is not only as a beast, but so much worse, that his light is darkness, of a quick understanding in the fear of the Lord, and wise to salvation. Now this exactly answereth the sinners need, and hath all his wants made up by Jesus Christ according to his riches in glory, and God's end in making his Christ to poor sinner's wisdom, Righteousness etc. That so he, who glorieth may glory in the Lord. Now if Mr. Baxter will Consider this, he will even lay aside his Peppercorn as of no Price; for here all is without money and without Price to the poor soul etc. and he is considered as a receiver of all from Christ.   

CHAP. XXXI.  
Gospel-obedience is not the Condition of Justification.  
THough, as we heard, Mr. Baxter himself will not say, that Gospel-obedience is the Condition of Justification; yet he recommendeth a book to us to peruse, to the end we may receive much light in the knowledge of the Gospel, I mean the discourse of the two Covenants formerly mentioned, wherein this is asserted with great confidence: And though this be sufficiently confuted by what is said; yet we shall in short take some notice of the grounds of this Man's Confidence, & give some remarks upon what he saith.  
He tells us pag. 132. That the sense, in which the Apostles did assert it, (i.e. Justification by Faith without the works of the Law) was, that faith justifieth without works, antecedent to believing (This is what Bellarmin & other Papists say) & without works, as the works of a literal observation of Moses law, which was opposed by the jews to faith. This is but his fiction, and its grounds may come to be considered afterward. But what is this Faith? It is a Faith (saith he) that hath Repentance, Regeneration & sincere Obedience in a holy life for its inseparable effects. Then (1) this Faith is not fruit of Regeneration, because Regeneration is an effect of it. (2) Then upon a man's sincere Believing, he cannot be said to have passed from death to life, & be freed from Condemnation, nay not until all the effects of faith be produced. And this he expresseth more clearly within a line or two, call Regeneration & new obedience parts of the Condition; thus making men able to Regenerate themselves, with some help of the Spirit, according to his former doctrine.  
Passing his inveighing pag. 134. & forward, against the orthodox doctrine, concerning Justification by faith alone; and loading it with Socinian reproaches, wherein he bewrayeth more acquaintance with Popish, Socinian & Arminian Principles & Consequences, than with the Gosp. I doctrine, either in Theory or practise, I proceed to examine his grounds, which he layeth down Chap. 7. pag. 140, 141. and prosecuteth to the end of that Chapter. His grounds are Ten in number.  
The first is. That works of Evangelical obedience are never in Scripture opposed to God's grace in reference to justification & Salvation. Ans. (1) Here we have the fundamental error of his whole discourse hinted to us; when he putteth Justification & Salvation together, making all that is antecedently required unto Salvation, to be also antecedently required unto Justification; or he must acknowledge no justification, until Salvation come; (2) A perfect contradiction to this ground of his we have Ephes. 2: 8, 9, 10. for by grace are ye saved, through faith, not of works, lest any man should boast: for we are his workmanshipe, created in Christ jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them. Here grace is opposed to works, to good works, unto which we are created in Christ Jesus, & in which we are to walk, and that in reference to the Salvation, that is in justification. The man was so wise for his own unhallowed ends, as never once to take notice of this place. He cannot but grant, that Works & Grace are opposed to other: but he giveth us a very sceptic evasion, telling us, that then by works we are to understand either works antecedent to conversion, or as they are denied (I think he would have said deemed, or some such thing) to merit, at the hands of God; or the works of the Law of Moses, as erroneously contended for by the jews; or the works of the Law as Typical & as opposed to things typified; or the works of the Law, as the Law is in its rigour opposed to the milder economy of the Gospel. And yet all this will not help the matter, for Paul tells us, that even Abraham was not justified by his works, but by faith, in opposition to works Rom. 4: 1, 2, 3. And Abraham's works here excluded from Justification, can be reduced to none of these heads of works here mentioned; They were not works antecedent to Conversion; for in opposition to these it is said, his Faith was reckoned unto him for Righteousness, long after his Conversion. Nor did the holy father dream of any merit in his works, nor were these the works of the Law in any of the senses mentioned; for Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness, even when he was in uncircumcision. Rom. 4: 9, 10, 11. etc.  
He taketh notice of Tit. 3: 5. not by works of Righteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy, he saved us: but giveth us p. 143. this gloss. This change of their condition was not effected, or so much as begun among them by any reformation of their own, till the Gospel came to work it (which is meant by the appearing of the kindness & Love of God vers. 4. & is of like import with. Ch. 2: 11, 12. Ans. By what either Law or Reason he restraineth that appearing of the kindness, & Love of God, mentioned vers. 4. to the Gospel, I know not. (2) And though the Gospel were here understood, that would not help the matter; for the Text saith, that after this did appear, he saved them (that is Justified in the first place, as we see vers. 7.) according to his mercy, & not by work of Righteousness. (3) These works are called works of Righteousness; But no works of their own, before Conversion, can be so called: can the works of such as are foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lasts & pleasures, living in malice & envy, hateful & hating one another, be called works of Righteousness? and yet such were these, before the kindness & Love of God reached them, as vers. 3. showeth. He thinks the same answer may be given to 2. Tim. 1: 9 And so we think, the same reply may suffice.  
His 2. ground is p. 114. That Paul, in speaking aghast justification by works, giveth sufficient caution not to be understood thereby to speak against Evangelick obedience in the case. That is, not to speak against justification by Evangelick works; which were to say, he took much pains for nothing; for if he had but said, that the Ceremonial Law was abrogate, he had sufficiently confuted justification by the Ceremonies, if that had been all the Law he meaned. But how proveth this man, what he here allegeth? He adduceth Rom. 3: 31. But I wonder how did the Apostle by his doctrine establish the Ceremonial Law? In the Spirit of it (saith he) in as much as in preaching justification in the Gospel way, he preached in plain precepts, the necessity of that spiritual purity unto Salvation, which was but darkly taught by the Ceremonial Law. Ans. (1) Then this man supposeth, that he is establishing the Ceremonial Law, by his doctrine in this book; for he thinks, that therein he is preaching up Justification in the Gospel way. (2) Neither did the Ceremonial Law more darkly, nor doth the Gospel in more plain terms preach the necessity of spiritual purity, as the Condition of Justification: So that this Author beggeth what he cannot prove. (3) But that this is the Moral Law, hath been frequently shown above; as also it hath been shown, how & what way it was established, by the doctrine of justification without works; so that we need not regaird his saying; that by the doctrine of justification by faith, they established the moral Law, both in the letter & Spirit of it, in teaching the necessity of Evangelical obedience to it, after a more spiritual & forcible manner, than had been taught before. For this saith nothing for their pleading for obedience to this Law, as a Condition of Justification; which is the thing, he should have said: And if he know not, how Justification without the works of the moral Law, can consist with necessity of Obedience to the Moral Law, upon Gospel grounds, he is ignorant of the Gospel, and hath been more educate in Socinus his School, than in the orthodox Church.  
He citeth to the same purpose Rom. 10: 4. & tells us, that Christ was the end of the Law in his doctrine, having taught that Righteousness of living, which the Law itself taught, but in a more excellent spiritual & effectual manner. Which is a very Socinian like gloss, but no way suiting the words, nor the scope of the Apostle, as the very reading of them may evince, & the following words vers. 7, 8, 9, 10. may put beyond all question, His citeing thereafter pag. 146. Rom. 7: 4. Gal. 2: 19, 20. is to no purpose; for in neither of these, nor any where else, doth he cry up holiness, performed in any manne● whatsomever, as a Condition of Justification; and this our Author should show, or he doth nothing: for we are not against the necessity of holiness, but see more Sure, more Comfortable, more Heart quieting, more Divine, and more Gospellike grounds, whereupon to press holiness, than any he discovereth in all his book, or can, according to his principles.  
His 3. ground is p. 147. That Regeneration or the new creature, as including Evangelical Obedience, is opposed to works of the Law, in the business of man's justification, as well as Faith is, & as well as the grace of God itself is. And this he thinketh to prove from Gal. 6: 15. as Schlightingius the Socinian did before him cont. Meysner p. 148. But one thing is to be proved, to wit, that the Apostle is speaking this, in order to justification, and so contradicting all the former disput he had; which neither Reason, nor Religion will allow us to think, nor do the words, nor any Circumstance of the words, nor any thing of the scope, or of the thread of the Apostles discourse give the least countenance hereunto.  
His 4. ground p. 148. is also from Schlichtingius ubi supra. That Evangelical obedience as well as faith, & together with faith, is opposed to the works of the Law, in reference to justification & Salvation. Gal. 5: 6. Ans. He supposeth here, that Circumcision is the same with the works of the Law, while as these that were crying it up at that time, took it only for a privilege, which might be keeped together with Christianity; and therefore the Apostle told them vers. 3. which they did not take notice of, that by their taking on that badge of circumcision, they made themselves debtors to do the whole Law (2) All that is required in reference to Salvation, is not required in reference to Justification. (3) Faith working by Love denoteth the right & the liuly Faith, which only is Justifying & Saving, but bringeth not in all Evangelic Obedience under Love, as sharing with faith, in the same prerogative of justification, as was showed above.  
His 5. ground p. 149. is. That Evangelical Obedience alone is opposed to the works of the Law, in reference to justification. And this he confirmeth by 1. Cor. 7: 19 borrowing it from Schlightingius, the Socinian, where only two things are wanting, to make this passage a confirmation of his Assertion, one is, that by Circumsion here is meaned the keeping of the Law: and what shall then be understood by Uncircumcision? The other is, that the Apostle is speaking this in reference to Justification, contrary to the whole context.  
His 6. ground ibid. is. That faith itself is an act of Evangelical obedience. Unto which we need say nothing here, having said so much above, to show, that Faith in the matter of justification is not considered as an act of Gospel-obedience, but as an Instrument, laying hold on the Righteousness of Christ, the Cautioner.  
His 7. ground is p. 152. That by Gospel-obedience Christians come to have a Right to Salvation Revel 22: 14. This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 liberty (as it is translated 1. Cor. 8: 9) Power or privilege, as it would seem to import 1. Cor. 9: 18. & elsewhere, is no proper Right; for all that can be called proper Right, the Saints have it through the purchase of Jesus Christ; his blood & his blood alone, hath bought the inheritance to us: And hereby we see the true tendency of this Man's doctrine, even to give us heaven as that, which we have bought with our labour & obedience; that is, to give us heaven by a new Covenant of Works, which Christ hath procured to be made with us. But this Right, is but a liberty to take possession of the crown of life purchased by Christ, & promised, at the end of the journay, in the way, wherein the Lord hath appointed us to walk towards the possession thereof: And can only prove, what we deny not, to wit, the necessity of Holiness, in order to the actual enjoyment of life: But what saith this unto justification? He will not have us put any difference betwixt them, alleging that, such as do, are more curious & nice in distinguishing, than Paul was. And why so? Paul calls justification, the justification of life. Rom. 5: 18. Therefore Justification & Glorification is one & the same, & have every way the same conditions: Ans. It followeth not. He citeth next Rom. 8: 30. which clearly maketh them distinct. What more? He (i.e. Paul) proves that men shall be justified by faith, because it is written, the just shall live by faith Gal. 3: 11. & with him to be justified & blessed are all one Gal. 3: 8, 9 Rom. 4: 7, 8, 9 Ans. What that from Gal. 3: 11. can be made to prove by him, I know not. And as for the next, it will prove as much, that is, just nothing. He might as well infer, that Poverty in Spirit, Mourning, Meekness, Hungering & Thirst●ng after Righteousness, Mercifulness, Purity in heart, Peacemaking & Suffering of persecution, were all the same with glory, because of what is said. Mat. 5: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Yet he proceedeth at this rate, & tells us p. ●54. That Paul useth Righteousness, or justification & life, as Synonimous terms Gal. 3: 21. Ans. As if Justification were not a state of life, unless it were the same with Glory. We have shown above, what a life it is. And (saith he) justification & Condemnation are put in direct opposition to eachother Rom. 5: 18. & 8: 33, 34. Ans. And what then? In short (saith he) Salvation as well as justification is promised to believing joh. 3: 16. Act. 3: 31. Heb. 10: 39 & therefore both must be the immediate effect of faith. Ans. Himself answereth all this, by adding if we take Salvation, as begun here in this life, as the Scripture represents it to be joh. 5: ●4. 1. joh. 3: 14. & 5: 12. He would further prove it from jam. 2: 14. As if in one Chapter the Apostle could not speak, both of Justification & Salvation, unless he would make them both one thing: But though there be a life begun in Justification, that shall at length end in Glory, we see no ground to say, for all that he hath brought forth, that they are so the same, as to require the same previous Conditions: How profitable so ever Mr. Baxter account this Treatise to be, yet I cannot think, that he shall approve of this, which yet is the main design of the book.  
His 8. ground p. 156. That the promise of forgiveness of sins is sometimes made unto Evangelical obedience. This he goeth about to prove from 1. joh. 1: 7. Where the Apostle is showing the Advantages that such have, as have fellowship with God through faith in Jesus Christ, evidenced by their walking in the light (as is clear from vers. 6. and this in particular, that as they will be daily failing, so they will have ready access to the blood of Christ; to get all their sins cleansed away. Neither is the Apostle here speaking of the first Pardon granted, when persons are translated into a state of justification, but he is speaking of such▪ as are already in that State. He cite●h next to this purpose 1. Pet, 1: 2. & addeth they were not elected to the benefit of being sprinkled with the blood of Christ, without obedience. Making that a condition of being sprinkled with the blood of Christ, which the Apostle mentioneth, as a distinct medium, to which they were elected, in reference to eternal life, the supreme end, as to them: And he might as well say, they were not elected to the benefice of obedience without being sprinkled with the blood of Christ: and that too agreeth more with truth.  
His 9 ground p. 157. is. That to forgive injuries is an act of Evangelical obedience to that precept Mat. 11: 25. And yet without this, men cannot be pardoned & so not justified Mark, 11: 25. Mat. 6: 15. & 18: 35. Ans. Though men cannot be pardoned without this, it will not follow, that therefore it is a part of the condition of Justification: but only proveth, that this must be present, as an evidence of their acting Faith on Jesus Christ, in truth & reality, in order to pardon: And these passages are explications of the fifth petition of the Lord's prayer, the sense whereof is well given in our larger Catechism §. 194. in these words, which we are the rather emboldened to ask. & encouraged to expect, when we have this testimony in ourselves, that we from the heart forgive others their offences.  
His 10. & last ground is. That Repentance is an act of Evangelical Obedience Act. 17: 30. & yet pardon of sin, which is essential to justification, is not to be obtained without it. Luk 13: 3, 5. Ans. Of Repentance we have said enough above Chap. XXV. I wonder how he can to this end cite Luk 13: 3, 5. where no mention is made of Remission of sins; but perishing threatened to all, that will not repent.  
I shall not here meddle with his misrepresentation of our doctrine, in the following pages, nor with the grounds & reasons of the preference he giveth, unto his way, seeing, by all that he speaks, he bewrayeth utter ignorance of the Gospel truth, which we own, & of its true Tendency to promove Gospel holiness, beyond any other way, what somever, hatched by Papist's & Socinians, that may be little or nothing beholden to jesus Christ, for Grace here, or for Glory hereafter. And his Insinuations, as if we did not press Repentance & Holiness, is little to his credit, or to the credit of the cause he maintaineth, seeing the contrary is so well known, to say no more.  
Nor shall insist on the grounds he layeth down, to overturn the whole arguings of the Apostle in this matter, seeing they are, upon the matter, the same, that others have laid down, and have been before spoken to: for from a tedious discourse concerning the mistaking apprehensions of the jews, about the Law & the works thereof, in order to justification, to very little purpose, he inferreth p. 117. that doubtless Paul's denial of justification & Salvation to be by the Law, is to be understood in the very same sense, in which the incredulous jews, against whom he disputed, did hold these so be attainable thereby: Forgetting with all, that what Paul wrote, was dictated by the Spirit, & so that for the use of the Church unto the end of the world. But sure, if no other works were here understood, than this Author will have here understood, it could be of little use to the Gospel churches, after the subject of the question, the Ceremonial Law, itself is taken away: And had it not been a shorter & most effectual way to have confuted the jews error here, simply to have proven (as he doth elsewhere) the abolishing of that Law? Beside, we find many things spoken of this Law, against Justification by obedience to which the Apostle disputeth, that cannot agree to the Ceremonial Law, as hath been several times touched. But let us hear what the true question was. We must understand him (saith he) to deny a freedom from the eternal punishment to be attainable by legal Sacrifices: & also to deny that the promise of eternal life was made upon Condition of literal Circumcision, & a literal observation of the Mosaical Law. Ans. If this had been all to what purpose, I pray, did the Apostle labour so much to prove, that not only the jews, but that the Gentiles also were under sin, Rom. 1. & 2. The Gentiles were not, nor yet were to be under the Law of Ceremonies. (2) How could the Apostle infer, that by the deeds of the Law, there should no flesh be justified, from his proving, that both jews & Gentiles were guilty of the breach of the Moral Law, whereby every mouth was stopped, & all the world become guilty before God Rom. 3: 10-20? (3) did only the Law of Ceremonies give the knowledge of sin? Himself proveth the contrary pag. 57 (4) did the curse only belong unto the Ceremonial Law? or did Christ only become a Curse, in reference to the breaches of that? Gal. 3: 10.  
He will not so much as yield p. 119. that Paul doth, on the buy, deny Justification by other works: And that merely because it would destroy his fabric of a judaical Socinian justification: though he pretend, that thereby the Apostles doctrine would be made inconsistent, not only with the Faith of the holy men of old, but also with his own doctrine: But neither did the holy men of old express the Condition of Justification (which he confoundeth with the Condition of the Covenant of mercy) by loving God & keeping his commandments; nor doth Paul speak any such thing, as we have seen, what ever he with Socinians & Arminians say.  
He giveth us another character (which also we heard from others before) of the works, by which Paul denied men were justified, calling them such works, which were apt to occasion boasting Ephes. 2: 9 Rom. 4: 2. But thus he quite perverreth both the sense of the words, scope & argueing of the Apostle; for the Apostle cleareth that it is by grace we are saved: & not by works, upon this very account, that if we were saved or justified upon the account of any of our works, man should boast Ephes. 2: 9 Not of works; why? lest any man should boast, manifestly declaring that all works were laid aside, in this matter, & that for this end, that no man should have any occasion of boasting: & this is not spoken, as every one may see, to qualify, or specify the works that are excluded; these words carry nothing of a restriction in them: The same is clear also Rom. 4: 2. If Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory▪ shall the meaning be, Abraham was not justified by such works, as give ground of gloriation? then the meaning lieth not in the words, but the words do expressly cross & contradict that sense, unless we shall suppose them to have no sense: to speak nothing of the following vers. 3. where believing is mentioned, & not another sort of works, to wit, such as give no ground or occasion of boasting, which, in this case of justification, no man can describe unto us, or tell us what they are.  
He tells us p. 122. that the meaning of these words Rom. 3: 28. Therefore we conclude etc. is no more but this, viz. That a man is justified in the Gospel way But not only is that in the general included; but that Gospel-way is particularly expressed, to be by faith without the deeds of the Law: And consequently his Popish, & Socinian way is diametrically opposite to the Gospel-way.  
He goeth about to explain to us p. 124. etc. what is meaned by their own Righteousness, that is so frequently set in opposition to the Righteousness of God, & tells us, that it was so called upon a threefold account. 1. Because they sought the pardon of their sins by their own Sacrifices. Ans. And why not also by their works of Obedience? Sure. neither Abraham, nor David sought for pardon upon any such accout, & they renunced other works, than these. Is that all the Righteousness that Paul renunceth Phil. 3: 9? Was he then occupied about Sacrifices? Some thing else sure is understood. 1. Cor. 4: 4.  
2. Because (saith he) they did not think Regeneration, or Supernatural grace necessary to the obtaining of it. Ans. And truly, all the Regeneration & Supernatural grace, which he thinks necessary, is but that a Pelagian, jesuit & Arminian will think necessary, & no more, as we saw above. But doth he think, that Abraham, or David had any such apprehensions? & yet even their works are excluded from justification. Was that the Righteousness that Paul called his own Phil. 3: 9? I think for shame he will not say it. And what meaneth Paul to say 1. Cor. 4: 4. I know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby justified. This sure, must include works done by supernatural Grace; & after Regeneration.  
3. Saith he. Because it was a way of seeking to be justified of their own devising, & not of God's appointing. Ans. This is very true, but it is not the whole truth in this matter: And his way is of the same Nature, no more consistent with the Gospel method of justification, through the Righteousness of God by faith, than theirs is; for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ he rejecteth with contempt: True justification he is ignorant of; He knoweth no Faith, but what is Popish & Socinian. His New Covenant is but a new edition of the old. His Regeneration is Pelagian. His Good Works are but works flowing from a Principle of Nature, aided with a common divine assistance.  
Let us now in end hear, what is the result of all his discourse. It is to show; That they were the works of the Law, as exclusive of Faith in Christ, & his death: & Not those, which are the immediate effects of Faith in Christ, in his death & in his doctrine. But the Gospel tells us, that in the matter of Justification, all the works, of the Law, are exclusive of faith in Christ, even Abraham's works David's works: & Paul's works; & therefore they were all laid aside, & justification was only looked for through Faith.  
Thus we have seen, what a Gospel this is, which Mr. Baxter recommendeth to us, the consideration whereof may move some to say.  Noscitur ex socio, qui non dignoscitur ex se.  

CHAP. XXXII.  
Of the object of justifying Faith.  
THough something of the Object of Faith was hinted before Chap. XX. when we were speaking of the Nature of Faith: yet it will not be amiss, to speak a little more of it here, both in reference to what followeth; and also, & more particularly in order to the better understanding of, what it is to Live by Faith.  
In order therefore to the explaining of this Object, we would premit these few things.  
1. As was mentioned in the forecited place, there is presupposed unto the right exercise, & actual exerting of Faith, accepting the offered Saviour & Salvation through him, a Conviction of sin & misery, in one measure, or other, whereby the Sinner is brought to a despairing in himself, seeing he can find no remedy, or relief for himself, within himself, and to a concluding, that he is an undone man, if there be no other remedy, than what he is able to do for himself: for after all means assayed (and a soul in that case is ready to turn to many hands, to seek relief, & until preventing grace come, will embrace & close with any promising way, how chargeable & troublesome so ever it be, ere it sweetly comply with the only Man-abasing & Grace-exalting way of Salvation, through Faith in Christ, revealed in the Gospel) he findeth himself disappointed. And further, it is presupposed, as necessarily requisite hereunto, some knowledge of the grounds of Religion; & particularly of the Gospel, of Christ, of his offices, Work etc. all revealed in the Gospel.  
2. When we speak here of the Object of Faith, we mean that Faith, by which a Soul is united unto Christ, & closeth with Him, as offered in the Gospel, & improveth Him to all ends & uses, which their case & necessity, in all time coming, calleth for. So that it is one & the same Faith, whether it be called Uniting Faith, Saving Faith, Justifying Faith, Sanctifying & heart-purifying Faith, or the like. It is one & the same radical grace, receiving these or the like various denominations, from the effects brought about by it, or the several ends & uses it hath, & is appointed for. And the same Faith bringeth all these effects about, in its way, according to the Order, Method & measure, ordained of God: the same Faith, whereby the believer is Married to Christ, & Covenanteth with Him, as Head, Husband, Lord & Saviour, by the same is he justified, adopted & brought into a state of Peace & Reconciliation with God. By the same Faith also doth the man get his heart Purified, & he liveth the life of Sanctification. By the same also he getteth Strength, Reviving, Comfort, & Support in times of Temptation & Trial. So that the Believers life first & last is by Faith, the beginning, progress, all the steps of it, & final Salvation is by Faith; whence it is called Saving Faith, to distinguish it from that Historical Faith, which, (though true in its kind yet) is not from the saving grace of God, nor hath it effects accompanying Salvation.  
3. Though this Faith be one & the same, by which the Believer liveth first & last; and which proveth serviceable & useful to him, on all occasions, & to all ends & uses, that his several necessities call for: Yet in reference to these various ends & uses, it acteth not after one & the same manner, in all points: Faith acteth not every way, after one & the same manner, in order to get Strength for Duties, that it acteth, in order to get Sin Pardoned: It acteth not the same way for Subdueing the reigning power of sin, that it acteth for Justification, nor doth it act the same way for Comfort and upholding strength in a day of trial, that it acteth, in order to Justification: And yet we need not say, that it acteth distinctly & differently, according to every distinct benefit, and blessing, that is had thereby: The different natures of the necessities we stand into, with the different ways of the ●ord's communicating what we stand in need of, according to the various Relations he standeth in, & various offices he hath taken on, in reference to his people's good, may satisfy us herein, & according as these several particular necessities may come under one head, & relief may be conveyed to them, after one & the same manner: All which will be best discerned by the understanding Christian, in his application to Christ, according to his Condition & wants, which he would have helped & supplied.  
4. Hence, though the Principal Object of this Faith be always one and the same; Yet there may be some peculiarities in that object, which Faith eyeth more in one case, than in another: As we find the Saints, in their addresses to God, in their several straits & necessities, sometimes pitching upon one attribute of God, sometimes upon another; according as thereby Faith presented God to the soul in a sutablness to the present case it was in; and so when dispensations seemed to cross the promises, Faith eyed God as Faithful & Unchangable; when enemies appeared strong, difficulties invincible, and the like, Faith took hold on God, as the Almighty, to whom nothing was impossible; & when sin appeared as a discouragement to drive them from their hopes, Faith took hold of the mercy of God etc. So when a poor sinner is under the convictions of sin & threatenings of the Law, Faith must take up Christ in a sutableness thereto, & eye something in Him, that peculiarly suiteth that case; & when again the believer hath need of Light, Instruction, Strength, Comfort, Throwbearing & the like, he fixeth his eye on some thing in Christ, that suiteth that particular necessity: and so Faith acteth accordingly: And thus, though the object remain the same, and Christ be always made use of; Yet Faith may and doth act more immediately on Christ, as Prophet, when in one case whereunto this office carrieth a respect; and at another time more immediately & directly on Christ, as a King, when the present necessity calleth for help from Christ as King; & again faith acteth on him, as a Priest, when only that, which Christ, as a Priest did, can answer their present necessity. Yet, (which is carefully to be observed, to prevent Mr. Baxter's challenge) I do not say, nor see I any necessity to say, that these several acts of Faith, are as so many several Conditions unto the receiving of the several favours, taking the term Condition in his sense; I do not say, that Faith acting one way on Christ is a proper Condition of Justification, & Faith as acting another way on Christ is the proper Condition of Adoption, & that Faith acting a third way on Christ is the proper Condition of Sanctification etc. but that, as the effects & benefices, which sinners stand in need of, are ascribed unto several effectuating acts of Christ, & to the several Relations & offices he hath taken on; so Faith in order to the receiving of these benefits, acteth suitably on Christ, & the Believer is, taught so to do by the Spirit of the Lord, to his Comfort, Hope & Encouragement.  
5. I presuppose here the Formal Object of all divine faith, which is the Truth & Veracity of God; for all divine faith giveth credit unto divine Revelations upon the Credit▪ the Truth & Veracity of the Revealer. Thus saith the Lord, who is true, & who is Truth itself, is the sole Formal ground & Ratio of this Faith.  
6. I presuppose here also that Comprehensive Material Object of all divine Faith, which is the whole will & mind of God, concerning whatsomever thing it be revealed, whether by the Scriptures, or by the Light of Nature. If the Truth & Veracity of God be the only Formal Ground of this Faith, than all that this God revealeth must be believed & received, as true, when known to be revealed by Him. By faith we understand, that the worlds were framed by the word of God. Heb. 11: 3. & we believe all things which are written in the Law & the Prophets Act. 24: 14. Yea & in the whole word of God: I do not here determine, what particular Truths, revealed in the word, are necessarily to be expressly & explicitly believed, by every one, that hath a true Saving Faith, & what not: only this I say, that many particular truths, are revealed, whereof a true Believer may be ignorant, & yet have a true Saving Faith, receiving all, which he knoweth to be revealed by the Lord, & rejecting no one Truth whatsomever, that he knoweth to be revealed.  
But we are here to speak of that Object of Faith, which immediately & directly concerneth our delivery from our natural state of sin and misery; and our eternal Salvation: And this, we judge, to be whole Christ jesus, as he is hold forth and revealed in the Gospel. We say Christ Jesus (1) wholly, and (2) as he is held forth and revealed in the Gospel. And both these, for explications sake, may be branched out, in several particulars.  
I say then first. That whole Christ is the object of Saving or Justifying Faith. Hence are we so often times commanded to Receive him, & to Believe in & on Him & in his name; & Faith is expressed by a Coming to him, Eating & Drinking of Him, Receiving of him, etc. joh. 1: 12. & 3: 16, 36. & 6: 29, 35, 37, 40, 44, 47, 51, 54, 55, 58. & 7: 38. Act. 10: 41, & 13: 38, 39 & 26: 18. Rome 3: 22. Gal. 2: 16. and many more places. Hence this Faith is called the Faith of Christ Gal. 2: 16. and the Faith of the Son of God Gal. 2: 20. So then Saving and Justifying Faith taketh whole Christ.  
1. Faith taketh him & closeth with him wholly; as to his Natures: Faith receiveth him, as Mediator, God & Man in one person, though it be formally terminated on him, as God joh. 14: 1. & as the Son of God Gal. 2: 20. Yet faith receiveth him, as God manifest in the flesh. 1. Tim. 3: 16. as the word made flesh joh. 1: 14. as the Christ, the Son of the living God Matt. 16: 16. joh. 6: 63. as the Immanuel, God with us Esai. 7: 15. Mat. 1: 23. Luk 1: 31.  
2. Faith taketh him wholly, as to his Offices; as a Prophet, as a Priest, & as a King: Faith embraceth him, as that great Prophet Act. 3: 22. as the Word of God, that came out of the bosom of the Father, to reveal his mind & counsel for our Salvation joh. 1: 17, 18. Faith receiveth him also as Priest, offering up himself to God a sacrifice for sins, and making Satisfaction to the justice of God, & as Interceding with the Father Ephes. 5: 2. Heb. 2: 17. & 7: 25. & 9: 14, 28. Hence we hear of Faith in his blood. Rom. 3: 25. And Christ crucified is proposed to Faith to receive, & feed upon. And in order to Justification & Pardon, faith (as we shall hear) hath a special eye unto the Surety. Righteousness of Christ. Faith also receiveth him as a King, to subdue their souls to himself, to make them Subjects, to sway his sceptre in their souls, to subdue all their spiritual Enemies, & to Support, Rule, Guide & Defend them by his Spirit Esai. 33: 22. Act. 5: 31. Psal. 110. through out.  
3. Faith receiveth him wholly, as to the Relations he hath taken on, in reference to his people, to wit, as an Husband Ephes. 5: 30, 31, 32. as an Head Ephes. 5: 23. & 1: 22. Col. 1: 18. as the Chief-Corner stone Ephes. 2: 20. 1. Pet. 2: 4, 5, 6, 7. as a Vine joh. 15: 1, 2, 5. As a Witness, Leader & Commander Esai. 55: 4. as a Light Esai. 42. 6. & 49: 9 Faith receiveth him under whatsoever Title, & Denomination, he is held forth for the comfort of his People.  
4. Faith receiveth him wholly, as to the Work imported, & Ends designed by these Offices, Relations, & Denominations, which he took upon him, & under which he holdeth forth himself.  
5. Faith receiveth him wholly, as to the Furniture & Qualifications, whereby he was fitted for the discharge of the duties, belonging to the Offices, which he did execute both in his Estate of Humiliation & Exaltation; & for throughing & perfecting of the work, which he undertook to do: so that Faith receiveth him, as the Anointed of the Lord, & as having the Spirit of the Lord upon him, & as having all Fullness, all Power & Authority, even the Spirit without measure, Esai. 61: 1. Luk. 4: 18. joh. 3: 34. & 1: 14, 16. Col. 1: 19 & 2: 3, 9, 10. Mat. 28: 18.  
6. Faith receiveth him wholly, as to all the sinners Necessities, Cases, Wants, Straits, & Difficulties, which they either are, or may be into, from first to last: All the Vessels must hang on Him, as the nail, that it fastened in a sure place Esai. 22: 24, 25. Faith eyeth Him, & Him alone, & seeketh the upmaking of all in Him alone, as knowing that in Him only, sinners can be compleet Col. 2: 10. & out of his fullness must they receive, & grace for grace. joh. 1: 16. Therefore is he held forth, as furnished with all richly, that we stand in need of, as a Store house & Treasury of all necessaries, as having Eye salve, Gold & Raiment, & what we need. Revel. 3: 18.  
7. Faith receiveth Him, with all the Sufferings, Crosses, & Inconveniences, that can follow: Faith taketh up the Cross, & followeth Christ. Mat. 10: 37, 38. Mark. 8: 34. Mat. 16: 24. Luk 9: 23.  
Next I say, That Christ as revealed, held forth, & offered in the Gospel, is the object of Saving & Justifying faith: And so  
1. He is received, as the result (to speak so) of the wonderful Contrivance & Design of free Grace, Love, Goodness, Mercy, & Wisdom, concerning the glorifying of God, in the Salvation of the chosen ones, in & through Him: faith here observeth & closeth cheerfully with that gracious Covenant of Redemption, betwixt Jehovah, or God Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and the Son in order to the Salvation of poor man, through the Sons becoming Mediator, God-man, & becoming Cautioner, for such as were given unto Him, and coming in their Law-place, and suffering for them, and their debt. etc. Faith closeth with, and embraceth this foundamental Ground of Salvation, in all its Parts, Ends & Means: and so receiveth Christ, as standing in such a place, and as engageing to through such a design of Love & free Grace; so far as the Believer cometh to know & understand the same to be revealed. We may consider to this end Esai. 53. through out Ephes. 1: 3. & forward. Rom. 3: 21-27. and other places; & there see how Christ is held forth.  
2. He is received as the great Gift of God joh. 4: 10. as the Sovereign Mean, through which all the great design of Grace is brought about, in a glorious manner, as the authorized Ambassador of God, and messenger of the Covenant Mal. 3: 1. as the grand Effect of Love, Grace & Goodwill Tu. 3: 4. joh. 3: 16. as fore-ordained and set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3: 25. and as made of God unto us wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification & Redemption. 1. Cor. 1: 30. He is received as the Power of God, and as the Wisdom of God 1. Cor. 1: 24. as He, in whom God was reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them 2. Cor. 5: 19 and as made sin, though he knew no sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God, in him 2. Cor. 5: 21. that is, as the Lord our Righteousness jer. 23: 6. Thus faith, in receiving Christ, as thus held forth in the Gospel, eyeth God, the Giver, the Sender, the Maker of Christ to be sin, and eyeth God, as the Justifier of the ungodly in him Rom. 4: 5. and as the Reconciler of us to himself by Christ 2. Cor. 5: 18. as forgiving sins, and granting Redemption through Christ's blood, according to the riches of his Grace, wherein He hath abounded toward us, in all wisdom & prudence. Ephes. 1: 7, 8. Here is the incomprehensible riches of the Mercy & Grace of God Father. Son & Holy Ghost, eyed as the Object, according to their peculiar method & order of working, in this grand affair.  
3. He is received as offered & held forth in the Promises: Thus was he embraced of old, as the promised Messiah, and as the substance of all the Promises, which the Fathers of old saw a far off Heb. 11: 13. joh. 8: 56. That promise made to Abraham that in him all Nations should be blessed, was the Gospel Gal. 3: 8. and contained a bunddle of promises vers. 16. And the faith of this, was that faith, by which Abraham was justified Rom. 4: 16-22. Hence all the promises are made good in and through him; and they are all yea & amen, in him 2. Cor. 1: 20. And he is the Substance of them all; for they either hold forth his Person, or his Work, or some thing of Him, or some thing from Him, according to the Various Exigencies & Necessities of his people.  
4. He is received as the grand means of declaring & setting forth the glorious Attributes of God; which the Lord will have manifested in and by this noble design of the Gospel: for Faith sweetly acquiesceth in this design of God's, to preach forth his Excellencies & Virtues, in this manner; and therefore receiveth Christ, as offered & held forth in the Gospel, for such a glorious End; & so receiveth him, as the great Gift of Love joh. 3: 16. as the mean, whereby the Righteousness of God is declared Rom. 3: 25. and his Grace Ephes. 1: 5, 6. and as the Power of God. and the Wisdom of God. 1: Cor. 1: 24, Ephes. 3: 10. Thus Faith seeth the glory of God shining with a peculiar splendour, in the face of Jesus Christ 2. Cor. 4: 6.  
5. So is he received as the grand & only Mean to bring about all the great Ends, designed of God, and desired by them: so that in the receiving of him, all these ends are closed with, and expected: such as Remission of sins, Justification, Acceptation, Adoption, Sanctification, Peace of Conscience, Joy in the Holy Ghost, yea life, and Immortality & full Redemption Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1; 14. Act. 26: 18. Rom. 3: 25. & 4: 6, 7, 8. Ephes. 1: 11, 12, 13, 14. Rom. 5: 1, 2, 3. 1. Pet. 1: 3, 4. So that Faith eyeth here, by way of end, all that Grace & Glory, they would have, and can desire to make them up,  
6. And, in a word, He is received as the grand means to Interest them in God, Father, Son & Holy Ghost, as theirs; to bring them nigh unto God, and in Covenant with Him, and to enjoy the several Effects & Benefits of their Workings. They come to God through Him, as the only way to the Father joh. 14: 6. They close with the Father, as their God and Father through Him, and with the Holy Ghost, as their Sanctifier, and comforter through Him, who sendeth the Spirit from the Father, joh. 15: 26. & 14: 26.  
All these several things belong unto the adequate & full Object of that faith, whereby believers become Justified, Adopted, Sanctified, & shall be at length finally Saved, for they shall receive the end of their faith, the Salvation of their souls 1. Pet. 1: 9 Yet to prevent mistakes, we would add some few considerations.  
1. By all this, we do not mean, that all these Objects, or Various parts or Considerations of the one adequate & compleet Object, are expressly and distinctly conceived & laid hold on by every Believer, when they act faith on Christ, or come unto God through him, according to the Gospel-command: But that these things belong to the full Object of Saving faith, and are implied therein; so that whoever believeth savingly, believeth these several truths, according to the measure of the Revelation of God, and of their Capacity & Information. So that a more full & explicit belief of these particulars is now required under the Gospel, than was required under the Old Testament, when ●his Revelation was not so full and plain, as now: and more is required of such, who have had clear information of Gospel truths; than of others, who have wanted that Advantage: and more also is required of such, as have large Capacities & Understandings, than of others, who are more Rude & of a narrower Reach.  
2. Wherever any of these truths are rightly believed, and heartily closed with, all the rest are implicitly also received; for they cannot be separated; the whole contrivance is such a noble piece of divine art & of infinite wisdom, that all the several pieces, are indissolubly knit together: Hence what ever piece it be, that the believer first doth directly & explicitly close with, or under whatsoever notion Christ at first be embraced, according us the believer cometh to more distinct apprehensions of other pieces or parts of this contrivance, so his heart complyeth with, and he cordially embraceth the same.  
3. We may be hereby helped to understand, the several and various expressions used in Scripture, to point forth faith, acting on its object; for, however these be not always one and the same, but different; yet the same whole object is implicitly understood; and these particulars, expressly mentioned, must not be considered abstractly, or alone; but according to their several place in the grand design, and with respect thereto; as when the object of faith is said to be He, who justifieth the ungodly Rom. 4: 5. and to be Him, who raised up jesus our Lord from the dead vers. 24. and in that same Chap. the object of Abraham's faith, whereby he was justified, is the Promise, that God would make him a Father of many Nations etc. vers. 17, 18. etc. all these must be considered with respect unto Christ, the grand medium, who was appointed to be a Saviour to all Nations, and was to die & rise again, after satisfaction made to Justice, and in and through whom alone God will Justify the poor sinner, that is ungodly in himself. With reference here unto must we understand the Publicans saying, God be merciful to me, a sinner, and the saints under the Old Testam. their so frequent fleeing to the Grace, Mercy & Bounty of God; for all this was with respect to the only Sovereign way, that the Lord had condescended upon, whereby to show forth, and manifest, his Mercy & Goodness & Grace to sinners. In the New Test. we find more express mention made of Christ, as the object of faith, as jesus of Nazareth, the true Messiah, who was promised joh. 20: 31. 1. joh. 5: 9, 10, 20. joh. 1, 45. Act. 13: 38. or as Lord & God. joh. 20: 28. as the Son of David. Mat. 15: 21. & 9: 27, & 20: 30. & 21: 42. As the Son of God joh. 9: 35. as the Christ the Son of God joh. 11: 27. Act. 8: 37. as come forth from God joh. 16: 30, 27. as the Lord jesus Act. 16. 31. as raised by God from the dead Rom. 10: 9 as one that died & rose again 1. Thes. 1: 14. as sent of God joh. 17: 8. that jesus is the Christ. 1. joh. 5: 1. So that under all these and the like, one and the same thing for substance is pointed forth; though some particular in that grand design of grace is more expressly & immediately pointed at; yet that particular is to be understood with reference to the whole; and the whole is to be included. So also when God is mentioned as the object of faith; either absolutely 1. Pet. 1: 2. Tit. 3: 8. Heb. 5: 1. 1. Thes. 1: 8. or in Reference to Christ, whom he sent joh. 5: 24. or through whom he is believed in 1. Pet. 1: 21. or the like, the matter must be thus understood.  
4. Hereby also may the Various Explications of this object of faith, given by men, be some way understood & reconciled, when some say, the Mercy of God is it, others say, the Promises, some Remission of sins, and the like? some God the Father, Son & Holy Ghost: for such as seem to restrict it most, may be understood as not speaking exclusively of what else the Scripture mentioneth as belonging thereunto.  
5. All this notwithstanding, faith may have & hath a special respect to Christ as Priest, and making Satisfaction to justice, and laying down the Ransome-money, and paying the debt, according to his undertaking as Surety, in order to the particular benefit of Justification, and of Pardon of sins; as was in part cleared above, and may be more spoken to afterward, in the following Chapters.   

CHAP. XXXIII.  
The Righteousness of Christ is the special Object of Faith in Justification.  
COnsidering what hath been said at some length above, concerning the imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, in order to Justification, we needed not insist on this here; Seing if what is said touching that fundamental point hold, this will not endure much debate: Yet because Mr. Baxter in his Apology against Mr. Blake §. 11. is pleased to tell us, that Faith, which is the justifying condition, is not terminated on the Righteousness of Christ: And that it is a mere fancy & delusion to speak of the receiving a Righteousness, that we may be justified constitutive thereby, in such a sense, as if the Righteousness were first to be made ours, in order of nature before, our justification, & then justification follow, because we are Righteous.  
But, sure, this eyeing of, laying hold on, and leaning to the Righteousness of Christ, holdeth clear correspondence with the experience of the Children of God, not only at their first Conversion, when delivered from under the Convictions of sin, and the terrors of the Law; but even afterward, when exercised with new assaults of Satan, objecting unto them their Unworthiness, & Filthiness, and hence inferring their exclusion from the face of God: for then their main quieting refuge is the Righteousness of Christ; wherein they seek only to be found, acknowledging that in themselves, they are but sinners, and so rejecting their own worth & holiness, as too ragged to cover the shame of their nakedness, wherein they have the Apostle Paul going before them Phil. 3: 8, 9 (which may also serve, for a scriptural proof and ground of the truth in hand) He rejected all these things, wherein sometime he gloried, and he did now (even long after his Conversion, while a prisoner at Rome & after all his great Labour & Pains in spreading the Gospel) count all things (nothing is here excepted) but loss (saith he) for the excestency of the knowledge of Christ jesus, 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 (it is nor good that Mr. Baxter should carp at Writters & Preachers, for speaking & teaching after this manner, as he doth Cath. Theol. Mor. Works §. 176.) which is of the Law; but that, which is through the faith of Christ, the Righteousness which is of God by faith. This saith ●early, that in order to Justification before God, faith layeth hold on a Righteousness, which is of God, and which is had by the Faith of Christ.  
And this Surety-Righteousness of Christ, is that which can only prove suitable unto the case of a wakened sinner, pressed with the guilt of sin, and seeing justice armed against him, stopping his way to life, because of his Un-righteousness. What can be more welcome unto such a sinner, than the news of a Righteousness, and of having Christ to become the Lord his Righteousness, as made of God Righteousness? And what can his faith grippe to more earnestly, than to this Righteousness, that he may be covered therewith, and think with joy of appearing before God? How else shall he think to be justified by God, who is just, even when the justifier of a believing sinner. He knoweth, that God is Righteous, and will not acquit the guilty; and therefore he must have a Righteousness, that he may be in case to stand before the Righteous God: So that he can have no peace, till by faith he have interest in the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ; for he knoweth, that he hath none of his own, and that there is none any where else to be had.  
And further, this way doth exceedingly serve to demonstrate, upon the one hand, the Righteousness of God, who will not Justify without a Righteousness, or one that hath no Righteousness; and upon the other hand, it commendeth the riches of the free Grace & Mercy of God, when the sinner seeth, how free Love hath provided such an alsufficient Remedy, a Righteousness against which, no exception can be made, and a Righteousness, under the wings of which, he may saifly hide & shelter himself & being covered with which, he may rest confidente of acceptance, and so may with full peace of mind rest here, and rely upon it. As also it serveth exceedingly to abase man in his own eyes, and to make him for ever keep a low sail, and walk humbly before this God, and give Him the Glory of all.  
Hence this Righteousness is called the Righteousness of Faith, or of Christ believed in, and laid hold on Rom. 4: 13. & the Righteousness of God, which is by faith of jesus Christ Rom. 3: 22. Phil. 3: 9 & a Righteousness through the faith of Christ, ibid. All which & the like expressions do manifestly say, that faith layeth hold on a Righteousness, even on the Righteousness of God. And this Righteousness is said to be unto all, & upon all them that believe Rom. 3. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And imputed, or reckoned upon their score. Rome 4: 24. Mr. Baxter in the forecited book Cath. Theol. §. 131. saith that the meaning of this Rom. 4: 24. is no more, but that God reputeth, or judgeth us Righteous. But how can he repute us Righteous, unless we have a Righteousness, either of our own, or from some other: of ourselves we have not a Righteousness, unless he account believing all our Righteousness, against which we have said enough above; and the very words of the text will not admit of this gloss, as was also shown above. If it be the Righteousness of Christ, who was delivered for our Offences, and was raised again for our Justification vers. 25. then it is fit object for faith to lay hold on, it being Christ's Surety-Righteousness, or the Righteousness, which he performed & wrought out, when he was delivered for our offences; and which was publicly declared to be accepted, when he was raised again for our Justification. And whatever Mr. Baxter think, this is, and must be so far made our own, through the gracious Imputation of God, that the Righteous God, whose judgement is to according to truth, may pronunce us Righteous, and accept of us, as such. But saith he, Imputing Righteousness to us, is a consequent act (after faith) of God as judge, and not an antecedent donation] Yet it is such a consequent act of God, as necessarily presupposeth God's free antecedent Donation: for it is God's reckoning that Righteousness upon the believers score, in order to the Justifying of him thereupon; and because this Righteousness must be given, we not having it of ourselves, there must a free donation antecede, and this groundeth Faith's accepting thereof, and receiving of it. And himself immediately before this, saith, that God, giving us all the effects, or Salvation merited, in itself properly, is said also not unfitly to give us the merit or Righteousness, which procured them, that is, as it was paid to God for us, to procure them. And if so, why doth he inveigh so much, in the foregoing pages, against the orthodox doctrine of Imputation; seeing he cannot but know, that they do not say, that God doth give us the very habits of holiness (as he speaketh there) which were in Christ, nor the transient acts which he performed, nor the very sufferings which he underwent, nor the Relation of Righteous Satisfactory & Meritorious, as it was that numerical relation, which immediately resulted from Christ's own habits, acts and sufferings: They dream of no such Translation of accidents. But only say, that seeing (as Mr. Baxter here & elsewhere saith) this satisfactory Righteousness was paid to God for them, and accepted of God, as a complete & Satisfactory Righteousness, they by faith coming to be united unto Christ (according to the way & method, which the Lord hath wisely condescended upon) have an interest in that Satisfactory Righteousness, as legally made over unto them, and therefore have the benefits purchased thereby; as when a stranger, who was not under the Obligation, cometh to pay the debt of a debtor lying in prison, the payment must in Law sense be made, and accounted the debtors, or put upon his score, and received upon his account, ere he can therefore be relieved out of Prison.  
But in the forecited place against Mr. Blake he maketh this Righteousness & Remission all one thing: And indeed if it were so, it could not belong to the Object of Faith, other ways, than as an end, intended to be obtained thereby. But to us Remission is a benefit purchased by this Righteousness, and followeth upon our having interest therein through Faith, according to the appointment of God: a Pardoned man, as such, is not a Righteous man. But he tells us there, that our divines of the Assembly do perfectly define justifying Faith to be, a receiving & resting on Christ alone for Salvation, as he is offerest in the Gospel. It is of dangerous consequence to define justifying faith to be the receiving of justification, or Righteousness. Ans. Here we have Justification & Righteousness made one and the same, which with me, differ as Cause & Effect; our divines of the Assembly give a more full definition or description of Justifying Faith, in the Larger Catechism, and there tell us, that thereby the convinced sinner receiveth & resteth upon Christ, & (N.B.) his Righteousness therein (i.e. in the Gospel) held forth, for pardon of sin, & for the accepting & accounting of his person Righteous in the sight of God for Salvation. And if Mr. Baxter would say so much, as is here, this debate would be at an end, and yet I find not this among his exceptions, against that Catechism, in his Confession. And when our divines mentione this Receiving & Resting upon Christ's Righteousness, they make not Justifying Faith to be a receiving of Justification; but the one a cause of the other: And he addeth a little thereafter, (which is considerable to our present purpose) That receptio Ethica activa of justification, or of Righteousness (for they are both one thing with him) goeth before justification, as a small & secondary part of condition, it being the accepting of Christ himself, that is the main condition: And we never spoke of the receiving by Faith of Christ's Righteousness, as exclusive of the receiving of himself. He tells us next. That Christ's Satisfaction or Redemption (solvendo pretium) & merit, cannot properly be received by us; for they are not in themselves given to us. We grant the price was paid to God, but it being paid to God for us, it may be imputed to us, and reckoned upon our score; and we may that way receive it by faith, and Lean our soul upon it, to the end, that the fruit of it may be given to us. And likewise he granteth ibid. that justifying faith doth as necessarily respect Christ's satisfaction & merit, as it doth our justification thereby procurea. If he will grant, that Justifying Faith respecteth Christ's Satisfaction & Merit, as the Cause, in which we are to have an interest, and under which we must refuge ourselves, and upon the account of which we are to be accepted of God, and accounted Righteous in his sight, all is granted that I desire.  
But his following exceptions are founded upon a manifest mistake of his own, taking this Righteousness, whereof we speak, and Justification, for one and the same thing: for he saith. To say therefore, that the justifying act of faith, is only the receiving of Christ's Righteousness, or of justification, is to exclude the receiving of Christ himself, any way, even to exclude him as Satisfier from the justifying act: & to exclude from that act his Redemption by Bloodshed, Satisfaction & Merit. The mistake here is palpable: for we look on Righteousness, which faith receiveth, as the Cause, and on Justification as the Effect: when this Righteousness of Christ, the causa proca●arctica of our Justification, is received by faith, it is impossible, but Christ himself must be received as a Satisfier: his Redemption, Bloodshed, Satisfaction & Merit, cannot be excluded; for therein was the Righteousness, which faith layeth hold upon, in order to Justification. He addeth for confirmation, for if it be only the receiving of Righteousness, that is the justifying act; than it is neither the receiving of Christ himself, nor yet the acknowledgement of his Satisfaction & Redemption by his blood. But this is nothing but what was said, repeated again, Neither do we say, that the Justifying act of Faith, as it is called, is a receiving of Christ's Righteousness, as distinct from himself: nor is it imaginable, how Christ's Righteousness can be received, without the acknowledgement of his Satisfaction, and of the Redemption by his blood.  
How he can say, that Christ's Righteousness & our Justification, are but one and the same thing, I do not understand, when as he saith himself▪ Cath. Theol. of moral works Sect. 13. n. 208. that our first constitutive justification (which is it whereof we are here speaking, to wit, that by which a soul is brought from an Unrighteous to a Righteous State, as he speaketh, n. 207.) is in its nature a right to impunity & to life, or glory. Now sure, this Relation, or Relative state is one thing, and the Righteousness of Christ, the ground & meritorious cause thereof is a far other thing. And when he saith apology ag. Mr. Eyre. §. 4. that he is well content to call Christ's Righteousness of Satisfaction the matter of ours, and that the imputation of Christ's Righteousness, taken for Donation, is the form of Constitutive justification, & that sentential adjudication of Christ's Righteousness to us, is the form of our sentential justification.  
That Faith in order to Justification doth in a special manner, eye the Righteousness of Christ, is clear from Esai. 45: 24, 25, Surely shall one say, in the Lord have I Righteousness; & then followeth. In the Lord shall al● the seed of Israel be justified. This truth is also clearly held forth, when faith in the matter of Justification, is called faith in Christ's blood Rom. 3: 25. for when faith layeth hold on the blood of Christ, it cannot but lay hold on his Surety-Righteousness, whom God set forth to be a Propitiation; and in & through whom there was a Redemption wrought vers. 24. for this hlood was the Redemptionmoney, the price paid, in order to Redemption. 1. Pet. 1: 18, 19 And the blessedness of Justification is through the Imputation of Righteousness, without our works Rom. 4: 6. and therefore faith, in order to the obtaining of this blessedness, must eye and rely upon this Righteousness which is the Righteousness of him, who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our Justification vers. 25. where we may also observe a manifest difference betwixt this Righteousness, (which consisteth in his being delivered for our offences) and our Justification; the one being the Cause (as was said) & the other the Effect.  
Moreover, this same truth is clear from R●m. 5: 17. where we read of the receiving of the gift of righteousness, which is by faith, and that in order to a reigning in life by one Jesus Christ: where also we see a difference put betwixt this gift of Righteousness & Reigning in life; which is also more clear, in the following vers. 18. Even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life: this righteousness of one, to wit, one Jesus Christ, is the Cause, and the justification of life, is the Effect: And further this difference is again held forth. vers. 19, 20, 21. Our being made Righteous is different from the obedience of one Christ Jesus; and by the Imputation of this Obedience to us, do we become Righteous, as our being made sinners is different from Adam's act of Disobedience; and we are made sinners by the Imputation of it to us. And as sin & death are different, when it is said, that sin hath reigned unto death; so Eternal life is different from Righteousness, when it is said, so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life.  
We need say no more of this, seeing it clearly followeth, from what was formerly at length confirmed; to wit, That justification is by the Righteousness of Christ imputed.   

CHAP. XXXIV.  
Faith in Justification respecteth not in a special manner Christ, as a King; but as a Priest.  
MR. Baxter did long ago in his Aphorisms tell us; That the Accpting of Christ for Lord, is as essential a part of justifying Faith, as the accepting of him for our Saviour; that is, as he explained himself, That faith, as it accepteth Christ, for Lord & King, doth justify. And this was asserted by him, to the end, he might clear & confirm how Sincere Obedience cometh in with Affiance to make up the Condition of Justification; for his Thesis LXXII. did run thus. As the accepting of Christ for Lord (which is the heart's Subjection) is as essential a part of Justifying Faith, as the accepting of him for our Saviour; So consequently, sincere obedience (which is the effect of the former) hath at much to do in justifying us before God, as Affiance (which is the fruit of the later. Hence the question arose, and was by some proposed thus; Whether faith in Christ qua Lord, be the justifying act: or, whether the Acceptation of Christ, as a Lord, and not only, as a Priest, doth justify. And Mr. Baxter in his Confess. p. 35. §. 13. saith, that it is not only without any ground in God's word, but fully against it, to say, that faith justifieth only, as it apprehendeth Christ, as a Ransom, or Satisfier of justice, or Meriter of our justification; or his Righteousness as ours; & not as it receiveth him, as King, or as a Saviour from the stain & tyranny of sin.  
I have showed before, that the moving of this question, is of little use, in reference to that end, for which, it seemeth, it was first intended, to wit, to prove, that Sincere Obedience hath as much to do in Justification, as faith, or Affiance hath; where I did show the inconsequence of that consequence. That because Justifying Faith receiveth Christ, as King; Therefore Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification, yea, or therefore a Purpose, or a promise of Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification. So that, in order to the disproving of that Assertion, that maketh obedience, or a Purpose, or a promise of obedience, an essential part of the Condition of Justification we need not trouble ourselves with this question: Yet, in regaird that the speaking to this may contribute to the clearing of the way of Justification by faith, (which is our great design) we shall speak our judgement there anent. And in order thereunto, several things must be premitted.  
As 1. The question is not, whether Christ, as a King, belongeth to the compleet & adequate object of that faith, which is the true & justifying faith: for this is granted, as was shown above, this faith, being the same faith, whether it be called True Faith, or Saving Faith, or Uniting & Covenanting faith, or Justifying faith, it must have one & the same adequate Object.  
2. Nor is the Question, whether Faith in order to Justification, doth so act on Christ, as a Priest, as to exclude either virtually, or expressly, the consideration of any other of his offices, or of Christ under any other of his offices: for under whatever office Christ be considered; when faith acteth upon him, whole Christ is received, and nothing in Christ is or can be excludeth; So that there is no virtual exclusion; nor can there be any express exclusion of any of his offices, when he, under any other of his offices is looked to a right & received; for such an exclusion would be an open rejection of Christ, and no receiving of him.  
3. When we speak here of receiving of Christ, as a Priest, or in respect of his Sacerdotal Office, it is all one, as if we named his Sacerdotal work, or what he did in the discharge of that office, offering up himself a Satisfactory Sacrifice, and giving his blood, and life for that end, and suffering inwardly & outwardly, what was laid upon him by the Father, in order to the making of full Satisfaction to justice, and paying our debt, by his Righteousness Active & Passive.  
4. Nor do we, when we speak of Faiths acting on Christ, as a Priest, so limit & restrick the same unto his Sacerdotal work, as to exclude any thing, that is presupposed thereunto, concomitant thereof, consequential thereunto & depending thereupon, or is necessarily requisite unto the effectual application of the same unto our Justification & Advantage. When therefore it is said, that in Justification, faith eyeth in a special manner the Sacerdotal office & work of Christ, there is no exclusion of the Consideration of that fountain Love, Grace, & favour of God, whereby Christ was given unto the chosen, and appointed to be their Priest, and to make Satisfaction for them: Nor of his foregoing Incarnation, Obedience, Resurrection, Asctnsion etc. nor of other thlngs that are necessarily requisite hereunto, for all these are necessarily herein included.  
5. When we speak of the Souls acting faith, in order to Justification, we do not suppose, that at that time, the troubled soul can have no other end or design before his eyes; nor be troubled with no other evil, or with the thoughts thereof, that he would be delivered from; and so in order to getting help therein, and a remedy thereof, cannot eye something else in Christ, answering & suiting the same: for a Sinner in that case, may be troubled with the sense of the great Unbeleef & Hardness & Impenitency of his heart, the Unholiness of all his ways, his Blindness & Ignorance; as well as with the sense of his Gild, and of his being under the Curse; and so may & must be supposed, in coming to Christ for relief, to eye in a special manner, that in Christ, which is answerable to these his Necessities: And in this respect, a Sinner may be said to go to Christ, as a Prophet, and as a King, as well as to him, as a Priest; But in reference to these evils, they are not said or supposed to go to Christ, for Justification; for that respecteth merely their state of Sin & Gild.  
6. But the real question should be, what is the special & practical meaning of these words, we are justified, or live by faith: and to this end, the true Question is, what special way doth faith act on Christ (for it is here presupposed, that Christ must be the Object of Justifying Faith) in order to the sinner's Justification? or what is that in Christ, that faith specially eyeth, and carrieth the soul out unto, when Justification before God is only designed? Or when the wakened sinner is earnestly desireous of delivery from the Gild of sin & from the Curse of God, and of enjoying the Favour & Reconciled Face of God, whether he is to apply himself by faith unto Christ, as King, or unto Christ, as a Priest & to what he did as a Priest, for the relief of sinners?  
In answer to the Question thus proposed, I say, That the wakened sinner, in that case, while seeking relief from sin & guilt, and from the curse, by Absolution & Justification, in the sight of God, in compliance with the Gospel method & design, making Justification to be by faith, & in obedience to the Gospel command, saying, Believe & be justified, is to act faith in a special manner on Christ's Mediation & Satisfaction; & to betake himself to Christ as a Priest, and rest on him & on what he di● as a Priest, that is, on his death, Blood, and Satisfaction. This is it, which others call the justifyinh Act of Faith: or that special act of faith, required in order to Justification.  
Though what was said in the foregoing Chapter to prove, that Christ's Righteousness is the Object of Justifying faith, may serve for confirmation of this; Yet we shall, in short, lay down these grounds of proof, and  
First Several Scriptnre-expressions, where Justification is spoken of and cleared in its causes, show and point forth what is, which faith should specially eye, and be employed about, in order to the interesting of the soul in this benefit: such as  
1. Rom. 3. 24, 25. Being justified freely by his grace, through the Redemption that is in jesus Christ; whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation, through faith in his blood. Here, as justification is said to be brought about & effectuate through the Redemption of Christ, who was a Propitiation, & this respecteth only his Priesthood; so the special object of faith, in this affair ', is expressly said to be his Blood, through faith in his blood, to tell us, that all such, as would have interest in this Privilege of justification, must by faith eye the Propitiation, the Bloody Sacrifice of Christ; And by blood we find it oft said, that Remission of sins is had Col. 1: 14. Ephes. 1: 7. Mat. 26: 28. and not without it. Heb. 9: 22.  
2. Rom. 4: 24, 25.- to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him, that raised up jesus, our Lord from the dead, who was delivered for our offences, & was raised again for our justification. As justification, here is held as procured & brought about by Christ, as a Priest, for as such, was he delivered for our offences, and as such was he raised, or brought out of prison, so faith here, even when acting upon God, yet it is with a special relation to Christ's Priesthood, or to his Satisfaction; for it is a Believing on him, that raised up Christ Jesus, our Lord, from the dead, that is, in God as declaring he hath now received full Satisfaction from the Cautioner Christ by bringing him out of prison; & consequently in that Satisfaction given by Christ, wherewith the Father is now well pleased. See also Rom. 10: 9  
3. Rom. 5: 9, 10. Much more than being now justified by his blood: for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son etc. As the way is here pointed out, how justification & Reconciliation was effectual by Christ, to wit, by his Blood & Death, or by what he did & suffered as Priest & Cautioner; so accordingly is our faith directed to look, in order to a partaking of this Justification & Reconciliation, especially when this is so clearly & expressly explained to us.  
4. Rom. 8: 33, 34.- It is God that justifieth- It is Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh Intercession for us. All which grounds of justification belong to his Priestly Office. And, if these be here laid down for grounds of Comfort & Assurance unto Believers, to fottifie them against all Assaults of the Accuser of the brethren, and against all Accusations, or Condemnations of men or devils; sure, the way is also pointed out, how faith should act, in order to their being brought into a state of justification.  
5. 2. Cor. 5: 19, 21. To wit God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself; not imputing their trespasses unto them 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. The way how Reconciliation was brought about, is here set down, to the end the ministry of Reconciliation, mentioned vers. 18. and whereby persons are beseeched to be Reconciled vers. 20. may be understood, and such as are called upon may know in special what to do, in order to be reconciled, to wit close with him, and be in him, and be united to him, who was made sin, for sinners, that they might be clothed with a sufficient Righteousness in him: so that this points out Faiths eyeing Christ, as such a Cautioner, having the debt of sinners imputed to him, and becoming a Sacrifice for sin.  
6. Gal. 2: 16, 20.- We have believed in Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ. And what he did, when he thus believed in Christ, that he might he justified, he plainly tells us vers. 20. saying I am crucified with Christ: thus he won to the life of justification; by eyeing Christ on the cross, making satisfaction unto justice, and assenting unto that way, & acquieseing in it, & resting & relying upon it. And in the same vers. he tells us, that his faith by which he lived, was on the Son of God, who have himself for him, that is, unto death.  
7. Gal. 3: 11, 13. The just shall live by faith. This is the Text we are upon, and we have cleared how this life here mentioned is the life of justification; But what is the special object of this faith, in order to justification? That is clearly enough pointed to vers. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us. It is Christ, & Christ as Redeeming from the Curse of the Law, & that by being made a curse for us; which only looks to his Priestly office.  
8. Phel. 3: 9, 10, 11. Paul was desireous to be found in Christ, & to be partaker of his Righteousness alone, which was by faith▪ But what was it in Christ, that the eye of his Faith was mainly fixed upon? He sheweth that vers. 10: 11. That I may know him, & the power of his resurrection, & the fellowship of his Sufferings, being made conformable to his death etc. Christ's Sufferings, Death & Resurrection were most in his eye.  
9 joh. 3: 14, 15. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. The special object of faith here is Christ, as lifted up, that is, as Crucified. joh. 12: 32, 33.  
It will not be sufficient for weakening of these reasons, to say. That none of these conclude, that faith in order to Justification, eyeth Christ as a Priest only: for (1) They sufficiently prove, that faith in this matter of Justification goeth to Christ, as a Priest, and eyeth his Sacrifice, Blood & Redemption through his death; and we are called to prove no more, because it lieth upon those, who are of another judgement, to show us from Scripture, that Faith, in order to the obtaining of justification, acteth on Christ's Kingly office, & receiveth him, as lord (2) We know what outcries Papists make against the like Arguments of Protestants for justification by faith, because it is not said, we are justified by faith alone. (3) Though the Scriptures do not as plainly say, that faith in justification doth not in an especial manner eye Christ, as King & Prophet; as it saith, we are not justified by works; Yet we are bound to follow the light of the word, and to regulate our conceptions, by what we find there expressed, & if we find not any mention made of faith in Christ's command or Government, or the like relating to his Kingly office, as we hear of Faith in his Blood & the like relating to his Priestly office, we may saifly judge, that the one, being so clearly mentioned & so frequently, is a denying of the other, that is never mentioned.  
Secondly. The very case & condition, wherein such are, who are desireous justification, may clear this: for they are now awakened, & made to see their natural state of death, wherein they are under the sentence of the Law, under the Curse & Malediction of God: And therefore the thing, which their soul now seeketh after, is a suitable Relief, something that may answer this case and may prove a fit Relief to them thus imprisoned, & in chains, because of their Debt & Transgressions: And therefore, as all Reason requireth; so experience proveth, that these wakened sinners seek after the Satisfaction through the Death & Merits of Christ, that they may have an Interest therein, and the benefit thereof, to the quieting of their souls; They lay hold on the Sufferings of Christ, that they may be hid in his wounds (as it were) that so they may be healed by his stripes; and have a Righteousness, under which they may with confidence stand, and appear before God; They become crucified with Christ, sweetly acquiesceing in, resting satisfied with, contentedly accepting of, and confidently resting & relying upon, his Merits, his Death, his Payment & Sntisfaction 〈◊〉 justice. Seeing then, that this (as experience proveth) is the way, that pursued souls take, to refuge themselves under a Crucified Christ, to flee to his Death & Merits, this, or Christ as a Priest dying & paying the debt, must be the special Object of the Faith of an hunted soul, panting after justification, or freedom from Condemnation.  
Thirdly, Christ's other Offices, as his Kingly, or Prophetical office, do not hold him forth, as immediately suitable unto souls under this pressure; nor is there any thing properly belonging to these offices, that promiseth immediate Relief unto a Soul, in this case, seeking after Reconciliation with God, & Pardon of sinners, which is only had by Christ's Death & Blood Rom. 5: 9, 10. & 3: 25. Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. Christ by his Kingly or Prophetical office, doth not act towards God, in the behalf of sinners, but by his Priestsly office he doth Heb. 5: 1, 5, 6, 7. And it is after this, that poor sinners, pursued with the sense of wrath, do seek, & this can only give present & futable Relief.  
Fourthly. The Faith of Believers under the sense of sin & guilt, under the Law, was thus led to act on the promised Messiah, when he was typified unto them by their Sacrifices, & they were to put their hands on the head of the Sacrifice, thereby, rolling their sin & guilt upon the Sacrifice, or on Him rather, who was the true Sacrifice, represented by these outward Sacrifices, & thereby professing their Faith in Him, as the only Satisfying Sacrifice, that could make Atonement, & Pacify an angry God, & deliver them from wrath.  
Fiftly, Christ is held forth, as having taken an these different offices, and as to show his being a full & compleet mediator, able to answer all our necessities, and ●s authorized to give forth suitable relief; so to instruct us how 〈…〉, & to act faith upon him sutabl●e, with hope & confidence, Therefore as he is a King to subdue Enemies, the faith of his people is to act upon him, as such, when they would have their spiritual Enemies subdued; & as He is a Prophet to teach, the faith of his people must act upon him, as such, when they would have Light, Counsel & Direction; so, as He is a Priest to Die, Satisfy, make Atonement, Reconciliation & Peace, their Faith is to act upon him, as such, when they would have Gild removed, & Peace made up betwixt God, & their souls.  
Sixtly. The end & design of asserting Christ, as King to be as specially the Object of Faith, in Justification, as is Christ, as Priest, may sufficiently render it suspicious; for it is, as we touched above, to bring-in our Obedience, as distinct from Faith, or as included in it, to be the Condition of Justification, the same manner of way, that Faith is: though, as was cleared above, the consequence will not be fou●d good. The real question here (as is well observed by others) is not, whether any thing of Christ, ● to be excluded from being the Object of Justifying Faith. But what, in and of ourselves, under the name of Receiving Christ as King, is to be admitted to share with Faith, in its place and interest, in our Justification?  
Seventhly. To say, that faith acteth, in order to justification, in as special a manner, on Christ as a King, as on Christ as a Priest, is to alter the Nature, Use & Ends of Faith, in this work & to give it the Place & Power of a proper potestative condition, as it is a virtue & work of ours; & not to look upon it as bringing all suitable supplies, in a distinct manner, from Christ, as was shown above: and this is but suitable to that alteration of the Nature of the New Covenant, that is made by the asserters of this, whereby it is of the same specific nature with the Old Covenant of Works; as if it were no more, but a new Edition thereof, with some alterations, as to the Conditions.  
Let us now see, what Mr. Baxter saith to the contrary, in his Catholic Theol. p. 2. of moral works Sect. 7. p. 55. etc.  
He tells us (n. 105.) That to be justified by faith in Paul's sense, is all one as to be justified by becoming Christians. Ans. We grant, with him, that to be a Believer, a Disciple, and a Christian, are all one, in the Gospel sense, & that by the same Faith, by which one is justified, he is a Christian also: but this proveth not, that Faith, in order to justification, acteth not, in a special manner, on Christ, as a Priest; and we have found, how Paul both in his Doctrine, and in his own Practice, explaineth the acting of Faith in Justification. This may serve for an answer also to what he saith (n. 106.) to wit, that the faith, by which we are justified is essentially a believing fiducial consent to our Covenant relation to God the Father, Son & Holy Ghost: for we grant, that it is but one & the same Faith, which doth all this, but yet this Faith may be conceived, as acting in a peculiar manner in order to justification. We grant also, that it is the same faith, by which we have Right to the benefits of the Covenant, & by which we are justified; Yet we say, that in order to Justification, that same Faith, which receiveth whole Christ, and thereby a Right to the benefits of the Covenant, acteth in a peculiar manner on Christ, as Priest, in order to Justification.  
He tells us next (n. 108.) That the faith by which we are justified, hath God the Father for its object, as essentially, as Christ the Saviour. Ans. And we do not deny God the Father to be the Object of that Faith, by which we are justified. And will he say, that Faith in God without Christ will justify a sinner, or that there is any believing in God the Father now, without believing also in Christ? The places he citeth joh. 17: 3. & 13: 1. show the contrary. Adam's Faith indeed was such before the fall; but our Faith now must be of another kind. It is to as little purpose for him to say (n. 109.) That it is as essential to this faith to believe in Christ, as the Purchaser of Holiness & heaven, as to believe in him, as the purchaser of pardon: For he purchased all as a Priest, & not as a Prophet or King & when faith acteth on him, as a purchaser, it acteth on him, as a Priest. But he addeth. And to believe in him, as the Teacher & Ruler of the Church, as to believe in him, as the justifier of believers. True because believing in him, as a Ruler, & believing in him as the justifier of believers, are both to believe in him, as a King: And this is not the thing that is denied, Believing in Christ, as the justifier of believers, is not the same with believing in him, as a Priest, in order to justification, which is the thing, he should have said here, if he would have spoken to the purpose.  
What he saith (n. 110.) concerning Faith's being the act of the whole soul, & having for its object God, the Father, Son & Holy Ghost & in Christ, all that is essential to him, as a Saviour, was granted, & asserted also by us formerly: but it maketh nothing to our present question. He tells us (n. 111.) That to say, that some one only of these parts of Christ's office, as they are conceptus inadaequati of a Saviour, is the only object of justifying faith or that by believing in Christ, as our Teacher & Ruler, as well as Priest, & as a justifying judge, as well as a justifying Sacrifice, and as a fulfiller of the Law, is to expect justification by works, as Paul denyeth it. This is a vain distinguishing, a falsifying the doctrine of Faith & justification, a departing from the Scripture simplicity by corrupting seeming subtlety, & one of those humane Inventions, which have wronged the Church. Ans. These, are but angry words, & carry with them no force of reason: And who is most guilty of vain distinguishing & of falsifying the doctrine of Faith & Justification etc. he, or such as he opposeth in this matter, indifferent persons are at freedom to judge: And whether his new Doctrine, or the old, which he so violently, in all his writings, oppugneth, hath more of seeming subtlety in it, to the wronging of the Church, in its peace & quiet, every one may judge by the effects. But as to the matter in hand, he may know (1) that there is a difference betwixt saying, that some one only part of Christ's office is the only object of justifying Faith (as he here speak) & sa●ing; that faith (whose adequate object is confessed to be as large, as he himself doth make it) in order to a souls justification, acteth in special manner on Christ as a Priest, not excluding Christ as a King, or as a Prophet, but rather including whole Christ, according to the manner above mentioned, (which is the thing we say.) (2) Where readeth he of Faith in Christ (in order to justification) as our Teacher, or Ruler or Justifying judge, or justifying Sacrifice? He should remember what he said (n. 107.) when speaking against the Phrase justifying faith, & faith justifying us, as being humane, & not Scriptural at all. (3) Indeed believing in Christ as Teacher & Ruler &c, in our sense, cannot infer justification by works: but he knoweth, that it was for this end, to bring Works in with Faith, as equal Conditions, or parts of one Condition of Justification, that this new question was stated by him, in his Aphorisms; And whether such doctrine be consonant to Paul's or not, we have seen in part above.  
He addeth (n. 112.) That it is but the same deluding subtlety, & vain curiosity, playing with deceitful words, to say, that we are justified by faith, quatenus recipit Christ justitiam, as it believeth in Christ's Sacrifice & perfect obedience only; & not as it believeth in him, as Teacher & Ruler, Sanctifier, judge. when the Scripture saith no such thing at all, but simply maketh faith in Christ, (supposing faith in God the Father) to be that, by which we must be justified. Ans. We mind not to be startled at his bold & angry expressions, for we meet with them so oft. Whether the Scripture warrandeth us to say, what we have said, or not, the Reader is at liberty to judge, from what is said. And we have nothing here yet said by him, to prove, that we are justified by Faith in Christ, as Teacher, or Ruler, which is it we are looking for here.  
More of this Stuff we have (n. 113.) This distinction (saith he) is founded on another falsehood supposed, which is that the effects of all Christ's saving works, are as distinctly to be ascribed to Receiving acts of faith, as they are to the the several procuring acts of Christ, the object of Faith, which is another corrupting addition to God's word. Ans. Who it is that saith so, as to all the several effects, I know not; Nor do I see any necessity to say so; as to some, & in special, as to Justification, we but follow the Scripture, going before us, as is shown. And we make no addition; but he is the man, that is singularly guilty of adding to God's word, in this point; for he saith, that faith, in order to justification, acteth not only in a special manner on Christ, as Priest (which is the truth, we say, and own with the Scriptures) but also on Christ, as a King, and as a Prophet, & as a judge; & yet giveth us us not one passage of Scripture to confirm this, but thinks we must be satisfied with his assertions, subtle distinctions, vain & curious expressions, answering his own Philosophical Notions, with which he seemeth to be much taken, and we very little. What followeth there, I have nothing to do with.  
He hath a large discourse of various Receiving (n. 114. 115.) to what purpose, as to the business, we are now upon, I do not well see; yet let us see, how he endeth it, God's Covenant (saith he) doth give us Christ & life, that is, justification, Sanctification, & Glorification, in title or right, in one gift, to be accepted by one entire faith, as the Condition; not making at all, the order of the gifts & faiths respect to them in that order, to be any of the Ratio Proprietatis. Ans. (1) Will he not distinguish betwixt having of these benefits in Title or Right, & having them in possession? He must, sure, or he must say, that believers are already perfectly Sanctified, and Glorified. (2) Will he say, that there is no more required to the actual Possession of Glory & full Sanctification, than here he saith is required unto the Title? But it is like, he will comprehend under this Faith, all after Gospel-obedience; But then, all this must preceded to justification etc. as well as to actual Glorification, & so none shall be justified, till they be Glorified, or he must admit of differences here. (3) As notwithstanding of what he saith here, he will, I suppose, grant that Faith hath a Further & special acting or manner of acting on Christ, in order to obtaining of Light, Life, Strength, and other things necessary in & for growth in Sanctification; so he may suffer us to say, that notwithstanding of this, Faith in a special manner eyeth & acteth upon Christ, as a Priest, in order to justification; for there is no more inconsistency in the one, than in the other.  
The humane instances, whereby he thinks to make this plainer (n. 116.) do not help here. A wife's relation (saith he) is founded in her marriage consent. Now if he be a noble man, a rich man, a wise man, a good man, & they knew all this, & by knowing it were induced to consent, & are to have their proportionable benefits by his Nobility, Riches etc. Yet their Title to these benefits ariseth not from the act of their consent, as it respecteth these benefits distinctly, but merely by consent unto their Relation. Ans. Notwithstanding hereof, when the woman is charged by her Creditors to pay her debt, her running to her husband's Wisdom, Nobility, & Goodness will not avail her; but she must in a special manner run to his Riches & must from thence bring a Satisfactory payment unto her Creditors: And if he, whom she hath taken for her husband, hath already satisfied the debt, she is to instruct that before the judges, before whom her alleidging, that her now-husband is a great Noble man, and a most Wise man etc. will not avail. We grant also, that by Faith the Believer is united & married unto Christ & hath thereby a Right, unto Him, & to all his Benefits, according to their necessity: Yet will the Lord have, that, in order to their actual justification, they shall apply his Merits, lay hold thereon, & as it were, produce the same in face of Court, as the only ground of their Discharge: as in order to their actual Glorification, he will have them doing many other things.  
In end (n. 117.) he tells us, that to say [faith justifieth me, as it is the receiving of Christ's Righteousness, & not as it is the receiving of Christ, as a Teacher, Ruler] etc. is a confounding or seducing saying. But as yet we have seen no strong reasons evinceing this to be such a seducing or confounding saying: but the contrary is apparent from what is said. Let us see why he judgeth thus. For (sayeth he) if it intimate, that faith justifieth us as an efficient cause, [principal or instrumental] it is false. But we have seen before, that faith may be considered here as an Instrument, & to say this, is neither to confound nor seduce: otherways all the Reformed, yea & his friend john Goodwin have been Confounders & deceivers, & none but Mr. Baxter, with Papists & Socinians & some Arminians, are free of this charge. 2. (saith he) If it mean, that faith is the condition of justification, as it receiveth Christ's Righteousness only, it hath either one or two falsehoods. We only say, that in order to the obtaining of justification, Faith acteth in a peculiar manner on Christ's Righteousness & Merits, & conceive that in this, there is neither one, nor two falsehoods, 1. (saith he) if it mean that faiths receiving act is the formalis ratio conditionis, or that it justifieth not quà conditio donationis, but qua receptio justitiae Christ, it is false. Ans. We are not here speaking precisely of the formalis ratio conditionis, in such a Philosophical Notion: for we say, that Faith in order to Justification, receiveth Christ's Righteousness; & that the Lord hath so appointed. Let Philosophers break their heads on these rationes formales, & the quas & quae's; we speak of this matter, so as every soul concerned may understand it. And then (saith he) 2. that [only the Accepting of Righteousness justifieth us, that is, is the condition of justification] is a falsehood. This he should have proved to have been a falsehood: but in all this discourse of this, we have had nothing like a proof, only confident Assertions, & that in great number.  
But in his Confession pag. 35. where he hath the same discourse for substance, he citeth several passages of Scripture, on the margin, as if they were confirmations of what he saith: And yet not one of them cometh home to the point in hand, as a short view may discover. For Col. 2: 6. proveth what we deny not, to wit, that Believers receive Christ Jesus the Lord: We have shown above, that whole Christ belongeth to the Object of Faith that is Justifying: but we are here speaking of the special acting of that faith, in order to Justification. Psal. 2: 12. only proveth, that such shall perish, as do not kiss & submit, to the Son & that kissing & submitting unto him, is required in order to being saved. Mat. 11: 28, 29. saith, that such as would have rest & ease, that is freedom from sin & misery here & hereafter, must come to Christ, & take his yoke upon them, & Learn of him: And in order to that particular rest & ease, had in Justification, we say also, that they must come to Christ, & take on his Righteousness, which is easy, though it seem a yoke to unrenewed Nature. Luk. 19: 27. Proveth indeed, that such as will not have Christ to reign over them, shall perish; but doth▪ doth not prove, that in order to Justification, Christ must be received, as a King Rom. 10: 9, 10. proveth, that faith eyeth Christ, as raised from the dead by God, (which respecteth his Death & Sacrifice) & that for a Righteousness, in order to the life of Justification; which is what we say, Mat. 17: 5. & Mark. 9: 7. prove, what is not denied, to wit, that it is the will of God, that Christ his only beloved Son should be heard & obeyed, in all things. And joh. 10: 3, 4, 9, 27. only proveth, that Christ's sheep know & hear his voice: And who denieth this? joh. 12: 46, 47, 48. showeth, what benefits believers shall receive, & what shall be fall unbelievers: but touch nor the point now in hand. Act. 2: 30, 33, 34, 36, 38. Proveth, that Christ is indeed a King, & that all such, as would be saved, must receive him, as the exalted King. Act. 3: 22, 23, 26. Proveth, that he is that Prophet, that was spoken of by Moses, & that he Died, Rose again & sent forth the Gospel. to the end, that poor sinners might be turned from their iniquities: But there is nothing here to prove, that Faith, in its special acting, in order to justification, receiveth & layeth hold on Christ, as well as a Prophet, as on Christ, as a Priest. Act. 5: 31. saith, that Christ is exalted to be a Prince & a Saviour, for to give Repentance to Israel & Remission of sins: but what is this to the question now in hand? joh. 13: 35. & 15: 8. & 8: 31. showeth the genius, disposition, & kindly work of his disciples, to wit, to love one another, to bear fruit, & to continue in his word; all which we willingly grant: Luk. 14: 26, 27, 33. Evinceth, that right coming to Christ is inconsistent with a predominant Love to any terrene thing, how near & dear so ever: But toucheth not the question now in hand. These are all the passages, he adduceth there, & none of them come near the question.   

CHAP. XXXV.  
Faith is the only Condition on our part, of the continuance of justification.  
HAving spoken of justification, as to its beginning, or as to a Believers entering into that State of Life: & having spoken to some Questions for further clearing of the truth: We come to speak a word or two of the Continuance of this Privilege & State: That it is a continueing and permanent State, we have seen above. The Question then, that we have to discuss, is, Upon what terms & Conditions is this State continued? or what is it, which the Lord requireth in order thereunto? or whether any thing more be required of us for continueing this Relation than was at first required to the making of it? that is, whether Faith alone, or Faith together with Works of sincere obedience, Mr. Baxter in his Confess, p. 47, n. 40. tells us, that there is much more goeth to the continuing & consummating our justification, then doth at first to justify us as to the condition on our parts, to be performed to that end: This Continueing of our State of justification, & Not-losing of it, he maketh one & the same, and that, which he requireth, as necessary unto the Not-losing or Continueing of this State, he maketh to be Sincere obedience, & many particular materials of that obedience, as to be humble, to forgive others, to confess Christ, & suffer for him, if called to it.  
That we may know both the State of the difference, & the Consequence thereof, we would premit these things.  
1. It is readily & on all hands granted & yielded unto, that there is an Holiness & Personal Obedience & Conformity to the Law, called for at the hands of all Justified persons, that are come to age: The denial therefore of what Mr. Baxter & others, that join with him, do here assert, cannot, with any show of reason, be loaded with this foul inference, that hereby we cry down, or lay aside all necessity of Holiness, & of sincere obedience: for we still affirm that the Law is in force, & obligeth unto obedience, and that all such as are justified, have received a new frame & disposition of soul, inclineing them to obedience; Yea & that they have now both peculiar Obligations unto Holiness, and also Advantages & Helps thereunto: They are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto Good Works, which God hath before ordained, that they should walk in them Ephes. 2: 10.  
2. Mr. Baxter tells us Confess. p. 102. that it is his strong opinion, & that he is confident of it, that no justified person shall ever lose his justification; & that God hath promised to cause them persevere. This State than is not to be compared with other States, which are losable & changeable among men: nor can we with such freedom speak of Conditions of not loseing that, which is fully secured from all loseing; as we may speak of the Conditions of keeping & Not-loseing that, which may be & oft is lost. We can not then speak of the State of Justification, as we do of Marriage betwixt man & woman: here there may be & are indeed Conditions required of each part, in order to the keeping up of the Relation, & they may be called Conditions of not loseing that Relation or Privilege: But as to justification, which is not so loseable, to speak of Conditions of not loseing it, may occasion Apprehensions in the minds of men of its being losable. It were saifer then, in my apprehension, to inquire how or what way is this State & Relation continued? or what is required on our part, in order thereunto? then to inquire? what are the Conditions of Not-loseing this State?  
3. Seing Mr. Baxter granteth Confess. p. 109. that no new sin destroyeth their State of Justification, nor maketh them cease to be God's reconciled Children, seeing they are still united unto Christ, and have his Spirit, and have Faith & Repentance, (at least as to the habit) & (pag. 129.) That the habit of Faith & Repentance, which is ever in them, qualifieth them for present Remission of ordinary sins of infirmity, at least: And it is undeniable, that the Lord's Spirit preserveth them from such sins as are inconsistent with a State of Justification, or that make an intercision in that State, & consequently in their Adoption & Union with Christ: seeing, I say, all this is granted, to what purpose is such a question as this here moved and stated, anent the Conditions of Not-loseing this state?  
4. The term Condition here is taken in the same sense, that it was understood in, when the question was about the Condition of our first entry into the State of Justification: and so they must take it here for a proper legal antecedent Potestative condition: for if by condition here were meaned no more than a mere Consequent Evangelick Condition: the question only would be. What is the Lord's Way, Method & Manner, how & by which he preserveth his own, in that State of Justification? But, according to their acceptation of the word condition, the question really cometh to this, What that is, which believers betake themselves unto, & which they can, may, & should plead with God upon, for the continuance of their state, that is, of their Reconciliation unto, & Acceptance with God, of the Pardon of their sins, & Right to glory?  
5. The question is not, what is the Condition, or what is required on our part for keeping the sense & evidence of our justification in our own▪ Consciences: many things may be useful herein, that yet cannot be called▪ Conditions of the Continuance, or Not-loseing of justification: But the justification here spoken of, is that which is before God, whereby the Believer is indeed brought into a State of Peace & Reconciliation with God, & hath obtained a Right unto the Inheritance of Life.  
6. When we speak here of the continuance, or Not-loseing of justification, the justification spoken of must be that State or Relation, where into the Believer is already brought: for that only can be said to be continued, while we are living, and that only can be said properly to be loosed, or Not-losed, which a man hath: These seem then to be two distinct questions, What is the Condition of our final Absolution in judgement; & what is the Condition of the continuance of our justification here; which Mr. Baxter seemeth to confound Confess. p. 83. as the Papists do confound their second justification with the last judgement, when they are pleading for works, being required as the causes thereof.  
7. Though, as we have seen before, justification importeth more than Remission of sins; Yet in this question of the Condition of the Continuance of Justification, the matter seemeth to be brought to this issue; whether works of Obedience be the Condition of future Remission of sins, in the justified. And though these may be conceived of, as distinct questions, yet the clearing of the way of the Remission of future sins, may serve much to clear the present Question; for if it befound, that the same course is taken for Remission of future sins, that was taken at first, it will be manifest, that justification is continued upon the same terms, or in the same manner, that it was at first obtained, if properly we can speak at all of the Conditions of its Continuance.  
Having premitted these things, the Question is, Whether faith alone, or works alone, or faith with works, are the condition required on our part, for the Continuance, or not-loseing of the state of justification? And I judge as faith alone was required at first, in order to justification, so that alone is to be called the Condition of the continuance of justification: or that the Condition both of our first installing in that state of justification, & of the Continuance of the Privilege, or of Believers continueing in that state, is the same grace of Faith. Yet these two things would be noted. 1. That though the first act of Faith in Christ, doth suffice to the entering of a soul into the state of justification; Yet we do not mean, that that one first, solitary, & numerical act sufficeth for all time coming, albeit it sufficeth for making up of the Relation, according to the appointment of God; for the same Faith is to continue in its habit; Yea & in its actings. So that we state not the Question so strictly, as Mr. Baxter seemeth to do, Confess. p. 47. when from the Continuance of the habit of Faith, & from the renewing acts of that Faith, required after the first act of Faith, he inferreth, that much more goeth to the continueing of our justification, than doth at first justify us. But our question is about the addition of sincere Obedience which he there mentioneth. 2. When we suppose the Continuance of Faith, not only as to its habit, but as to its renewed actings; we do not suppose, that the actings & Effects, or Concomitans of Faith afterward, are every way the same, with what they were at first; so that we may also yield to this difference, & grant that some thing more may be requisite afterward, Particularly, in order to the Remission of some heinous sin, in the acting of Faith, or in the Effects or Concomitants thereof, at least as to measure, or outward significations, to wit, in Godly sorrow, Humiliation, Forgiving of others, Restitution, or the like; & yet it will still remain true, that justification is continued by Faith, & not by Works.  
For the proof of what we conceive to be truth, we lay down these grounds, both from Scripture & Reason; as  
1. The words of the Text, whereupon we are, do evince this: for it is said, the just liveth by Faith: And, as was cleared at the beginning of our discourse, the words, as used by the Prophet Habbakuk, from whom they are cited, are spoken of such, as were already Believers & Justified; and pointed out the way, how they were to have a life, in an evil time; and how they were to continue, or be keeped in that State of Favour with God, whereinto they were brought; to wit by Faith; for the just shall live by his Faith; and accordingly the same words are cited by the Apostle Heb. 10: 38, 39 Now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them, that draw back, unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul. Where living by Faith is opposed to drawing back, to wit, through unbelief; and as drawing back is unto perdition, so believing is to the saving of the soul; & therefore the Continuation of this life of justification unto the end, even unto the final Salvation of the soul, is by Faith. This life of justification, as it is begun by Faith (as the Apostle evinceth Rom. 1: 17. and in our present Text citing in both places these same words, for that end) so it is continued by Faith, as the only condition thereof. And to say, that the particle only is not here added; & therefore, other Works of Obedience must be, or may be adjoined here, in this matter, notwithstanding it be said, the just liveth by Faith, were in effect to destroy the Apostles Argument, in our Text, where he useth this same expression, without the addition of only, to prove, that we are not justified by the works of the Law. Therefore, as this assertion, that the just liveth by faith, proveth justification by faith without the works of the Law; so the same proveth the Continuation of Justification, without the works of the Law, as the Condition thereof.  
2. The Grounds & Causes of Justification, mentioned by the Apostle Rom. 3: 22, 24, 25, 26. hold good als well in the Continuation, as in the first beginning of justification; for there, as well as here, the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, even the Righteousness of God, which is by Faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them, that believe; for there is no difference. Justification first & lastly is free by his grace, through the Redemption, that is in jesus Christ, whom God hath set fort to be a Propitiation, through faith in his blood. And there is not the least hint given, that the matter is altered, in the Continuation of justification.  
3. As the beginning of justification is so contrived, as all boasting is taken away, so must the Continnance thereof be conceived to be? But if works be admitted, as Conditions of the Continuance of Instification, though they be denied to be the Condition of the Beginning thereof, all boasting shall not be excluded, contrary to Rom. 3: 27. for if a sinner, after that he is justified by the merit of Christ, at first, should have it to say, that for the Continuance of his justification, he were beholden to his own Works, he should surely have matter of boasting in himself, in so far at least. Papists think to evite this Argument against their Second justification by works, by saving that all these good works are not of themselves, but of the Father of Lights. But this shift will not help, for all these works are not the Righteousness of Christ, but are works of Righteousness, which we do, & are excluded in this matter, as occasioning boasting, or giving ground thereunto; as the next Argument will more fully clear.  
4. Abraham is said to have Righteousness imputed unto him, & Faith imputed unto Righteousness, and so to be justified by faith, not only when he was first justified, but many years after, even when he offered up Isaac his son. Rom. 4. & jam. 2: 21, 23. So was he justified first & last, as, to have no ground of glorying, and therefore not by works. Rom. 4: 1, 3, 4. But it will be said, that the Apostle james saith expressly, in the place cited, that our father Abraham was justified by works, when he had offered his Son Isaac on the Altar. I Ans. Not to engage in the whole explication & vindication of that Passage of Scripture here, which is of late to good purpose, & most satisfyingly done by the learned Doctor Owen; I only say, that Abraham's being justified by works, was such, as thereby the Scripture was fulfilled; which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for Righteousness etc. vers. 23. Now if Abraham had been justified by works, properly so taken, the Scripture had not been fulfilled, which said, he was justified by Faith, but the contrary had been made good, to wit, that works were imputed to him, & he was justified by them, as by his Righteousness. But the meaning is, that Abraham was justified by faith, a true faith, that proved itself such, in time of a trial, by works of obedience, & particularly by obedience to that command, whereby the Lord tried or tempted him Gen. 22: 1, 2. and by such a Faith as wrought with his works, & was perfected, or discovered & manifested to be real, after the trial of the fire. jam. 2: 22. It is a good direction that the learned Camero giveth here Op. fol. pag. 83. That we should hóld fast the scope of the Apostle james, & to this end, that we should take notice of the Apostles Proposition, and of the Conclusion thereof. The Proposition is set down vers. 14. What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he, hath faith, & have not works, can faith, (or that faith) save him. Whereby we see, that the Apostles scope is to prove, that that Faith, which the man supposeth he hath, who hath no works, is not that Faith, by which we are Justified & saved; & that because it is unprofitable to poor indigent brethren, in necessity vers. 15. 16. is dead vers. 17. 20, it can not be shown by works vers. 18. it is a Faith that devils have vers. 19 All which & what followeth is cleared from the Conclusion vers. 26. for as the body without the Spirit is dead, so faith with works is dead also.  
5. It will always hold true, that God is he who justifieth the ungodly & so justifieth him, that worketh not, but him to whom saith is counted for Righteousness. Rom. 4: 5. But if the Continuance of Justification were by works; & works were counted for Righteoulness, in order to the continuance of justification; God should not continue to be the justifier of the ungodly: but should justify the ungodly at first, & thereafter justify the Godly; whereof the Text giveth not the least hint.  
6. The Instance of David cleareth this also Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. for David is there Psal. 32. speaking of himself, long after he was first justified, and yet his words saying, blessed are they, whose iniquities are forgiven etc. prove Justification by faith, without the works of the Law (which is the Apostles scope, & the end, for which he adduceth this prove; and we must not think, that any of his probations are impertinent) but this they could not prove, if the continuance of justification were by works, & not by Faith only; as is manifest; for who can infer, that the beginning of Justification is by Faith alone, from this, that the continuance of justification is by works? but when the Continuance of Justification is by Faith alone, it followeth manifestly, that the beginning of it must be by faith alone. Yea, it is hence also manifest, that Pardon of sins committed after Justification, is not had by works, but by the imputation of Righteousness, without works, for saith Paul, David describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth Righteousness, without works: And how did David describe this? When he said, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven etc.  
6. Paul tells us Rom. 5: 2. that as by Christ, we have access by Faith into grace, so in the same we stand, & rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. Access into this grace must import the State of Justification, & as this is by Faith, so is the standing & abiding therein; and consequently, the continuance of Justification: and there is no word of works here at all, in this whole affair.  
7. Paul likewise confirmeth this, in his own Experience Gal. 2: 20. where he tells us, how, and what way he lived unto God, being dead to the Law, to wit by the Faith of the Son of God: and as this was true of the life of Sanctification: so much more of the life of justification, both as begun & as continued; for the whole life of a Christian, now crucified with Christ, & living unto God, is here spoke to: And this is in opposition to the works of the Law, as is clear from verse, 16. & from the following vers. 21.  
8. The same is confirmed by the doctrine of the Apostle Ephes. 2: 8, 9, 10. for by grace are ye saved, through faith- not of works lest any man should boast: for we are his workmanship, created in Christ jesus, unto good works, which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them. This Salvation taketh-in both the Beginning, Continuance & End of our life, of Justification; & all this is by Faith alone, & expressly it is said, not to be by works, and that, lest any man should boast (which confirmeth our third argument) & these works are works of Gospel-obedience, and he tells us of another end & use of these, than to be the Condition of the Continuance of our Justification, even to be the way we should walk in, according to the fore-ordination of God, and carry as his workmanshipe, created thereunto.  
9 We have the Apostles own practice again set before us, to clear this matter Phil. 3: 9 where he tells us, what was his main design & work, not at first only, when he was Justified; but long thereafter, to show what was his constant design, & should be to the end; even labour to be found in Christ, renuncing his own Righteousness, and to seek to be hid under & covered with that Righteousness, which is through the faith of Christ, & which is of God by Faith: So that, as he believed in Jesus Christ, that he might be justified by the Faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law. Gal. 2: 16. So here he showeth, that he will continue in this exercise to the end.  
10. We may add to these, that passage of Paul. Tit. 3: 5, 6, 7. Not by works of Righteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us (and this Salvation, sure, will take-in the Continuation of justification) by the washing of regeneration, & renewing of the holy Guest; which he shed on us abundantly, through jesus Christ, our Lord: that being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs, according to the hope of eternal life. And when he willeth Titus in the following verse, to affirm, that they which have believed in God, may be careful to maintain good works, as being good & profitable unto men; he addeth nothing of their being the Condition of the Continuance of our justification, as sure, he had a fair occasion to do, if the matter were so: but he had fully excluded them from all interest therein vers. 5.  
We may add to these a few Reasons.  
1. Is it not considerable, in this point, that Paul speaking so frequently & disputing at such a length of justification & clearing so many things about it; Yet, in all his discourses thereupon, he never mentioneth this Condition (to wit works of obedience) of its continuance. And, which is also considerable, though he oftentimes press to holiness, & useth many Arguments to that end; Yet he never maketh mention of this place & office it hath, in & about the Continuance of justification; which sure, is supposed by the Assertors, to be a mighty argument unto the constant exercise of Holiness.  
2. We have proved above, that justification at first is by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, received by faith; and we have shown, that Faith in Justification specially eyeth the Righteousness of Christ, & resteth thereupon. If then our personal Obedience be brought in to be the Condition of the Continuance of Justification, Christ's Righteousness is quite laid aside from having any Further interest therein, and the Believer is never, after the first time, to act faith upon the Righteousness of Christ; and the reason is, because works do not act so upon the Righteousness of Christ, as Faith doth; neither have they that capacity to do so. But how absurd is it to think or say, that the Believer hath no more to do with Christ's Righteousness? And how contrary is it to the fixed resolution of Paul Phil. 3: 9 And how inconsistent with the whole scope of the Gospel, which is the power of God unto Salvation to every one that believeth, and wherein is the Righteousness of God revealad from faith to faith, as it is written, the just shall live by faith Rom. 1: 16, 17? If it be said, That this cannot militate against such, as take-in Faith with works. I Ans. It will militate against such; for works cannot act upon the Righteousness of Christ, as faith doth; & therefore if faith & works concur as conditions, in one & the same manner, Faith is not here considered, as acting on the Righteousness of Christ, but only as a work, & another moral virtue: and so the Righteousness of Christ is quite excluded.  
3. Believers by Faith in Christ, are completely justified, as to their state & have all their bygone iniquities pardoned, and they are accepted as children in his Favour joh. 1: 12, they are made heirs of God & joint heirs with Christ Rom. 8: 17, and are discharged (as Mr. Baxter granteth himself Confess. p. 102. Concl. 9) from all guilt of Eternal Punishment, yea & of all destructive Punishment in this life. Yea they are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the Law Act. 13: 39 They are blessed Rom. 4, 5, 6. And all this is so fixed, that none can lay any thing to their charge Rom. 8: 33, 34. Yea they are said to have Everlasting Life, joh. 5: 24. Now, seeing all this is by Faith: what necessity is there for another Condition, beside this same Faith, keeping fast by Christ, unto the Continuance of this State? If it be said, that notwithstanding hereof, they are liable to future sins, and these must also be forgiven; and in reference to the Pardon of these, other Conditions may be required, & in that respect, these may be called Conditions of the Continuance of Justification.  
4. The answer to this will furnish us with another Argument; for answer therefore I say. That works are not the Condition of Pardon of after sins, but faith going to Christ, and washing in his blood 1. joh. 2: 1, 2. If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, jesus Christ the Righteous, & he is the propitiation for our sins. Christ is here proposed to sinning believers, in his Priestly office, as the object of their Faith, in order to Pardon: And Mr. Baxter, in the forecited place Concl. 11 saith, that when ever the justified do commit any sin, they have a present & effectual certain remedy at hand for their pardon, that is, the merit of Christ's blood, & his Intercession, the Love of God, the Promise of Pardon, in which they have interest, & the Spirit to excite them to Faith & Repentance. No word of works of obedience, as Condition here. David in order to the obtaining of the pardon of his sin, did betake himself to the free mercy of God, that he might get his sin covered, his iniquities forgiven, and his sin not imputed unto him; Psal. 32: 1, 2. and this was, in Paul's judgement Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. a betaking himself to imputed Righteousness without works. So he betook himself to mercy, and withal he desired to be purged with hyssop, Psal. 51: 1, 7. which looked to the blood of Christ, that only sprinkleth consciences. Heb. 9: 13, 14, 22.  
5. If Justification be continued upon Condition of works, we inquire what these works are? Are herein comprehended all commanded duties? or all that is required of justified persons by way of duty? then a faloure in any of these, whether by Omission, or Commission, should cause an intercision of that State, and a breach of that Relation: But this is utterly false; Yea, if so, the justified should become Unjustified every day, for no man liveth & sinneth not. The reason of the Consequence is, because the non-performance of the Condition, upon which the State & Relation of the justified is continued, must make a breach in that State. If it be said, That not every sin, but only such sins as are inconsistent with the State of Justification, will make an Intercision. Then it must consequently be said, that upon these alone, or on the non-performance of these alone doth the Continuance of Justification depend, as on a Condition. And what be these? David's sin, I hope, nor Peter's sin, were none of these. And whatever they be, I suppose it will be granted, (except by Arminians) that there is sufficient provision against these laidin in the New Covenant of Grace; and that such, as are justified indeed, shall never fall into such sins. And then, what need it be said, that the State of Justification is continued upon such terms?  
6. By this way, Proud Nature should have occasion to boast, and say. It was of God's Grace & Mercy, that I was brought into a justified State, & had all my former sins pardoned; but for my abiding & continueing therein; and for the pardon of all my sins, that I have committed, or do commit since, I am beholden to my own Gospel-obedience immediately; for Remission is granted, and my Justification continued, upon Condition of my personal & Gospel-obedience. But how inconsistent this is with the whole strain of the Gospel, cannot be unknown. We no where read, that our sins are pardoned, or not imputed to us, in or by our Evangelic Obedience; but as we are justified freely by grace, through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Rom. 3: 24. so it is in & through Him, & his blood, that we are washen, & our sins purged away Mat. 26: 28. Revel. 1: 5. Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14.  
7. The daily experience of the people of God, may clear to us, what that is, upon which their State is continued; and upon which they seek & obtain new Remission of their new Transgressions, and show us, that it is not their own personal Obedience; but the Grace & Mercy of God, in Jesus Christ: for it is to this they betake themselves daily, both in reference to their being keeped in the favour of God, & in reference to their getting new extracts of Pardon; It is to the blood of sprinkling they go daily, that there they may be washen, & cleansed from all their sins & sailings. It is to this fountain opened to the house of David & to the Inhabitans of jerusalem, that they run with their sins & uncleannesses. Zach. 13: 1. For it is his blood alone, that cleanseth from all sin. 1. joh. 1: 7. And so they find by experience, that they stand only by Faith, and that it is through Faith in this blood, that they are kept in the favour of God, & get their sins pardoned.  
These proofs may serve for confirmation of what we say; Let us now see what Mr. Baxter saith for the contrary.  
In his Confess. p. 47. he adduceth three Arguments. The first is this. The word expressly constituteth these Conditions of our not-loseing our State of Justification, or of Continueing it. And this he tells us, he hath formerly showed in many Scriptures, meaning, I suppose, the passages he had immediately before cited on the margin. But to these I Answer in general. That not one of them maketh mention of the continuance of our justification, or of our not loseing of it: And therefore it cannot be said from these, that the word expressly constituteth these Conditions of our not-losing Justification. But we shall consider them particularly.  
Mat. 12: 36, 37. speaketh not of justification, whereof we are now treating, but of the last judgement, and we see no cause of confounding this Justification, whereof we speak, or its Continuance, with the last Judgement, as Papists do confound their second justification with this judgement; and abuse the same Scriptures here adduced by Mr. Baxter & the like, to prove their second justification to be by works.  
Jam. 2: 24. speaketh not of the Continuance or not losing of justification; but of the very beginning of justification, which is not by a dead faith or by a faith, that cannot produce works of Obedience, or by such a faith, as devils have; but by a faith that is working, & making the soul prompt & ready to yield all Obedience unto the Lord: and this is the true meaning of the words, as was shown above, and the whole scope of the place evidenceth. Will Mr. Baxter say, that by a dead Faith, and by a Faith that cannot save, and by a Faith that is in devils & is attended with no Christian Love, we are brought into a justified state at first? No sure: and yet this is the faith, that james opposeth unto works, or rather unto a working faith, whereby we are justified first & last, as was Abraham vers. 21. whose faith was such, as it wrought with his works, and by the same was manifest to be what it was, the true & saving faith of God's Elect. And sure, this Faith of Abraham, and the faith that wrought in Rahab, was another sort of Faith, than is the Faith of devils, or that Faith, that is but a dead carcase.  
Mat. 6: 14, 15. speaketh of Remission of sins: And I suppose, it will not be said, that every one, who forgiveth his neighbour, doth thereby and thereupon obtain Remission of his own sins, at the hands of God; otherways Heathens, & wicked persons may be said to have their sins Pardoned before God, because they may forgive others, some wrongs done unto themselves. If it besaid, that such cannot forgive others a right, not having a principle of grace, and not being in Christ. True, but then we see, that it is not this forgiving abstractly considered, that is spoken of here, but a Forgiving, flowing from faith & principled thereby; and so the meaning of the place is, That without such a Faith in Christ, as principleth & prompteth to Pardoning of others, we can expect no pardon of our own sins from God; not have ground to suppose that we are indeed pardoned of God: our forgiving of others then is here mentioned as the native Effect, & evident Sign of Faith; as our Commentators manifest upon the place, speaking against the Papists. See Pareus, Gualther & others. Pareus particularly disproveth the Papist's gloss; & sayeth, that our pardoning of others must follow upon God's pardoning of us, as he cleareth from Mat. 18. and will not have our forgiving of others said to be the causa sine qua non of our obtaining Remission from God. This place than saith, That while we cannot find in our heart, a readiness cheerfully & heartily to forgive others, we have no ground to imagine, that our sins are pardoned; for all such as are pardoned of God, have this Christian disposition flowing from faith in Christ: They may have this, as to the seed & root; but till it grow up to yield this fruit, they want the evidence of their faith & consequently of pardon.  
1. joh. 1: 9 meaneth such a Confession of sins, as is accompanied with the making use by faith of the blood of Christ, that cleanseth from all sin vers. 7. and with a running to the Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, who is a Propitiation for sins Chap. 2: 1, 2. Most wicked persons, as Saul may make confession of their sins; but not so as to run to the fountain, the blood of sprinkling: And by a Confession, that is not accompanied with this acting, they can attain to no Remission before God: And therefore faith only acting in humble Confession to the glory of God, & to the taking of shame to themselves, is the condition of Pardon, & of Continuance of Justification, as to this.  
Revel. 22: 14. is also abused by the Papists. to prove their second justification to be by works. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hereused, doth not always denote right, or jus: for it sometimes signifieth mere freedom, liberty & power to do such or such a thing, as 1. Cor. 9: 4, 5, 6. And so here the words import that such as do his commandments, are blessed; for thereby they have free access unto the tree of life, unto Christ, their objective blessedness, which is the same with that, which is commonly said, viz. that Works of Obedience are the way of the Kingdom, but not the cause of reigning. It will not suit with the Gospel, to say, that by our works of obedience we buy a right to the tree of life, even in part, or in subordination to Christ's blood; for Christ hath purchased the whole Right: & nothing of ours must be joined, as a part of that price, otherwise must we have a proportionable share of the glory to ourselves. Nor can it be said, that by our works of Obedience we obtain a Right to Christ & to his Merits; for before we have a Right to Christ, we can do no works of Christian Obedience, and Christ alone hath bought to us both Grace, & Glory: But our works of Christian Obedience, though they cannot precede our Right to, yet they may go before our Possession of the Inheritance purchased; now Right & Possession are different things. But in fine we say, that this place, speaking of the possession of glory, is not apposite to the purpose now in hand, for Justification is different from Glorification. Rom. 8: 30. And of justification, as continued are we here speaking.  
joh. 15: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. Verse. 3. & 9 can prove nothing, in reference to what we are upon. Vers. 4. showeth that there is no fruitfulness in Grace, but by a constant abiding in, & sucking of sap by faith from Christ the true Vine, which none denieth. Verse 8. showeth that by fruitfulness in good, the Father is Glorified, & thereby a demonstration is given to the world, who are indeed the true disciples of Christ, vers. 6. holdeth forth the dreadful punishment that attendeth Apostates; but we hope, true believers are secured against full & final Apostasy. Vers. 10. proveth indeed, that keeping of Christ's commands, is a mean to keep the sense of our being beloved of Christ fresh in our souls, & to enjoy the fruits of his Love of Beneficence: but saith nothing of good works being the Condition of our Continuance in the state of justification: unless we will also say, that Christ's obedience was the Condition of his Continueing in the State of Justification.  
1. joh. 2: 24. etc. proveth, that full & final Apostasy from the faith & truth of the Gospel will indeed cut off from all Interest in Christ, & from benefit by him; But as true believers are secured from this, as vers. 27. cleareth. So this will only prove, that continuance in Faith, is the Condition of continuance of Justification.  
Mat. 18: 35. Only proveth (and so confirmeth what was said to Mat. 6: 14.) that such as do not from their hearts forgive their brethren their trespasses, can have no ground of Assurance, that God hath forgiven them theirs. theirs our Cruelty & Unmercifulness towards our Brethren, may give us sufficient ground to doubt of our Pardon, whatever seeming assurance we had formerly. So that this place speaketh nothing of the Condition of our pardon, but of the condition rather of our Sense, Feeling & grounded Assurance of Pardon; which is a far different thing.  
These are the Scriptures, whereby he would prove his first argument. His 2. Arg. is this. Our first faith having the nue nature of a Covenanting with Christ, & giving ourselves to him, & taking him for our Lord & Redeemer: therefore it follows, that as the Covenant making & accepting was of necessity, as the condition of our first right & remission; so is our Covenant keeping of the same necessity to our continued right. And that God is, as it were, disobliged, if we should not keep Covenant. And the keeping hath more in it, than the bare making. No Covenant-relations usually are entered among men, but the Covenant keeping is more than the making; and the conditions of their continued right more than of their first right. So it is with a Subject to his Prince, wife to a husband, Soldier to a commander, Scholar to his Teacher. Servant to his Master etc. Promising will give them the first right, but performing (in the essentials) must continue it, it or will cease: for the end of the promise was its performance: And in that respect faith, which is the Covenant, is inferior to obedience, which is promised, though in other respect it may be superior.  
Ans. (1) Though Justifying Faith be also a Covenanting faith, and of uniteth he soul with Christ; Yet in order to Justification, it hath not (to use his words) the true Nature of a Covenanting with Christ, nor a giving up ourselves to Him: but rather it is a receiving & resting on Him, and his Righteousness, and a fleeing to his Merits for refuge. (2) Nor doth faith, in order to Justification, (as we cleared above) receive Christ, or go to him, as Lord & King, but rather as Priest. (3) Nor doth the receiving of Christ at first, as King, formally include Obedience, or a promise of obedience; as was also manifested above. (4) Therefore, from this first acting of faith in order to justification, it can no way follow, that Obedience, or Covenant keeping (as he speaketh) is the condition of our continued Right, or of our continued justification. (5) What God hath promised upon Covenant-keeping, he is, it is true, disobliged from giving to speak so, when the Covenant is not keeped: But we find not, that he hath promised Justification, or the continuance thereof upon these terms. (6) There is no Covenants among men, that can fully quadrate, either with God's Covenanting with us, or with the matter of Justification, about which we are now speaking. The sentences of judges absolving the debtor, upon the payment of the Cautioner instructed, agreeth more with this; and we find not in such sentences, any suchlike Conditions, mentioned of their Continuance in force. (7) Some of these Relations or Covenants mentioned are purely alien, being betwixt a Master & his servant, and the Captain and the Soldier; these are mere mercenary contracts, having Obedience & service for their only end, & promiseing a reward upon that Condition. Our justification hath no likeness to this. (8) Even in these Relations, every act of disobedience, or non-performance of the duties required, doth not dissolve the Relation; and therefore it cannot be said, that upon the contrare performance, as a condition, the continueing of the Relation dependeth, Mr. Baxter seeing this, addeth a restriction, (in the essentials.) And in our case, I would require, what he will account Essential? It must be that, sure, the contrary whereof is inconsistent with a Justified state: and what can this be, but a total Apostasy? From which there is full security laidin, in the New Covenant, (which is not in any of the Covenants among men, which he hath mentioned.) And this total Apostasy must include a full renuncing of Christ, & his Righteousness, as to Justification: And this rather would say, that the continuance of Justification dependeth on the continuance of Faith, adhering to Christ & his Righteousness: & to this I shall willingly assent. And this taketh away the force of the 3. Arg. which he adduceth, saying.  
3. Arg. If there were no more necessary to the continueing of our justification, but only the same thing, which did constitute it, than we should be justified by no none act of faith, to our lives end, but only the first instantaneous act; & so our faith, after that instant, should never more be justifying faith. But that's false, etc. Ans. This whole argument, I yield unto; for I plead not against the interest of faith here; but against our works being the condition of continued Justification; as was said above.   

CHAP. XXXVI.  
Of the Interest of Repentance in the Pardon of after-sinnes.  
WE spoke before Chap. 29. of Repentance in order to the first pardon of sins, or to justification; and in the foregoing Chapter we show that the continuance of Justification did not depend on our works, as the Condition thereof: But now the question will be moved touching Repentance; Whether it may not be said to be required, as a Condition of the Continuance of Justification; or at least, as a Condition of the Pardon of sins committed after justification. Concerning which we would premit these things.  
1. It is granted, that Repentance is not only necessary, at the first Conversion of a sinner, but is a Grace, that is constantly to be exercised, by a Believer, so long, as he liveth; both in respect of its terminus a quo, & of its terminus ad quem, or both in respect of its aversive, & of its conversive part; for he is still more & more to depart f●om sin, and to turn unto God, and to all the ways of his Commandments Psal. 119: 59 The very body of death is constant matter of groaning and mourning unto him Rom. 7: 24. & his daily iniquities & transgressions ought to keep him low, and to put him to this exercise. Beside what at extraordinary times of public wrath or judgement against the Land, Church, or Place he liveth in, or judgements upon his own near Relations, Family etc. or upon occasion of his own more heinous out break: as in David. Psal. 51.  
2. It is also granted. That where is no Repentance, or no true Repentance, for sins committed, there is no ground for that man to suppose, that his sin is pardoned: I do not here speak of the measure or expressions of Repentance; for there may be mistakes on both hands; some thinking their Repentance is naught, because not in such a sensible measure, as they think is required; may therefore infer that their case is worse, than indeed it is, others, upon the other hand, may suppose they have repent, when it is not so; & so infer pardon, when they have no ground. But this is granted, that where true & sincere Repentance is not, there is no Pardon from God of sins, whereof such are guilty: for to such, as he mindeth to Pardon, he giveth also a Spirit of Repentance, as both Scripture & Experience proveth:  
3. Yet notwithstanding of this, it is true, that an outward Repentance; where there is no inward, real & sanctified change wrought, may hold off for a time, or prorogue the inflicting of temporal strokes; as we see in Aabh, Nineveth & others.  
4. It will be granted also by all the orthodox, that Repentance is no proper, meritorious cause of pardon; not doth it make any Satisfaction to God, or appease his wrath & anger.  
4. I shall also grant, that where there is true & unfeigned Repentance, after some sin committed, there that person may saifly infer that his sin is pardoned: Repentance is a good sign of Remission; because it is a good evidence, that the man hath run to the fountain, to the blood of Jesus, and there hath washen himself, & made himself clean. See Esai. 1: 16, 17, 18.  
5. The Exercise of Repentance is very useful, to make sin become bitter, mercy welcome, & to make the soul more careful & watchful in time to come.  
But the Question is, whether Repentance be a proper Condition of Pardon of sins, committed after Justification: or not? And when we speak of Repentance here, we consider it by itself, & not as being the sensible signification & expression of Faith; for the Question is not, whether Faith acting in & through Repentance, or working the soul up unto unfeigned Repentance, be the Condition of Remission; for that is not Repentance, but Faith, accompanied with, & acting the soul to Repentance; but the Question is of Repentance considered in itself, & as a distinct grace from Faith: And speaking of Repentance, as such, & considered in itself, I say, that it is not the Condition of Remission of after sins; but faith only, acting in a Gospel manner, on Jesus Christ, & his Blood & Merits.  
And the reasons are. 1. Because it is Faith & not Repentance, that carrieth the sinner away to the Blood of Jesus Christ, & to his Merits, through whom, & by which alone Remission is had Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. Zach. 13. 1. Heb. 9: 14, 22. Revel. 1: 5. Repentance as such, layeth not hold on Christ, grippeth not his Merits, maketh no application of these; but is wholly exercised about another object, about sin.  
2. This would give man too great ground of boasting in himself: if upon his Mourning, Sorrow & Repentance, Pardon were to be had; and would give occasion to think, that there were some merit & worth, in that work, & some thing satisfying or appeasing to God: for the man hereby is keeped within himself: & upon the account of something within himself, or done by himself, is he pardoned, as he might suppose.  
3. This should be derogatory to the Blood & Merits of Christ, by which alone we have pardon first & last; and the Gospel is so contrived, as that Christ must have all the Glory; and all the methodes, means & order of the Gospel, and new Covenant, are in like manner framed, so that man may be abased, free grace exalted, Christ acknowledged the only Redeemer; But if our Repentance were made such a Condition, there should be no application made of Christ & of his blood by the sinner; No acting on him, & on his merits, in order to the obtaining of Pardon; and so, no occasion of exalting free grace, and Love in Christ; no occasion of wondering at the wise contrivance of the Covenant of Grace, in all points: If it be said, There is no derogating from Christ & his Merits here; because it is by virtue of his Merits, that Repentance is made such a Condition: ay Ans. This is not cleared from the Scripture; nor is it suitable to the frame of the Gospel-Covenant; for the whole of it is so contrived, as that Christ is immediately to be made use of: But this way keepeth the soul off all immediate going to, applying of, and resting upon Christ, in order to Remission of new sins; & setteth them only upon the exercise of Sorrow & Repentance within themselves.  
4. The Apostle john pointeth out the way to believers of obtaining Remission-of sins 1. joh. 2: 1, 2.- And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, jesus Christ the righteous. And he is the Propitiation for our sins. Now, Repentance doth not make use of Christ, as an Advocate, & as a Propitiation; but Faith doth. And it is the proper work of Faith, in order to Remission, to make use of Christ, in his Priestly office, & to carry the soul away to his Propitiation & Intercession.  
5. The daily experience of the Saints evidence this, when upon conviction of sin, they betake themselves to the free Mercy of God, in Christ, to the Blood of sprinkling, crying out for Pardon for the Lord's sake, and seeking to be washen, in his blood. It is not their Repentance, or Sorrow, that they flee to, as the ground of their hope of Pardon; but the merits of Christ, held forth in the new Covenant, is that fountain, wherein they must wash & be clean. See Psal. 25: 11. & 51: 7.  
6. This was sufficiently held forth under the Law, when for their Errors, Failings & daily Transgressions, the people were to bring their Sacrifices to the Priest, which were to be offered up, as types of Christ & they were to lay their hands upon the head of the Sacrifice, in sign of their resting upon the Sacrifice typified, & of rolling their sins upon that only Sacrifice, & of expecting Acceptance & Pardon, through it alone. See Levit. 4: 20, 26, 31, 35. & 5: 10, 13, 16, 18. & 6: 7, 19, 22.  
7. If Repentance be the Condition, than this must either be said of that part of Repentance, which precedeth the acting of faith, or of that which followeth: This last cannot be said; for than it would follow, that upon the acting of faith, that precedeth, there were no Remission; & so faith laying hold on Christ & his Merits, should be utterly excluded from having any Interest in the pardon of sins. Nor can the first be said, for then there should be Remission, before & without all application made of Christ by Faith: Yea & the very imperfect beginnings of Repentance should be judged sufficient for Remission: which cannot be said. If it be said, that this is meaned of complete Repentance. I Ans. Compleet Repentance cannot be without Faith: & it is against what is said, to make Repentance, considered alone & by itself, or as abstracted from Faith, the only Condition; seeing this would be a manifest exclusion of Faith altogether. If it be said, that Repentance & Faith may be considered together, & as joined together called the Condition of Pardon. I Ans. Seing it is manifest, that both do not, neither can act one & the same way on Christ; they cannot be considered as equally sharing in the place & interest of a condition: And therefore, I judge it saifest to say, That faith, acting in & by Repentance, or so discovering itself to be true & lively, is the sole Condition of Pardon.  
8. As at first, so always that holdeth true, which Peter saith Act. 10: 43. To him (i. e. to Jesus) give all the Prophet's witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him, shall receive Remission of sins. As the stung Israelit was always, in order to his cure, to look to the brazen serpent: so is the Believer, that would be cured of the guilt of new transgressions, to have his recourse by Faith unto the Mediator, crucified & lifted up joh. 3: 14, 15.  
Obj. 1. It is said, that Repentance is necessary both as commanded, and as a mean appointed for attaining Remission of sins: And therefore must be the Condition of Remission. Ans. The consequence is not good; for this same may be said of Prayer, and other Duties; which yet cannot be called proper Conditions of Pardon. That prayer is a commanded duty, none will deny; That a praying sinner may be said to be using the means to attain unto Pardon, and to be in the way of obtaining of it, will also be granted: and so in that respect, prayer may be accounted a mean: and yet it cannot be called the Condition; for then every one that prayeth should have pardon, though he act not faith: And if it be said, that it must be prayer in faith jam. 5: 15. I Ans. True, but then the Condition is not Prayer, but Faith exerting itself, and acting in & through Prayer: And the same we say of Repentance, and so keep it in its due place, and press it in the Gospel way & method.  
Obj. 2. It is said. That there is a kind of congruity & sutablness, in this order, by subjoining the promise of pardon to it; for it is more suitable that a penitent sinner should have Pardon, than an impenitent. Ans. So this same may be said of Prayer; for it is also more suitable, that a praying sinner, be pardoned, than a sinner that nev● once asketh pardon: And this tendeth more also to the exalting of free grace. But the truth is, in pardon there is not only a declaration & exalting of Grace & Mercy; but also of divine Justice Rom. 3: 25, 26. and unto this, Faith is singularly fitted, because it layyeth hold on the Propitiation, and on blood, for the declaration of God's Righteousness for Remission of sins; and hereby is the Lord declared to be just, when he is the Justifier & Pardoner of the believer. So that neither prayer, nor Repentance, nor Self-searching etc. can be properly called the Condition, but Faith acting in & by these.  
Obj. 3. It is said, that Repentance qualifieth the sinner, in reference to the promise of pardon, or putteth him within the reach of the promise; so that he may take hold of the promise of pardon: And it disposeth him to accept the offered Salvation freely, and to rest upon Christ alone, for that end. Ans. (1) What disposeth to accept of Salvation etc. cannot for that cause be called the Condition of Pardon, unless we speak improperly; as felt poverty in a beggar, though it disposeth him to receive an offered alms thankfully, Yet it is not the proper Condition: No more self conviction, in our case, a Condition of Pardon. (2) If it qualifieth for the receiving of the offered Salvation; than it qualifieth immediately for Faith, & but mediately & remotly for Pardon. (3) The promise of Pardon is not made to the penitent properly, & as such; but to the Penitent believer; that is, to faith acting & exerting itself in & by Repentance.  
Obj. 4. Esai. 1: 15, 16. put away the evil of your doings, cease to do evil, etc. this is Repentance: & then vers. 18. full pardon is promised, though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white, as snow etc. Ans. Yet with all he bids them wash & make clean; which could only be, by the blood of the Messiah, for that only cleanseth. 1. joh. 1: 7. and this they had neglected, in going about their Sacrifices, which therefore were abominable in the eyes of the Lord vers. 11, 12, 13. because not accompanied with Faith, that purifieth the heart Act. 15: 9  
Obj. 5. 2. Chron. 7: 14. the Lord promiseth to forgive sin, if his people would turn from their wicked ways. Ans. But with all it is required there, that they seek the face of God, & that was in & through the Messiah, typified by the Temple, to which their prayers were to be directed, as we see Chap. 6: 20, 24, 26, 29, 31, 34, 38.  
Obj. 6. Prov. 28: 13.- He that confesseth his sin & forsaketh it shall find mercy. Ans. True, because none will do that a right, but the believer; who laith hold on the Merits of Christ. And so this & the like places, are not exclusively to be taken, but principally to be understood of Faith so acting, and evidencing itself to be true & lively, and of the right stamp, by its acting so.  
FINIS.    


CHAP. I.  
Imputation both of Christ's Active and Passive Obedience necessary.  
MR. john Goodwin in his Treatise of justification part. 2. Ch. 2. laith down several conclusions, whereby he might overturn this Truth: & what he saith must be examined.  
His 1. Conclusion in this. He, for whose sins a plenary satisfaction hath been made (either by himself, or another for him) & hath been accepted by him, against whom the transgression was committed, is as just & righteous, as he that never sinned, but had done all things, that were requisite & meet for him to do. Ans. If by just & righteous be meaned one, who only hath not deserved the punishment threatened; then his Conclusion is true: but if by just & righteous be meaned one, who not only hath not deserved the punishment, but hath also deserved the reward promised; then his Conclusion is false; for the Satisfaction, if it respect only the transgression committed, can only put the man, for whom it is given & accepted, in the state of one, that is under no obligation to be punished: but it cannot put him in the state of one, who not only is not to be punished, but is also to be rewarded. He addeth. This is evident; because there is as much justice & righteousness in repairing the the wrongs & injuries done to any, as there is in abstaining from doing wrong. Ans. True, in reference to the wrong done; and therefore such an one is rightly & justly delivered from the obligation to punishment; but is not made so righteous, as to challenge the reward, till a more compleet satisfaction be made, to wit, such as may comprehend also perfect conformity unto the Law in all points, to the end, he, for whom this is done, may be looked upon as a fulfiller of the Law, & therefore to have right to the reward, as he would have had, if he had in his own person perfectly keeped it. He that simply repaireth the wrong done, doth not that, which deserveth the reward. The simile he annexeth confirmeth this, and demonstrateth how far out he is, as to our case. He that by his cattle, or otherwise, hath made spoil in his neighbours Corn, & hath given him full satisfaction for the spoil done, to his contentment, is as good a Nieghbour, & deals as justly & honestly with him, as he that never trespassed in that kind upon him. How impertinent this is, as to our case, any may see; or he must say, that there was no reward promised to Adam, upon his perfect obedience; & that that word, do this & live, had no place, in the Covenant made with him. The Satisfying Nieghbour deserveth no reward, nor was there any reward promised to him, upon Condition of his being a good Nieghbour. He addeth. The essence & nature of justice or righteousness is suum cuique tribuere, to give to every man his own. i e. that which is his own in a way of equity & right, is due from us unto them. Ans. But that which Adam was obliged to give to God, as his own, was glory, by faithful & constant obedience, that he might receive the reward to the glory of God's faithfulness, & goodness. Now when Adam dishonoured the Lord by disobedience. & rob him (as it were) of his Authority, as just & righteous Governor, a satisfaction for the wrong done, excluding positive & full obedience unto the Law, is not a giving to God all that is due to him. Now (saith he) when we have enjured or damnified any man, in any of his rights, or things belonging to him, there is nothing more due to him, than that which is his own, i. e. that which is fully valuable to the injury we have done unto him. Therefore he that tenders a valuable consideration or satisfaction for an injury done to another, is just, according to the height & utmost exigency of justice; & consequently as just, as he that never was injurious or did wrong. Ans. All this is to no purpose, as to our question; for it is not betwixt God & us: no● was it betwixt God and Adam, as it is betwixt one man & another. God is to be considered, as a supreme Lawgiver & Ruler, enjoining obedience to his Laws, under penalties, and promising rewards unto the obedient: Now when his Laws are broken, he is doubly enjured, & the breaker, is obliged unto punishment, and also forfeited of his expectation of the reward. When satisfaction is made, and withal no compleet obedience to the Law, the person is by the satisfaction made, only exemed from the obligation to punishment, but hath thereby no right to the reward promised, until the Law be compleetly obeyed.  
His 2. Conclusion is. There is no medium between a perfect absolution & freedom from all sin; & a perfect & compleet righteousness: But he that is fully discharged & freed from sin, ipso facto, is made perfectly & compleetly righteous. Ans. The same distinction, which we made use of in the other Conclusion, will help us here. If by perfectly & compleetly Righteous be meaned one, that is liable to no punishment, it is true, that he, who is fully discharged & freed from sin, is made perfectly righteous, but if by perfectly & compleetly Righteous be meaned one, that moreover hath a right to the recompense of reward, that is promised, than it is false: freedom & absolution from sin respecteth only the guilt, & dissolveth the obligation to punishment, & in that respect, is a perfect & compleet Righteousness; i. e. the person, so absolved, is as free of punishment, or of obligation thereunto, as if he had never sinned; but having sinned, he cannot by this dissolution of the obligation to punishment be ipso facto made as perfectly & compleetly Righteous, as he would have been, if he had never transgressed, but had perfectly keeped the Law; for if he had perfectly keeped the Law, he had obtained full right to the reward, which now he hath not, and which no pardon, or discharge, as such, can restore him unto. Let us hear his reason. Nothing (saith he) can any way diminish, or prejudice the perfection of Righteousness, but only sin, as no thing can hinder the perfection of light, but darkness in one degree, or other. So that as the air, when it is free from all degrees of darkness, must of necessity be fully light; so he that is perfectly freed from all sin, must of necessity be fully & perfectly Righteous. Ans. This would make us believe, that he is here speaking of sin itself, and not of its guilt and demerit, and so the opposite hereunto, must be holiness; which expelleth sin (in a manner) as light doth darkness, or as one quality doth its contrary. But then he is fight, all this while, against his own shadow, for we are speaking of the guilt of sin, which also must be properly understood, (and nothing else can) when he spoke of absolution & freedom from sin, in the Conclu●on. If he speak here of sin in respect of guilt & demerit, his simile doth not quadrate; and opposite to this guilt he should set Righteousness or obedience with its merit: and if any will do this, they shall easily see the mistake, for though a man hath not transgressed, yet he hath not eo ipso right to the premium, for in order to this, more days work may be required, than one or half of one day's work; far less can the Pardon of or satisfaction for this transgression, give a man right to the reward.  
He addeth. It is impossible to conceive a man defective in any part of Righteousness, & yet withal to conceive him free from all sin: sin & Righteousness being in subjecto capaci, contraria immediata, as Logicians speak. Ans. Defective in Righteousness may be either understood in respect of the mere duty or command, or in respect of full right to the reward. In the first sense, such an one cannot be free of all sin; but taking it in the second sense, he may: as for example, when one is to work eight days in dressing a garden, & then to receive the reward promised, & if he fail in his work any of the days, to be punished; this man, so long as he worketh 2, 3, 4. 5. days cannot be charged with sin, nor said to be defective, as to his duty; and yeth he hath not full right to the reward until he hath wrought Eight days, but is defective in some part of his Righteousness, as to this reward. And according to this may we understand that logical axiom.  
Further he saith, The Scriptures themselves still make an immediate opposition, between sin & Righteousness.- To find out a third estate between sin & Righteousness, we must find out a third Adam, from whom it should be derived. Ans. The state of sin & of Righteousness, whereof the Scripture speaketh, admitteth indeed of no medium, or third betwixt them, and the reason is because, we are all now borne in a state of sin, & are obnoxipus to wrath; & remain so, until we be translated into a state of Righteousness, which is not by mere pardon of sins, but also by the imputation of a Righteousness; for being in this State of Righteousness, we have not only the Obligation to wrath & eternal punishment removed, which is done by Remission upon the account of the Satisfaction of Christ imputed; but we have also a right to the reward, the crown of life, which is had by imputation of Righteousness, or of obedience, though it were better to say, we have both by both; or we have both by the imputation of that compleet Satisfaction & merit, which comprehendeth, or consisteth of both.  
His 3. Conclusion is this, Adam, whilst his innocency stood with him, and till his fall by sin, was compleetly Righteous, & in an estate of justification before God: Yea, for the truth & substance of Righteousness, as Righteous, as he could or should have been, if he had lived to this day, in the most entire & absolute obedience to the Law. Ans. Adam, while he remained innocent, was completely Righteous, that is, was changeable with no transgression, it is true: That he was completely Righteous, that is, had full right to the reward, as having done all his duty, and completed his work, it is most false. Therefore (2) it is false to say, he was in a state of justification, unless nothing else be hereby meaned, than that he was not in a state of condemnation. Though there be no mids betwixt these two now, as to us, but either we must be in a state of justification, or in a state of condemnation; Yet Adam while he stood, was in neither; Not in a state of condemnation, because he had not yet transgressed the Law; Nor yet in a state of justification, because he had not yet done all his duty; for he was to persevere in obedience to the end: And if he had been justified, he had full right to the reward, & so had been glorified, for whom the Lord justifieth, he glorifieth: But Adam was not glorified upon his Law-obedience, and consequently was not justified by his Law-obedience. (3) The truth & substance of Righteousness (unto which he would restrick all) is not the thing enquired after, nor is it at all to the point; for upon Adam's having of that simply he could not expect the reward of life, that was promised, because, the Covenant, he was under, required continuance & perseverance in all the several duties, called for by the Law, even to the end, ere he could challenge a right to the reward: And further Adam had this truth & substance of Righteousness at the first, & it was concreated with him; Yet he could not, upon that account, have challenged glory, as his due.  
He addeth. Even as the second Adam was as completely & perfectly Righteous from the womb, & so from his first entrance upon his public ministry, as he was at last, when he suffered death. Ans. If we speak of our Lord Jesus, as the second Adam, that is, as standing in the room of sinners, as the Head & public Person, engaging in their behalf, whom he did represent, to pay all their debt; though he knew no sin, and upon that account was perfectly Righteous, and separat from sinners; Yet he was to finish the work laid upon him, and to perform the whole debt, both of duty & suffering, which he had undertaken; and till the last penny of that debt was paid, his work was not finished, and until his work was finished, he could not challenge his reward: And so this confirmeth what we have said of the first Adam.  
To say (he addeth) that Adam was not perfectly Righteous, & consequently in a justified estate or condition before God, until his fall by sin, is to place him into an estate of condemnation before his sin, there being no middle or third estate betwixt these two. Ans. This was obviated before. Adam's state before his fall, was a state of Innocence, wherein he enjoyed the favour & presence of God, he being perfectly Righteous, in reference to that state; & to what was required of him; but justified he was not; for the reward was not adjudged unto him. So that, as to him, there was a middle state betwixt a State of Justification & a State of Condemnation; though, as to us, there is not, as the places, which he citeth afterward namely Rom. 5: 18. & 8: 1, 2, show, & the whole Scriptures evince.  
He closeth this matter thus. Therefore to grant, that forgiveness of sins puts a man into the same estate & condition, wherein Adam stood before his fall (which is generally granted by men of opposite judgement in this controversy; & nothing granted neither, in this, but the unquestionable truth) is to grant the point in question, & to acknowledge the truth laboured for, throughout this whole discourse. Ans. It is not granted that remission of sins, as such, putteth a man every way into the same Condition, wherein Adam stood before his fall; for it putteth not a man in the same estate of inherent holiness, wherein Adam was; but it putteth a man into the same estate of freedom from any obligation to punishment, for it taketh away the reatus poenae, so that a pardoned man, as such, is no more under the actual obligation unto the curse & wrath of God, threatened for transgression, than was Adam, before he fell: and this is all, that is confessed. Which is far, yea very far from granting the point, that he goeth about to establish: for he would have remission, as such, put a man in the state of full right to the reward, to the end he might exclude the imputation of the obedience or Righteousness of Christ, as not being necessary unto this end, contrary to the Scriptures of truth. Adam, before he fell, had not right unto the promised reward, because he was to finish his course of obedience, before he could obtain that: And therefore the granting, that remission putteth a man into the same Condition, wherein Adam stood, will contribute nothing to his end.  
His 4. Conclusion is. That perfect remissien of sins includeth the Imputation or acknowledgement of the observation of the whole Law; even as the imputation of the Law fulfilled, necessarily includes the non imputation of sin, or the forgiveness of all sin, in case any hath been committed. Ans. The conclusion is manifestly false, if we speak of remission simply, & abstractiuly as such; And the ground here alleiged for it, is ambiguous; for the imputation of the Law fulfilled, may either be to sach, as never broke it, & then it doth not include remission, but taketh away all necessity of it; or to transgressors, and then indeed it may presuppose remission, but doth not include it, as such. But to remove ambiguities, we shall distinguish, & say, that perfect Remission of sins includeth the acknowledgement of the observation of the whole Law, in respect of Punishment; but not in respect of the Reward; that is, perfect Remission of sins exeemeth a man from Punishment, as well as if he had perfectly keeped the Law; but doth not give him right to the Reward; for unto this was requisite the perfect observation of the Law: Now perfect observation of the Law saith, there was no transgression; but remission saith, & supposeth, that the Law was not perfectly observed. So the imputation of the Law fulfilled either saith, the Law was not broken, or that now satisfaction is made for the breach thereof, & therefore the person, unto whom this imputation is made. hath a right unto the reward, which this imputation doth directly & immediately respect, as such. But in our case, both these go together, perfect remission, & the imputation of the Law fulfilled, because freedom from the obligation to punishment, & right to the reward, go also together inseparably.  
For how can he be said (saith he) to have all his sins fully forgiven, who is yet looked upon, or intended to be dealt with all, as one that hath transgressed either by way of omission, or commission, any part of the Law? Ans. He that hath his sins fully forgiven, may well be looked upon, as one that hath transgressed, either by omission, or by commission, or by both; because he must be so looked upon: for pardon presupposeth sin; no man can be pardoned, but a sinner, and no man can think or dream of a remission, but withal he must suppose, that the person pardoned hath sinned. But it is true, he who is said to have all his sins fully forgiven, cannot be intended to be dealt withal, as one that hath transgressed: for pardon destroyeth that obligation to punishment, but doth not so destroy sin, as to cause that it never was; for that is impossible. What more? And he that is looked upon as one, that never transgressed any part of the Law, must needs be conceived or looked upon as one, that hath fulfilled or keeped the Law. Ans. This is very true: But what then? Which is nothing else (saith he) but to have a perfect Righteousness, or (which is the same) a perfect fulfilling of the Law imputed to him. Ans. This is also true, taking this imputation of a perfect fulfilling of the Law, to be to one, who never broke the Law by sin; but it is not true, in our case, who are transgressors, all the imputation of Righteousness in the world can not make us to have been no sinners.  
Yet he inferreth. So that besides that perfect remission of sins, which hath been purchased by the blood of Christ, there is no need of (indeed no place for) the imputation of any Righteousness, performed by Christ unto the Law. Ans. The inconsequence of this is manifest from what is said: But he addeth a reason. Because (saith he) in that very act of remission of sins, there is included an imputation of a perfect Righteousness. Ans. This is but the same thing, which was said, & is manifestly false. Remission regairdeth only the punishment, or the obligation thereunto, & dissolveth it, but, as such giveth no right to the reward, which was promised only to obedience to the Law.  
But then he tells us more properly, & with Scripture-exactness (as he saith) that that act of God, whereby heremitteth & pardoneth sin, is interpretatiuly nothing else, but an imputation of a perfect righteousness or of a fulfilling of the Law: compare Rom. 4: 6 with vers. 7. & 11. Ans. This is but the same thing, & needeth no new answer; for it is denied, that that act of God, whereby he pardoneth sin, considered in itself, & as such, is interpretatiuly an imputation of perfect Righteousness. But it is true, in our case, it may be called so interpretatiuly, in this respect, that there is such an in dissoluble connexion betwixt the two, that the one inferreth the other, necessitate consequentis. And this is all that can be proved from Rom. 4: 6, 7, 11.  
He addeth, Even as the act of the Physician, by which he recovereth his patient from his sickness, may, withfull propriety of speech, be called that act, whereby he restoreth him to his health. Ans. The Physician purging away the humours, the causes of the distemper, is the cause of health, by being the causa removens prohibens; because ex natura rei, health followeth upon the removal of that, which caused the distemper; but the connexion of pardon & of imputation of Righteousness is not ex natura rei, but ex libera Dei constitutione: connecting the causes of both together. His next similitude of the sun, dispelling darkness, & filling the air with light, is as little to the purpose; because here is a natural necessary consequence, light necessarily expelling darkness; which is denied in our case. Hence there is no ground for what he addeth, when he saith. In like manner, God doth not heal sin, that is forgive sin, by one act, & restore the life of righteousness, that is impute righteousness, by another act at all differing from it, but in & by one & the same punctual & precise act he doth the one & the other. For we are not here enquiring, after the oneness or diversity of God's acts in a Philosophical manner: God can do many things by one Physical act: but we are enquireing concerning the Effects, whether they be one precise thing, flowing from one moral cause; or so divers, as to require divers moral causes, & grounds, or whether the one doth naturally & essentially include the other, as being both but one thing.  
His following words would seem to speak to this, when he saith, forgiveness of sins, & imputation of Righteousness are but two different names, expressions, or considerations of one & the same thing one & the same act of God is sometimes called forgiuness of sins, & sometimes an imputing of Righteousness; & the forgiuness of sins is sometimes called an imputing of righteousness, to show & signify that a man needs nothing to a compleet Righteousness, or justification, but the forgiuness of his sins: And again the Imputing of Righteousness is sometimes called the forgiuness of sins, to show that God hath no other Righteousness to confer upon a sinner, but that which standeth in forgiveness of sins. Ans. This is but gratis dictum; nothing at all is proved: These two, pardon of sins & imputation of Righteousness, are two distinct parts of one compleet favour, and blessing granted of God, in order to one compleet blessedness, consisting likewise in two parts, to wit, in freedom from punishment, which was deserved, & in right to the promised inheritance, which was lost: And because these two, both in the cause, and in the effect, are inseparable conjoined by the Lord; therefore, the mentioning of the one may & doth import & signify both, by a Synecdoche: And hence no man, with reason, can infer, that they are both one & the same precise thing, flowing from one & the same precise cause, and import only the different names, expressio●s or considerations of one & the same thing, Christ's obedience to the Law, and his suffering for sin, were not one & the same thing under various considerations, or names, but distinct parts of one compleet Surety-Righteousness: no more can the effects, that flow therefrom, be accounted one & the same thing, but two distinct parts of one compleet effect: And therefore the mentioning of the one, in stead of the whole, proveth no confusion, or sameness, but rather an inseparablness, which is yielded.  
He move ●in an objection against himself ●▪ 5. thus. How can God be said to impute a Righteousness to a man, which never was, nor ever had a being, no Righteousness (at least of that kind, whereof we now speak) having ever been, but that perfect obedience, which Christ performed to the Law? This indeed is a very rational question; for our Author talketh much of an imputed Righteousness, and never doth, nor yet can tell us, what that is, that can deserve the name of a Righteousness. Let us hear, what he answereth. 1. saith he. There is as express & compleet a Righteousness in the Law, as ever Christ himself performed. Ans. But what Righteousness is or can be in a Law, but what is there, by way of prescription? And who doubts 〈◊〉 the perfection of this, that acknowledgeth the perfection of the Law? This is utterly impertinent to the purpose in hand, where the question is of a Righteousness consisting in conformity to the Law, and which must be attribute to man, to whom the Law is given? And what if it be said (saith he) that God, in remission of sins, through Christ, from & out of the Law, imputeth to every man, that believeth, such a Righteousness, as is proper to him? Ans. To say this, is to speak plain nonsense: for what is that to furnish a man with a Righteousness out of the Law? Can a man be changed into a Law? or can a man have any Righteousness, prescribed by a Law, but by thoughts, words, & deeds, bearing a conformity to the commands of the Law? And how can 〈◊〉 pardon cause this transformation? can the pardon of murder, or of any prohibited act, make that act conform to the Law? Pardon thus should be a self destroyer; for an act, that is no transgression of a Law, can need no pardon: and thus pardon should make itself no pardon. What he subjoineth, hath been spoken to elsewhere.  
He giveth a 2. answer, saying. To say, God cannot impute a Righteousness, which never had a being i.e. which never was really & actually performed by any man, is to deny that he hath power to forgive sin●. Ans. This hath been & is full denied; it never hath been, nor never shall be proved, that forgiuness of sin is the imputation of a Righteousness. Though he addeth from Rom. 4: 6. & 3: 28. etc. that it is the imputation of such a Righteousness, as consisteth not, no●es made up of any works performed to the Law by any man, which is but a Righteousness, that never had a being. Ans. This is but a plain perverting of the Scriptures, which speak only of works (in that exclusion) done & performed by us, as the whole scope, and all the circumstances of the passages, demonstrate to any man, who will not willingly put out his own eyes: and it were a mere imposing upon the Understandings of the most ordinary Reader, and a miserable mispending of time, to go about the evincing of this, which is so obvious. But what desperate shifts will not a wrong cause put men to use, who will not be truths captives?  
His 5. Conclusion cometh here also to be considered: It is this. He that is fully discharged from his sins, needeth no other Righteousness, to give him-Right 〈◊〉 unto life. This is as false as the rest; for the Law is; do this & live: and pardon for transgressions is not the same with doing of the Law. What is his reason? death is the wages of sin, is of sin only, being due to no creature in any other respect, nor upon any other term whatsomever. But what then? Now he that it free of death, & no ways obnoxious thereunto, cannot but be conceived to have a right unto life, there being neither any middle condition between death & life, wherein it is possible for a reasonable creature to subsist, nor again any capacity of life, but by some right & ●itle thereunto. Ans. Though this be true, as to us now, that he who is no ways obnoxious unto death, hath a right unto life; Yet the consequence that he would draw from it, is not good: to wit, that that only, which taketh away the obnoxiousness unto death, giveth also a right to life: because God hath inseparably joined these effects together, as also their distinct causes together, and giveth them inseparably; so that he who is pardoned hath also a right to life, not merely upon the account, that he is pardoned, but because together with the imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ, whence floweth pardon, he imputeth also Christ's Righteousness, upon which followeth the right to life. And howbeit now, as to us, there is no middle state betwixt these two; Yet in Adam there was; for while he stood, he was not obnoxious unto death; and yet he had not right unto life: but was to work out & perfect his rask, to that end. But he tells us, That while Adam stood, he was already in possession & fruition of life; else he could not be threatened with death. Ans. This is not the life, whereof we are speaking; we are speaking of the life, promised by that Covenant, unto perfect obedience: But it seemeth, that he joineth with the 〈◊〉, in this, granting no life promised to Adam, but a Continuance of what he was already in possession of.  
He enquireth. If he had not a right unto life by his freedom from sin, but was to purchase this right, by an ctlual fulfilling of the Law, it would be known, what quantities of obedience to the Law he must have paid, before he had made this purchase; & how long he must have obeyed & kept the Law? Ans. There is no necessity of any exact knowledge of these things; our main question doth not ●●and or ●all with the knowledge or ignorance of them: Yet, we may say (and that is sufficient) that that Law, or Covenant, requiring perfect obedience, and perpetual, without the least omission or commission, he must have paid all that obedience, which the Law required of him, to the day of his trans●●●gration, or change to glory, before the 〈◊〉 had been made. He addeth; for had he lived a two years in his integrity & uprightness, without the least touch of any transgression, he h●d still but a debtor of obedience to the Law, upon the same terms, that he was, at the beginning, & the least interruption or breach in the course of his obedience, had even now been the forfeiture of that life he enjoyed. Ans. How long Adam should have lived upon earth, before his translation to glory, we know not; nor is it of use for us to inquire; it is sufficient to know, that he was to finish his course, & to persevere in obedience to the end, if he would not both forfeit the life he had, and the expectation of the life of glory, which was promised upon his compleeting his work of obedience.  
He addeth. Notwithstanding, the Scriptures of the New. Test. seem to place the immediate right, or capacity, which believers have to the Kingdom of heaven & eternal glory, rather in the grace of Adoption, than in any Righteousness whatsoever, even Remission of sins itself not excepted. Ans. I have spoken to this elsewhere, and shall only say here, That hereby he hath destroyed his Conclusion; for hereby we see, that in order to the attaining of right to life, more is requisite, than mere Remission, for he cannot say, that Remission of sins & Adoption, is all one, having clearly hinted the contrary here, & having also denied Righteousness to be the ground of Adoption, while as before he made Righteousness & Remission of sins all one. He shall never prove that Adoption is without the Imputation of Righteousness. Let us hear his reason. The reason whereof may (haply) be this, because the life & blessedness, which come by jesus Christ, are of far higher nature, excellency and worth, than that which was Covenanted to Adam, by way of wages for his work, or obedience to the Law, & therefore require an higher & fuller & richer capacity, or title in the creature, to interest him therein, than that did: work faithfully performed is enough, to entitle a man to his wages, but the gift of an inheritance requirtth a special grace or favour. Ans. As this is but dubiously asserted; so it is to no purpose; for though some difference may be granted betwixt the glory, now had by the Gospel & that promised to Adam, in several respects; Yet it was a life of glory, that was promised to Adam, & our Adoption is not without the imputation of a Righteousness. Nor was Adam's obedience such a work, as in strike justice called for wages, without a Covenant. The Imputation of Righteousness is indeed a special grace & Favour & therefore fit enough to found Adoption.  
His 6. Conclusion is this. That Satisfaction, which Christ made to the justice of God for sin, & whereby he procured Remission of sins (or perfect Righteousness) & reconciliation with God for those that believe, consists only in that obedience of his, which he performed to that peculiar & special Law of Mediation, which God imposed upon him (which we commonly, though perhaps not altogether so properly, call his passive obedience) & not at all in that obedience or subjection, which he exhibited to that common Law of nature, which we call moral. Ans. Though, if we should speak strictly of satisfaction, as distinguished from obedience, & as relating to the punishment for sin, the substance of this Conclusion might be granted; Yet taking Satisfaction more largely, as relative to our whole debt, it must necessarily include his obedience to the Law moral. (2) Though for explications sake, we may speak of Christ's Active, & of his Passive obedience distinctly; Yet there was suffering & satisfaction, in all his Active obedience (as it is commonly called) & there was action & meriting in all his Passive Obedience (as it is commonly called.) His supposing Remission of sins, & Perfect Righteousness, is already discovered to be a mistake, (4) The special Law of Mediation required of Christ both obedience & suffering, & he speaketh without ground, when he restricteth it to his passive obedience, (as it is commonly called) only. His reason is. Because nothing can be satisfactory to divine justice for sin, but that which is penal. Heb. 9: 22. for doubtless, where there is Satisfaction, there is & may be remission. Ans. This confirmeth only what we granted of satisfaction taken strictly. But cannot prove, that Satisfaction largely taken, may not, or cannot, yea or must not, include obedience, this being part of our debt to the Law, and to the Lawgiver: nor will it prove, that there was nothing of Satisfaction in Christ's obedience, which he performed in his state of humiliation. It is true, where there is Satisfaction, there is & may be Remission; but Remission is not all, that we stand in need of. But he will have that obedience, which Christ exhibited to the moral Law, no way penal: And his reason is, because it was required of man, in his innocency, & imposed by God upon Adam before his fall; Yea & still lieth & shall lie to the days of eternity upon men & Angels. Ans. Yet for all this, it might be & was penal unto Christ, who was not mere man, but God & man in one person: And for Him, who was God, & above all Law, that man cometh under, to subject himself to that Law, which was imposed upon man, as a Viator, must needs be penal, it being a part of his subjection, as made under the Law, & a piece of his humiliation, for thus, in part, he took upon him the form of a servant, & was made in the likeness of men; & being found in fashion, as a man, he humbled himself, & became obedient unto death. Phil. 2: 7, 8. Gal. 4: 4. What they do, who are in glory, is not to the purpose; for here we are speaking of the obedience & subjection of such, as are Viators, & not Comprehensors. And Adam while innocent, was a Viator; and Christ, to pay that debt, which was required of us all, as Viators, did humble himself to perform the obedience of a Viator, in our place, & in our stead, that so he might give full satisfaction, & pay our whole debt.  
From hence, there is no ground for his Inference, to wit, that. Therefore man was punished, & that by order & appointment of God, before his fall, & that now the glorified Saints & Angels, yea & jesus Christ himself, are now punished in heaven. For (1) it might be & was penal to him, who was God, which was duty unto man in innocency, as is cleared, & (2) The Obedience of Saints & Angels, now in glory, & far less that of Jesus Christ himself, (if it can properly be called obedience) is not the duty of Viators, & therefore utterly impertinent to our purpose: We do not say, that Adam's obedience was penal, it being his duty: but Christ's was, seeing no Law required such obedience of him, who was God; nor was it necessary even to his humane Nature, in order to life for himself: for the hypostatical union fully removed that necessity, & either made him, as to himself, in respect of his humane nature, a comprehensor, or in the nearest capacity to it, even when he was subjecting himself to the obedience of a Viator, for us, and as standing in our room.  
But he saith, the Scriptures themselves no where ascribe this satisfaction to Christ's Active obedience; but still to his passive. And here he citeth many passages of Scripture, to no purpose, seeing none of these give any hint of the exclusion of his active obedience; but rather do include it; or else he may as well say, that all Christ's active obedience was no way necessary, or requisite, unto the work of Redemption; because these passages do not expressly say so; and yet this he will not say, seeing he granteth, that his obedience was an essential requisite, & absolutely necessary, to the constitution of him our Priest, and his Sacrifice propitiatory: But we read of his being made under the Law, to redeem these, that were under the Law. Gal. 4: 4, 5. and of his Righteousness & obedience, as necessary to our Righteousness & justification, and as having a no less direct influence into the same; than Adam's offence & disobedience had unto our death & damnation. Rom. 5: 17, 18, 19   

CHAP. II.  
Christ underwent the Curse of the Law.  
MR. Goodwin tells us in his 14. Conclusion. That the sentence or Curse of the Law was not properly executed upon Christ in his death: But this death of Christ was a ground or consideration to God, where upon to dispense with his Law, & to let fall or suspend the execution of the penalty, or curse therein threatened. Ans. (1) This is directly contrary to what the Apostle saith Gal. 3: 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law, being made a Curse for us; for it is written, cursed is every one, that hangeth on a tree. It was the Curse of the Law, that we were under, & were to be delivered from; and this Christ hath delivered us from, by coming in our stead & bearing it for us, yea bearing it so, that he is said to have been made it, being made a Curse for us, which is a most emphatic expression, to hold forth Christ's bearing the very penalty, threatened in the Law, which cursed every one, that continued not in all things, which are written in the book of the Law to do them. vers. 10. Deut. 27: 26. If Christ underwent the Curse of the Law, he, sure, did suffer the very sentence, or punishment threatened in the Law; for the Curse of the Law can import no other thing. (2) If Christ did not bear the sentence or Curse of the Law, how could he be said to have died or suffered in our place, room or stead? No man is said to suffer in the place & stead of another, who doth not suffer that same particular kind of punishment, that the other is obnoxious to, and is obliged to suffer. (3) Why was Christ said to be made sin for us 2. Cor. 5: 21. & to bear our iniquities Esai. 53: 6. 1. Pet. 2: 24. If he did not undergo the very punishment; that was due to us, because of sin? (4) This is to give away the cause, in a great measure, unto the Socinians, who will not yield, that Christ's death was any satisfaction to the justice, or payment of our criminal debt, or a suffering the punishment of sin, due to us; for if Christ did not suffer the curse & sentence of the Law, he did not suffer the punishment, which the Law threatened, and justice required; he did not suffer any punishment at all, if he suffered not our punishment, or that which was due to us; he did not stand in our Law-place to answer all the demands of justice according to what we were liable unto by the Law? nor did he bear our sins in his own body on the cross. (5) If Christ's death was a ground or consideration to God, whereupon to dispense with his Law; than it is apparent, that the consideration of Christ's death was anterior to the dispensing with the Law: whereas the contrary is rather true, to wit, that the Lord's dispensing with the Law, was anteriour to his sending of Christ, because the Law properly knowing no mediator, and requiring none to suffer the penalty for another, must first, in order of nature, be considered, as dispensed with, before Christ be substituted in the room of sinners to undergo what they deserved. (6) If it was only a ground to God, whereupon to let fall, or suspend the execution of the penalty, than it seemeth, Christ's death was no full payment, or Satisfaction; for a full Satisfaction requireth more than a suspension of the execution of the punishment, even a full delivery therefrom.  
Let us hear his reason. Because (saith he) the threatening & Curse of the Law was not at all bent or intended against the innocent or Righteous, but against transgressors only. Therefore God in inflicting death upon Christ being innocent and Righteous, did not follow the purport or intent of the Law●but in sparing & forbearing the transgressors (who according to the 〈◊〉 of the Law should have been punished) manifestly dispenseth with the Law, and doth not execute it. Ans. All this being granted, yet it will not follow, that the sentence & Curse of the Law was not executed upon Christ in his death: for notwithstanding of this dispensing with the Law, as to the persons; Yet was there no Relaxation of the Law, as to the punishment threatened? Though the Law did not require, that the innocent should suffer; Yet the Supreme Lord & Ruler dispensing with his own Law so far, as to substitute an innocent person, in the room & place of sinners, the Law required, that that innocent person, taking on that penalty, and thereby making himself nocent, as to the penalty, should suffer the same that was threatened, & consequently bear the Curse, threatened in the Law.  
As (saith he further for explication) when Zaleucus (the Locrian Lawgiver) caused one of his own eyes to be put out, that one of his son's eyes might be spared, who according both to the letter & intent of the Law, should have lost both, he did not precisely execute the Law, but gave a sufficient account or consideration, why it should for that time be dispensed with. Ans. This speaks not home to our case, wherein we pay not the half, nor no part of the penalty. But Christ payeth the whole, as substitute in our room. If Zaleucus had substituted himself in the room of his son, & suffered both his own eyes to be put out, though the Law had been dispensed with, as to the persons, yet the penalty of the loss of both eyes had been paid, & the same punishment, which the Law required, had been exacted: And so it is in our case, as is manifest.  
Yet he granteth, that in some sense, Christ may be said to have suffered the penalty or Curse of the Law; as 1. It was the Curse or penalty of the Law (saith he) as now hanging over the head of the world, & ready to be executed upon all men for sin, that occasioned his sufferings. Ans. If this were all, all the beasts & senseless creatures, may be as well said to have suffered the penalty & Curse of the Law; & consequently to have suffered for man & to have born man's sin, in order to his Redemption, as Christ; for the sin, & penalty of sin, whereunto man was liable, did occasion their suffering, or being subjected to vanity Rom. 8: 20, 21. Thus our whole Redemption is subverted, & the cause yielded unto the wicked Socinians, for if this be so, Christ had not our sins laid upon him, he did not bear our sins in his body on the tree, he was not wounded for our transgressions, the chastisement of our peace was not on him; He was not made sin for us. He was not our Cautioner & High Priest; He died not in our room & stead.  
Again 2. (saith he) (& some what more properly) Christ may be said to have suffered the Curse of the Law, because the things, which he suffered were of the same nature & kind (at least in part) with these things, which God intended by the Curse of the Law. Ans. Though this seemeth to come nigher to the truth, than the former; Yet it cannot give full satisfaction, until it be explained, what that part, is in respect of which, only Christ's sufferings were of the same Nature & kind, with what the Law threatened. Let us hear therefore what followeth; & see if thence satisfaction can come. But if by the Curse (saith he) of the Law, we understand either that entire system & historical body (as it were) of penalties & evils, which the Law itself intends in the term; or else include & take-in the intent of the Law, as touching the quality of the persons, upon whom is was to be executed; in neither of these senses, did Christ suffer the Curse of the Law. Ans. (1) This doth not explain to us, what that part is, in which Christ sufferings are of the same Nature & kind, with what was intended by the Curse of the Law. (2) There is need of explication here, to make us understand, what is that entire Systeme & historical body of penalties & evils, which the Law itself intends in the term Curse, or death: for this is but to explain one dark thing by what is more dark; & so can give no Satisfaction. (3) But if the alternative added be explicative, & so the two particulars here mentioned be one & the same; then we deny, that that doth properly belong to the essence of the penalty, as threatened in the Law: that is, every thing that necessarily attended the punishment, as inflicted on man, did not directly & essentially belong thereunto, as threatened by the Law, such as the everlastingness of death, despair, & the like necessarily accompanying this punishment inflicted on sinners; so that notwithstanding Christ did not, neither could, endure these accidental & consequential evils; Yet he both did & might be said to suffer the Curse & death threatened by the Law, which is to be abstracted from what floweth not from the Law itself, but merely from the Nature of the subject, or Condition of the sinner punished. But it may be, these words of his, the intent of the Law, as touching the quality of the persons, upon whom it was to be executed, have some other import, & that he meaneth, hereby no more but this, that the intent of the Law was, that the sinner should suffer: And indeed if so, it was impossible, that Christ's sufferings could answer the intent of the Law: But we have said above, that as to this, the Law was dispensed with; & yet notwithstanding Christ the substitute Sufferer did suffer the same kind of punishment, that the Law threatened under the terms of Death & Curse. What he addeth Further can give no Satisfaction. So that God (saith he) required the death & sufferings of Christ, not that the Law properly, either in the letter or intention of it, might be executed; but on the contrary, that it might not be executed, I mean upon those, who being otherwise ohnoxious unto it should believe. Ans. Though it be true, that God required the death & sufferings of Christ, not that the Law either in the letter or intention of it might be executed, as to that, wherein it was dispensed with: Yet God required the death & sufferings of Christ, that the letter & intent of the Law might be executed, as to that wherein it was not dispensed with: that is, as to the punishment therein threatened; And unless the Law, as to this, had been executed, no man obnoxious to it, should have escaped, and that because of the Veracity of God, yea & because of his justice, which he had determined to have Satisfied, ere sinful man should escape the punishment.  
In the next place he tells us, that God did not require the death & sufferings of Christ, as a valuable consideration, where on to dispense with his Law towards those that believe, more (if so much) in a way of Satisfaction to his justice, than to his wisdom. Ans. This savoureth rankly of Socinianism. It is not for us to make such comparisons, as if God's Wisdom & justice were not at full agreement, and were not one. The Scripture tells us, that God set forth jesus Christ 'tis be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his Righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, To declare, I say, at this time his Righteousness, that he might be just & the justifier of him, which believeth in jesus. Rom. 3: 25, 26. And so it is manifest, that Satisfaction to justice was hereby intended: And this is enough to us, who know also, that in the whole contrivance of the business, the Infinite Wisdom of God is eminently relucent; And Love not to make any such comparisons: only we think, that a Propitiation, and Satisfaction, & the like terms, used in Scripture, in the expressing of this matter, have a direct aspect, & bear a manifest relation unto justice, and correspond directly there with, yea clearly enough infer the same, though there were no other mention made expressly of the justice of God, in this matter.  
What saith he next to prove this. for (doubtless) God might (saith he) with as much justice, as wisdom (if not much more) have passed by the er ansgression of his Law, without consideration of satisfaction. Ans. What God might have done by his absolute Sovereignty, antecedent to his design & purpose, as to the punishment, or the reatus poenae (which must not be extended to the reatus culpae) is not to the question. But now, the Lord, having declared his determination & purpose to rule & govern the world thus, & to have the glory of his relative justice manifested in the Salvation of lost man, could not according to justice, pass by transgressions, without a satisfaction. He adds. No man will say, that in case a man hath been injured & wronged, that therefore he is absolutely bound in justice, to seek satisfaction, though he be never so eminent in the grace & practice of justice: but in many cases of injuries sustained, a man may be bound, in point of wisdom, & discretion, to seek satisfaction in one kind or other. Ans. This is the Socinian way of argueing: & nothing to the point; for we are to look upon the Lord in this matter, not as a private man, who may dispense with injuries done him; but as a Righteous Governor, who is resolved to demonstrate his justice & equity, and who therefore cannot suffer sin to go unpunished without a due satisfaction had, for the violation of his Laws.  
Nor is it to the point to tell us, that some hold, that God, if it had pleased him, might have pardoned Adam's transgression, without the Atonement made by the death of Christ: for they speak not of what God may now do, having determined to manifest the glory of his justice; but what he might have done in signorationis ante decretum. And as for that word Heb. 2: 11. It became him. etc. it will as well respect the justice of God as his wisdom, seeing it became him upon the account of justice, which he would have glorified.  
Mr. Baxter in his Confess. Chap. IX. Sect. 5. pag. 289. thinketh that to say, that Christ paid the same thing, that the Law required of us, & not only satisfied for our not payment, is to subvert the substance of Religion: But this is only in his apprehension, & as he taketh up their meaning, who say so; And others possibly may have no lower thoughts of some, who hold, that Christ only gave such a sacrifice to God, as might be a valuable consideration, on which he might grant us the benefits, on such conditions as are most suitable to his ends & honour; & that he did not suffer the same, which the Law threatened. The screwing up of differences to such an height, as to make either the one, or the other, subversive of the substance of Religion, had need to be upon clear & undeniable grounds, and not founded on mere sandy and loose consequences, such as those seem to me, by which Mr. Baxter maketh out this Charge.  
For he tells us. The Idem is the perfect obedience, or the full punishment that the Law requires. It is supplicium ipsius delinquentis. Ans. But now, seeing such as say, that Christ paid the Idem, will say as well as he, that when Christ suffered that, which they call the Idem, the person himself that sinned, did not suffer: And I would inquire at Mr. Baxter, whether paid Christ the Idem, as to all other respects beside; that is, whether Christ suffered all that penalty, which the Law did threaten to transgressors only this excepted (which must be excepted) that he did it in another person, & that he was not the person himself, that sinned, or not? If he say, Not, than the difference goeth deeper; but why doth he not then, to make out this heavy charge, Instance some particulars, threatened in the Law, which Christ did not undergo? And why doth he insist only on this one, that he was not ipse delinquens. but another person? If he grant that in all other respects, Christ paid the Idem; no man, sure, can see such difference here, as shall make the one side subvert the Substance of Religion: for it is a mere s●●ife about a word; & it cometh all to this, whether when one man layeth down his life, to save another condemned to death, after all satisfaction in money, lands, rends service, or what else, hath been rejected, he can be said to pay the Idem, which the Law required, or not? Some Lawyers would possibly say, he did pay, or suffer the Idem; Mr. Baxter would say not, because he was not ipsa persona delinquens, was not the very person, that was condemned, but another. And yet death, unto which the other man was condemned, was inflicted upon him, and no less would be accepted as satisfaction, at his hands; which would make some say, that all that debate, whether it was the same, or the equivalent, were a mere needless contest about a word. And if it be but just so here, in our present debate, every one will judge it very hard, to call that a subversion of Religion, which, after examination & trial, is found to be but a strife about a word. Now, how will Mr. Baxter prove that the suffering of the Idem, is only, when it is supplicium ipsius delinquentis? And not also, when the same punishment, in all its essential ingredients, is undergone & suffered by another? When the Law imposeth the penalty of death, or of such a great sum of money, on a person transgressing such a Law; common discourse would say, & I suppose the Law give allowance thereto, that, when another came, & paid the same penalty for him, without the least abatement, he paid the same penalty, which he Law impofed, and not another; and not merely a valuable consideration. It is true, the Law threatened only the transgressor, & obliged him to suffer; but notwithstanding, another might pay the very same thing, which the Law threatened & requireth.  
He saith next (p. 290.) the Law never threatened a Surety: nor granteth any liberty of substitution: that was an act of God above the Law? If therefore the thing due were paid, it was we ourselves morally or legally, that suffered. Ans. Sure, some Laws of men will threaten Sureties, & grant liberty of substitution too: But if he speak here only of the Law of God, we grant; that it threatened only the transgressor; & that it was an act of God above the Law, & dispensing therewith, that granted a substitution; Yet notwithstanding of this it is not proved, that that Substitute did not, or could not, suffer the same punishment, which the Law threatened. And if Mr. Baxter think, that the laws not threatening a Surety, nor granting liberty of a substitution, will prove it; it is denied. Next His other consequence is as uncleare, viz. That if the thing due were paid, it was we ourselves that suffered personally: all these consequences run upon the first false ground, that no man can pay the Idem, but the very transgressor. What he meaneth by, we ourselves morally, he would do well to explicate. And as for legally, we ourselves may be said to do legally, what our Surety & undertaker doth for us. And if this be all he meaneth, viz. that if the thing due (to wit by Law, as threatened there) be paid, either we in our own persons, or our Surety for us, & in our room & Law place, paid it, it is true, but subversive of his hypothesis: It must then be some other thing that he meaneth by morally or legally & it must be the same with, or equivalent to personally: or the like; but his next words clear his meaning; for he addeth; And it would not be ourselves legally, because it was not ourselves naturally. And what lawyer, I pray, will yield to this reason? I suppose, they will tell us, that we are said to do that legally, which our Cautioner, or Surety doth for us. But if he think otherways here also, that nothing can be accounted to be done by us legally, but what is done by ourselves Naturally (which is a word of many significations, & might occasion much discourse) that is, personally; Yet it will not follow, that no other can suffer the Idem, that was threatened, but the delinquent himself.  
At length he tells us, That if it had been ourselves legally, than the strickest justice could not have denied us a present & perfect deliverance ipso facto, seeing no justice can demand more, than the idem quod dehitur (rather debetur) the whole debt of obedience or punishment. Ans. But what if ourselves, in our own natural persons, had undergone the penalty, had we therefore ipso facto attained a perfect deliverance? It will be confessed, I suppose, that all that underlye this punishment, underlye it for ever: how then doth their legal suffering the idem help them? If it be said, that they must eternally suffer, because never able to suffer so, as to make satisfaction: Yet still it is obvious, that their undergoing the idem in their own persons naturally, doth not advantage them, as to a present & perfect deliverance ipso facto, or ever at all. And where is then the truth of this axiom? Or where is its pertinency to our purpose? When a man is punished with death, according to the Law, is he ipso facto presently & perfectly delivered? It seemeth then, that the paying of the Idem, yea, or the tantund●m by another person, is more effectual for their liberation, than their paying of the Idem in their own persons. And again the Law, in many cases granteth liberation, even when the Idem in Mr. Baxters' sense is paid, that is, when another payeth down the same: Yea & likewise if the Creditor be satisfied, when another thing is paid: So that neither part of this assertion holdeth true, universally.  
But yet some may say; That if the Idem or the very same, were paid by Christ, our liberation should immediately follow. I Ans. It will not follow; so if we, in our own persons, had made full payment of that debt of suffering (which is impossible to be done in time) it might be granted, that actual liberation would immediately follow: but when we did not this, in our own persons; but Christ made full payment of what the Law could demand by way of punishment, or threatened, for us, it will not follow, that our deliverance should immediately follow thereupon: and the reason is because it was such a paying of the Idem, as was refusable, and as God himself provided out of wonderful love & free grace; and was accorded unto by a mutual compact, according to the free & wise Conditions of which the benefits were to be given out.  
Mr. Baxter in his Cath. Theol. part. 2. n. 48. saith, the Very nature & Reason of the Satisfactoriness of Christ's sufferings was not in being the very same either in kind, or in degree, which were due to all for whom he suffered. Whence we see, that he denieth, that Christ suffered the same, either in kind, or in degree, that was due by the Law to those for whom he suffered. His reason, why they could not be the same, which was due by the Law, he giveth (n. 49.) is the same we heard before viz. The Law made it due to the sinner himself. Which notwithstanding, it might be the same both as to kind & degree, which Christ suffered, that the Law made due; the substitution of a new person, that the Law did not provide, altereth not the punishment either as to kind, or as to degree. He addeth: and another's suffering for him ful●illeth not the Law (which never said either thou, or another for thee shall die) but only satisfyeth the Lawgiver, as he is above his own Law, & could dispense with is, his justice being satisfied & saved, dum alius solvit, aliud solvitur. Ans. Though the Law intent only the punishment of the transgressor; Yet when the Lawgiver dispenseth with the Law, & accepteth of the punishment & suffering of another, the punishment & suffering of another, doth not eo spso, that it is the punishment & suffering of another, become different in kind & degree from the punishment enjoined by the Law; as is obvious; when ●ne man suffereth death for another, the Law being dispensed with, that made death due to the transgressor himself: his death doth not become eoipso, that it is the death of another, than of him that transgressed, another kind of death, are distinct as to degrees; it may be the same as to both: And yet this is all the force of Mr. Baxter argument, dum alius solvit, aliud solvitur; which whether it be a certain & universal rule in the Law, I much doubt: but though it were: Yet no man can hence infer, that aliud quoad genus & gradus, eo ipso solvitur: for it is a rule in logic, that a genere ad speciem non sequitur affirmative, so that though, when the Law requireth, that he who sinneth shall suffer, & die, & another suffereth & dieth, in the room & stead of him who sinned, it may be said, that in so far aliud solvitu●; Yet it cannot be hence inferred, that the death or suffering of him, who sinned not, is quite of another kind, & differeth in degrees from that death, which the Law made due to the sinner.  
He mentioneth afterward in the 2, 3, 4. & 5. places some particulars, which were not in Christ's sufferings, & yet would have been in the sufferings of sinners themselves: But all this is to no purpose; for the question is not, whether Christ's sufferings were the same every way with the sufferings of the damned, as to all circumstances, & consequents, flowing from the Condition of sinners suffering; But whether they were the same, as to kind, with that death & Curse, which was threatened in the Law, by way of punishment, & which was therefore due by Law unto the transgressor. Let us now see the particulars. 2. And sin (saith he) itself (though not as sin) was the greatest part of the sinner's punishment. To be alienated from God, & not to Love him & delight in him, but to be corrupted & deluded & tormented by concupiscence. Ans. These are indeed necessary consequents of sin in the person, who is a sinner, and are consequently punishment; but not directly such; neither were they threatened as punishments by the Law, & so do not belong to the essence & substance of that punishment, which the Law threatened, & which Christ was called to undertake. 3. Saith he. And the immediate unavoidable consequents resulting from sin itself, were punishments, which Christ did never undergo, (as to be hateful & displeasing to God, as contrary to his holy nature, to be related as criminal, to lose right to God's Favour & Kingdom. Ans. To be hateful & displeasing unto God ● agreeth only to a creature (which God doth not hate, as such) as a sinner inherently: and though Christ did not feel God's hatred & anger against his own person, yet he felt his anger & hatred against sin, & sinners. And Christ was also related as Criminal, not inherently, but by imputation, when he was made sin for ●s. 2. Cor. 5: 21. The sinner that is such inherently only, loseth right to God's Favour, & Christ miss the sense thereof, when he cried out, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? And 4. (saith he) none of the further punishment, which supposed real faultiness, could fall on Christ, as the torment of an accusing conscience, for rejecting & offending God, for casting away our own felicity & running into hell etc. the sense of God's hatred of us, as real sinners. Ans. All this is granted, but these belonged only to the punishment as inflicted on the sinner & transgressor himself, but did not belong to its essence & substance abstractly considered, & so could not accompany the same, as inflicted upon one, who was in himself wholly free of all sin. And this is yet more manifest in that which he mentioneth. 5. Saying much less the Desertions of the Spirit of holiness, to be left without goodness, in a state of sin, & to hate God for his justice & holiness, which will be the damneds case; for these did not belong to the essence & substance of the punishment, threatened in the Law; but were only consequents thereof, as inflicted on sinners inherently. We do not say, that Christ suffered, what the damned do suffer, or that he was in the damneds case. Thus, though we make them not of the same kind, with all that the damned do suffer; Yet without any blind zeal (as he is pleased to censure) we may say, that Christ suffered the same curse & death, that was threatened in the Law properly, as a punishments, as to substance; and yet no way be guilty of intolerable blaspheming of our Saviour.  
The same answer may serve to that, which he saith (n. 50.) Nor could Christ's sufferings be equal in degree, intensively & extensiuly, to all that was deserved by the world, as is easily discernible by perusing what is now said, seeing our deserved suffering lay in things of such a nature, as to be left in sin itself, destitute of God's image & love & communion, under his hatred, tormented in conscience, besides the everlasting torments in hell, which are more than these, upon all the millions of sinners, which were redeemed. This is already answered: & it is not demonstrated, that all these consequents & concomitants of the punishment, as inflicted on such as were sinners inherently, did properly belong to the essence & substance of the punishment threatened, in itself considered; And of this we only speak, for as to this, we only say, that Christ suffered the same. If two men be condemned to pay, each a thousand pounds, which none of them are well able to do, & a rich man undertaketh to pay the sum for one of the two, that rich man may well be said to have paid the same sum, that the poor man was obliged to pay, though his paying of that sum be not attended with such consequents & circumstances, as it would have been, if the poor man himself had been put to pay it, or as the other poor man findeth it, who is made to pay it; in the poor man it is necessarily attended with poverty to himself & all his family, & possibly he & all his must be sold for slaves to make up the sum; but the rich man can pay it without any such concomitants, or consequents, & yet be said to have paid the same sum.  
It is to be observed, that Papists & some others use all these same arguments to prove, that Christ did not suffer any thing of the penalty of sin in his soul, as may be particularly seen in Parker de descensu lib. 3. But Mr. Baxter granteth (n. 51.) that Christ did suffer more in soul, than in body: And yet what answers are made by Parker & other reformed divines, in this matter, against Papist's, may also serve our turn against Mr. Baxter & others: Socinians also, (as may be seen in Smalci● Refut. lib. de Satisf. Christ Chap. 6. & 7.) upon these same grounds, deny, that Christ's sufferings were a proper satisfaction, he thereby not paying the Idem, the same, that man should have suffered. And Socinus Prael. Theol. Cap. 18. fol. 205. saith in plain terms, That Christ did no way satishe the justice of God by his sufferings, unless it be said, that he suffered the same things, which we should have suffered because of our sins. Therefore there is a necessity, to hold that Christ suffered the same for substance, that the Elect were liable to suffer, that it may the more clearly appear, that his sufferings were indeed a Satisfaction.  
But Mr. Baxter tells us, in the same book (n. 149.) that Solution of the debt & satisfaction, strictly taken, thus differ, that Satisfaction is solutio tantidem, vel aequivalentis, alias indebiti. And if Christ be said to have paid the very same duty & punishment, which the Law required, he is denied to have satisfied, for our nonpayment; for a Law that is fully performed can require no more, nor the Lawgiver neither: And therefore both Satisfaction & Pardon are shut out. Ans. Thus we seem to be hardly straitened, for if we say, that Christ paid the Idem, the Same, Mr. Baxter thinketh we destroy thereby all Satisfiction & all Pardon, and so yield the cause to the Socinians: If upon the other hand, we say, that Christ did not suffer the Idem, we yield the cause unto the Socinians, and deny all Satisfaction, in t●er judgement; and their consequence seemeth to be as rational, as Mr. Baxter's. But truth may be affirmed, without all hazard: And to make such a difference betwixt Solution & Satisfaction, is to play needlessly upon words, & at length will but recurre unto this, Sialius solvit, aliud solvitur; and so by saying that Christ's Satisfaction was also a solutio ejusdem, we shall deny both Satisfaction & Pardon; or by calling it so: But, as was said above, it is not fit to lay so much weight upon the simple use of a term or word; and sure it is most unfit for Mr. Baxter to do so, who on all occasions, venteth his displeasure so much against others, who lay so much weight on meet terms of art, or words. But, as to the thing, sure, the creditor will think himself satisfied, when the same sum, which was oweing by one, is paid by another for the debtor, & that in the same species of Silver, or of Gold. And if that hold, that sialius solvit, aliud solvitur, Mr. Baxter may see, that if another pay, his payment may become a Satisfaction, because it is so far aliud another thing, though really & upon the matter, it be the same. And here lieth the truth, that we assert, Christ paid the very same suffering, that we were obliged to pay; but he being another, and not the persons guilty themselves, his sufferings were not only a solutio debiti, a payment of our debt, but also, as being performed by him, they were a Satisfaction to justice, and so much the rather a compleet Satisfaction, that they were the same sufferings, we were liable to, & not strictly equivalent. And this appeareth to me the more clear from what Mr. Baxter said before (n. 5●. & 53.) where he hath these words. [The true reason of the Satisfactorieness of Christ's suffering was, that they were a most apt means for the demonstration of the Governing justice, holiness, Wisdom & Mercy of God, by which God could attain to the ends of the Law & Government, better than by executing the Law on the world in its destruction.] Where we hear no word of its being solutio equivalentis alias indebiti. and next, all this is more clear by Christ's suffering the very same, that we were to suffer, than by saying that he suffered some other thing; The most clear demonstration of the Governing justice of God was in exacting of Christ the full penalty, & the very same punishment both in Soul & Body, that the Law of God made due unto transgressors; No other thing could give such a demonstration hereof, justice could not have required more; and justice had not fully been demonstrated by exacting less: and the exacting of the very same, both as to Kind, and as to degrees keeped a just correspondence with the requisite demonstration of the Governing justice of God. Hereby also was his Holiness Wisdom & Mercy, whereby he attained the ends of the Law & Government, most clearly manifested, when he did not execute the Law upon the sinful world, but upon the substituted Cautioner, that the Elect world might be saved: This, I am sure, was evidently a full salvo to God's justice, when the same punishment was paid down, that Law & justice called for. Not that God might give pardon & life to sinners, upon the new terms of the Covenant of Grace (as he speaketh n. 53.) for that looketh too like the Arminian Satisfaction: as if nothing but a possibility & freedom were here obtained for God to bestow pardon & life, upon such conditions; whereby notwithstanding of this Satisfaction, it might come to pass, that not one should be saved. See Colloq. Hag. p. 172. Impetratio salutis pro●omnibus, est acquisiti● possibilitatis, ut nimirum Deus, illaesâ suâ justitiâ, hominem peccatorem possit recipere in gratiam. See also Grevinch. ad Ames. fol. 9 Posita & praestita Christi morte & Satisfactione, fieri potest, ut, nemine novi foederis conditionem praestante, nemo salvaretur. Therefore I judge it saifest to say. That justice was so satisfied, as that all such, for whom the Satisfaction was given, shall in due time, and according to God's own method, certainly receive both pardon & life, both grace & glory, both grace to believe in Christ, and all the other graces that follow thereupon, with life everlasting.   

CHAP. III.  
We must not lean to any Righteousness within us, whereby to be justified.  
Mr. Baxter in his Cathol. Theol. part. 2. n. 176. speaketh thus. It is ordinary (saith he) with some writers & preachers, to tell men, that no part of their Righteousness is in themselves, & with others, that at least, none which they are justified, by in any part is in them; And that it is all in Christ only: And that nature is loath to yield to this, but thinketh it a fine thing, to have some little part of the honour to itself: And as to the honour of a good Action, if it be but 999. parts, that it ascribeth to God, & taketh one part of a thousand to ourselves, it is a dangerous arrogation: We must have none. And it might be thought, that such as ever understood the Gospel, considered the particular expressions, used in Scripture, to abase man, yea & the whole Contrivance of the Gospel Salvation, through a Crucified Cautioner, and that such as ever understood & were acquanted with the Natural Pride, deceit, & Treachery of their own heart; and had any experience in the devices of Satan, in & about wakened consciences, to keep them from an hearty closing with & willing accepting of, and cleanly resting upon the way of Salvation, revealed in the Gospel, should be far from condemning this saying, & from making exceptions against it. But indeed, the grounds, that Papists, Socinians & Arminians lay down, as the Basis of their antievangelick Fabric, & Contrivance of the way of Salvation, are more favourable to Self, and are therefore the more cordially embraced by many, & more stiffly maintained. Mr. Baxter seemeth to say here, that these are different things, to say, That no part of our Righteousness is in ourselves, and that no part of our Righteousness, by which we are justified, is in ourselves, where with the Orthodox, these are but different expressions of the same thing; for when they deny a Righteousness within ourselves, it is not a denying of begun Holiness & Sanctification; but a denying of a Righteousness as the ground of justification, for all this they acknowledge to be wholly & only in Christ, the Lord our Righteousness. And to adjoine to this, the Question about the honour of a good Action, as whether that should be wholly ascribed to God, or one part of a Thousand may not be ascribed to ourselves; is neither very savoury in itself, nor pertinent to the clearing of the other.  
But what answereth Mr. Baxter? This (saith he) well explained may be made sound: But thus grossly delivered, it is but a popular cheat, under the taking Pretence of self abasement & giving Christ all. Ans. I should readily fear, that Mr. Baxter's explication should be so far from making the expressions sounder than they are, that it should rather prove a Commentary corrupting the text, seeing I find him thus dissatisfied with expressions so consonant to the strain of the Gospel, to the holy genius of all savingly illuminated, and to the very language of the Saints, in Scripture. But as to his Censure, calling this no less than a popular cheat, it is sharp, and, more befitting, in my judgement, a Papist, or a Non-Christian Socinian, than Mr. Baxter.  
Yet let us hear the ground of this so sharp & so unseemly censure. The Devil (saith he) is as willing as any one, that you should have nothing honourable or praiseworthy in you; & be as vile, as he can make you. Ans. If it would not be displeasing, I would say, that this answer is a plain cheat: for the question is not, whether we should have any thing in us, truly honourable & praise worthy, or whether we should be as vile, as the devil would make us; No protestant ever spoke so; But the question is. Whether for any thing in us truly honourable & praise worthy, we should Sacrifice to our own net, & burn incense to our own drag; or give the glory unto God, who worketh all our works in us; and worketh in us both to will, & to do Esai. 26: 12. Phil. 2: 13. The question is not, whether we should have good in us, or not? but whether we should not say, with Paul 1. Cor. 4: 4. Even when we know nothing by ourselves, yet are we not hereby justified? and whether we should not say with him Phil, 3: 8, 9 that we count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, our Lord, & count them dung, that we may win Christ, & be found in him, not having our own Righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Christ, the Righteousness which is of God by Faith. The question is not, whether Christ be made Sanctification to us; but whether that Sanctification, be any part of that Righteousness, which Christ is made of God to be unto us? What more?  
He addeth. It is God, who honoureth these, that honour him, & praiseth his Saints, as the excellent on the Earth, & his Jewels & peculiar Treasure, adorneth with his own lovely image, & partakers of the divine Nature, and members of Christ, as his own flesh. And it is Satan & wicked men that vilify & dishonour them. Ans. This is but a Continuance of the same cheat: for it is no part of the question, whether the Saints should be vilified, or honoured? But the question is, whether the Saints should rob God of his glory, and ascribe that unto themselves, which is due unto him, be it in less, or in more? We know, the Saints are God's excellent ones, his Jewels & his peculiar treasure; but all this is through the free underserved grace of God, making them beautiful & lovely with his own graces, and partakers of his divine Nature: And therefore we say, that for all that they ought to be humble, knowing what their birth & nativity was, and whence all this is come; and who ought to have the glory of all this; and notwithstanding of this, what is the sole ground of their justification before God, and what is that Righteousness, upon the account whereof they are justified in the sight of God.  
And I have oft lamented it (saith he further) that these very men, that hold this kind of doctrine of self-abosement, as having no part of Righteousness, nor share at all in any good work, are yet too oft so proudly conceited of their own goodness (even for holding, that they have none for which they are praise worthy) as that their pride is no small trouble to the Churches & all about them. Ans. I shall not plead for pride, or proud conceits in any: but whether such as lay down doctrinal grounds of pride, and teach men to be proud, or such as lay down contrary grounds, but do not practise accordingly, be most blame worthy; I leave Mr. Baxter to judge. One thing I would ask: How Mr. Baxter came to know, that such, as he opposeth here, were proudly conceited of their own goodness? Pride & a proud conceit lieth most within, & is not obvious to the view of every one, especially being upon such a ground. I hope Mr. Baxter will not take upon him to judge of hearts: And if it be by their contendings for that, which they conceive to be truth: If this be an infallible mark, no man can be judged more proud, than is Mr. Baxter, none having in this matter contended by so many & so great volumes, as he hath, since his Aphorisms come abroad, & that indeed to the no small trouble of the Churches. And further, some might think, that if Mr. Baxter did aright lament, that any were proudly conceited of their own goodness, he should not have laid doctrinal grounds for fomenting of this pride; nor moved such an objection against himself, as he doth here; for no man can rightly lament at the practice of that doctrine, which himself embraceth & teacheth.  
He proceedeth (●. 177.) Whatever is of God is good: & whatever is good is laudable or praiseworthy, & meriteth to be esteemed as it is. Ans. True, & therefore God, who is the Author thereof, should have the glory, & it should be esteemed, as it is, to the glory of God, & not to puff us up with proud conceits, or to be the ground we lean to, in order to be justified & accepted of God. He addeth (n. 178.) All the Sanctified are inherently righteous, but with an imperfect Righteousness, which will no further justify them in judgement, save only against this Accusation, that they are unholy. Ans. Mr. Baxter then is much to blame, who will have this Imperfect Righteousness to be a perfect Righteousness, as being our Gospel Righteousness, and the Potestative condition of our Justification & absolution at judgement, and so the immediate & sole formal ground of our Justification before God. But this answer is also impertinent; for these he here writeth against, speak not of a particular justification, from this or that false Accusation; but of that justification before God, whereof Paul treateth, in his Epistles to the Romans & Galatians, & which is a justification of the ungodly. Rom. 4: 5.  
He addeth (n. 179.) There is no Righteousness, which will not justify him, that hath it in tantum, so far as he is Righteous: for the contrary is a contradiction: for to be just, is to be justifiable. Ans. This is sick of the same impertinency with what went before: for the question is not concerning a particular Righteousness, & a particular justification, upon that account; but of a general justification, as to our state & that from the just accusation of Law & justice, under which we stand by Nature, in reference to which, all our inherent Righteousness, how great so ever it be, is no ground, nor part of the merit, or formalis ratio of that. Paul had no small share of this Righteousness, when he said, he knew nothing by himself: And yet he addeth▪ Yet am I not hereby justified 1. Cor. 4: 4. and we would say the same, & speak after this manner, if Mr. Baxter would suffer us.  
Next (n. 181. for 180.) he saith. All the Righteousness, which formally justifieth us, is our own, or on ourselves, where it justifieth us: for to be made just or justified, in the first sense constitutiuly, is nothing else, but to be made such, as are personally themselves just. Pardon of sin is made our own, Right to Christ & glory is made our own; though Christ's Righteousness was the only meritorious cause of all this; which therefore is & may be called our Material Righteousness, as that, which meriteth it, is the matter. Ans. There seemeth to be nothing here, but confusion: for (1) he speaketh ambiguously, when he saith, that all that Righteousness, which formally justifieth us, is our own, or on ourselves; for this may be true, whether by that Righteousness, he mean the Surety-Righteousness of Christ (which he doth not mean, for he is too much against the imputation of that, as we have seen) because we say, that is made ours by imputation, in order to our justification upon the account thereof: or whether he mean our own inherent Righteousness; but then if this be his meaning, it is false, that we are hereby formally justified, unless he mean, as before, only a particular justification, which is nothing to the point, as was said. (2) To be made just & to be justified, are not formally the same, but to such only, who Love confusion. (3) He who is made just, is but constituted justifiable, & is not eo ipso constitutive justified: But Mr. Baxter loveth his own Expressions & Explications of them. (4) When he saith that to be justified constitutively is nothing else but to be made such, as are personally themselves just, he speaketh very indistinctly; not only as confounding, being made just & being justified, as if they were formally the same; but also as not giving us to understand, what he meaneth by these words personally themselves just: Hereby he would seem to say, that only by something inherent in our persons, we are constituted Righteous, & are justified; and not by any thing imputed to us: And if so, the ground of all Antievangelick boasting & glorying in ourselves is laid. (5) Pardon of sin, as such, is neither a making a just, nor a justifying: and the same we say of Right to Christ & to Glory. (6) Christ's Righteousness, according to Mr. Baxter, can not be called the meritorious cause of our pardon, justification, & Right to Glory &c. because it is only made by him the meritorious cause of the New Covenant, wherein pardon, Right to Christ & to Glory are promised upon New Conditions, & so is made the meritorious Cause of the connection betwixt the performance of these New Conditions, & the obtaining of Pardon & that Right; so that by virtue of Christ's Merits, these New Conditions are made the proper & immediate meritorious cause ex pacto of these favours: And by this way, Man can not but boast & glory in himself immediately, and give Christ only some remote far-off thanks, for procuring the New terms. (7) Christ's Righteousness cannot be called our Material Righteousness, any other way, than as it hath purchased the New Covenant, according to Mr. Baxter; & this being equally for all, Christ's Righteousness shall be the Material Righteousness of the Reprobat, as well as of Believers: And how can that be called ours, which is not ours, nor our own, nor are we by it made personally just ourselves? as he spoke before (8) According to this doctrine, Christ Righteousness meriteth to us another Righteousness, which is our own & on ourselves & by this we are formally justified: that is, according to what went before, & to what followeth, we are formally justified by our own personal inherent holiness (for of this, he is speaking only) and yet that which he here mentioneth, as the Righteousness, which formally justifieth us, is said to be pardon of sin, & a Right to Christ & to Glory, which formally is no Righteousness at all, nor no where so called in Scripture, & is but a consequent of that, which elsewhere he calleth our Gospel Righteousness, and the Condition of Justification.  
He goeth on (n. 182.) He that is no cause of any good work, is no Christian, but a damnable wretch, & worfe than any wicked man I know in the world: And he that is a cause of it, must not be denied falsely to be a cause of it. Nor a Saint denied to be a Saint, upon a false pretence of self-denial. Ans. Of such a cause of any good work, he knoweth the objection speaketh, that should have the glory & praise thereof; and & of good works, as the ground & formal Cause of justification; which these against whom Mr. Baxter here disputeth, do deny. But we may see here, what Mr. Baxter accounteth good works; even such as the most damnable wretch, and possibly the devil himself may do; that is a work materially good, though far different from the good works described to us in Scripture. And thus the Justification upon good works, which Mr. Baxter here meaneth, must be a Justification, that all Heathens, damnable wretches, yea & devils themselves are capable of: But this is not the justification we speak of, of which who ever are partakers shall be glorified Rom. 8: 30. We say nothing, that giveth him ground to think, that our thoughts are, that a Saint should be denied to be a Saint, upon pretence of Self-denial. Only we say that such as are Saints indeed will be loath to rob God of his glory, or take any of that to themselves, which is due to him alone, in so far as they act as Saints; And they should not, because Saints, glory & boast, as if their justification before God, were by their Sanctity & good works; & not of mere grace, through the imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ. One thing I would ask. Doth Mr. Baxter think, that Christ's Righteousness hath merited that justification, which those damnable wretches & devils may partake of, by any good work, which they do? himself told us in the foregoing (n. 81.) that all Righteousnuss which formally justifieth, is our own, & that to be made just & to be justified are the same, or equipollent; and to be Justified constitutively is nothing else, then to be made such as are personally themselves just. Now, when devils & damnable wretches may be the causes of some good work, that good work cannot but formally justify them, and they thereby become constitutively justified, I would inquire, whether this Justification be purchased by Christ or not? And again I would inquire, whether this Justification be accompanied with pardon of sin, & with Right to Christ & to glory, or not? If not, how can it be called a justification? & if it be not a justification, how can they be hereby formally justified, & constitutively justified?  
He tells us next (n. 183) As God is seen here in the glass of his works, so he is to be loved & praised, as so appearing. This is, say I, good & reasonable. What then? Therefore (saith he, he that dishonoureth his work, dishonoureth God, & hindereth his due love and praise. This consequence, I grant, is good; but what is it to the point in hand? And his most lovely & honourable work (saith he) on earth is his holy image on his Saints; & as Christ will come to be admired & glorified in them at last, so God must be seen & glorified in them here in some degree▪ Neither, say I, is any thing of this to the purpose in hand. He addeth. And to deny the glory of his image is the malignant's way of injuring him, & that in which the worst will serve you. And what then? He that will praise God (saith he further) as Creator & Redeemer must praise his works, of Creation & Redemption: And is it the way of praising him, as our Sanctifier, to dispraise his work of Sanctification? Ans. What maketh all this to the purpose? Must all such be guilty of this malignant wickedness, who tell men, that no part of their Righteousness is in themselves, by which they are to be justified, but that it is all in Christ only: or that say, that God must have all the glory of what good action they do? This is hard, that either we must be wicked Malignants, or Sacrilegious robbers of God of the Glory, due unto him, But I see no connexion, and Mr. Baxter hath not yet demonstrated the same. He must then prove the Consequence of this argueing.  
He addeth (n. 184.) Those poor sinners of my acquaintance, who lived in the grossest sins against Conscience (as Drunkeness, & whoredom etc.) have been glad enough of such doctrine, & forward enough to believe, that there is nothing in man, that in any part can justify him, or that is any part of Righteousness, but it is all out of us in Christ, & therefore they are as justifiable, as any. But Conscience will not let them believe it, as they desire, Ans. To this cannot answer, not knowing, nor having acquaintance with those poor sinners; Yet this I may say, (& others will say the same with me) that Mr. Baxter's way is that, which I find more relishing unto carnal Souls, than the self denying way of the Gospel, which we use to preach: And that the way, which Mr. Baxter is not satisfied with, is the way, that is most pleasant & acceptable unto the truly gracious, and rightly exercised Souls. But surder, what of all this? Knoweth not Mr. Baxter that some can turn the grace of God into lasciviousness? Must therefore the mountains be removed for them?  
He saith Moreover (n. 185.) It is arrogant folly to divide though praise of any good act between God & man, & to say God is to have so many parts & man so many: for the whole is due to God; & yet some is due to man: for man holdeth his honour only in Subordination to God, & not dividedly in Co-ordination. And therefore all is due to God: for that which is Man's is God's; because we have nothing; but what we have received. But he that arrogateth any of the honour due to God or Christ, offendeth. Ans. If it be thus, Mr. Baxter is the more to blame, in being dissatisfied with such, as are but expressing their care, that God have all his due, and that man do not proudly arrogat to himself any of that honour & glory, which is due to God alone: And if Mr. Baxter knoweth not, that there is a strong propension in corrupt nature, to spoil God of his glory, he knoweth nothing: And woe to such, as would indulge nature in this Sacrilege. Them that honour God, He will honour. What honour is justly due unto man, in subordination unto God, none of those, I suppose, whom Mr. Baxter here opposeth, will grudge him of; but all their care is, to have God's due keeped for himself, & that is all; & it is not commendable in any, to oppose them in this.  
But next he saith (n. 186.) If all had been taken from God's honour, which had been given to the creature, God would have made nothing, or made nothing good; heaven & earth & all the world would derogate from his honour; and none of his works should be praised. And the better any man is, the more he would dishonour God, & the wickeder the less. But he made all good, and is glorious in the glory, & honourable in the honour of all: & to justify the holiness of his servants, is to justify him. Ans. All this is little or nothing to the purpose: for such as are careful that man rob not God of his glory, do not deny the honour due to the creature, knowing that when honour is given to the creature, upon a right ground, and in the right manner, it redounded unto the honour of the Creator: But who knoweth not, how ready the Creature is to steal into the throne of God; and how ready men are to transcends, and transgress all due limits? And is it not saifest to keep far from such a dangerous precipice? Is it to edification thus to gratify with our plead proud Nature, and to blow at this fire of corruption, that the Saints have dailyhard work about to suppress & extinguish? Must we thus, on so small occasions, plead so stoutly for man, & pretend to plead for God too?  
He addeth next (n. 187.) If these Teachers mean, that no man hath any power freely to specify the acts of his own will by any other help of God, besides necessitating predetermining premotion; & so that every man doth all that he can do, & no man can do more than he doth; They di honour God by denying him to be the Creator of that f●ee power, which is essential to man, & which God himself accounteth it his honour to create. And they feign God to damn & blame all, that are damned & blamed, for as great impossibilities, as if they were damned & blamed for not making a world, or for not being Angels. Ans. This is not a fit place to treat of that Question of Predetermination, though Mr. Baxter pull it in here by the ears; It is enough for us, that we see now, whither all that Mr. Baxter hath here been saying, tendeth, even to give unto Man, the glory of all the good he doth, of his Faith, Repentance, Love of God, obedience & perseverance, in the first, chief & immediate ●●ace; for by his own Natural Power he did freely specify the acts of his own will, and so believed, when he might have rejected the Gospel, Loved God & Christ, when he might have hated both, Repent, when he might have remained impenitent, Converted himself, when he might have remained in his former state (& Mr. Baxter maketh no difference of acts here, and so his words must be looked on as meaned of supernatural acts, as well as of Natural) & that without any predetermining grace or motion of God. This glory shall we never yield to be due unto man, Let Mr. Baxter load the Doctrine of Predetermining grace, with all the reproaches, and absurdities, he can invent. He needs not think now to restrick his opinion of denying Predetermination unto natural acts, for as the good spoken of by those he here opposeth, is supernatural good, as such; so his discourse here is expressive enough of this: And thus the cause is yielded unto Pelagians, jesuits & Arminians, and the crown is put upon the head of man, and he is to honour & praise himself for what good he doth, for all began at his own self-determining power & will; and the Almighty himself could not have bowed & predetermined his will, except he had overturned the course of Nature, & destroyed that free power, which is essential to man. And thus it is made to be to the honour of God, to create a Creature, that is absolute Lord & Master of all his own actions, & so must be the first Cause of his own actions, as to their specific moral nature, & what is this, but to make man an independent Creature, as to his actions, & consequently a God to himself: Mr. Baxter hinteth some other help of God besides Predetermination; but what that is, he telleth us not; is it his Concourse? From this the same inconveniences will flow, that flow from Predetermination. And beside Mr. Baxter seemeth to incline more to Durandus' his opinion, & A dolas, which even the Jesuits are ashamed to own, and his friend D. Strang doth directly confute; as loving to set man yet higher up, than they dar do. Doth Mr. Baxter think that it is essential to man to have such a free power, as that of himself he can specify the acts of his own will, without any predetermining Motion of God? Can he then believe in Christ. Hope savingly in God, yield Christian Obedience to all the commands of God, without God's Predetermining motion upon his heart? And is that Common General influx, whereby he is preserved in his being, & his faculties & power not taken away, enough to make a man turn from Nature unto Grace, if he will be so good natured as to bow his own will, & determine himself, as he may? Why do we then condemn the Pelagians? What did or could Pelagius say more? But enough of this here.  
In the following, Paragraph (n. 188.) He tells us, that some men teach, that Christ strippeth a Christian of two things, his Sins, & his Righteousness. Or that two Things must be cast away for Christ, Sins & Righteousness. And he is not satisfied with such speeches, though they be consonant to, yea upon the matter, the very same with the speeches of Paul Phil. 3: 8, 9 He faith they should speak better, if they would not deceive. And why saith he not so of the Apostle Paul also? May it serve him, that we speak, as Paul did? Nothing (saith he) is to be cast away, as evil, but sin. True; and yet the Apostle desired to be found in Christ, not having his own Righteousness; & what was a Righteousness in his eyes before; and was a Righteousness, which is in the Law, and wherein he was blameless, he now accounted loss for Christ, yea he accounted them but dung; which includeth a rejecting & casting of it away with detestation. He addeth, Righteousness truly such is good, & never to be cast away. If it be no Righteousness, why do they falsely say, that we must cast away our Righteousness? Ans. Let the Apostle Paul answer this, whom it concerneth as much, as us: And let Mr. Baxter in soberness consider how this reflecteth upon the Spirit of the Lord, inspiring the Apostle to speak so. As for us, we are not very anxious in this matter, but can freely tell Mr. Baxter, that though our personal Righteousness be good; Yet in the matter of justification before God, and absolution from the condemnatory sentence of the Law, & adjudication to life, we must lay it aside, and betake ourselves solely to the Righteousness of Christ, and seek to be found in him alone, after the example of the Apostle, & according to the clear doctrine of the Gospel; And this we are resolved to do, how displeased soever Mr. Baxter be with us upon that account.  
He addeth. To cast away a false conceit of Righteousness, is not to cast away Righteousness, but Sin only; indeed beside sin, we are said justly to cast away that, which would be the object & matter of sin: And the phrase is fitlier applied to a thing Indifferent; than to a thing necessary, lest it seduce. Ans. To account our Righteousness, consisting in our obedience to the Law, to be dung, as Paul did, in the business of justification, is all we played for, let Mr. Baxter call it a casting away of a false conceit of Righteousness, if that will satisfy him, but even in this we cast away our Righteousness, when we will not trust to it, as our Righteousness, in order to justification; or as that Righteousness, upon the account of which we expect to be justified in the sight of God. And if Mr. Baxter be afraid of Seducing here, he may know where we ground our expressions: I suppose Paul was far from seducing, when he spoke, as he did Phil. 3: 8, 9  
There is nothing so good (saith he) which may not be made the object of sin; not Christ, or his Righteousness, or God himself excepted; But we must not thus objectiuly abuse them. Ans. And what is all this to the purpose? Doth he think that those teachers, he here opposeth, were enemies to holiness; or would have men laying aside all thoughts of it, and care about it when they spoke so? He may as well infer such things from the Apostles speeches. But what is meaned secundum quid, should not be understood as spoken simpliciter. His reasoning here then is impertinent, as also is that which followeth, when he saith. So holiness & true Righteousness (inherent or imputed) may be objects of sinful pride & boasting; But it is not edifying doctrine therefore to say, that we must cast away inherent & imputed Righteousness. For we plead not for casting away every thing that may be abused, but for casting away our own Righteousness, in the matter of justification, that impured Righteousness may only take place. But how imputed Righteousness can be the object of sinful pride & boasting, he would do well to teach us; that Inherent Righteousuess may be so, we know; and to plead for justification upon that account, is to lay the foundation of sinful pride & boasting, as the Scriptures teach us.  
He addeth. But yet true self denial requireth that we deny our Righteousness (inherent or Imputed) to be that which indeed it is not. Ans. And therefore we deny, that our inherent Righteousness is the ground, or formalis ratio objectiva of our justification: But what way Self-denial teacheth us to deny our imputed Righteousness to be what it is not, he must be pleased to inform us; and to speak thus alike of both our inherent & imputed Righteousness, is not very fair; as if there were no difference.  
Further he tells us. And so when men accounted the jewish observations to be a justifying Righteousness, in competition with, & in opposition to Christ, Paul counteth it as loss & dung, & nothing in that respect: when yet elsewhere he saith, I have lived in all good conscience to this day: And Christ himself fulfilled that Law & Righteousness. Ans. What meaneth Mr. Baxter by these jewish observations? Meaneth he nothing but their observance of the Ceremonial Law? But did Paul mean nothing but his conscientious observance of this Law, when he said, I have lived in all good conscience to this day? And did he mean nothing else, by that Righteousness, which he counted loss & dung. Phil. 3? The Apostle himself distinguisheth betwixt the Law, touching which he was a Pharisee; and that Law touching the Righteousness whereof, he had been blameless: And sure before the writing of this Epistle, he had preached down the observation of the Ceremonial Law, and was far from the observation thereof, & yet now, he accounted that same Righteousness, which formerly was gain to him, now to be loss & dung, so that this could not be, his Ceremonial Observances; for it had been a small demonstration of his excessive desire to win Christ, to count tha●loss now, which he had before condemned as unnecessary. Yea as unlawful, & had laid aside, as such. So that he meaneth all that, which could be called his own Righteousness, & which is of the Law, and was not that Righteousness, which is through the Faith of Christ, and of God by Faith. And it is also observable, that the Apostle useth a very comprehensive term beside, saying, And I count all things but loss etc. Moreover, th● jewish observances, while that Law stood in force, were useful & good, & a Righteousness, as well as the observation of the moral Law, to which they were also reducible, being enjoined by virtue of the Second Command. And if these observances could be brought (through men's corruption,) in competition, with & set in opposition to Christ, and therefore were justly accounted as loss & dung & nothing, in that respect: why ought not also moral observances be ●o accounted, seeing they through man's corruption, can be & are too oft brought in competition with, & set in opposition against Christ, & his Righteousness? If Mr. Baxter will yield to this, he needs disput no more at this rate.  
He addeth. So if a man will conceit, that his common grace will justify without holiness; or his holiness without pardon, & the Righteousness of Christ, he must deny this Righteousness; that is, he must deny it to be what it is not, & must cast away (not it, but) the false conceits of it. Ans. We think them in an error, who conceit, that either common grace will justify without holiness, or holiness with or without pardon & the Righteousness of Christ: and it is not proper for him, who will not hear others saying, that Faith justifieth, to say, that holiness justifieth. And it is as improper to say, that pardon justifieth: Let him tell me, how holiness with pardon can justify? And as for the Righteousness of Christ, all men (with Mr. Baxter) are justified by it alike, for it only purchased the New Covenant, and that it did to all alike, and is no other way imputed unto any whatsomever. And so, according to his judgement it must be denied, that Christ's Righteousness becometh the believers through God's imputation, & that believers are there with clothed, and thereupon made juridically Righteous, and then justified, or pronunced Righteous, through that imputed Surety Righteousness of Christ: this is the self-denial that Mr. Baxter will teach us; and stead of this Surety-Righteousness of Christ, we must be clothed (according to him) with our own Gospel Righteousness, Faith & New Obedience, and upon that ground, as the only nearest formal reason; or meritorious cause, expect to be justified; because Christ's Righteousness hath purchased this Covenant, and connexion. Mr. Baxter must not be offended, that I mention the word Merit here, remembering what he saith himself (n. 194.) where his friendliness to Papists, & his displeasure at Protestants is so remarkable, in these words. [And those that reject the saying of some Papists, who in this sense say, that Christ merited that we might merit, placing our Evangelical merit in a mere subordination to Christ's, do but show, what prejudice & partiality can do, and harden those, who perceive their errors.]  
Finally he saith here. And so if any Libertine will say, that Christ's Righteousness imputed to him, will justify him without Faith, or be in stead to holiness to him, he must deny imputed Righteousness thus to be, what indeed it is not. Ans. Though I know, the Lord hath thought good to ordain Faith, as a mean, whereby we may be made partaker of Christ's Surety-Righteousness, and so be justified; Yet I may say, that Christ's Righteousness imputed, as being the sole meritorious cause & Ratie formalin objectiva of our justification, will justify without Faith, as any part of that Righteousness, which we are considered as clothed with, when declared & pronunced Righteous. And though it be not in stead of holiness, as if holiness were no more required of us; Yet it is & must be in stead of that holiness & Righteousness, which was required of us in the Old Covenant & by the Law, in order to our being accepted & justified thereupon.  
He tells us in the margin, that none deny. That all that are saved have inherent Righteousness; and that in tantum we are Righteous by it; That a man accused, as being an Insidel, Atheist, Impenitent, Ungodly, a Hypocrite etc. must be justified by pleading all the contraries in himself; or else perish; And that this inherent Righteousness is imperfect, and in us found with sin, & that therefore no man can be justified by it without pardon of sin, nor at all against the charge of being a sinner, & condemnable by the Law of innocency. But what is all this to the point? Must we not therefore say with Paul, that in the business of justification, we must account our own Righteousness to be but dung, and only lean to the Righteousness of Christ? What would he hence conclude? And what remaineth then (saith he) but to trouble the world with contending de nomine, whether this Imperfect Righteousness, shall be called Righteousness, & the giving of it, called justifying, or making us Righteous so far. Ans. And who, I pray, more guilty of troubling the world with these contendings, than he? But to the matter, it is no mere contending the nomine, that he hath caused, when in stead of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ, with which the Orthodox Asserted believers to be clothed, as the immediate ground of their justification before God, and which they by Faith were to lean to, and rest upon in order to justification, he substituteth, in its place, our imperfect holiness, & maketh that to merit justification & Salvation, as a subordinat Righteousness (so called, though indeed in this case the principal.) advanced to that dignity by the merits of Christ's Righteousness; and as all that Righteousness, which can properly be said to be ours, and to be imputed to us, as the only Potestative Condition of our Justification & Salvation, according to the New Covenant, purchased by Christ. This is something more, and a great something more, than a mere contest about a word, or a name. This toucheth the foundation of the Gospel, let Mr. Baxter think as little of it, as he will. I need not take notice of his making these two one thing, justifying & making us Righteous, and of his calling the giving of Righteousness or holiness a justifying of us, for this is but suitable to him, who would confound all.  
This is all he speaketh to this matter in this place: But thereafter Sect. 5. of merit (n. 196.) he tells us, It is a great question, whether a man may trust to his own Faith, Repentance or Holiness. And I should think, that no orthodox man should once make a question about it; but should reject the very insinuation of such a thing with detestation: seeing Trusting to these things is the native consequent of the Popish, Socinian & Arminian error about justification; or of all, who speak of the Imputation of Faith etc. as our Righteousness, in stead of the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. What answer giveth he? But some men (saith he) will trouble the world with unexplained words, where no sober men differ. Ans. The words are plain enough, and need no explication, & every ordinary Christian understand their meaning; but against such, as will seek knots in rushes, and raise dust in the most clear air, for their own ends, there is no remedy. I am afraid the point of difference shall be found such here, as that our agreement shall not be expected in ●haste, unless our sobriety be such, as well make us embrace inconsistences.  
Let us hear what he saith. No wise man can dream, that we may trust to those for more than their proper part, as that we may trust them to do anything proper to God, to Christ, to the Spirit, to the promise etc. And to use the phrase of Trusting to our own Faith, or holiness, when it soundeth absolutely, or may tempt the hearers to think, that they may trust them for God's part, or Christ's part, & not only for their own, is a dangerous deceiving course. Ans. It is true, no wise man will say, that we may trust to these for more than their proper part, but when we are mistaken about their proper part, & conceive them to have that place & part, which they have not, and accordingly trust unto them, do we not amiss? And Mr. Baxter maketh it their part to be the immediate meritorious cause expacto (which he otherways expresseth to be the Potestative Condition) of Justification & Salvation: which we say is the part of Christ & his Righteousness alone: And sure, who ever shall trust unto them for this part, which according to the Gospel is Christ's part, trust unto them for more than their proper part. Neither is it any dangerous or deceiving course, to speak thus, when the meaning is obviously known (except to such as have wit enough to darken things) to be this, that we must not Trust to Faith etc. as the price, the merit, ex pacto (as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant) of our Justification, Adoption, & Salvation. But it is a most dangerous & deceiving course to call them only Conditions, or cause fine quibus non, when in the mean time, they are made to have the same place in the New Covenant, that perfect obedience had in the old; & are made our Gospel-Righteousness, for which we are justified, yea & put in the same place, that the Orthodox put Christ & his Surety- Righteousness, that is, to be the immediate ground, formal cause, Ratio formalis objectiva of our Justification.  
What more? But that really they may be trusted, for their own part, and must be so, no sober person will deny: for so to believe, obey, pray to God etc. & not to trust to them in their place, that is not to think, that we shall be ever the better for them, is unbelief & indeed distrusting God, & saying, it is in vain to seek him, and what profit is it that we call upon him & such diffidence & despair will end all endeavours. Let every man prove his own work etc. This is our Rejoicing &c. If we are justified by Faith, we may trust to be justified by it. But the rare use of such a phrase in Scripture, & the danger of it, must make us never use it without need. Ans. As I said, all the question is concerning what is their own part: And by saying that they are not to be trusted unto, we deny them to have that part, or place in the matter of our Justification & Salvation, that others give unto them: And if there were no more, this is a shrewd ground of presumption to us, that Mr. Baxter, owneth not the Orthodox doctrine in this matter, viz. That he cannot with patience hear it said, That we must not trust to our own Faith, Repentance or Holiness, but accounteth such expressions dangerous, and deceiving. (2) It is but a wrong gloss put upon this expression, We must not trust to our own Faith etc. to make the meaning of it to be, we must not think, that we shall be ever the better for our Faith. etc. And therefore his following words are vain, and to no purpose. (3) It is one thing to trust to be justified by Faith, which is but believe God, and trust in his word; and a far other, to trust in our Faith; For this is to lay our stress, & lean our weight, & found our hopes of Justification & Salvation on our weak & feckless Faith, in stead of trusting to, & relying upon Jesus Christ & his Surety Righteousness, as the only immediate ground, & as that Righteousness by & upon consideration of which, we are justified, & have a Right to Glory: And if Mr. Baxter do not see a difference betwixt these two, it is not because he cannot, but because he will not, as some may suppose. (4) He talks of the rare use of such a phrase in Scripture; but I would know, where he findeth it used at all in Scripture? And it is well, that he confesseth there is danger in it: which two, me thinks, should be enough to make him, as great an enemy to this expression, as we are: But the truth is, according to his principles, we are as much now to Trust to our Faith Repentance & Holiness, in order to Justification & Salvation, as Adam was to trust to his perfect obedience, according to the Covenant of works; & as much, as, according to our doctrine, we are to trust to Christ & his Surety-Righteousness.   

CHAP. IU.  
The Law, by the works whereof Paul denyeth that we are justified, is not the jewish Law.  
WE find the Apostle Paul directly & professedly proving & concluding, that we are not justified by the Law, nor by the works of the Law: Yet such as differ from us, about the interest of works, in justification, not being willing to yield & submit unto the truth, do seek what Evasions they can, to evite the force of the Apostles a gueings & peremptour Conclusions; and therefore say, that Paul is to be understood, as speaking only of such, or such a Law; & excludeth only such & such works, in which they think they may yield unto, what the Apostle saith, the same being limited & restricted, according to their own mind, and yet do no prejudice to their own Hypothesis: But yet what this Law in particular is, and what are the works thereof, our Adversaries are not at all agreed among themselves; but some imagine one thing, and some another, as we shall hear.  
Some by the Law, and the works thereof, which Paul excludeth from justification, do mean the Ceremonial Law, and the Observances thereof; or as others express it, the jewish Law, including their judaical Law, & so understanding hereby all that Law, which is called Moses' Law: this is owned by some Papists, as Bellarmine showeth us. De justif. Lib. 1. Cap. 19 but he himself rejecteth it, upon this ground, that the Apostle Rom. 4. Ephes. 2. Tit. 3. doth simply exclude works, making no mention of the Law of Moses: The Socinians do choose this way of interpreting the Apostle, as particularly may be seen in the Author of a book, in●●●●led Consensus Pauli & jacobi &c. printed. An. 1620.  
But this opinion doth not correspond with truth, as may be manifest from these particulars.  
1. If Paul disput only against Justification by Ceremonial Observances, he had a far shorter cut, to confute that conceit, than the way he took, to wit, to tell them: that shortly that Law, with all its observances, was to be laid aside & no more to be observed, by virtue of the Gospel Administration, & because the end of all these observances, & He, who was typified thereby, was come, and had put an end to that dispensation. But we find not the Apostle making any use of this One & Only Argument, which had sured that purpose; but on the contrary he useth such Mediums & Arguments, as suit no less, if not more, other Laws, beside the Ceremonial.  
2. Yea before the writing of these Epistles, wherein the Apostle did disput against Justification by the Law, at least, before he wrote that to the Galatians, he had by his preaching & practice, opposed the observation of the Ceremonial Law, as himself telleth us Gal. 2. And in that same Epistle Chap. 3. & 4. he condemneth the observation of that Law, in most peremptory terms, as being no less, than a falling from grace: And yet when he is treating of Justification not by the works of the Law Chap. 3. he mentioneth not this ground, which would have taken away the very subject of the debate. Shall we think, that the Apostle would have disproved Justification, only by the works of the Ceremonial Law by such Arguments and Tipicks, out of Scripture, when he was within a little by forcible reasons to remove the very Law itself, and condemn all observation thereof?  
3. It is strange, that Paul in writing to the Gentiles, should deny Justification to be by the works of the Law, meaning the Ceremonial Law only; and james writing to the Jews, should cry up the observation of that Law, and plead for justification thereby: This would say, that Jews & Gentiles were not both to be justified one way: or that james & Paul do clearly contradict other; neither of which must be said. That james speaketh of another Law, than Paul speaketh of, cannot be made good. And therefore when our Adversaries will prove from james, that we are justified by works, their meaning is, that we are justified by the Observation of the Ceremonial Law.  
4. The several things mentioned of this Law, whereof the Apostle speaketh, showeth, that he is not speaking of the Ceremonial Law only: as (1) Rom. 3: 19 It is a Law that stoppeth all mouths, & whereby all the world becometh guilty before God: But this is not the Ceremonial Law, or the jewish, or Moses Law, under which the Gentiles were not, nor yet are. (2) Rom. 3: 20. It is that Law, by which is the knowledge of sin: but this is not by the mere Ceremonial Law, as we see Paul himself professing Rom. 7: 7 (3) Rom. 2: 13. It is that Law, the döers whereof shall be justified: But this can not be asserted of the mere Ceremonial Law, or of Moses' Law. (4) Rom. 3: 27. It is that Law, which doth not exclude boasting: but it cannot be said, that the Law of Moses is only that Law. (5) Rom. 3: 31. It is that Law, that is not made void, through Faith. But this is not the Ceremonial Law; The Ceremonial Law is not established by Faith. (6) Rom. 3: 28. It is that Law, justification by which is inconsistent with & opposite to justification by Faith: but this is not the Ceremonial Law only. (7) Rom. 4: 1, 2. It is that Law, by the works whereof Abraham, was not justified. But the Apostles argument from the Instance of Abraham had not been pertinent, if no Law had here been understood, but Moses' Law; which was not in being in Abraham's days. (8) Rom. 4: 2. It is that Law, & works of obedience to it, that would give ground to man of glorying: But this is not true only of the Ceremonial Law. (9) Rom. 4: 4. It is that Law, obedience to which is a working, and maketh the reward of debt: But this cannot be said only of the Ceremonial Law. (10) Rom. 4: 15. It is that Law that worketh wrath: But other Laws do this, than the Ceremonial Law, (11) Rom. 8: 3, 4. It is that Law, that was weak through the flesh, and the Righteousness of which was to be fulfilled in us: but this cannot be applied to the Ceremonial Law only. (12) Gal. 3: 10. It is that Law●, of the works of which as many as are, are under the Curse, and of which it is said, cursed is every one, that continueth not in all things, which are written in the Law to do them. But this agreeth not to the Ceremonial Law only. (13) Gal. 3: 12. It is that Law, by the doing of which, man should live: But by perfect obedience to the Law of Moses alone life was not to be had. (14) It is that Law, that cursed all transgressors, & under the Curse whereof all thoselay, for whom Christ died. Gal. 3: 13. But that is not the Ceremonial Law, which laid no Curse upon the Gentiles. (15) Ephes. 2: 9▪ 10. It is that Law, that enjoineth those good works, which God hath before ordained, that we (even Gentiles) should walk in them: But that is not the Ceremonial Law. (16. It is that Law, the works whereof are inconsistent with grace, as the ground of Election: Rom. 11: 6. But this is not Ceremonial Law only, else we must say, that Election is for works of the Moral Law, and yet is for grace. (17) Phil. 3: 9 It is that Law, obedience to which can be called our Righteousness: But this is not the Ceremonial Law only.  
5. If Paul's mind had been only to disput against Justification by Mosaical Observances; after he had stated the question, and proposed the Truth, he was minded to confirm Rom. 1: 17. to what purpose did he insist so much, to show, how guilty the Gentiles were, who were never under Moses' precepts, and thereby clear, what need they had of a justification by free grace through faith without the works of the Law? This seemeth not to have a clear tendency unto the clearing of justification to be by Faith, & not by Mosaical Observances; for what had the Gentiles to do with these?  
6. We find like wise the Apostle to convince the Jews themselves to be under sin, in order to the necessity they had of being justified by faith, holding forth their breaches of the Moral Law Rom. 2: 21, 22. and speaketh of a Law distinct from that, to which Circumcision belonged, saying vers. 25. etc. for Circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the Law; but if thou be a breaker of the Law, thy Circumcision is made uncircumcision: And this Law, is a Law, that he, by supposition, saith, one not circumcised, might observe, and so could not be the Law of Ceremonies. See also Rom. 3: 9▪ 19  
7. The Arguments, which the Apostle adduceth to disprove justification by the Law, cannot conclude against the Ceremonial Law only: for (1) all the world are not guilty of transgressing only the Ceremonial Law: and yet because all the world are become guilty before God, the Apostle inferreth Rom. 3: 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law, there shall no flesh be justified. (2) So that other Argument ibid. for by the Law is the knowledge of sin, cannot conclude against the Ceremonial Law only. (3) Justifieation by the deeds of the Ceremonial Law only, repugneth not to the justification through the Righteousness of God without the Law, and which is by Faith of Jesus Christ; and through the Redemption, that is in Christ. (4) The Law of Ceremonies alone doth not exclude boasting. (5) Abraham's works were not works of the Ceremonial Law only (6) works of the Ceremonial Law only do not exclude glorying, nor make the reward of debt & not of grace. (7) Believing on him, that justifieth the ungodly, is opposed as well to him that worketh according to other Laws, as to him, that worketh according to the Ceremonial Law Rom. 4: 5. (8) Imputed Righteousness, mentioneth Rom. 4: 7, 11. is as much opposite, in the matter of justification, to other observances, as to Mosaical Observances. (9) Forgiveness of sins, mentioned Rom. 4: 7, 8. is as inconsistent with the observation of other Laws, as of the Ceremonial Law. (10) Justification by the Faith of Christ is as opposite to the Moral Law, as to the Ceremonial Law: And thus reasoneth the Apostle Gal. 2: 16. (11) That Curse denounced Deut. 27: 26. by which the Apostle proveth Gal. 3: 10. that justification can not be by the works of the Law, is not against transgressors only of the Ceremonial Law. (12) Obedience, to the moral commands, is as little a living by faith, as was obedience to the Ceremonial Law: And by this Argument Paul proveth Gal. 3: 11. that no man is justified by the Law, in the sight of God, because the just shall live by faith. (13) This is clear also from vers. 12. & 13. to mentione no more. And the Law is not of faith (which holdeth not true only of the Ceremonial Law) but the man that doth them shall live in them (which was the Tenor of the Old Covenant Rom. 10: 5. Levit. 18: 5.) Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law (And sure this is from the Curse of other Laws, than of the Ceremonial Law.)  
8. Though it were true, that Paul's conclusion was only against Justification by Mosaical Observances: Yet by good consequence it might hence be inferred, that there is no Justification by the works of the Moral Law. Partly because the Apostle's Mediums & Arguments are general, &, as we saw, reach further than to the Ceremonial Law: Partly because if it were not thus, all the Apostles disput should be of no use or value unto us, now the subject of that controversy being quite removed: Partly because the Ceremonial Law belonged to the first table, being God's institute worship, & obedience thereunto required by the Second Command: Partly because so long as that Law was not abrogated, obedience thereunto was their Gospel Righteousness, as well as obedience to other Law's is now called our Gospel-Righteousness: And if that could not then justify them, no more can this now justify us.  
We do not by all this say, that the Ceremonial Law had no place or interest in this disput; for the Jews being pertinacious adherers unto this, & the false Teachers urging the observation of this, even upon the Gentile Churches, gave occasion & first rise unto this Question; for they alleiged, there was no Justification, or Salvation without the observation hereof: But as they did not restrict the Law & the works thereof, purely unto the Mosaical Rites & Typical Ceremonies; but urged the observation of the whole Law, which comprehended moral precepts, as well as Ceremonial Injunctions; so the Apostle argueth against Justification by the works of the Law in general, without any particular limitation (expressed or hinted) unto the Ceremonial Observances.  
Mr. Baxter, in his Cathol. Theol. part. 2. Sect. 26. where he would tell us, how Paul & james agree, about justification by works (n. 362.) saith that, The key of understanding Paul's discourses of justification is, to know 1. That the grand question, which he first manageth, is, whether the Gentiles may not be saved, without keeping the jewish Law, as well as the jews with it? Ans. (1) But our Principal difficulty here is to understand, what Mr. Baxter meaneth by the jewish Law? for if he mean all that, which was prescriscribed unto the Jews, as a Rule of their obedience, we assent; but then the Moral Law is as much concerned here, as the Ceremonial, or judicial: And these, as such being abrogated, the disput concerneth us, as well as them, in respect of the Moral Law: But if he mean hereby, only the Law of Ceremonies, we have shown, that howbeit this might have given the first rise unto the disput, yet the disput was not wholly & purely restricted thereunto; Nor doth the Apostle only speak to that abstracted or restricted consideration of the Law, in his pleading against a justification by the works of the Law; as we have seen; This he doth, when he pleadeth for the Abrogation of that Law, & against the observation of it. (2) Mr. Baxter, as it would seem, supposeth, that Paul made no question concerning the Jews themselves, but yielded that they were justified & saved by their Law: for the question was, saith he, whether the Gentiles might not as well be saved thereby, as the jews? But where findeth he this, either asserted, or granted by the Apostle, or the Question thus stated by the Apostle?  
2. Saith he. To prove the Affirmative, he proveth, that the Jews themselves cannot be saved or justified merely or primarily by the Law, notwithstanding the divinity & great excellency of it; But must be justified by a Saviour, & free given Pardon & Right to life, & to which the sincere keeping of Moses Law was intended to be but subservient. Ans. (1) Then the Question concerned the Jews, as well as the Gentiles, & Paul did no more grant justification by the Law to the one, than to the other. (2) Where findeth Mr. Baxter these restrictions, Merely or Primarily, in all the Apostles disput? This is not fair, to pervert the Apostles plain peremptour, & absolute Conclusions, & restrick them to a certain limited sense, that they may the better be subservient to our designs, & our Hypotheses. Do the Apostles Mediums only serve to prove, that justification is not by the Law Merely or Primarily? Which of them all, I pray, hath only this force? (3) Though the keeping of Moses' Law be here said to be but subservient; Yet, according to Mr. Baxter, it was all their Righteousness, no other was properly imputed to them, & upon it immediately they received Pardon & Right to life, as merited thereby ex pacto, the Saviour only procuring the New Covenant: that is, that all, who work well & keep the Law of Moses, shall have free Pardon & Right to life. And thus they were as well justified by the works of the Law, as by faith: for faith was also required of them: And then the meaning of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3: 28. is, therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by faith, and by the deeds of the Law: for both faith & works with Mr. Baxter, belong to this Subservient Righteousness, as he calleth it. If this be consonant to the Apostles doctrine, which doth so contradict it, let the Reader judge.  
3. Saith he. That therefore it appeareth, that the Jews did so fond admire the Law, & their National Privileges under it, that they thought the exact keeping of it was necessary & sufficient to justification & Salvation. And they thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness, as a Sacrifice for sin, & meriter of free Pardon, & the Gift of life, but only a great King & Deliver, to redeem them by Power from all their Enemies & Bondage. Ans. This mistake of the Jews, concerning the Messiah, speaketh nothing to the point, whereupon we are; that is, that Paul denieth justification to be by the Law: And their error & mistake about the Law, is not to be limited & restricted to the Ceremonial Law; & so the thing, that we say, is confirmed hereby. (2) They thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness: And Mr. Baxter will not have him to be our Righteousness, save only, in that he hath purchased the New Covenant, wherein our faith & obedience to the Law, is to be looked upon as all our proper & immediate Righteousness, upon the account of which we are to receive Pardon & Right to life.  
4. He saith. That is was not Adam's Covenant of Innocence, or persection, which the Jews thus trusted to, or Paul doth speak against, as to justification (though a minore ad majus, that is also excluded) for the Jews knew, that they were sinners, & that God pardoned sin, as a Merciful God, & that their Law had Sacrifices for Pardon & Expiation with Confessions etc. But they thought that so far as God had made that Law sufficient to Political ends, & to Temporal Rewards & Punishments, it had been sufficient to Eternal Rewards & Punishments, & that of itself, & not in mere subordination to the typified Messiah. Ans. Though the jews knew, that they were sinners, yet they did also suppose, that by their works of obedience to the Law Moral, as well as Ceremonial, they might make amends, & so think to be justified & pardoned thereby, and that God would accept of them, & grant them life for their own Righteousness sake, & therefore did they labour so much to establish their own Righteousness, & followed after the Law of Righteousness, & sought Righteousness, as it were by the works of the Law. What Mr. Baxter talks here of the jews not using of that Law, in subordination to the Typified Messiah, hath need of Explication: for as to his sense of it, we see no ground thereof in all the Apostles discourse.  
5. He saith, That the thing, which Paul disproveth them by, is. 1. That the Law was never made for such an End. Ans. Yet he said, that the man, which doth those things shall live by them. Rom. 10: 5. Levit. 18: 5. Gal. 3: 12. & that the doers of the Law are justified Rom. 2: 13. And therefore speaketh of that Law, which according to its primitive institution, was made for such an end 2. saith he. That even than it stood in subordination to Redemption & free given life. Ans. This we cannot yield to, in Mr. Baxters' sense, often mentioned, for Paul no where giveth us to understand, that their obedience to this was their immediate Righteousness, & Condition of Justification, & the meritorious cause (ex pacto) of their Right to Christ, & to life etc. 3. saith he. That the free Gift or Covenant of Grace, containing the promise of the Messiah, and Pardon & life by him, was before the Law, and justified Abraham & others without it. Ans. It is true, this Argument did particularly militate against the Ceremonial Law; Yet, this not being the Apostles only Argument, & other Arguments reaching the Moral Law, as well as the Ceremonial, we must not limit the Apostles disput only to the Ceremonial Law. 4. saith he. That their Law was so strike, that no man could perfectly keep it all. Ans. Add also, that they could not perfectly keep any one command thereof. 5. saith he. That every sin deserveth death indeed, though their Law punished not every sin with death by the Magistrate. Ans. And this holdeth true of the Moral, as of the Ceremonial Law. 6. saith he. That their Law was never obligatory to the Gentile world, who had a Law written in their hearts; & therefore not the common way of justification. Ans. The Apostle maketh no such conclusion, that therefore it was not the common way of justification, for this would suppose, that it were the way of justification unto them, which is directly against the Apostles disput. 7. saith he. That their Law, as such, discovered sin, but gave not the Spirit of Grace to overcome it: in so much, as though he himself desired perfectly to fulfil it without sin, yet he could not, but was under a Captivity, that is, a moral necessity of Imperfection, or sins of infirmity, from which only the grace of Christ could, as to guilt & power, deliver him. Ans. Therefore the Moral Law is as well here to be understood, as the Ceremonial; as is manifest. 8. saith he. That no man ever come to heaven by that way of merit, which they dreamt of, but all by the way of Redemption, Grace, free Gift, & Pardoning Mercy. Ans. But that way of merit attendeth all works, in the matter of justification; as the Apostle assureth us Rom. 4: 4. Ephes. 2: 8, 9 & is opposed to the way of Redemption, Grace, free Gift, & Pardoning Mercy. Rom. 11: 6. & 3; 21, 24. Tit. 3: 5, 7.  
From these things Mr. Baxter draweth this Conclusion. Therefore their conceit, that they were just in the main & forgiven their sins; & so justifiable by the mere dignity of Moses Law, which they kept, & by the works of the Law, & not by the free Gift, Pardon & Grace of a Redeemer, & by the Faith & Practical Belief of that Gift, and acceptance of it, with thankful penitent obedient hearts, was a Perniciove Error. Ans. 1. Nothing is here said to ground a restriction of this erroneous conceit of theirs unto the Ceremonial Law: for this conceit of being justifiable by the Law, and the works thereof, in opposition to the free Gift, Pardon & Grace of a Redeemer, is as applicable to the Moral, as to the Ceremonial Law. (2) The Apostle doth not ground his disput upon the jews their express rejecting of a free Gift, & of Pardon etc. But from justification by Faith, laying hold on the free Grace & Merits of a Mediator, he argueth against justification by the Law & the works thereof: And according to the Apostle's Method do we argue. (3) To cover Justification by our own inherent Righteousness, having the same place in the New Covenant, which inherent Righteousness & Obedience had in the old, by these fine words, Faith, & a Practical belief of the Gift, & acceptance of it, with thankful penitent & obedient hearts, is not such ingenuous dealing, as the Importance of the matter requireth: But this will be clearer by what followeth.  
But (saith he) the true way of Righteousness was to become true Christians, that is, with such a penitent, thankful accepting, practical belief, or affiance to believe in God, as the giver of Salvation, in Christ as the Redeemer, & his Spirit, as our life & Sanctifier; and to accept Christ, and all his procured Benefits, justification & Life, as purchased by his Sacrifice & Meritorious Righteousness, & given in the New Covenant on this Condition, and so to give up ourselves to his whole saving work, as to the Physician of our souls, & only Mediator with God. This is the sum of Paul's doctrine on this point. Ans. Not to speak of this matter here, which is elsewhere done, I shall only say, that we are not enquiring after the true way of Righteousness, but after the true way of Justification before God; And inquire where the Apostle teacheth, that all the Righteousness, required unto justification, must be within us, & none at all imputed; as this Sum holdeth forth? Where he teacheth that this faith, including works & all obedience, is the only mean of justification? Where he teacheth, that this inherent imperfect Righteousness of ours, is the immediate ground, and meritorious Cause (ex pacto) of our justification & Salvation? Where he teacheth, that Christ's Righteousness is no otherwise ours, than as purchasing the New Covenant, wherein our own personal Righteousness is made the Potestative Condition of our Justification & Salvation? And yet these and several other Particulars of this alloy doth Mr. Baxter hold forth, as taught, in Scripture; as hath been seen elsewhere.   

CHAP. V.  
Works excluded in Justification are not works only done before Faith, nor perfect works required in the Law of Innocency, nor outward works only.  
THe other Evasion, which such, as plead for the Interest of Works in Justification, fall upon, to evite the dint of the Apostle's argueing & concluding against Works, is, That by the works of the Law, which Paul excludeth from justification, works are meant, which are done before Conversion & Faith, by the strength of Nature; & not the works of grace done after. This is the Evasion of Bellarmine & others.  
But against this we have these Reasons to propose.  
1. When the Scripture saith, we are justified by faith, the meaning is that so soon as a soul believeth in Christ, by a true Faith, he is justified before God: But this opinion saith, That a man is not justified when he believeth in Christ; No not until he perform Works of Righteousness after he hath believed: And thus, we may conceive a man to be a believer, & yet not to be justified; which is contrary to the Gospel.  
2. If we were justified by the Works of Regenerate persons, we should be justified by works, that are imperfect; and consequently by an imperfect Righteousness: for these works being made our Righteousness, if we be justified by them, as our Righteousness, we must be justified by an imperfect Righteousness; for they are not perfect, neither as to parts, nor as to degrees. Esai. 64: 5. 1. joh. 1: 8, 10. 1. King. 8: 46. 2. Chron. 6: 36. Eceles. 7: 20.  
3. Regenerate persons have renunced their own Righteousness, in the matter of justification before God; therefore they judged, that they were not justified thereby: And this is registrate in the word for our Instruction & example; that we may learn also to renunce our own works in this business. The Antecedent is clear from these Instances (1) David saying Psal. 130: 3. If thou Lord shouldest mark iniquity, o Lord, who shall stand: And in opposition to this, he betakes himself to free Remission, saying vers. 4. But there is forgiveness with thee. So Psal. 143: 2. And enter not into judgement with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified. So that if God should enter in judgement with the best, even with his servants; they could not expect to be justified by their works, even by their best works. So when he saith Psal. 32: 1, 2. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered etc. he renunceth all justification by the best of his works; for Paul Rom. 4: 6, 7. giveth the meaning hereof to be, that David describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without works. (2) Paul also renunceth his Righteousness in this matter, & that several times? for he saith 1. Cor. 4: 4. for I know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby justified. And he speaketh of himself, while in the State of Regeneration. So Gal. 2: 16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the Faith of jesus Christ, even we have believed in jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ, & not by the works of the Law. And Phil. 3: 9 he desired to be found in Christ, not having his own Righteousness, which is of the Law. No man can think, that by his own Righteousness here he meaneth only works, done before he was regenerate.  
4. The Instances, whereby Paul proveth Justification by Faith, without the works of the Law, confirmeth this, that works after regeneration are excluded as well as works before: for (1) Abraham was a regenerate man when his saith was said to be imputed to him Rom. 4: 1, 2, 3. compared with Gen. 15. for before this time Gen. 12: 1. he obeyed the call of God by faith. Heb. 11: 8. See also Rom. 4: 9, 10, 11. (2) David (another Instance of Justification by Faith) was also regenerate when he was justified, as Paul cleareth Rom. 4: 6, 7. by the imputation of a Righteousness, without the works of the Law.  
5. The Apostle excludeth simply the works of the Law, from being the Righteousness of any, in point of justification: And we have no warrant to except or distinguish, where the Law excepteth not, nor distinguisheth. The works of Regenerate persons are works, & works of the Law, as well, as any other: And Paul doth absolutely & simply exclude works & the works of the Law, from being the ground of justification.  
6. By what reason can it be evinced, that the Law, or the Works of the Law signify works before Regeneration, or works done before faith, more than other works? Do these words carry this sense, where ever they are used? Or can it be demonstrated, that they carry this express sense any where?  
7. Are only regenerate persons said to be under the Law? Now the Apostle speaketh of all the works of those, who are under the Law, that every mouth may be stopped, & all the world become guilty before God. Rom. 3: 19  
8. The Righteousness of God, which is by Faith of Jesus Christ, is as much without the Law, or the works of the Law, done by Regenerate persons, as without the Works of the Law, done before Regeneration: And justification by these works after Regeneration, is as much inconsistent with justification by faith without the works of the Law, as justification by the works of the Law, done before regeneration; as is manifest, from the true sense of justification by faith.  
9 Paul excludeth all works of the Law from justification, that giveth any ground of boasting: and of glorying, as we see Rom. 3: 27. & 4: 2. But if justification were by works of the Law, done after Faith & Regeneration, all boasting & glorying should not be excluded Ephes. 2: 9 Not of works lest any many should boast: And what these works were, the next Argument will show.  
10. Even works are excluded, unto which we are created & which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them Ephes. 2: 8, 9, 10. for by grace are ye saved, through Faith, & that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast: for we are his workmanship, created in Christ jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them. Now these works are works done after regeneration, as is manifest.  
11. All works are excluded in this matter, which make justification not be of mercy or of grace. Rom. 3: 24. Ephes. 2: 8. Tit. 3: 5, 7. But this do works after Regeneration, as well, as before, as Paul cleareth Ephes. 2: 8, 9, 10. & works & grace cannot consist, in being the ground of justification, no more, than in being the ground of Election. Rom. 11: 6.  
12. Works done after regeneration belong to that Righteousness, which is of the Law, which Paul describeth Rom. 10: 5. from Levit. 18: 5. to be, that the man, which doth those things shall live in them. But the Righteousness of the Law, & the Righteousness of Faith are opposite & inconsistent, as the Apostle cleareth there Rom. 10.  
13. Works done after regeneration, if made the ground of justification, will made the reward of debt & not of grace Rom. 4: 4. as well as works done before regeneration; for the Scripture holdeth forth no ground of difference, in this matter.  
14. If works done by Faith, and after Regeneration, be admitted, as the ground of justification, God should not be said to justify the ungodly; for a Regenerate believer, working works of Righteousness, is no where in Scripture called an ungodly man. But the Scripture speaketh this expressly Rom. 4: 5.  
15. Paul tells us Rom. 4: 16. that the promise was of Faith, that it might be by grace, to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the Law, but to that also, which is of the Faith of Abraham, who is the Father of ut all. Now this seed which is of the Faith of Abraham are believers or Regenerate persons; And yet as to these the Law is excluded, & the works thereof; because if they which are of the Law be heirs, Faith is made void, & the promise made of none effect vers. 14.  
16. If Justification were by the works of the Law, done after Regeneration, we could not, upon first believing, be justified, & have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ; nor could we rejoice in hope of the glory of God, & glory in tribulation etc. And yet this the Apostle expressly affirmeth Rom. 5: 1, 2, 3. etc. If justification did depend upon our after works, we could not as yet have peace & reconciliation, or assurance, or joy etc. because of the uncertainty of our obedience.  
17. If Paul had not excluded works done after Faith & Regeneration, from being the Cause & ground of our justification, what seeming ground or occasion had there been for that objection Rom. 6: 1. What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? What ground could any have to say. We are justified by our works done after Regeneration; therefore we may continue in sin, that grace may abound? Any might see at first, how ridiculous this was.  
18. And if we are justified by works done after Regeneration, is it not strange, that in all Paul's answers unto this objection, he never once sayeth, nor hinteth, that by these works we shall be justified, & no other way, and yet this had been the shortest & clearest solution of the objection, if it been according to the doctrine of justification, delivered by Paul.  
19 The false Apostles, who were corrupting the doctrine of the Gospel & of Justification, did not urge works done before Faith in the Gospel, as the ground of justification, for they were corrupting such, as had already embraced the Gospel & believed in Christ? as is clear out of the Epistle to the Galatians. Therefore when Paul is confuting their error, & opposing himself unto them, he must deny that we are justified by works done after Faith in Christ.  
20. Justification by works done after regeneration, is as opposite to faith, & to living the life of justification by faith, as justification by works done before Regeneration for the Law is never of faith, so reasoneth Paul Gal. 3. 11, 12. But that no man is justified by the Law, in the sight of God, it is evident: For the just shall live by Faith: And the Law is not of Faith.  
21. All the works of the Law are excluded: But works wrought after believing & after Regeneration, are works of the Law, being required thereby Psal. 119: 35. Rom. 7: 22. Therefore even these works are excluded.  
22. When the Apostle excludeth works from being causes of justification he must mean good works, for no man was ever so mad, as to imagine, that he could be justified by bad works. But no works can be called good works but such as flow from faith, & from the Spirit of grace, granted in Regeneration. Therefore while good works are excluded, these done after Regeneration are excluded.  
What is said by Bellarmine, in confirmation of his sense of these works of the Law, which are excluded from justification, is abundantly answered by all, that write against him; & therefore we need not take any notice thereof.  
There is another Evasion, found out by our Adversaries in this matter, & another gloss put upon these works. By the works of the Law there shall no flesh be justified. For some say, that hereby the Apostle only excludeth those works, that are perfect, which were required by the Law in Innocency. This Evasion granteth, that the Law here spoken of is not the Ceremonial Law, for that was not required in Innocency; but the Moral Law. The end why they invent this Evasion is not, to exclude works in the matter of justification; but to establish their own fancy of asserting justification by other works, than perfect works, required by the Covenant of works, to wit by imperfect works, which they say, are required in the Gospel: And therefore their meaning is, we are not justified by perfect sinless obedience; but by imperfect obedience to the Law. This is the Evasion of the Socinians, who say, the Apostle speaketh of the works of the Law, to show, that he speaketh of those works, which are enjoined by the Law, to wit of perpetual & perfect obedience required by the Law: And they say, that by Faith he meaneth that confidence & obedience, which every one is able to perform, and which is endeavoured after & studied.  
That this cannot be the meaning of the Apostles conclusion, we suppose will be clear from these Considerations.  
1. This supposeth, that they against whom the Apostle is here disputing, were of opinion, that men could yet be justified, & must be justified by perfect obedience to the Moral Law: But it is hardly imaginable, that men in their wits did ever so dream, or think, that they were innocent, & could expect to be justified before God by their own perfection, or perfect obedience to the Law in all points: for this were to say, they never had sinned:  
2. When the Apostle, in the beginning of his disput, in his Epistle to the Romans proveth, that all have sinned, & are guilty before God, both jew & Gentile, he thence inferreth, that by the works of the Law, no flesh shall be justified in God's sight Rom. 3: 20. Whereby he giveth us to understand, that there is no justification by the Law, unless it be perfectly keeped: And because no mere man did ever keep it perfectly, or can so keep it; therefore he concludeth, that no man can be justified thereby. There is no justification by works, unless the works be perfect; & consequently that such as expect justification thereby, be wholly sinless.  
3. If the Apostle had so disputed against justification by perfect works, as to have granted, or established justification by imperfect works; he needed not have used any more arguments to that end, than what was mentioned & cleared Rom. 1. & 2. & in the beginning of the 3. Chapter: for his evincing that all had sinned & come short of the Glory of God, had been sufficient to this end, without the addition of any one argument more, seeing it is impossible, that sinners can be perfect obeyers. And we must not think, that all the Apostles further arguings are merely superfluous, for this would reflect upon the Spirit of God, who acted Paul in this.  
4. How strange is it to imagine, that the Apostle should disput against perfect works, that he might establish imperfect works in the matter of justification: & to think that the Apostle is proving, that we are not justified by the perfect works of the Law, but by the imperfect works thereof; that is, we are not justified by such works, as keep a conformity with the Law, but by such works, as are violations of the Law; as all works are, which are not conform thereunto, in all points?  
5. Imperfect works, as to the ground of justification, are not that Righteousness of God without the Law, & which is by Faith of Jesus Christ, but opposite thereunto, and inconsistent therewith, as well as perfect works: for as he, that perfectly keepeth the Law, needeth not another Righteousness, in order to his justification; so neither needeth he, who hath an imperfect obedience if that be made the formal objective & merit cause of justification. But Gospel-justification is by the Righteousness of God, which is without the Law, & which Faith layeth hold on Rom. 3: 21, 22.  
6. Gospel justification is by Faith, as the whole Gospel cleareth; but faith & imperfect works are not one & the same: Yea they are as repugnant in this affair, as faith & perfect works are. We are justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law. Rom. 3: 28. Gal. 2: 16. Living by faith & living by works, are opposite. Gal. 3: 11, 12.  
7. Justification by imperfect works, is not free justification by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood: as is manifest: But this is the Gospel-justification Rom. 3: 24, 25.  
8. Imperfect works, exclude grace, & are as inconsistent therewith, as perfect works are. But Gospel-justification is by grace without works Rom. 3: 24. Ephes. 2: 8, 9 Tit. 3: 5, 6, 7. The Major is clear from the places cited, as also from Rom. 11: 6. If by grace, than it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace, otherwise work is no more work. Now if it be said, that perfect works are here understood, and not imperfect works: it must be said also, that Election (of which the Apostle here speaketh) is upon foresight of imperfect works.  
9 Imperfect works if made the Cause of Justification, can give ground of boasting & of glorying, as we see in the Pharisee Luk. 18. But Gospel justification removeth all ground of boasting. Rom. 3: 27 & 4: 2.  
10. Imperfect works can not be accounted a perfect Righteousness, by the Lord, whose judgement is according to truth Rom. 2: 2. But there is no justification without a perfect Righteousness, either inherent, or imputed. God will pronounce no man Righteous, who is not so, nor justify any as Righteous, who is not so indeed: But upon the account of an imperfect Righteousness, can no man be justified as Righteous.  
11. Even this imperfect Righteousness, when made the ground of justification, will make the reward of debt, and not of grace: As Abraham's works, if he had been justified by them, would have done: for Abraham's works were not perfect works, but imperfect works, as is manifest.  
12. If justification were not by perfect works, but by imperfect works, then through faith, or through Gospel justification, the Law should be made void, contrary to Rom. 3: 31. The reason of the consequence is, because hereby the Law, that requireth perfect obedience, is laid aside & another Law that requireth imperfect obedience admitted in its place: or rather the same Law is pretended, but it is made void, as to its requireing perfect obedience; & must now be satisfied with an imperfect obedience. But this is not to establish the Law, but to destroy it, when many Jotes & titles are taken away from it Mat. 5: 17, 18.  
13. The jews did not imagine, that they were perfect & without sin, but followed after the Law of Righteousness, & that, as it were (●s) by the works of the Law Rom. 9: 31, 32: And this of necessity must have been mixed with much imperfection: And yet the Apostle plainly saith in the place cited, that they did not attain to a Righteousness, nor to the Law of Righteousness, because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law, so that seeking after Righteousness as it were by the works of the Law, is opposite to a seeking of it by Faith. And again Rom. 10: 3. they went about to establish their own Righteousness, and did not submit themselves unto the Righteousness of God; which two are opposite & inconsistent; And this their own Righteousness, was but an imperfect Righteousness, which they were labouring to cause stand, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
14. We cannot imagine, that when the Apostle did exclude his own Righteousness, and desired not to be found therein, he only excluded, that which was not; & desired not to be found in that, which he had not, and which he knew he had not, to wit, a perfect sinless obedience. Rom. 7: 24. 1. Tim. 1: 13, 15. He confessed he had been a blasphemer, and the chief of sinners, and so was far from imagineing, that his obedience was perfect & sinless. This than could not be the Righteousness, whereof he speaketh Phil. 3: 9 but his imperfect Righteousness, being that only which he could call his own, is that only, which he desired not to be found in, in the day of his appearing before his judge, in order to his justification.  
15. If Paul had disputed only against perfect obedience & had yielded justification by imperfect obedience. What ground was there for that objection. Rom. 6: 1. Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound: seeing justification by imperfect obedience doth of itself engage to all endeavoure after obedience, & against the allowance of sin?  
16. And the Apostles answer to this objection may furnish us with another Argument against this; for if Paul had allowed of, or pleaded for justification by our imperfect works, he had used this, a● least, as one argument to persuade unto an absteaning from sin, by saying, there is no justification but by endeavouring after obedience; But we hear of no such think in all the Apostles Arguments, whereby he presseth unto holiness & obedience, whether there, or elsewhere.  
17. We are not justified by works done after Faith & Regeneration, as was proved before. Therefore we are not justified by imperfect works; for works after faith are imperfect, & again, they cannot but be so, as presupposing sin & guilt going before.  
There is yet another Evasion, wherewith some satisfy themselves, for they say, that when Paul saith, we are not justified by the works of the Law, by these works, he meaneth only outward works of the Law, performed without an inward Principle of Grace, of faith, or fear or Love of God. But we need not insist in the discovery of the vanity of this Evasion, having before at large proved, that the works, whereof Paul speaketh, are not works done before Faith & Regeneration; For all these works, that are done before Faith & Regeneration, are done without any inward Principle of Grace, & are only outward works, such as Heathens may perform: a few reasons will serve he●e: as  
1. When Paul denieth justification to be by the Law, or by the works thereof; he must mean such works, as are enjoined & commanded by the Law: But the Law commandeth other works, than those outward works, for it condemneth all works, that flow not from a principle of grace: because the Law is holy & spiritual, & the first & chief command thereof is, that we, Love the Lord our God, with all our heart; with all our soul with all our strength etc. Rom. 7: 12, 14. Mat. 22: 37. Mark. 12: 30. Luk. 10: 27. Deut▪ 13: 3. & 30: 6. If then Paul exclude only such works, as flow not from a principle of grace, he shall not exclude the works of the Law, but works prohibited by the Law; & his meaning should be, we are not justified by works, which the Law commandeth not, but we are justified by works, which the Law commandeth: which is contradictory to the whole scope & design of the Apostle.  
2. The Apostle doth manifestly exclude the works of Abraham Rom. 4: 1, 2. But the works of Abraham were other than such servile works or such outward works, performed from no principle of grace or Love to God; Therefore such cannot be here understood.  
3. Outward works, done without any principle of grace, could with no face or show of a pretence, lay a ground, or be any occasion of boasting or of glorying, because they were no other, but manifest sins, being prohibited & condemned by the Law, & not commanded or approven: But the Apostle excludeth such works, as could do this. Therefore he excludeth good works, which were done in conformity to the Law, & not such outward lifeless works only, as were mere servile works, & no better.  
4. Such lifeless, servile, & outward works could give no show of a ground of making the reward of debt: But Paul excludeth such works as would make the reward of debt. Rom. 4: 4.  
5. If Paul had meaned here only such outward, servile works, which are not conform to the Law; what occasion had there been, for Paul's proposeing of that objection. Rom. 3: 31. Do we then make void the Law through Faith? for to lay aside these works, which are not conform to the Law, giveth no probable ground of supposal, that thereby the Law is made void.  
6. Israel could not have been said to have followed after the Law of Righteousness, by doing of works merely ourward & lifeless: And yet this is said of them, & it is also said, that by all their following of the Law of Righteousness they could not be justified. Rom. 9: 31, 32.  
7. Mere performance of outward servile works, cannot be called a Righteousness: But the jews went about to establish their own Righteousness, & therefore miss justification. Rom. 10: 4.  
8. There was never any life had by these outward & servile works alone; But by the works, which Paul excludeth, there was life to be had, if they had been perfect. The man, which doth those things, shall live by them. Rom. 2: 13. & 10: 5. Levit. 18: 5. Gal. 3: 12.  
9 These outward servile works are not good works; but even good works are here excluded. Ephes. 2: 9, 10.  
10. Paul did not mean such works only, when he excluded his own Righteousness. Phil. 3: 9 Nor can such works be called works of Righteousness; which yet are expressly excluded in this matter. Tit. 3: 5.   

CHAP. VI  
By works, which Paul excludeth, is not meant the Merit of Works.  
THere is one other Evasion, thought upon to shift by all the Apostles arguings, & yet to maintain the Interest of Works, as the Cause & ground of justification before God, to wit. That Paul only disputs against a groundless conceit of merit in works; not against the works themselves, but against a Pharisaical sense of merit & worth in their works, whereby they conceived & conceited, that thereby they could satisfy for their sins, & buy & purchase to themselves Justification & Salvation. But against this Evasion, we have these things to say.  
1. By merit here must either be understood, that which is called meritum ex condigno, that is, that merit, which ariseth from the due proportion of worth, that one thing hath unto another, in the balance of equity & justice. And who ever imagine this merit in their works, must dream of an intrinsic worth in their works, which God, if he do according to justice, cannot but reward with eternal life: or that which is called meritum ex congruo, which floweth not from any inward Condignity in the work, but from a Promise or Covenant, & so it is meritum ex pacto, whereby the reward is not absolutely of grace, but of debt, because of a congruity in the thing, in respect of the Promise & Compact made. Our Adversaries cannot understand this last, when they say, that Paul disputeth against merit, because themselves own it, when they make works the Condition of the Covenant, & God to have promised justification & life unto our works. Neither are they shy of the word merit itself, as we saw lately from Mr. Baxter. But now, that Paul is not disputing against the merit of works, in the first sense, is manifest from these. (1) The very works required of Adam in the first Covenant, had not in them this intrinsic worth & merit ex condigno, and so the Apostle shall be disputing against that, which never was nor never will be nay, nor cannot be. (2) Then the Apostle saith nothing to disprove justification by the Old Covenant of Works made with Adam, but establisheth that, which who can believe? (3) No man, that is right in his wits, can imagine such a thing. And shall we think that the Apostle is disputing against that, which none, but such as are transported with mere ignorance & vanity, will own, or stand to, in their more sedate & composed thoughts. (4) Even the most proud & vain person, that is, will join the free mercy of God, with all the conceit of merit they have; but this merit ex condigno leaveth no imaginable room for the free mercy of God, in less, or more. (5) Paul disputeth not against the merit ex congruo, as separated from the works themselves, whereupon it is founded. As the following Arguments will evince. Therefore far less doth he dispute only against the fond & foolish conceit of the merit ex condigno.  
2. It is strange, that the Apostle should dispute against that, which he doth never once mentione, in his dispute, or in his Conclusions. He every where mentioneth works & the Law, & the works of the Law; but no where mentioneth he this merit of works, as the thing he disputeth against, as abstracted & distinguished from the works themselves.  
3. And that place, which they think, giveth some countenance unto their imaginations, viz. Rom. 4: 4. Now to him that worketh is the rewasd not reckoned of grace, but of debt, is directly against them: for, there the Apostle showeth that works are excluded, & all works (for there is no distinction made) are excluded; because, than the reward should be of debt: showing, that if works have any place, in the matter of justification, debt must have place also; but because debt hath no place, but grace (which two are inconsistent & incompatible) therefore all works are excluded. And to think, that the meaning of the Apostle is, now to him, that worketh, with a conceit of merit, attending his work, the reward is reckoned of debt; is to add to the word of God, to pervert the Apostles Argument, & to contradict the scope & cohesion of the words; as hath been shown elsewhere, far less can any hence infer a restriction of works to such only as make the reward of debt: for then the reward might be reckoned to him, that worketh, & yet be reckoned of grace & not of debt, & thus the Apostles Argument, should be manifestly false, & a plain Paralogism: which were wickedness & blasphemy to assert.  
4. The Apostle excludeth, in as plain terms, as can be, all the works of the Law: but even such works, as are performed without this fond & groundless conceit of merit, are works of the Law, being required & commanded by the Law. Yea the Law never commanded any works with this conceit of merit: And therefore by this opinion none of the works of the Law are excluded.  
5. Adam was obliged to give perfect obedience to the Law, without the least thought of meriteing ex condigno thereby: And if no merit or works with a conceit of merit be now excluded, but the merit ex condigno, then is the Covenant of works established by the Gospel. Nay thus, our imperfect works, are made to merit as well ex congruo & ex pacto, justification & life, as Adam's perfect & sinless obedience could have done.  
6. The man that hath works, without this conceit of merit, can not be called an ungodly man, no more than Adam could have been called so, while he stood in his integrity: But the justification under the Gospel is of the ungodly, God justifieth the ungodly. Rom. 4: 5. Nor can the worker without this conceit of meriting, be said to be one that worketh not, but believeth on him, that justifieth the ungodly: as is manifest.  
7. Either the Apostle establisheth works of justification by them, & only condemneth the apprehension of merit in our works: or he excludeth all works, in which men may conceit some merit to lie. If the first be said, than I conceive, the Apostle would have once mentioned this in arguings & conclusions, and not always have mentioned the Law & the works of the Law; for with our adversaries these are separable, and from the one the other can not be inferred: but we see not the least appearance of any such thing in all the Apostles arguings. And if the last be said. We have all we desire, for thus all works shall be excluded, because men can & ignorant persons too oft do imagine & conceit a merit in what they do, though not that merit, which is ex condigno, Yet that which is ex congruo.  
8. If the Apostle disput not against works, but against a conceit of merit in works, why doth he not oppose works without this conceit unto this conceit, or to works with this conceit? Why doth he always oppose Faith unto works, & say, we are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law? Is works the same with conceit of merit, or with works having this conceit adjointed? and is faith the same with works, or with works without this conceit of merit? Then Adam should have been justified by faith, if he had stood in his state of innocency; for he should have been justified by works without this conceit. But what palpable & manifest perverting of the Scripture & of the works thereof, is this? To take this liberty of expounding the words of the Scripture, is plainly to make nothing of the Scripture, but what we please.  
9 Are there no mediums to prove, that there is no merit in our works in reference to justification & Salvation, but such as the Apostle here useth, to exclude works from this Interest? If this had been all, which the Apostle had intended, his saying with Christ. Luk. 17: 10. So lilkewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things, which are commanded you, say, we are unprofitable servants; we have done that, which was our duty to do, had sufficiently confuted that mistake: But the long series of Arguments, with their variety, which the Apostle here useth, manifestly declare, there was some other thing in his eye; and he leveled at some other mark, even that, which he plainly declareth, in his repeated conclusions, viz. That we are justified by faith in Jesus Christ, without the works of the Law.  
10. Gospel Justification is of Grace. And therefore is not of works: Rom. 4: 4. Ephes. 2: 9▪ 10. And the Apostle cleareth the consequence, because all works have a ground of merit with them, & make the reward of debt & give ground to the worker to boast & to glory before men: thought not before God: for upon these grounds doth the Apostle reject all works, in this affair; as we see Rom. 3: 27. & 4: 2. Now to say, that the Apostle rejecteth only such works, as men conceit to be meritorious for their intrinsic worth, & not other works, that merit only ex pacto; is to destroy the Apostles Arguments, & to enervat all his discourse; for even works meritorious ex congruo, or ex pacto, will give ground of boasting before men, & make the reward of debt, as we know it would have been, if Adam's Covenant had stood: But whatever works lay the foundation of due debt, they stand in opposition to the way of grace; for grace & debt are not compatible.  
11. If any were puffed up with this conceit of the meritoriousness of their works, ex condigno, it could be none beside the proud fantastic Pharisees; nor is there any ground to suspect any other. And if so, why, may we suppose, would the Apostle state a needless controversy, a controversy concerning all both jews & Gentiles, when none of the Gentiles, and few, if any of the jews, were concerned therein? And why, may we inquire, would the Apostle so laboriously prove both jews & Gentiles to be guilty of sin? and why doth he speak of them all, without exception, seeing the question did only concern a few, & a very few, & such, as are never once named in all the dispute? These things look not very probable like.  
12. Can we think, that the Galatians, who were seduced by false Teachers, to adjoine to their Christianity, the practice of some jewish Ceremonies, were also carried away with this absurd Fancy, that there was a meritoriousness ex condigno, in all their works? Though there be ground to imagine such a thing; Yet we see the Apostle followeth the same disput against them, that he did, in writing to the Romans, of which no reason could be assigned if this merit was all, he disputed down.  
13. We find it said of the Jews Rom. 9: 31. that they followed after the Law of Righteousness; and yet by so doing did not attain unto the Law of Righteousness; because (vers. 32.) it was not by Faith, but as it were by the works of the Law. Now neither were these works of the Law, nor that Law of Righteousness which they were following after, a mere irrational conceit & groundless fancy of a merit in what they did, or of an intrinsic worth, meriting ex condigno the reward they expected. But a groundless apprehension, that their works themselves was the way of their attaining unto life, & therefore they followed that way of works, & would not take the way of faith, but stumbled at that stumbling stone.  
14. Then, according to this interpretation, works performed without this conceit of merit, must be God's Righteousness, as works together with this conceit of merit must be our own: for these two are opposite. Rom. 10: 3. But there is no ground to imagine; that our works performed without this fond conceit of merit in them, are the Righteousness, for these are not Christ, or his Righteousness: And it is there added vers. 4. for explication of the Righteousdess of God, for Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness, to every one that believeth.  
15. The Righteousness of the Law is, that the man, which doth these things shall live by them. Rom. 10: 5. Gal. 3: 12. Levit. 18: 5. So that this Righteousness consisteth in man's own doing: and not in a mere irrational apprehension of a merit in what he doth: So that it is not this groundless fancy, that the Apostle is disputing against, but this Righteousness, which is of the Law, because he is labouring to establish by his doctrine, the Righteousness of Faith, which is opposite to & inconsistent with the Righteousness of the Law. And this Righteousness of Faith is not our own personal Righteousness, or obedience performed to the Law without this apprehension & conceit of merit, as is clear from vers. 8, 9, 10, 11. following, & from the whole Gospel.  
16. If this be all that the Apostle is disputing down, to wit, justification by works, which we conceit to be meritorious, & not all justification hy works, why did the Apostle adduce the Instance of Abraham, & insist so much upon it, as he doth Rom. 4? Shall we think, that Abraham that holy Patriarch & friend of God, did obey with any such conceit of intrinsic worth, in his obedience? Was he infected with that leaven of Pharisaical pride? And if not, where is the consequence of the Apostles argueing from his practice? Is it a good consequence to say, Abraham was not justified by works performed in sincerity, without pharisaical pride & conceit of merits; therefore we cannot be justified by works, which we conceit to have merit in them: but by such works we can & must be justified, when we conceit no merit in them, but a simple merit ex congruo, or ex pacto? The like may be said of David, who had no conceit of merit in his works, & yet expected not to be justified by them, but looked for free pardon, & for justification through imputed Righteousness. Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8.  
17. If the Apostle had been establishing justification by works performed without such a fond conceit of merit in them; what ground was there for that objection which he preoccupieth Rom. 6: 1. saying. Shall we sin, that grace may abound? The urging of justification by works, could give no show or apparent ground for this. Neither can any such purpose be in the least seen & observed, in all the answer at large prosecuted Chapters 6. & 7. which is given hereunto. There is not the least hint given of his rectifying of the misapprehensions, that any might have about works, as if they were or could be supposed to be meritorious ex condigno: Nor is there the least ground of surmise laid down, of their being meritorious of justification or of life eternal ex congruo, or ex pacto: but all things sound the contrary way: & life eternal is expressly said to be the free gift of God.  
18. Then all that Paul meaned, when he desired to be found of his judge, not having his own Righteousness, which is of the Law, was that he desired not to be found puffed up with a pharisaical conceit of the perfection & meritoriousness of his works, as meriteing his justification & life ex condigno, by their intrinsic value & worth. But no such thing appeareth Phil. 3. 9 where he utterly renunceth his own Righteousness, which is of the Law; that is, a Righteousness consisting in his obedience & conformity to the Law: for in opposition to this, he desireth to be found in that Righteousness, which is through the Faith of Christ, the Righteousness, which is of God by faith; & this is some other thing, than his own works, performed without that pharisaical opinion.  
19 We are saved by grace, through faith, not of works, lest any man should boast, Ephes. 2: 8, 9 & consequently not of any works, seeing all works give ground of boasting. And he meaneth such works, unto which we are created in Christ Jesus, as his workmanship: and which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them vers. 10. Now these works are certainly works done without any vain conceit of merit: and yet we see, that by these works we are not brought into a state of Salvation.  
20. The Apostle excludeth works of Righteousness, which we have done, as opposed to Mercy & grace. Tit. 3: 5, 7. Now grace standeth in opposition to all works, even to works performed without this conceit of merit, as we see Rom. 11: 6. else we must say, that the Apostle there granteth Election to be for foreseen works, performed without a conceit of merit, and nothing must be called works, but what is done with a Pharisaical conceit of merit & intrinsic worth in them, which is absurd.   

CHAP. VII.  
James 2: 14. etc. cleared & Vindicated.  
ALI, who have been of old, and are this day Adversaries to the way of justification before God, which the Orthodox own from the Scriptures, have thought to shelter themselves, under the wings of of some expressions of the Apostle james; & have therefore laboured so to explain & stretch forth the same expressions, as they with their corrupt Notions about justification may seem at least to have some countenance therefrom, yea and warrandise to hold fast the same: And for this cause they have laboured so much, and do still labour, so to expound the words of Paul, as that they may carry no seeming difference unto the words of james: for it is received as a known truth, and it is willingly granted, that there is no real Contradiction betwixt the two Apostles, but what ever apparent or seeming disagreement there be betwixt their words; yet all that difficulty is removable; & their words, how contradictory soever they seem to be, are yet capable of such an interpretation, as shall manifest their harmonious agreement in the truth: so that james saying Ch. 2: 24, Ye see then, how that by works a man is justified, & not by faith only, dot not contradict the Apostle Paul, who saith & concludeth, that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law. Rom. 3: 28.  
But a question is here made, whether we should interpret James' words by Paul's, or Paul's by James'. Our Adversaries are much for this later, to wit, that we must interpret Paul's words by the words of james, because, as they allege, Paul is obscure in his doctrine, & many were beginning to misinterpret & pervert the same & that therefore james was necessitate to clear up that doctrine of justification, so as Paul's words might be better understood. But how unreasonable this is, the leamed D. Owen hath lately manifested, & his grounds are indeed irrefragable; for (1) It is a received way of interpreting Scriptures, that when two places seem to be repugnant unto other, that place, which treateth of the matter directly, designedly, expressly & largely, is to regulate our interpretation of the other place, where the matter is only touched obiter, on the buy, and upon some other occasion, and in order to some other ends. And that therefore accordingly, we must interpret james by Paul, and not Paul by james; seeing it is undenible, that Paul wrote of this Subject of Justification, directly & on purpose to clear up the same, and that with all expresness & fullness, on several occasions, disputing the same, in a clear & formal manner, with all sorts of Arguments, Artificial & Inartificial, and answereth objections, that might be moved against the same, at large, and with a special accuracy: But on the other hand, it is as certain, that james hath not this for his scope to open up the Nature of Justification; but only toucheth there-upon, in order to the other end, which he was prosecuting. (2) There is no ground to suppose, that it was the design of james to explain the meaning of Paul, no footstep of any such purpose appeareth. For than his main business should be to explain & clear up the doctrine of justification, which neither is apparent from this part of the Epistle, nor from any part of it at all; his design being quite another thing, as is obvious. (3) Nor was there any necessity for james, to Vindicate the doctrine of Paul, from such corrupt inferences, as Adversaries suppose, were made therefrom: for as to any such, as might be made, to wit, as if he had given any countenance unto such, as were willing to lay aside good works; he himself did fully & sufficiently Vindicate his own doctrine, by showing, on all occasions, the necessity of good works, and particularly when he is speaking of Justification, not only in his Epistles to the Romans, and to the Galatians, where he largely & professedly treateth of that matter, but even when he is but mentioning the same on other occasions; as we see Ephes. 2: 8, 9, 10. Phil. 3: 9, 10, 11, etc. & Tit. 3: 5, 6, 7, 8. So that to imagine that james asserteth another interest of works in our justification, than Paul doth, and that to explain Paul's meaning, is not to reconcile these Apostles, but to set them at further variance & enmity. And it cannot comport with sobriety, to think or say, that james, to clear the Apostle Paul's doctrine, and to vindicate it from objections, should speak to the same objections, which Paul himself had spoken to & fully removed, and that james should give such answers unto these objections, as Paul would not give, but rather rejected: And yet this must be said by our Adversaries here.  
It will be of great use to us here, to understand aright, what is the plain scope & drift of the Apostle james; for as for the design & scope of Paul, in his discourses of justification, it is so obviously manifest unto all that read the same, that no doubt can be made thereof, to wit. To clear up fully & plainly the Nature & Causes of this great privilege of justification, which is the hinge & ground work (as it were) of his doctrine of the Gospel, and to show how poor sinners, standing under the Curse for sin, come to be justified before God; as in his Epistle to the Romans: And to Vindicate the same doctrine of the Gospel from the corrupt pervesions of false teachers, as in his Epistle to the Galatians; as also to commend the free grace of God, in that noble contrivance, both in the places mentioned, and Ephes. 2. Phil. 3. Tit. 3. and elsewhere, when he mentioneth the same.  
Now as to the scope of the Apostle james, there is nothing to declare unto us, that it was his Intent, or design to explain & make known the way▪ how poor convinced sinners, standing under the sentence of the Law, come to be justified before God, and to receive pardon of their sins. No such question proposeth he to be discussed; No such point of truth doth he lay down to be cleared, or Vindicated. But his whole scope & drift is to press the real study of holiness, in several points particularly spoken to through the Epistle. And in that second Chapt. from vers. 14. & forward (as will appear more fully in the explication & vindication of the several verses in particular) he is particularly obviating that gross mistake of some, who thought that a bare outward profession of the Gospel Faith, or of Christian Religion, was sufficient to save them, and evidence them to be in a justified state, and that therefore they needed not trouble themselves with any study of holiness: And therefore showeth, that all such hopes of Salvation were built on the sand, for they had no ground to suppose, that they were truly justified, & so were in any fair way unto salvation, so long as all their faith was no other, than a general assent unto the doctrine of the Gospel, & to truths revealed, & not that true lively faith, hold forth in the Gospel, whereby sinners become justified before God.  
Mr. Baxter tells Cath. Theol. part. 2. n. 364. that St. James having to do with some, who thought that the bare profession of Christianity, was Christianity; & that faith was a mere assent to the Truth; & that to believe that the Gospel is true, & trust to be justified by Christ was enough to justification, without Holiness & fruitful Lives; & that their sin & barrenness hindered not their justification: so that they thus believed (perhaps misunderstanding Paul's Epistles) doth convince them, that they were mistaken; & that when God spoke of justification by faith, without the works of the Law, he never meaned a faith that containeth not a resolution to obey him in whom we believe, nor that is separate from actual obedience in the prosecution: But that as we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being Insidels; so must we be justified by our Gospel personal holiness, and sincere obedience, against the charge, that we are unholy & wicked, or impenitent, or hypocrites, or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation, that is justified by God.  
Ans. (1) It is true, for it is manifest, and undeniable, that james had to do with some, who thought that the bare profession of Christianity was enough, & that an assent unto the truth, was that faith that would prove justifying & saving. But (2) it is not so manifest that james had to do with such, as thought that to trust to be justified by Christ, was enough to justification without holiness & fruitful lives, & that their sin & barrenness hindered not their justification: for whatever Mr. Baxter imagine, we find not in Scripture, that justification followeth lives, that is, that there is no justification, before this fruitfulness of life appear: And himself useth to say, that in order to the first justification, this holiness of life is not requisite: And beside this, which he calleth the first, we know no other; unless he mean glorification. But then (3) as to glorification & final Salvation, we grant, that james hath to do with such, as thought a mere assent to the truth, without holiness, was sufficient hereunto; but that their believing thus could flow from their misunderstanding of Paul's Epistles, is not any way probable, seeing Paul in all his Epistles, even where he speaks most of justification by Faith without the deeds of the Law, presseth the necessity of holiness in order to Salvation, so as no imaginable ground hereof can with the least of shows be pretended. (4) That when Paul said, justification was by Faith, without the works of the Law, he meant a true & lively faith, which only is to be found in that soul, in which the seed of grace is sown, and which is made partaker of the holy Ghost, and of the divine Nature, is true; but yet justifying faith, doth not formally contain in it a resolution to obey him, in whom we believe, as was shown elsewhere. (5) Then we see, that the faith, whereof james speaketh, is not the same with that Faith, whereby Paul said, we are justified: And seeing both do not speak of the same Faith, there can be no appearance of discrepance. (6) When he saith, we must be justified by our Faith, against the charge of being infidels. I would know, what he meaneth, by this charge of infidelity; If he mean, the charge of not believing the Gospel, he knoweth that a mere assent to the truth, will justify from that Charge. If he mean the charge of not receiving & resting upon Christ, according to the Gospel, even that will be but a particular justification from that particular charge; and is not that justification from the sentence of the Law, whereof Paul speaketh. (7) That we must be justified (as he saith) by our Gospel personal holiness & sincere obedience, against the charge, that we are unholy & wicked, or impenitent & hypocrites, is true; but what can all this say, for a justification from the sentence of the Law, under which we are all lying by Nature; and of which the Apostle Paul speaketh? And if james speak of justification by works, in reference to this accusation, he speaketh of no other kind of justification, than that which the most wicked wretch, yea & the devils are capable of, when, to wit, they are falsely accused of having done some evil, which they have not done. And how can Mr. Baxter infer from what james saith, (if he speak of no other kind of justification) that works are required unto our justification, as to state, or unto our general justification from the sentence of the Law, adjudging us to death because of transgression? (8) But he addeth, or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation, that is, justified by God. Then the Justification, that james speaketh of, & that Mr. Baxter meaneth, is final Salvation: And we willingly grant, that there must be personal holiness & sincere obedience before this, and that no wicked or impenitent person, or hypocrite shall be adjudged to Salvation. But the justification, which Paul treateth of, is different from this, though it be the sure way to this, seeing all who are justified, shall be thus saved. Thus we see, that according to Mr. Baxter, the meaning of james is, the same with Paul's, when he saith Heb. 12: 14. Follow peace with all men & holinoss, without which no man shall see the Lord. And then, james speaketh nothing of that justification, whereof Paul treatch & this is, what we say; whence it is manifest, that there is no appearance of contradiction betwixt the two holy writers.  
But that we may come to some further clearness in this matter, we must see, whether Paul & james mean & speak of one & the same Faith: for if it be found, that they speak of divers Faiths, all appearance of Contradiction is removed. Now that the Apostle Paul meaneth of a true, lively, saving Faith, which is a saving fruit of the Spirit of God & the special Gift of God, is easily granted on all hands: All the question is of that faith, which james speaketh of, Papist's say, that it is true justifying, that james speaketh of: for justifying. Faith, with them, is nothing but a real assent unto the Catholic Doctrine, or to divine Revelation: And indeed if Justifying. Faith be nothing else, it can not be well denied, that james meaneth here a justifying faith. But the folly of this ground is obvious to all, that understand the Gospel: and we need not here insist in confuting the same. That which james here saith of this Faith, is enough to demonstrate of what Nature it is; and the Epithets he giveth it, do sufficiently manifest, that it is not Faith of the Right stamp, nor that true & lively Faith, by which Paul saith, that we are justified: and the discovery of this will be enough to our purpose; and every verse of his discourse hereanent will help us herein for (1) vers. 14. it is a profitless Faith, which cannot be said of justifying Faith, as the whole Scripture cleareth. (2) Ibid. it is a Faith, that hath no ground or reality, but a man's saying, nor no other evidenee, or proof, What doth it profit, my Brethren, though a man say, he hath Faith? There is no other proof adducable but his say so; which cannot be justifying Faith. (3) Ibid●can Faith save him; so that, it is a Faith, that hath no sure connexion with, nor tendency to Salvation; which cannot be supposed of the true, lively justifying Faith, as is known. (4) vers. 15, 16. It is no more true Faith, than that is true charity, which saith to the naked & destitute brother, depart in peace, be thou warmed & filled & notwithstanding giveth not those things, which are needful to the body. (5) vers. 17. It is expressly called a dead Faith. But the precious Faith of God's elect is a lively Faith. (6) ibid. It is a Faith without works, having no connexion therewith, nor being any ground thereunto; but the true Faith, that justifieth, worketh by Love, & is a living principle, and floweth from the infusion of life. (7) So vers. 18. It is a Faith uncapable of any true evidence, or demonstration, as to its being, from works of holiness▪ and so is not accompanied with any real change of soul: But it is not thus with true & saving Faith. (8) vers. 19 It is such a Faith; as devils may have: But devils are not capable of justifying Faith. (9) vers. 20. It is the Faith, that a Vain man▪ never humbled in the sense of his own lost Condition, nor driven out of himself to seek reliese elsewhere, in the free mercy & grace of God, through Jesus Christ, may have: But that is not the Faith of the humbled, hear broken man, that's fleeing to Christ for refuge, (10) vers. 21, 22, 23. It is not such a Faith, as Abraham had, that made him willing to offer up his son Isaac, when commanded, & so wrought with & was evidenced & demonstrated by works. (11) vers. 25. Nor is it like the Faith of Rahab, which prompted her to receive the Messengers, and send them out another way. (12) vers. 26. It is such a Faith, that is no better than a carcase without breath, which is no essential part of a living man. But the Faith that justifieth, is a far other thing. By these particulars, it is manifest, that this Faith, whereof James speaketh so much, and which he opposeth unto works, & denieth justification, & salvation unto, is not the precious faith that Paul speaketh of.  
We have seen, that Paul & James speak not of one & the same faith, we shall now inquire, whether they speak of One & the same Justification: And if it be found, that therein they differ, all ground of imaginable difference will be further removed. What that justification is, whereof Paul speaketh, is manifest, & needeth not here be declared, for it is plain, that he treateth of that justification, whereby a poor sinner, convinced of his sin & misery, in lying under guilt, & under the Curse of God because of sin, is absolved before God from the sentence of the Law, & accepted of Him, and brought into an estate of Favour & reconciliation, having a right unto Salvation, through Faith in Jesus Christ. Upon the other hand, it is as obvious & clear, that James is not treating of this justification, whereby a change of state is made in the man. But of a justification of a far other nature, even such a justification, whereby the Man's Faith, the reality of his Christianity, & his justification before God, is evidenced, or may be evidenced to himself, or to others. So that, whether we take justification here, as mentioned by James, for the evidence & demonstration of justification, or for a justification of the truth of the Man's Faith & Christianity, it cometh all to one; for where true faith & true Christianity is, there is justification, and there only; so that what demonstrats the one, will demonstrat the other; and a justification, or manifestation of the one will be a justification of the other. Nor is this sense of the word justify, or justification alien from the Scriptures, as we see Psal. 51: 4. Rom. 3: 4. for God can not other ways be justified, but by being declared, avowed, & proclaimed to be Righteous. So jer. 3: 11. Ezek. 16: 51, 52. Mat. 11: 19 Luk. 7: 35, 29. 1. Tim. 3: 16.  
Now that this is the justification, whereof james speaketh, may be further cleared by these particulars. (1) The scope, that james here leveleth at, being not to clear up the way & manner, how, or the causes by which, this change of Relation & State is wrought & brought about, but to discover the groundlesness of the vain pretences of such, as supposed they were justified, & in a sure way to be saved, who had no more for their ground, but a loose & verbal outward profession of the preached truth, without any real fruit of godliness: So that this Enquirie is, what can truly evidence a person to be justified indeed before God? And he showeth that an empty fruitless profession will not do it, but works of Faith, or Faith proving itself lively by works. (2) The very Instance of Abraham, which he adduceth, cleareth this; for he saith vers. 21. Was not Abraham our Father justified by works, when he had offered his Son upon the altar? Now twenty five years, or as some compute, Thirty years, or thereby before this time the Scriptures say, that Abraham believed God, & it was reckoned to him unto Righteousness. Gen. 15. & hence Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by Faith. Therefore if now he was justified, when he offered, his Son, he must have been twice justified & that in the same sense, with the same kind of justification, which can not be said. Nor will it avail to say, That Gen. 15. he was justified by the first justification, which was by Faith, of which Paul speaketh Rom. 4. But Gen. 22. he was justified with the second justification, which is by works; & of this james speaketh: for this distinction of justification into First & Second, is but a mere device of the Papists, having no ground in, nor countenance from the Scriptures: and beside, it would follow, that a mere historical, dead Faith is sufficient unto the first justification, and that Paul understandeth such a faith only, when he said Rom. 4. that Abraham believed God, & it was counted to him unto Righteousness, the contrary whereof is manifest. Nor will it serve here to say, that Paul speaketh of justification as begun: but james speaketh of justification as continued: for than it would follow, that justification at first, or as begun, is by a dead faith, and by such a kind of faith, as devils may have, & consequently, that of such a faith, as this, Paul speaketh; because of such a faith james speaketh, as we have seen: But this cannot be said, for it was a true & lively faith, that Abraham had, when he believed the promise of the Messiah & a dead faith is not the faith, that justifieth, first, or last. Yea because james maketh an opposition betwixt faith & works, in reference to justification, in the sense, wherein he speaketh of it, it will follow, that faith should not be requisite unto the Continuance of justification. (3) james said vers. 20. that Faith without works was dead: and to confirm this, he addeth vers. 21. was not Abraham our Father justified by works etc. As if he had said. The faith by which Abraham was brought into an estate of justification & life, was a lively faith, having works of obedience attending it, and his obedience declared that his faith was lively, and that he was truly justified by faith, Ergo a faith, that is lifeless, and wholly without works of obedience, is but dead, & can give no ground to conclude one justified, & in the way to life; So that what mention he maketh of justification by works is but to prove the reality of lively faith; & by works true justification by faith is evidenced & demonstrated, & not by a bare idle & vain fruitless profession. (4) When Abraham was justified by his works, the Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed God, & it was imputed unto him for Righteousness, as is manifest from vers. 22, 23. Now by this mentioned of Abraham in the Scripture Gen. 15: 6. Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by faith. But if james were here speaking of the way of our becoming justified, before God, as Paul doth, there could be no connexion here, yea the proof should contradict the thing to be proved; for to say, that Abraham was justified by faith, will not prove, that he was justified by works: nor could his being justified by works, be a fulfilling, a clearing & confirming of that truth, that faith, he was justified by faith; for faith & works, in the matter of justification, are inconsistent, & perfectly opposite, as Paul teacheth us, & as here james also teacheth us. But taking justification here for its declaration & manifestation, it can be by works, and a declaration of justification by works can be & is a very signal confirmation & clearing of that Testimony, which saith, that Abraham was justified by faith. (5) By that work of offering up his son, at a the command of God, Abraham declared, that he was no hypocrite, but a true believer, and thus was he justified (as Mr. Baxter will have it, as we heard lately) from any such accusation. But a Justification from this accusation, is but a justification of the truth & sincerity of faith, & so a confirmation & evidence of justification; or justification as evidenced & declared; and not justification as produced by its causes. (6) When james saith vers. 23. That the Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed God & it was imputed to him unto Righteousness, when he was justified by offering up his son vers. 21. this fulfilling of the Scripture-testimony was, either because at that time, when he offered up his Son, Righteousness was imputed unto him, & he was justified, or because it was then manifest, to be a truth, that he was justified indeed: But the former can not be said, because Righteousness was imputed unto him, and he was justified long before this. Therefore it can be only understood, as to its manifestation. (7) This is also clear from what the Lord spoke at that time, Gen. 22: 12. Now I know, that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not witheld thy Son, thine only Son from me. No word here of imputing Righteousness unto him, or of his being brought into a justified state; but only God's solemn declaration, that he was a true fearer of God, & so one, that had true faith, & was really justified. (8) Vers. 22. he saith Seest thou, how faith wrought with his works & by works was faith made perfect. But how could this follow upon what he had said vers. 21? Justification by works (if justification be taken absolutely here & not for its declaration & manifestation,) will not prove faith's working with works. But if justification be here taken for justification declared & manifested, the sense is plain: for such works as do evidence & declare, that a person is justified, will manifestly prove, that faith is working with these works, because justification presupposeth always a true & lively faith, that will work with works of obedience. (9) Far less could it follow from justification (taken absolutely) by works, that faith was made perfect by works: but from such a work as will evidence a man to be justified, it is manifest to every one, that that work is a clear evidence of a true & lively faith, & by it faith is perfected, that is declared, evidenced & demonstrated, to be faith indeed, as the word perfected is used 2. Cor. 12: 9 for my strength is made perfect in weakness. (10) That other Inference vers. 24. ye see then, how that by works a man is justified & not by Faith only: will not follow from what went before, if justification be here taken absolutely: for the command so Abraham to offer up his son was no promise, and to did not call for faith, but for ready obedience, though upon another account he believed that God was able to raise him up from the dead Heb. 11: 17, 18, 19 But Gen. 15. promises were made unto him, & he is said to have believed, & upon this Righteousness was imputed unto him. So that Gen. 15. he was justified by faith only, as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. for thereby he confirmeth his Conclusion set down Rom. 3: 28. that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law. And from that other place Gen. 22. james could not infer, that Justification is by faith & works together, for than he could not infer therefrom that the Scripture was fulfilled, which said, Abraham believed God, & it was imputed unto him for Righteousness, because Paul doth hence infer Rom. 4. that justification is by faith without works: And what is a ground for justification by faith without works, cannot also be a ground for justification by works & not by faith only; And thus the Apostles are made in plain terms to contradict other: by inferring contrary or contradictory conclusions from the same premises: which ought not to be thought, let be said. But it will be said, that Paul speaketh of the beginning of justification, which is by faith without works; but james speaketh of justification, as continued, which is by works, and not by faith only. This cannot satisfy: for beside what is said, it must first be granted hereby, that this faith, which james mentioneth, when he saith & not by saith only, must be the same faith, that Paul faith, we are justified by, without the deeds of the Law: but this cannot be, for the faith, that james speaketh of is, as we saw above, a dead, useless, fruitless carcase & no saving Faith, as that is, whereof Paul speaketh, and whereby we are justified. But now taking justification for its manifestation & declaration, the words of james are most clear, & carry no appearance of contradiction, unto what Paul taught; For his meaning is, ye see then, how that by works, a man evidenceth, proveth & declareth his Justification, or maketh it manifest, that he is a justified person; & not by that faith only, which is but a naked fruitless, & dead profession. (11) The same may be said of the other Instance of Rahab vers. 25. She was justified by works, when ●he had received the messengers; not that she was brought into a justified state by that act; for she received the Spies by faith Heb. 11: 31. & declared her faith unto them jos. 2: 10, 11. And so was a believer & consequently justified, before she received the Spies, or they came to her. Yet by this deed, accompanied with so much hazard, unto herself & all her families, she proved & evidenced her faith & justification. (12) The Conclusion of his discourse vers. 26. for as the body without the Spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also, declareth manitestly, what he would be at, to wit, to show, that works can only demonstrate true faith & consequently prove justification; for a naked profession of faith, that wanteth works, is dead, and like a body wanting breath & soul, which is but a dead carcase. This cannot be said of that faith, whereby Paul saith and proveth, that we are justified, for it is true & lively, flowing from the Spirit of life, although it be not as yet proved by outward works of obedience, whereof there may be, as yet, no opportunity or call.  
What is brought against this sense, of the word justify & justification, which we have now confirmed, by the Socinian Author of the book, entitled Consensus Paul● & jacobi etc. pag. 2. etc. and by the Remonstrants in their Apology Cap. 10. is of no great weight. When they say. That the proposition set down vers. 14. is subordinat to what is said vers. 12. where the judgement of God is spoken of, & therefore saving justification must be here understood. Ans. We grant, that It is saving justification, but yet it is justification that is distinct from Final Salvation. We grant, that james speaketh here of saving justification; Yet he handleth not that question, how & by what Causes this justification is brought about; but how it is evidenced & proven to be true, and not a mere presumptuous conjecture. They say next. It is said vers. 25. that the Scripture was fulfilled; not, that it was shown to be fulfilled. A●s. That saying of Scripture was a truth before this time, even when Abraham first believed; which was before he was circumcised as we see Gen. 15. comp. with Gen. 17. & Rom. 4: 9, 10, 11. And therefore was not now first fulfilled, or verified. And to talk of the increase of imputation according to the increase of Faith, and to measure the excellency of faith, by the excellency of that obedience which it produceth, as that Socinian Author doth, is to give us nothing but the Popish justification; for Relations (of which Nature we hold Justification to be) are not intended & remitted in themselves, but only as to their evidence: We esteem it a Socinian dream, to say, that the first Narration of Faith & Justification, which is Gen. 15. was but a rude draught of that, which was afterward Gen. 22. Abraham's faith was afterward said to be perfected by that special work, of offering up his son, no● in itself, for he had a strong faith before Rom. 4: 19, 20, 21. but in its manifestation after that signal trial, It is said further. Man's justification cannot be here understood, for that is not necessary to salvation, nor universally true, seeing men may justify other, upon vain grounds. Ans. No● do we understand any such justification pronounced by men here, but a true justification before God, yet as evidenced, proven & declared by effects, unto all, that will judge understandingly & spiritually, so that works here are mentioned as the Effects, and yet as the Causes of justification. But then they object further. T'has, as the Apostle from that Faith, which the vain man boasted of denieth the man to be justified, so from works he proveth justification, & that as antecedent. Ans. The Apostle showeth, that the vain man, who had no more, but a vain dead empty faith, had no ground to conclude himself a justified Man: for this is no Cause or Condition of Justification: And hence it will not follow, that works, by which both the reality of sa●ing Faith, & of Justification thereupon, may be evidenced, are antecedent Causes, or Conditions of Justification. It is objected again by the foresaid Socinian Author. That if the meaning of these words, the Scripture was fulfilled, be, that the Scripture was shown to be fulfilled: then the meaning should be, that it was demonstrated to Abraham's two servants, who went with him to the mountain, & by them to others; But than it must be supposed, that before this time, that which passed Gen. 15. was known unto them: & it must he said, that by a work done long afterward, men may see, that the worker was justified. But that should not suit James' scope, seeing by this means they might think to delay for a long time their good works, & yet suppose themselves presently justified. Ans. All this is but vain language; for it is all one to the scope of james, whether this come to the actual knowledge of few, or of many, & who they were to whose knowledge it came; He is only showing, that such, as had but a dead faith, that brought forth no works of obedience, when called for, had no evidence, or clear ground to assert their own justification, seeing Abraham's justification was thus declared by his signal obedience, to all that came or ever should come to the knowledge of that act of obedience of his, to the end of the world: Yea, had it been unknown to any, yet hereby he had a sure proof, to ascertain his own heart & conscience of his justification. But say the Arminians, Good works cannot be such a proof & demonstration, because it cannot be known to others, whether these good works proceed from faith, or not. Ans. Nor is any infallible judgement here necessary, or requisite; nor doth the scope of james require any such thing, who is only showing, that such as wrought not works of obedience, when called for, could not conclude themselves justified, & in a saife estate, notwithstanding of all their fair profession. Notwithstanding we cannot judge infallibly of principles, motives & ends of the good works of others, yet by what may be seen of these, God may be glorified Mat. 5: 16. 1. Pet. 2: 12.  
Thus we have seen, that neither is that faith, whereof Paul speaketh, when he saith. We are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law; & whereof james speaketh, when he saith. Ye see then, how a man is justified by works & not by faith only, is not one & the same. Nor is it the same justification, or justification in the same sense & consideration, that both the Apostles speak of. And therefore how ever, as to their words, they seem to speak contrary to other: Yet in their true sense & meaning, there is nothing but a sweet harmony & agreement. But now as to works, whereof both make mentione, the question remaineth, whether they be one & the same? The forenamed Socinian Author saith, that both do not speak of the same works▪ and that Paul excludeth from justification only legal works, & not Evangelical. And consequently, that james must speak of Evangelical works only: But sure we are, james cannot be supposed to speak of Evangelical works, in their sense; seeing, they cannot say, that Abraham's offering up Isaac or Rahab her receiving & sending away the spies, were Evangelical works. James speaketh of works commanded by the Moral Law, which he mentioneth both in general, & in its particular commands jam. 2: 9, 10, 11. And all the duties, which he presseth them unto, & the sins, which he dissuadeth them from, relate unto the Moral Law. And what these works are, whereof Paul speaketh, we have seen before. Others think, that james by Works here meaneth a working faith: & so that his meaning, when he saith, that by works a man is justified, is, that by a working faith, such as Abraham had, a man is justified. But though it be a truth, that justifying faith is a working lively faith? And that we are justified only by such a faith, as is lively, & prompteth to obedience, in every duty called for; & though this truth will follow by consequent, from what the Apostle james here saith; Yet I judge, that both Paul & james understand the same thing by works, even duties of obedience, performed to the Law of God, & that by Works here in james, is not meant a working faith, this not being the scope & design of james to clear up justification in its Causes, or to show by what means it is brought about; but only to show, what way it is or may be evidenced proved & demonstrated to ourselves or others, so as we may not be deceived thereanent; And real works of obedience, as they evidence a true & lively faith, so they prove the reality of justification: And the Apostles intention being, to show the vanity of that pretence, whereby many deceived themselves, thinking that their profession of the truth of the Gospel was enough to secure their Salvation, & to prove them to be in a justified saife state, though they indulged themselves a liberty to walk loosely, according to the flesh; this acception of the word works, in a proper sense, is most contributive unto that design, & no other acception, how consonant so ever unto the Analogy of Faith, doth so directly & clearly contribute assistence thereunto. Therefore he opposeth faith & works, & denieth that to faith, which he ascribed unto works: though by consequence he put hereby a difference betwixt a dead faith, & a working faith; Yet his principal Thesis vers. 14. is, that by works, & not by a bare profession of the truth, we come to Salvation. And the enquiry prosecuted is, whether we have that faith, that will indeed prove saving, & this can only be evidenced by works, as his whole following discourse evinceth, especially when he saith vers. 18. show me thy faith without thy works, & I will show my faith by my works. And vers. 20. when he saith, faith without works is dead & verse. 26. that it is as dead, as a body is without breath or Spirit. And this he fully confirmeth by the following instances of Abraham & Rahab.  
From what is said, it is apparent, how little ground there is to think, that there is any real appearance of contradiction betwixt Paul & James; & how needless it is, in order to a reconciliation, to say with Papists, that Paul speaketh of a first justification & james of a second; or with others, that Paul speaketh of justification, as begun, & james of justification as continued, or with Socinians, that Paul denieth justification by the works of the Law, James affirmeth justification by the works of the Gospel.   

CHAP. VIII.  
No countenance given to Justification by Works, from Jam. 2: 14. etc.  
BEcause all, who ascribe our justification in one sense or other (all are not agreed in one & the same sense) unto our works, seek countenance unto the same from these words of James Chapt. 2: 14, & forward: notwithstanding that what was said concerning this passage, in the fore going Chapter, might be sufficient, to discover the groundlesness of any such pretence, where it was shown, that the whole face of this place looked towards another airth, and had not the least aspect unto any such conclusion; Yet for a fuller Vindication of this place from this too ordinary abuse & perversion, we shall examine every part thereof, & see, what ground there is; for any to alleige the same, for confirmation of their particular opinions.  
The Papists generally say, that this place speaketh of the Second Justification: But their opinion of a first & second justification is vain, having no ground in the word, and the whole of their fabric is sufficiently demolished by the Reformed, writing against them; so that we need not insist thereupon. Others there are, who suppose that James is here showing, how justification is continued, & therefore say, though faith alone be the Condition of Justification, as begun; Yet unto the continuance thereof works are required, as the Condition. But all that speak thus, & think that james pointeth forth the Condition of Justification as continued, must say, that those persons, who had this faith, whereof James speaketh, were really justified, & that James doth presuppose them to be justified, & speaketh to them & of them, as such▪ But than it must be granted, that the Popish faith, consisting in a mere assent unto the truth revealed, is justifying faith; and that that faith, which is no more true & saving faith, than that is true & Christian Charity, which saith to a brother or sister, that is naked & destitute of daily food, depart in peace, and giveth not those things, which are needful to the body, is sufficient to bring one into a justified state; and that a dead faith, & a faith of the same nature & kind, with the faith of devils & a faith, which a vain man, puffed up with a vain conceit & a fleshly mind may have, & a faith, that cannot & will not work with works, is a justifying faith: which if true, it would follow, that all men, who believe that God is, & Devils also, who believe this, should be justified. But none, who understand the Gospel can think or speak thus. And therefore this place carrieth no show of proof, that works are the Condition of Justification▪ as continued.  
Nor can this place give any countenance to such, as say that Faith & Works together are the Condition of Justification, making no difference betwixt justification, as begun, & as continued. For (1) James'● scope (as we manifested above) is not to clear up & explain the way, how justification is brought about, or to show, what are the Causes, or Conditions thereof: but to discover the vanity of that ground, whereupon some professors, who indulged their Lusts, deceived themselves & supposed that they were in a state of justification, & salvation, notwithstanding they neglected all duties of holiness. (2) James opposeth a faith here unto works, a faith, which he called unprofitable, dead etc. & doth not ascribe justification hereunto, as to a Condition, in whole, or in part: But such, as speak thus, include faith & works, as making up one full & complete Condition. (3) The Instances, which James here adduceth, should not then serve his design, if his purpose was to prove faith & works to be the Condition of Justification; for Abraham was long justified before that particular act of obedience in offering up his son Isaac, was called for: And so was Rab●● justified before she sent away the spies. (4) This work, by which Abraham is said to have been justified, was a work, that seemed contrary unto the Moral Law: And therefore if this be urged, as a ground of justification by works, it will rather prove justification by other works, then by works commanded in the Moral Law of God. (5) The works, mentioned in both the Instances, are outward external works, obvious to the eyes & ears of others: And hence it may as well be proved, that only external works, are required unto justification, and no other. And indeed, if it had been James' design to prove justification by works, he had named other works, then merely external, that he might have prevented a mistake.  
But more fully to discover the vanity of this supposition, let us see, what can be alleiged from the several parts of this passage, for justification by works, from vers. 14. it is said. Faith alone cannot save, but is unprofitable; but yet faith & works is profitable & will save. Ans. This maketh nothing for justification by works; because it is denied, that whatever is requisite before Salvation, is requisite also before justification, for if so, no man could be said to be justified, as long as he lived. But next, the faith, whereof james here speaketh, availeth not to Salvation, because it is not of the right kind, & we say also, that this faith availeth not to justification, because it is but mere empty profession, deceiving & puffing up & it is but a faith, that a man saith he hath.  
From vers. 15, 16, 17. It is said As charitable wishes, joined with real acts of Love & Alms deeds is, profitable & no other charitable wishes; so Faith with works, is available to justification, but not without them. Ans. These charitable wishes, not accompanied with Alms deeds, as they are not profitable unto the indigent brother & sister, so they are far from that Christian charity, that is called for in the Gospel: & as that charity is not true, Christian & saving charity; so neither is the Faith, which he proveth to be dead, true, saving or justifying Faith. Nor doth the Apostle say, that faith with works is available unto justification; but that that faith, which hath not works, is dead, & not available to prove & evidence, that the man that hath it, is in a saife & in a justified state.  
But the main ground of this apprehension is vers. 21, 22, 23, etc. for it is objected that it is expressly said, that Abraham was justified by works. Ans. That it is so said, we grant; but the difference is about the sense & meaning, in which it is said so. We have shown, that the meaning is. That by works Abraham was declared, proved & manifested to be a justified person, and one that had a true & lively faith; for it is added, that hereby the Scripture was fulfilled declaring him to have been justified by faith, or that he believed God, & it was accounted to him for Righteousness. And this is it, which others have called justification before men, in opposition to justification before God, that is, a justification declared & manifested to the man's own conscience & to others, & not the justification before God in its causes. And this Mr. Baxter seemeth to have mistaken in his Aphorisms, when he argued against this justification before men, as if it had been merely a justification from men's Accusation, & not the true justification before God, as evidenced & proved to men: And when we speak of justification in this sense, we do not make the world lawful judges of our Righteousness before God, or in reference to the Law of God, or say, that they are competent, or capable judges: But we only say, that by works of obedience Faith & Justification by Faith is evidenced. And where as he saith. That works are no certain medium, or evidence, whereby the world can know us to be Righteous: for there is no outward work, which an hypocrite may not perform, & inward works they cannot discern: nor yet the principles from which, nor the ends to which our works proceed & are intended. There is as much need of a divine heart-searching knowledge, to discern the sincerity of works, as of faith itself. He may see, that all this will make as much against Christ's saying Mat. 5: 16. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, & glorify your Father, which is in heaven. And that joh. 13: 35. By this shall all men know, that ye are my disciples: if ye love one another: and that 1. Pet. 2: 12. Having your Conversation honest among the Gentiles— they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God, in the day of Visitation. Nor is it to the purpose to say, that he was the justifier, who was the imputer of Righteousness, that is, God; for works of obedience may declare, that God hath imputed Righteousness unto the person, & hath justified him; and this is all; we say that Abraham was in this sense justified by his works, that he was declared to be justified indeed before God, by his works.  
Some were pleased to express their sense of James' words thus, That james speaks of works as justifying our faith, & not as justifying our persons, meaning only, that the Apostle did not consider works here, as the Cause, or Condition of the persons being justified before God, but as the effect & evidence proving the man's faith to be sound & saving, and consequently the man thereby to have been justified: which sense is the same with what we have given: but Mr. Baxter, saith, it is as plain, as can be, that it is the person & not his Faith, which is here said to be justified. Ans. The person, it is true, is said here to be justified, but not causatively, but declaratively, that is, It is not said, that by works his justification is effectuated, but that it is declared, & that because it is hereby declared, that the man is a true believer, & thus his faith is manifested to be of the right kind, which is all that was intended by that expression.  
Yet Mr. Baxter will not say, that works do effectually produce our justification (for Faith doth not so.) But yet he will have both to justify, as Conditions, or as parts of one Condition: Only he addeth, that they do not justifio, as equal parts of the Condition; for Faith is the principal; but as the secondary less principal part of the Condition. Ans. Yet, james hinteth at no such thing, but giveth the preference to works: Yea excludeth the faith, whereof he speaketh; altogether from having any interest in justification, as being nothing but a dead, carcase, a vain, fruitless & unprofitable thing, & so hath no kind of causality or procurement in justification. But he addeth as a reason. 1. That when it is said we are justified by works, the word by implieth more than an idle concomitanoy. Ans. I shall easily grant this, but withal say, that this will not give unto works any causality in justification; but only evince works to be an evidence of justification, as the cause is said to be manifested by the effect.  
He addeth 2. When the Apostle saith. By works & not by faith only, he plainly makes them concomitant in procurement, or in that kind of causality, which they have. Especially seeing he saith not, as he is commonly interpreted, not by faith, which is alone; but by faith only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ans. Then hath fruitless dead faith, which devils may have, a kind of causality in justification; which is expressly contrary to the scope & all the reasonings of the Apostle: And therefore the common interpretation must be admitted; But he addeth. 3. Therefore he saith, that faith is dead being alone, because it is dead, as to the use & purpose of justifying;— This appears from his comparison in the former vers. 16. that this is the death he speaks of; & so works make faith alive, as to the attainment of its end of justification. Ans. If it be thus, how could he then say before, that faith was the principal part of the Condition? can that be the principal part of the Condition, which is dead & useless without the other, & must be quickened, in order to its usefulness by the other: I would think, that other looked rather like the principal part, and most considerable & necessary, seeing this were but a dead cipher without it. But the truth is, the Apostle, as is said, hath a far other design, & showeth, that that faith, which they pretended unto, as sufficient to ground their conclusion of their justification, & hope of Salvation, was no true saving faith at all, but a dead thing & so no works could make it of any use as to justification; because it behoved first to flow from another principle, even from a principle of saving grace; and than it would evidence & prove itself to be of the right kind, by good works, that would flow from it.  
But saith he. When the Apostle saith, that faith did work in & with his works, it clearly aimeth at such a working in & with, as maketh them conjunct in the work of justifying. Ans. No such matter; for the Apostle is only there showing (as the whole context cleareth) that Abraham's faith was another sort of faith, than that, whereupon they relied; even a faith that did prompt to the most difficulty duties, when the call of God came, & so did work in & with his performances; but not in order to justification, for he was justified already, many years before this.  
He addeth. And when he saith, that Faith was made perfect with works, it is not only a manifesting to be perfect, But as the habit is perfected in its acts, because they are the end to which it tendeth: & as marriage is perfected per congressum & procreationem; or any Covenant, when its Conditions are performed. Ans. The whole of the context showeth, that faith was perfected purely, as to its manifestation, as by the like expression is clear 2. Cor. 12: 9 Col. 4: 12. Mat. 5: 48. Nay, though It were granted, that faith were perfected by works as the end to which it tendeth, that would say nothing for the interest of faith in justification, but in Salvation; let is be granted, that justification is perfected by faith without works, as marriage is by consent, without what he addeth, & we have what we desire. That works are a Condition of entering into Covenant, or of the Covenant, in order to justification, as required before justification, is still denied. He saith further elsewhere, against Mr. Cartwright p. 212. That by works faith was made perfect, as is hath naturam medii viz. conditionis to the continuation & consummation of justification. Ans. That the continuation of justification hath other media or Conditions, than the beginning hath, is not yet made apparent: far less can any such thing be drewn from this passage to continuance the same, the Apostles scope not being to speak to any such thing; nor can it be supposed, that he looketh on such, whose proud conceits he was here depressing, as already justified, as to the beginning of justification, seeing a dead faith, (which was all the faith they had) is no Condition of justification at all. And as to consummation of justification (as he speaketh) Abraham's saith was not yet perfected, neither could be before his death. He addeth finally. That obedience perfecteth faith, as it is part of that necessary matter (not necessary, at the first moment of believing, but necessary afterward, when he is called to it) whereby he is to be justified against the charge of non-performance of the New Covenants Condition, even against the Accusation of being an unbeliever or hypocrite. Ans. If obedience perfect faith thus, it is only as evidenceing & proving the man a true believer, & no hypocrite, or one that hath only a mere profession; which is the thing we say? if it be looked on as the Condition of the Covenant, & so as the ground of justifying the man from the charge of non-performance of that Condition, it standeth only for itself, & for its own part, & cannot not be said upon that account, to perfect faith; as when both abstaining from murder, and from stealing is called for; the absteaning from stealing cannot be said to perfect the other, though it ground a Man's justification from the charge of stealing. And therefore by this assertion, faith can as well be said to perfect works, as works be said to perfect faith.  
Mr. Baxter giveth this ground of Agreement betwixt Paul & james; that Paul is about this question, What is the Righteousness, which we must pload, against the Accusation of the Law? or by which we are justified as the proper Righteousness of that Law? And this he well concludeth is neither works, nor faith: But the Righteousness which is by faith, that is, Christ's Righteousness, Ans. Paul speaketh to this question, how sinners come to be justified before God, & therefore cleareth up the matter of justification, in all its causes; and not only showeth what that Righteousness is, which must be pleaded against the accusation of the Law; but also what way we come to be partakers of that Righteousness in order to our being justified before God, to wit, by faith, without the deeds of the Law. If faith be not that Righteousness, why did Mr. Baxter say▪ that Rom. 4. where it is said, that faith is imputed unto Righteousness, faith is taken for our act, & not for the object of faith, or Christ's Righteousness laid hold on by faith. But now, what question handleth james? His question is, saith he. What is the Condition of our ●ustification by this Righteousness of Christ, whether faith only, or works also? Ans. And doth not Paul also speak to this question, when he saith. We are justified by faith? Will not Mr. Baxter grant, that faith is the Condition of our justification by this Righteousness? If james then handle this question, there shall be no agreement betwixt him & Paul, but a manifest contradiction, for Paul saith that we are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law, that is upon Condition of Faith, as Mr. Baxter will grant, & james saith, that we are justified not by faith only, but by works, as the Condition: & here is a perfect contradiction, both speaking ad idem & the one saying we are justified by faith without works, & the other saying by faith & works. What the true question is, whereof james speaketh, we have shown above; & the ●eby manifested a clear harmony betwixt the Apostles, & left no ground of suspicion of any contradiction.  
He saith, next that Paul doth either in express words, or in the sense, & scope of his speech, exclude only the works of the Law, that is, the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Law ourselves. But never the fulfilling of the Gospel Conditions, that we may have part in Christ. Ans. Whether the works of the Law, which Paul excludeth, be so to be understood, or not, we have seen above: only I say, now, that both speak of the same Law, that is, the Moral Law, & both consequently, speak of the same obedience, that is obedience to the same Law: And nothing can be alleged to prove that Paul meaneth works as taken for the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Law ourselves & james meaneth the same works as taken for the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Gospel ourselves. And further, the faith that james speaketh so much of, is none of the Gospel Conditions of justification, for it is but a dead carcase, & an unprofitable thing. But his following words, saying. Indeed if a man should obey the commands of the Gospel with a legal intent that obedience should be but legal show that by the works of the Law he meaneth some thing in opposition to the commands of the Gospel, wherein he joineth with Socinians. But we own no commands of the Gospel, but such as are enjoined by the Law of God, even the Moral Law, of which james speaketh expressly vers. 10, 11.  
He tells us 3. for clearing of this agreement, That Paul doth by the word Faith especially direct our thoughts to Christ believed in: for to be justified by Christ, & to be justified by receiving Christ, is with him all one. Ans. This is all very true, & sure, he must also say, that to be justified by Christ, & to be justified by works, is not all one, for all obedience or works is not receiving of Christ. But now, what doth james direct us to by the word Faith, which he mentioneth? doth he not direct our thoughts to Christ believed in? If not, it cannot be justifying Faith, he speaketh of, as Mr. Baxter supposeth. If yea, why doth he add works more than Paul doth? Shall Paul's directing our thoughts to Christ believed in, exclude works, and James' directing our thoughts the same way include them? Where is then the agreement?  
But 4. he addeth, that when Paul doth mentione Faith, as the Condition, he always implieth obedience to Christ. Ans. It is denied, that he implieth obedience, as the Condition of Justification: And Mr. Baxter himself will grant this, I suppose, as to justification begun, or as to our fi●st justification as he speaketh, in replying to Mr. Cartwright: which is enough for us, for we know no second justification, distinct from the first, whereof either of the Apostles do speak. And I like not that which he addeth, saying. He i.e. Paul) implieth obedience in requiring Faith, as truly, as he that subjecteth himself to a Prince, doth imply future obedience, in his engagement to obey: for this maketh justifying faith a plain engagement to obey. And thus to be justified by faith is to be justified by a formal engagement to obey, & a formal engagement to obey, is a receiving of Christ: for to be justified by faith, & to be justified by receiving Christ is all one.  
Mr. Baxter in his Catholic Theol. part. 2. n. 365. giveth us five particulars of justification by works, that james standeth for, & that he accounteth undeniable by any thing but prejudice, Ignorance, & siding peevishness. So that it must be unquestionable, that james speaketh of all those particulars, & that he speaketh of justification by works, in no other sense, the contrary whereof we have seen already: Yet let us see what these particular respects are, wherein (as he saith) works are not excluded from being Conditions of our justification, or the matter of it.  
1. Saith he. That faith itself, which is our act, & an act of obedience to God, & is the fiducial accepting belief in God the Father Son & Holy Ghost, for the benefits of the Covenant, is the Condition of our first Cevenant-Right to these benefits. Ans. To speak of Saving Faith in its full latitude, or of that faith, whereby the Covenant is fi●st made up, as such, is not to the present purpose; but of faith only, or of its acting, in order to justification: and as to this, himself lately told us, that Paul by the word Faith doth especially direct our thoughts to Christ believed in: so that faith in this matter is not considered as our work, or as an act of obedience in us, & as our personal Righteousness; but as the Mean, Hand, or Instrument laying hold on Christ & his Righteousness. And if this be the meaning of james, when he saith, we are justified by works, that, we are justified by faith, we shall not contend, as to the thing; though we conceive james handleth another purpose, as is said.  
2. Saith he, That this faith is not actual obedience to Christ, as Christ (at first, but only to God, as God) But it is the souls subjection to Christ, as Christ, which is our Covenant-consent, to our future obedience, & virtually, though not actually, containeth our future obedience in it. Ans. This upon the matter, is but the same with the former, & needeth no further answer, as to our present question, concerning the meaning of james, when he saith we are justified by works; for if this faith be not actual obedience, james doth not mean actual obedience by the word works, but only that Faith, which is a consent to future obedience. But what the Faith is, whereby we are justified, & what is its peculiar acting, in order to justification, we have shown elsewhere. And to distinguish betwixt obedience to Christ, as Christ, and to God as God, is to be unnecessarily critical: & by Mr. Baxeer we see, that all the after obedience of believers is obedience to God, as God, though their first Faith be said to be a fiducial accepting belief in God the Father, Son & Holy Ghost, and this be said virtually to contain after obedience, which therefore must be obedience, to God Father, Son & Holy Ghost; And their first Faith is no obedience to Christ, as Christ, though Christ, as Christ call & invite, yea & command sinners to come unto him, & believe in him.  
3. He saith. That there is somewhat of Love Consent or willingness, of Desire, of Hop, of Repentance, which goeth to make up this Moral work of Faith, as it is the Condition, even our first Christianity itself. Ans. All this somewhat of Love, Consent etc. which necessarily attendeth Faith (for that they make up this moral work of Faith, as integral parts thereof, I see no ground to assert) only show the true nature & genius of that Faith, whereby we are justified, for it is no where said, that we are justified by Love, Hop, or Repentance (as for Consent or willingness & desire, they are included in Faith.) But all this yet saith nothing for the Interest of Works (as it is pleaded) in our justification: And if james mean no other thing by works he shall give little ground to any to assert justification by works, as is done this day, by too many.  
4. He saith, That at the making of a Covenant, is for the performing of it; & subjection is for obedience; & Marriag for conjugal duties; so our said first Covenanting-faith is for our future faith, Hop, Comfort, & grateful obedience & Holiness. And these are the secondary parts of the Condition of Salvation. And so are the secondary parts of our justifications Condition, as continued, or not lost & consummate. For to justify us is to justify our Right to Impunity & Glory. Ans. How different Faith as justifying, or in its acting in order to justification, is from this Covenant making, Subjection & Marriage, as explained & applied to this purpose by Mr. Baxter, is elsewhere shown. (2) That these graces are required in order to Salvation, we grant, & shall not stand to call them secondary parts of the Condition of Salvation, as to its possession. But (3) we are here speaking of justification, and not of Salvation, which two differ, as we conceive, much more being required to the one, in case persons live after their first Faith, than to the other. (4) We have shown elsewhere, that justification, as continued hath the same Conditions, that justification as begun hath, & of loseing of justification we read not in the Scriptures, nor yet consummate justification: these are Mr. baxter's new Notions, with which we are not satisfied. (5) Our Right to Impunity & Glory is had by Christ alone, when we are possessed of his Surety-Righteousness, through Faith; and thus are justified by Faith: And how justification is a justification of that Right, Mr. Baxter would do well to explain.  
In the last place he saith. That our own performance of the Condition of the free Gift of Impunity & Glory, by the New Covenant, purchased by Christ's Righteousness is the thing to be tried & judged in God's judgement. And therefore we must so far be then justified from the charge of not performing that Condition of being Infidels, unsanctified, Impenitent, hypocrites, Apostats; & so of having no part in Christ & the free gift, even by our personal, Evangelical Faith, Holiness, Repentance, Sincerity & Perseverance, Ans. Then, it seemeth, james speaketh only of works, in order to final Salvation, or our justification; at the day of judgement, and not in order to our justification here, when first brought out of nature into the State of Grace: And if so, what ground can any hence have, to infer our present justification to be by works, unless they think, that whatever is required antecedent unto our Final Salvation, is required also antecedent to our first justification? which I know Mr. Baxter will not say. And if this be all that james saith, why did not Mr. Baxter give this as a ground of reconciling james with Paul, that james speaks of works, in order to Final Salvation, but Paul, excludeth them, in reference to justification? This would have had greater agreement with what the Orthodox say, than to tell us of works being the secondary parts of the Condition of our Justification, and that james includeth them as such, when he saith, we are justified by works, and not by Faith only.   

CHAP. IX.  
John Forbes his Arguments, against the Imputation of Christ's active obedience, examined. With a View of Wendelin's reasonings against it.  
John Forbes in his Treatise tending to clear the doctrine of justification Chap. 24. pag. 93. etc. cometh to speak of the matter of our Righteousness, that is, that, wherein Christ is made of God Righteousness unto us; And tells us, that this in one word, in the Scripture, is said to be his obedience Rom. 5: 19 But this obedience he restricteth pag. 94. unto the passive Obedience of Christ only in his death: And by this restriction, not only excludeth all his obedience to the Law, but even all his suffering, in his state of humiliation; Yea & his soul-sufferings also, for any thing that appeareth.  
He mentioneth a distinction betwixt those things, wherein the Righteousness itself standeth, which is imputed to us, & those things, which are requisite in Christ, to the end, that in the other he may be Righteousness unto us. And this distinction is good in itself; but not rightly applied, when he referreth all to this last head, which Christ did and suffered, except only in his death.  
He granteth pag. 95. that the word obedience is oft times in the Scripture referred to the whole work of Christ's humiliation: But we do not take it so largely here, as to comprehend even his Incarnation; but as comprehending that, which belonged to his work of Mediation, as our Sponsor, in satisfying the Law & the Lawgiver, for what we were owing, and were not able to pay: Nor can we so restrict it, as he doth: Let us therefore see his grounds.  
His first ground is this. We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness, in any thing, but in that only, wherein God hath purposed, & according to his purpose ordained, & according to his ordinance set forth Christ to be our Righteousness & Propitiation. For the purpose of God, he citeth Col. 1: 19, 20. for the Ordinance 1. Pet. 1: 18, 19, 20. For his setting forth Rom. 3: 25. Ans. We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing, but in that only where in the Scriptures hold him forth to be so: And in that, wherein the Scripture holdeth him forth to be so, God purposed, ordained & set him forth to be so: But we must not restrict the whole Scripture to these three or four places cited: If the Scriptures elsewhere point forth Christ to be our Righteousness in other acts, than in his death, all this argueing is to no purpose. Sure the Scriptures speak of his sufferings in soul, & of his being made a curse for us, & of his being obedient even to the death, of his being made under the Law to redeem them, that were under the Law: And that 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. See Phil. 2: 7, 8. Gal. 4: 4. Rom. 8: 3, 4. (2) There is nothing in these texts exclusive of Christ's obedience: And it is loose argueing to say, Christ's death only is mentioned in three or four places of Scripture. Ergo nothing else is mentioned, or to be understood, any where else: the particle Only is not here to be found, neither expressly, nor tacitly. (3) Beside that in all these passages, there is not one word of a Righteousness, no expression, signifying the matter of imputed Righteousness to consist therein; or that Christ was our Righteousness, upon the account thereof: Nay, neither here, nor nowhere find we Christ called our Righteousness, because he died for us. Nor doth the Apostle attribute our Righteousness unto his blood only Rom. 5: 9 Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. No such thing appeareth there. Neither Pardon, nor Justification, which only are there spoken of, are a Righteousness, or our Righteousness, but the consequences, fruits or effects thereof.  
His argueing, That without shedding of blood, there is no remission, & from Heb. 6. & 10. That Christ dieth no more. Therefore Christ is appointed our Righteousness & peace, in nothing, but in his death & blood of his cross, is most loose, & can only conclude against those (if there be any such, that say, By Christ's obedience active only, & not at all by his death & sufferings have we peace & remission of sins. We willingly grant, that without shedding of blood there is no remission; But this saith not, that shedding of blood alone is all our Righteousness. We conjoin both his active & his passive obedience, & so we take in his whole Mediatory work, which maketh up his complete Surety-Righteousness: and say that this must be imputed to us, in order to our Justification, Peace, Pardon & Acceptance.  
He▪ argueth next from Adam, as the Type Rom. 5. & sayeth, that this Type teacheth us four things. 1. That our Righteousness should proceed from one man jesus Christ. 2. That our Righteousness should consist in the obedience of that one man. 3. That our Righteousness should consist in one obedience only of that one man. 4. That our Righteousness should consist in the only one obedience of that one man, once only performed. Ans. (1) If our Righteousness consist in the obedience of Christ, & that in opposition to Adam's disobedience to the Law; than it must not consist in his sufferings alone; for sufferings, as such, are no obedience to the Law: And further Christ's obedience is called his Righteousness Rom. 5: 18. but suffering & dying is no Righteousness. (2) There is no ground to assert either of the two last, much less both: for though Adam's act of disobedience was one, and that done at once; Yet it will not follow that therein he was a Typ of Christ; or that therefore Christ's obedience must be one act only, & that performed at one time only: for Paul hinteth no such comparison, and we must not make typical similitudes without warrant. And again, one act of disobedience, once committed, is a violation of the Law, & enough to constitute one unrighteous; but one act of obedience, howbeit frequently performed, far less once only performed, cannot be a compleet Righteousness, which requireth conformity to the whole Law, in all points, & that all the days of our life. Wherefore Christ's obedience, being a Righteousness (which consisteth in full conformity to the Law) must be perfect, & correspond with the whole Law, & cannot be one only act, once only performed; & that such an act too, is no formal act of obedience to the Law at all.  
His Second ground is taken from the signs & seals of the Righteousness, which is by faith, that is Baptism & the Lord's supper, & tells us, that they signify & represent to us, what is the Righteousness itself, whereby we are justified, & seal & confirm unto us, that that Righteousness is ours. Ans. I should rather think, that they represent & exhibit whole Christ, & seal to believers, or the worthy receivers their interest in Him, & Right to Him, and to all his Spiritual benefits. And though these Sacraments, do in a more special manner, represent Christ, as suffering, or as dying; Yet it is no good consequence hence to infer, that his dying alone & shedding his blood is our Righteousness; for his death is principally & specially there held forth, as being the last & compleeting act of his Mediatory obedience, in his state of humiliation, unto which all his former acts of obedience had a special respect; & in which they did all ultimately terminate. And by what reason, will it be proved, that nothing done or suffered by Christ, can be any part or portion of our Righteousness in him, but what is distinctly & expressly represented & pointed forth by these seals; What shall then become of his soul sufferings in the Garden, & on the Cross? these were not his blood, nor his broken body: & therefore, according to him, make no part of our Righteousness in Christ. But we dar not say this.  
His Third ground is from Heb. 10: 5, 6, 7. etc. cited out of Psal. 40. And thus he argueth. The obedience of Christ, in the matter of our Righteousness, is of no larger extent, than is the will of God, which he did obey & by which we are sanctified. But this is restrained only to the offering of Christ. Ans. The minor is here denied, there being no such restraint made, as is alleiged: for he came to do all the will of God & therefore was baptised, that he might fulfil all Righteousness: It was not serving to the Apostles scope, to mentione any other act of obedience, than his offering up of himself; but his mentioning no other there, will not exclude all, mentioned elsewhere: Sure, the Adversary will not exclude the promptitude & readiness of mind, that Christ had unto the offering up of himself, long before the appointed time, as being no part of that obedience, that he performed; It cannot then be said, that by his once offering up of himself, at the last, alone, we are sanctified, & by nothing going before in conjunction with this. But he tells us, that our justification, Reconciliation, etc. are ever attributed unto the blood, death & Cross of Christ. Ans. Never exclusively as to his preceding obedience: Yea we are to be saved by his life Rom. 5: 10. & justification is upon Christ's Righteousness vers. 18. And all this will as well conclude for the exclusion of his foregoing obedience from being requisite in Christ (as he said above) to the end he may be Righteousness to us, as for excluding of it from being any part of our Righteousness: as also the next thing he saith, concerning Paul's respecting in his preaching only the cross of Christ: for the Apostle is not there speaking merely of the matter of our Righteousness, but of the Gospel way of Salvation, through a crucified Mediator, which the wisdom of this world despised; And to this, sure, our Author will willingly acknowledge that more belongeth, than his death abstractiuly considered.  
His fourth ground is from Heb. 10: 18. whence it followeth, saith he, that i● nothing, which is in Christ himself, before his death, consisteth the remission of our sins, & so consequently our righteousness. Ans. We willingly grant, that in nothing, that Christ did before his death, considered abstractly from his death, and separately by itself, did remission of sins consist, or to speak more properly, was satisfaction made, in order to remission; Yet hence it will not follow, that all his preceding obedience was no part of his Righteousness, or of that, whereof we are made partakers in him; more than it will follow, that it was not requisite in him, to the end, he might become Righteousness to us: If any said (as he seemeth to alleige) that all our iniquities both original & actual were pardoned in his preceding actual obedience, (which I shall be loath to say, nor know I who speaketh so) than his argueing were good, that then Christ should be made to die without a cause. If any say, (as he insinuateth also pag. 104.) that Christ was offered only to remove the punishment of our sin, and not the sin, or guilt thereof, I shall not approve of it. Yet I cannot assent to what he saith. Ibid. That the very offering of Christ for sin, secludes all things preceding whatsoever, from all virtue or efficacy of removing iniquity; for than it should seclude his soul sufferings, which, sure, were no small part of the Satisfaction made by him for sin. Neither will it hence follow, that all his foregoing acts of obedience made no integral part of that Surety-Righteousness, which he undertook to perform. He citeth for his first ground 1. joh. 1: 7. To which we say, That it is true, the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin, because it was the blood of him, who had fulfilled all Righteousness, & in his death had compleeted that Satisfaction he undertook to do: He tells us again pag. 105. from Rom. 4. That unto eternal blessedness it is sufficient to have remission of sins. But he remembereth not, that all such as have remission of sins, there, have Righteousness also imputed without works: & we deny, that Righteousness consisteth, in remission of sins alone: But in all this, he is disputing only against such, who say, that remission of sins is had by the imputation of Christ's actual obedience, & by his death, freedom from punishment is obtained; & with such, I have nothing to do. To what he here addeth of the difference betwixt an innocent man, & a just man, enough hath been said already elsewhere.  
His sixth & last ground pag. 108. is builded upon the Law of the Priesthood, which saith he, was ordained of God, for this end to make expiation of our sins, & to bring us unto God, which two were shadowed in two actions, in the day of Expiation viz. in offering sacrifice etc. & in carrylng the names of the tribes, engraven in the stones on his shoulder & breast plate. And this is so far from making against us, that it confirmeth rather our opinion: for that carrying of the names of the Tribes, on the Ephod, which was upon the other holy garments, together with that plate of pure gold, that was upon the mitre, on the forefront having engraven upon it HOLINESS TO THE LORD Exod. 28. was sufficient to typify & hold forth Christ's holy obedience & Righteousnest, & could not typify his death & sacrifice. And without a Righteousness, there is no coming or approaching unto God, & this Righteousness is some other thing, than mere remission of sins. His argueing from the Priests first entry on their office at 30. Years of age, & Christ's doing the like Luk. 3: 21. to infer, that no action performed by Christ before that time, can be accounted the action of expiation of sin, or of reconciliation of us to God, is most vain; for (1) we make no limitation or restriction of his expiatory work to what he did before he was 30 years of age. (2) This will make against himself, & nothing for limiting & restricking all to his last act of death. Therefore he addeth. That no action done after by Christ, can be accounted a Priestly action of expiation except only the offering of himself, & entering with his own blood into the heavens for us. But then (1) what will he do with his prayer & intercession before his death, specially joh. 17? (2) There was more than expiation of sins requisite to bring us unto God; Therefore the High Priest was to carry that memorial on the front of his Mitre.  
The learned Wendeline, in his Great Systeme of Theology lib. 1. c. 25. Thes. 7. pag. 1116. etc. disputeth against the imputation of the Active obedience of Christ together with the Passive, making it only a Condition requisite in the Mediator, so as without it, he could not be our Mediator, & merit any thing to us, by his death: So that in his judgement, Christ's active obedience, whereby his obedience to the Law of God is understood, & that no doubt, moral, Ceremonial & Judicial, did only contribute to qualify him, to be a fit Mediator, which it seemeth then, according to him, he was not by his hypostatical union; & to put a value upon his passive obedience, (by which he understands his suffering & dying, so undergoing the Curse of the Law, & paying the penalty in our room) which his being God did not, as it would seem, sufficiently do: And thus all his acts of obedience, while under the Law, & in the state of humiliation, howbeit in all he may be conceived as a sufferer, are excluded from being any part of the Satisfaction, he was to make unto justice, & to the Lawgiver, for us & in our room, or any part of that Righteousness, which is imputed to us, in order to Justification.  
He first proposeth his Arguments & Vindicateth them, & then proposeth, some, used for the contrary opinion, adding his Answers.  
His 1. Arg. is, Christ, as man, was bound to give active obedience to the Law, for himself; every Creature is bound to obey his Creator. Therefore it is not imputed unto us. Ans. The Antecedent is denied; neither doth the proof adduced confirm it; for the humane Nature of Christ, now in the state of glory, is & will be a creature for ever; Yea the consirmed angels, & Saints made perfect are Creatures, yet not subject to any Law as Viatores, but as Comprehensores; such was not the obedience of Christ, while in the flesh. He was obedient, as a Viator, but in respect of himself, he cannot be looked upon as a mere Viator, his Humane Nature being personally united unto the divine, & subsisting therein, in respect whereof he became heir of all things, & Lord of life; & therefore stood in no need of working out a life of obedience for a crown to himself: wherefore, what he did as a Viator was for us, for whom he subjected himself, & became obedient, even to the death: And moreover all his acts of obedience were not the acts of obedience of a mere creature, out of one who was God-man; for his humane Nature did not subsist of itself, and so did not of itself as a nature not subsisting, perform acts of obedience, but in the Godhead, & performed acts of obedience, as so subsisting. We have said enough to this at several occasions before.  
It was Answered Christ was made man, not for himself, but for us; Therefore he obeyed not for himself, but for us, that is, in our place. He Replieth. 1. The Anteced. is ambiguous: If you say Christ was made man for us, that is, for our good, it is granted, if for us, that is in our room, it is denied: for what Christ was made, in our place, that we are not bound to do & to be, as he was made a curse for us, that we might not be an eternal curse. But Christ by his Incarnation did not obtain, that we should no more be men, or be bound to do things congruous to humane Nature. Ans. We grant that he was made man for us, not in our room, but for our good: Yet do hence gather, that he being made man for our good, to the end he might come under the Law, both as to its duty, & as to its curse, under both which we were lying, what he did, as well as what he suffered, while in that Condition, in order to the ends of his being made man, for our good, was in our room & stead; because this was our debt & he became man for our good, that in our stead, he might pay our debt. The reply is not grounded upon that word alone, he was made of a woman, but on that, with what followeth. Made of a woman, made under the Law. And if it would have necessarily followed, from his being made of a woman, that he would have been under the Law for himself; to what purpose was this added, made under the Law? And yet we see the main emphasis lieth here, because of what is added to redeem them, that were under the Law. And why did the same Apostle Phil. 2: 7, 8. after he had said, that he took upon him, the form of a servant, & was made in the likeness of men, & found in Fashion, as a man, tell us moreover, that he humbled himself, & became obedient unto death, seeing this did necessarily follow his being man, & that for himself? And may it not hence be inferred, that the exaltation afterward mentioned vers. 8, 9 was given to him, not as Mediator, but for himself, as an humble, obedient man?  
He Replieth 2. denying the Conseq. for (saith he) albert Christ was made man, not for his own, but for our good; Yet after he was made man, he was a man by himself, & therefore subject to the Law by himself, & for himself, as man● as after he assumed a body subject to corruption of itself, he stood in need for himself, of meat, drink, rest etc. As it was not necessary for man to be created, so nor for the Word to be incarnate, & to assume the form of a servant, but only upon supposition. Yet as man, being created, is necessarily subject to the Law of his Creator; So the Word being made man, is, as man, necessarily subject to the Law of God. Ans. (1) Christ, being made man, for our good, & particularly for this end, that he might come under the Law, & pay our debt, he was not subject to the Law for himself. (2) Though he was true man, having man's Nature, yet he was not made man, as other men are; for his humane Nature had no subsistence of its own, as other men have; & therefore could not for itself be subject to the Law, as other men are. (3) How or what way Christ's body was subject to corruption, of itself, we need not here debate; it is sufficient, to note, that our question here is about moral actions as such, the performance of which was a part of our debt. (4) What is added, is but a repetion of what is denied, to wit that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word, becoming man, did become, upon that account, necessarily subject to the Law for himself.  
His 2. Arg. is. If Christ did perform active obedience, in our room, so as it might be imputed to us unto Righteousness, than we should be no longer obliged to perform active obedience to the Law. The reason of this, he taketh from the like, saying; as we are not obliged to undergo eternal death, because Christ hath sustained that, in our room. Ans. To this enough hath been said elsewhere: I shall only here say, That it will no more hence follow, than from the Satisfaction of Christ (whatever Socinians alleige) that we are loosed from all obedience to the Law; but only that we are loosed from that obedience, which was required, under the Old Covenant of works, to wit, to perfect obedience, & thereby obtain the prize, as our reward of debt; and fail in the least, & lose all, which were the Conditions of the Old Covenant; and as to this we deny the minor.  
He replieth by denying, what is now in question, to wit, That Christ performed active obedience, in our room, to procure eternal life to us, affirming that he was bound to do it for himself, & so did merit nothing to ut thereby. Ans. This is but, what was said above; & hence it is clear, that, in his judgement, Christ wrought for the crown of glory to himself, & did merit it to himself: & so had no Right thereto before, by virtue of his hypostatical union, let be possession, albeit all the Angels were to worship him, & his throne was for ever & ever Heb. 1: 6, 8.  
He addeth. If notwithstanding of Christ's active satisfaction, we be obliged to satisfy actively; so, notwithstanding of his passive satisfaction we should be bound to satisfy passively, that is suffer eternal death. Ans. All the obedience now required, is no satisfaction to the Old Covenant-Conditions: Christ hath satisfied that, and left no part thereof for us to do; And therefore it will not follow, that we are bound to suffer eternal death, or any part of the Curse, as such.  
To that answer, that some gave, that by Christ's active obedience we have this advantage, that we are more obliged unto rigid & exact obedience. He replieth. That then we should not sin by short-coming, or negligence. Ans. But by that rigid & exact obedience, is not meaned full conformity unto the Law; but such a conformity, as was the Condition of the Old Covenant, as is said; that is, we are now freed from obtaining the crown, or right thereto by perfect conformity (which to us is impossible) & from loseing of the crown upon the least escape or failing. All obedience runneth now in another channel, though the commands & the Law, as a Law & rule of walk, remain the same.  
His 3. Arg. is. The Scripture every where, speaking of our justification & pardon, mentioneth Christ's passive, & not his active obedience. As Esai. 53: 5, 6. Rom. 3: 24, 25. & 5: 9 Gal. 3: 13. 1. joh. 1: 7. Ans. It is denied, that the Scripture doth every where mentione only Christ's passive obedience, and the contrary hath been frequently shown. And as to the places mentioned, none of them contain any exclusive particle, or hint the exclusion of his active obedience: And our Adversaries themselves must understand these & the like passages, Synecdochically, otherways they shall exclude Christ's soul sufferings, as well, as his active obedience, & restrick all to his death & blood shed on the cross; which yet they will not do.  
Now followeth his answer to some Arguments for the contrary Arg. 1. Two things are required unto our Salvation, delivery from death, & the gift of life; that is had by expiation of sin by his suffering, this by the donation of Righteousness, or imputation of his active obedience.  
He answereth. The passive obedience of Christ both expiateth sin, & giveth life, his death giveth life 1. Pet. 2: 24, & 3: 18. Ans. True, but the reason is, because it was the death of one, who had fulfilled all Righteousness: we need not speak of his obedience & of his sufferings, so distinctly, as to ascribe to each severally, these several effects; It is better, I judge, to take both conjunctly, as one compleet Righteousness, for us, & one meritorious cause of all the benefits procured thereby.  
Arg. 3. (for the Arg. 2. I pass, as judging it not cogent.) The actual disobedience of Adam made us sinners.  
He answereth. If by actual obedience of Christ, in the Conseq. his active obedience be understood (for his passive may also be called actual, in that actually & not potentially only he suffered) & that imputed to us, the consequens is denied: for Christ's passive obedience imputed hath restored unto us what we lost by Adam's disobedience. Ans. But thus the comparison, that Paul maketh Rom. 5. betwixt Adam's disobedience & Christ's obedience is taken away: He opposeth the Righteousness of Christ to the offence of Adam: now Christ's death & suffering is no where called his Righteousness: So he opposeth obedience to disobedience, & therefore, as the disobedience was the violation of the Law, obedience must be the keeping of the Law. Christ's death imputed is no Righteousness answering the commands of the Law; and therefore, though it did merit the recovery of what we lost in Adam, being the death of one, that fulfilled all Righteousness; Yet considered abstractly, by itself without his active obedience, it cannot be our formal Righteousness, with which we must be covered & as having which we must be considered, when justified of God, who pronunceth none Righseous, but such as are Righteous indeed.  
Arg. 4. With Christ's active obedience, his passive was conjoined.  
He ans. Denying the conseq. that therefore the one cannot be imputed without the other: for things conjunct can be distinguished; & as the one can be known, so also imputed without the other. Ans. But they are so conjoined, as being integral parts of one complete Surety-Righteousness & Satisfaction for our debt; & therefore belong to his Estate of humiliation; during which in all his obedience there was suffering, for a part of his subjection was, that he was made under the Law, even under the commanding power thereof; because otherways, being God & Man in one person, he was not subject to the Law, as a Viator, in reference to himself. So in all his sufferings, there was obedience. And what is thus inseparably conjoined, we ought not to separate, especially seeing our case & necessity calleth for the imputation of both.  
Arg. 5. If only Christ's passive obedience were imputed, then only the half of Christ should be given unto us; contrary to Esai, 9: 6.  
He Ans. denying the Conseq. because it is one thing to be given to us, & another thing to be imputed, even Christ's humanity & deity is given unto us. Ans. But Christ was so given, as that all he did & suffered, as such a given & public person & which our case called for, was to be made over to us, in order to our receiving the grand benefits of pardon & life: Now it was necessary for us, to have a Righteousness, consisting in perfect obedience to the Law, because of that Constitution, Do this & live, & Suffering, as such, is no obedience to the Law.  
He addeth. Their opinion is hard, who deny that Christ's passive obedience is imputed to us unto Righteousness, & that it is the cause of the reward, or of life eternal. How could Christ's blood purge us from all sin, if it were not the Cause of our Righteousness? how should he give his flesh for the life of the world, if life were not restored to us thereby; ho● should we be healed by his stripes, if we were not sanctified by him? how should Christ's death be our life, if we goat not life thereby? betwixt freedone from the Curse of the Law, & right to the everlasting inheritance, there is no middle state. Ans. (1) We deny only, that Christ's passive obedience alone is imputed to us, unto Righteousness; for alone considered, being only the paying of the penalty, it is not the Righteousness required in the Law. (2) The paying of a penalty, though it may deliver from punishment; yet cannot procure a right to the reward, promised to keeping of the Law; as is manifest; & therefore Christ's passive obedience, considered alone, cannot procure a right to that reward of life, that was promised to the fulfilling of the Law by obedience. (3) Christ's blood, being the blood of one, that fulfilled also the Law; and conjunct with that obedience, both purgeth from sin, & meriteth life: And so we say of the rest following; only I cannot see how pertinently, in the last, sanctification is mentioned; for we are speaking of right to life eternal. (4) It is true, as to us now, there is no midd'le state, betwixt freedom from the Curse of the Law, & Right to the Inheritance ● because Christ's whole obedience both active & passive is imputed, as a complete Satisfaction & Righteousness, whereby we come to obtain both a freedom from the Curse, & a right to the Inheritance: But in Adam before he fell, there was a middle state, for so long as he stood, he was free of the Curse, & yet was to finish his course of obedience, in order to obtaining the right to the promised reward; unless it be said, that no more was promised, than the continuance of what he possessed.  
It was excpted, That the Law is not fulfilled by suffering the punishment: for the Law & the command is one; but punishment fulfilleth not the commandment, it only satisfieth the threatening. Therefore the suffering of the punishment can not be the cause of the reward.  
He ans. by denying the Antec. & saying, that by suffering of the punishment the Law is fulfilled by the Mediator, partly formally, in that he suffered the punishment due to us by the Law, partly efficiently, in that by his sufferings he not only took away the Curse, but acquired a holiness to us, & with holiness, life eternal. Ans. This answer is no way satisfying; for suffering of the punishment, as such, is no obedience to the Law; and of the fulfilling of the Law by obedience to the commands thereof, did the Exception only speak, no man will say, that such as are now suffering the punishment in hell, are any way fulfilling the Law. Neither is that holiness, procured by Christ's death, any fulfilling of the Law, according to the Old Covenant; & such a fulfilling is required, in order to the obtaining of a right to the reward of life, promised in that Covenant.  
He answereth again, that when the threatening of the Law is satisfied, that is done, which the Law commandeth to be done; & so in part the Law is fulfilled. Ans. Suffering as such is no commanded thing, & the Law constituting a penalty, maketh only suffering to be due, but doth not enjoin any suffering: So that though the Law be satisfied with a Satisfaction laid down by another, so far as that the other is not to suffer; Yet by this paying of the penalty, the Law's commands are not fulfilled, in whole, nor in part; And the Law, as to the commands, must be fulfilled, ere a right to the reward, promised to obediencer, be obtained.  
Arg. 6. is taken, from passages of Scripture, mentioning the active obedience of Christ, such as Dan. 9: 24. jer. 23: 6. 1. Cor. 1: 30. Rom. 5: 19 Phil. 2: 8.  
He Ans. 1. That these places do not prove, that Christ's active obedience is imputed, so as by it we are accounted observers of the Law. Ans. These passages sufficiently prove, that his active obedience belongeth to that Righteousness & Satisfaction, which is imputed unto us; & the fruits of the Righteousness of Christ, imputed, are here as well ascribed to his active, as to his passive obedience: of the places in particular, we have said enough elsewhere: our disput here is not about imputation, but about that which is imputed, or that, which is reckoned to us, as our Righteousness, & this, we say, cannot be pure suffering of the penalty; for that, as such, is no Righteousness nor no where is it so called.  
He Ans. 2. That it only followeth, that the reforming of our corrupt nature could not be had from Christ & by Christ, without his active obedience. Ans. The same may as well be said of the passive obedience; & so the cause shall be yielded unto the Socinians: But the matter is clear. That Christ is our complete Righteousness, not effectiuly: for he worketh no complete legal Righteousness in us, that is a Righteousness according, as was required in the Old Covenant: And beside the expiation of sin, he brought in a Righteousness, which is called everlasting Dan. 9: 24. which can not be understood of our imperfect sanctification. And beside that he is our Sanctification, he is our Righteousness 1. Cor. 1: 30. & therefore must be our Righteousness another way, than by working it in us; for so is he our Sanctification. And Rom. 5. our justification & life is directly ascribed to his Obedience & Righteousness.  
To that Phil. 2: 8. he saith. The meaning is, that Christ from his birth to his death, did so accommodate himself to his Father's will, that he suffered all most patiently, that was to suffer, even the cursed death of the cross. Ans. It was a suffering of what he was to suffer, even to come under the Law, for that was a part of his humiliation; & the text saith, he humbled himself, & became obedient; and there is no ground to restrick the word Obedient, to his suffering only.  
Arg. 7. Christ was made under the Law for us Gal. 4: 4, 5.  
He Ans. He was made under the Law for our good, that he might be a fit Mediator. Ans. Why may not we as well admit the same sense of Christ's being said to be made a curse for us, to wit, that it was only for our good; and so give up the Cause to the Socinians? Then it seemeth all the Hypostatical union, & his having the Spirit, without measure, was not sufficient to make him a fit Redeemer for us. Nor was he a fit Mediator, until he had finished his whole course of obedience. And yet he was borne a Saviour Luk. 2: 11. And was the Lord's Christ vers. 26. & Salvation vers. 50.  
Arg. 8. We are made acceptable unto God in the beloved, Christ, Ephes. 1: 6.  
He Ans. We are acceptable to God by inherent obedience, which Christ hath purchased by his sufferings. Ans. But the Text is to be understood of a being made acceptable, in order to our obtaining the redemption, mentioned vers. 7. that is, the forgiveness of sins; & so cannot be meaned of that acceptation, which is upon our inherent holiness, which followeth our Justification & Pardon.  
Arg. 9 Christ hath purchased his Church, that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle Ephes. 5: 27.  
He Ans. That Christ did purchase by his death the churches inherent Righteousness. Ans. This is granted. But not withstanding▪ the expressions here used, & in the foregoing verse, will hold forth a full cleansing, not only from the stain & power of sin, in Sanctification; but also from the guilt of sin in justification, the Church must be presented without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, & cleansed with the washing of water, & holy & without blemish: Now in order to justification, the sinner must be clothed with a complete Righteousness.  
Arg. 10. Believers are found in Christ, having a Righteousness Phil. 3: 9 How forceable this place proveth our point, hath been shown elsewhere.  
He Ans. The Righteousness of Faith is twofold, one is imputed & apprehended by Faith, which is Christ's passive obedience; the other is inherent, which is also by Faith. Ans. But Paul here layeth by all his inherent Righteousness, which was his own, & was according to the Law; & only betaketh himself, to that Righteousness, which is of God by Faith: & this is not to be restricked to Christ's sufferings only; for these, as such are not a Righteousness, as hath been oft said, & the contrary hath never yet been proved, though it be the main ground of all.  
Arg. 11. We are perfect & complete in Christ Col. 2: 10.  
He Ans. Christ maketh us perfect in justifying, sanctifying & glorifying us, by the imputation of his passive obedience only. Ans. This is but to assert the thing, that is a disproving: we say, we cannot be justified, without the imputation of a complete Righteousness, because in justification we receive a right to life, & this cannot be had, according to the Constitution of God, do this & live, till the Law be satisfied by obedience, & because we could not do it, we must have it in & from Christ, in whom we are complete, & have all, we need.  
Arg. 12. Christ hath delivered us from all our debt, both of yielding perfect obedience, & of suffering for disobedience Col. 2: 14.  
He Ans. He denyeth this, & sayeth; Christ hath not delivered us from giving perfect obedience, for we remain obliged thereunto, & wherein we come short it is pardoned for his satisfaction imputed to us, & it is piece & piece made up by begun holiness, which hereafter shall be perfected. Ans. This looseth not the force of the argument; for though we be obliged to keep the Law in all points, yet we are not under that obligation, by virtue of the Old Covenant, so that the least breach should frustrate us of heaven, & so as the reward should be of debt, and of this obligation the Argument is to be understood: Now because, by virtue of this Covenant, which must be satisfied, we cannot partake of the prize, because it is violated, therefore, it must be satisfied by the perfect obedience of another, of our Surety, which must be imputed unto us, in order to life; for all our begun sanctification will not avail us; & Christ's satisfying by his suffering, according to that, that day thou eats, thou shalt die, doth not withal satisfy that other part of the Law, do this & live.  
Arg. 13. We must not only not be unjust, but we must be just, if we would have life eternal. Therefore Christ's Righteousness must be imputed, as well as his death.  
He Ans. denying the Conseq. And saith. We are freed from the Curse of the Law by justification, whereby the Passive Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us: Purity is begun in us in Sanctification. Ans. By justification we have no Righteousness imputed to us, for we must be Righteous, before we be justified; & therefore must have a Righteousness imputed before. (2) Our begun Sanctification, is no purchase of the reward of life (3) delivery from the Curse, is but a freeing us from punishment, or from the guilt of punishment, but this is nothing but a being not unjust, as Adam was before he fell; It is not a being positiuly just, in order to the reward; for to this is required complete obedience to the Law, & that unto the end, in which respect Adam was never just, having never finished his course of obedience, that he might have had a right unto the reward promised, I mean in himself.   

CHAP. X.  
The Fathers give Countenance to the Doctrine of Imputation; and some Papists approve it.  
THat it may not be thought, that the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, is a new upstart opinion, I shall here set down some of their Testimonies unto this truth▪  
justin. Martyr. Epist. ad Diognet. p. 386. Quid enim aliud peccata nostra potuit tegere, quam ejus justitia? in quo alio nos iniqui & impii pro justis haberi possumus, quam in solo Dei filio? O dulcem permutationem! o impervestigabile artificium! O beneficia expectationem omnem superentia! ut iniquitas quidem multorum in justo uno abscondatur; justitia autem unius faciat, ut multi injusti pro justis habeantur. i e. for what else could cover out sins, but his (i. e. Christ's) Righteousness? in whom else, could we, who are naked & ungodly, be accounted for Righteous persons? than only in the Son of God? O sweet permutation! O unsearchable Contrivance! O benefits exceeding all expectation! that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just one, & the Righteousness of one should make many, who are unrighteous, be accounted Righteous.  
Again in lib. de Expositione fidei. Filius Dei, quatenus homo, vitam ab crimine remotam traduxit; mortemque voluntariam pertulit; per exactam & accuratam Conversationem, peccatum obliterans, & per mortem indebitam debitum delens. i e. The Son of God, as Man, led a life free of all fault, and suffered a voluntary death; obliterating sin by his exact & accurate Conversation, & deleting the debt by an undue death.  
Irenaeus Adv Haeres. c. 15. Dominus in Amicitiam nos reduxit per suam in●arnationem, mediator De● & hominum factus, propitians quidem pro nobis Patrem, in quem peccaveramus, & nostram inobedientiam Consolatus: nobis autem donans eam, quae est ad Factorem nostrum, Conversationem & Subjectionem. i e. The Lord brought us into friend ship by his Incarnation, being made a Mediator betwixt God & Man, Propitiating the Father for us, against whom we sinned & comforting us over our disobedience: but freely giving us that Conversation & Subjection, which is to our Maker.  
Athanasius Tom. 2. p. 270. Necessarium est, maximeque necessarium, ●re●dere Scripturis Sanctis, confiteri ex nostro genere primitias, celebrare singularem● assumentis in genus humanum amorem, obstu pescere magnâ oeconomiae atque dispo sitionis miraculum, non timere execrationem legis (Christus enim nos a maledictione legis liberavit) impletionem legis a primitiis factam toti massae asscribere (imputare, in the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) i. e. It is necessary, yea most necessary, to believe the holy Scriptures, to confess the first fruits (i. e. Christ) of our kind, to celebrat that singular love of him that assumed (viz. Man's Nature) unto mankind; to be astonished at that miracle of the great Oeconomie & disposition; not to fear the Curse of the Law (for Christ hath delivered us from the Curse of the Law) ascribe or impute the fulfilling of the Law, done by the first fruits, unto the whole mass.  
The same Author de Incarn. Verbi contra Samosat. Tom. 1. p. 461. Impossibile est puritatem & innoeentiam in humana natura exhiberi, nisi Deus credatur in carne esse, qui justitiam omni peccato liberam in mundum introduxit, cujus quia participes redditi sumus, vivemus & salvabimur. Illud enim non est justus in terra, qui bonum faciat, & non peccet, in common, ad omnes homines pertinet, unde ex coelo descendit, qui immaculatam ex se justitiam daturus erat. i e. It is impossible that purity & innocency shall be exhibited in man's nature, unless we believe, that God is in the flesh, who hath brought into the world a Righteousness free of all sin, of which because we are made partakers, we shall live & be saved: for that there is not a just man upon earth, who doth good & sinneth not, doth appertain to all men in common, wherefore he descended from heaven, who was to give a pure Righteousness of himself.  
Chrysost. When a Cavilling jew shall object, how can the world be saved by the Rectitude, or Obedience of one Christ? Answer him again, by ask, how came the world to be condemned by the disobedience of one Adam?  
Greg. Nyssen. Orat. 2. in Cantic. Christus in se transtatis peccatorum meorum sordibus, puritatem suam mecum communicavit; meque pulchritudinis ejus, quae in ipso est, participem fecit. i e. Christ having translated the filth of my fins upon himself, did communicate unto me his own purity, & made me a partaker of that beauty, which is in him.  
By these we may see, that even before Augustins' days, this Truth was asserted, though Mr. Baxter, in his book against D. Tully Ch. 1. § 3. intimate the contrary.  
Cyrillus Alexandr. in joan. lib. 11. c. 25. Quemadmodum praevaricatione primihominis, ut in primitiis generis nostri, morti addicti sumus: eodem modo per obedient●am & justitiam Christi, in 〈◊〉 seipsum legi subjec● quamvis legis Author esset, benedictio atque vivificatio, quae per Spiritum est, ad totam nostram penetravit naturam. i e. As by the transgression of the first man, as in the first fruits of our kind, we are adjudged unto death; so the same way by the Obedience & Righteousness of Christ, in as much as he subjected himself to the Law, though he was the Author of the Law, the blessing & Vivification, which is by the Spirit, did reach to our whole Nature.  
Leo Epist. 72. ad juvenalem. Ut autem repararet omnium vitam, recepit omnium causam, & vim veteris chirographi pro omnibus solvendo vacuavit: ut sicut per unius reatum omnes facti f●erant peccatores, ita per unius innocentiam, omnes fierent innocentes, inde in homines manante justitia, ubi est humana suscepta Natura. i e. But that he might repair the life of all, he undertook the cause of all, & paying for all made void the force of the Old obligation, to the end that as by one man's guilt all were made sinners, so by one man's innocency, all might become innocent; Righteousness coming unto men thence, where the humane Nature is taken on.  
August. ad Laurent. Cap. 41. Ipse peccatum, ut nos justitia; nec nostra, sed Dei sumus: nee in nobis, sed in ipso; sicut ipse peccatum, non suum, sed nostrum, nec in se, sed in nobis constitutum, similitudine peccati, in qua crucifixus est, demonstravit. i e. He was sin as we were Righteousness, not our own, but of God, not in ourselves but in him: as he did demonstrat himself to be sin, not his own, but ours; not in himself, but in us, by the similitude of sinful flesh, in which he was crucified.  
Idem in Psal. 30. Cone. 1. in tua justitia erue me & exime me, quia non invenisti in me justitiam meam, erue me in tua, hoc est illud, quod me eruit, quod me justificat, quod ex impio pium facit, quod ex iniquo justum. i e. Deliver me in thy Righteousness. Because thou didst not find my Righteousness in me, deliver me in thine; that is it which delivereth me, which justifieth me, that maketh me of ungodly godly, & of unrighteous Righteous.  
Id. in Psal. 70. Erue me in justitia tua, non in mea, sed in tua; si enim in mea, er● exillis, de quibus ille ait, ignorantes Dei justitiam, & suam volentes constituere, justitiae Dei non sunt subjecti. i e. Deliver me in thy Righteousness. Not in mine, but in thine; for if in mine, I should be of them, of whom he saith, being ignorant of God's Righteousness & willing to establish their own, they did not subject themselves unto the Righteousness of God.  
Id. Tom. 9 Tract. 3. in joan. Omnes qui ex Adamo cum peccato, peccatores, omnes qui per Christum justificati, justi; non in se, sed in illo; nam in se, si interroges, Adam sunt; in illo si interroges, Christi sunt. i e. All that are of Adam with sin are sinners, all who are justified by Christ, are Righteous; not in themselves, but in him; for if you ask, what they are in themselves, they are Adam's; if you ask what they are in him, they are Christ's.  
Bernard. Serm. 61. in Cantic. Nunquid justitias meas? Domine, memorabor justitiae tuae solius: Ipsa est enim & mea; nempe factus es mihi tu justitia a Deo. Nunquid verendum, ne non una duobus sufficiat? non est pallium breve, quod secundum Prophetam, non possit operireduos, justitia tua justitia in aeternum, & te pariter & me opertet larga & aeterna justiti●, & in me quidem operit multitudinem delictorum. i e. Shall I make mention of my Righteousness? Lord, I will make mention of thine only: for that is also mine, because thou art made of God unto me Righteousness. Is it to be feared that that one shall not serve two? It is not a short cloak, that according to the Prophet, cannot cover two; thy Righteousness is an everlasting Righteousness, & that large & eternal Righteousness shall cover both thee & me, & in me indeed it shall cover a multitude of sins.  
Id. Dom. 1. post Octau. Epiph. Serm. 1. Veruntamen, ut jam non sit quod causeris, O homo, contra inobedientiam Adae, datur tibi obedientia Christi, ut si gratis venundatus es, gratis & redimaris. i e. But, that thou o man, should not have whereof to complean, fore against the disobedience of Adam (which he said before, was imputed) the obedience of Christ is given unto thee, to the end, that if thou be sold for nothing, thou shalt also be redeemed for nothing.  
Idem Epist. 190. ad Innocent. Pont. Rom. Quid namque ex se agere poterat, ut semel amissam justitiam recuperaret homo, servus peccati, vinctus diaboli? assignata est ei proinde aliena, qui carui● sua, & ipsa sic est. Venit Princeps mundi & in Salvatore non invenit quicquam, & cum nihilominus innocenti manus injecit, justissime quos tenebat amisit; quando is qui morti nihil debebat, accepta mortis injuria, jure illum qui obnoxius erat & mortis debito & Diaboli solvit Dominio Qua enim justitia id secundo exigeretur? homo siquidem qui debuit, homo qui solvit: nam si unus, inquit, pro omnibus mortuus est, ergo omnes mortui sunt, ut viz sa● factio unius omnibus imputetur, sicut omnium peccata unus ille portavit, nec alter jam inveniatur, qui forte fecit, alter qui satisfecit, quia Caput & Corpus unus est Christus. Satisfecit ergo Caput pro membris; Christus pro Visceribus suis etc. quod si dixerit, Pater tuus addixit te, Respondeb●, sed Frater men's redemit me, cur non aliunde justitia, quia aliunde reatus? alius qui peccatorem constituit, alius qui justificat a peccato? alter in semine, alter in sanguine. An peccatum in semine peccatoris, & non justitia in sanguine Christi?- non convenit filium portare iniquitatem patris, & fraterne fieri exortem justitiae. i e. For what could man, a servant of sin & a bound slave of the devil, do of himself, to recover the Righteousness, which he had once lost? Therefore another is assigned unto him, because he wanted his own, & the same is so. The Prince of the world came, & found nothing in the Saviour, & when notwithstanding he put hands on the Innocent, he lost those most justly, when he held; when he, who owed nothing to death, having received the injury of death, he did by right lose him, who was liable to the debt of death, & deliver him from the Dominion of Satan, for by what Right could he exact that the second time? seeing as it was man, who owed, so it was man, who paid: for if one, he saith, died for all, then are all dead, that, to wit, the Satisfaction of one, might be imputed to all, as that one did bear the sins of all; Neither now is it found, that one did the wrong & another satisfied, for the Head & the body are one Christ: the Head therefore did satisfy for the members; Christ for his own bowels. But if he shall say. Thy Father bound thee over; I shall answer, but my Brother hath redeemed me, why should not Righteousness be from another; as guilt was from another▪ one who made man a sinner, & another who justifieth from sin; the one in the seed, the other in blood. Was sin in the seed of a sinner; & shall not Righteousness be in the blood of Christ. It is not right, that the Son should bear the iniquity of the Father, & be defrauded of the Righteousness of his Brother.  
Idem Serm. ad Milites Templi c. 1. Qui peccati meritum tulit, suam nobis donando justitiam; ipse meritis debitum solvit, & reddit vitam; sic namque mortua morte, revertitur vita, quemadmodum ablato peccato redit justitia; porro mors in Christi morte fugatur, & Christi nobis justitia imputatur etc. Qui nostram & induit carnem & subiit mortens, putas suam nobis negabit justitiam? Voluntary incarnatus, voluntarit passus, voluntary crucifixus, solam à nobi● retinebit justitiam; afterward ibid. Unus peccavit & omnes tenentur rei, & unius innocentia soli reputabitur uni? Unius peccatum omnibus operatum est mortem, & unius justitia uni vi●am restituet? Haud Dei justitia magis ad condemn●ndum, quam ad restaurandum valuit? aut plus potutt Adam in malo, quam Christus in bono? Adae peccatum imputabitur mihi, & Christi justitia non pertinebit ad me? i. e. He who took away the desert of sin, giving to us his Righteousness, the same by his merits, paid the debt, & restored life; for if death be dead, life returneth; even as sin being taken away, Righteousness returneth: Moreover death is banished away in Christ's death, and Christ Righteousness is imputed to us etc. He who took on our flesh, & underwent death, thinks thou, that he shall deny to us his Righteoysness? He who willingly was incarnate, willingly suffered, willingly was crucified, shall he withhold his Righteousness from us?-one man sinned & all are guilty, & shall the innocency of one be accounted only to one? One man's sin hath wrought death unto all, & shall the Righteousness of one restore life only to one? Shall God's Righteousness be more powerful to condemn, than to restore? Could Adam do more in sin, than Christ in good? Shall Adam's sin be imputed unto me, & shall not Christ's Righteousness belong unto me?  
Ambros. lib. 3. de Virginit. p. 100 Om●ia Iesus est nobis si volumus. Si vulnus curari defideras, Medicus est: Si febribus aestuas, sons est: Si gravaris iniquitate, justitia est: si auxilio indiges, virtus est: Si mortem times, vita est: si c●lum desideras, via est: si tenebras fugis, luxest: si cibum quaeris, alimentum est. i e. Christ is all things to us, if we be willing, if thou desirest to have thy wound cured, he is the chyrurgen: if thou burn with fevers, he is a fountain: If thou be burdened with sin, he is Righteousness: If thou want help, he is virtue: If thou fear death, he is the life: if thou desirest heaven, he is the way: If thou fleest from darkness, he is light: if thou seek meat, he is aliment.  
Idem de side lib. 2. c. 4. O sides the sauris omnibus opulentior! O vulnerum nostrorum peccatorumque medicina praestantior! Consideremus, quia nobis prodest bene credere. Mihi enim prodest scire, quia propter me Christus suscepit infirmitates meas, mei corporis subiit passiones, pro me peccatum,- pro me maledictum factus est, pro me atque in me subditus atque subjectus. i e. O faith more rich than all treasures! O most excellent medicine for all our wounds & sins! Let us consider, for it is profitable for us to believe well: It is profitable for me to know, because Christ for me took on my infirmities, he underwent the passions of my body, he was made sin for mefor me was he made a curse, for me & in me, was he made a subject.  
Macarius Homil. 20. Quicunque enim in propria sua justitiâ & redemptione consistit, in vanum & cassum laborabit; nam omnis opinio de propria justitia concepta, tanquam pannus menstruat● mulieris, in novissimo die manifestabitur, sicut inquit Esaias Propheta-Petamus itaque & obtestemur Deum, ut induat nobis vestem salutis, Dominum nostrum, Jesum, Christum, ineffabilem lucem, quem ferentes animae in aeternum non exuentur. i e. Who ever standeth in his own Righteousness & redemption laboureth in vain: for all conceived opinion of our own Righteousness shall be manifest to be a menstruous cloth, in the last day, as the Prophet Esai saith- Let us ask therefore; & beseek the Lord, that he would clothe us with the garment of Salvation our Lord Jesus Christ, that ineffable light, whom if our souls put on & wear, they shall never be denuded thereof.  
Even some Papists of old, (though few or none now since the Council at Trent,) did assent unto this Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ.  
In Colon there was a book written an. 1475. directing, how to comfort dying persons, wherein these words are found. Age ergo dum superest in te anima, in hac sola morte fiduciam tuam constitue, in nulla re fiduciam habe, huic mortite totum commit, hac sola tetotum contege, totum immisce te in hac morte, in hac morte totum te involve; & si Dominus Deus te voluerit judicare, dic Domine, mortem D.N.I.C. objicio inter me & tuum judicium, aliter ●ecum non contendo. Et si tibi dixerit, quia peccatores, dic mortem D.N.I.C. pono inter te & peccata mea. Si dixerit tibi quod meruisti damnationem, dic Domine, mortem D.N.I.C. obtendo inter te & mala mea merita, ipsiusque merita offero pro merito, quod ego debuissem habere, nec habeo, Si dixerit, quod tibi est iratus, dic, Domine, mortem D.N.I.C. oppono inter me & iram tuam. i e. Go to then, while thy soul is in thee, put all thy confidence in this death alone, have confidence in no other thing, commit thyself wholly unto this death, cover thyself wholly with this death alone, mix thyself wholly in this death, roll thyself wholly in this death; & if the Lord will judge thee, say, Lord, I cast up the death of our Lord. J. C. betwixt me & thy judgement; no other way do I contend with thee. And if he say to thee, that thou art a sinner, say, I put the death of the Lord Jesus Christ betwixt thee & my sins. If he say, that thou hast deserved damnation, say, Lord, I hold forth the death of our Lord J. C. betwixt thee & my evil merits; & I offer his merits, for the merit, which I should have had, & have not. If he say, that he is angry at thee; say, Lord, I set up the death of our Lord J. C. betwixt me & thine anger.  
Isidorus Clarius Orat. 40. in Luc. Nos dicimus neque fide primò, neque charitate, sed una Dei justitiâ in Christo nobis impertitâ justificari. i e. We say, we are justified at first neither by faith, neither by charity, but by the Righteousness of God alone in Christ, bestowed upon us.  
Albertus' Pighius Controu. 2. de side. Fortassis etiam nostram hanc damnarent (n. Scholastici) sententiam, qua propriam, & 〈◊〉 ex suis operibus esset 〈◊〉 Deo, justitiam derogamus omnibus Adae filiis, & docuimus una Dei in Christo niti nos pesse justitid, una illa justos coram Deo, destitutos propria, nisi hoc ipsum astruxissemus aliquanto diligentius. i e. It may be they (i. e. the Scholasticks) would condemn this opinion of ours, whereby we take away from all the Sons of Adam, their own Righteousness, which is of their own works, before God, & did teach, that we must lean upon the Righteousness of God, in Christ, alone, & that by that alone, we are Righteous before God though destitute of our own, if we had not confirmed it a little more diligently.  
Idem ibid. Nam quod nen operibus nostris, non in justitia nostra, sed in una ignoscente iniquitates nostras misericordia, benevolenti● erga nos divinae, & salutis a Deo assignandae nobis spes sit Davidis Testimonio Apost. ad Rom. comprobans, non alia justiti● niti nos posse, nisi quam imputari nobis absque nostris operibus affirmat-non dicit, beati qui ex operibus suis justi coram Deo sunt, beatus vir, qui non commisit, nec fecit injustitiam, sad beati, quorum a Deo misericorditer remissae sunt iniquitates quorum ipse, sua justitia tegit & abscendit peccata. i e. That our hope of the Lord's good will, & of life is not by our works, nor in our Righteousness, but only in the mercy of God, forgiving iniquities, Paul to the Rom. confirmeth by the testimony of David, proving to us, that we may lean to no other Righteousness, but that, which he affirmeth to be imputed to us without our works.— He saith not blessed are they, who are Righteous before God by their own works; blessed is the man, that hath done no iniquity; but blessed are they, whose iniquities are mercifully pardoned, whose sins he covereth, and hideth with his own Righteousness.  
Thereafter the same man saith. In illo ergo justificamur coram Deo, non in nobis, non nostra sed illius justitia, quae nobis cum illo jam communicantibus imputatur. Propriae justitiae inopes extra nos in illo docemur justitiam quaerere. Cum inquit, qui peccatum non noverat, pro nobis peccatum fecit, hoc est hostiam pecc●ti expiatricem, ut nos efficeremur justitia Dei in ipso: non nostra, sed Dei justitia justi efficimur in Christo: quo jure? Amicitiae, quae communionem omnium inter amicos facit, juxta vetus & celebratissimum proverbium, Christo insertis, conglutinatis & unitis, & sua nostra facit, suas divitias nobis communicate, suam justitiam inter Patris judicium & nostram injustitiam interponito, & sub ea, veluti sub umbone & clypeo, a divina, quam commeruimus, ira nos abscondit, tuetur ac protegit, imo tandem nobis impertit, & nostram facit, qua tecti, ornatique audacter & secure jam divino nos sistamus tribunali & judicio; justique non solum appareamus, sed etiam simus. i e. In him (that is, Christ) therefore are we justified before God, not in ourselves; not by our own but by his Righteousness, which is imputed to us, when now we communicate with him. Being void of a Righteousness of our own he teacheth us to seek a Righteousness, without ourselves; in him, when he saith he made him sin for us, who knew no sin, that is, he made him a sacrifice for sin, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him. By what Law? By that of friendship, which maketh a community of all things among friends, according to the old & well known proverb. Being insert into Christ glued & united unto him, he maketh what is his to be ours, he communicateth unto us his riches, he interposeth his Righteousness betwixt the Father's judgement & our unrighteousness, and under it, as under a shield, he hideth, defendeth, & protecteth us from God's wrath, which we had deserved; Yea at length giveth it to us, & maketh it ours; with which being covered & adorned, we may boldly & saifly sister ourselves before the Tribunal of God, and we not only appear Righteous, but also are Righteous.  
Ruardus Tapperus Tom. 2. Art. 8. p. 36. Sicut Christo nostra scelera a Patre, ob spontaneam eorum assumptionem, & corporis mystici intimam unionem, imputantur: ita ejus justitia, quasi capitis, nobis ejus membris, ad justitiam & via●m aeternam imputatur. i e. As our iniquities were imputed by God unto Christ, because of his voluntary assuming of them, & of the near union of the mystical body: so his Righteousness, as head to us his members, is imputed unto us unto Righteousness, & life eternal.  
Yea Bellarm. granteth lib. 2. de justif. C. 10. That Christ may be called our Righteousness, because he satisfied the Father for us, & did so give & communicate that Satisfaction to us, when he justifieth us, that it may be called our Satisfaction & Righteousness. And again; this way it were not absurd to say, that Christ's Righteousness & merits were imputed to us, when they are given & applied to us, as if we ourselves had satisfied God. So in Resp. ad 3. Arg. We are said to be the Righteousness of God, not in ourselves, but in Christ, because he is our head, & what agreeth to th● head, agreeth to the members, not as they are distinct from the head, but as they are one with it. So c. 11. in Resp. ad Arg. 2. The similitude of putting on agarment may be saifly accommodat unto imputed Righteousness; if one say, we must put on Christ's merits, & some way be covered with them, seek pardon of sins. cap. 7. Arg. 4. he saith Christ's merits are imputed to us, because gifted to us, & we may offer them to the Father for our sins, because Christ took upon him the burden of satisfying for us, & of reconciling us to God the Father. Thus he  
After Cardinal Bellarmin. we may mention Cardinal Contarenus, who is more orthodox here, than any of them; & speaketh as plain truth, as any of the orthodox themselves can do: for so doth he, in Tract. de justif. state the question. Quoniam ad duplicem justitiam pervenimus, per fidem, justitiam inharentem nobis & charitatem ac gratiam, qua efficimur consortes divina naturae; & justitiam Christi nobis donatam & imputatam, quoniam inserti sumus Christi, & induimus Christum: Praetat inquirere Utra-nam debeamus niti, & existimare nos justificari coram Deo, id est, justos & Sanctos haberi. i e. Because by faith we obtain a twofold Righteousness, one inherent in us, love & grace, whereby we are made partakers of the divine nature; the other the Righteousness of Christ, given & imputed to us, because in●ert into Christ, & because we have put on Christ: It is fittest to Inquire, unto which of these we ought to lean ourselves, & account ourselves justified before God, that is looked upon as Righteous & holy.  
The question thus proposed he thus determineth. Ego prorsus existimo, pi● & Christian●egrave, di●i, quod debeamus niti (niti inquimus, tanquam rei stabili, quae cert●nos sustentet) justitia Christinobis donota, non autem justitia & sanctitate nobis inhaerente: h●c enim nostra justitia est inch●ata & imperfecta, quae impedirenon potest, quin assidue pe●cemus; idcirco in conspectu Dei possumus eb hanc justitiam haberi justi & boni, quemadmedum deceret filios Dei esse bonos & Sanctos; Sed justitia Christi est vera & perfecta justitia, quae omnino placet oculis Dei, in qua nihil est quod Deum offendat, quod Deo non summopere placeat; h●ac ergo sola re certa & stabili nobis nitendum est; & ob eam solam credere nos justificari coram Deo, id est haberi justos & dioi justos. Hic est pretiosus Thesaurus, quem qui invenit, vendit omnia quae habet, & emit illum. i e. I verily think, that it is piously & christianly said, that we ought to lean (I say lean, as to a stable thing, that shall certainly hold us up) unto Christ's Righteousness, given unto us; but not unto the Righteousness & holiness, that is inherent in us: for this Righteousness of ours is inchoate & imperfect, that cannot hinder us from ssinning daily; therefore we cannot for this Righteousness, in the sigt of God be accounted just & good, as would become the Sons of God to be: but the Righteousness of Christ is true & perfect Righteousness, which every way pleaseth God's eyes, in which is nothing that can displease God, & doth not highly please him: Therefore we must only lean to this certain & stable thing, and believe, that for it alone we are justified before God; that is, accounted Righteous, and so called. This is the Precious Treasure, which who findeth, he selleth all he hath, & buyeth it.  
Yea this he confirmeth afterward by Experience, saying. Ind est, quod pro experimento videmus viros Sanctos, qui quanto magis in veritato proficiunt, tanto minus sibi placent; ac propterea tanto magis intelligunt se indigere Christo & justitia Christi sibi donata; ideoque se relinquunt, & soli Christo incumbunt: ●●c non obeam accidit causam, quod facti sanctiores minus videant quam prius; neque quia facti sunt animo dimissiori vel viliori; imo quanto magis in sanctitate proficiunt, tanto majore sunt animo, tanto sunt perspicaciores. i e. Hence it is, that by experience we see, holy men, how farther they advance in the truth, please themselves the less, & therefore do more understand, that they have need of Christ, & of his Righteousness given unto them: wherefore they relinquish themselves; and lean upon Christ alone: This cometh not to pass, because they become of a more base & Law spirit: Yea the further they advance in holiness, they are of greater spirits, & see more clearly.  
FINIS   

Arguments against Universal Redemption.  
AS concerning the point of Universal Redemption, we find various sentiments, or various explications of the matter, given to us by Adversaries; for they do not all agree in their apprehensions of the thing. Some explain the matter thus, God sent his only begotten Son to be a Redeemer and Propitiator for Adam and all his Posterity; who by his death did pacific an angry God, and restore Mankind to their lost inheritance; so as all, who are now condemned, are not condemned for their former sins and guilt; for Christ hath abundantly satisfied for these; but for their Unbeleef, for not believing in the Redeemer of the world, and for rejecting the Reconciliation made, & the grace of God declared in the word. And thus, they must say, that Christ hath died for all sins, but Unbelief; and that salvation doth not certainly follow upon this Reconciliation; and so that it is rather a Reconciliableness, than a Reconciliation; and they must necessarily maintain, that this matter is revealed unto all and every son of Adam, who otherwise cannot be guilty of Rejecting this reconciliation, other ways it shall be of no advantage to them; unless they say, that the want of the Revelation putteth them out of a capacity of being guilty of Unbelief; and so they must necessarily be saved; and thus their condition shall be undoubtedly better, than is the condition of such, as hear the Gospel; and then the revelation of the Gospel shall be no Favour, but a Prejudice rather. And in reference to this, they devise an Universal Antecedanious Love, whereby God, out of his Infinite Goodness, was inclined to desire the happiness and salvation of every mother's son; and therefore to send his Son to die for: as if God had such Natural & Necessary Inclinations; and as if all his Love to Mankind, and every appointment of his concerning us, were not the free act of his good pleasure; and as if there were any such Antecedent & Conditional will in God, that could or might have no issue or accomplishment, but as Lord Freewill would; and as if the Love that sent Christ, were only such a Poor Conditional Inclination towards all Mankind, which the Scripture holdeth forth, as the greatest of Loves, & as the ground or all the Effects & Grants, which man's full Salvation calleth for. But why could not this Love effectuate the good of all? Therefore, they tell us, that Justice being injured by sin, unless it were satisfied, that Love of God, whereby he wisheth well to all sinners, could effectuate nothing, as to the recovery of any: & upon this ground they imagine, Christ was sent to make an Universal Atonement; & so, Justice, being satisfied, might not obstruct the salvation of any, whose Freewill would consent unto terms of new to be proposed.  
Others hold forth the matter thus [Christ, according to the eternal Counsel of God, did properly die for this end, and by his propitiatory sacrifice obtain, that all and every man, who believe in Him, should for his sake actually obtain Remission of sins, & Life Eternal; but others, in case they would Repent & Believe, might obtain it.] But thus we hear no word of Christ's obtaining any thing to any in particular; no word of his obtaining Faith & Repentance: and what Counsel of God can this be, to send Christ to die for persons, upon that condition, which he knew they would not & could not perform? And what by this means hath Christ's Propitiatory Sacrifice obtained more, than a mere possibility of salvation, to either one or other? Shall we imagine, that God designeth good to persons, who shall never enjoy it? Or that God hath Conditional Intentions & Designs? By this means, Christ's death was designed, and no person designed thereby to be saved, yea Christ should be designed to die, and that for no certain end, unless to procure a mere possibility, by stopping the mouth of justice, that it should not stand in the way: but then we can not say, that God sent Christ to die for any man, much less for all.  
Others express the matter thus [Christ, out of the gracious Decree & Purpose of God, did undergo death, that he might procure & obtain Reconciliation with God for all sinners whatsomever, without any difference, before that God would open again the door of salvation, & enter into a new Covenant of Grace with sinners.] But this Reconciliation hath no more force, or import, but that God might enter again into a Covenant with sinners: and so there is no Actual Reconciliation of sinners unto God. And all that is obtained, is for God, & nothing for man, save a Possibility of Salvation by a new Covenant; nor are we told, whether Christ hath satisfied for the breach of the First Covenant, so that that sin is fully pardoned unto all; or not, until the condition of the second Covenant be performed: nor are we told, upon what account the sins against the second Covenant are pardoned; Or if they be unpardonable.  
Others explain the matter thus [Christ died for all and every man, not only that God might, without any violation of Justice, enter into a new Covenant with sinners, upon what condition he pleased; but that it should be upon this Condition, that man should be united with Christ the Cautioner: and not only, that Redemption & Salvation should be possible to all, but that really & most certainly Salvation should be bestowed on such, as Christ thought good.] But seeing Christ knew, that his death would profit none, but these few, whom he had designed, to what purpose should he have laid down his life for the rest? And how can his death be a price of Redemption for the rest? How can Christ be said to satisfy for the rest? Did he purchase Faith to these few; and would he not purchase Faith to the rest, & yet lay down the great price for them? What was the end obtained for the rest? was it only a Possible Call of all, Justice bein satisfied? But of what import could that Possible Call be, if Salvation was not also possible unto them? And whereunto is that Call? They will not say, it is unto Salvation, but to Faith: But did not Christ know, that this call would not be obeyed by them? Did he procure Grace unto them, to obey it? then he procured Faith, and if he procured Faith, than he procured Salvation. Again, if Justice be satisfied for these others, why are they not liberat? If they say, the new Condition is not fulfilled. Then it cannot be simply said, that Christ satisfied Justice on their behalf, for he knew before hand, that these would not perform the new Condition; how can he then be supposed to die for them not withstanding?  
Thus we see what difference is among men, that hold Universal Redemption, about the Proper & Immediate End & Aime, of the purpose of God, in sending Christ to die; and of Christ in coming to died: and how, for the most part, it cometh all to little, or nothing, for it was, saith Arminius, That God might save sinners, what way it pleased Him, his justice, which stood in the way, being satisfied, or as Corvinus: That God might will to save sinners, & That Christ intended by his death, to make such satisfaction to justice, as that he might obtains to himself power of saving upon what Condition the Father pleased. And thus Christ is said to have obtained Reconciliation & Redemption to all, not that they should actually be partakers thereof, but that God, his justice now being satisfied, might prescribe a Condition, which when they had performed, he might & would actually make them partakers thereof: Some say, that all men are put into a new Covenant, in which Adam was a common person, as well, as in the old, by virtue whereof, none shall be damned that do not sin actually against the Condition, & fall thereby from that new state, whereunto they are borne. And this opinion differeth not much from that of jacobus Andreae at the conference at Mompelgard, which afterward Huberus maintained (as Kimedoncius showeth, in his refutation of the same) which was this in short, [That Christ suffered & died for all, none excepted, Effectually, and obtained for all a Reconciliation, without any respect to Faith, or Unbelief; so that all who receive this Reconciliation & continue in it, shall be saved, but as to those who refuse it by unbeleef, it is made null, and they perish.] Others say, [That Christ by his satisfaction removed Original sin in all, so that all Infants, dying in infancy, are undoubtedly saved.] Others [that he died for all sins alike, but conditionally.] Some say, [that after the price was paid, it was absolutely undetermined, what condition should be prescribed; so as God might have reestablished the Covenant of works:] Others, [that the procuring of a new way was part of the fruit of Christ's death.] As for this condition, some say, [that man can perform it with the help of such means, as God affordeth to all] and thus establish the Diana of Freewill. But others [assert the necessity of grace flowing from election hereunto,] and so destroy Universal Redemption, which yet they assert. So that some say [Christ died for all Conditionally, if they believe] making the Act the cause of its own object; for Faith with them is a believing that Christ died for them. Some say [that he died for all Absolutely; Yet so as they partake not of the benefire, until they perform the Condition, which was to be prescribed;] and thus they affirm, that Christ did no more sustain the persons of the Elect, than of the Reprobat, but of all alike. If we inquire therefore, what was the Immediate Result & Product of the death of Christ, they agree not to tell us, whether it was a Power, or a Will, or a Right, to God, to save any he pleased.  
However all the Arminians & Camero with them agree in this. That Christ did not purchase faith for any: and that as to all (say some) or as to the most part (say others) Christ hath only procured a Possibility of Salvation: And what is this Possibility? Some call it an Exemption from that necessity of perishing, under which they came by the violation of the former Covenant, if a satisfaction had not interveened; and by this Exemption, they say, it cometh to pass, that Christ, if he will, justice being now satisfied, may bring all to life: And hereby also, say they, all may be saved, if they will: But what is this else then a mere Possibility? What efficacy hath it, seeing notwithstanding thereof, all may perish again? They say, it is really Efficacious as to this Possibility, which was not, before Justice was satisfied: But yet notwithstanding of this Efficacious Possibility, it might come to pass, that not one should have been saved: for how can salvation be possible without faith? So that if faith be not hereby purchased, it would seem, that Salvation is not possible. And further, it doth hereby appear, that all which is procured, is but some power to God & to Christ; But what is man's advantage? They say, That a way to life is opened unto man, that so he may now come to God by Faith & Repentance. But how can he come, who hath no power to Believe or Repent, without grace? Or is it in corrupt man's power to Believe or Repent?  
What that truth is, which we stand for, is plainly & fully enough set down in several places of Our Confession of Faith: as Chap. 3. §. 6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory; so hath he, by the Eternal and most free purpose of his Will, fore ordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are Elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit, working in due season; are Justified, Adopted, Sanctified, & Keeped by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are other Redeemed by Christ, effectually Called▪ justified, Adopted, Sanctified & Saved; but the Elect only. So Chap. 8. §. 1. It pleased God, in his eternal purpose, to choose & ordain the Lord jesus, his only begotten Son, so be the mediator between God & man. ●Unto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed, and to be by him in time Redeemed, Called, justified, Sanctified & Glorified. And ibid. §. 5. The Lord jesus by his perfect obedience, & sacrifice of himself; which he through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father, & purchased, not only Reconciliation, but an Everlasting inheritance in the Kingdom of heaven, for all those, whom the Father hath given unto him. So ibid. §. last, To all those, for whom Christ hath purchased Redemption, he doth certanely and effectually apply & communicate the same, making intercession for them, & revealing unto them, in & by the word, the mysteries of salvation, effectually persuading them by his Spirit to believe & obey; and governing their hearts by his word & Spirit, overcoming all their enemies by his Almighty power & wisdom, in such manner & ways, as are most cansonant to his wonderful & unsearchable dispensations. Our judgement is this, in short, That Christ, according to the good pleasure of his Father, laid down his life a Ransom for the Elect only, who were given to him to save from Wrath, and Destruction; and by that price purchased Salvation, & all the Means necessary thereunto, for them only to whom in due time, & after the method, which he thinketh best, doth effectually apply the same unto them, & actually save them.  
Though grounds sufficient, considering the places of Scriptures, annexed in the margin of the Confession, confirming all, are clearly hinted & laid down, in these passages cited; yet I shall, with what brevity is possible, point forth our grounds in plain terms. And (1.) The Scripture is full & plain, in holding forth 2 Covenant betwixt ●ehova, and the Mediator, a transaction concerning man; or the purposes of God concerning the Salvation of Man, in way of a mutual Compact; both for our better understanding of that solid ground of our Peace & Hope, & for the confirming of our staggering & weak Faith. And though the full explication & confirmation hereof, would, I judge, fully undermine & destroy the rotten grounds of Socinians & Arminians, and of all, who are for the Diana of Freewill, and enemies to the Grace of God; yet I cannot digress thereunto here; and shall only refer such, as would see the same confirmed, unto Mr. dickson's Therapeutica sacra, & Mr. rutherford's book upon the Covenant. Taking it therefore for granted, till what is by these Worthies said anent it, be confuted; and finding, that Arminius himself in his Orat. de Sacerdotio Christi, saith, there was a Covenant betwixt the Lord & Christ, I shall but shortly infer therefrom, That it is repugnant to reason, to say, that the result of that Eternal Transaction: and the whole intended by it, was only to procure a mere Possibility of Salvation; and that such a Possibility, as that though it was equally for all; yet it might so fall out, that not one person should be saved, among all the sons of Adam. How unreasonable is it to imagine such a bargain betwixt the Father and the Son, as among men, considering what they are doing, can have no place? If Christ was to see his seed, by virtue of this Contract, then certainly God had a special eye and respect unto that seed; and that feed must be distinguished from all the rest, for it cannot be all, else all should be saved: and so Christ did not undertake to buy all, nor did the Father give him all, for his seed: and in reference to that feed, the Redemption purchased must be an Actual, & not a mere Potential, or Possible Redemption; and the Lord must have full Power & Dominion over the Will of that Seed, whereby he may determine their hearts unto a following of the Method, which he was to prescribe; and all these means, whereby this actual Closeing with the Conditions was to be effectually wrought, must have been secured: for a transaction betwixt persons, infinite in Wisdom, must of necessity be, in all things, contrived in deep Wisdom. So then, if by virtue of this Covenant, a seed was insured to Christ, it was these concerning whom the transaction was made; for what interest could others have in this, or advantage by it? And so the Rademption was neither Universal; nor yet merely Possible, & no more.  
Again (2.) The Scripture every where pointeth out the end of Christ's coming & dying, to have been, to Procure & Obtain some good to man; it were endless to cite the Scriptures speaking this out plainly: But if it had been only to have procured a Possibility, than the proper & immediate end of his dying, had been only to have procured something to God, viz. a Power to Him, that he might, without hurt to his Justice, prescribe a possible way of salvation. Now, not to discuss that question, agitated among Orthodox Divines, viz. whether it was impossible for God to have pardoned the sins of man, without a satisfaction made by his Son, or not; meaning antecedently to a decree, determineing this way of manifestation of the Justice of God; only I must say, that as yet I can see nothing from Scripture, determineing the egresses of the Relative Justice of God, to be more essential to God, & less subject to the free determinations of his good will and pleasure, than are the egresses of his Mercy; nor do I see any necessity for asserting this against the Socinians, seeing our ground, walking upon a decree, is proof against all their Assaults; far less see I any necessity of founding our whole debate with the Socinians, upon that ground; yea I cannot but judge it the result of great imprudence so to do, seeing the Socinians may reply, that the sole ground of that Opposition to them is not only questioned, but plainly denied, by such as we account Orthodox & learned; and may hence gather, that we have no other solid ground, whereupon to debate with them, but such as the learned of our own side overthrow. The depths of God's Counsel are beyond our fathoming; and it is hard for us to say, hithertil the omnipotent can come, but not one ince further. I dar not be wise above what is written; and I would gladly see one passage of Scripture, declareing this to have been in itself utterly impossible, & inconsistent with God. B● whatever may be said of this. what Scripture tells us, that Christ was sen to die, that he might obtain this Power unto God? And further, what was this power? Was it a mere Power & Liberty, that should never have any Effect? If it was to have an Effect, what was that? Was it only to make a new Transaction with man, in order to his salvation? If that was all, notwithstanding of all this Power & Ability, not one man might have been saved. Was it certanely to save some? Then, the Redemption cannot be called Universal, nor yet merely Possible. Nay, if by the death of Christ a Right & Power only was obtained to God, God was at full liberty to have exerced that Right & Power, or not, as he pleased; and so notwithstanding thereof man might have remained in the same Condition, whereinto he was, and never so much as have had one offer of life, upon any terms whatever; or only upon the old terms of the Covenant of works; and what then should the advantage of this have been? The whole Scripture, speaking of the death of Christ, mentioneth far other Ends, respecting man.  
If we (3.) Consider how the Scripture mentioneth, ● number given of the Father to Christ, to be Redeemed & Saved, we shall see, that there is neither an Universal, nor yet a mere Possible Redemption: for this gift is utterly repugnant to, & destructive of both: for if, conform to the Covenant betwixt the Father and the Son, there were some given to Christ to save & redeem, these he must actually save & redeem; and for these only, was Christ ordained & designed of the Father to be a Redeemer; and upon the account of these only, did he undertake the work, & lay down the ransome-money: for it is not rational to suppose, that, the design of Father & Son being to save actually these gifted ones, Christ would shed his blood for others, who were no● given to him, & who should receive no salvation by his blood; for cui bono? what could be the design of Father & Son in this? The matter goeth not so in humane transactions, where the price is considerable. Now, that the Scripture mentioneth some given to Christ, & that in distinction from others, is clear joh. 17: 2.— that he should give eternal life to as many, as thou hast given him. So vers. 12. Those that thou gavest we, I have kept, and none of them are lost, etc. So joh. 6: 37. All that the Father hath given me, shall come unto me, & vers. 40. And this is the Father's will, that hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing Joh. 17: 9 I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them, which thou hast given me; for they are thine. 10. And all thine are mine & mine are thine, and I am glorified in them. 11.- Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me. 24. Father I will, that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am, etc. Whence we see, that Christ had no charge of the rest; was under no tye to save them, nor would be so much as pray for them: but as for the given ones, Joh. 10. called his sheep, for these he laid down his life, & prayed; and for these was ●e to give an account: nay, which is more, these had a special Interest in God's heart & affection & were thereupon given to Christ. They were the Father's, & given of the Father to the Son; and so fully discriminated from all the rest; and both Father & Son stand engaged to carry these thorough unto salvation: all which considered, it is most plain, that the Redemption was Particular & Actual, conform to the Undertaking, & Transaction.  
Nay (4.) If we will consider the fountain love, from whence the sending of Christ came, we will see how unreasonable it is to imagine an Universal mere Possible Redemption, as the proper end & effect, of Christ's death & merits. It is said joh. 3: 16. A place, which our Universalists look upon, as most favourable for them) that God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that all believers in him, might have eternal life. This love is held forth as unparallelable, a love greater than which cannot be conceived, & a love demonstrated by the greatest effect imaginable, sending & giving his only begotten, to give his life a ransom, & to die for sinners; and it must be contrary to all reason, to imagine, that all this was to procure a Redemption, by which it was possible, that not one man should be Actually Redeemed. Christ himself saith, Joh. 15: 13. greater love hath no man, tha● this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. See also Rom. 5: 8. And shall we think, that the effect of all this Non-such Love, both of the Father, & of the Son, was only a Possible Salvation, and Redemption? and that all this love should be outed; and possibly not one man saved? Either the Lord knew, that some would get good by this fruit of wonderful love, or not? then he was not omniscient: and then the Father gave his Son, & the Son came, & both were the effect of the greatest love imaginable, & yet neither of them knew, that any one soul should be saved for all that. If he knew, that they would get good by it, either by themselves alone, without his Grace, or not. If the first, why would he send his Son to die, & why would Christ come to die for such, as they saw would never have a will to be saved by his death? If the last be said, then, seeing the greatest expression of of love was to send his Son, & in the Son to come & die, how can we think, that that was for all, when the grace to improve that death, & profit by it, was not designed for all? Sayeth not Paul Rom. 8: 32. He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall not with him also freely give us all things? Importing that that was Impossible. Shall we imagine that that is the greatest love, which is common to all, & is not able to effectuate the salvation of those upon whom it is set? and how can this be, that the greatest effect of this greatest love shall be common to all, & smaller effects not common also? See also 1. joh. 4: 9, 10, 11. where this special love, by which Christ was sent, is made peculiar unto believers; for john is speaking of none else: So is this love peculiarly terminated on Christ's Wife & Church Ephes. 5: 26, 26. & hath gracious & saving effects Gal. 2: 20. Tit. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Ephes. 2: 4; 5, 6. Rom. 8: 36, 37. 2. Thes. 2: 16, 17. Revel. 1: 5, 6. Beside, that this love is mentioned as an Old, Everlasting, & Unchangeable Love, jer. 31: 3. Ephes. 1: 3, 4. Rom. 9: 11. joh. 13: 1. Zeph. 3: 17. And is all this nothing but a General Common thing, that cannot save one soul, if Lord Freewill do not consent, of his own accord?  
Moreover (5.) if we consider the ends assigned to the Death of Christ, mentioned in Scripture, we shall see that it was some other thing, than a mere Possible Delivery & Redemption, common to all mankind. Mat. 8: 11. He came to save that which was lost; and not to make their salvation merely possible; for if that were all, Christ's argument should have had no strength: So 1. Tim. 1: 15.- jesus Christ came into the world to save sinner: if it were a mere possibility, that might never take effect, how should this faithful saying be worthy of all acception; So Luk. 19: 10 where the matter is exemplified in Zaccheus Mat. 1: 21. the reason of the name jesus, given to the Redeemer is, because he shall save his people from their sins, that is, Actually & Really, and not Potentially or Possibly only: and this cannot be meaned of all; for he saveth not the Reprobat from their sins; at least, not from the sin of unbeleef, by the confession of Adversaries; But here, no sin is excepted, and therefore is his death restricted to his people, whom he saveth from all their sins. Heb. 2: 14, 15. there is another end of his death mentioned, viz. that he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil, and deliver them, who through fear of death, were all their life time subject to bondage. This was no mere Possible Deliverance, but Actual & Effectual; and it was not common to all; for it is restricted to his Brethren vers. 11, 12, 17. and to sons 13. & to the children which God gave him vers. 13, 14. & to the Seed of Abraham vers 16. and again verse 17. wherefore in all things it behoved him to be make like unto his brithrens, that he might be a Merciful & Faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the people. Behoved Christ to be a Merciful & Faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, only to make a Possible Reconciliation, whereby it might be, that not one person should be reconciled? & are the Reprobate his brethrens? Ephes. 5: 25, 26. To what end did Christ give himself for his Church? (And all the world of mankind belong not to his Church.) It was, that he might sanctify & cleanse it with the washing of water, by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spotor wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish. Is this a mere Possibility? Then might Christ have died, & have no Church to present to himself fair & spotless: his Church might have remained full of spots & wrinkles, unholy & full of blemishes, yea should have been no Church. Tit. 2: 14. He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works. Do all the world belong to his peculiar people? doth Christ redeem all the world from all iniquity? Is all the world purified & made zealous of good works? Or is all this mere may be, which may not be? 2. Corinth. 5. vers. 21. He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him. Was Christ made sin, or a sacrifice for sin, that all the world might possibly be made the Righteousness of God in him? that is, that possibly not one person might be made the Righteousness of God in him? who can dream thus, that God's intentions & designs should be so loose & frustrable, & that God should be so uncertain in his purposes? Gal. 1: 4. why did the Lord Jesus give himself for our sins? It was, that he might deliver 〈◊〉 from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father. This is no mere Possible Deliverance; and it is such as was designed not for all the world, but for the us, there mentioned. So Chap. 4: 4, 5.— 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 sons. This Real Benefit is manifestly here restricked. joh. 17: 19 for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified through the truth, Christ sanctified himself, to be an oblation, not to obtain a mere may be; but 〈◊〉 they, for whose sakes he did sanctify himself, that is, they that were given to him vers. 6: 9 and were his own vers. 10. & were in due time to believe in him vers. 20.) might Really & Actually be Sanctified through him. Heb: 13: 12. wherefore did Jesus suffer without the gate? it was, that ho might sanctify the people with his own blood; sure, this is more, than a may be. Rom. 3: 25, 26. Why did God set forth Christ to be a propitiation? It was to declare his Righteousness, for the remission of sins that are past, that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in jesus: a Certain Real thing. Many more passages might be added to this purpose, but these may suffice, to discover the absurd falsehood of this doctrine.  
Add (6.) such passages, as mention the Actual Accomplishment & Effect of Christ's death, where it will yet more appear, that this was no mere may be, or Possible thing, but that which was to have a certain Being & Reality as to the persons, for whom it was designed; Such as Heb. 1: 3●— when he had by himself purged our sins. Can their sins be said to be purged, who pine a way in hell for ever, because of their sins? could this be true, if no man had been saved? and yet, if it had been a mere possible & may be Redemption, it might have come to pass, that not one person should have been actually saved. So Heb. 9: 12.- by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. Is a mere possible Redemption to be called an eternal Redemption? and was that all that Christ obtained? Then Christ's blood was more ineffectual in the truth, than the type was, in its typicalness; for the blood of bulls & goats, and the ashes of an hiefer sprinkling the unclean, did not obtain a possible and may-besanctification, and purifying of the flesh; but did actually & really sanctify to the purifying of the flesh verse. 13. Again vers. 14. (which also confirmeth what is now said) how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works, to serve the living God. So that all such, for whom he offered himself, and shed his blood, and none else, have their consciences purged from dead works, to serve the living God: and who darsay, that this is common to all, or is a mere may be, which the Apostle both restricteth & asserteth, as a most certain real thing; Again vers. 26.- but now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared, to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself. So that he did Actually & Really, and not Possibly & Potentially only, put away sin; the sin viz. of those, for whom he was a sacrifice, even of them, that look for him, and to whom he shall appear the second time, without sin unto salvation verse. 28. and sure, no man in his wits will say, that this is the whole world. Gal. 3: 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law, being made a curse for us. 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through jesus Christ, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit, through faith. Here are three Ends & Effects of Christ's Redemption mentioned, which no Man will say, are common to all viz. Redemption from the Curse of the Law; and this was Really, & not potentially only done, by Christ's being made a curse for us; the Communication of the blessing of Abraham, and the Promise of the Spirit, which are insured to such as are Redeemed from the Curse of the Law, and to none else. So Ephes. 2: 13, 14, 15, 16. But now in Christ jesus, ye, who sometimes were afar off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ; for he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, the Law of commandments in ordinances; for to make to himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile both unto God, in one body, by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby. To which add the paralled place Col. 1: 21, 22. & 2: 14, 15. was all this delivery from Wrath, Enmity, Law of commandments & whatever was against us, but a mere Potential thing, and a may be, common to all, in whose power it was to cause it take effect, or not, as they pleased? Esai. 53: 5. He was wounded for our transgressions, ●e was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed with 1. Cor. 15: 3.- Christ died for our sins & 1. Pet. 2: 24. who his own self bear our sins in his own body, on the tree- by whose stripes we are healed: How can we then imagine, that all this was a mere may be, seeing he was so bruised for our iniquities, so died for our sins, so bear our sins, in his own body; as that thereby all, in whose room he stood, are healed by his stripes? The Apostle doth moreover fully clear this matter, Rom. 5: 6.- Christ died for the ungodly: was this for all? Or was it to have an uncertain End & effect? No, vers. 9 much more than being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. The ungodly and the sinners, for whom he died, are such as become justified by his blood, & shall at length be fully saved from wrath. And again vers. 10. for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, by the death of his son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life: Upon his death followeth Reconciliation with God, & then Salvation; and his death is for no more than his life is for. By him also they receive an atonement verse. 11. As the consequences & effects of Adam's sin did Certainly, and not by a may be, redound to all, that he represented & engaged for; so the fruits & effects of Christ's death do as certainly come unto such, as are his, as the Apostle cleareth, in the following verses, laying the advantage on the side of Christ & his; vers. 15.— much more the Grace of God, and the gift by grace, by one man jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many, vers. 16.— but the free gift is of many offences, unto justification, verse. 17.- much more they, which receive abundance of grace and of the Gift of Righteousness, shall reign in life, by one jesus Christ, verse. 18.— even so by the Righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men to justification of life, verse. 19— so by the obedience of one shall many be made Righteous, verse. 21.— so might grace reign, through Righteousness unto eternal life, by jesus Christ, our Lord. Is all this a Common thing, and a mere may be, or Possibility? joh. 10: 11. he giveth his life for his sheep & verse. 15. But may they for all that perish? No, in no wise vers. 28. and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish. He came that they might have life, and might have it more abundantly, verse. 10. To the same purpose he saith joh. 6: 33. that he giveth life unto the world, not such a life, sure, as may never quicken any. Upon Christ's death doth the Apostle infer Rom. 8: 32. that the Elect shall have all things, & vers. 33, 34, 35. that they are free from all Accusations, or any Hazard therefrom, being justified, and having Christ's Death, Resurrection, and Intercession to secure them at all hands; & thereupon they have assurance, that nothing shall separate them from the love of God. Act. 20: 28. Christ hath purchased a Church with his own blood. The whole world is not this Church; nor is this purchase an uncertane may be; And all this Real & Certain Effect of Christ's death, was foretold by Daniel Chap. 9: 24,— to finish the transgresion, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting Righteousness, etc. And who can imagine, that this is Universal, or Uncertane?  
If we will (7.) Consider some other Ends of the death of Christ, which the Scripture pointeth forth, which are not to be found among Heathens, or any except the few Chosen ones, Ordained to life, we shall see, how unreasonable the Adversaries are. Gal. 4: 5. Christ died to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Was this end, & fruit left at an Uncertanty? Shall we thinks, that Christ might have died, & yet one man receive this Adoption? Was this Adoption purchased upon an uncertain Condition? Or was this purchased equally for all? Then such as received it, might have thanked their own well natured Freewill, upon that account. But let us consider some other fruits. Gal. 1: 4. who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world. So 1. Pet. 2: 24. He bear our sins, in his own body, on the tree: but for what end: That we being dead to sin, should live unto Righteousness: & Chap. 3: 18. Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust: To what end and purpose? To bring us to God. Heb. 10: 10. by the which will we are sanctified. How came this to pass? Through the offering of the body of jesus Christ, once for all, So he suffered without the gate, that he might sanctify the people Chap. 13: 12. Revel. 1: 5, 6.— he loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood. But was this all? No, it is added, And hath made us Kings & Priests unto God, and his Father. So Ch. 5: 9, 10.— thou was slain, and hast redeemed us to God, by thy blood; and what more? And hast made us unto our God, Kings & Priests, etc. So 2. Cor. 5: 15. He died for all: But for what end and purpose? That they which live, should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him, which died for them, and rose again. See Col. 1: 22. These & the like passages do clearly point forth a special end of Christ's Death, which was designed both by the Father, that sent him, & by himself: and shall we suppose, that this great & chief design was made to hang upon the lubric & uncertain will of man? Shall Christ be beholden to man's good will for the purchase he made, at so dear a rate? If not, why are not all these ends attained, in all, for whom he died? Did Christ fail in laying down the Ransom? Or doth not the Father keep condition? Who can say either of these? Then surely, there can be no reason to say, that Christ made an uncertain bargain, & purchased only a Possibility of these fruits, which he knew not if ever he should attain, in any one; Nor to say, that he died for all.  
Let us further (8.) take notice: That for whom Christ died, he died to take away their sins; And that so, as they may be fully Pardoned, & never brought on reckoning again: that is, that they be Remitted & Pardoned; and that the poor sinner may not suffer therefore. This sure must be the import of that prayer, forgive us our trespasses. If then Christ by his death hath taken away sin, and purged it away, making satisfaction to justice therefore, how can we think, that justice can punish the sinner in hell fire, for these same sins? But let us see, what the Scripture saith, 1. joh. 3: 5.— he was manifested to take away our sins. Ephes. 1: 7. we have redemption in his blood: what Redemption? forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. So likewise Col. 1: 14. Now when sins are thus taken away, they are blotted out, & not remembered Esai. 43: 25. Fer. 31: 34. Heb. 8: 12. Yea they are blotted out as a cloud, and as a thick cloud Esai 44: 22. So they are said to be subdued, & casten into the depths of the sea. Mica. 7: 19 Shall we now say, that Christ hath died, to purchase this Redemption, the Forgiveness & blotting-out, as a thick cloud, and casting into the depths of the sea, of sin; and yet multitudes of those; for whom this was purchased, and that by the blood of God, should never obtain this benefire, but have all their own score? This so pincheth the Adversaries, that the best evasion they can fall upon, is to say, that none shall have Original sin charged upon them: But the Scripture no where restricteth this Remission to that sin only. Others therefore say, That no sin now shall be be charged upon any, but the sin of Unbeleef. Then judas doth not suffer to day, for betraying his master: was it for this sin only, that the Old World was drowned; or that the Cities of Sodom are suffering the vengeance of eternal fire? jude seemeth to say some other thing vers. 7. so are there other sins there reckoned up vers. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. to which is reserved the blakness of darkness for ever, verse. 13. But some say, that these are all but pardoned upon condition. Then the Redemption is neither Actual & Real, nor Complete, but a poor may be, and a may not be: and how can such sins be said to be forgiven or blotted out, and casten behind God's back, and into the depths of the sea? Did Christ know, whether or not this condition would be performed? If not, than He is not the omniscient God. If he knew, that it would not be performed by the greatest part, how can we imagine, that he would notwithstanding lay down his life to purchase a Remission for them? And how 〈◊〉 we think, that He should purchase a Pardon to all, and let the event hang upon the pendulous tottering will of a sinful creature? But as to that Condition, we shall.  
Propose (9) this consideration. The not performance of that Condition was no doubt a sin, and if Christ died for all the sins of the world, he died for that too: And if he died for that too, that is taken out of the way, or there must be another Condition imagined, upon performance of which, that is to be taken our or the way; and the non-performance of this Condition being also a sin, our proposition will recurre upon this, and so in infinitum: but if this sin be taken out of the way, it cannot prejudge them of the pardon of therest: and thus all their sins being pardoned, they must needs be saved: and yet it is not so. But it is said, that Christ died not for the sin of Final Unbeleef; yet it seemeth, that it will be granted, that he died even for the sin of Unbelief of all the world, and for unbelief continued in, until the last hour of a man's life; but not for that last act; which yet is but the same Unbelief continued in an hour longer; and shall we think, that Christ bore the Unbelief of 20, 40, 60. or more years, in his body, on the cross, & not the same Unbelief for one hour or half hour, yea or quarter of an hour? Who seeth not, how little ground there is for such an imagination? But the thing I would have mainly here considered, is this. That for whose sins Christ hath died, he hath died for all their sins; and therefore, if he died for the sins of all the world, he died for the Final Unbelief of all the world: But this will not be granted; therefore neither can it be said, that he died for the sins of all men. Whose sins he took upon him to make satisfaction for, he left none for them to answer for; for he is a complete Mediator, and is sole Mediator. If he died for all the rest of the sins of the Reprobat, and of the whole world, why not for that also? Sure, when the Scripture speaketh of Christ's taking away of sin, and of the Redemption, that is, forgiveness of sins, which people enjoy through him, there is no sin excepted, He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquity; Esa. 53: 5. the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all vers. 6. or made the iniquity of us all to meet on him; there is no ground for any exception here: when he was stricken for transgression verse. 9 and his soul was made an offering for sin, verse. 10. is there any appearance of the exception of any one sin? when he bear their sin and their iniquities verse. 11, 12. what intimation is given of an exception of any? Yea, if this exception was to be made, which would null & destroy all, what consolation could the declaration of this Redemption, remission of sins, yield unto poor sinners? Col. 1: 14. Ephes. 1: 7. When the Lord made him to be sin for us, was it only in part? how then could we be made the Righteousness of God in Him 2. Cor. 5: 21? was the Lord in Christ reconcileing the world unto himself, not imputing only part of their trespasses to them? but the imputing of one sin would mar the reconciliation for ever. Is not final unbeleef a dead work? Doutbles; yet the blood of Christ purgeth Consciences from dead works Heb. 9: 14. Did the blood of bulls & goats so sanctify, as to the purifying of the flesh, as to leave the most defileing spot of all untaken away? How could healing come by his stripes, if he bear but part of our sins, in his body on the tree, seeing final unbeleef alone would mar all? for where that is, there is no coming to God imaginable. But moreover, the Scripture tells us, that the blood of jesus Christ his Son oleanseth us from all sin 1. joh. 1: 7. and that if any man sin, there is an Advocate with the Father, who is a propitiation for sins, 1. joh. 2: vers. 1, 2. and so must be for all sins, otherways there were little ground of comfort here: And it was foretold by Daniel Chap. 9: 24. that he should make an end of sin, & finish the transgression, & so bring-in everlasting Righteousness. Doth this admit of exceptions, and of such an exception, as would unavoidably make all null? No certanely. But you will ask of me, if I think, that Christ did die for final unbelief? I Answ. Not: for I judge, it is the sin only of Reprobates, who hear the Gospel: and I judge that Christ did not die for any sin of Reprobats: But this I hold, and have cleared, That for whose sins soever Christ hath died, he hath died for all their sins: And because he hath not died for Final Unbeleef, therefore he hath not died for any sin of such, as shall be guilty of this: and as for his own, he died to prevent their falling into, and to keep them from this sin; for he died to bring them unto God, that they might have the Adoption of sons, that they might be sanctified, and live unto Righteousness, be made Righteous, yea the Righteousness of God; as is clear 1. Pet. 2: 24. Heb. 10: 10. 2. Cor. 5: 21. 1. Pet. 3: 18. Rom. 5: 19 what then will they say to this? Final unbeleef is certainly a sin; and Christ either died for it, or not; if he died for it, than it can be laid to no man's charge; or Christ's death is of no value. If he died not for it, he died not for all the sins of all men; but at most, for some sins of all men; and if that was all, no man could thereby be saved, for one sin is enough to procure damnation.  
Moreover (10.) we find the Persons, for whom this price of blood was laid down, designed more particularly, and the Object of this Redemption restricted; and so it could not be for all & every one. It is said to be for Many Esai 53: 11. Matth. 20: 28. & 26: 28. Mark 10: 45. Heb. 9: 28. and what these many are, is abundantly declared in other Scriptures, where they are called Christ's Sheep joh. 10: 15. Christ's People Mat. 1: 21. His People, whom according to the predictions of the Prophets, which have been, since the world began, he should save from their enemies, and from the hand of all, that hate them, to perform the mercy promised to the Fathers, and to remember his holy Covenant, the oath, which he swore to Father Abraham; that he would grant unto them, that being delivered out of the hand of their enemies, they might serve him without fear, in holiness & Righteousness, before him, all the days of their lifo Luk. 1: 68, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75. His Church Ephes. 5: 25. Act. 20: 28. His Body Ephes. 5: 22. The Children of God, that were scattered abroad joh. 11: 52. Sons, Sanctified, Brethren, the Children that God gave him, that Seed of Abraham Heb. 2: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. They are the Sheep, that shall infallibly believe, because sheep joh. 10: 26. and Whom Christ knoweth, and of whom he is known verse. 14. and such as shall hear his voice vers. 16. & follow him vers. 27. to whom he will give eternal life, so that they shall never perish, & who are given to him of his Father verse. 28, 29. & the Elect 2. Tim. 2: 10. He is bread giving life unto the World, of them, that the Father hath given him, and shall come to him joh. 6: 33, 39 They are these, concerning whom the Father's will was, as being given of him, that he should lose nothing, but raise it up again, at the last day ver. 38, 39, 47. The Redeemed ones that are numbered by God 144000. & are the first fruits unto God, and the Lamb. Revel. 14: 3, 4, 5. They are such as are the Lords, & whom the Lord knoweth for his 2. Tim. 2: 19 & are enroled in the Lamb's book, Revel. 13: 8. & 20: 15. So are they designed to be these, for whom God is, and who shall have unquestionably all things; the Elect who shall be justified, who shall not be separated from the Love of Christ; are in all things more than conquerors Rom. 8: 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 38, 39 These with whom the Covenant shall be confirmed Dan. 9: 27. The redeemed out of every Kindred, & Tongue, & People, & Nation; and made Kings & Priests Revel. 5: 9, 10.  
Further (11.) if Christ died for the sins of all persons, how cometh it that they are not all actually pardoned? It cannot be said, that Christ's death was not a satisfactory price, nor that the Father did not accept of it: If then he shed his blood for the remission of sins, Mat. 26: 28. are not all these sins pardoned virtually & fundamently? or shall they not all actually be pardoned in due time? If it be said, they shall be pardoned upon Condition of their faith. But if the sins of all be equally paid for, and equally in a virtual manner discharged, in Christ's being actually discharged from that debt, in the day of his Resurrection; and the actually discharge depending upon the uncertain Condition of man's Will; man, who willingly performeth the Condition, shall praise himself for the actually pardon, and none else; for Christ did no more for him, as to the Actual Pardon, than for others, who never shall be blessed with actual forgiveness: and yet forgiveness is held forth, as a special act of free grace; forgiveness of sins is according to the riches of his grace Ephes. 1: 7. Moreover as to that Condition, whether did Christ purchase it, or not? If he did not purchase it, than man is not beholden to Christ, for the Condition; be it faith, or what ye will, it is no purchased mercy, but man is beholden to his good Lord- Free Will, for it, and so he may sacrifice to his own net, and sing glory to himself, for making himself to differ, and for obtaining to himself Actual Remission of all his sins, and consequently blessedness Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. for had not his own well disposed Lord- Free Will performed that Condition, all that Christ did, had never more advantaged him, than it did others that perish.  
If it be said, that grace to perform the condition, though it be not purchased by the blood, of Christ, yet it is freely given by God, to whom he will. I Answer Not to insist here, on the proof of faith's being purchased by Christ; because we shall clear it afterward, & there is nothing else assigned for the condition, I would inquire, whether Christ knew to whom this grace would be given; or not? if not, than we must deny him to be God: if he knew, why shall we suppose, that he would lay down his life equally for all, when he knew before hand, that many should never get grace to perform the condition, upon which his death should redound to their actual pardon & justification? what Ends, or what Advantages can we imagine of such an Universal Redemption?  
(12.) If the Condition, upon which actual pardon & justification is granted, in the blood of Christ, be purchased by Christ; then either all shall certainly be Pardoned & Justified, or Christ hath not purchased an Equal, Common, & Possible Redemption, to all and every man: But the former is true, & it is not true that all shall certainly be pardoned & actually justified; for then all should be glorified. That the condition, to wit, Faith, & Repentance is purchased by Christ, who can deny, seeing, he is expressly called the Author of Faith, Heb. 12: 2. and a Prince exalted to give Repentance & forgiveness of sins Act. 5: 31? So that as forgiveness of sins is founded upon his death, as the Meritorious cause; so must Repentance be; and Christ, as an exalted Prince & Saviour, hath this power to dispose of his own purchased legacy, which he hath left, and insured by his death, unto the heirs of salvation. Upon his Death, & Satisfaction made in his death, hath he goat all power in heaven & earth, a power to quicken whom he will Matth. 28: 18. joh. 5: 21, 22, 27. Phil. 2: 9, 10. Hence we are said to be complete in him Col. 2: 10. & to be blessed with all spiritual blessings, in celestials (to which, no doubt, Faith & Repentance do belong) in him Ephes. 1: 3. Is it not from hence, that the divine power hath given unto us all things, that pertain unto life and godliness 2. Pet, 1: 3? Nay Paul tells us expressly Phil, 1: 29. that it is given to us, in the behalf of Christ, to believe on him. And certainly there is a promise of Faith & Repentance; and all the promises are yea & amen in Him 2. Cor. 1: 20. all the Blessings contained in the Covenant, are made sure by his death, who was the surety of this better Testament Heb. 7: 22. & this Testament was to have force by his death Heb. 9: 15, 16, 17, 18, & the New heart & heart of flesh, is promised in the Covenant, & comprehendeth Faith & Repentance, they being some of his Laws, which he hath also promised to write in the heart jer. 31: 33, Heb. 8: 10. Ezech. 11: 19, 20, & 36: 26, 27. We have moreover seen that Sanctification & Holiness, from which, Faith & Repentance cannot be separated, were purchased by Christ, & intended in his death: whence he is made of God unto us Sanctification 1. Cor. 1: 30. If it be not purchased by Christ, how come we by it? is it a thing in our Power, and an act of our own Free Will? Then, as I said before, we are beholden to ourselves, for Faith and all that follow upon it, & then farewell all Prayer for Faith & Repentance, & all Thanksgiving to God for it. This is pure Pelagtanisme. If it be said, that it is the free gift of God Ephes. 2: 8. and a Consequent of electing love. I Answer all the fruits of election, which are to be wrought in us, are procured by the blood of Christ, for all are conveyed to us in a Covenant, whereof Christ is the Mediator & Surety, and with Christ he giveth us all things Rom. 8: 32. & we are blessed in Him with all spiritual blessings, according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world Ephes. 1: 3, 4. So we are predestinate unto the adoption of children by jesus Christ, Ephes. 1: 5. and adoption is not had without Faith joh. 1: 12. can we have Actual Redemption in Christ's blood Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. even forgiveness of sins, and not have also in his blood Faith, without which there in no actual redemption, or forgiveness of sins to be had? when Christ gave himself for us, that he might purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works Tit. 2: 14. did he not purchase Faith, without which we cannot be such? when the Renewing of the holy Ghost is shed on us abundantly, through I. C. Tit. 3: 5, 6. have we not Faith also through him? May we not pray for Faith; and can we pray for any thing, & not in Christ's name? See 2. Tim. 1: 9 1. Pet. 1: 3. Rom. 8: 32, 39 Luk. 22: 32.  
Again (13.) All that Christ died for, must certanely be Saved, But all Men shall not be saved. That all, for whom Christ died, must certanely be saved, is hence apparent. (1.) That all, who have Saving Faith & Repentance, shall be saved, will not be denied; & that Christ hath purchased Faith & Repentance to all, for whom he died, we have shown above. (2.) These who shall freely get all things f●om God, must get Salvation; for all things else signify nothing without that; but all they, for whom Christ was delivered, shall get all things, Rom. 8: 32. (3.) They whom nothing shall separate from the Love of Christ, and from the Love of God, which is in Christ Jesus, our Lord, must certainly be saved: But all they, for whom Christ hath died, will in due time have ground to say this. Rom. 8: 34, 35, 39 (4.) All they, to whose charge nothing can be laid, shall be saved: But this will be true of all that Christ died for; for Christ's death is held forth as the ground of this, Rom. 8: 33, 34. (5.) They, for whom Christ intercedeth, shall undoubtedly by saved: But Christ intercedeth for all, for whom he died, Rom. 8: 33, 34. (6.) All who are sanctified shall be saved: But all that Christ died for, shall in due time be sanctified; Sanctification being, as we showed above, one principal intended end of Christ's death. (7.) All Christ's Elected sheep shall be saved: But such are they, for whom Christ died, as was shown. (8.) All that God & Christ love with the greatest love imaginable, shall certainly be saved: But such are they, for whom Christ died, joh. 3: 16. & 15: 13. Act. 20: 28. Eph. 5: 25. (9) All that become the Righteousness of God in Christ shall be saved. But that shall be true of all, for whom he died, or was made sin, or a sacrifice for sin 2. Cor. 5: 21. (10.) All, that shall be blessed in having their sins pardoned, shall be saved, Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. But all for whom Christ died shall have this Redemption, Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. (11.) All they, whom Christ knoweth & acnowledgeth, shall be saved, Mat. 7: 23. But he knoweth all them for his sheep, joh. 10: 14, 17. for whom he died. (12.) All, for whom Christ rose again, shall be saved, seeing he rose for our justification, Rom. 4: 25. But he rose again for all those, for whom he died, Rom. 4: 25. who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification, Rom. 8: 34. (13.) All who shall be planted together with Christ, in the likeness of his resurrection, shall be saved: But that is true of such as he died for, Rom. 6: 5. (14.) All they in whom the old man shall be crucified, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth they should not serve sin, shall be saved: But that is true of such as he died for, Rom. 6: 6, 7, 8. knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin: for he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe, that we shall also live with him, etc. (15.) All they, who shall be made Kings & Priests unto God, shall be saved. But all the redeemed shall be such, Rev. 1: 5, 6. & 5: 10. See worthy Mr. Durham on the Revel. p. 303. (16.) If Christ must see of the travail of his soul, than these he died for must be saved: But the former is true, Esai. 53: 11. (17.) All whom Christ shall Justify shall be saved, But he shall justify all, whose iniquities he beareth, Esai. 53: 11. Thus is this sufficiently proved.  
It is also considerable (14.) That no where in Scripture, we find it expressly said & affirmed, That Christ died for all men; Far less find we it said, that Christ died for all and every man. Why then is all this trouble made? But they say, as much as all that is said by consequence. And this we deny: if they will rationally press this matter, they should evince, that such expressions, as they make so much work about, can be no otherwise understood, than they suppose, in the places, where they stand: and this they shall never be able to do. Though it be said, that Christ gave his life a Ransom for all; yet no reason can evince, that that is necessarily to be understood of all & every man: so nor can they conclude any thing rationally from the word world. They may as well infer from these words all, and the world, that Christ died for devils, beasts & senseless creatures, as that he died for all & every man; for they are comprehended under these terms, as well as Men: And if they will restrict these terms to men, because of other Scriptures; why may not we restrick them also to the Elect, because of the correspondence of other passages of Scripture? They cannot deny us the liberty, they take to themselves. If they say, that there is a vast difference betwixt Devils an Men, in reference to such favours. We deny it not: but shall add, that in reference to spiritual favours, amongst which we cannot but reckon, with the good leave of our Adversaries, the death of Christ, being the fruit & expression of the greatest Love of God to Man, we find also a great difference in Scripture. Some are Loved, some Hated Rom. 9: 11, 12. Some whom he Knoweth some whom he Knoweth not joh. 10: 14. & 13: 18. Mat. 7: 23. 2. Tim. 2: 19 Some Chosen & Ordained to life, others not, but to Wrath Act. 13: 48. Rom. 8: 30. & 9: 18. etc. Ephes. 1: 4. 1. Thes. 5: 9 Some Sheep, others Goats Mat. 25: 32. Some on whom God hath Mercy, others whom he Hardeneth Rom. 9 Some his Church, others not Act. 20: 28. Ephes. 5: 25. Some. of the World, others not joh. 17: 9, 10. Some his Brethren, others not Heb. 2: 10, 12, 13. And as plainly read we, that Christ died for his People Mas. 1: 21. his Sheep joh. 10: 11, 12, 14. his Church Act. 20: 28. Ephes. 5: 25. his Elect Rom. 8: 32, 34. and his Children. Heb. 2: 12, 13.  
If we would consider aright. (15.) What Christ did undergo & suffer, while he was made sin, or was making satisfaction for sin; we should hardly think it probable, that Christ Jesus, God-man, who was the brightness of though Father's glory, and the express image of his person, Heb. 1: 3. and thought it no robbery to be counted equal with God, Phil. 2: 6. Should have undergone what he did undergo, and that the Father should have laid all that upon him, which he did lay upon him, and that to purchase only a mere Possible Redemption from sin & wrath, whereby not one person should be saved or pardoned, if so it had seemed good to captain Free will. Not to mention his condescending to be Born of a woman, & to be made under the Law, Gal. 4: 4. nor his being in the form of a servant, Phil. 2: 7. nor his Poverty & mean Condition in the world, 2. Cor. 8: 9 nor his Conflicting with the indignities of the world, Psal. 22: 6. Heb. 12: 2, 3. with the temptations of Satan Math. 4: 1-12. Luk. 4: 15. and his being under the infirmities, common to the nature of man, being in all things like us, except sin Heb. 2: 17. & 4: 15. Esai. 52: 13, 14. Nay, nor his sufferings in his Body, Name, Honour at death, when he was betrayed by judas Mat. 27: 4. forsaken by his disciples Math. 26: 56. Scorned & Reviled by the world Esai. 53: 2● 3. Condemned as a malefactor by Pilate, & Tormented by his persecutors Mat. 27: 26-50. joh. 19: 34. & Endured the Painful, Shameful & Cursed death of the cross Phil. 2: 8. Heb. 12: 2. all which & the like being endured by Him, who was the Son of God, could be no mean suffering, nor undergone for an uncertain end, or for the procureing of a mere Possible & Uncertain good: But that which we would most take notice of here, is, his Soul sufferings, being pursued by divine justice, when that Zach. 13: 7. was accomplished, awake, O sword, against my shepherd, against the Man, that is my follow, saith the Lord of hosts, smite the shepherd and the sheep shall be scattered, Mat. 26: 31. and the Lord did bruise him, and put him to grief Esai. 53: 5, 10. and he began to be sorrowful even unto death Mat. 26: 37, 38. and was sore amazed and very heavy Mark. 14: 34. and was put to offer up prayers and supplications, with strong cries and tears to him, that was able to save him Heb. 5: 7. when; notwithstanding that an angel appeared unto him from heaven, strengthening him, yet being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground Luk. 22: 43, 44. and at length was made to cry out, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me Psal. 22: 1. Mat. 27: 46. Mark. 15: 34. This was no mean business, when the Rays & Irradiations of Divine Love were drawn-in & withheld from him, who had such a sharp sense of the happiness in the enjoying of God's favour, because of the Personal union with the Godhead. But that which is most of all to be considered, is his being made a Curse Gal. 3: 13. and so made to wrestle with the Justice and Wrath of a sin revenging God. This was the gall and the worm wood, that made him cry joh. 12: 27. Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour. Shall we suppose, that all this was about an Uncertane Bargain? Shall we think, that he died the cursed death of the cross, and bore the weight of God's wrath Luk. 22: 41. Mat. 27: 46. and so became a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice Heb. 9: 14, 18, & all to purchase a mere Possibility; or a mere Possible Redemption? Shall we think, that the Second person of the Trinity should do & suffer all these things, for to redeem man, when possibly, if Freewill should be so ill natured, not one man should reap any advantage thereby? Me thinks, the asserting of this should be a great temptation to cause people turn Socinians, and deny all these soul sufferings of Christ, & his bearing the wrath of God, & making any satisfaction to justice.  
Add to this (16.) That the Scriptures speak of Christ's Death & Sufferings, as being not for himself, but for others; and that not only for the good & advantage of others (and doubtless the advantage of all this should be but little, if it were nothing else, but a mere Possible Redemption, which Free will might make actual, or not Actual, as it pleased) but in their Room & Place: hence it is called the chastisement of our peace Esai. 53: 5. and he is said to have borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows verse. 4. He was wounded for our transgressions; and bruised for our iniquities verse. 5. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all vers. 6,— for the transgression of my people was he stricken vers. 8.— for he shall bear their iniquities verse. 11.— he bore the sin of many vers. 12. He bear our sins, in his body, on the tree 1. Pet. 2: 24. the just suffered for the unjust 1. Pet. 3: 18. Hence believers are said to be crucified with him Gal. 2: 20.- to be baptised into his death Rom. 6: 3. buried with him by baptism into death verse. 4.- planted together in the likeness of his death vers. 5. dead with Christ verse. 8. He was cut off, but not for himself Dan. 9: 26. See also Heb. 2: 9 1. Pet. 2: 21. Shall we say, that this was merely for our good, seeing it was, in some respect for the good of the whole creation Rom. 8: 20, 21, 22, 23. Act. 3: 21. and not in our Place & Stead? Paul saith 2 Cor. 5: 14. If one be dead than were all dead. And it is manifest, that he paid the Law-debt, having taken on him the seed of Abraham for this end Heb. 2: 16, & being made a curse for us, he redeemed us from the curse of the Law Gal. 3: 10. So that it was in our stead Rome 5: 6, 7, 8 joh. 11: 50. & 10: 11, 15. And the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath clearly this import Mat. 5: 38, & 17: 27, Esa. 41: 4. Exod. 21: 23, 24. 1. Chron, 14: 1. 1. King. 3: 7, 2. King. 1: 17, & 11: 43. Prov. 11: 3. joh. 16: 4, & 34: 17. 1. Pet. 3: 9 Rome 12: 17. See many other places cited by worihy Mr. Rutherfoord in his book of the Covenant pag. 254, 255. where both in the N. T. and in the LXX. version of the old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath this import. And this truth is abundantly made out by our Orthodox Divines, writing against the Socinians; so that I need say no more of it; only I think, such as assert the Redemption purchased by Christ to have been a mere General Possible Redemption, do strengthen the hands of the Socinians; and join with them against the Orthodox: But to our purpose, Such as Christ did thus die for, & in their room & place, are accounted to have died in Him, & so freed: as in Ter. Pro illo te ducam, Ego pro te molam.  
Moreover (17.) If we consider the furniture, which Christ as mediator had given to him of the Father, we shall see more of the unreasonableness of this opinion, which the Arminians embrace: Not to speak of what he had as God, the Father's Fellow & Equal, let us but take notice of that communicated furniture, which he had as Mediator between God and man, 1. Tim, 2: 5. and our Emmanuel, Esai. 7: 14. We see he is called Wonderful, Counsellor, etc. Esai. 9: 6, 7. He is that Candlestick, whence the golden pipes do empty the golden oil, Zeoh 4: 12. He was full of grace & truth joh. 1: 14. Was this fullness for a mere Possible effect? Or had he it so, and for such an end, as none might possibly be the better thereof? No; and of his fullness have all we received grace for grace joh, 1: 16. He had not the Spirit by measure joh, 3: 34. It pleased the Father, that in him should all fullness dwell. Col. 1: 9 In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom & knowledge Col. 2: 3. and in him dwelleth all the fullness of the godhead bodily vers. 9 And wherefore is all this? Even that all his might be compleet in him vers. 10. Grace was poured into his lips Psal. 45: 2. and he was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows verse. 7. And Esai. 61: 1. Luk. 4: 18, etc. The Spirit of the Lord God was upon him, because the Lord had anointed him. And for what end? To preach glad tidings unto the meek, to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. See further vers. 2, 3. Sure, this was no uncertain end, nor left to the discretion of Free will. So Esai. 11: 2. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, etc. Shall all this be, and further shall Righteousness be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins verse. 5. And may it notwithstanding so come to pass, that the Wolf shall not dwell with the Lamb, nor the Leopard lie down with the Kid, etc. nor the earth be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea? Vers. 6, 7, 8, 9 How absurd is it to imagine this? All this furniture saith, that it was no Uncertain General End, which he had before his eyes, in undertaking this work; and the Father in sending him, and granting to him this fullness.  
Add to this (18.) The Titles & Relations, which Christ took upon him: for they cannot be mere insignificant and empty Names. He is called a Redeemer Esa. 41: 14 & 54: 5. & 49: 26, & 60: 16. & 43: 14 & 44: 6, 24. & 48: 17. & 49: 7. & 47: 4. & 59: 20. Rom. 11: 26. And shall we imagine, that He shall be a Redeemer & Deliverer, and yet no man Redeemed or delivered? No: He hath a redeemed company, whom he owneth as such Esa. 35: 9 & 43: 1, 23. & 44: 22. & 48: 20. jer. 31: 11. Esai. 51: 11. & 52: 3. & 63: 4. Zach. 10: 8. Luk. 1: 68 & 24: 21. 1. Pet. 1: 18, Revel. 5: 9 & 14: 3. He is called a Saviour Esai. 43. 3. 11. & 45: 15, 21. & 63: 8. Luk. 1: 47. & 2: 11. joh. 4: 42. Act. 5: 31. & 13: 23. 2. Tim. 1: 10. Tit. 1: 4. Ephes 5: 23. 'tis 2: 13. & 3: 6. 2. Pet. 1: 1, 11. & 2: 20. & 3: 2, 18, 1. joh. 4: 14. Shall we think, that he was given & sent for a Saviour, and took upon him that title & relation, and notwithstanding no man might be saved? No, there are also some designed, the Saved 2. Cor. 2: 15. Act 2: 4. 1. Cor. 1: 18. He is called a King Revel. 15: 3. & 17: 14. & 19: 16. 1. Tim. 6: 15. joh. 12: 15. Luk. 19: 38. & 23: 2. Zach. 9: 9 Mat. 21: 5. Now is he an actual King, and shall have none but potential Subjects? Shall he be a King without a Kingdom? See joh. 18: 36. Col. 1: 13. 1. Cor. 15: 24. He is called an Husband 2. Cor. 11: 2. jer. 31: 32. And therefore he must have a Wife & a Bride joh. 3: 29. Revel. 18: 23. & 21: 9 & 22: 17. He is called an Head Ephes 5: 23. 1. Cor. 11: 3. Ephes. 4: 15. & 1: 22. Col. 1: 18. And so must have a body Ephes. 1: 23. Rom. 12: 5. Ephes. 4: 4. Col. 3: 15. & 1: 24. & 2: 19 Ephes. 4: 16. & 5: 23. & 3: 6. He is called the Vine stock, & shall he have no Brancnes? joh. 15: 1, 2. etc. These things might be further enlairged & pressed; but we shall haste forward.  
(19) Our Adversaries say, That Christ by his Death & passion did Absolutely, even according to the Intention of God, purchase Remission of sins & Reconciliation with God, and that for all & every man: Others say conditionally: But withal as to the application of this purchase: it is made to depend upon faith: and so they distinguish betwixt Impetration & Application. And though it is true, the purchase made is one thing, and the actual enjoyment of the thing purchased is another thing: Yet we may not say, with our Adversaries, that the Impetration is for more, than shall have the Application; But we assert, that both Impetration & Application, in respect of the design of the Father, which is absolute & certain, and the Intention of Christ the Mediator, which is fixed & peremptory, are for the same individual persons; so that for whomsoever God sent Christ, & Christ came to purchase any good, unto these same shall it actually, in due time, & in the Method & manner Condescended upon & prescribed, be given; & upon them, & none else, shall it actually be bestowed: for (1.) No other thing, beside this Application, can be supposed to have been the end of the Impettation; And sure, Christ was herein a Rational Agent: Nay, it was the Intention & design of the Father, that the Application of these good things should be by the means of this Impetration, as is abundantly cleared above. (2.) We cannot suppose that either Christ, or his Father, should fail, or come short of their end designed; but by our Adversaries, the Impetration might have been obtained, and yet no Application made of the good things impetrated & obtained. (3.) If no Application was intended by the Father or by Christ, than it must be said, that both were uncertain, as to what the Event should have been, or at least Regardless & Unconcerned; either of which to affirm were blasphemy. (4.) The very word Impetrate, having the same force & import with, Purchase, Procure, Obtain, Merit, and the like, doth say, that such, for whom this Impetration was made, have a right, upon the Impetration, to the thing Acquired & Purchased: And if they have a right thereto, that Possession should follow. (5.) Yea the word importeth, the actual conferring of the good, to be the very end of the Purchaseing & Impetrating; and so, in this case, the very Impetration is ground of Assurance of the Application, considering, who did impetrate, and at whose hands, and withal, what was the ground of the Father's sending of Christ, and of Christ's coming to impetrate, even inconceiveably wonderful & great Love. Nor doth the intervening of a condition, required before the actual collation of some of the good things purchased, hinder at all; for all these Blessings, some whereof are as a condition to others, are the one good thing Impetrated, and the very conditions are also Impetrated, as we declared above: and so this pointeth forth only the method of the actual bestowing of these good things purchased. (6.) How absurd is it to say, a thing is Impetrated or Obtained, and yet may, or may not be Bestowed; may be Possessed, or not Possessed? Or to say, that such a good thing is Obtained by price or petitioning, and yet the same good thing, may never be Bestowed, or the Bestowing of it hangeth & dependeth upon an Uncertain Condition, which may never beperformed? (7.) How unreasonable is it, that such should have right to the Merits, that have no right to the thing Merited? Doth not an interest in the Merits, procureing any thing, include an interest in the thing Merited? When a ransom is paid for captives, to the end they may be delivered, have not these Captives a right to the deliverance, upon the payment of that ransom? (8.) The Scriptures do so connect these two, that it argueth contempt thereof, to imagine such a separation: as Rom. 4: 25. Yea the one is assigned as a certain Effect & Consequent flowing from the Other, as its Moral cause Esai. 53: 11. By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, this Justification is the Application; & whence cometh it? For he shall bear their iniquities, there is the Impetration given as the ground hereof: So further vers. 5. he was wounded for our transgressions, etc. and what followeth upon this Impetration? And by his stripes are we healed. So Rom. 5: vers. 18. By the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men to justification. So that the Application reacheth an all, that is, all who have interest in the Righteousness, which is the thing Impetrated see also Heb. 10: 10. (9) If Christ's Intercession be for the same persons, for whom he died, than the Application is to the same; for this Intercession of Christ is in order to the Application: But that Christ's Intercession is for the same persons, for whom he died, we shall see hereafter. (10.) If all things be insured to such, for whom Christ died, then certanely this Application cannot fail but the former is true Rom. 8: 32. He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not (mark this manner of expression which importeth the greated of absurdities to think otherwise) with him also freely give us all things? (11.) And in that same place vers. 33, 34. Christ's death is given as the certain ground of Justification, & Salvation, so that such, as he died for, shall certanely, in due time, & after the method prescribed, be Justified & Saved; otherways, there were no sure ground in the Apostles argueing; for if all the ground of this certanty, as to Application, were from their Faith, or fulfilling of the Condition, the Apostle would have mentioned this, as the main ground, & not have led them to a ground common to others, who never should partake of the Application. (12.) This matter is abundantly confirmed from what we said above, concerning Christ's purchasing of Faith, and dying for our sanctification, & to bring us to God, etc. so that more needeth not be added here.  
(20.) For further confirmation of this, and because our Adversaries think to salve the fore mentioned separation of Impetration & Application, by telling us, that where good things are Absolutely purchased, than Application must follow; But not where good things are purchased only Conditionally, as in our case: we shall therefore show, how this will not hold, nor advantage their cause: for (1.) If all be Redeemed Conditsonally, that condition, whatever it be, must in equity be revealed to all. (2.) Either God & Christ knew, who would perform this condition, or not: If not, than they were not omniscient: If they did know; then sure, this death was more particularly & designedly intended for them, than for the rest: and upon what account, & to what end, should Christ lay down his life a Ransom for such, as he knew certainly should never be the better thereof? And why would the Father send him to die for such? (3.) This Condition is either in man's sole power, without the help of the Grace of God, to perform, or not: If it be in man's power, from what Scripture shall this Pelagianism be confirmed? How shall then the new Covenant of Grace be distinguished in specie from the Covenant of Works, made with Adam? If this Condition be not in man's power, but the Grace of God must work it. Then either God will work it in all, or not: If not, why would God purchase good things to people upon a Condition, which they could not perform, & which he alone could work in them, & resolved not to work in them? If he will work it in all, than all shall certainly be saved. Again, if this Condition be the free gift of God, then either God will give it Absolutely to all; and so all shall certainly be saved: or Absolutely to some, & then none but they shall be saved, and why should Christ die for the rest? Or Conditionally to all: And if so, the doubt will recurre concerning that Condition, which either must be Absolutely given, & so we are where we were, or Conditionally, and so still the doubt recurreth. (4.) This condition is either purchased by Christ, or it is not. If not, than we owe no thanks to Christ for it, nor for what is obtained upon that Condition, more than others who perform not the Condition, & so obtain nothing: but to ourselves only, who make ourselves to differ; and so may we sing praises to ourselve, & put the crown upon our own heads, and give no song of praise to the Redeemer, but what such as go to hell are bound to give, contrary to all Christian Religion: If Christ hath purchased this Condition, than it is done either Absolutely, of Conditionally: If Absolutely, than all shall Absolutely have it: if Conditionally, we inquire, what is the Condition? And whatever it be, we may move the same questions concerning it. (5.) By this means the act should creatits own object; for Faith in the death of Christ is ordinarily given as the Condition, and this faith maketh the death of Christ valide, which otherways would not be. (6.) This maketh all the virtue of Christ's death to depend upon man's act; so that if man will, all shall be saved; if not, no man shall be saved, notwithstanding that Christ died for them. (7.) This makes Christ but, at most, a half Mediator, doing one part of the work; and man, coming in to compleete it must be the other half mediator; and so, at least, must have the half of the Praise. (8.) where saith the Scripture, that if we believe, Christ died for us? or that Christ died for all, or for any, Conditionally? It is true, some of the effects of Christ's death are bestowed Conditionally, (taking the word conditionally not properly, as if the performance of that Condition, did in proper Law sense procure a right to these mercies; for through the merits of Christ's blood have we a right properly to all; but improperly as denoteing nothing but the Method & way of God's bestowing the blessings purchased, first this, and then, upon the souls acting of that, another; as for example, first faith, then upon the souls acting of Faith, Justification, than Sanctification etc. and upon the souls acting of Sanctification, Glorification) but the death of Christ cannot therefore be called Conditional, more than the will or purpose of God can be called conditional, because some of the things willed, may depend upon other, as upon a condition. (9) Then by performing the Condition, man should procure to himself a Legal Right, and Title not only to the death of Christ, but to Justification, Adoption, Sanctification, yea & to Glorification; yea and that a more near & effectual Title & Right, than what was had by Christ's death; for the Title had by Christ's death (if it can be called a Title) was far Remore & Common to such, as shall never have any profit by it; but the other is Certain, Particular, Proxime, & giveth possession, ●us in re. (10.) Then Christ's blood, as shed upon the cross, was but a Potential thing, having no power or virtue in itself to redeem any, it was but a poor Potential price: and all its virtue of actual purchasing & procureing is from man's performing the Condition; this, and this only, giveth it Power & Efficacy: and so Christ is beholden to man for giving virtue unto his Blood, and making it effectual, which before was a deadineffectual thing. Then let any judge, who should have the greatest share of the Glory of Redemption, Man or Christ. (11.) was Christ's death Absolute in no respect; or was it, as to some things, I mean, belonging to Grace & Glory, Absolute? if in nothing, than Man must certanely have a great share of the glory: if it was Absolute as to any thing, what was that? and why was it more Absolute as to that, than as to other things? And why should it then be simply, & without limitation, said that Christ died for all Conditionally?  
For Further confirmation of our 19 Argument, & confutation of our Adversaries position, we add (21.) That Christ Jesus is heard of the Father in all that he asketh Psal. 2: 8. joh. 11: 41, 42. and as an High Priest he entered into heaven Heb. 9: 11, 12. now to appear in the presence of God for us vers. 24. to prepare a place joh. 14: 2. & to act the part of an Advocate, interceding with the Father, in the behalf of all such, for whom he died 1. joh. 2: 1, 2. If then Christ, whom his Father heareth always, intercedeth in the behalf all these, for whom he died, either he did not die for all, or all must certainly be saved. That Christ's Intercession, & Death are for the same persons, will be, and must be denied by our Adversaries: But to us it is most manifest from these grounds. (1.) To Intercede & pray are as Essential & Necessary Acts of the Priestly office, as to offer sacrifice: and the Apostle Heb. 9 cleareth up, how Christ did in truth, what the High Priest among the Jews did in the type; for as the High Priest alone went, once every year, into the second tabernacle, or holy of holies, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and the errors of the people verse. 7. So Christ, being come an High Priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal Redemption verse. 12. Hence he is said to Live for ever to make Intercession for us. Heb. 7: 25. and he is an Advocate with the Father 1. joh. 2: 1. Hence than it is manifest, that Christ must Intercede for such, as he did Offer up himself for, or he shall not be a Perfect & Compleet High Priest; or not faithful to perform all the Offices of the High Priest: neither of which can be said. (2.) The ground of his Intercession, is held forth to be his Oblation: as the High Priest went into the holy of holies with the blood of the sacrifices, which he had offered; so Christ entered into the holy place, having first obtained by the sacrifice of himself an Eternal Redemption. Heb. 9: 12. So he is an Advocate with the Father, being first a Propitiation for sins 1. joh. 2: 1, 2. (3.) Both his Death & Intercession make up one Compleet Medium, & are intended & designed, as one Medium, for the end designed, viz. the bringing of many sons unto glory, saving to the uttermost all that come to God through him etc. (4.) How unreasonable is it to think, that Christ would refuise to Pray for such, whom he loved so dearly, as to lay down his life for? yet he saith expressly, that he prayeth not for the world, but for others, distinguished from the world, joh. 17: 9 (5.) As His Death was for such as the Father had given him (is we saw above) so his Intercession & Prayer is restricted to such joh. 17: 9- I pray not for the world; but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine. (6.) Christ's end in coming into the world, was to save his people; Hence he goat that name jesus; but he should not be able to save them, Perfectly, Compleetly, & to the Utermost, if he did not join his Intercession, with his Oblation; Yea upon this account he continueth ever a Priest, having an unchangeable Priesthood, Heb. 2: 24, 25. But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable Priesthood, wherefore he is able to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. (7.) The Apostle so joineth them together Rom. 8: 34. that they must do manifest violence to the Apostles reasoning, who would pull them asunder, & separate the one from the other. It is (says he) Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. (8.) Yea, they are so joined together here, that his death alone considered could not yield that ground of triumph & boasting, nor security from Accusations: Yea rather, that is risen again, etc. (9) So that the separating & taking of these asunder, is greatly prejudicial to the consolation of his people; for though they should attain to some apprehensions of Christ's dying for them, as an Advocate with the Father, upon new sins 1. joh. 2: 1, 2. Though Christ died, yet they might be condemned, for he must also Intercede; and if he do not Intercede for them, their Hopes, & Comforts are gone: And so there should be no force in that, who is he that condemneth, it is Christ that die●● Rom. 8: 34. And a poor soul might be hall saved, but not to the uttermust, contrare to Heb. 2: 25. (10.) And that place Rom. 8: 33. restricteth both equally unto the Elect: who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? (11.) When Christ laid down his life a Ransom for sinners, he could not but know, that by that Ransom none should be actually saved, without his Intercession, it being accorded betwixt Father & Son, that the mediator should mediate both by Price & by Prayer: And he could not but know, for whom he purposed & intended to Intercede; how shall we then suppose, that he would lay down his life for those, for whom he was purposed not to Pray? Or that he would do the most for them, For whom he would not do the least? (12.) Christ's intercession is really a presenting unto God the Oblation made: Therefore says the Apostle Heb. 9: 24. that Christ is entered into heaven itself, to appear in the presence of God for us: And so by appearing he intercedeth: & his appearing is in his own blood, whereby he obtained Eternal Redemption Heb. 9: 12. & so his Intercession must be for all, for whom the Oblation was, & the eternal Redemption was obtained. (13.) Yea both these are so joined together by Esaias Chap. 53: 12. as that they are made one ground, & procureing cause of God's divideing him a portion with the great, & of Christ's own divideing the spoil with the strong; Because he hath poured out his soul unto death, and he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (14.) This is further clear from the reasons, we gave to confirm that fast connexion betwixt Christ's Impetration & Application, in the foregoing paragraph, for the Actual Application of the benefit & fruit of his oblation is attributed to his Intercession. (15.) Nay, that whole Chapter joh. 17. confirmeth this; for there Christ is both Offering himself, or sanctifying himself thereunto vers. 19 and Interceding▪ and these are so linked together, both in themselves, & as to the persons for whom, that it must argue, at least, much incogitancy, to imagine a divulsion, & separation of these two acts of his Priesthood. (16.) If Christ Intercede not for the same persons, for whom he died, we ask for whom he Intercedeth? Is it for actual believers? Then we ask a Scripture ground for this restriction? And then it is manifest hence, that Christ Intercedeth not for the working of faith in any: And yet Esaias tells us, that he maketh Intercession for transgressors. And we see joh. 17: 20. that he prayeth not only for those, who were already believers, but for such also, as were not yet believers. He told us Himself also, that he would pray the Father for the Spirit, joh. 14: vers. 16. And among other things, this is one work of the Spirit, to cause a sinner believe, 2. Cor. 4: 13. Ephes. 1: 17, 18, 19  
The point we are upon will be further clear, if we consider. (22.) That Christ's death was a Redemption, & we are said to be Redeemed thereby Gal. 4: 5. & 3: 13. Rom. 3: 24. Ephes. 1: 7. Col. 1: 14. ● Pet. 1: 8. Revel. 5: 9 Tit. 2: 14. And therefore, all such, as he laid down this Redemption, or Redemptionmoney for, must of necessity be redeemed & saved, & consequently he died not for all, seeing all are not redeemed & saved. His Ransom, or Price of Redemption, which he laid down, viz. his blood, which he shed, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ransom Mat. 20: 28. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Tim. 2: 6. That all such, for whom this Redemptionmoney was paid, & this Ransom was given, must be saved, is clear; for (1.) Other ways it were no Redemption, a Ransom given for Captives doth say, that these Captives, in Law & Justice, aught to be set at liberty. (2.) This Redemption is the same with, (as to the effect,) or hath attending it, forgiveness of sins. Col. 1: 14. Ephes. 1: 7. & forgiveness of sins, is with justification, & hath blessedness attending it Rom. 4: 6, 7, 8. (3.) Salvation necessarily followeth upon this Ransom & Redemption, as is clear 1. Tim. 2: 4. compared with vers. 6. (4.) This Redemption is from a vain Conversation 1, Pet. 1: 18. & consequently is attended with Salvation. (5.) It is attended with justification, Rom. 3: 24. being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption, that is in jesus Christ. (6.) Hence it is called the Redemption of the transgressions Heb. 9: 15. that is, either of Transgressors, by a metonimy, or of us from the evil of transgressions, & that upon a valuable compensation & satisfaction; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Redemption from evil by the Intervening of a Price, a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Ransom, (7.) This was a Redemption from the Law, for God sent forth his son— made under the Law, to redeem them, who were under the Law Gal 4: 4, 5. & so by this redemption, there is a liberation had from the Law, & its Curse & Penality. (8.) And it is a Redemption of such as were under the Law, for this end, that they might receive the adoption of sons Gal. 4: 5. But this Adoption of sons is not common to all. (9) All which receiveth confirmation from this, that the Father, who received this ransom, did himself send his Son to lay it down, & so it was his own Ransom; and therefore must have been paid, upon a certain design of actually Redeeming & delivering from Sin, Satan, Death & Hell, those, for whom it was laid down. (10.) So is there an other end of this Redemption mentioned Gal. 3: 13, 14. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law— that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through jesus Christ. (11.) Seeing the Lord jehovah might have refused to free the sinner, upon any Redemption or Satisfaction offered, & exacted all of the sinners themselves, that they lay under by the Law, it was a great condescendence in love of this great Lord, & a gracious act of Sovereignty, to accept of a mediation; & of Love & free grace to provide a Redeemer; we cannot but in reason think, that His good pleasure did regulare this matter, as to the Persons, who should be Redeemed, & as to the manner & method after which they should actually partake of the Redemption. And that therefore, the persons to be redeemed were condescended upon, and the persons condescended upon were certanely to be Redeemed; the Lord having intended, in the contrivance of this Redemption, the certain Salvation & Redemption of those, who were condescended upon, & of none else, and the Intentions, Designs & Purposes of God are not vain nor frustrable.  
Further (23.) Christ's death ha● a real Merito in it, that is, a worth and value, to procure the good things, it was given for; so that thereby there was a Purchase made. Act. 20: 28. And therefore, we cannot suppose, that all that was Procured & Purchased hereby, was a General, Uncertain, & merely Possible thing. If it had a value & worth in it, (as no question it had) to purchase & procure grace & glory, unto all, for whom it was given, and was accepted as a valuable price of the Father, why should not the thing, hereby purchased, be given & granted, in due time? To say, that all was suspended upon a condition, is to made all Uncertain: or we must say, that Christ's death did procure that Condition also: and then all is right, for that is it, we say.  
(24.) Christ's death is to be considered as the death of a Testator Heb. 9: 15, 16, 17. And for this cause, he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of transgressions, that were under the first Testament, they which are called, might receive the promise of eternal inheritance: for where a Testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator: for a Testament is of force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength, at all, while the testator liveth. So he said himself of the cup, in the Sacrament, that it was the blood of the New Testament Mat. 26: 28. Mark. 14: 24. & that it was the cup of the New Testament in his blood Luk. 22: 20. and Paul calleth it, the New Testament in his blood 1. Cor. 11: 25. So that his Death & Bloodshed was the death of a testator, for the confirmation of the New Testament, and for ascertaneing of the Legatees, of the good things bequathed to them in legacy, by the Testament. Now a Testament commonly is a declaration of the Testatours free, Absolute & Voluntary Purpose of bestowing such & such benefits, to such & such friends; and so it is the Testatours letter will, whereby he willeth that this legacy be given to this person, & that to another. It is true, men may insert some Conditions, as to some legacies, because they are but men, & know not contingent future things, nor have they the wills & dispositions of such, they appoint legatees, in their own hand and power; But it is otherways with our testator: and therefore we cannot think, that He left the legacies in his Testament, at the uncertainty of conditions, to be performed by men; especially considering, how as he died to ratify the Testament, so he rose again to administrate the same, as the sole executor thereof by his Spirit, & that what legacies he left to be bestowed, upon such & such conditions he left not the matter at an uncertainty; for the condition itself was bequeathed, as the necessary good of the Testament, without which all would have been to no purpose. It is unreasonable then to think, that Christ died to give force to his Testament; and yet it might come to pass, that he should have no heir, to enjoy the goods left in legacy. Nor is it reasonable to think, that all the world were equally his heirs, seeing the Inheritance, and Kingdom is for the little flock Luk. 12: 32. and a peculiar select number 1. Pet. 1: 4. joh. 17: 24. Col. 1: 12. who are heirs of the promises, of God, of salvation, of the Grace of God, of the Kingdom etc. Rom. 8: 17. Gal. 3: 29. & 4: 7, 30. Ephes. 3: 6. Heb. 1: 14. & 6: 1. & 11: 7. jam. 2: 5. 1. Pet. 3: 7. Therefore, all whom Christ hath appointed heirs in his Testament, shall certainly enjoy the good things tested, in due time, for his Death gave force to his Testament, as being his Last & Unchangeable will, so that they cannot miss of the inheritance, and be disappointed; especially considering, that Christ by his death laid down a valuable & rich price to purchase all these good things, which he left in legacy to his friends & heirs.  
Christ's death moreover (25.) is to be considered, as the death of a Sponsor & Cautioner, and this will further confirm our point: Hence he is called a Surety Heb. 7: 22. and is said to die for the ungodly Rom. 5: 6. to be made a curse for us Gal. 3: 13. and to be made sin. 2. Cor. 5: 21. and other expressions of the like Kind have the same import: From whence it is evident, that Christ took the debt upon him, that was justly to be charged upon the account of sinners, that he became one person in Law, with sinners the principal debtor; that he paid & satisfied for all the debt, and that in their room and place: and that therefore all these, for whom he died, must certainly be delivered from the Debt, and from the Charge & Consequences thereof. These things are manifest of themselves, and need no further confirmation. Now seeing all are not delivered from the debt of sin, nor from the punishment due because of sin, we cannot say, that Christ died, as a Cautioner, for all; for sure his death was a complete payment of all the debt he undertook to pay, and to satisfy for. Nor can we say, that he died as a Cautioner for he knew not whom; far less, that he died as a Cautioner, and yet none might possibly receive advantage thereby. Not yet can we say, that he died, as a Cautioner, and paid for some sins of all, and not for all their sins, for whom he died; seeing he was a Compleet Cautioner. So then, as Christ died in their room & stead, as their Cautioner, & Sponsor, for whom he died, wrong should be done to Him, if all these, for whom he was a Cautioner, should not at length actually be delivered out of prison, & freed from the accusation of the Law: They, for whom he died, being in him legally, when he died, and morally & virtually dying in him, and with him, must not, in justice, be made to pay their own debt, & satisfy the Law over again: Christ's striking hands (as the phrase is Prov. 22: 26.) and so putting his name in the obligation, and accordingly making satisfaction, the Principal's name is blotted out, and he free in the time appointed: for he bore our griefs, and carried our sorrows etc. Esai. 53: 4, 5. and by means of death, he delivered them, who through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage Heb. 2: 14, 15.  
This matter will be further clear, if we consider (26.) How the death of Christ was a Satisfaction: and none can deny this, but Antichristian Socinian: Others willingly grant, that Christ did substitute himself, in the room of sinners, and was willing to undergo the punishment, threatened in the Law against sin, that the sinners, for whom he undertook satisfaction, might be freed: So he bore their sins Esai. 53: 11. 1. Pet. 2: 24. And he was made sin 2. Cor. 5: 21. Hence he is called a Propitiation 1. joh. 2: 3 & 4: 10. Rom. 3: 25. Whereby we see, that Christ took upon him the whole Punishment, that was due to sin; and that God, whom sinners had offended, was well pleased with what he did and suffered, according to that undertaking, yea more pleased, than he was displeased with all the sins of those, for whom he suffered: for hereby His Authority & Justice was made to appear more glorious & excellent. How then can we think, that many of those, & it may be all, for whom he gave that satisfaction, may, notwithstanding, possibly be made to make satisfaction for themselves, as they may by our Adversaries way? Was not his satisfaction full & complete? Why should any then, for whom he gave that satisfaction, be liable to Punishment? Is this consonant to justice? Did not the Lord Jehovah send Christ & sit him with a body for this end Psal. 40: 6. Heb. 10: 5. & laid upon Him the iniquities of us all Esai. 53: 6. that He might make full satisfaction for them to justice, & suffer for them all that the Law could demand of them, or they were liable unto by the broken Law? Did not Christ do & suffer all, which he undertook to do, & suffer for this end? And did not the Father accept of what he did & suffered, as a full Compensation, & Satisfaction? And seeing this cannot be denied, & it is manifest that this was done by Christ as a Cautioner Heb. 7: 22. how can it be imagined, that the Principal debtor shall not thereupon have a fundamental right to freedom & pardon, & in due time, after the Gospel method, be actually Discharged, & delivered from the penalty of the Law, & Redeemed by the Satisfactory Price paid by the Cautioner, & accepted of the Creditor? Doth not the denying of this certain & infallible Effect, call in question the value & worth of Christ's satisfaction, and give ground to say, that Jehovah was not Satisfied with the price; or that Christ made no Satisfaction? Did not Christ make Reconciliation for the sins of his people? Heb. 2: 17? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Add for a further confirmation of this. (27.) That Christ's death was a propitiating sacrifice. He gave himself for us, an Offering and a Sacrifice to God, for a sweet smelling savour Ephes. 5: 2. He offered up himself once Heb. 7: 27. He is a sacrifice for us, 1. Cor. 5: 7. & the lamb of God, which beareth, or taketh away she sin of the world joh. 1: 29. He offered up himself without spot to God Heb. 9: 14. & he was once offered to bear the sins of many Heb. 9: 28.— we are sanctified through the offering of the body of jesus Christ once for all,— he offered one sacrifice for sin for ever Heb. 10: 10, 12. Now as the sacrifices under the Law, which were a type of this, did not procure a General, Possible benefit, but did procure a Real favour, only to the People of God; for they sanctified to the purifying of the flesh Heb. 9: 13. So certainly this Real & Perfect sacrifice must have a Peculiar & Real Effect & sprinkle consciences from dead works, to serve the living God: Heb. 9: 14. And this is not a thing common to all, nor is it a mere Possible thing: They must then do a great indignity unto the Sacrifice of Christ, who speak of an Universal merely Possible Redemption.  
Add to this. (28.) How upon this Sacrifice, which Christ offered up, in his death, we read of a Reconciliation made Ephes. 2: 16. and that he might Reconcile both unto God, in one body, by the cross, having s●aine the enmity, by it, or in himself 2. Cor. 5. 10. when we were enemies we were Recenciled to God, by the death of his Son. Col. 1: 20. and having made peace, through the blood of his cross, by him to Reconcile all things unto himself. Therefore is he called our Peace Ephes. 2: 14. & he maketh Peace vers. 15. we have Peace with God through our Lord jesus Christ. Rom. 5: 1. Now this Reconciliation being of parties, that are at variance, must be a Reconciliation of both to other, and so a mutual Reconciliation: and Christ effectuateth both: and both are purchased by his death: we cannot then imagine with Socinians, that all the Reconciliation, mentioned in Scripture, is of us to God; as if God's Anger & Wrath were not appeased & taken out of the way; nor with Arminians, that Christ obtained an Universal Reconciliation of God to all, but no Reconciliation of man to God; friendship betwixt enemies must be mutual, if a Reconciliation be; and our state before this was enmity Rom. 5: 10. Col. 1: 20, 21. and God's wrath was against us & upon us, Ephes. 2: 3. joh. 3: 36. But now, how will this agree with Universal Redemption? Is God Reconciled to all, when many perish under his wrath, for ever? Can God be said to be, upon the death of Christ, Reconciled to all, when it may so fall out, that not one soul shall have peace with God? How cometh it to pass, that many, whose Reconciliation Christ hath purchased, live & die enemies to God? Sure the Apostle tells us 2. Cor. 5: 19 that to whom God is reconciled, to them he doth not impute sin: & he assureth us, that all such, as are reconciled to God, by the death of his Son, shall be saved. Rom. 5: 10.  
Add (29.) That it seemeth hard to say, That Christ laid down his life a Price, a Ransom, a Sacrifice, an Atonement & Propitiation, etc. to Purchase, Procure, Merit Grace, & Glory, & to make Reconciliation & Peace betwixt God, & such, as were already suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, & to satisfy for their sins, who were already condemned to the torments of hell fire: and yet this must be said by such, as assert Universal Redemption. Was Christ so prodigal of his blood, as to cast it away, for such as were irrecoverably gone? If it be said, that this is no more hard, than to say, that Christ suffered for such, as were already glorified. Any may see, how vast the difference is, for such as were glorified, were glorified upon the account of Christ's Death, which was to be, in the time appointed & designed by Father & Son. When one promiseth a sum for redeeming of so many slaves, & the sum, according to mutual agreement, is to be paid at such a day, the slaves may be presently relieved, in contemplation of the price, which is accepted, & is to be paid hereafter at the time appointed: But when one cometh to lay down Ransome-money, he cannot be said to lay it down for such are are dead, & that he knoweth to be dead many years ago, & so uncapable of Redemption.  
Further (30.) If Christ died for all, than he intended to die for all; then the Father also intended, that he should die for all; then he intended that it should be a Redemption for all, & that thereby all should be Redeemed: for to what end else should Christ die & redeem, if not that such, as he died for & Redeemed, be Redeemed & Delivered? Or to what other end should God intended that Christ should die for all, than to the ends mentioned in Scripture, of which we have spoken? And how can we say, that God did intend the Redemption of all, when all are not actually Redeemed? Are his intentions so fallible, and frustrable? If it be said, that he Intended only a Possible Salvation, and not Actual. I Ans. The Scripture speaketh no such thing as we have seen: And how unsuitable is it to the wisdom of God, to send his Son, actually to die, and bear the curse, and only intend thereby a Possible Redemption, which might never prove Actual to any one soul? If it be said, That he Intended an Actual Redemption, but Conditionally. I Answer. Redemption upon a Condition is but a Conditional Redemption, & that is but a Potential, Possible Redemption, unless you say, that the condition is also purchased: and then, as to God, it is an Absolute Redemption, & intended as such: doth it suit the wisdom: of God, to intend Redemption to all, and not intend also the Condition, by which alone it must become Actual, & which he alone can work, but will not? Must we thus ascribe such intentions to God, as must hang upon man's will, & be subordinate thereunto? Or if he see, that the Condition will never be performed, how can we think, that he intendeth any thing upon a Condition, that shall never be? But enough of this, at present.  
Moreover (31.) This doctrine of Universal Redemption is derogatory to the solid consolation of the Redeemed, & Weakeneth the grounds of their song; and therefore it is not to be admitted. This Argument is fully & solidely prosecuted, and vindicated from what can be allaiged against it, by the learned & solid divine Mr. Durbam, in his Comment on the Revelation pag. 304. & 305. And to him shall I refer the Reader: only I shall crave leave to add this: That by our Adversaries grounds, the song of the Saved shall not run, as it doth Revel. 5: 9, 10. But rather thus, We have saved ourselves, out of every kindred, & tongue; & people, & nation, & have made ourselves unto God, Kings & Priests: For whereas Christ by his blood Redeemed all of every kindred, and tongue, and people, & nation, and not some only out of them; we ourselves have, by our own free good will, made a difference betwixt ourselves, and the rest; and we are no more beholden to Christ for all that we have attained to, than the damned in hell are, for whom Christ shed his blood, as well as for us, & to whom he purchased by his blood & death, as much, as for us; as Adversaries say. So that I see not how Arminians, can think to join in this Song, & have any share of this Consolation, which is solely founded upon the Redemption of Christ, as a peculiar & no common blessing. Let them consider it, for it concerneth them not a little, seeing all that come to glory will sing to the honour of their Redeemer, upon other grounds, as we see, than these are, which our Adversaries lay down, and plead so earnestly for. If any say, that Christ moreover hath purchased faith to some, even to all that are actually saved. I Answer. As neither the Arminians, nor semi-Arminians, I mean the followers of Camero will say this, or grant so much; so the granting of it, will ever the other Universal Conditional Redemption; for the Scripture speaketh but of one kind of Redemption, of one Price laid down, of one Covenant betwixt Jehovah & the Mediator; & of one Giving unto Christ of Persons to be redeemed. Shall we think, that Christ would lay down as great a ransom for such, as he was not to purchase faith unto, as for the rest? Shall we think that he would lay down his life in vain, & make no purchase thereby? And of the Reprobat, for whom he was not to purchase thereby? And of the Reprobat, for whom he was not to purchase faith, he knew he could make no purchase; for without faith his death would be of no advantage unto them. And where do we read, that all were given unto him to redeem? Yea, are not the given ones clearly distinguished from the rest? joh. 17: 6, 9, as we cleared above.  
Again (32.) If the Redemption of Christ be Universal, and Conditioonal: it must necessarily follow, that Christ laid down his life, and the price of his blood, as much for judas, and all the Reprobate, as he did for john, and all the Elect: for the Redemption being Conditionally for all, it cannot be more for one, then for another. And yet this cannot be said, as appeareth from the reasons formerly adduced. This would lay, that the Fathers and Christ's love was equal towards all; and that no more was purchased for the one, than for the other; and that the Elect have no more benefit by Christ's death, than the Reprobat have; and that Christ had no more an eye to Redeem the Elect by his death, than to Redeem the Reprobat; & was no more a Cautioner for the one, than for the other: all which and the like cannot but be looked upon, as most absurd. Shall we think, that Christ became sin, as well, or as much, for judas, as for Peter? Shall we think, that He redeemed all alike from the Curse of the Law? These sound ill to Christian ears.  
So (33.) we may thus reason: Either Christ's Redemption is Conditional & Universal, as to the Price laid down & Satisfaction made; or as to the Application & Actual bestowing of the benefits purchased: But neither can be said to the advantage of the Adversaries cause; for if the last be said, we willingly grant that some of the benefits, as Justification, Adoption, and actual Glorification, are conferred in a manner conditionally: but some, as faith and the New heart, are given absolutely: and this cannot Help the Adversaries cause, for they will not say, that either all have faith bestowed upon them, or that all are by believing Justified & Adopted etc. and so this is not Universal: and if the first be said, to wit, That Christ laid down his life Conditionally, it must be said, that Christ did not lay down his life Absolutely, but upon some condition; and what can that Condition be, upon which the death of Christ was suspended? If it be said, that the faith of those, to whom it was to be preached, was the Condition: than it must be said, that christ did not die until these believed, or that his death was no satisfaction or price, until they actually believed: and then the Father could not be well pleased with the price as a satisfaction, until men's Faith came to make it an Actual price: which is both absurd, and contrary to Scripture. If it be said, That Christ did absolutely lay down his life a satisfactory Ransom, and that for all, yet so as none, that would not fulfil the Condition, should be redeemed. I Answer. If it was an Absolute satisfactory Ransom, & accepted as such, something must have been purchased thereby, & all behoved actually & really to be delivered from the Law & from the curse, or from something, by virtue of that Absolute Price; and they could not be made to pay over again what was paid by the price of his blood; for Justice could not call for two satisfactions. And if all were, upon this Absolute Price paid, Redeemed from the Law, the Curse, & the Sentence of the first Covenant, no man shall now die for that broken Covenant. If it be said, No man was Absolutely delivered even from that, but only Conditionally. I Ans. How then was it an Absolute Price? Or what was purchased thereby? If it be said, That a possibility of Freedom was absolutely purchased. Ans. This was rejected above: and the Scripture inferreth Actual Redemption from Christ's purchase, He shall justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities Esai. 53: 11. which saith, That all whose iniquities he did bear, shall be Actually & Really Justified by him, & not have a mere Possibility of Justification.  
Further (34.) We may thus argue, If Christ died for all & every one, He either died for all Absolutely or Conditionally, The first cannot be said, for the reasons already adduced militate against that. Nor can it be said, that He died for all Conditionally: for then either he died to purchase Life & Salvation to all upon Condition of their performance of something proposed as a Condition; or to purchase salvation, and all the means thereunto or Conditions thereof, Conditionally, But neither of these can be said. Therefore etc. The major is clear from this; that the enumeration is full, & noother way can this Conditional Redemption be conceived or explained. The minor may be thus confirmed, The first way cannot be said, to wit, that life and salvation was purchased to all, upon a Condition to be by them performed, that is, upon Condition of their believing: for either this Condition is in the power of every son of Adam, or not: if it be not in their power (as all but Pelagians will confess) then this Redemption is no Redemption; for a Redemption of Captives upon a Condition impossible to them, is as good as no Redemption. Nor can the last way be said, to wit, that Redemption, and all the Conditions & Means thereof were Conditionally purchased; for what can be assigned as the Condition of these Conditions? And though there were a Condition of the Lords working of Faith assigned, (which yet we find not in Scripture) yet that would not help the matter; for that Condition of Faith would itself be a mean to salvation, and so purchased Conditionally, upon another Condition, and that other Condition must be purchased upon another Condition, & so in infinitum: which is absurd.  
As also (35.) this is considerable, That the asserting of Universal Redemption goeth not alone; but there are several other Universalities also affirmed, and maintained, either as Consequences, or Concomitants, or Grounds thereof, which the Scripture knoweth not: such as these. (1.) An Universal Love & philanthropy, towards all & every one, without any difference: which they lay down, as the ground of the Sending of Christ to die for all indiscriminatly. (2.) An Universal Will in God to save all, which they call an Antecedent Will; and hold forth as a Velleity, or a wish & desire, that all might be saved; as if God could not effectuate whatever he desired, or could have a velleity towards any thing, which either he could not, or would not effectuate. (3.) An Universal Predestination conditional; which expression Amerald used until the Synods in France did dissuade him therefrom. (4.) An Universal gift of all to Christ, or an Universal gift of Christ to all; that is, a Will & purpose that Christ should lay down his life for all, and Redeem all; at least Conditionally. (5.) An Universal Justification conditional. And why not also an Universal Salvation conditional? (6.) An Universal Covenant of Grace made with all mankind in Adam, wherein is a free universal deed of gift of Christ first, and of Pardon, Spirit & Glory, in & by him, to all Mankind without exception, upon condition of acceptance; as also an offer of Faith, Repentance, Conversion, with all the consequences thereof. (7.) An Universal will in God to call into this Covenant, and unto the Participation of the benefits thereof, all & every man. (8.) An Universal execution of this will, or promulgation of this Gospel or New Covenant, unto all & every one, by common favours & benefits bestowed on all, whereby all are called to believe in a merciful pardoning God; and all have abundance of Mercies & Means of Recovery & of life; for the Lord now governeth the world, only on terms of grace. (9) Upon this followeth an Universal Command to all men to use certain duties & means for their Recovery by Faith & Repentance. (10.) An Universal pardon of the first Sin, so far, at least, that no man shall perish for the mere Original sin of Nature alone, unless he add the rejection of grace. (11.) Hence followeth an Universal Judgement & Sentence on all, in the great day, only according as they have performed the new Gospel Conditions. (12.) Some also add an Universal Subjective Grace, whereby all are enabled to perform the conditions of the new Covenant. (13.) Universal proper Fruits & Effects of this death, whereby all the outward favours, that Heathens enjoy are said to be purchased for them by Christ: & why not also what Devils enjoy?  
Finally (36.) This assertion of Universal Redemption layeth the ground of, & maketh way to a new frame of the Covenant of Grace, quite overturning its Nature, and transforming it into a new Covenant of Works, making it one & the same with that, as to kind, & only to differ, as to the change of Conditions to be performed by man: for as, in the first Covenant, Adam was to obtain right to, & possession of life promised, in, by, for, through and upon the account of his fulfilling the Condition of perfect obedience, imposed by the Lord; so, in the New Covenant, man is to obtain & acquire to himself a right to & possession of the Life promised, in, by, for, through & upon the account of his performance of the Condition of Faith & new obedience, now imposed in the Gospel; and all the difference is, that in stead of perfect obedience to the Law, which was the Condition of the first Covenant, now Faith & sincere Gospel Obedience is made the Condition: And thus we can no less he said to be justified by works of the Law, or which we do, than Adam should have been said to have been so justified, had he stood; and this justification giveth as great ground of boasting unto man, & of making the reward of debt, & not of grace, as justification by the first Covenant would have done; for though it be said, that Christ hath made satisfaction to justice, for the breach of the first Law, & thereby purchased to all, upon Condition, Justification & Salvation; yet this removeth not the difficulty; for what is purchased by Christ's death is made Universal & Common to all; and so can be nothing (according to our Adversaries) but a putting of all men, in statu quo prius, in case to run & obtain the prize for themselves; as God's absolute free love put Adam in that Condition at first: Christ's death (though thereby, as they say, he purchased the New Covenant, which with them is the chief, if not the only, effect & fruit of his Death & Merits) can be no more, than a very remote ground of Right to Life & Salvation, unto any person; for it is made Universal & Common to all, so that all have equal share therein, & advantage thereby; man himself, by performing the new Conditions, only making the difference; so that the immediate ground of the Right to life, which any have, is their own Faith & Obedience, or performance of the New Covenant-conditions. Whereby it is manifest, that as to our Particular, and Immediate Right to Happiness, we are to plead our own works, & lean to them, as our ground whereupon we may stand & appear before God's Tribunal; and upon the account thereof plead for the crown, as our due debt, having now run for it, & performed the Condition, agreed upon, and so sing praises to ourselves, in stead of singing praises to our Redeemer. Hence the Righteousness, wherein we must appear before God, is not the Righteousness of Christ, but our own; for the Righteousness of Christ, say they, is only imputed in regard of its effects, whereof the new Covenant is the All, or the Chief; and so that doth not become the Righteousness of any man, nor can be said to be imputed to any man properly, (which also they assert) but his own Faith is only imputed properly (which also they plead for) as his Righteousness; not, as a Way, Medium, or Method, of Gospel-Righteousness (especially when Gospel-Obedience is adjoined) The Righteousness of Christ being thereby only accounted to be imputed, in that it hath procured, that our own Gospel Righteousness, Faith & new Obedience, shall be imputed to us, as our Immediate Righteousness; & the ground of our Right to Glory. What accord is betwixt this frame of the Covenant of Grace, & that way of justification held forth by Socinians, Arminians & Papists, the learned will easily see; and how contrary it is to the Covenant of Grace held forth in the Gospel, & hitherto professed & maintained by the orthodox, every one acquainted therewith cannot be ignorant; & it is obvious, how opposite this is unto what the Apostle saith Phil. 3: 8, 9 yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung; that I may win Christ, and 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. And Tit. 3: 5, 6, 7. Not by works of Righteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly, through jesus Christ our Saviour: that being justified by his grace, we should be made he●rs, according to the hope of eternal life. And Rom. 3: 20, 21, 22, 24. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified— but now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifest— even the Righteousness of God, which is by Faith of jesus Christ, unto all and upon all them that believe— being justified freely by his grace, through the Redemption, that is in jesus Christ. And many other places. It is no less clear, how hereby the true nature of justifying faith, and Gospel Obedience is perverted: & withal how dangerous this is, if put into practice; or if men act & live accordingly, every serious exercised Christian knoweth.  
FINIS.    


The Contents of the Chapters.  
CHAP. I. THE Introduction to the Work, and the Text Gal 3. 11. opened up. Pag. 1  
CHAP. II. Naturally we are inclined to cry up Self in justification. 12  
CHAP. III. The Doctrine of justification should be kept pure with all diligence, and what dangerous expressio●s should be shunned. 15  
CHAP. IV. justification is so contrived in the Gospel, as man may be abased, and have no ground of boasting. 22  
CHAP. V. In justification there is a state of Life. 25  
CHAP. VI What mysteries are in justification. 34  
CHAP. VII. Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, cleared out of the Old Testament, & the passages vindicated from the exceptions of JOHN GOODWIN. 57  
CHAP. VIII. Some passages out of the New Test. confirming the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, vindicated from the exceptions of JOHN GOODWIN. 66  
CHAP. IX. Othen passages of the New Test▪ briefly mentioned, which plead for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. 94  
CHAP. X. Some Arguments for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, vindicated from the exceptions of Mr. JOHN GOODWIN. 98  
CHAP. XI. Objections taken out of Scripture by Mr. GOODWIN against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto justification, Answered. 118  
CHAP. XII. Some other Objections, proposed by JOHN GOODWIN, examined. 147  
CHAP. XIII. Mr. BAXTER's opinion, concerning Imputation, examined. 182  
CHAP. XIV. How Christ is our Surety, & what Mr. BAXTER saith as to this, examined. 202  
CHAP. XV. Mr. BAXTER's Answers to some of our Arguments for Imputation, examined. 209  
CHAP. XVI. Mr. BAXTER's further opposition to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness examined. 226  
CHAP. XVII. Reason's enforcing the practice of the Truth vindicated. 247  
CHAP. XVIII. Some of the Duties of such, as live the life of justification, proposed. 254  
CHAP. XIX. Of the life of justification, as to its continuance. 259  
CHAP. XX. The State of justification remaineth, notwithstanding after-sins, & punishments. 273  
CHAP. XXI. justification is by Faith, what this Faith is? and how it is wrought? 280  
CHAP. XXII. Our act of Faith is not imputed to us as a Righteousness. 296  
CHAP. XXIII. Some Argum, against the Imput▪ of Faith vindicated from the exceptions of I. G. 303  
CHAP. XXIV. The Imputation of Faith itself is not proved from Rom. IU. 5. 314  
CHAP. XXV. Faith is not our Gospel-Righteousness. 327  
CHAP. XXVI. Christ did not procure, by his death, the New Covenant, or the terms thereof. 335  
CHAP. XXVII. How Faith is, & may be called a Condition of the New Cou. & of justification, how not? 339  
CHAP. XXVIII. How Faith is and may be called an Instrument? 346  
CHAP. XXIX. What interest Repentance hath in our justification: & that it is no Condition of the same. 357  
CHAP. XXX. Whether Love, purpose of New Obedience, or Perseverance be Conditions of justification. 374  
CHAP. XXXI. Gospel-Obedience is not the Condition of justification. 383  
CHAP. XXXII. Of the Object of justifying Faith. 391  
CHAP. XXXIII. The Righteousness of Christ is the special Object of Faith in justification. 398  
CHAP. XXXIV. Faith in justification respecteth not in a special manner Christ as a King but as a Priest. 403  
CHAP. XXXV. Faith is the only Condition, on our part, of the continuance of justification. 414  
CHAP. XXXVI. Of the Interest of Repentance in the pardon of after-sins. 426   

The Contents of the Appendix.  
CHAP. I. IMputation both of Christ's Active & Passive obedience necessary. 431  
CHAP. II. Christ underwent the Curse of the Law. 442  
CHAP. III. We must not lean to any Righteousness within us, whereby to be justified. 452  
CHAP. IV. The Law, by the works whereof Paul denyeth that we are justified, is not the jewish Law. 465  
CHAP. V. Works excluded in justification, are not only works done before Faith, nor perfect works required in the Law of Innocency, nor outward works only. 473  
CHAP. VI By works, which Paul excludeth, is not meant the merit of Works. 481  
CHAP. VII. james 2. 14. cleared & vindicated. 486  
CHAP. VIII. No countenance given to Justification by works from jam. 2. 14, etc. 497  
CHAP. IX. John 〈◊〉 Arguments against the Imputation of Christ's a Active Obedience, examined, with a View of Wende●●n's 〈◊〉 against it. 506  
CHAP. X. The Fathers give Countenance to the Doctrine of Imputation, some Papists approve it. 518  
Arguments against Universal Redemption. 526    

ERRATA.  
PAg. 1. l. 13. for woule read would. p. 2. l. 17. r. Essays. p. 3. l. 3. r. Essentials. p. 4. l. 4. r. safeguarded. l. 7. r. to be attacked. l. 39 r. Notions. p. 7. l. 36. r. held forth, l. 41. r. out. p. 8. l. 18. r. just p. 9 l. 11. r. comfort. p. 12. l. 5. r. twig. p. 18. l. 31. r. for in thy sight. p. 20. l. penult. r. laying. p. 21. l. 6. r. expect. p. 24. l. 38. r. oftentimes. p. 28. l. 17. for this, r. his. p. 31. l. 34. for faisty. r. feasting. p. 33. l. 2. for possion. r. possession, l. 9 r. standeth. p. 37, l. 2. r. transgressor. l. 17. r. finned. l. ult. r. bare. p. 38. l. 9 r. notwithstanding. p. 42. l. 8. r. length. l. 31. r. derision. p. 46. l. 6. r. layeth down. l. 18. for of r. if. l. 32. r. Justice. l. 37. r. appeareth. l. 38. r, people. p. 57 l. 10. r. toil. l. 11. r. wages p. 58, l. 23. r. the Nature and Native work. p. 59 l. 30. r. made over unto. p. 60. l. 42. r. than what. p. 69. l. 24. r. Christ's p. 70. l. 33, r. than the Righteousness p. 75. l. ul●. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 76. l. 1. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 81. l. 26. r. prosecution. p. 82. lin. 3. à fine. r. Christ. p. 84. l. 20. r. Spirit of the lord l. penult. r. believers. l. 85. l. 9 r. of the Moral. p. 90. l. 12. r. and if we be made. p. 91. l. 6. r. all the iniquities. l. 8. r. head of the goat. p. 92. l. 6. r, these words. p. 94. l. 22. deal of. p. 95. l. 1. & 8. r. circumcision. p. 97. l. ●. r. suitableness. p. 104. l. 36. r. Nor is it. p. 134. l. 25. r. as faith itself. p. 159. l. 30. r. evacuateth. p. 187. l. 24. r. immediate imputation of p. 434. l. 14. r. chargeable. p. 476. l. 37. r. words. p. 501. l. 3. à fine. r. drawn. ibid. r. countenance. p. 512. l. 8 r. repetition. p. 514. l. 24. for hoas. r. how. p. 521. l. 12. r. Frater meus. p. 533. l. 22. r. If not, than he was not. l. 24. r. If he knew, than he knew that they would. l. 28, deal of. l. 32. r. shall he not. p. 537. l. 23. r. not one man. l. 35. r. Priests. p. 538. l. 22, 23. r. but have all their sins charged upon their own score. p. 539 l. 35. r. trespasses. l. 36. r. doubtless. p. 541. l. 10. r. fundamentally. l. 14. & 16. r. actual. p. 551. l. 17. r. of all these l. penult. for is r. as.