Christ Exalted, AND Dr. CRISP Vindicated IN Several Points called Antinomian, being Cleared, From Neonomian Suggestions Alleged, By some Remarks on Mr. A— his Rebuke to Mr. Lob.  
Showing from Scripture, and most Orthodox Authors, the Invalidity of his Rebuke, in taxing the Doctor to be Apocryphal, and his Doctrine Antinomian.  
WITH Some Observations on the Bishop of Worcester's Letter concerning the great Point of the Change of Persons between Christ and Believers, wherein he differs from the Doctor, but yet mildly and genteely treats him, though he comes short of the Truth, as contained in the Doctrine of the Church of England.  
With a Table to find the Heads insisted on.  
Done by a Happy, tho' Unworthy, Branch of the said Doctor.  
It was needful for me to write to you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the Faith, which was once delivered to the Saints, Judas 3. And once professed by the Church of England.  
His Neighbour cometh after him, and searcheth him, Prov. 18.17.  
LONDON, Printed for the Author; and are to be had at Mr. John Marshall's at the Bible in Grace-church-street. 1698.   

ERRATA.  

PAge 11 Line 22 for thereof read there, of.  
25. l. 6. r. Arminian.  
34. l. 22. r. Arminian.  
36. l. 1. r. as Believers.  
45. l. last, r. She.  
46. l. 1. of r. our.  
47. l. 22. r. by the Power.  
48. l. 20. r. laid.  
65. l. 5. & 6. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
68 l. 37. r. Racovia.  
81. l. 24. make the stop at allowed,  
83. l. 9 r. he bore.  
27. r. and act.  
96. l. 27. r. Reporter.  
97. l. 5. the stop at for,  
98. l. last, r. zanachta.  
100 l. 5. r. reprobavit.  
10. r. kareu.  
103. l. 15. r. perfection.  
109. l. 5. for them r. him.  
111. l. 15. r. chattathi-  
115. l. 27. r. with a Passage.  
31. make the stop at doing,  
116. l. 10. for as to say r. by saying.    

To his several Particular Friends of the late House of Commons, Assembled in Parliament.  
Gentlemen and Right Honourable Patriots,  
MANY Daughters have done Virtuously, and thou excellest them all, was a Motto on the Memorial of Q. Elizabeth, hung up in most Churches, for the good Laws she made against Popery. What high Encomiums of Praise, and great Retributions of Thanks, then are due to you, right Christian Senators, for your warm Addressing His Majesty to suppress the Blasphemy and Debauchery which the Nation abounds with? And upon His wise referring back so great a Work to yourselves, to effect it by an Act of Parliament, for your thereupon forming the late good Act, wherein it is, to your great Honour, Enacted, That if any Person ........ shall by Writing, Printing, Teaching, or advised Speaking, deny any One of the Persons, in the Holy Trinity, to be God, or shall assert or maintain there are more Gods than One, or shall deny the Christian Religion to be True, or the Holy Scriptures, of the Old and New Testament, to be of Divine Authority, shall suffer so and so. Although there be no Reward to the Prosecutor, it is hoped you have thereby, in a good measure, put a stop to the career of the Profane Tongues and Pens of a debauched Crew of this Age, that Impiously deny the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, that mock at all Revealed Religion, as contained in the Scriptures, that call the Scriptures an Inken Divinity, and the Blood of our Lord Jesus, as the Blood of another good Man, and make his dreadful Agony and Sufferings, but Facile Representations of what Christ doth in us, and that could Print, That when God hath glutted himself, etc. (as in the Book): For your Zeal to God's Glory in which, may you have an Eternal Reward above, and many good days of God's Blessing here, is my Supplication to the Throne of Grace. But besides these Dragons against the Christian Religion, which you have been quelling, we have the Foxes running about that spoil the Vines; those that under the fair Species of Man's Holiness, would undermine God's Righteousness in our Justification: For going about to establish their own Righteousness, they have not submitted to the Righteousness of God, Rom. 10.3. That is, they are against being justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus, against having his Righteousness imputed to them, to be unto, and upon, all that believe, though the Scripture is clear herein. But besides the pure Word of God, which is the Sheet-Anchor of our Religion, it is a great Mercy that in Disputes, with Men of corrupt Minds, that we have the Fundamentals of Christianity contained in the Doctrines established by Law, in the Book of the Homilies, wherewith to encounter such Foxes as would spoil our tender Grapes, by denying our very Sins to be born by Christ, and bringing in some degrees of our Obedience, though imperfect, to join, as it were, with Christ's Righteousness for our Justification, and to make such our Obedience pass currant, by bringing in God making a Law that in effect allows of Sin, which are excepted against in the ensuing Treatise; which I put forth to vindicate, according to my poor Talon, not so much Dr. Crisp, but the Doctrine of God our Saviour, delivered by the Doctor consonantly to the Sacred Scriptures, and to the said Homilies, as you may perceive, upon perusal of these my Collections, from Scripture and sound Authors: Which I humbly recommend to your leisurely serious Considerations, hoping you will think it necessary, in this degenerate Age, to contend for the Faith delivered to the Saints; and that yourselves, so many of you as shall be chosen for the next Parliament, (which I suppose will not be a few), that you will think it worthy your Pains and Labour to endeavour to suppress all Socinian and Arminian Tenets, that, to uphold Man's Free Will to do good, strike at our being saved freely by God's Grace, contrary to God's Word; We are saved by Grace through Faith; and that not of ourselves, it is the Gift of God: Not of Works, lest any boast. Our Holy Forefathers, in the Nations shaking off the Popish Yoke, spoke plainly, We in Christ paid the Debt: We in him are fulfillers of the Law: He on his Cross made a perfect cleansing of thy Sins. But this will not go down with Arminianizers of this day, that bring in our Gospel-Holiness to concur with Christ's Righteousness in our Justification. This I address to your Pious Thoughts; and, I suppose, not improperly to you, as expected Members of the House of Commons, hoping the next Parliament may begin where the last left off, in taking Care of the True Christian Religion: And that you may be the better fortified, I quote a Vote of a former House of Commons, March 2. 1628. Whosoever shall bring in Innovation of Religion, or by Favour, or Countenance, seem to extend Popery or Arminianism, or other Opinion, disagreeing from the Truth and Orthodox Church, shall be reputed a Capital Enemy to the Kingdom and Commonwealth. Which Spirit, against Popery and Arminianism, through the great Mercy of God to this Nation, hath been kept alive and warm in all Parliaments since 1628., even in the Reign of King James the Second; and there is no doubt of losing it in this Reign, wherein His Majesty hath given good Proof that he is neither Papist nor Arminian, nor inclining thereto. Now whether the Quotations, in this Treatise, do not show, that some mentioned therein go against the Orthodox Church, judge ye, and the Lord give you Wisdom to withstand. Thus hoping for a favourable Construction of my Endeavour, pro modulo si non pro voto, to vindicate the Truths of the Gospel, I beg the Lord's Blessing on you, and am,  
Your Humble Servant, Hananiel, Philalethes. 28 July, 1698.   

To my Dear Kratiste, the Author of the Rebuke, and Vilifier of Dr. Crisp.  
SIR,  
I Cannot but be troubled that in your declining days you should inflame the Reckoning, as you have done in your Rebuke, to the Grief of your best Friends, among whom myself am particularly concerned, that you should so violently let fly against those Truths of the Gospel, which have solaced the Souls of Thousands, as held forth by the Doctor, whom you have very ungravely treated, as an Heterodox wild Monster, to the Eternal Infamy of his Name and Family. what in you lay. I hope,  this, God hath caused you often to mourn over your intemperate Management of your Rebuke; and lest you should come short therein, that I may provoke you seriously thereto, I think it necessary to lay before you the Character, I had lately from a Worthy Minister of the Gospel, and Friend of yours, concerning him you have so unmercifully traduced, which was given by one that, sometimes in the height of his Zeal, was as bitter as any against Dr. Crisp, except yourself; that is, by Mr. Richard Baxter upon his Deathbed but two days before he died, as this Friend of yours assured me, once and again, that Mr. Baxter told him, and he related it to you very lately, as thus, that Mr. Baxter said to your Friend, There has been a great deal of Talk about Dr. Crisp, but I look upon him to have been a Godly, Holy Man, and that he was Sound and Orthodox, and that he brought in more Souls to Christ than any of us; but this was his Fault (said Mr. Baxter) that being a Popular Man, and mightily flocked after, he would preach Extempore Sermons, which exposed him to deliver Things undigested, which needed to be corrected, but for the main he was Sound and Orthodox. For which Testimony I thanking the Relater, desired him to give me it in Writing in ipsissimis Verbis; but being prudent, he desired Excuse, and repeated the same again to me, and afterwards to others. I told him, as to the Extempore Sermons, that was a great Mistake to my knowledge; and I was glad God had convinced so great an Enemy to the Doctor. Now if this be true, as there is not the least grain of ground to doubt, it coming from a Faithful, Holy Minister, then surely Dr. Crisp was not such an one as my Kratiste hath blackened him to be, God having provided for the embalming his Memory with sweet Odours, even from his gainsayers when launching into Eternity, to give an account of their hard Speeches unrepented of. I hope it may please the Lord, by his Holy Spirit striking in with this and other Occurrences, to lower the topsails of my good Friend, before he brings you to the brink of Eternity, when your Natural Parts will signify nothing; and that you may have more Time, than Mr. B— had, to testify to the World your high prising the Free Grace of God in Christ, as held out by many besides Dr. Crisp, as in the ensuing Treatise; and that you may testify to the World also, that your Father in Law, Mr. King, mistake in his Prophecy, saying, (as I am told) That his Son in Law (your self) had good Parts, but his Pride would undo him. But I hope, and pray, the contrary, viz. That God would undo him only of Natural self, and do him up again by the renewing of the Spirit. To his Grace I commend you, and am,  
Your real Friend, a Happy, tho' Unworthy, Branch of the Doctor, Hananiel, Philalethes. 28 July, 1698.   

To all that love our Lord Jesus in Sincerity, Grace, Mercy, and Peace, with Growth therein, while they peruse a few Remarks on a Rebuke to a Report concerning some Differences between the Congregational Ministers and Presbyterian; wherein the Rebuker, to Vindicate Mr. Williams, hath bespattered not only Dr. Crisp, and others he calls Antinomians, but some great Doctrines of the Gospel, which are Established by Law in the Homilies, and which by Act of Parliament are to be Read in Parish Churches, when there is no Sermon.  

SECTION I.  
I Who account myself a Happy, though Unworthy, Branch of the said Doctor, finding in the abovesaid Rebuke, that the Author has flown into frothy and bitter Invectives against the Reporter, Mr. Job, for a very Modest Account he had given of the Differences among some Ministers, and that the Rebuker hath branded Dr. Crisp, and his Sermons, with Crispian Heresies, etc. though mostly consonant with the Scripture, and the Judgement of Thousands of serious Christians; but chief I finding the great Doctrine of the Free Grace of God in Christ, as asserted by the great Reformers, to be in the said Rebuke obscured, whereby Socinianism and Arminianism gets ground; and being encouraged by Augustine in Antisozzo his saying, That all Men, that can handle a Pen, are obliged to say somewhat against the Enemies to the Free Effectual Grace of God; I therefore think it my Duty, for the Honour of our Lord Jesus, to spend a few Hours in some necessary Remarks on the said Rebuke; and though but in a mean manner, yet humbly to offer this Mite of my Testimony to the Truth, so far as the Lord shall guide me; which I humbly implore his assistance in, by detecting several Blemishes cast on the Truth in the said Rebuke, which I premise with that saying of our Lord Jesus, Wisdom is justified of her Children.   

§. II.  
So I desire these Remarks may be, which begin with noting the Sarcasms or Taunts the Rebuker casts on Mr. Job for his Report; which first entrance shows with what an unbeseeming Spirit he manages his Design: To which I may say, Do Men gather Grapes of Thorns, or Figs of Thistles? By their Fruits you shall know them. Can any expect our Lord Jesus should be honoured in such a Discourse, which gins with treating a Reverend Minister with such opprobrious Language, as in the two first Pages to cast these Eleven Reflections on him? As, 

Prevaricating.  
Partial.  
A Learned Divine. (In a Jeer.)  
Insolent.  
Scribbler.  
A Huff.  
Little Fooleries.  
Fire-balls. (So he calls his Papers.)  
Poison.  
Pedantic.  
Great Wit. (In a Scoff.)   To which I Remark, That doleful is the Consideration that God should suffer an Eminent Person, a Reverend Divine of the First Rate in the Presbyterian Society, to fall so much below himself, as to use such Terms as are very indecent in small Matters, but much more in so weighty a Matter as the Debate was about, viz. The Justification of Sinners, and the Satisfaction of our Lord Jesus. O whither will the gratifying of a fluent Wit transport a Man, that is in love with himself, when the luscious Humour of advancing it is a float! However his Juvenile Strains of Wit might be pleasant, yea laudable, in a Protestant Almanac, they are not at all palatable but distasteful in a grave Divine, especially when treating of the greatest Points of God's Glory in Man's Salvation by our Lord Jesus. O that he and I could often mind that blessed Advice of our Lord, Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly; who when he was reviled, reviled not again.   

§. III.  
From this blustering Porch let us see if we may find better Wether in the House, though some Men find the worst Storms within doors; I come therefore to Page the 5th of the Rebuke, where he saith the Reporter has left out New Obedience and Good Works, out of the account he gives of the Substance of the Gospel; and then by way of a smiling Banter, he saith the Reporter said, The Substance of the Gospel lies in what Christ suffered for them. This he seems to disallow; which I look on with a sad Eye: For if what Christ hath done for us, (all his Life as well as his Death being his Suffering); if this be not the Substance of the Gospel, what will become of us? If the Rebuker consults Luke 2.10. he will find that our New Obedience and Good Works are not the Substance of the Gospel, but that to us is born a Saviour. The Angel tells the Substance of the Gospel there; I evangelise to you great Joy, which shall be to all People; for to you is born this day a Saviour, Christ the Lord. Evangelizomai, I Gospelize this to you. Here we see what the Gospel is; it is glad Tidings. And what is this glad Tidings? It is that Christ, a Saviour, was born. Here's not one word of New Obedience or our Good Works, to be part of the Substance of the Gospel; they come in as Fruits of the Spirit upon receiving the Gospel; but are no more the Substance of the Gospel, than the Holy Law of God is the Substance of the Gospel: But the Law came by Moses, and Grace and Truth by Jesus Christ. Surely the Spirit of God knew better how to give an account of the Gospel, what it is, than any he calls, We poor Presbyterians: And for any to jeer at Christ's Sufferings for us, for its being called the Substance of the Gospel, it may trouble their Consciences one day, when they shall be forced to fly to that as their tutissimum est, as Bellarmine did, though some think too late. O! how should we have a Care that our Wit do not put us on jesting with the Gospel; which in its discovering Christ to be all in all to us, our Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption, is the Power of God to Salvation. We should consider what the Apostle counted the Substance of the Gospel, when he said, I determined to know nothing among you but Christ, and him crucified. This was his great Study, Christ and his Sufferings, so it should be ours.   

§. iv  
In Page 6. he saith, Give me my Bible again. This Jest may be returned with seriousness, It is well he called for his Bible again, for he had spoke without Book sadly before, in saying, Good Works are to come in in the Substance of the Gospel. This 'tis for Men to speak without the Bible, which alone, by the Spirit, makes wise to Salvation: But I fear some sad use he will make of his Bible; for it soon follows in the same Page, that which I grieve at, viz. his making a Jest of Christ's putting himself into our Place, State and Condition, which he jeers with the Socinian Retort; If so, then (saith he) Christ was destitute of a Righteousness, and we too, to entitle us to Eternal Life. For Answer, If Christ was not in our Place, State and Condition, what's become of the Gospel? We have lost it, if the Just did not suffer for the Unjust, if the Lord did not lay on him the Iniquity of us all, if he was not the Man of Sorrows that bore our Griefs. Was he not in our Place, State and Condition, in all this? And to say that then he was destitute of a Righteousness, is to deny his being God-Man; or not to distinguish between his being Perfect in himself, and so holy, harmless, separate from Sinners, and his being made Sin and a Curse for us, as being our Representative. Methinks those that call themselves Poor Presbyterians, should not so coalesce with the Socinians to enforce such a Consequence from Christ's being our Surety, as the Socinians do to say, That if Christ stood in our Place, than he wanted a Righteousness in himself. You may as well say, that Christ was not made Righteousness to us, if he was made Sin for us: how could he be both? Very well. He was made our Righteousness, as we having his complete Godlike, yea, God's Righteousness; as it was his Righteousness the Son of God imputed to us, so he was made Righteousness to us; and he was made Sin for us, by the Lord's imputing and laying our Sins on him, and yet he, though made Sin, was still the most holy Son of God, without Sin in him.   

§. V  
In the next Assault, he insults over the Reporter, for saying, we are Sin. What though that very word is not in the Text? What is it less, to be sinful, to be sold under Sin, conceived in Sin, yea, to be a Body of Sin? But the fling is against the Change; Christ's being made Sin and a Curse, and we thereby delivered from Sin and the Curse. Suppose Man is not said in Scripture to be Sin, Sin itself, and that that is a debasing Man below, being born in Sin, and having a Body of Sin, will you find fault with him, or any, for lessening of Man so; whereas Christ is far more lessened? For it is said positively, God made him to be Sin for us; and that no Man can have the Face to deny that owns Revealed Religion. But many will so mince his being made Sin for us, that at last it shall be like some Minced Pies, that shall not taste a jot of the Meat in them: They say in words, he was made Sin; but they distinguish away every bit of the Sin, and say, Christ only bore the Punishment due to Sin. As if God should be so Unjust, as to punish Christ for Sin, when no Sin was upon him. If Christ our Lord, in being made Sin for us, had not our very Sins laid on him by God, and borne by himself on the Tree, why was he punished? Will you make God Unrighteous, to lay Sin upon him, to bruise him for our Iniquities, and these very Sins and Iniquities not made his, or accounted his by Imputation?   

§. VI  
In Page 7. O! how doth the Rebuker fly out against this Sentence of the Reporter, By this blessed change, Christ is made Sin and Curse, and we delivered from Sin and Curse; as if the Reporter had imposed the Turkish Alcoran on our Faith: whereas he no where denies the Order of the Gospel for our enjoying the Blessedness of our being delivered from Sin and the Curse, viz. the intervening of Faith and Repentance. And yet this the Rebuker calls, Learning to quibble at Cambridge. Sure this is not a Style becoming a Grave, Learned Instructor of Souls; and yet the Rebuker cannot refrain his own Quibbles, dished up with much Tartness, calling the Reporter's Substance of the Gospel, A superfaetation of Articles, spawning of Creeds, equipping Confessions every Campaign. O! whither will not a fertile Fancy transport a Man, that prefers his Wit before his Master Christ's Humility.   

§. VII.  
The great Objection comes in Page 9 about the Change of Persons between Christ and Sinners. The Rebuker owns there was a Change of Christ for Sinners, but denies that Christ took the Person of Sinners: But if we read John 17. there we may find for our Comfort, in Christ's Prayer, Christ saith, Thine they were, thou gavest them me, and I am glorified in them, that they may be one in us. Is not this taking their Persons into Oneness with himself? And v. 23. I in them, and thou in me, that the World may know that thou hast loved them as thou hast loved me. And how can we be said to be Crucified with Christ, to be Buried with him, Risen with him, if he took not our Persons? He hath made us sit in Heavenly places in Christ Jesus. It is not said only with him; but in him. Surely then Christ hath taken the Persons of Elect Sinners into himself; and to deny this, looks like denying being chosen in him from all Eternity, and real Union to him, and Incorporation in him in time.   

§. VIII.  
In Page 10. the Rebuker seems to swerve very much from the Orthodox, in his opposing the Terms laid down, and contradicts them very Dogmatically; and in the place of that which he calls the Reporters Terms of Art, he gives us his Sense concerning the Change of Persons, All that the Case of Sinners required for Satisfaction to Divine Justice, was a Substitute or Sacrifice to be offered for our Sins; for the Substitute to take on him the PUNISHMENT due to them: (That's all he allows, not the Sins, not the Gild, not the Offence, only Punishment, that's all that Justice requires) But to take on him the Person of Sinners, as the Phrase is new and uncouth, so it's to me unintelligible, till they who have invented it shall interpret it. O! that Men were wise to Sobriety, and not in effect to tax the Holy God with speaking uncouth, new, unintelligible Things. 'Tis evidently not true, that the Term is new, how uncouth or unintelligible soever it may be to some who will repel Scripture Truths. Will any pretend to teach the Most High how to speak of our Sins laid on Christ, by saying, he only bore the Punishment due to them, and that's all that our Case required? God saith expressly, The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all; and he shall bear their iniquities. Their very Iniquities it was: And he bore their Sins iii his own Body on the Tree. Our very Sins, our very Iniquities. And is all this dwindled to nothing but the Punishment due to them? Bearing Sin is in Deed and Truth, if God say true, bearing Sin, 'tis not bearing Punishment, that follows bearing Sin. Bearing Punishment is a word invented to nullify Christ's bearing our Sins, and so to evacuate the Gospel: For if Christ bore not the Sins as well as the Punishment, the Sins must lie on the Sinner to all Eternity. For Sin being once committed, must be born by us, or our Surety. I can find but lieu Texts where Christ is said to bear Punishment due to Sin; but through Infinite Rich Grace, many Texts of Divine Truth show that he bore Sins, and did them away. In bearing the Chastisement of our peace, he bore our very Sorrows and Griefs, which is more than bare Punishment due for Sin.   

§. IX.  
But this is new, uncouth and unintelligible, that Christ should take on him the Person of Sinners, till they interpret it, who invented it. For this we may raise the Dead, without a Miracle, to prove the Expression, though not the Invention of it (that being Time out of mind.) I at present omit Calvin and Luther, Twiss and Davenant, Men of great Name, and propose the Famous Dr. Harris, who was an Eminent Member of the Assembly in 1642, and in opposition to the Poor Presbyterians, as the Rebuker calls Mr. Williams and his Friends, though the said Doctor was an Honourable one, he saith plainly, Christ sustained the Person of a Sinner, in his Treatise fol. 215, thus, Christ he stood in our room, and sustained the Person of a Sinner, though in himself sinless. I add, (saith Dr. Harris) if this were not true, that Christ sustained the Person of a Sinner, how could God punish him? So that this uncouth and unintelligible saying, was not only intelligible to this Learned Doctor, but is by him well interpreted by his Question, Else how could God punish him, if he sustained not the Persons of Sinners in himself? As much as to say, God could not justly punish Christ, if our New Neonomian Doctrine be true, That Christ bore only the Punishment due for Sins, that he did not bear the Sins, the very Sins, the very Iniquities of his People. Now saith this Doctor, he was so far from not bearing their very Sins, that he bore their Persons; which surely must include their Sins, and all the horrid Appurtenances belonging to them. But well may this be unintelligible to such as call Mr. Cole's Works, Mysterious Nonsense. What then is the great Armah's saying, fol. 192. in the Sum of Christian Religion? Our very Nature, Body and Soul, being coupled to the Body and Soul of Christ. Is not this unintelligible? But saith the Rebuker, This new Phrase, that Christ took on him the Person of Sinners, is a Phrase to puzzle and confound men's Understandings. Answer, So doth the whole Doctrine of the Gospel do to some Understandings: As that we should be Righteous by the Righteousness of another, that we should be Christ s Delight from all Eternity before we had a Being, Prov. 8. How may that of the Apostle confound a Man? I live, not I but Christ in me; I sin, not I but Sin that dwells in me; and we were planted in the likeness of his Death, our Old Man crucified; when? With Christ; we are dead to the Law; how? By the Body of Christ. What Nonsense and puzzling Stuff is this to the Natural Understanding? Was I in being when Christ was Crucified? No: How then can I say, I was Crucified with Christ, or that Paul was Crucified with Christ? Surely not otherwise than he was chosen in Christ from all Eternity, by Christ's being the Representative of all the Elect from all Eternity, and as he sustained all their Persons in time when he hung on the Tree. And this though uncouth to the wise and prudent of this World, is couth and of a ravishing sweetness to those that taste this Grace of our Lord Jesus; and owned by Mr. Alsop in Antisozzo, p. 376. Duos Populos in se suscepit Christus. Ambrose. How is the wind turned? And 394, 'tis Mystical Union; but now unintelligible.   

§. X.  
In Page 16. he brings in Doctor Crisp's Works, as the Ground of the present interruption of the Union; thus, In 1690, a new Impression of Dr. Crisp 's Works came into the World— creating a Suspicion in some tender Minds, lest some Doctrines were openly vouched or secretly couched, which might disturb the Harmony of the Confession, and might weaken and dissolve the Union. Answer, Here is some Modesty to the Doctor. One Would wonder how those Doctrines here, creating Suspicion only, are by and by exclaimed against as Heterodox Heresies, Antinomian Dregs. This would give one Jealousy that the Rebuker in these last Terms was acted not by himself. But here follows a Query, How those Sermons of the Doctor's which were Reprinted in 1689, not 1690, could prejudice the Union which was Two Years after, viz. 1691? Sure the Brethren that united in 1691, had Time sufficient to digest the Doctor's Sermons in Two Years time: And it appears by that Union, so long after, that these Sermons could not indamage the good Correspondence between the Brethren. If they had been Reprinted in 1692, this Argument might have some weight. But it is manifest rather, that Mr. Williams, and they who set him a work, had a Mind to break the Union; which they effectually accomplished, by letting fly so hotly against the Truths of the Gospel, asserted in those Sermons: For they knew well, that most of the Congregational Brethren held with Doctor Crisp in many Things, called Errors in Mr. William's his Gospel-Truth (mis) stated. So that the Rebuker's assigning those Sermons, a Reason of Suspicion, is brought in by Head and Shoulders, to cover Mr. Williams' Head from the Charge of breaking the Union, by his so formidably treating those Sermons, and therein the Favourers of them, such as the Reverend Mr. Cole, Mr. Mather, and many others.   

§. XI.  
Let us see how the Rebuker imbellisheth and inamels this dividing Book of Mr. Williams. His brief Encomium is this, A Book, to say no more, ingeniously Penned, exactly Methodised, the Truths and Errors fairly stated, and, for aught I can see, Piously designed. Who would not run the risk of being taxed for setting all the Town together by the Ears, to have such a Plaudite? But however ingeniously Penned and Methodised, there is a Bar put in to the fair stating the Truths and Errors, whereby Dr. Chancy hath evinced fully to the World great unfairness, and some Falsity; though the Doctor hath been very favourable in omitting several Blunders of Ungrammaticalness therein, which others have taken Notice of. But as if that Book was not enough to break the Union, he comes forth in 1694, with his Man made Righteous; and therein confirms the Breach, as if he designed it should never be made up; and in a few Lines, gives these Epithets to his Opposers; Mr. Mather, by Name, is a Boutefeu and kindle Coal, that gets others to blow the Flames, Dr. Chancy is Billingsgate, Esq Edward's that wrote against him, and challenged him to prove, that Dr. Crisp wrote nothing but what Dr. Owen's Writings concurred with, he is by Mr. Williams, called Hell-hot Fire and thick Darkness, the Author of the War of the Angels, is Falsehood and Profaneness, and for Mr. Cole, that Profound and Excellent Scholar and Divine, he is Mysterious Nonsense. All these Titles he bestows without one word of Proof. And is not this a Gentlemanlike Divine, who deserves so great a Champion, as our Rebuker, to give him this great Character, Ingeniously Penned, and, for aught I can see, Piously designed.   

§. XII.  
But his Acuteness for Grammar, is somewhat like his not being the point of Courtesy for Manners, of which, for the lowering his Plumes, I shall give a Taste out of his Man made Righteous, p. 171 and 173, where he insults over Mr. Mather, for saying, Christ's Incarnation was no part of his Humiliation; wherein Mr. Mather meant, without doubt, his mere Incarnation, not including any part of his Mediatory Work. And here Mr. Williams, to show his Skill in Greek, makes a bluster on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Phil. 2.7. translated, made of no Reputation; but Mr. Williams would correct the Translation, and calls it exaninition. I was amazed at his exaninition, not knowing what to make of it, and thought it might be a slip of the Pen, or Printer, to put exaninition for exinanition; but when I found it three times exaninition, than I concluded Mr. Williams had forgot to construe inanis, from whence he fetched his exaninition, instead of exinanition; but exaninition may serve for some Gentlemen, that cannot accuse Oxford or Cambridge for their breaking Prissians Head. If he had committed such a Fault at School, his Master, with a Ferrula, might have told him, he was as much an exany-wigeon, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would produce exaninition. Behold the Champion for fairly stating Truths and Errors, ingeniously Penned, exactly Methodised.   

§. XIII.  
But why must the Rebuker be put on the drudgery of bearing up his Name and Reputation? Is it to make some Compensation for the severe Discipline of a faithful Rebuke indeed, when Things went high against him of another nature than blemishing Gospel-truths', instead of fairly stating them? But of this Altum Silentium, waiting for God's blessed Gift to him, of a sound incontestible Repentance, which, if true, will appear in a profound Humility; which when visible, will rejoice the Hearts of all that pity and pray for him.   

§. XIV.  
In Page 17, he says, Many and grievous Crimes were laid to Mr. Williams 's Charge. This methinks looks faltering in the Rebuker, the Champion's Champion, to give an intimation of the Charge against Mr. Williams, which one would have thought should have been laid to sleep; but it seems many Crimes he was charged with, and was nothing proved, was the Old Disciple Mr. K. his Testimony nothing. But all the Crimes are washed off by Three Eminent Divines leaving the Pinners-Hall Lecture to countenance Mr. Williams, after the Merchants had declined his Service there, that so the heavy Charge against him might not lessen his Reputation, though by it they have not increased their own; but have given a blessed Occasion for a fuller and clearer Publication thereof, the Free Grace of God in Christ Jesus, without any concurrence of our Works to justify us, than was preached there before, by their Places being supplied at the said Lecture, by Free Grace Preachers. O the Infinite Goodness of God that out of this Collision, and by their Causeless departure from that Work which God had called them to, he hath made his Grace to superabound in that place.   

§. XV.  
All Objections made against Mr. Williams 's Book are accounted for. O! how happy would it be if this were made out. What all accounted for? This is so high that, I dare say, the Rebuker will think twice before he say it again; because there are many Objections or Exceptions in Dr. Chancy's, Esq Edward's, and other Books, unaccounted for, to which no Satisfaction was ever given; and particularly, that of his saying, The Righteousness of God by Faith, which the Apostle desired to be found in, Phil. 3. did principally intent our Gospel Holiness: Which dismal Interpretation, I do not find, had any Public Recantation made to it; and so all Objections are not accounted for.   

§. XVI.  
If Mr. Williams shall hereafter Write, or Preach, any thing in derogation of the subscribed Articles, it will oblige him to make Satisfaction; but for his Book, that has received its Compurgation. I must beg your Pardon here. Can it suffice the whole World, where his Book has been sent, and his Errors taken vent, that at last he hath subscribed the Articles drawn up, but never published, so as to counterpoise his Book? His Book still speaks, being countenanced by 49 Ministers, whom he has drawn in to sign his fair stating Truths and Errors: And what less than a public renouncing the Errors found therein, attested by those that subscribed his Book, can be a Satisfaction, especially renouncing that of Phil. 3.9.? O! that we had as warm a Zeal for the Righteousness of God as holy David had, than we should not say, that all in Mr. Williams' Book is accounted for, so long as that mention of Christ's Righteousness being to be found in, is called our Gospel Holiness, and that this is not publicly renounced: For David saith in Psal. 71.15. I will make mention of thy Righteousness, even of thine only. What have we to rejoice in, or boast of, but this Righteousness only, and not set up our Gospel Holiness in the place of Christ's Righteousness, which is the Righteousness of God?   

§. XVII.  
At length our Rebuker is come into the Field of Battle against Dr. Crisp; and, without any Prologue, falls foul on him in page 23, charging the Dissenting Brethren (as he calls the Congregational Pastors, Mr. G. G. T. Cole, Nath. Mather, etc.) with having dipped too deep in Dr. Crisp's Doctrines, which he calls Crispian Heterodoxies, thus, It's an unquestionable Truth, that some of them had vented such strange Doctrines, that it gave umbrage that there might be found among them one or two, or so, that had dipped very deep in those CRISPIAN HETERODOXIES; of which one is, That (the Elect) any are in the sight of God justified or entitled to Eternal Life, before they are effectually called. To which, in the Spirit of Meekness, I would say first, this is a Scurrilous Term at best, to say it is a Crispian Heterodoxy, for the Doctor to say, with many Famous Divines before the Doctor was extant, That in the sight of God such are entitled to Eternal Life before called; of which there may be a taste by and by: But for the Rebuker to cast such Dirt on the Name of one whom his great Opponent, Mr. Williams, could bestow a Commendation on, that he believed Reverend Dr. Crisp a Holy Man; this is the Rebuker's setting up a Sign over his own Door, with this Title, Here lives a Bespatterer of a fervent Exalter of the Lord Jesus. Solomon tells us what he is, who condemns the just, Prov. 17.15. which I pray God may not be said of the Rebuker, that he is an abomination to the Lord: But righteous Lips are the delight of Kings, Prov. 16.13. Not fulsome flattering Lips to a Supporter of Antichrist. It had been a due piece of Modesty, before he had stigmatised the Doctor thus, to have evinced some Heterodoxies of him he scoffs at; but thus to run a tilt, and stab his precious Name, before any Proof of Heterodoxy, is not becoming a Minister of the Gospel, or a Gentleman, much less doth it become an Old Disciple of Jesus Christ our Lord, who was meek, and though reviled, reviled not again; but he hath told us, Judgements are prepared for Scorners, Prov. 19.29. which I beseech the Lord to divert from the Head and Family of the Rebuker. What a Scoff, or Scorn, is here put on a fervent Servant of the Lord Jesus, (his Enemies being Judges) to Nickname him at the first dash Crispian Heterodoxy, and so to make his Name and Family the Reproach of City and Country; whereas many Thousands in both, have for Fifty and Five Years since he died, accounted his Name, under Christ, as sweet Ointment, having had their Souls refreshed with the Savour which was cast abroad, in his opening the Excellencies of his Lord and Master, in his Sermons, among so many Thousands. I'll give one of the greatest Instances that is, in an Expression of that Great Divine, the Reverend Mr. Thomas Cole, who departed this Life the 16th of September, 1697, who was so ravished and transported with the Sermons of Dr. Crisp, that he said, over and over, in the presence of many, That if he was worth but 100 l. in all the World, and Dr. Crisp ' s Sermons were not to be had under 50 l., he would give it rather than not have them; and this he said several Years after his first saying so. And said before a great Number of Eminent Ministers, whereof the Reverend Mr. How was one, That if Dr. Crisp be an Antinomian, than I am one; and he told me that Mr. How said, And so I am also, if he be one. And, if I mistake not, he said Dr. Bates was one in the Company that said, And so am I But now that the New Law is set up, they draw off their Suffrage, and the Doctor's Works are called Crispian Heterodoxies.   

§. XVIII.  
In Page 23, the Rebuker brings in the Dissenting Brethren, called upon by the United ones, to renounce some odd Notions, as he calls them; the third of which I note, it being, That any are in the sight of God justified, or entitled to Eternal Life, before they are effectually called, etc. This is to be renounced as a Crispian Heterodoxy, though countenanced by Men of greater Name than Dr. Crisp. If known to God are all his Works from Everlasting, which the Rebuker cannot deny, then in the sight of God, all are Justified from all Eternity, I say, in God's sight, that are not actually Justified in their own Persons, till united to Christ by Faith. But besides, that sort of Justification of the Elect, in God's sight, from Eternity, there are several Scriptures which import that which is tantamount to Justification of the Elect actually, though not personally, in God's sight, from Eternity, as Jer. 31.3. Yea, I have loved thee with an Everlasting Love: Which Everlasting Love, all agree, is as well from Eternity past, as to Eternity to come; and if loved from Eternity, what is that short of being then justified? For God loved them as he saw them in Christ undertaken for to be justified by his Righteousness: But that which goes higher, they were the Delight of Christ from all Eternity; Prov. 8.26, 30, 31. While as yet he had not made the Earth— I was by him, as one brought up with him; I was daily his Delights, and my Delights were with the Sons of Men. Here was the high Effect of Eternal Love, Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of the Father, he from all Eternity, and in all Eternity, he was the Delights of the Father; and during the same Eternity, the Son's Delights were with, or in, the Elect given him of the Father; Thine they were, and thou gavest them me. So that there was an Eternal Complacency in the Lord Jesus, in and to all that he was to redeem, by laying down his Life; and if so, did not he delight in them, as having Grace given to them in Christ before the World was? And so he looks on them as Redeemed, as Justified, and as Sanctified by him; though it was not actually accomplished in their Persons, yet it was actually concluded between the Father and Son, in the Council of Peace, Zach. 6.13. and God thereupon took Christ's Word, or Covenant, for it, as if it were actually done, upon which account Abraham, and all the Old Testament Believers, were justified and saved before Christ had actually paid the Ransom for many. Thus being undertaken for by Christ from Eternity, they were looked on by God as having a representative being in Christ from all Eternity, when chosen in him, and Grace given them in him from all Eternity in 2 Tim. 1.9. And this our Representative being from all Eternity in Christ, even Mr. Clark himself, in his Notes on the Bible, was forc d to allow. Therefore to renounce absolutely that the Elect are justified in the sight of God, before their effectual calling, is to bear hard on those Scriptures that declare God's Everlasting Love to them, and Christ's Delight in them, from all Eternity, and Grace given them in Christ before they are effectually called; of which see Mr. Pemble, and Dr. Twiss, by and by.   

§. XIX.  
I cannot pass without a Remark on the different Epithets the Rebuker gives to Socinianism, and his Crispian Antinomianism. How softly doth he tread on the Graves of Horrid Socinians, and how ruffly he deals with the Independants, for that which he calls in them Antinomianism? It is in fol. 25, where Socinianism he calls but an Error, but Antinomianism is Heresy; thus, The United Brethren had given demonstration— against all Socinian Errors— They did try these Dissenting Brethren (Mr. Griffith, Cole, mather's,) whether they were sound in the Faith, in opposition to the Antinomian Heresies; of which he gives a Catalogue of 21. So that with them it is but an Error, or a small Peccadillo, a little Trip, to deny the Deity and Satisfaction of our Lord Jesus, with the Socinians; but it is an Heresy, a damning Heresy, to say, That an Elect Person is, in the sight of God, justified before effectually called: or to say, A Believer works from Life, and not for Life, with those he counts Antinomians. O Kratiste Theophile! (so I call the Rebuker now) where is your Zeal for our Lord Jesus, to be so favourable to the Socinians, as to call it only an Error in them to deny our Lord Christ's Deity.   

§. XX.  
I cannot but stand in admiration, and can scarce believe my Eyes, when I look on this Catalogue or Beadroll of 21 Antinomian Heresies, my Dear Kratiste hath loaded his Brethren with, for dissenting from Mr. William's his Gospel-Truth stated (amiss). I hope it may not be unprofitable to myself, and some others, to spend a few Thoughts, by searching what the Scriptures of Truth say about them; for which I implore the Holy Spirit's assistance, that he would bring to remembrance the blessed Truths therein, relating hereunto.   

§. XXI.  
The first is, That a Gospel Threat, if not a Katachresis, is a Bull. This methinks is ridiculously called a Heresy, to say, a Gospel Threat is a Bull. What of Heresy can you make this? But let us see what the Spirit saith concerning the Gospel, what it is: He saith by the Angel, Behold I bring you glad Tidings, a Saviour is born; or, I Gospelize this to you, that Christ is born. And what is it but a Bull, or a Calf like a Bull, to put a Threatening to Glad Tidings, and call that Gospel? One may as well say that, Cursed is every one that continues not in all things written in the Law, is Gospel, as any other Threat: But if Curses, because written in the New Testament, are the Gospel, than our Neonomians have done their Business effectually, and we have a new Thing, a Curse, for what they call Gospel, besides the Lord Christ's Gospel, which is, that he Jesus is come to save his People from their Sins; not but that the Threat is made use of in the hand of Christ in publishing the Gospel of Salvation by him; but to say that the Threat is the Gospel, is the same as to say, that Condemnation is a Pardon, which whether Bull or Calf matters not, but to be sure it is very near to a Contradiction; and my Dear Kratiste must strain hard to make the saying so, to be an Antinomian Heresy: But here he marshals it as the Captain-General of the 21, how formidable then must the following 20 be, if this Man of Straw must lead the Van, that 'tis an Heresy to say, a Gospel-Threat is a Bull. But leaving this Moon calf,   

§. XXII.  
His second Heresy is, That Pardon is rather the Condition of Faith, than Faith is of Pardon. That is to say, That Faith rather flows from Pardon, than Pardon from Faith; and for any to say so, is with him an Antinomian Heresy; which is a strange Strain, for the Scripture saith, We are justified freely by his Grace; which Justification includes Pardon; then we are Pardoned freely by his Grace, not of Works, lest any boast; if so, than we are not pardoned upon account of Faith, as a Condition of it, but upon account of Christ's Blood washing away our Sins, which is called the Righteousness of God, and this is received by Faith: but Christ, with this Righteousness of his, first receives or apprehends us; and then being apprehended by him, we, by his Spirit, are enabled to apprehend him by Faith; and so the Righteousness of God is revealed from Faith to Faith. The Apostle doth not say, the Righteousness of God (wherein our Pardon is included) that this is made ours by Faith, or that Faith is the Condition of our having it; but Faith is that whereto it is revealed to us: It was given to us before when Christ first apprehended us, but it is Revealed, made manifest to us, that it is ours by Faith wrought in us, and more and more Revealed as Faith increases, it being revealed from Faith to Faith, mark it is to Faith. So that this Heresy amounts to no more than this, as for a Person to say, That Christ (and Pardon with him) first takes hold of us, is the Root of an endless Life in us, and so works Faith in us: This with you is Heresy, but with us sound Truth, else we should never have either Pardon or Faith; and this we must aver, rather than to say, that Faith is the Condition, or Root or Principle, from which our Pardon flows or grows, because to call Faith a Condition of Pardon, any other way, than as it is an Eye that Pardon is revealed to, and an Hand that receives a Pardon first given, is to make Faith a Copartner with Christ's Blood, and God's Free Grace, which must not be asserted.   

§. XXIII.  
His third Heresy to be renounced, I think, is as Ridiculous as the first, and that is this, 'Tis a Heresy to say, It was Sin as to the Anomia that Christ bore; The Fault of Sin was laid on Christ. That is, with them Christ did not bear the Anomia, the Iniquity of Sin, and Christ did not bear the Fault of Sin, that is to say, with the Neonomians Christ boar Sin without the Anomia of it, or Christ bore Sin without the Fault of it; which is the same as to say, Christ bore Sinless Sin and Faultless Sin; which is, besides its being a Catachresis, or Bull to bear Faultless Sin, 'tis a total Overthrow of the whole Gospel, and of all our Salvation by Christ's Sufferings; for if Christ bore only Faultless Sin, than he bore only the Punishment, and that very Unrighteously too, and left the Fault for us to do away as well as we can, with Tears of Repentance, and with our New Obedience, which will never wash our Black-a-moor Souls White, or else we must bear the Fault to all Eternity, for nothing can wash away the Stain and Pollution but the Blood of Christ: But by their Doctrine Christ hath not done away the Anomia, nor borne the Fault. But in plain English, I must say to my Dear Kratiste, and all his Friends, that vent and vend such Doctrine, It looks very Boldly and Affrontingly, to teach the Holy God to speak; He saith over and over in the Old and New Testament, that Christ bore our Iniquity, our Transgression, our Sins; he bore our Sins in his Body, he hath done away Sin by the Sacrifice of himself, he bore our Sins, our very Sins, without any distinction of Punishment, Gild, Slain, Fault or Filth; he bore our Sin, and for these Gentlemen to talk of bearing Sin without the Fault, or to talk of Faultless Sin, how bold a Stroke at the Root of the Gospel is this, and how dreadful a Thought must this make, in all that come to God for Pardon through the Blood of Christ, to hear it asserted by the great Gospel-Staters, that Christ bare Sin, 'tis true, but he left the Fault for the Sinner to wash off by his Holy Life, and to do otherwise they call Antinomian Heresy. But for Argument, If Sin be laid on Christ without the Fault, then 'tis no Sin, for what is Sin but the Transgression of the Law? And what is that but Fault? And besides, this is to make God infinitely , and also Cruel to our Lord Jesus, his Dear and Only begotten Son, to inflict the Heavy Dreadful Punishment which was laid on him for Sin, when this Sin, as to the Fault that deserved the Punishment, was not laid or charged on him: So that Christ was by such Doctrine punished where no Fault was charged: From such Doctrine the Good Lord deliver all that desire Salvation by and through our Lord Jesus: This is strange Doctrine, to tell us of Faultless Sin borne by Christ: But it is the same sort of Divinity as a Gospel-Threat, or a Glad-Tyding-Threat; first we have Gospel Threat, that's our New Gospel; and now comes Faultless Sin, and that's the Curse that Christ bore. But by the way, there could be no Curse in Christ's Sufferings, if he did not bear the Fault as well as the Punishment: But Blessed be God our Good Old Bibles have no such Language in them, but tell us plainly he bore our Sins, our very Sins, and hath washed us from our Sins (that is, from all the Fault, Slain and Pollution) in his Blood. Therefore leaving this Idle Heresy, let us ever adore him that hath done away our Sins, our very Sins, all that appertains to them, by the Sacrifice of himself, to whom be Glory for ever and ever.   

§. XXIV.  
He proceeds to aggravate this third Antinomian Heresy, as he calls it, and saith, 'tis Heresy to say, Christ was reputed a Criminal, not only by Man, but by God. This is the more strange, because my Dear Kratiste, the Rebuker, owns that Christ suffered, loco nostro, vice nostra, in our place, in our stead. And how this could be, and he not a reputed Criminal, is a Paradox, unless he means in our place was no more than as the Socinians say, for our good only; 'tis true, this he is charged with, and he gives but too much occasion for it, but I cannot believe he excludes Christ in his Suffering, making Satisfaction to God in our stead, and his bearing away our Sins by his Suffering, and imputing his own Righteousness to us for our Good. But whatever he grants, here we see he brings in this Clause, of Christ being reputed a Criminal by God, to be one of those which he calls Abominable Doctrines. In the same page 25. Which if not Antidoted against (he saith) will prove a Bane and Poison to the Soul. O whither is my Kratiste driven in the Hurricane of his disturbed Zeal for Mr. Williams. Can Christ bear our Sins, and be punished for our Sins, even to that Extremity, as to cry, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me: Can the Just suffer Justly for the Unjust, and not be a reputed Criminal? What shall we make of the Justice of God, to say, Awake, O Sword, against the Man that is my Fellow: If this Fellow of God, this Blessed Holy Spotless Lamb of God, had not the Sins of his People so charged on him, that he was looked on as a reputed Criminal, standing in their place, with all their Sins laid on him; and so though he was not a Criminal in the least actively, yet he was looked upon by God as a Criminal representatively, in their stead whose Crimes and Sins he bore. This is the General Argument of all the Orthodox, How could God justly punish him, if he was not a reputed Criminal, as standing a Surety for us? What was Imputed to him, if not our Sin, when he bore our Sins, and cried out, My Soul is exceeding Sorrowful to Death? But to be plain, it appears our Lord Jesus was a reputed Criminal, when Innocent to Perfection in himself, in that he owns all the Sins of Believers to be his Sins, as in Psal. 40.7. compared with the 12th Verse, he saith, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God: Then it follows, Mine Iniquities have taken hold of me, so that I am not able to look up: They are more than the hairs of mine head. This is spoken by our Lord Jesus, as is plain in Heb. 10.9. here he owns they are his Iniquities; How were they his? but as he sustained the Persons of all the Elect, and so was a reputed Criminal in their stead, and their Sins being by the Lord laid on him, he takes them on himself as his own Iniquities, and saith, They are more than the Hairs of his Head. And again, in Psal. 69.4, 5. Christ saith, Then I restored that which I took not away, O God, thou knowest my Foolishness, and my Sins are not hid from thee. Then it follows, The Zeal of thine House hath eaten me up: Which is plain of Christ. So that our Foolishness and Sins being laid on him, he calls them his, and saith right, for they were really his, though but by Imputation, as a Debt is really a Sureties, though he be but a Surety, yet that's enough, and so our Lord Jesus found it, when he was in his Agony, Sweeting clodders of Blood, and on the Cross, crying, My God, why, etc. sure he did not cry out so terribly for faultless Sin, but as a reputed Criminal for real Sin laid on him.   

§. XXV.  
The Fourth Heresy, as he calls it, is, As to the Elect, there never was any Gild upon them, in respect of the Righteous Judgement of God in foro Dei, but that which accompanied the Letter of the Law setting in with Conscience. Where he picked up this Offensive passage he shows not, but that it goes among his abominable Doctrines this he declares. Now how far this is Heresy, we will at present only consult Famous Twiss, who was no Antinomian, and see what he says of Pardon in the sight of God before Faith, nay from Eternity, as it was an Immanent Act of God, Twiss de Electione, Sect. 25. Fol. 294. he proves Forgiveness to be before Faith, even at Christ's Death, nay from Eternity. His words are these, Quanam erit illa peccatorum remissio quae fidem consequitur?  
This is his Question, than he answers as follows.  
Remissio enim peccatorum si Quidditatem inspicias nihil aliud est quam aut punitionis negatio aut volitionis puniendi negatio, sit ergo peccata remittere nihil aliud quam nolle punire, at hoc nolle punire ut actus immanens in Deo fuit ab aeterno, nec fidem consequitur nec Spiritus Sancti operatione in nobis terminare deprehenditur, Quod vero operatione Spiritus Sancti nobis hac parte per fidem contingit aliud esse non poterat quam SENSUS Gratiae Dei. Ex quibus conficitur non potentialem tantum, sed & actualem peccatorum remissionem Christum morte suâ à Patre impetrasse nobis paucis concludimus immediatam mortis Christi effectionem esse expiationem Peccatorum. Sive pro peccatis plenariam Satisfactionem quae quidem nobis non innotescit nisi per Fidem & Spiritus Sancti operationem. Which is to this purpose: What is that Forgiveness of Sins which follows Faith?  
Which he answers thus: Forgiveness of Sins, if you consider the Quiddity (or Essence) of it, is nothing else but either a denying of Punishment, or denying a Will to punish: Therefore to remit or forgive Sins, is nothing else but not to will to punish. Now this not to will to punish, as it is an immanent Act in God, it was from Eternity, neither doth it follow Faith, neither is it held to terminate by the Operation of the Holy Spirit in us; but what belongs to us by the Operation of the Holy Spirit, in this matter, can be nothing else but a SENSE of the Grace of God; from which it is gathered, not a Potential only, but also an Actual Remission of Sins, Christ obtained of the Father for us at his Death. In short, We conclude the immediate Effect of Christ's Death to be Expiation of Sins, or a full Satisfaction for Sins, which truly is not made known to us but by Faith, and the Operation of the Holy Spirit.  
Here you see this Famous Doctor evacuates your charging it to be an Antinomian Heresy to say, in foro Dei, there never was Gild on the Elect in respect of God's Righteous Judgement; and to make good your Charge, I hope you will not call him an Heterodox Apocryphal Antinomian.   

§. XXVI.  
His fifth Heresy he charges, as Antinomian, is, that Union to Christ is before Faith, at lest Naturâ, and we partake of the Spirit by virtue of that Union. It is to admiration that this firm solid Truth should be called Heresy. Can any thing be more clear, than that Faith is a Fruit of Union to Christ, unless it be a dead Faith? Can a Branch bring out Grapes before it is united to the Vine, Christ Jesus? Doth he not say, Without me you can do nothing? I would ask, whence can a living Faith come, but from Union to Jesus Christ? Can it spring out of corrupt Nature, and so bring us to Christ? A dead Branch may be tied to the Vine, but a living Branch grows out of the Vine. The Apostle was of the mind, that Christ first takes hold of us, before we can, by Faith, take hold of him; according to Phil. 3.12. I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which I am also apprehended of Christ Jesus. Here he was first apprehended of Christ, as Dr. Manton told us well at Pinners-Hall, and from thence inferred, (as well he might) that all that partake of Christ are first apprehended of him, and so he unites himself to them before they can act Faith on him, which is their apprehending him. They must make Christians to be Monsters, that make them to live as Members of Christ by Faith, before they are united to him. How can a Man possibly, that is dead in Sins by Nature, come to believe in Christ, unless Christ comes first and quickens him, by uniting himself to the Soul? Hence the Apostle said, It pleased God to reveal his Son in me, Gal. 1.16. Till than he was a zealous persecuting Pharisee, and could have not only called all Christ's Disciples Antinomians, but have slaughtered them too, as some now slay their Names; but when Christ took hold of him, and God revealed his Son in him, than he conferred not with Flesh and Blood, but in the way that they counted Heresy, he worshipped the God of his Fathers; believing what is written, Acts 24.14. The second Adam is the quickening Spirit, and quickens all his Seed before they can live: You who were dead in Sins hath he quickened. Sure here was Union of Christ to them, thereby quickening them when dead in Sins, before they could put forth any living Act of Faith in him; or else we must feign, that a Believer hath a Spiritual Life in him, that is not from Christ, if he have Faith before he is united to Christ, as some pretend; and so there would be two Spiritual Lives in a Believer, one before Union to Christ, which works Faith, and the other from Christ upon acting our Faith: But this Ass of our own Spiritual Life, and the Ox of Christ's Life in us, will not draw well together. So that I think, I may safely conclude, this is no Heresy to say, that Union to Christ is before Faith; much less is that which follows an Heresy to say, that we partake of the Spirit by virtue of that Union. This is brought in as part of the fifth Heresy. Whence do the Branches partake of the Sap of the Vine, but from the Root, by Virtue of Union to the Vine? 'Tis strange to admiration, that this should be questioned by those who, like Peter, seem to be Pillars in the Church, to call it an Antinomian Heresy to say, We partake of the Spirit, by virtue of Union to Christ. If the Spirit be not in us before Faith, how can he convince of Sin in not believing, and thereby work Faith? Doth not the Scripture say plainly, 1 Cor. 12.8, 9 To one is given, by the Spirit, the word of Wisdom, to another Faith by the same Spirit? Doth the Spirit give Faith, and is he not then in the Soul to work Faith before it is wrought? Is not the Former before the Thing form? If so, then sure my Dear Kratiste was in a great Mistake, and has sadly imposed on those that profess Faith in our Lord Jesus, to rank this for a Heresy, That we partake of the Spirit by virtue of our Union to Christ, which in Naturâ is before Faith.  
The sixth, as being much akin to the former, I pass only with the naming of it. 'Tis Heresy, he saith, to say, Justification, in regard of Application, must be before Believing. Whose Saying this is, or whence it is taken, I know not: If the meaning be, that God applies it to us, or reckons it to us, before our Believing, that we are Justified: This is so far from Heresy, that I think the contrary is a Contradiction: Or 'tis Nonsense for me to believe a Thing is mine, before it is given me, or applied to me, and so made mine. And in that Sense the Application of Justification, by God's Spirit, to my Conscience, that God hath loved me, and given his Son for me; this must first be applied to me before I can believe it, or else my Believing is but Presumption. But if by Application of Justification before Believing, he means, that the Soul doth apply it to himself before his Believing, I think he is to seek for any that hold that Tenet.   

§. XXVII.  
His seventh Heresy is this, That the first Application, ordine Naturae saltem, is to an  Man, eo nomine, that he may believe. That this is a blessed Gospel-Truth, and no Heresy, appears by what our Blessed Lord Jesus saith, That he came not to call the Righteous, but Sinners. And his immediate Call made them follow him; as Levi from being a Publican to be a believing Disciple: Nay, saith our Lord, Publicans and Harlots enter into the Kingdom of God before you. Ye believed not; but the Publicans and Harlots believed, Matth. 21.31, 32. Here was Application to ungodly Wretches, eo nomine, that they might believe; and when Publicans and Harlots they did believe, and so came off from their Ungodliness: Yea, the Dog Syrophenaecian, as Christ called her, she had Faith given her while she was a Dog, even to the Admiration of Christ himself; who said, O Woman, great is thy Faith! And saith the Apostle, for a full Proof that the Application is to an ungodly Man eo nomine, While we were Enemies, we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son: Nay, as God will have it, the very word ungodly, which they oppose as Heresy, is asserted in the Scripture, that the first Application of Christ is to an ungodly Man, in Rom. 4.5. To him that believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness. If the Blessed Apostle saith, God justifieth the ungodly, I trow, this is no Heresy in him; but if Heterodox Dr. Crisp say the same words, then 'tis an Antinomian Heterodoxy. Now there's a great outcry, what do you make God to be? Is God such a Friend to Sin as to justify the ? Doth it become the Holiness of God to justify an ungodly Man? This is the way to vindicate all licentious Antinomianism, That God justifies the ; and that while he is an Enemy he is reconciled to God. O out upon such profane Antinomians! We can allow the Apostle Paul to use such Language, because we can distinguish this into, he doth not justify the , that the Apostle means so whatever he saith; but we cannot bear it, that Apocryphal Tobias should say so, nor that Mysterious Nonsense say so, as Mr. William's called Mr. Cole, we cannot bear it in him; for this is to open a gap to Profaneness, to say, God justifieth the .   

§. XXVIII.  
The eighth Heresy is to assert, That we believe that we may be justified declaratively. The Case I take to be thus: The Apostle saith in Gal. 2.16. We believe that we may be justified by the Faith of Jesus; from whence the Neonomians conclude, that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, our Act of Faith, is that very Thing which justifies us, or that we are justified by our Work of Faith; if not by Works of Faith and Holiness, (which sometimes they join) yet at least by a Work, by our Act of Believing: Whereas the Orthodox, according to the Homilies and Doctrine of the Church of England, from plain Scripture, put Faith itself from us, as that Act that justifies, and say, Faith justifies only declaratively, as it manifests to the Conscience our being justified by Christ's Blood, Rom. 5.9. and freely by his Grace (not our Grace of Faith) through the Redemption that is in Jesus. Rom. 3.24. Titus 3.7. It is still ascribed to his Grace, not any Grace in us; our Grace of Faith being only the Instrument, or Hand, given us of God to receive Christ, and all in him. If Justification be as they would have it, from any Act of ours as the Ground or Cause of it, than we are not freely justified by his Grace, but by our Work of Believing; which, if not a Popish, is an Arminian Tenet, to blemish the Free Grace of God in Jesus Christ So that it may be safely concluded, that it is no Heresy to say, our Justification by Faith is declarative, in as much as the Essence of Justification is by the Blood of Jesus, and the Grace of God, imputing it to us, is the form of our Justification; which being received by Faith, is thereby manifested or declared to the Conscience by the Illumination of the Holy Spirit, concurring with our Spirits therein. See the Assemblies Catechism.   

§. XXIX.  
The like sort of Heresy to this last, we find well spoken to by Famous Pemble, in his Treatise of Grace and Faith, in fol. 22, to prove God's being reconciled to the Elect before they believe, and so to take off the Clamour from Dr. Crisp; as if it were Antinomian Heresy to say, we believe that we may be justified declaratively. Mr. Pemble argues solidly thus; Now that God doth actually love the Elect before they are regenerate, or can actually believe, may appear thus: (1.) Where God is actually reconciled he actually loves, but with the Elect, before they actually believe, God is actually reconciled; therefore he loves them before their Faith. The Minor is evident; because, before they are born, a full Satisfaction and Atonement is made by Christ, and accepted on God's part, whereon actual Reconciliation must needs follow: He was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the World. (2.) If God did actually love the Elect before Christ's time, when an actual Reconciliation was not made, then much more may he actually love the Elect after the Atonement is really made by Christ's Death, even before they do believe it. The former is true by the Salvation of the Patriarches, therefore the latter may not well be denied. (3.) Election, Vocation and Faith, are Fruits of God's Love to the Elect; which Graces he bestows on them, because he loves them. Now I argue; If God loved his Elect from Eternity, and this Love neither increaseth nor diminisheth, as in God, as Mr. Pemble saith anon, than it is plain, that in the Righteous Judgement of God, foro Dei, there was never any Gild on them, after they were delighted in by Christ: For God doth not take a Sinner by the Hand; that is the same as, he may be said, not to love guilty Souls; but he doth take the Elect by the Hand from Eternity. As they are chosen in Christ from Eternity, so they were delighted in by Christ from Eternity; therefore the Elect, as Elect, are not guilty in the sight of God: For if they were, how should they be delighted in from Eternity, as having Grace given them in Christ, by the Father, from Eternity? 2 Tim. 1.9. and Prov. 8.   

§. XXX.  
And now my hand is in with Mr. Pemble, and because the Rebuker, and others, may, if the Lord please, see their Mistake in their hard Censure on Dr. Crisp, and others, to say 'tis Heretical for them to say, That Justification is before Faith, I shall a little enlarge on this eighth Heresy. 'Tis well known Mr. Pemble was no Antinomian, yet he saith, in concurrence with Dr. Twiss and Dr. Crisp, thus; In foro Divino, in God's sight Justification goeth before our Sanctification; for even whilst the Elect are unconverted, they are then actually justified and freed from all Sin by the Death of Christ, and God having accepted of that Satisfaction, is actually reconciled to them. (2.) There is Justification, in foro Conscientiae, in our sense, which is but the revelation, and certain declaration, of God's former secret Act, of accepting Christ's Righteousness to our Justification. And why is not the outcry of Heresy against this Good Man? who asserts so plainly the actual Justification in God's sight before the Conversion of the Elect; and that the Justification in our Consciences, is but the revelation and declaration of the former secret Justification before God.   

§. XXXI.  
To the like purpose is the Confession of the Assembly at Westminster, on the Article of Justification, which saith, Christ by his Obedience and Death did fully discharge the Debt of all those that are justified. Here our Sins are called a Debt, which our Rebuker makes a dangerous word, and here this Debt is fully discharged; when? even at Christ's Death. And if so, than I argue with the Apostle, if the Debt was discharged then, Who can lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect, either of Sin or Gild? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again. Sure this was no Antinomian Assembly, yet they make the Debt discharged at Christ's Death.   

§. XXXII.  
But Mr. Pemble goes farther in this Point, and saith, That Faith doth not precede Participation with Christ, appears: (1) Our Sanctification wrought by the Spirit, conveys Life and Grace into our Souls when we are void of Faith, and before 'tis asked. (2.) Our Justification in God's sight, which was long before we were born, is purchased for us by Christ: 'Tis vain to think, with the Armenian, That Christ's Merits only made God PLACABILEM, not Placatum; no, the Ransom is paid and accepted, all the Sins are actually pardoned; this grand Transaction between God, and the Mediator Jesus Christ, was dispatched in Heaven, before we had a Being; yet the Benefit of it was ours, and belonged to us at that time, though we never knew so much, till after that by Faith we apprehended it: As Lands may be settled on an Infant, though he knew nothing of it till he come of Age. O! what clear Testimony is here, to convince the Neonomians, that besides express Scripture, those that the Rebuker calls Antinomians, have very good Company going with them.   

§. XXXIII.  
Here I cannot omit from the word Placabilem, to reflect on what one of the Deserters of Pinners-hall Lecture, well known to the Rebuker, said there, about April 1693, not without great Trouble to some of the Auditory, That Christ's Death was to make God PLACABLE. As rank Arminianism as can be, which was well answered there the sixth of June 1693 by Worthy Mr. Laurence, though the same Person was never answered there as I heard, to a worse piece of Arminianism that he uttered there, to the Scandal of Pinners-Hall, viz. That Adam ' s first Sin was not ours, or We did not Sin that first Sin, that Sin only corrupted our Nature. Which is clean contrary to the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all Sinned, Rom. 5.12.  
Now we may no longer wonder to see such Persons Symbolise with, and be Champions for unsound Mr. Williams, who holds, That more than the Elect may be Saved; Witness these words of his by way of Scorn to his Opposers, in his Appendix to Gospel Truth stated, It is not enough (saith Mr. Williams) that we own that Christ absolutely redeemed the Elect, so as to purchase saving Graces, as well as Benefits, to be infallibly theirs, unless we add, that all others are in state of Devils, as having no real offers of Life on Gospel terms: Nor is their Salvation possible if they will Repent and Believe. Here he holds it possible, that others, besides the Elect, may Repent and Believe, and so their Salvation is possible. Nay herein Antisozzo, whom my Dear Kratiste hath a great value for, doth partly coalesce in Page 103, saying, When God gave the Promise to the common Parent of Mankind, there was a possibility in the thing, that that means of Salvation might have been derived to all those Rivulets into which his Posterity should be subdivided: If it was not, I conceive the Fault was theirs, not God's, (as if it would have been a Fault in God, if he did not give means for all to be Saved, when they had Damned themselves.) Thus Antisozzo has in a manner laid Salvation open in common, to Elect and Non-elect, to Vessels before of old ordained to Condemnation, Judas 4. as well as to Vessels of Mercy, for whom the Kingdom was prepared from the Foundation of the World, Matt. 25, directly contrary to the Confession of the Assembly, which they both have Subscribed, though I find not that they ever recanted this Expression. The Assembly say, on the Point of God's Decree directly, that none but the Elect can be Saved thus, These Angels and Men, their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be increased or diminished; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually Called, Justified, Adopted, Sanctified and Saved, but the Elect only. For the proof of which, they quote 2 Tim. 2.19. John 13.18. & 17.9. & 6.64, 65. & 10.26. & Rom. 8.28. I lay down my Life for the sheep, and ye (Pharisees) ye believe not, because ye are not my sheep. Thus these great Men have asserted, and this our Neonomians subscribe to, in order to deceive the Simple, to believe they are Orthodox, when here 'tis visible, how Heterodox these two great Contenders for the New Law are, plainly deviating from the Assembly, in allowing a Possibility for the Non elect to be Saved. But I beg for them the Mercy of God, to give them the Eyesalve of his Spirit, to show them their Mistake.   

§. XXXIV.  
The Ninth and Tenth Heresies are scarce worth mentioning, they being only some curtailed Expressions, that the Antagonists to the Free Grace of God, in his eternal Love to poor Sinners in Christ, do take from the Writings of some of the Asserters of our Sins being fully done away, by the Death of our Lord Jesus, and from thence this Pharisaical Spirit quarrels at them, and charges them for laying a ninth Heresy, It is denied that God requires Faith, as an indispensible Qualification, in them whom he will Justify by Christ's Merits. How this is worded by his Antinomians he mentions not, whether they deny Faith indispensibly in Infants or Lunatics or no: So that this Quarrel needs little answer, seeing they know that we are as much for Faith as themselves, if not more, as it excludes Works in the Point of Justification; but not for Faith to take the Crown off from the Head of Jesus, and itself to wear the Honour of Saving us in whole, or in part.   

§. XXXV.  
Such another is his Tenth Heresy, All that a Believer can pray for, is the farther Manifestation of Pardon; for he knows that all his Sins are pardoned. This is a manifest Breach of Charity, for he knows they pray for more; and though they may at some Seasons, have full Assurance of being accepted in the Beloved Jesus, wherein they see all their Sins were done away in his Blood, when he, to Sanctify the People, Suffered without the Gate: Whereupon they, upon Believing, cry, Glory to him who hath loved them, and washed them from their Sins with his Blood. Yet they daily pray for fresh Discoveries of the same, which, as to their Consciences, is a Fresh Pardon, or renewing of Pardon. I hope my Dear Kratiste will not deny, That by one Offering, he hath for ever perfected those that are Sanctified; and that he Sanctified the People with his own Blood, when he Suffered without the Gate. If so, than all successive Pardons, upon fresh Acts of Faith, are only the Clearing up of Pardon to the Conscience, that there should be no more Conscience of Sin: Whereas the Grand Pardon in the Court of Heaven was, as Mr. Pemble says, when Christ was delivered for our Offences, and raised for our Justification; which is not manifest to the Conscience till Faith comes. And thus this Heresy vanishes, having only left us a Testimony, that the Neonomians do Boggle in the point of Pardon, and would hook in our Faith to be a Joynt-Saviour with Christ, by being a procurer of Pardon, rather than a Manifestation of it.   

§. XXXVI.  
It is an Amazement his 11th Heresy, which is this, A Believer is to work from Life, and not for Life. For answer, If a Man be a Believer, he is a Living Member of Christ, and so he Works from Life in Christ: Sure than this cannot be the Heresy intended here, to say he works from Life: Then this is his Heresy, That a Believer works not for Life. But how can that be Heresy? to say, A Believer doth not work for Life; when the word saith, The Gift of God is Eternal Life, Rom. 6.23. If it be Gift, than it is not Worked for by us, do Men call that a Gift that is wrought for? that is, Wages; Death indeed is wrought for by Sin, for the Wages of Sin (which is in our best Works) is Death, but Life is the Free Gift of God: How then can it be called Heresy to say, A Believer works not for Life? Antisozzo was once of another Mind I find, but the Rebuker does well to conceal his Name, for to call this Heresy, must needs cast a sad Reflection. What more substantial Truth is there, than that a Believer works from Life, and not to gain Life by his Works? Whither shall we run, if we do not maintain this for Truth, That a Believer works not, that he by his good Works might procure to himself Eternal Life? No; but he works from a Divine Principle of Life in him, that he may glorify God for the Gift of Eternal Life, through his Son Jesus Christ. O! how true is that of Luther, Every Man hath a Pope in his Belly; and how ready are we to run into the Dregs of Popery to Work for Life.   

§. XXXVII.  
The Twelfth is, 'Tis Heresy to say, It's a great Truth, that God sees no Sin in a Believer. I hope it is a great Truth, and no Heresy, that God saith, I have blotted out, as a thick Cloud, thy Transgressions, and as a Cloud, thy Sins, Isa. 44.22. And if blotted out, it is to show that God doth not see them: And if God saith, He has cast them into the Depth of the Sea, and he has cast them behind his Back; and he will remember them no more: Is it not the same thing, as not to see them? And doth he not say, He hath not beheld Iniquity in Jacob; not but that they had Iniquity enough; but when their Sins are covered with the Robe, the fine white Linen of Christ's Righteousness, than it may be said, without Imputation of Heresy, 'tis a great Truth, and a Blessed one, that God sees no Sin in a Believer: Sure my Dear Kratiste had strangely forgot himself, to call this glorious Truth a Heresy.   

§. XXXVIII.  
The Thirteenth, Sin can do no real hurt to a Believer.  
Answer. If, as Sin abounds, Grace much more abounds, (which nevertheless is no Encouragement to any to Sin but a Devil) and if all works for good to those that love God, then though Sin may bring dreadful Chastisements, they are for good, and not for real hurt, to a Believer; not that we are to continue in Sin that Grace may abound, God forbidden.   

§. XXXIX.  
The Fourteenth, God is not displeased with his People, nor angry with the Persons of Believers for their Sins.  
I answer. God saith, whom he loves, he loves to the end; whom he loves, he may Rebuke and Chasten, and yet not be angry with them; he is angry with the Wicked every day; but as to his People he is God, and changes not, and his Kindness endures for ever: This is such a Maxim, that 'tis the conclusion of every Verse of the 136th Psalm, we translate it, His Mercy endures for ever, but the word is, chasdo, his Kindness, 'tis that which endures for ever. I know the Rebuker loves a learned Testimony from Man, to concur with the Word of God; take it then from one never accounted an Antinomian, though in this as great an one as Dr. Crisp, nay, such another as the Apostle Paul. I say in this particular, concerning the Unchangeableness of God's Love to his People, even Famous Pemble, who saith thus in his Tract of Grace and Faith, Fol. 22. I would have you (saith he) learn a Distinction between God's Love in itself, and its Manifestation to us. The first is PERPETVAL, from all to all Eternity without CHANGE, Increase or Lessening, towards every one of the Elect: But the Manifestation of this to our Consciences gins in time at our Conversion. We may truly say, that God's Love to us, when he decreed to Save us, is one and the same, without Addition, with that which he manifests to us when he glorifies us, (if not, say I, there is a Change in God) That holy Flame of Love burns as hot to us now as then; his Love to their Persons is from Everlasting the same; nor doth their Sinfulness lessen it (though it may hid it) nor their Sanctity increase it; because God, in loving their Persons, never considered them otherwise, than as most perfectly Holy and unblameable in Christ. God approves of their Persons, while he disallows their Corruptions; and when his fiercest Wrath was showed against their Sins, in the Person of Christ, then did God most compassionately love the Persons both of Christ, and of all the Elect. O! that our New-law Men, would or could well weigh these Passages, highly consistent with the Unchangeable unvariable immutable Nature of God. This Testimony, though but Humane, is founded on good Ground, I the Lord change not Had Dr. Crisp written this, than we had had an Outcry of Notorious Antinomian Heresy. But we must wait at the Throne of Grace in behalf of Opposers, for 'tis God alone gives Eyesalve, to see into the Mystery of the unsearchable Riches of his Grace, to poor Sinners in Christ, that their Sinfulness doth not lessen his Love to the Elect; though he still hates Sin in them, as much as if they were Damned to Eternal Burn for every Sin which is due to them; but they are borne and suffered for by our Blessed Lord Jesus, the Just for the Unjust, by his once Suffering for Sins (even for all and every Sin of those given to him from Eternity) that he might bring us to God: To whom be Glory for ever.   

§. XL.  
The Fifteenth Heresy, as he calls it, is, Legal Convictions before Saving Faith, are no more than Sin, it's but the filthy Conscience polluting Gild of Sin.  
Answer. Surely my Dear Kratiste forgot himself here, or rather the Word of God, which he should ever steer his Course by: Doth not the Scripture say plainly, Whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin? Rom. 14.23. And doth not the Apostle show what he got by his Legal Convictions before Faith, that the Law wrought in him all manner of Concupiscence, Rom. 7. I was alive without the Law, but when the Command came (when Legal Convictions came) Sin revived, and I died; and Sin taking occasion by the Command (or by Legal Convictions) wrought in me all manner of Concupiscence. Here we see the Fruit of Legal Convictions; O! how ill doth it become such as would be accounted Ministers of the Gospel, to run thus to Moses, and to talk at that rate; as if any Work of ours, before true Faith, were aught but Sin; and if Sin, it must be Conscience-polluting; And where is the Heresy now? If there be Sin in our best Duties after Faith (or else why was the High Priest to have a Plate of Gold on his Forehead, to take away the Iniquity of their Holy Things) what then are Works before Faith, but Conscience-polluting? I desire my Kratiste to take another Turn with the Reverend Assembly, and see what they say of this, viz. Works done by Unregenerate Men, because they proceed not from an Heart purified by Faith, they are sinful. Titus 1.15. To the Defiled and unbelieving, is nothing pure.   

§. XLI.  
The Sixteenth, All imperfect Holiness is Sin. This methinks the Rebuker may blush to mention for an Heresy, seeing the Scripture saith, He that errs in one point, is guilty of all, and Cursed is he that continues not in all things written in the Book of the Law to do them. So that the discontinuance a moment from doing all things commanded in the Law, brings a Curse, if there be but the least Deviation from the perfect Rule: So that if our Holiness be in the least short of the full Requirement of the Law, it brings a Curse, which it could not do if it were not Sin. But here lies the Core, the Heart of the Armenian Spirit as I take it, That God accepts imperfect Holiness for Christ's sake, in the stead of perfect: As for the first part, that God accepts imperfect Holiness for Christ's sake, the Orthodox do hold; but it is only as Christ hath taken away the Sin of the Imperfection, by his once offering himself for all the Sins of the Elect; but God never accepts it as perfect, or in the stead of perfect, that would be to accept it for what it is not, much less doth God accept us for our imperfect Holiness: Besides the Scripture saith, All our Righteousnesses are as filthy Rags, What is that but Sin? And the Assembly say, The best Works wrought by us are defiled; and if so, then 'tis no Heresy to say, All imperfect Holiness is Sin. And one would wonder how it should enter into the Thoughts of these Antagonists, to subscribe what they have done of the Assemblies Confession, and yet assert that to be Heresy, which is owned by them for solid Truth.   

§. XLII.  
The seventeenth Heresy is to say, Turn ye, Turn ye, why will you die? is but the triumph of the Law over a dead Sinner. Answer, The bare outward Call to Sinners to turn, you will grant, is not sufficient to turn them; for they are, by Nature, dead in Sins and Trespasses, and there must be an Almighty Power put forth to quicken them, besides the bare Call, Turn ye, turn ye. It is God that must work both the Will and the Deed; for without me, saith Christ, you can do nothing. If so, what is the Call to turn, without the Spirit of God effecting the turn, but a manifestation of God's Right to command, which you may call the triumph of the Law? You will not say, that God hath lost his Right to command us to turn to him, though we are dead, and are not able to turn, till there goes forth from God, with his Call, an Almighty saving Power of turning us to him; and on this account the Church prays, Turn thou me, and I shall be turned, Jer. 31.18. And till then, the Call is but God's triumphing in his Sovereignty, in the Law, over poor dead Sinners.   

§. XLIII.  
The eighteenth is a very weak Heresy, though a long one, and in truth no more a Heresy, than 'tis Heresy to say, Christ took not the Nature of Angels, but the Seed of Abraham; but however this comes in the Beadroll, to fill up the number; and 'tis thus, The Eternal Life, in which the Angels were created and confirmed by Christ, differs from that Eternal Life which Believers have in Christ: The one is a Creature Life, or a created Life, the other is the Eternal Life of God communicated in time. This, though not of the Essence of Christianity, or a Fundamental, may be a little explained, and so it will appear that it is no Heresy. But some Persons are glad of a small Occasion to quarrel. The only Ground for quarrelling at this Expression, is, That the Life of a Believer is the Eternal Life of God; by which, I suppose, is meant of God-Man, the Lord Jesus Christ. Now take it in that Sense, than Christ being the Life of every Believer, they have the Eternal Life of God-Man in them, so as the Angels have not. Christ took not their Nature; they are not Members of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones, and Believers are; Eph. 5.30. He is not their Resurrection and Life, as he is the Believers. Is it not a great Truth, that by Virtue of their Union to Christ by Faith in his Flesh and Blood, the Flesh and Blood of him who is the Eternal Son of God, they have that Eternal Life in them, from him, which the Angels have not? As to the Eternal Life which the Angels have, and shall enjoy, what is it but a created Life? Whereas the Life of Christ in his Saints, and with them to all Eternity, is their participation of his Life, as he is more than a mere Creature, as he is God-Man; and they one with him, partaking of the Divine Nature, as the Branches partake of the very Nature of the Vine; not that they are Godded with Christ God-Man, but in an ineffable manner they partake of his Divine Nature, being made one Body, incorporated into him, and so one with him; which must comprehend an Eternal Life being in them, which is more than merely created, they being filled with all the fullness of God, Eph. 3.19. That is, as they have Christ in them, the hope of Glory, in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead Bodily, but in Believers he dwells only Spiritually.   

§. XLIV.  
The nineteenth they make a great one, viz. That Believers are as Righteous as Christ; I mean, not in a way of Similitude, but in a way of Equality. Here is high Disingenuity, to quote part of a Sentence. For Mr. Mather, from whom this is taken, though he said somewhat to this purpose at Pinners-Hall, yet he put in several Qualifications of the Expression, whereof one was, That they were as Righteous as Christ, as they did partake of his Mediatorial Righteousness, and of that part only, of that Righteousness, which was wrought out for them. To this there may be more said, when I answer the Rebuker's saying, That Mr. Williams had denied his Redeemer, if he had not denied Dr. Crisp's Assertion, of a change of Persons. In the mean time, I leave this Scripture to be pondered, That we might be made the Righteousness of God in him, (Christ), 1 Cor. 5.21.   

§. XLV.  
The twentieth is, That Christ's Incarnation was no part of his Humiliation. This is brought in (I suppose) to insult over the Grave of Mr. Mather, who could doubtless have so explained his meaning, as it needed not have put Mr. Williams on showing his great Parts and Learning, to go to confute it for an Antinomian Heresy, in interpreting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a new English word, well enough agreeing with the Neonomian Doctrine, calling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exaninition, which he might as well call exany-thing, or to make it chime, his next Interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, exinanition; instead of his calling it exany-nition, it may be exany-wigeon, or any thing else, as his mighty Learning may coin for it. If Mr. Mather, in that Expression, meant it of mere Incarnation, without respect to Mediation for Sinners, how was his Incarnation any Humiliation, more than God the Father his dwelling in the Heart of the Humble and Contrite is his Humiliation? May not God the Father, or God the Son, assume what shape they please, as well as the Holy Spirit assumed the shape of a Dove, and yet that no Degradation or Humiliation? It is true, God is said to humble himself to behold things in Heaven, but that is spoken Figuratively, as his Eyes behold, his Eyelids try the Children of Men; but to say, God is humbled by it, is harsh; and so to say, that Christ's mere Incarnation was his Humiliation, is to deny him the liberty to assume what form he pleases, or to make it a diminution of his Glory, is what, I suppose, cannot well be maintained. I am sure his Incarnation was a Glorious Exaltation of our Humane Nature; and would it not be harsh to say, he could not exalt our Nature without depressing his own? God is able of Stones to raise up Children to Abraham, much more is Christ able to take our Nature, when made Sinless, and not thereby degrade his own. But let Mr. Williams run away with his Triumphs over Mr. Mather, calling him Blow-flame, and make an exaninition, or an exany-thing of him, when all is done, this Expression, among wise Christians, will hardly pass for an Heresy to say, Christ's mere Incarnation was not a part of his Humiliation, though his Incarnation, as Mediator, was.   

§. XLVI.  
The last, the one and twentieth, is, We coalesce upon believing into one Mystical Person with Christ, which is distinguished from Legal Union, which is before Faith. Whose Expression this is, I am to seek, but methinks 'tis very harmonious with the Gospel; and if this deserves the Name of Heresy, we must seek a New Gospel. What can be more coalescing than that of Christ? You in me, and I in you. Or that of the Apostle? We are Members of his Body, etc. Eph. 5.30. And he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit. Is not this one Spirit, one Person? Is the blessed Holy Spirit the Third Person in the Trinity? Is he a Person, and are not Christ and his believing Members becoming one Spirit, are they not become thereby one Person? Why else are they called Christ? 1 Cor. 12.12. Is this novel, uncooth and unintelligible, to my Dear Kratiste, a Master in Israel? Need Christ, and they, go into his Mother's Womb to become one Person?   

§. XLVII.  
As for Legal Union before Faith, I know of none, unless he means a faederal Union, such as Children of believing Parents have, or bare nominal Christians have. Sure these may be distinguished, without Offence, from such as have a Mystical Union by Faith, without any Heresy attending it. Thus we conclude the 21 Antinomian Heresies, which have met with a Presbyterian Lash, as the Great Apostle Paul did with the like from the Jews. They appear not so formidable as the Neonomians would make them, but rather, some of them, shine forth with brighter clearness, for great Gospel-truths', by their being so set forth. This I am comfortably satisfied in, that God hath, by the late Abuse put on Evangelical Truths, held out by the branded Dr. Crisp, Mr. Cole, and many others, he hath enlightened many Souls thereby; and I wait, in assured hope, that God will in his blessed time, which is hastening, make the Light of the Sun of Righteousness, shining in the Gospel, to be as the Light of seven Days, when Men will not put Light for Darkness, and Darkness for Light. Which the Good Lord, for the sake of thy dying and interceding Son, our Lord Jesus, do thou hasten.   

§. XLVIII.  
In the mean time, to our grave Rebuker, I say, Kratiste Theophile, most excellent Sir, take heed you be not a Theomaikos, a Fighter against God, while you design to justify a Man whom you cannot vindicate with Honour, till he renounce some Expressions in his Books which fight directly against the Gospel, especially that Soul-endangering one in his Preface to Gospel-Truth stated, which is this, I affirm that the Righteousness of God, Phil. 3.9. principally intends the Gospel-Holiness of a Person justified by Christ's Righteousness: Which is an Interpretation that is directly opposite to all sound Protestants Judgements. From such Interpreters of a Gospel-Truth the Lord in Mercy deliver all his People, and from being a Champion for such an Interpreter, the Lord deliver the Rebuker, and all his 49 Vouchers.   

§. XLIX.  
In Page 27 he bewails the Case, and saith, And thus the Breach became beyond the United brethren's making up. He means, I suppose, beyond their Power of making up; that is, because these Antinomian Heresies were not recanted. And no wonder that it was beyond their Power to make up the breach that these Points made; for how can Truth and Error coalesce? If the Poor Presbyterians, as he calls them, do insist on the renouncing these 21 Doctrines, as Heresies, which have much of the Marrow of the Gospel in them, as appears from plain Scripture, and sound Authors, already quoted, they may enjoy their Repose in their own benighted Sentiments, but may not imagine, that they who are clearlyer enlightened in the Mysteries of the Gospel, having tasted the good old Wine of God's Everlasting Love of Electing them in Christ, that they will come to the new Wine of a pretended New Law given them by Christ, That we performing Gospel-Obedience with our sincere endeavours to fulfil that New Law of Faith, Love, Repentance, Holiness, and perseverance therein; this, though imperfect in its self, shall be accepted instead of perfect, by Virtue of the Righteousness and Merits of our Lord Jesus. Which in effect is to say, that we are not saved by Grace, but Christ hath merited that we should save ourselves.   

§. L.  
That this is their meaning, appears by what Mr. Williams (who seems to be their general Mouth) has said, in his Preface to Man made Righteous by Christ's Obedience: Where he rebukes his Antinomians for owning no Law of God, that admitted of faulty Obedience; and by way of Contempt to Mr. Cole, etc. he saith, They own no Law but the Law of Works, which admitted nothing short of perfect sinless Obedience. So that he looks on it as an horrid Error to hold, that no Law is given by God that admitted of Obedience, that had Sin in it: Which shows plainly that they hold, that God has set up a Law in the room of the Moral Law; and that this their New Law, which they have invented for God, and wretchedly impute to God, it doth admit of Sin in the Obedience to it; than which there cannot be a more horrid Affront offered to the Holy God, viz. That God should set up a Law that allows Sin. Now if contradicting such Doctrine as this, is accounted Antinomianism, then to be freed from their Slanders, we must rob God of his Honour, nay, deny him to be God, to comply with their Doctrine of charging on God his making a Law, that allows Sin in our Obedience to it. For I dare be bold to say, in Contradiction to such an Assertion, and in Zeal to the pure Holy Nature of God, God never did, nay never can, and that's a bold word, but true, if God be God, and Holiness his Nature, he never can make a Law that admits of any thing but Sinless Obedience: For God saith, he cannot behold Iniquity; and for any Man, or number of Men, or for any Angels of Heaven, to talk at that rate, for God to make a Law that admits of Sin, let him be accursed. To talk of a Law that admits of Sin, is to make the Maker of such a wooden Law to be little better than a wooden God. It is enough to make one's Flesh to tremble, and Spirit rise into a rage, against the bold strokes of some Ungodly Pens that corrupt the Gospel and Minds of Men, to talk of a Law of the Holy God that admits any thing of Sin. Mr. Williams and his Justifiers, have subscribed to the Assemblies Confession of Faith, and they say upon the Head of Repentance, There is no Sin so small, but it deserves Damnation; and they justify it by that Scripture, The Wages of Sin is Death. But our Neonomians, our New-Law Men, bring in God making a Law, that admits of Faulty Obedience, or Obedience that is not Sinless, which is all one with Faulty Obedience. Now my Dear Kratiste, this Man's Champion, pray where is this accounted for? And if not, how can it be expected, that the Breach between the Orthodox and these should be made up? Offences will come, but woe to that Man by whom they come. To such a Man as would impose a Law, allowing Sinning Obedience: And if Sinning, than it hath Sin in it; and if so, and that the Assembly say right, (from the Wages of Sin being Death) the least Sin, never so small, deserves Damnation, than they will bring in God making a Law, in complying with which Men shall be damned: For Men shall be damned for Sinning Obedience, so far as the Law hath Power over any Man; and if they are saved, it cannot be by a Sinning Compliance with their New Law, but merely of Grace, on account of the perfect Holy Law of God, which admits of nothing but Sinless Obedience, by its being fulfilled by our Lord Jesus for us, and by his Blood taking away our Sins, in coming short of the Holy Law of God. Now if our Rebuker will continue rebuking, I would pray he would employ his Talon in rebuking such Doctrines, as bring in a Law of God that allows of Sin, rather than on saying, We work from Life, and not for Life. Whereas 'tis a mad sort of Work for Life, to work under their New Law that allows Sinning Obedience.   

§. LI.  
In Page 31, Mr. Williams is brought in, with an Ecce Homo! Behold the Man! by the Rebuker, in magnifying his Soundness in the great Point of Christ's Satisfaction; and saith, I will speak a great Word, NONE (no none, not the Apostle Paul himself) has ever more clearly stated this Truth (of Christ's Satisfaction) than Mr. Williams, (saith my Kratiste), for which I refer you to his Gospel-Truth, Chap. 2. (where Mr. Williams saith) Though our Sins were imputed to Christ with respect to the Gild thereof, so that he, by the Father's Appointment and his own Consent, became obliged, as Mediator, to bear the Punishment of our Iniquities; and he did bear those Punishments to the full Satisfaction of Justice. Here's a great Word, (None ever more clearly stated, etc.) for this great Confession of Mr. Williams, and I am glad he owns our Gild was imputed to Christ, so much of our Sins was imputed: But we have a Proverb, That some Cows will give a good mess of Milk, and kick it all down, and spill it when they have done; so our great Truth-stater hath, in a few Lines, kicked all this down: For though he allowed that our Sins were imputed to Christ, as to the Gild of them, and that he bore the Punishments, yet he warily hides the Socinian here, and forbears saying, Christ bore the Sins; 'tis only the Gild of them was imputed, and the Punishment borne. This 'tis true he owns; but what became of the very Sins, if Christ did not bear them? We know what God saith of them, He laid on him the Iniquity of us all; and he bore our Sins in his Body on the Tree; but if Dr. Crisp, or Mr. Cole, say so, 'tis Antinomianism. But what saith the Admired Gospel stater, after his none more clearly stating this Truth? Why, he plainly denies Christ's bearing our Sins; for within four Lines after his extolled vindicating the Doctrine of Satisfaction, he hath these words, It is an Error (saith Mr. Williams) that he laid all the very Sins of the Elect on Christ. Is not this a Man to be admired? that in flat opposition to the Scripture, denies God's laying the Sins of the Elect on Christ: For to say he did not lay the very Sins on Christ, is to give God the Lie in plain English; for the Scripture saith plainly, without a Trope or Figure, The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all. Did God lay our Iniquity on Christ, and not our very Iniquity? Did he bear the Sins of many, and not their very Sins? Will he have so much audaciousness as to make God a Cheat? To make us believe he laid our Sins on Christ; but when it comes to the upshot, it is not our Sins, not our very Sins, but somewhat like our Sins; that is, Gild imputed and Punishment borne, but for the very Sins they were not laid.   

§. LII.  
I confess 'tis much to find from such a Pen, That God imputed the Gild of our Sins to Christ; but if he comes after, and saith, he means by Gild imputed, as he saith of Sins laid on Christ, 'tis not the very Gild; where are we then? We must stand to his Courtesy for not saying so. He may better say so of Gild imputed, than of Sins laid, because Sins laid is very Scripture, whereas Gild imputed is a borrowed Term. Therefore I beseech my Dear Kratiste to stay his Admiration of him, in saying, None has ever more clearly stated this Truth, for fear it be found that none has more sullied it: For what can the rankest Socinian say more, in derogation to the Truth of Christ's Satisfaction for our Sins, than to say, 'Tis an Error to say our very Sins were laid on Christ? Nay, such an Error as, I fear, my Dear Kratiste can sublimate (by his Art of Bespattering) to make it to be the Dregs of Antinomianism, to say our very Sins were laid on Christ.   

§. LIII.  
Let us see a little what Consequence he makes of this Error, Why then Christ was the Murderer, (saith Mr. Williams) Christ was the Blasphemer, Adulterer, etc. And for this Dr. Crisp must be arraigned, with the Dregs of Antinomianism laid to his Charge, as if he was the Author of such horrid Expressions, that Christ was such an one in himself; whereas he hath excellent Authority, both Humane and Divine, for all that he has asserted. If Dr. Crisp had said, that Christ was made Sin and a Curse, and the Scripture had been silent therein, Mr. Williams, and his Champion, might have had Ground for the Accusation: But if so, why should not Dr. Luther come in for a Snack, and Dr. Calvin for a Lash? But as the Case is, Dr. Paul, the Apostle, must have the severest Stroke, for saying, God made our Lord Jesus Sin for us, and a Curse. But because, for Shame, they will not charge him with gross Blasphemy for so saying, they will distinguish away the force of the Words, by saying, he meant that Christ bore the Punishment, and not the very Sins; but left the Sinner to bear them.   

§. LIV.  
And farther, that Dr. Crisp may not bear all the Load that these Rigid Gentlemen lay on him, I shall give some Humane Testimonies, which concur with him, though they have had abundance from Dr. Chancy, and others, which must needs convince their Conscience, they being many of them unanswered; but for the present purpose they must have some of them again; therefore let us see what Mr. Calvin saith on Gal. 3.13. It is thus; Two Things are here to be considered, not only in the Person of Christ, but also in his Humanity: One is, That he was the Lamb of God, without Spot, full of Blessing and Grace. The other, That he took our Person; therefore he was a Sinner, and under the Curse, not so much in himself as in us. O my Dear Kratiste, why do you not spend some of your Talon on this uncouth novel, unintelligible Stuff of this Great Person, as well as on the Apocryphal Story of Tobias? And when your Hand is in, pray let Bold Martin Luther have a taste of your sour Sauce on his sweet Meat, which he gives you on Gal. 3.14. for he deserves it more than the Doctor you are so displeased with; Luther saying, We may apply to Christ's that whole 27. Deut. For as Christ is Innocent in this General Law, touching his own Person, so he is also in all the rest; and as he is guilty in this General Law, in that he is made a Curse for us, and hanged on the Cross, as a Wicked Man, a Blasphemer, a Murderer, a Traitor, so he is guilty in all others: For all the Curses of the Law are heaped together, and laid upon him. He was therefore not only accursed, but made a Curse for us. (And a little above he said), That he putting off his Innocency and Holiness, and taking thy sinful Person on him, might bear thy Sin, thy Death, thy Curse. Why is not this criminated for the Dregs of Antinomianism? Being read with Arminian Spectacles, it may pass for such, but if read by the Light of the Holy Spirit, in the Glass of the Word, it will be found pure clear Water of Life flowing from the Fountain of Israel, the Rock that followed them, our Lord Jesus Christ; Whom, for our Everlasting Comfort, God made Sin for us, though he knew no Sin, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him:  
I must confess I am amazed at the Uncharitableness of some Men, in charging the Doctor with making Christ a Murderer, etc. as if he meant any otherwise than all sound Orthodox Christians do; that is, that he was only a Sinner by Imputation. And let my Dear Kratiste but examine his Conscience on consulting the Doctor's Sermons, when his fierce Anger is allayed, and he will say, there is as Great and as Adorable a Sense of the Glorious Excellency of our Lord Jesus in his own Person, in those Discourses, as he can find in any writings he most applauds; and that notwithstanding it must be still asserted, or we must all be damned, That for the sake of poor Sinners he was made Sin and a Curse for us: And it is well known that the Doctor meant, and so expressed himself, that he was so only by Imputation.   

§. LV.  
The next is a very unbeseeming and dreadful Charge against the Doctor in Page 38, where the Rebuker saith, The Doctor had affirmed a wild, monstrous Sense of Change of Person between Christ and the Elect; for which he quotes Mr. Williams, citing Dr. Crisp in these words, pa. 31, of Gospel-Truth, Mark it well, (saith the Doctor) Christ himself is not so completely Righteous, but we are as Righteous as he; nor we so completely Sinful, but Christ became, being made Sin, as completely Sinful as we: Nay more, we are the same Righteousness, for we are made the Righteousness of God; that very Sinfulness that we were, Christ is made the very Sinfulness. So that here is a direct Change; Christ takes our Person and Condition, and stands in our stead; we take Christ's Person and Condition, and stand in his stead. So that if you reckon well, you must always reckon yourselves in another's Person, and that other in your Person.  
This is the monstrous Sense of the Doctor, upon which the Rebuker makes this dreadful following Comment; And now you have it, that Change of Persons which the Doctor affirms, and Mr. Williams denies; which had he not, he had denied his Redeemer, and betrayed the Gospel. So then the Doctor hath in these words, in his Judgement, denied his Redeemer, and betrayed the Gospel; Cujus contrarium: For upon search of Scripture, and keeping to it, it will be found, that the Doctor hath said nothing but plain Scripture, or clear Scripture consequence: And if so, it will appear that the casting this Dirt on the Doctor, is not on him, but on the Scripture, and the Spirit of God in the Scripture. Wherefore it is good to consider that word, Acts 5.39. If it be of God ye cannot overcome it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Our Rebuker and Mr. Williams think to blast the Doctor; but if his Assertions be clear deductions from the Word of God, than their calling this a wild Monster, may prove them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

§. LVI.  
It matters not much how the Doctor is traduced, but his plain Scripture Assertions to be called Antinomian Heresies, will prove dangerous, and to call them a wild Monster, may make such fall under the character of fighters against God; therefore to the Law, and to the Testimony. I pass by Luther, who in the Doctor's Sense saith, Christ was the greatest Sinner in the World; that is, by imputation of Sins to him. I say no more of Famous Dr. Harris, Christ sustained the Person of Sinners, how else could God punish him? But the Word of God must be our Shield; and I will oppose those two Scriptures, The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, and God made him to be Sin for us, with those other two, He shall be called the Lord our Righteousness, as well as He shall be called the Lord of Righteousness, the 33. & 23. Jer. with, We are made the Righteousness of God in him. These I oppose against all the Assaults of the Enemies of the Truth, or Mis-staters of this Gospel-Truth, of the Change of Persons.   

§. LVII.  
Did Dr. Crisp say, Christ himself is not so completely Righteous, but we are as Righteous as he? And did he not say, in the same Breath, We are made the Righteousness of God, which is plain Scripture? Now, I pray, what difference is there between our being as Righteous as Christ, and our being the Righteousness of God? God goes higher in his Expression of our being Righteous, in saying, We are the Righteousness of God, than if he had said, We are as Righteous as Christ: And God may well be allowed (to speak after the manner of Men) to declare his own Mind in higher Terms, than it is meet for Man to do. Then let us turn the Tables, and say, If God had said in Scripture, by the Apostle Paul, that Christ himself is not so completely Righteous, but we are as Righteous as he; and if the Doctor had inferred from thence that we are made the Righteousness of God; we that are poor Sinful Creatures in ourselves, we are made the very Righteousness of God in the abstract of it, (that is, by imputation) then there might have been some Ground for Dirt to be cast on the Doctor; but when he goes a degree lower than the very words of Scripture, and instead of saying, We are made the Righteousness of God, saith, We are as Righteous as Christ: The opposing this must be accounted fight against the Truth, not the Doctor. Pray what will Men make of this Righteousness of God, which is the Righteousness of God-Man Jesus Christ the Mediator, his Righteousness made ours, imputed to us, he being made of God to us Righteousness? Do they make to be made this Righteousness, is less than to be completely Righteous as Christ? Sure they will not so lessen Christ, to make his Righteousness to be ours, to be our being less Righteous than himself: If not, than this Righteousness made ours, makes us, by Imputation, completely Righteous, as he is Righteous; which is the same as is his Name, The Lord our Righteousness. And I will presume, these Opposers will not be so base as to pretend the Doctor meant any other way, of our being completely Righteous as Christ, than by his Righteousness made theirs, and imputed to them; whereupon he saith, Thou art all fair my Love, there is no spot in thee. And if so, where is the wild Monster that he is so ungenteely, if not invidiously, charged with?   

§. LVIII.  
It may be they will show the Monster in the next Passage of the Doctor, Nor we so completely Sinful, but Christ became, being made Sin, (mark, this is Scripture, being made Sin) as completely Sinful as we. Here, without doubt, is the Monster: But if the Spirit of God looks steadfastly in the Face of him that makes this to be a wild Monster, that Christ, being made Sin, became as completely Sinful as we; if the Spirit look with dazzling Light on him from this Scripture, I suppose it may terrify him for casting Contempt on plain Scripture, to call it wild and monstrous. And what can be more plain? If Christ was made Sin, by his having our Sins laid on him, and imputed to him, than that thereby he became, by Imputation, as completely Sinful as we, and that in the same way as, by Imputation, we become the Righteousness of God, and so are completely Righteous as Christ, still by Imputation.   

§. LIX.  
This daring Contempt cast upon plain Scripture Consequence, with my hopes that the Spirit of God will cast Beams of Conviction on the Consciences of those that expose it as wild and monstrous, by his Glorious Irradiation into their Hearts of the Power of the Blessed Word, that Christ was by God made Sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God. This puts me in mind of an amazing Conviction, that I lately had assurance of from an extraordinary credible Hand; it was of one Allen a Stage-Player. About Eighty Years ago, he the said Allen was acting the part of Dr. Faustus, conjuring up the Devil, and he performed it so intently and effectually, that the Appearance of the Devil came before him in a dreadful Shape, with Noise and Stinks, that so terrified him, that he resolved never to Act on the Stage more: Nay, 'tis said, that he repent so mightily that he vowed all his Estate to the glorifying God; and in pursuit thereof he builded Dullidge College, Four Miles from London, and endowed it so as to maintain a great number of the Name of Allen, with a Minister of the same Name to preach to them. Which I would apply thus; That it may please God when Men will endeavour to evacuate plain Scripture, and call genuine Consequences from it a wild monstrous Sense, he may cause their Consciences to stare them in the Face, as a wild Monster, and terrify them for so doing, which may be in great Mercy; for it is not good to kick against the Pricks, to load the Divine Truth, that Christ was made Sin, with being monstrous, because the short Line of our Reason cannot fathom it. And to say the Truth, it is a Deep unfathomable, for our weak Understandings to conceive of by our Reason, that the most Holy, Harmless, Innocent God-Man Jesus should be made Sin for us, or that we Wretched, Vile, Miserable Sinners should be made the Righteousness of God in him: But that which Reason cannot comprehend, we must beg of God Faith may receive, and live upon; For the Just do live by Faith, not by Sight or Reason.   

§. LX.  
The Doctor knew when he preached he had Enemies lay at the Catch, so he saith, and therefore guarded himself so strongly with that clear Scripture, as clear as possible, to justify his Assertion, and saith, Christ being made Sin, became as Sinful as we. If he had said, (and not God) That God made Christ Sin; and if God had only said what he said, Christ became as completely Sinful as we, he had spoken presumptuously; for he would by it have said more of Christ's being Sinful than God had laid: But he sheltering under God's Word, of God's making Christ to be Sin, he from thence infers only, that Christ was as Sinful as we; which of necessity must be taken for his being so by Imputation only, that is, by the Lord's laying on him the Iniquity of us all; and this being Sinful as we, is less derogatory to Christ than to say, he was made Sin: For my Dear and Learned Kratiste will grant, to be made Sin must be more dreadful than to be Sinful.   

§. LXI.  
But our New Law Men have an evasion for Christ's being made Sin, and make it no more than that Christ bore only the Punishment of Sin; and some go farther, that he bore the Gild; but for the Sin itself they utterly deny it, though by it they evacuate or exinanitiate many Texts of Scripture, and come very near one, I may call a Prince of a Quaker, their Head and Glory, Mr. William Pen, a Gentleman beyond any of them, but to his dreadful Shame has told the World in Print, that Christ's Sufferings were only the Facile Representations of what was to be accomplished in Man. Thus he brings it in, in opposition to John Faldo, in his rejoinder, page 336 and 337, It is strange (saith W. P.) that those Transactions of Christ, who died as a Malefactor, etc. should be counted most difficult, that were, by the Divine Wisdom of God, ordained as so many Facile Representations of what was to be accomplished in Man. How much short of this shameful Doctrine, is it for Men to deny Christ's bearing our very Sins, and put it off with his bare bearing Punishment due for Sin, which is Ten Thousand Millions of Times less than his bearing their Sins? Methinks these Men should not dare to teach God how to utter the Truth, and his Mind, concerning our Sins being borne by Christ. God saith, he made Christ to be S●n: Man saith, No not Sin, not very Sin. God saith, he bore our Sins: Man saith prodigiously, shamefully, God ordained Christ's Sufferings to be Facile Representations. Yea, saith Mr. Williams, in ●e●minis, he bore our Sins, not our very Sins, which is the same as Mr. Penn's Facile Representations; which, in plain English, is to say, O thou Holy, Blessed Spirit of God, who hast inspired Holy Men to write the Holy Scriptures, thou tellest us an Untruth, in saying, Christ bore our Sins in his Body on the Tree: I, William Penn, say they were Facile Representations; I, Daniel Williams, say he did not bear our very Sins. But I pray, what difference between bearing our Sins, and bearing our very Sins? It looks as if he meant, he bore our Sins; that is, the Shadow of them, the Facile Representations of them, the outside Shell of them, and the Punishment of them; but for the very Sin, which deserved the Punishment, Christ bore it not. And so they would make God Unjust, to punish him for Sin, when the Sin was made none of his. This is the Fruit of his denying the Change of Persons, to make God Unrighteous, to punish his Holy, dearly Beloved Son, without having our Sin made his, by God's Imputation and his own voluntary Acceptation, that poor Sinners might go free.  
Once again, let us try how the Scripture will run in Mr Williams' Language, He was once offered to bear the Sins of many; that is, with Mr. Williams, to bear their Sins, but not their very Sins. Again, He shall save his People from their Sins; but not from their very Sins. He hath by himself purged our Sins; ay, saith Mr. Williams, but not our very Sins He was manifested to take away our Sins; but not our very Sins. This is a bold Attempt, to teach the Spirit of God to speak, and all to cast Dirt on Dr. Crisp, and Free Grace Preachers, as Antinomians, which in truth is casting Dirt, and a wild monstrous Sense, on what the Spirit of God speaks of God's making Christ to be Sin, which they make not very Sin; and so leave Sin to be borne by the Sinner. But if one Glare of Sin should stare, in its hideous hue, in the Sinners View and Conscience, O! what frightful work would it make? If Sin on Christ made him in that Agony, and cry out, my Soul is exceedingly troubled, what would it make a poor sinful Wretch do? I never heard any Man set it out like Excellent Mr. Christopher Fowler; O, saith he, if God should let one flash of Sin, in its true Nature, fly in the Face of a Sinner, there would be such, yelling, shrieking and roaring, and tearing themselves, that this (great) Room (the Meeting-place by Three Cranes) would not hold them, they would make away themselves immediately, if possible. And yet Mr. Williams, and the Socinians whom he follows, will not grant that Christ bore our very Sins, but hath left them on the Sinner; and so David's Murder and Adultery must be upon David to all Eternity, notwithstanding Christ's bearing the Punishment and Gu●lt thereof; and this, though God hath said, Their Sins, and Iniquities I will remember no more; their Sins shall be sought for, and not be found. O that this Socinian Divinity, that our very Sins were not borne by Christ, were cast, by the great Angel, into the bottomless Pit, and chained up there the Thousand Years, that it might deceive the Nations no more: And in the mean time, let all the maintainers of such Doctrine know, that thereby they contradict the Spirit of God, and will be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

§. LXII.  
But it may be he means this to be Dr. Crisp's Monster, his saying, We are the same Righteousness, for we are made the Righteousness of God. I Answer, To call this a monstrous Sense, of Change of Persons, is very strange; for it is plain Scripture, that we might be made the Righteousness of God, 2 Cor. 5.21. And is there any difference between our being the same Righteousness (of Christ), and our being made the Righteousness of God? Sure not any in an unprejudiced Mind.   

§. LXIII.  
But the Doctor said, That very sinfulness which we were, Christ is made that very sinfulness. Answer, If Christ was made Sin, it was not his own Sin, but our Sin: And if made Sin, it was very Sin: And if made very Sin, and our Sin, then for him to say, Christ was made the very sinfulness that we were, is the same as to say, he was made Sin. Do but grant that God made Christ to be Sin, when he laid on him the Iniquity of us all, (or you must deny plain Scripture, and that on which our Salvation depends:) I say, grant this, and you grant all that the Doctor hath said, in as much as to be made Sin, is as much, if not more than to be made Sinfulness.   

§. LXIV.  
The Doctor proceeds, saying, So that here is a direct Change. Is this the wild Monster? I am sure it had been an hideous Monster, to say, Christ was made Sin, any otherwise than being made our Sin, or our Sinfulness. And if he was made our Sin, then sure this is a direct Change: But if you will not allow the Change, than Christ was made his own Sin, which is horrid Blasphemy: And at whose door will the wild Monster lie now? Therefore let me, a poor Worm, advise you to have a care of disallowing the Change of Persons between Christ and us, when he was made Sin for us; lest haply you be found not only a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not only a fighter against God, but a murderer of our Lord Jesus Christ, which I know my Dear Kratiste will be ware of; and I will pray that his Friend, Mr. Williams, may escape from being so.   

§. LXV.  
But it may be he is gravelled at this that follows in the Doctor, Christ takes our Person and Condition, and stands in our stead. If he allows loco nostro, how can this, taking our Person and Condition, confound him as uncouth, novel and nonsense? Whereas, in our stead, is brought in to explain what he means by taking our Person and Condition. Most Men know what a Surety in a Bond of 1000 l. is, he sustains the Person of the Debtor; and is he not in his Condition, when he lies in Goal for him, and pays his Debt for him? If the Rebuker had felt the smart of that, he might better understand this, Christ's taking our Person and Condition, than to call it unintelligible Nonsense. When our Lord Jesus was sweeting clodders of Blood in his Agony in the Garden, and when nailed to the Cross, did he sweat Blood for himself, and pour out his Soul in extreme Anguish for himself, or did he then sustain the Persons of the Elect Sinners? Were they his own Sins, or the Sins of the Elect, that he cried out of, My Sins are more than the Hairs of my Head, Psal. 40.? Surely not his own, but the Sins of those given him of the Father, from all Eternity, whose Persons he sustained or stood in the place of, which is all one; and so accounted (before my Dear Kratiste could handle a Pen) by Men of great Integrity and Sense.   

§. LXVI.  
Well, but what shall we think of this part of the Monster, We take Christ's Person and Condition, and stand in his stead? I hope it is no Monster to say, Thou art all fair my Love, there is no spot in thee, as our Lord Jesus saith of his Spouse, who was fair through his Comeliness put on her, Ezek. 16.14. though she, in the sense of her Sins, said of herself, Look not on me, because I am Black. Did not she appear as in the Person of Christ, clothed with his Righteousness? Nay, was she not joined to him, when thus all fair, and so, being joined to the Lord, became one Spirit? Can she and Christ be one Spirit? Can she have the Comeliness of Christ upon her, and not appear in his Person? How could her Name, as well as his, be the Lord our Righteousness, Jer. 33.16. & 23.6. if she did not take upon her the Person and Condition of Christ? Or how else could she be called Christ, 1 Cor. 12.12.? O that we did more taste the Sweetness and Comfort of this Relation and Condition every day; then, instead of calling it uncooth and novel, we should give Glory to God, for his Infinite Rich Grace, to marry us to his Son Jesus, and be ravished with his amazing Love, to make such vile Creatures, as we are in ourselves, in whose Flesh, as the Apostle saith in Rom. 7. dwells no good thing, that we should be Members of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones; which is to take his Person and Condition with a witness. What new coined business is it to say, Christ and Believers are one; that they take his Person, and he theirs; when the Scripture so frequently speaks of, I in them, and they in me; I the Surety, they the Discharged; I standing in their stead, taking their Sins on me, and so sustaining their Persons? Thus they, taking his Person and Condition, are made the Righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. O that we could well conceive and receive this; that we could feed and feast on this Marrow and Fatness of the Gospel every day, and drink deep draughts of this Unsearchable Rich Grace of God; then we should adore his Goodness; and not call it a Monster, or a wild monstrous Sense, this Change of Persons.   

§. LXVII.  
For the Conclusion, the Rebuker is pleased to leave the dreadful Tail of his wild Monster, in his Comment on the Doctor's Scripture Assertion, in these words, And now you have it, that Change of Persons which the Doctor affirms, and Mr. Williams denies; which had he not, he had denied his Redeemer, and betrayed the Gospel. Here's a deadly Sting in this Tail, a very malignant one; for it is neither better nor worse, than to say, the Doctor, by his wild monstrous Sense of the Change of Persons, has denied his Redeemer, and betrayed the Gospel: Bona verba, easily and dangerously enough said, but not at all proved. I am sure, he that denies Christ being made of God Sin for us, very Sin, not the shadow or shell of Sin, and that denies our being made the Righteousness of God, the very Righteousness of God-Man Jesus Christ, in him, he by having our very Sins laid on him, he therein sustaining our Persons, and we by having his very Righteousness imputed to us, and being upon us, whereby we stand in his Person, and appear Righteous in the sight of God, as he is Righteous, as being clothed with his Righteousness, he is the denier of Christ, and betrayer of the Gospel; nay, he wholly evacuates and exinanitiates the Gospel. For what Benefit can we have by Christ's Death, if our Sins were not made his, and laid on him, and he made Sin for us? Or by his Righteousness, if it be not made ours given to us, and we appear in it, in and through Jesus Christ, before God? How could the Apostle say of any Man, 1 John 3.7. He is Righteous as God is Righteous, but by his believing in Christ, where his Faith is accounted to him for Righteousness? As Abraham's Faith justified him, not his Act of Faith barely, but the Act taking in the Object of it, viz. Christ's Righteousness; and so he truly doth Righteousness that believes in the Lord Jesus his Righteousness and Strength; and thus doing Righteousness, he becomes Righteous as he is Righteous, and to deny this, is to betray the Gospel, in order to bring in our own Righteousness to join it with Christ's, as it were by the Works of the Law, Rom. 9.32. Or how are we accepted in the Beloved, if we do not appear in his Person before God, and so sustain his Person? Is this a denying Christ, and betraying the Gospel? O that God would anoint men's Eyes with the Collirium, the Eyesalve of the Spirit, than they would be able to bear the light of the Glory of God, as it shines on and in poor Creatures, in the Face of Christ, to make Righteous as he is Righteous, and not dazzle them, to make them call this betraying the Gospel.   

§. LXVIII.  
It may do well for all Calumniators to consider the Judgement that God inflicted on the Children at Bethel, that mocked Elisha, saying Come up thou bald Head, Come up thou bald Head, (which is a thousand times less detracting, than to say, thou denier of Christ, and betrayer of the Gospel); whereupon there came out of the Forest two She-Bears, and tore in pieces 42 of them: Which was a far less Judgement than what God has inflicted on some, to leave them to write against the Truth, and thereby to harden themselves, and grieve the Godly. So far as the Rebuker has dipped his Pen in Gall in this kind, I only say, The Lord rebuke thee. Is not this a Brand plucked out of the Fire? What! call a faithful fervent Servant of our Lord Jesus, the Air of whose Sermons carries such a favour of Love and Honour to our Lord Jesus, and such a Zeal for Holiness, that his very Enemies, even Mr. Williams, could say, he believed he was a Holy Man; I say, for my Dear Kratiste to call such an one, A wild monstrous denier of his Redeemer, and betrayer of the Gospel, has a dismal Aspect; as if God had left such, if not to the hardening their Heart against the Truth, yet to such an high towering Opinion of themselves (in order to the greater humbling them), that for their falling into such contemptuous Language, they may be made contemptible by some sharp Pen. We read that Michael, when contending with the Devil about the Body of Moses, he durst not bring a railing Accusation against him, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. And so I beseech the Lord in Mercy, to do to all that call the Advancers of Free Grace in Christ by such virulent Names, as we have seen.   

§. LXIX.  
In Page 41, our Dear Kratiste seems mighty angry with the Reporter Mr. L. for saying, It's impossible to establish the Doctrine of Justification on its true and proper Basis, any otherwise, than by clearing the Point of Commutation of Persons. And yet the Rebuker himself owns this to be Articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae. Then sure it ought to be cleared. And how can that be, That the Holy, Innocent Jesus should be made Sin, and the Unholy, the Nocent Sinners should be made the Righteousness of God, but by a Commutation of Persons? He standing in our stead, being our Surety, sustaining our Persons on the Cross, suffering for us, as Calvin, Luther, Twiss, Pemble, Harris, with a multitude more, do affirm, whom the Rebuker will own to be of the First Form of Learned Holy Divines, not Apocryphal Tobiases; and we standing in Christ's Person, being found in him, having put on Christ and his Righteousness, as the Apostle Paul hath it, in Phil. 3.9. who according to some men's way of dogmatizing, and making Antinomians, is the King-leader of them all, by saying, as we frequently must quote, That God made him Sin for us, and us the Righteousness of God in him. I must beg Pardon for casting this Salt so oft into the bitter Waters to make them sweet, these two Passages into their Broth of Antinomianism; and until you raze them out of the Bible, they will be a good defence of the Change of Persons, between Christ and Sinners.   

§. LXX.  
These Two Pillars are the Jakin and Boaz (Establishment and Strength in him), that King Solomon, our Lord Jesus, hath erected before the Temple, the Basis of the Commutation of Persons, Christ made Sin for us, and Righteousness to us; and I am sure, The Gates of Hell will never prevail against them, let the Socinians, or Deists, or Quietists, and let their Friends the Arminians, be never so rampant. One Athanasius, one Hylary, one Mr. Cole, could withstand Ten Thousand Batteries, and be no more shaken than a pair of Three penny Fellows can shake down the Monument, and so extinguish the Memory of the Papists burning of London in 1666; witness Mr. Cole's sealing his Doctrine with Triumph at his departure, dying in the Joy of what he had preached, (though by Mr. Williams called Mysterious Nonsense), he saying, a little before his Death, in opposition to our Modern 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the resisters of the Truth, Now I can spit in the Face of the Devil; and so died in the Joy of having preached the Doctrine of Justification, by Free Grace, through Christ, without any Works of ours concurring thereunto.   

§. LXXI.  
In Page 43, he asks, Where has this Doctrine of Justification been settled all this while, since the Reformation? This is just copying after the Papists, Where was your Religion before Luther? We answer, It was in the Scripture, and in abundance of faithful Witnesses; and so was this Doctrine in particular. Read but the Apostle Paul, and he'll tell you where it was settled, viz. In our being chosen in Christ before the World was, and in Grace given us then in him, and in Christ's being made Sin for us, and the Righteousness of God to us. Besides, if you will read Calvin, Twiss, and Luther, with multitudes more in your Study, you will find how they settled it. Antisozzo hath it in part also; and why may not Dr. Tho. Goodwin come in for an Author? O no, now I remember a great Reason, for said Kratiste, he speaks in his Treatise on the Ephesians of the Spirit himself dwelling in Believers; but I utterly deny it, said he: And I affirm (said he) he dwells in Believers only by his gracious Operations: To which was opposed, The Spirit himself witnesss with our Spirits, that we are the Children of God. And besides, the Rebuker, 'tis like, will say, he is as dreadful an Antinomian, as wild a Monster, as the Dregs of it Dr. Crisp, therefore I will not allow him to be an Author in this great Point of Justification, for he is all for Free Grace.   

§. LXXII.  
He proceeds, It is strange to me, That Councils General and Provincial, Synods, Assemblies of Holy Learned Men, should so oft so strenuously assert and confirm, by the Word of God, this great Truth, and yet never once dream of Dr. Crisp ' s Commutation of Persons, upon which to superstruct the Doctrine of Justification. But it will appear more strange by and by, I am persuaded, that my Dear Kratiste, with his Eagle-eyed Talon, should so far over-shoot himself, as to talk as if he had read all Councils and Synods, etc. when it will appear he has not well read our English Homilies, setting forth clear Gospel-Truth in the Doctrine of the Church of England. He is got into a large Field with a mighty Challenge, like a Goliath, defying all Councils, etc. to show the Commutation of Persons. He wages War, under the Banner of all Councils, etc. as he thinks, whereas one little David with a Stone out of the Brook of Life, the River that makes glad the City of God, one Text of Scripture, will answer all his Rodomantado Challenge. What if Councils, etc. that contract principal Articles of Faith into short Terms, have not used the Doctor's very words, yet if they are consonant to Scripture, one would think they may pass without such a strangeness? Are there no Sentences in Antisozzo and Melius, that are not in Synods and Councils, and yet pass for Authentic? I am confident the Doctor could not think it worth his while to tumble over the Records of all Councils, etc. to authorize him to speak to the Rebuker's approbation; if the Scripture do but warrant him in his Change of Persons, 'tis enough; and that is very abundant in Terms that may bear him out: As where it speaks of Christ in us, the hope of Glory, do not we sustain his Person there, or rather, he being in us our hope, he sustains our Persons in hope? It speaks of our putting off our Sins in the circumcision of Christ, Col. 3.11. which cannot be otherwise than by Christ's sustaining our Persons when he was circumcised; and so our putting off our Sins is by our being in him representatively, when the Foreskin of Christ's Flesh was cut off, in order to the putting off our Sins in our Faith in a circumcised Christ. It speaks of our being buried with him, of our being raised in him, of our being found in him. What is this but a Change or Commutation of Persons? I live, saith the Apostle, yet not I, but Christ lives in me. Is not this a Change of Person that answers Dr. Crisp's Commutation? And yet still we are not Christ Personal, but Christ Mystical; and Christ was not Paul Personal, but Paul and all Believers Mystical, as sustaining their Persons, as many Eminent Divines, besides the Doctor, speak without being accounted strange Monsters.   

§. LXXIII.  
For further Satisfaction in this great Point, I refer the Rebuker to the great Pains of Dr. Chancy, who hath gathered the Sentiments of very great Men, among whom take this of Luther, on Gal. 3.14. who saith, It behoveth him to bear the Punishment, and Wrath of God, not for his own Person, but for our Persons; and so making A HAPPY CHANGE with us, he took upon him our Sinful Person, and gave unto us his Innocent and Victorious Person. Is not this as monstrous a wild Sense as Dr. crisps? But my Dear Kratiste hath more Sense than to call this new, uncooth, unintelligible Nonsense, because of the great Name of Martin Luther. Another, of Dr. Chancy's Quotations, is out of Mr. Stone of New England, no Antinomian, (unless made so by the Rebuker), he adds in the same, Page 102 of Dr. Chancy, There must be an Exchange between the Mediator and us, 1 Tim. 2.6. There must be an Exchange of Person for Person, which is the surest Exchange in War or Captivity, when nothing but one Person will be taken in the room of another.   

§. LXXIV.  
One would wonder how it should happen that my Dear Kratiste, and his Friends, should be ignorant of such Passages as these, so, as he should speak, as if this Term was never dreamed of before, when the Great Luther is so precise in the Term, and other Excellent Men. Therefore, I beseech you, be not too confident of your grasping all Things in all Councils, Synods and Assemblies, lest you lose all. O how much better is it to say with the Apostle, He that thinketh he knoweth any thing, knoweth nothing as he ought to know it; and with Agur, I have not the Understanding of a Man, than to Challenge all the World with what is said in all Councils, General and Provincial. The humble he will teach, and the mock he will g●●●● in Judgement: Which the Lord grant to us all; and that we may be ever learning of our Blessed Lord and Master to be meek and lowly.   

§. LXXV.  
My Dear Kratiste goes farther in Bontering the Phrases, of Christ's taking our Person and we his Person, and spares not to call them Apocryphal Phrases, though they are such as many Holy Men have made use of to clear up the great and comfortable Doctrine, of Christ's being our Surety, and making Satisfaction for us. Well may he call Tobias, Apocryphal, if he calls his great Teacher, under Christ, the Apostle Paul, Apocryphal; as I shall show by and by. He is pleased to come forth in great State, in Page 49, as my Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, with his Quo Warranto, against the Commutation of Persons, and thus Harangues the World; Quo Warranto? Why must all the World be Hereticated, that dare not subscribe to these Apocryphal Phrases, which neither Scripture, nor Ancient Fathers, nor General nor Particular Councils, nor Synods, nor Assemblies, nor single Churches, ever brought into their Creeds? etc. What a scampering flourish is here over all Councils, Fathers, etc. circuating the Universe, as if our Author were the Magazine of all Learning, and had fortified himself on every side against this Change of Persons, and Christ's sustaining our Person, as if the Phrase were intolerably uncooth? I shall only attack one Fort, which is the first Out-Fort, the Scripture, and if that be taken he must yield all the rest, The Scripture is the Pillar and Ground of Truth. We will see if that doth not bring into our Creed this Term, of Christ's bearing our Person, and we his Person; or that which is plainly tantamount, doth not the Apostle say, Col. 2.6, 7. As ye have received the Lord Jesus Christ, so walk in him: Rooted and built up in him? What is this but to be in his Person by Faith, joined to the Lord, and so he coming one Spirit, as the Apostle saith, which is the same as to be one Person? But as if God would at once, by one stroke, quell all the Quarrels and Exceptions against the Truth, and calling it unintelligible Nonsense, (as in Truth it is to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philosophers) he condescends to the very Term of our being in the person of Christ▪ and saith in 2 Cor. 2.10. by the Apostle Paul, If I forgave any thing, for your sakes forgave I it, in the Person of Christ? What thinks my Dear Kratiste now? Is this Term so novel, as never to be brought into our Creed by Scripture, Councils or Fathers? O how good is it to be humble, and not to tower to the top of all Learning, denying this phrase to be in Scripture, Fathers or Councils, when at the very threshold we see one may fall: For here the very express Scripture uses the phrase of the Apostles being in the Person of Christ, and forgiving an offending Brother in the Person of Christ. And so I hope we shall all learn to forgive one another, and not to rebuke with immoderate strains, as our Rebuker hath very unwarrantably done, in charging the Doctor with wild monstrous Sense, and Apocryphal Phrases, when he speaks the Apostle Paul's Language.   

§. LXXVI.  
I hope you will allow the Apostle to bring this Term, of our sustaining Christ's person into our Credenda, or Things to be believed, though the Doctor, whom for it you charge with Antinomian Heresy, may not use the word without a severe Lash. Is this to learn of our Lord Jesus, who would excuse his Disciples, under failings, and not presently bring them to the block, much less would he tax them with a wild monstrous Sense of Things, when they spoke only the Sense of the Scriptures? But why this Expression should be Heresy in the Doctor, though Orthodox in the Apostle, I can quickly tell: It being, I reckon, from his having some men's persons in admiration. Our Kratiste having, some time since, pressed hard on the Conscience of Mr. Williams, he is now raising up his Reputation; which he might suppose this a proper way for, by loading the Doctor with the Title of a Dreggy, Apocryphal Heretic, because Mr. Williams had written so much against him in his Gospel-Truth stated▪ and so the Rebuker here seconding Mr. Williams in aspersing the Doctor, would redintegrate the said Mr. Williams into the good esteem of those who had occasion given them for low Thoughts of him, upon account of what the Rebuker had reflected on. Now to make him amends, if Mr. Williams hath criminated the Doctor, the Rebuker must do so also; or how can Mr. Williams stand Rectus in Curia, or in statu quo, with those who had taken some Offence at those Things he was charged with? So that Things being thus, Mr. Williams being to be redintegrated into public applause, now if Mr. Williams say, I deny a Change, Kratiste can do no less than say, The term of a Change is novel and unintelligible: If Mr. Williams say, This is Dr. Crisp ' s Error or Mistake, Kratiste will exemplify, enlarge and perfect the Crimination, and call it Heresy. Which how Christian like it is, or the contrary, I hope the Lord will one day convince him.   

§. LXXVII.  
In Page 51, he offers us a moot Point, worthy to be taken notice of, thus, I would propound a moot Point, whether the Socinians, who have blasphemously degraded the Person of Christ into a God by Office, though a mere Man by Nature; or the Antinomians, who own him to be a God by Nature, yet affirm him to have been a Sinner, the greatest of Sinners, nay, Sinfulness itself, do more derogate from the Honour of our Redeemer?  
For Answer, This is so far from being a moot Point, that it is no point at all; unless you can find any of your Antinomians that assert what you here say they affirm. You cannot but know your Antinomians own and assert strenuously, That the Lord Jesus was ever holy, harmless, separate from Sin, a Lamb without spot in his own person, being perfect God and perfect Man; nay, they assert, he is so far from being a Sinner in himself, that being God-Man he cannot sin, nay, he never could commit Sin, or be guilty of any Sin of his own All that they affirm of his being a Sinner, is only that he was so by Imputation only: As a King's Innocent Son, undertaking for a Criminal, may be a Thief or Murderer by Imputation, if he suffers for the Thief. And so Luther calls Christ the greatest Sinner in the World; and yet Men dare not call Luther an Antinomian, whatever they think. And so to repute Christ an imputed Sinner, we are taught by the Blessed Apostle, when he saith, God made him Sin. And my Dear Kratiste knows in his Conscience, that not a Man of his Antinomians have any such thought, expressed by word, that our Blessed Lord Jesus is a Sinner, any other way than by our Sins imputed to him; which nevertheless were as really made his, so as to bear them, and suffer for them, as if they had been committed by him; and yet though they were laid on him, and so made his, they, nor ten thousand millions of times more Sins, were not able to defile or pollute, in the least, his most Holy God like Body or Soul. So that it is mere strain, and looks like Malice, to say, they make Christ a Sinner, because they say he was made Sin by Imputation.   

§. LXXVIII.  
I suppose this may rather be a moot Point in our New Divinity, or New Gospel, Whether be the greatest degraders of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Socinians, that say Christ is not God by Nature; or the Neonomians, that make Christ to be the Mediator upon a New Law of God's making? Such Law admits or allows of Sin in obedience to it, or doth not require Sinless Obedience: That is, That Christ hath purchased, that our imperfect Obedience shall be admitted for perfect, for his sake. This is by the New Law of their coining; which is to un-God the Holy God, and to make void the Death of Christ: For if God be such a God, as makes a Law that admits of Sin, than he is not the true God; for God cannot behold Iniquity with the least allowance, no, not the least Iniquity of a vain Thought. And if the Blood of Christ doth not take away the Sin that cleaves to our most sincere Obedience, we must perish to all Eternity; because the Soul that sins must die, either himself or his Surety for him, even for the least Sin. And did not some Men count little Sins, to be little Things, they would not trifle with the Holy God, as if of course he passed by little Sins, or that he hath made a Law that admits of that which is not Sinless Obedience. And because Man's Law will not hang a Man for stealing a Pins head, they will have a God like themselves, that cannot damn a Man for it; whereas God's Law is without exception, the Soul that sins shall die; and the stealing a Pins head may be with as felonious an intent as stealing a Kingdom. So that stealing a Pins head needs the Blood of Christ, to wash the Gild away, as well as robbing 1000 l. on the Road needs it; for both need it, though the latter be the more heinous. And besides their ungodding of God, by charging him with making a New Law that admits of Sin, they hereby make vain the Death of Christ: For if our imperfect Obedience may be accepted for perfect, without washing away the Imperfections or Sins in it, by Faith in the Blood of Jesus to wash away those, and all our Sins, than Christ's Death is in vain. For if little Sins may pass without the Redeemer's Blood, washing them away, then may great ones also; for without shedding of Blood there is no remission; and it is the Blood of Christ which cleanses from all Sin. If from all, then from little, as well as from great; and if not from little ones, then also not from great. But it doth cleanse from all; therefore there can be no Law of God's making that admits of Sin. And if you will be making Antinomians, here you have matter for it; they being the true Antinomians that are against Sinless Obedience; and if so, they are for Sinning Obedience. And it is their own brainless Brains, and not the Holy God, hath set up a Law that admits Sin in the Obedience. If this be not Antinomianism there is none in the World. I own God accepts sincere Obedience, that hath respect to the pure, perfect, holy Law of God, though there be Sin in such Obedience, provided the Obedience be done in Faith, looking to the Blood of Jesus, and trusting to it to take away the Iniquity of our holy Things: But to talk of a New Law that admits of Sin, is so far to un-God God, the Maker of such a Law, that it may well be a moor Point. Who are the most to be abhorred, the Socinians, that un-God our Lord Jesus, or the Neonomians, that un-God the Father of our Lord Jesus, by attributing such a Law to him to be the Author of, even a Law that admits Sins, as Mr. Williams doth?   

§. LXXIX.  
He procoeds, and saith, This is a day wherein Antinomianism is triumphant. That is to say in the Neonomian Dialect, It is a day wherein Free Grace flowing to poor Sinners, through the Blood of the Lord Jesus, as the only ground of our Justification, Sanctification and Salvation, without any thing of our Works, yea, or Faith itself concurring as any cause thereof, that this Free Grace is triumphant. I wish you could make good your Position, than the Doctrine of our English Protestant Religion in the Homilies, than the Truths that have been delivered by Luther, Calvin, Twifs, Dr. Goodwin, Crisp, Cole, Mather, etc. would be triumphant. But alas the new way, the Cassandrian way, the going about to establish our own Righteousness, and not submitting to the Righteousness of God, by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law, Rom. 9.32. & 10.3. this Doctrine hath its ten thousands among Papists, Arminians, common Protestants, who are only for their doing well, and so dying well, and leaving out Jesus; or if he come in, 'tis but like some Flowers on the brims of the Dish, to garnish it in many men's Sermons and Prayers; while the other Doctrine of our Lord Jesus being all in all; the Lord our Righteousness made of God to us Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption; that there is no Name, or Thing, under Heaven, whereby we can be saved, in whole or in part, but only the Name of Christ; this Doctrine hath for its followers but its single hundreds. But the day of the Lord is coming, that will burn as an oven, and will burn out all the Dross and Tin that is among his own People, and utterly consume all that will not submit to the alone Righteousness of his Son, to be saved by that, and that alone, imputed to them for Justification: For other Foundation can no Man lay, than that which is laid, Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. 3.11. and all hay and stubble upon it shall be burnt: Which every sincere lover of our Lord Jesus daily prays may be hastened; Even so come Lord Jesus.   

§. LXXX.  
Our Rebuker, like some Captain General in the Confederates Army in Flanders, where most of them are Papists, or very sorry Protestants, is in the next place giving orders for a kind of Popish Barriere to be set about the Divine Justice, in pa. 51, though by the way, a Barriere against an Enemy, had been more like a General's Word of Command, but let it go for the Neonomian Word of Command, a Barriere about Divine Justice, his Sentence is this, I would have (I your General) a Bar, a Barriere, about the Divine Justice, that Men may not dare to represent him (or it for better sense) as a Tyrant, in making so many millions to damn them eternally, to damn them without respect had to their demerits. This is plain Arminius, or worse, and such as I never suspected from my Dear Kratiste, to justify the general out cry of corrupted Natural Religion; What did God make us to damn us? How could we help our first Parent's Sin? But doth not the Scripture say, In Adam all died (for that or) in whom all have sinned; and by the offence of one, judgement came upon all Men to condemnation, Rom. 5.? And will you now run with the Herd, and cry, God made Millions to damn them, as a Tyrant, without respect to their Demerits, because they are condemned in Adam? Now I see some Reason why the Rebuker said once, in the Pulpit in Pinner's Hall, We did not sin Adam ' s Sin. But I am sure he must own that in Adam all died; then he must own with Augustine, In Adam all are damned: Damnati antequam nati, Damned before Born, and yet God no Tyrant, but Holy and Just, as well as Gracious and Merciful. Hath not the Potter power over the Clay, of the same lump to make a hundred chamberpots and but five drinking Vessels? Shall proud insolent Man teach God what Vessels of Wrath prepared of old to this Condemnation, to make, Judas 4. and what Vessels of Mercy? Or whom he will to have Mercy on, and whom he will to harden? O that Men were wise, and not to set Barriers of their divising! God hath set his Barriere, and let Men stand, and adore, and tremble at that word, What if God, willing to show his Wrath, and to make his Power known, endured with much long-suffering the Vessels of Wrath, fitted for destruction? Is God, by saucy, profane Man, to be called a Tyrant, for showing his Wrath on Vessels of Wrath, before of old ordained to this Condemnation, having fitted themselves, by their Sin in Adam, for this destruction? Shall we say it is without their own Demerits, when God saith, in Adam all died? O that Men were wise to Sobriety, and would not think to jostle God out of his Throne! Let us adore Free, Rich, Sovereign Grace, that is published in the Gospel, that whoever will may take the water of Life freely, Rev. 22.17. All in the sound of the Gospel being invited to come to Christ, and they shall find rest for their weary Souls. Those that charge God as a Tyrant, for damning Millions without respect to their Demerits, when they are lost and condemned in Adam, will not condemn a Temporal Prince, for a Tyrant, to take and seize the Estate of a Traitor condemned, and to take it from all his Posterity ever after to the World's end. And shall Man be justified as no Tyrant, and God be charged so arrogantly? Let us adhere to God's Barriere, that in Adam all sinned; and the Wages of that Sin is Damnation to all that have not an Interest in Christ.   

§. LXXXI.  
In his hedge about Justification, I take notice of his indispensable Bulwark, that is, That Faith be made indispensably necessary to it in all the Adult. Here one might ask, what precise time should be fixed for the Adult, it being an odd word and unscriptural? The Scripture saith, He that believes shall be saved; he that believes not is condemned already. And if there be not the Seed of Faith in Infants before they die, (which God alone gives, as Sanctification in the Womb, or afterwards when he pleaseth), I know not how, according to the Scripture, (our only Rule to judge by) they can be saved, if they have not the Seed of Faith in Sanctification. Would you have one way for Infants to be saved, and another for the Adult; when Christ alone is the Way, the Truth and Life? But passing by that, it may be asked, what kind of Faith is it that is to be so necessary? There is bare assent to the Truth; and this many call a Faith sufficient, provided they live good Lives (as they call it); but this Faith the Devils have, and tremble: Then there is Historical Faith and Temporary Faith: There is above and beyond these, a Faith of assurance, which some make absolutely necessary. I would hope he means none of these; but a Faith of adherence to the Lord Jesus for Life and Salvation by him, and him alone; of relying on him, trusting to him, renouncing ourselves, and our best performances as loss and dung in the matter of Justification, or as any cause of our Salvation This might have given some Light into his indispensably necessary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the Doctrine of Justification. I fear there lies a snare in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this indispensably necessary. Some, and those mighty, Friends to the Arminians, make Faith necessary as a Cause or Condition, that stands in the place of Works of the Law. Some make it a Condition as joined with Repentance, and per verance in Gospel-Obedience, and so put it in the place of Christ's Righteousness imputed to us; and make Faith, as it is our Work, to be imputed to us for Righteousness. And so the Hedge is become a hodgepodge of our Gospel Righteousness joined with Christ's Righteousness, under the notion of Faith a Condition. O how good is it for us to fence ourselves with God's Word, that the Foundation of God stands sure! Whom he did foreknow, them he did predestinate, and them he called, and them he justified, and them he glorified. Here's not a word of what we do, that we predestinate, we call, we justify, or we glorify ourselves, 'tis God doth all: And if instead of our pleading to justify and glorify ourselves, we would endeavour to justify and glorify God for his free justifying and glorifying us, through and for the sake only of his dearly beloved Son, our Dear and Blessed Lord and Saviour, it would be much better than to make a pother about the Conditionality of Faith, when all is of Grace.  
But I hope in this indispensably necessary Faith to Justification, he doth not exclude some mixture of doubting with Faith, though he names not the least allowance for that; and yet where is the Faith absolutely free? If some poor Souls have not power to put forth clear direct Acts of Faith on the Lord Jesus, for Righteousness and Life by him; if they have strong desires after him, and hunger and thirst after his Righteousness to be fed with it, as their alone true Food, shall they not be filled? Though their fears make them cry out of their Unbelief, I hope my Dear Kratiste doth not intent that his Thorny Hedge, as he called it, about God's Justice, that this shall keep such out. No, if you will put your Thorny Briars before him in the way of his Free Salvation to poor miserable lost Sinners, that come to him in the Name of the Lord Jesus, he will pass through and burn them up, Isa. 27.4.   

§. LXXXII.  
But methinks our Hedger has left a wide gap open, which I overlooked, in page 46, where he makes light of a Surety, of our Lord Jesus his paying our Debts as our Surety, and bids us have a care of that notion; at least, not to insist so strictly upon it: For which, instead of Scripture, he quotes one that he calls a Learned Author, probably Mr. Baxter, saying thus, None need think themselves obliged to maintain that Opinion, That Christ paid a rigid and proper Satisfaction for the Sins of Men, under the Notion of a Debt. And why forsooth, because the Socinians Arguments are levelled against it? This Learned Man might say the like concerning the Notion of Christ, being God Essential, because the Socinians Arguments are alike levelled against that Notion But what saith Kratiste, of this Arminian Caution, against the rigid and proper Satisfaction of Christ for the Sins of Men, under the Notion of a Debt? He saith thus, I wish I were worthy to advise this confident Man (Mr. Job) not to insist so strictly on that Notion of a Debt, and Debtor: And on that occasion he brings in his Learned nameless Author. O how would some Men triumph over an Antagonist, to have him under Correction, as the Rebuker seems here to be! But I lament over him. Some Persons question his owning Christ's making a full proper Satisfaction; I wish that he had not given too much occasion, by such passages as these, not to insist so strictly on it, that Christ paid a rigid, proper Satisfaction for Sins. What he means by so strictly, I know not; but I am sure we cannot be too strict in insisting on Christ's proper Satisfaction. This, so strictly, seems at first only to loosen the stake in the Hedge, and by and by it must be pulled up, and Satisfaction must be evacuated: For if Christ did not make a full, proper, and that which they may call a rigid Satisfaction, than he made not a complete Satisfaction; and if not a complete one, then how is it called Satisfaction? O! why should we not insist strictly on that which is one of the most comfortable Notions in all the Book of God, in all the Revelation of Grace, by Jesus Christ, That our Lord Jesus paid our Debts? Why doth our Lord Jesus bid us pray to the Father to forgive us our Debts, if he had not made Satisfaction to the Father, and paid them? Would you have God forgive our Debts without receiving Satisfaction? That's Socinian Language indeed, and you pretend to be much against them. But it must not be a Pecuniary Debt you say. Who ever said our Debts to God were Pecuniary; that is, That we own God so much in Milled Money or in Guineas? Yet we may, and do, own God that which is a better Coin than any ever made in the Tower; and that is perfectly Pure, Holy, Spiritual, Heavenly Obedience to his Holy Law; and we own God Satisfaction for our Disobedience to the same. And tho' Leather Farthings, or Copper, may go in some poor Kingdoms, as Shells in Guyny go for Money, and in richer Kingdoms the chief Payments are in Gold and Silver, yet in the Kingdom of Heaven no Payment passes there but perfect spotless Obedience; and is not that as much a Debt to God as any Pecuniary Debt between Man and Man? And who ever paid that but our Lord Jesus in his doing and dying for us? But why not insist on that Notion of a Debt, and Debtor? May we not, without a Rebuke, insist on that which Christ insists upon in Matth. 5.25, 26.? He insists strictly on a proper rigid Satisfaction there, and saith, Agree with thine Adversary quickly, lest he at any time deliver thee to the Judge, etc. Thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost Farthing, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the last Farthing; plainly showing, that God will never abate a Sinner one Farthing that has not agreed by the way, that has not fled to Christ, his Surety, who hath paid to the last Farthing. And this we may be sure of, God never made a Composition with Christ to take Ten Shillings in the Pound for our Debts, no, nor Nineteen Shillings and Eleven Pence Three Farthings; for it is said plainly in Rom. 8. God spared not his Son; no, not one Farthing. Therefore 'tis Socinian Language, I conceive, to prohibit men's looking to Christ as satisfying for us, under the Notion of a Debt, and Debtor. This puts me in mind of Christ's Speech, and sweet Rebuke, to Peter, which I hope may have a sweet influence on our Rebuker for his Caution, Simon, I have somewhat to say to thee, Luke 7.40. There was a certain Creditor, had two Debtors; the one ought five hundred Pence, the other fifty. Will any one say now, that our Debt to God must not come under the Notion of a Pecuniary Debt, when in these two Instances, from the Lips of our Lord Jesus, nothing is more plain than that God makes use of this Notion? Why then should we be cautioned against it? I must confess myself much ashamed, that my Dear Kratiste should be found thus in the Camp of the Enemies of our Lord Jesus, who would not have us insist strictly on a rigid proper Satisfaction. O whether shall we drive, if we let lose this sheet Anchor of the Gospel! The Ship will split in a thousand pieces, and the Arminians and Socinians will run away with all the broken pieces, but not have one plank to carry them safe ashore. O! let us never let go this Notion of Christ, our Surety, paying our Debt. Doth not our Lord Jesus set it off, with wonderful Consolation to all that truly believe in him, by saying, He came not to be ministered to, but to minister; and to give his Life a Ransom for many? What is a Ransom, but the paying a Debt that is agreed upon for the redeeming a Slave? Now this Debt our Lord Jesus paid, or else it could not be said to be a Ransom. So that 'tis no hazardous Thing, but a strong Duty, for us to insist on Christ's Satisfaction under the Notion of a Debt.   

§. LXXXIII.  
And O that my Dear Kratiste, and the Neonomian Brethren, would, or could, return to the simplicity of the Gospel, and pray as our Lord Jesus teaches, That God would forgive their DEBTS for the sake of Christ our Surety, who hath bought us with the Price; not of corruptible Things, as Silver and Gold, but with the precious Blood of the Lamb without Spot, the Lord Jesus Christ, that Blood being the only Current Coin in Heaven for poor Sinners Debts. Shall God say, ye are bought with a Price, and shall vain Man dehort us from the Notion of a Pecuniary Debt? Take away this, and you will take away all the Gospel in a little time, It will soon be lost, if the Rebuker's Learned Man's Doctrine must pass for currant, That we must not insist on Christ's paying a rigid proper Satisfaction. If by rigid he means a full, complete, perfect Satisfaction, to the last Farthing; then, I say, to deny or wave this, (and the Apostle warrants it), let him be accursed; for by it he overthrows the whole Gospel, which lies in this, That Christ hath ransomed, bought and redeemed us by his Blood, which cleanses us from all Sin: And this gave a full complete Satisfaction to God; upon which account he said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; and on the same account the Apostle saith, If any bring any other Gospel let him be accursed   

§. LXXXIV.  
I cannot but continue an admiration, that my Dear Kratiste, once famous for strenuous arguings for the Truth, should quote and confirm such a Passage, as is fit to come from Raconia and Rome, than the Pen of a Gospel Divine. What not insist on Christ's proper, yea rigid Satisfaction? If not a proper one, and a full one (that's a rigid one) then 'tis none at all. But they would abate the Poison of it, by saying, not insist on it under the Notion of a Debt and Debtor; so the Rebuker. But, I pray, why may not God's Terms and Notions be insisted on rather than the Socinians? God bids us pray, forgive our Debts, and saith, We are bought with a Price. And what is that Price, but Christ's paying our Debts? For the sake of which Price only, God in his infinite Mercy forgives the Debts of all that believe in the Lord Jesus. But to insist on this Notion, looks like our Rebuker's Antinomianism he charges Dr. Crisp withal. If we say that Christ paid our Debts, by the Price of his Blood and Life, than this looks as if we were discharged in God's sight from all our Sins at Christ's Death, or rather, at his Resurrection; and than that of the Apostle would be rigidly insisted on for our Justification at Christ's Resurrection, He was delivered for our Offences, and raised for our Justification, Rom. 8. But of this the Neonomians must have a care, lest they by it come over to the Antinomians. Therefore 'tis necessary for them to wish, with the Rebuker, they were worthy to advise, not to insist so strictly on that Notion of Debt and Debtor.   

§. LXXXV.  
To answer his Wish with another Wish; I hearty wish I were worthy to advise all Neonomians, all New Law Men, to be so humb●e and good to themselves, as to peruse and learn the Sentiments of our Reformers from Popery, that made the Book of the Homilies, in which are many excellent Passages to uphold this Notion of Christ's paying a Price for us. In the first part of the Sermon of Salvation, they have these Heavenly Expressions, God provided a Ransom for us, that was the most precious Body and Blood of his own most dear, and best beloved Son, Jesus Christ, who, beside the Ransom, fulfilled the Law for us perfectly. And a little further they are more clear, saying, He for them paid the Ransom by his Death, he for them fulfilled the Law in his Life; so that now in him, and by him, every true Christian Man may be called a fulfiller of the Law. O what can be more positive and plain! Is not here a rigid-proper Satisfaction, and that in the Notion of a Debt, calling it a Ransom? Nay, he paid their Ransom And what can be a more rigid Satisfaction, than fulfilling the Law (every tittle) for them in his Life, and paying a Ransom in his Death? O! that my Dear Kratiste would, by himself, a little blush at this, and what the Church of Scotland, in Knox his Reformation in Fol. 8, he calls the Gospel, Christ's being a Debtor for our Sins, and Christ paid our Debt. The Law saith, Pay thy Debt; the Gospel saith, Christ hath paid it for thee.   

§. LXXXVI.  
I pray, what Titles may we expect in the next Rebuke to be given to these Holy Men, these Fathers in our Church of Christ in England and Scotland, upon the emerging out of Popery? Sure they must also be called a parcel of Antinomians. Sure Dr. Crisp got his Dregs of Antinomianism from you, a company of Apocryphal Tobias'. What did we fulfil the Law in Christ? Sure you want dare to say so: Then all our Neonomian Scheme is spoiled, of our being accepted in part on account of our Evangelical Righteousness, in Obedience to a Law wherein God doth not require Sinless Obedience: Then if we fulfilled the Law in Christ, all our thundering Anathemaes against Antinomianism will fall on ourselves. If this be true that you Reformers have said, then how shall we be able to flourish our Colours with a bravado, that this is unintelligible, uncooth, novel Doctrine, such as never any Council, Synod, or Nation, ever brought into their Creed? But my Dear Kratiste knows, that what is said in the Homilies is said by the whole English Nation; that these Sermons have many Acts of Parliament to confirm them for True, Sound, and Orthodox Doctrine; and particularly this, that we in him fulfilled the Law. And I wish that all our Divines, as well Conformists as Nonconformists, would seriously lay this to Heart, and be humbled, so far as they swerve from this blessed Truth, That he paid the Debt for us, and we in him fulfilled the Law.  
Where is the Neonomian Vaunt now? O how good is it to be humble, and not challenge all the World against the Notion of Debt and Debtor, or the like! For here the Great Assembly of the Nation, King, Lords and Commons in Parliament, for the utter Confusion of Neonomianism, have confirmed this almost One Hundred and Fifty Years ago, and many times since; which hath stood for Sound Doctrine in the Church of our Lord Jesus, in England, many Years before Dr. Crisp was born, and Fifty Five since he went to Rest; viz. That in him, and by him, every true Christian Man may be called a fulfiller of the Law. If they fulfilled the Law, in him and by him, did not Christ sustain their Persons in himself, when he fulfilled the Law for them? How else can they be said to fulfil the Law in him, if they were not in him, and sustained by him? This we are taught here for the utter silencing and shame of those that call it Antinomianism.   

§. LXXXVII.  
This great Expression of our Reformers from Antichristian Dotages, That in Christ, and by Christ, we are fulfillers of the Law, may help our Rebuker to rectify his saying in Pa. 47, If Christ's putting on the Person of Sinners be left out, it's better out than put in, till it be known what it signifies. 'Tis strange that our sharp sighted Rebuker cannot tell what it signifies, when the first emergers out of Popery, the Reformers, are so positive that we fulfilled the Law in Christ; which cannot possibly be without his sustaining our Persons. Can all those Worthies of the last Age, Luther, Calvin, etc. know what it signifies, and we that stand on their Shoulders, cannot we see as far as they? But they cannot see that will shut their Eyes. Doubtless many of our New Law Men would say, but for the outcry of every sound Protestant, that this Expression, That we fulfilled the Law in Christ, had been better left out of the Doctrine of the Gospel than put in; for it hath strengthened a many of those he calls Antinomians. So that now we cannot, without great difficulty, run down the Doctrine of Christ's sustaining our Persons, but these Antinomians, as we call them, will be too hard for us, so long as the Epistles of Paul, and the Doctrines Established by Law, are so armed against us.   

§. LXXXVIII.  
But some may say, Why should these old musty Homilies be trumped up now against the Great Baxter, and his Successor, the Gospel-stater of Truth? Those Good Men are gone to Rest, and with them let their Homilies sleep. No say I, they being dead yet speak; and their plain honest simplicity will go farther with every good Christian, that we in him fulfilled the Law, than the Sceptical Notions of Mr. D. Williams, such as this, That God provided for his own Glory while he promiseth Life by forgiveness, and yet insists on some degree of Obedience. Here instead of our fulfilling the Law in Christ, this Gospel-Truth stater brings in our Obedience (in ourselves) insisted on by God in his forgiving Sins. Such a medley of God's forgiveness upon our Obedience, the Reformers rejected as spurious Popish Doctrine. They are so far from attributing our Obedience to be insisted on by God, in forgiving our Sins, that they will not allow Faith itself to come in for any share in farthering our forgiveness; but say plainly of Faith thus, Our Faith in Christ (much more our degrees of Obedience) saith unto us thus, It is not I that take away your Sins, but Christ only; and to him ONLY I send you for that purpose, forsaking therein all your good Virtues. (What's that but your degrees of Obedience)? Thus through the good hand of God we are helped, by our great Reformers, to quell this New Law Doctrine of the Neonomians, setting up some Gospel-Holiness of ours in co-partnership with the everlasting Gospel, of being saved only by Grace, through Faith; and that (Faith) not of ourselves, it is the Gift of God; to whom be Glory, for that he hath freely given Christ, and all with him.   

§. LXXXIX.  
My next Notice I take is, with Grief and Sorrow, at the dismal contemptuous treatment the Rebuker gives of Christ's sustaining the Person of Sinners. This great tremendous Point, which is sustained by many Reverend Persons, my Dear Kratiste makes a Banter of in Pa. 53, saying, What then can these Expressions signify, but that Christ wore the mask, the vizor, the disguise of Sinners, that he was personatus histrio, like a Stage player that puts on the Person of a King, when indeed he is but some sorry fellow? Do such Terms of our Blessed Lord become the Pen of an adorer of the Blessed Jesus, to impose such a Sense, and such horrid Consequences, from a Doctrine professed by all sound Protestants, when God himself saith, he made him Sin for us? And Thousands of Adorers of him, adore him for this Thing, that he was made Sin for them, though he knew no Sin; and on that account say, he sustained their Persons; that is, that they were in him, and fulfilled the Law in him, and by him, as the whole Nation of England have declared for Good, Sound, Orthodox Doctrine almost 150 Years: And now shall such an Inference be fetched from it as scoffs thus at our Lord Jesus? As if the Parliament of England in establishing that Expression by Law for good Doctrine, as if they had thereby declared that our Lord was a sorry Fellow, a Stage-player acting the part of a King, that he wore a Mask, a Vizor, in so doing. If such Language had been used in any Interlude, Show, May-game, Stage-play or Pageant, than the Act of Parliament would have forced the Rebuker to pay Ten Pounds: For it saith, If any Person, in any of those five places, shall Jestingly or Profanely use the Name of God, or of Jesus Christ, or of the Holy Ghost, or of the Trinity, which ought not to be used but with great Reverence, they shall forfeit Ten Pounds. 3 James 1.21. And if a Stage-player, or Buffoon, shall forfeit Ten Pounds, what shall a Divine, who should both know and teach better Things, what should he forfeit, if he print such profane Jesting with our Dear and Blessed Lord, whose Name is dreadful? O! that Men were wise to Sobriety, and not suffer themselves to launch into such exorbitant Expressions concerning our Blessed Lord. To tax his opposers with such an Inference from Scripture Premises, it puts me in mind of what Antisozzo saith in Fol. 191, Sed male dum recitas incipit esse tuus, He that recites such Passages without necessity and abhorrence, they begin to be his own Passages. But I hope my Kratiste will never fall into such Language again.   

§. XC.  
There is a very great word to the Point of Christ's sustaining our Person, in Ephes. 3.6. which is this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we render, That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body; but may be rendered fellow-heirs, and fellow-body, or co-body. As Believers are heirs, fellow-heirs, coheirs with Christ, and of Christ; so they are of the same body, fellow-body, co-body with Christ, and in Christ. And as before the Apostle forgave in the Person of Christ, so here the believing Gentiles are fellow-body with Christ. And what is this but his sustaining their Persons, and they his Person? But this is to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks foolishness. To our learned, topping Gentlemen, it is uncooth, unintelligible, and better left out than put in, till it be known what it signifies. Just so the Socinians, concerning the words Trinity in Unity, 'tis to them Nonsense and Contradiction; as all the Gospel is to Flesh and Blood; as that a Wicked Man should be saved by the Righteousness of one that he never saw in his Life, by a crucified Jesus; but to them that are carried he is (as sustaining our Persons as we are in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 co-body he is) Christ the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God. And for my part, if I did not look on the Lord Jesus as sustaining my Person on the Cross, and sustaining it every moment, not only by his common Providence, but in himself, and by himself, as Flesh of my Flesh, I must look on myself (as I am in myself) a lost, wretched, forlorn Creature, to be miserable in Hell to all Eternity. But I flee for refuge to him to be kept in this Faith, I in them holy Father, and thou in me, that they may be perfect in one, John 17. That is in himself, the blessed Lord Jesus sustaining our persons, to whom be Glory for ever.   

§. XCI.  
I come now to his Postscript, which is sharp and stinging to purpose, as if he had not sufficiently degraded Dr. Crisp in the body of the Rebuke, he blackens him by comparing the Doctor to Apocryphal Tobias, and Mr. Williams to Canonical Daniel, thus, All this is nothing but a trial of Skill between the Apocryphal Story of Tobias, and the Canonical History of Daniel. Tobias and Daniel being the first Names of the Doctor and Mr. Williams, as much as to say, all the Doctor's Sermons are Apocryphal Stories, but Mr. William's s Books of Gospel-Truth are Canonical History. To which I may return, there is also the Canonical History of Tobias, and there is the Apocryphal Story of Daniel, relating the filthiness of the Elders with Susanna: For instance, Tobijah, which signifies my good Lord, hath near as honourable a memorial put upon him in Canonical Scripture, as Daniel, God my Judge. 'Tis true, Daniel is called O greatly beloved; and God grant that our Daniel may be so also, upon a due sense of his Miscarriages in his Books and Converse. It is also true in Zach. 6.10, 14. of Tobias, he was to take Silver and Gold, and make Crowns: And 'tis said, The Crowns shall be for Helem and Tobiah, etc. Here was a Crown for Tobijah, signifying the Crown of Righteousness; and I question not but your traduced Tobijah hath been wearing one before the Throne, and before the Lamb, and casting it down before him this Fifty Five Years. Here were several Crowns made, and I hope one remains for my Dear Kratiste; for the blessed Jesus pardons, and so overlooks innumerable Failings, and will give a Crown of Righteousness to all that love him, that will submit to his Righteousness. Then for the Apocryphal Story: 'Tis true Tobiah is brought in with his Dog following him, but no Dogs barking at him: Such Things are reserved for these latter days. But how is Daniel brought in? He, like my dear Kratiste, comes in, giving a faithful Rebuke to a sad Report of a Lascivious Elder, and saith, O thou (Elder)! that art waxed old in Wickedness, thy Sins are come to light.   

§. XCII.  
What Issue have we of this trial of Skill? Is your Tobias the more Apocryphal because his Name is in the Apocrypha? And is your Daniel the more Canonical in his Writings, because his Namesake was 〈◊〉 Man greatly beloved? Or on the other side, may not your Tobias have a Crown given him, as well as Tobijah had one? And may not your Elder have a severe Rebuke given him, as well as Daniel's Apocryphal Elder had one? For every one shall receive according to his own Work. So that this Apocryphal Witticism might have been spared, for any honour it can bring to your Daniel, or dishonour to Tobias. But this is plain evidence that the Rebuker hereby declares, that he takes all the Discourses of Dr. Crisp, of the Free Grace of God in Christ, to be Apocryphal Stories, and all that Mr. Williams hath writ is Canonical History; especially his Gospel-Truth stated, which is supported by himself, and Forty Eight more Vouchers. This must pass for Canonical, though he makes room therein for more to be saved than ever God chose in Christ, and though he saith to this purpose, That God hath set up a New Law that doth not require SINLESS Obedience.   

§. XCIII.  
In the next place he treats the Doctor more roughly, if not profanely; for he calls the asserting the necessity of Repentance, Regeneration and Faith, the unpardonable Sin against the Doctor; whereas we know of no unpardonable Sin, but that against the Holy Ghost, which some in opposing clear Gospel Freegrace come very near, unless they do it ignorantly: But to talk of an unpardonable Sin against the Doctor, and that for asserting what the Doctor never denied, is a strange strain of Wrath against his Memory. His words are these, in Pa. 56 & 57, That although the express Word of God doth express the necessity of Regeneration to our entering into the Kingdom of God, and requires Repentance that our Sins may be blotted out, and Faith in Christ that we may be justified. This the Rebuker calls the brethren's fully bearing Testimony against the Antinomians; and adds, that their asserting this is the unpardonable Sin against Dr. Crisp. The Rebuker means, that Mr. Job accounts this Testimony of the Rebuker to be the unpardonable Sin against Dr. Crisp; which I may say is Gratis dictum, sed non gratiosé, It is freely said, but not graciously. I do not see what could be spoken with more malignity, to say it is never to be forgiven by Dr. Crisp's Vindicators, to say Regeneration, Repentance and Faith, are necessary. Sure my dear Kratiste cannot be thought not to have read Dr. Crisp, where he may find this Charge, That the Doctor accounts it a horrid Crime to assert Faith, Repentance and Regeneration, necessary, to be most false. I appeal to the Rebuker's Conscience; for I 〈◊〉 not but he hath read the Doctor's Sermons, or Dr. Chancy's Quotations, where he brings in Dr. Crisp, saying in express words quite contrary to this Charge, and fully owning the need of Sanctification, etc. In Fol. 46, Dr. Crisp saith thus, There is no Person that is a Believer, but after he hath received Christ, he is created in Christ Jesus unto good Works, that he should walk in them. I say, he that sprinkleth them with clean Water, that they may become clean from all their Filthiness, writes his Law in their inward parts. So that I say, mark well my words, That Sanctification of Life is an inseparable companion with the Justification of a Person by the Grace of Christ. Now can any Thing be more clear, than that it is no unpardonable Sin with Dr. Crisp, to assert the necessity of Regeneration, Repentance and Holiness? For that he saith, Sanctification (which includes them all) is inseparable from Justification; that one is never without the other: As much as to say with the Apostle, Christ who is made of God to us Righteousness for Justification, he is at the same time made of God to us Sanctification.   

§. XCIV.  
Now methinks 'tis strange that he should be branded with your Titles of Apocryphal wild Monster, Crispian Heterodoxy, especially to blast him in the business of Holiness, Repentance, etc. who so strenuously hath asserted its inseparableness from Justification; of which you may find whole Sermons on that Text, Tit. 2.12. The Grace of God teaching us, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live godly, righteously and soberly. So that from his Doctrine, there is no Reason to make that an unpardonable Sin, to assert the necessity of Regeneration; and as little Reason to do it on account of his Conversation, which, through the Grace of God, was by the Report even of his Enemies, untainted; yea, exemplarily holy, as several at this day in this City can witness: For farther Satisfaction, be pleased to read him on the Sermon entitled, Free Grace the Teacher of good Works, where he saith, in Fol. 35, Good Works are necessary, ex parte Dei, ex parte Rei, ex parte nostri, on the part of God, on account of the Thing itself, and on our own account. O! that it might please God to fill my Dear Kratiste's Bosom with fervent Charity, to prevent, for the future, his charging a fervent Servant of our Lord Jesus, as if it were an unpardonable Sin against such an one to urge the necessity of Holiness: Though still I take it to be an unaccountable Contradiction to the Gospel, and the Free Grace of God in Christ whereby we are saved, for any to assert the necessity of our Holiness, so as that it shall come in to have any share with our Lord Jesus in the saving us; for in that respect we must always say with David, Psal. 62. He only is my Rock and my Salvation; and in Psal. 71.16. I will go in the strength of the Lord God, I will make mention of thy Righteousness, of thine only. There must not come in one Rag of our own; no, not so much as to wrap about a cut Finger. 'Tis only the fine white Linen of Christ's Righteousness can recommend us acceptable to God; with which the good Lord cloth us.   

§. XCV.  
The next excursion to be lamented, in my Dear Kratiste, is his branding all that descent from the Writings of Mr. Williams to be whaffling Whelps, that can bark and not by't. In Fol. 58, he speaking of Exceptions that were made, or to be made, against Mr. William's Writings, saith thus, Was ever a poor Creature thus tied to a Stake, to be baited by the English Molossi, and (by) every whaffling Whelp, that could bark though not by't? This is very hard Language against his dissenting Brethren in the Ministry. I cannot now wonder at what an Eminent Person told me lately, That the Rebuker had better have cut off his Fingers, than to have written that which he calls, A Faithful Rebuke. Was it ever heard of, that a Gentleman, a Scholar, a Divine, one Sagacious to an high degree, should so far indulge his Heat, as to call the Reverends Mr. Cole, and Mr. Mather, now with the Lord at Rest, dying in the Joy and Comfort of opposing Mr. Williams' Errors, and to call Hundreds of Able Divines in this Kingdom, and in effect to call all the reformed Churches abroad, and our Reformers at home, that made the Homilies, wherein they do oppose his Errors, to call them all whaffling Whelps, that can bark and not by't? O! that there might be a due Reflection, than there would be smiting on the Breast, and saying, What have I done, to reflect so indecently on the Servants of the most High, lest our Lord Jesus cast him to the Ground, with a Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?   

§. XCVI.  
O how sad is it that my Dear Kratiste should so far engage himself in such a Cause, as he should think might need such Rail as suit only to a Rabshakeh, not a Protestant Divine! This is the way to have Ismaels' Character, his Hand against every Man, and every Man's Hand against him. O! that the Lord would cause him, upon a Melius Inquirendum, to pour some Oil upon this Vinegar of whaffling Whelps; and that he would follow Holy Austin, and retract such Language, and own, Humanum est errare. One would stand in admiration at such an Expression, from one that would surely be accounted a lover and learner of our Lord Jesus, who was meek and lowly, and so far from calling any of his followers whaffling Whelps, that he called Judas, his betrayer, Friend, Mat. 26.50. and when he was reviled, he reviled not again; and when he was forced to chide his Disciples, how sweetly doth he do it, Ye know not what Spirit ye are of. And so, I suppose, may be said of this Rebuker.   

§. XCVII.  
What if Paul and Barnabas differed, so that they parted one from another, did Paul call the other a Whelp, a whaffling Whelp? Sure our faithful Rebuker, when the Lord shall be pleased to convince him of his excess herein, he will go and bewail this before the Lord, that he hath opened the Mouths of Scorners, who may say, we may well call these Parson's a parcel of pitiful Fellows; for you see how one of the first Rank calls his Brethren Whelps; whereas the Servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle towards all, 2 Tim. 2.24. How happy would it be if all, that fear the Lord, would learn of Abraham, who said to Lot, Let there be no strife between thee and me, for we be Brethren.   

§. XCVIII.  
He having provoked the Reporter, now he fears his Friend Mr. Williams, whom he has taken this Pains for, may be set in the Pillory, there to be palted with rotten Eggs; and all this because it had been propounded that he should give Satisfaction about what might be excepted against him: And I pray where can the hurt of this be, that he should be desired to satisfy those that object against him? Is this palting him with rotten Eggs? If he be to be palted with Eggs of his own laying, that are not very sound, I know one that hath got together about a hundred out of his Nest of Man made Righteous, besides what are laid in his Gospel-Truth. If it should happen that some of these be cast on him, and defile him, it is not his Friends flattering can make him clean; 'tis only his going into the Fountain of Life, the Lord Jesus, can take away all the uncleanness that such Eggs will bring upon him. I will cast none of them at him, but only break three of them before him, which I am sure have a worse savour than the rottenest Egg in the Town; these I take out of Fol. 140 of Gospel-Truth, where he saith, The respect to Glory which our good Works have, they are as Seed to the Harvest, (that's one), and as the Foundation to the Building, (that s a second), and as Work to Wages, (there's a third). So that he makes our good Works to be our Christ Jesus. I begin with his second, as being most of the Romish scent, Our good Works have the same respect to Glory that the Foundation hath to the Building. Was ever any thing more Popish? Doth not the Scripture say, I lay in Zion for a Foundation, a Stone, a tried Stone, Isa. 28.16.? Is not that our Lord Jesus, of whom the Apostle saith, Other Foundation can no Man lay? And Christ saith, On this Rock I will build my Church. And shall we now have this Egg laid, That our good Works are the Foundation to the building us up unto Glory? Sure this rotten Egg can never be endured in the Nostrils of any good Christian. The first is like it, as one Egg can be to another, That our good Works have the same respect to Glory that the Seed hath to the Harvest. Now every one knows that the Harvest grows immediately from the Seed; and if we had no Harvest of Glory but what grows out of the Seed of our Works, it would be a very dark dunghill Glory; for our best Righteousness, as to getting us Glory, is but as menstruous Rags: But for our Comfort the Scripture saith, One sows and another reaps. Christ hath in Infinite Grace sowed his Body as a grain of Wheat in the Earth, John 12.24. out of which all our Glory must grow. O how contrary is his Assertion to the whole Gospel, which saith, We are saved by Grace, and not of Works, lest any Man should boast. Our Glory is so far from being the Harvest of our Works, that the Apostle saith, He hath saved us, not according to our Works of Righteousness which we have done, 2. Tim. 1.9. Neither for our Works, nor according to them. O how sad is it that my Dear Kratiste should by his Hand, together with Forty Eight more, midwife this rotten Egg into the World. The third is of the same brood, That Glory is the Wages of our Works; which is diametrically opposite to the Apostle, who wholly excludes Works, saying in Rom. 11.6. If it be by Grace, it is no more of Works; otherwise Grace is no more Grace. But if it be of Works, it is no more of Grace. And the Apostle concludes, to the shame of self-justiciaries, Rom. 3.27. Where is boasting then? it is excluded. By what Law? of Works? Nay; but by the Law of Faith. So that Mr. Williams must not lay this Egg at the Apostle's Gate; it being as rotten an one as any in the whole Council of Trent: But one dash of the Rebuker's Pen, That he hath accounted for what he hath written, by subscribing the Assemblies Confession, shall cleanse him from all; whereas his subscribing that, without his recanting this, is but like some of the Clergy in Antisozzo, that snatch up the Pen to subscribe the Articles of the Church of England, and to their shame, immediately preach against some of them, in advancing Man's  in opposition to God's Free Irresistible Grace, and denying particular Election, and the like: For which we may mourn and say, Proh Dolour.   

§. XCIX.  
It is not to be unminded how the Rebuker slides off the three first Conditions, on which Mr. Williams his acceptance was to be grounded; which are these, If he concur in the Doctrine of Justification, and the Change of Persons between Christ and Believers, and Christ's undergoing the Father's displeasure for our Sins: These, he saith in 58, I will not mention to save Time and Paper. A great Husband of Time and Paper. But would not Time and Paper have been better employed by far, in setting these three Points in a true Light, than to talk of whaffling Whelps and rotten Eggs? I fear there are greater Reasons, than to save Time and Paper, that he waves them. It being judged by many, from his Writings, that he is not extraordinary tied in the Point of Justification; and therefore, being conscious thereof, he might not be free to expose himself, by declaring his Judgement therein, as to the Conditionality of Faith, and New Obedience, and how far our Works have any concern in our Justification, notwithstanding the Scripture saith, We are justified freely by his Grace. And it may justly be suspected, that he who could say, We did not sin Adam 's Sin, (so denying the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) might as well say, That that Sin of his was not ours, and so we not concerned in it, so as to be condemned for it. And thence might as well say, that Christ's Righteousness, which he performed in obeying and suffering the Law, is not ours, it was only wrought for our Good, and so we not justified by God's imputing it to us; but that we have only the Effects of it, or this is the main, viz. Pardon of our Sins, if we repent, and believe, and walk in holy Obedience, and so continue to the end of our Lives (thereby denying assurance till the last breath); and then for the sake of Christ's Righteousness, on our sincere performance of our Duty, we shall have Heaven and Happiness; as his Gospel-Truth stated, and before him Mr. R. B. But if this be current, how can the Scripture be true, that we are justified freely by his Grace, and that we are justified by his Blood, that he was raised for our Justification, without one word of our Gospel-Obedience concurring thereto, it being not according to Works of Righteousness which we have done? And whereas the Word saith, we are justified by Faith; all sound Protestants, the Assemblies Confession, and the Doctrine of the Church of England, do uno ore with one mouth agree, that it is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, it is not our Act of Faith justifies us, but the Object of Faith; that Righteousness of Christ which he wrought out for us, which we lay hold on and receive by Faith. It is that Righteousness made ours, given to us by God, and reckoned by God to us, which alone doth justify us; on which account it is said, It is God that justifies, Rom. 8. But this my Kratiste waves, lest he should bewray (it is feared) some halting in this, as the Reporter saith he has done in the Point of Christ's Satisfaction: Or else, if he be right in it himself, and if he had declared it, he must have left his Friend Mr. D. W. in the Ditch, who is sadly tardy in this case.   

§. C.  
As to his second Point that he waves, The Change of Persons between Christ and Believers, this he might be allowed for; he had said enough, and too much, of that, in ridiculing it before with Christ's wearing a Mask, a Vizor, etc. when he bore the Persons of the Elect in himself. For which, I beseech the Lord to give him Repentance and Pardon.   

§. CI.  
But as to the third, of Christ's bearing the Father's displeasure for our Sins, he having said little or nothing of that before, it might have been expected he should have said somewhat of it now, if it had been only to confirm his Friend Mr. Williams, who had abused the Doctor, when he took the Doctor to task about it: But this is so fully handled by Dr. Chancy, and such full Evidence brought in by him, of our Lord Jesus his undergoing the displeasure of God, and sustaining the Wrath of God for our Sins, when by God himself they were laid upon him, that I suppose the Rebuker had little list to enter the Lists in that Debate.   

§. CII.  
But it being a Subject of infinite concernment to every poor Soul, that hopes for Eternal Life by and through our Lord Jesus; it being that on which hangs all the hopes of a poor Sinner for his escaping the direful, terrible, tremendous and eternal Wrath of God, due to every one for his Sins, by our Lord Jesus his bearing that Wrath which was due to us, I shall quote somewhat of Dr. Chancy's collecting, in his Vindication of what was expressed in Dr. Crisp's Sermons, and shall afterward add some Animadversions on the Rebuker, about the Lord Christ's bearing the Father's displeasure: And I begin with what Dr. Chancy quotes from Mr. Calvin, in his Discourse on Gal. 3.13. The Apostle doth not say (saith Calvin) that Christ was cursed, but a Curse, which is more; for it shows, that all Malediction was included in him— God was not ignorant of what kind of Death his Son should die, when he said, Cursed is every one that hangs on a Tree— He took our Person, therefore he was a Sinner, and under the Curse; not so much in himself, as in us— He underwent his Wrath, else how could he reconcile the Father to us?— Again, How could he free us from the Wrath of God, unless he had TRANSLATED it from us to HIMSELF? Therefore he was wounded for our Sins, and experienced God as an angry Judge. Can any thing be more positive and plain for Christ's bearing the Father's displeasure, which is so cried out upon by the Neonomians, as if it were heterodox, monstrous, wild Antinomianism, when so great a Man as this saith, that Christ translated the Wrath of God from us to himself, and that he experienced God as an angry Judge? And this is no Testimony from an Antinomian; though in this saying as much an Antinomian, in saying Christ was thus a Sinner, as Dr. Crisp in saying the like.   

§. CIII.  
A second Witness to confirm this Truth, out of Dr. Chancy, is Martin Luther, who goes a step or two higher in the Rebuker's Antinomianism than Calvin; and faith on this Point, in Vindication of Dr. Crisp, thus, Then hast thou him (Christ) indeed, when thou believest that this more pure and innocent Person is freely given to thee of the Father to be thy Priest and Saviour, yea rather thy Servant; that he putting off his Innocency and Holiness, and taking thy SINFUL PERSON upon him, might bear thy Sin, thy Death, and thy Curse. As Paul applied to Christ that place of Moses, Accursed is every one that hangeth on a Tree, so may we apply to Christ not only that whole 27 Deut. but also may gather all the Curses of Moses' Law together; for as Christ is innocent in this General Law, touching his own Person, so is he also in all the rest; and as he is guilty in this General Law, in that he is made a Curse for us, and hanged on the Cross as a Wicked Man, a Blasphemer, a Murderer, a Traitor, even so he is guilty in all others. Here Luther makes Christ to bear the Father's displeasure with a Vengeance, bear our Sin, Death and Curse; yea, all the Curses in Moses' Law.   

§. CIV.  
But what need have we of Humane Testimony for this, although such Testimony is more authentic with some, and will pass farther in Proof with some than David's Psalms, or Paul's Epistles, for God's displeasure with Christ, as bearing our Sins, and our Persons, and as being our Surety and our Representative? Therefore because Mr. Williams is so foul on Dr. Crisp, for asserting God's displeasure against Christ for our Sins, and my Dear Kratiste seems afraid to declare his plain Sense in this Point, pretending to save Time and Paper, and thereby leaving Dr. Crisp under the foul Pen of Mr. Williams, whose Cause the Rebuker vindicates, on this account I think it necessary to bring good Scripture Proof of God's displeasure against his own ever-dearly beloved Son; our Lord Jesus, as he stood in our stead bearing our Sins; for which I produce the 22th, the 25th, the 69th and 89th Psalms, to show that Christ was under the displeasure of God. In Psal. 22.1. he cries out, Why art thou so far from helping me? Why hast thou forsaken me, and are far from the words of my roaring? Surely God's forsaking was sufficient ground for his roaring. In Psal. 35.17. he saith, Lord, how long wilt thou look on? Rescue my Soul. And ver. 22. O Lord, be not far from me. So that here is forsaking even to make him roar; and here he minds God of standing far off, and looking on while he is in his Agony. And can any one think there was no displeasure in God when he did so? In Psal. 69.3. he cries, Mine Eyes fail while I wait for my God. (Surely then God had withdrawn from him). Reproach hath broken my Heart, says he, ver. 20. I looked for pity, but there was none. Thus we see God looking on, and not comforting him under this terrible Dispensation, when his Heart was broken with Reproach; and could God withhold his Comforts so long as he did, if he had not executed his displeasure on Christ, which was due to us for our Sin? But that which puts it beyond doubt, is that direful, doleful word of our Lord Jesus, in Psal. 89. where he shows, how Reproach had broken his Heart, in ver. 38. he saith, But thou hast cast off and ABHORRED, thou hast been wroth with thine Anointed, (thy Christ). That this abhorring was spoken in the Name of Christ appears farther, in ver. 50. I do bear in my bosom the Reproach of all the mighty People; wherewith they have reproached the footsteps of thine Anointed. This the Apostle shows is spoken of Christ, in Rom. 15.3. The Reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen on me, saith he. Whence it is clear, that if the one is spoken of Christ, viz. the Reproach, than it follows that the other, the abhorring, is spoken also of him; for they are joined together Psal. 89. And if so, what Sunbeam can be clearer than this, That our Lord Jesus, if under this abhorring, he was under the sore displeasure of his Father, as bearing our Sins? Now for Mr. Williams to tell the World his dreadful Story against Dr. Crisp, for his using the same words of Christ as the Spirit of God doth, and with the same Sense, viz. That this displeasure of God was only upon account of Christ's bearing our Sins, and that he was made a Curse for us, not in respect of his own Holy, Innocent Person, but as bearing our Persons; for Mr. Williams to load the Doctor so foully as he doth, and for the Rebuker to say nothing hereto, is seemingly to justify Mr. Williams, and makes one fear he doth not reckon that Christ was under any displeasure of the Father, nor that Christ bore our Sins, our very Sins, or was made a Curse, a very Curse, any more than Mr. Williams doth. But Mr. William's absolutely denies that Christ bore our very Sins; and if the Rebuker did not concur with him therein, he would doubtless have spent a little Time and Paper on so important a Point, rather than in calling his Opposers whaffling Whelps. But of this, God willing, more anon in another Section; in the mean time, this Testimony of Christ's bearing the Father's displeasure may humble us all.   

§. CV.  
But whaffling Whelps is a trifle to some Expressions which the Rebuker's Genius taxes his Antagonists with; the remembering him of which, I hope, may work some Shame in him, for whom his Friends are greatly ashamed. I tremble to think whither his Passion had transported him when he wrote this Passage, in Pa. 25, Some of the biggest Name from the Press and Pulpit had disseminated such horrid Opinions, as filled all Intelligent Persons with equal Astonishment and Indignation. O the Rage of Corrupt Nature against Free Grace (say I)! Here my Dear Kratiste leaves Dr. Crisp as a petty Antinomian, and falls very foul on two of the biggest Names in our cognizance, for strenuous asserting the Doctrine of the Free Grace of God in the Gospel, Mr. Cole and Mr. Mather, now with their dear Lord Jesus, and calls their Sermons and Books, such Things as filled (yea, brimful they filled) the Intelligent with Astonishment and Admiration at their horrid Opinions. In his Fury and Wrath in this Storm and Tempest, he had a good steady pair of Balances that did not pendulate an Hairs breadth, there was an equal (an exact equality to a grain of) Astonishment and Indignation. And we have Proof what the latter was, his Indignation, in that he vents himself somewhat like him that Solomon speaks of, who casts out Firebrands, Arrows and Death, Prov. 25.18. and it is to be feared we shall find him triumphing in their seasonable Deaths. O! how unlike is this to the blessed meek Jesus, or to him the Apostle speaks of, viz. The Servant of the Lord should be gentle? So we see how he leaves this great Point, to be a good Husband of his Time and Paper, and fastens on that wherein he had an opportunity to magnify a Juvenile Talon of Serene Wit, in bringing out his Molossi and whaffling Whelps, and crying, Stoo Dogs, stoo; which I would call, Ludere cum Sanctis, a jesting with Holy Things, but for Reverence to so celebrated a Divine as my Dear Kratiste: Yet, I hope, I may say without Offence, yea for his future Caution and Advantage, That such Language better becomes a Terrae Filius in the Schools, than Kratiste the Aged Divine; or a Merry Andrew on the Stage, than one that was sometimes valued for his Melius Inquirendum.   

§. CVI  
This Melius helps me to consider what the Eminent Antisozzo saith against the then Rector of St. George's, now Dean of P—, for which Piece many have honoured him, with myself, this 21 Years. There he writing against Arminianism, turns perfect dreggy Antinomian, according to his Modern Style of them; though now, (in his vindicating the grand Neonomian, the New Law establisher, who blasphemed God with setting up a New Law; which Law, not the Gospel; but which Law admits of Obedience that is not Sinless), now I say Antisozzo leans on the contrary side, and Arminianizeth, by calling it Heterodox Antinomianism, to say that the Fault of Sin was laid on Christ, and that Christ bore Sin as to the Anomía, that Christ was reputed a Criminal not only by Man, but by God. Pray mark! This in Kratiste's Rebuke is reckoned the third Antinomian Heresy. This is part of that, of which, he said, some of the biggest Name had from the Press and Pulpit, with such horrid Opinions, filled the Intelligent with equal Astonishment and Admiration. Now can any one believe that the Rebuker was once guilty of this horrid Opinion, or any thing like it, That the Fault of Sin was laid on Christ? Of which I may say, If he is not of that Opinion, I would not be in his condition for all the World: For if the Fault was not laid on Christ, of every Sin he hath committed, it must lie on him to all Eternity. For it was by that one offering of Christ, once made on the Cross, that he put away Sin; and all Sins, that were not put away by that offering, must remain on the Sinners to Eternity; for there remains no more Sacrifice for Sin. This by the By.   

§. CVII.  
But to return: Whatever he may now say to uphold Mr. Williams, I am satisfied my Dear Kratiste was (when in Antisozzo he vindicated Dr. Owen) one of Dr. crisps Antinomians. Witness some Passages following. In Pa. 686 he is inferring Antinomianism from Mr. Sherlock's saying, God bestows the Rewards of Righteousness on those who, according to the strictness and rigour of the Law, are not Righteous; that is, saith Sh—, They shall be justified and treated as Righteous Persons. Upon this Antisozzo turns Antinomian, and infers thus, If God can treat them like Righteous Persons, who are not really so, because he is so well pleased with Christ's Obedience, why may not God conceive Me to have DONE that which I have NOT DONE, as well as to be what I am not? Why not to have OBEYED IN CHRIST, to have SUFFERED IN CHRIST'S SUFFERINGS? Here it is plain, that the Rebuker allows that God may conceive me to have done and suffered what Christ did and suffered; nay, that we obeyed in Christ, and suffered in Christ's Sufferings. What is this but Commutation of Persons, and Christ's sustaining our Persons in his Sufferings? What is this but justifying Dr. Crisp's Heresy of Antinomianism? Why then all this Noise about the Town of uncooth, novel, unintelligible Change of Persons, when yourself argue for our obeying in Christ?   

§. CVIII.  
In Fol. 703, Antisozzo goes farther in the behalf of Dr. Crisp, though now he opposes him, and here he owns Adam's Disobedience is ours; though in the Pulpit in P. H. he said, We did not sin Adam 's Sin. In Page 703 he reproves Mr. Sh— for saying, Not that Christ's Actual Obedience is reckoned as Done by us, which is impossible. To which the Rebuker, or Antis. answers, But why is this so impossible? There's no more impossibility in it, than that Adam 's Disobedience should be reckoned as mine: Which if it be not, let Men shift and evade with all their cunning, they shall never be able to justify God's procedure with his Posterity in intailing Evils, many Evils; and Death itself upon them, for Adam 's sake, if they be not guilty of the Crime. Here's an abundant Proof that he then owned Adam's Sin was reckoned as his; and if reckoned so by God, then certainly it was his: Nay, he reproves Mr. Sher— for saying, It's impossible Christ's Actual Obedience is reckoned as done by us, and saith, Why impossible? And a little lower, in Pa 703, he again confronts his nowself Arminianizing for Mr. Williams, by his then self Antinomianizing for Dr. Owen, and therein for Dr. Crisp, and saith thus, If then the Penalty of Sin may be inflicted, there's a necessity that the Gild of Sin be imputed. Now to talk of Gild imputed and not the Fault, is Nonsense: For what Gild is there where there is no Fault? Did Christ bare Sin and Gild without Fault? Then he bore faultless Sin, and faultless Gild; which is ridiculous Well, but my Dear Kratiste goes on currently for his Antinomians, and saith, It's impossible indeed that we should personally have committed Adam 's Sin, or performed that very Obedience which Christ performed, but not impossible that the Disobedience of the one, or Obedience of the other, should be reckoned AS committed and performed by us. How doth this agree with his equal Astonishment and Indignation at the horrid Opinion, to say, That the Fault of Sin was laid upon Christ? O! that he would humbly own his hasty heat. O! that he might recover himself, and return to the Truths he owned in Antisozzo, and not call it an horrid Opinion, That the Fault was laid on Christ, when himself owns the Gild was, lest he exasperated his tart Answerers to call him not only an Ecclesiastical Droll, but a Terrae Filius Droll, to talk of Gild without Fault. This might possibly occasion that severe Reflection of Fits in the Rebuker, not fit to be mentioned; but meliora speramus, we hope better Things, and such as accompany Salvation, by his freeing himself from halting in the Point of Christ's Satisfaction, which the Reporter chargeth him with.   

§. CIX.  
I proceed to convince (if it may please God) my Dear Kratiste of his unbenign Temper, in his treating the Opposers of Mr. Williams, in Pa. 60. O! how unlike are those Passages to any thing we find of our beloved Lord and Master Jesus, the meek and lowly, who had no Guile in his Mouth; and who being reviled, reviled not again. But so it fares not with the Rebuker, who though he was not reviled in the Report, yet he Banters and Jeers his Friends that concur not with him, in Page 60, with this Expression, speaking of his Opposers, he saith of them, They will make no farther Contest (with Mr. Williams); I mistake, (saith the Rebuker) but private Whisper, and evil Surmizes, and insinuated Slanders, and clandestine Reproaches, may be multiplied while Mr. William's lives. O what a dire Charge is here in this climax and constellation of Accusations! Here are Whisper, Surmises, Slanders and Reproaches, and these epethited with being private, evil, insinuated and clandestine: Nay, 'tis to be feared they will feed upon his Carcase. See here what Cannibals he makes all the Gospel-Ministers, that cannot, that ought not to concur with Mr. William's his unsound stating of Gospel-Truth. May not Men write and plead for the Truth, which it is obvious Mr. Williams hath wronged, as on that Text Phil. 3.9. but they must be invidiously loaded as above? O my Dear Kratiste, I beseech the Lord to mollify your Temper, and to give you an humble, broken Gospel-Sense of your too much giving way, through the Temptation of the Floridness of your Style, to an excess of Carnal Passion in your Rebuke. Doth not the blessed Apostle tell us, in 2 Tim. 4.2. that his beloved Timothy, though but a Young Divine, that he should rebuke with all long-suffering? How much more is it a Duty for the Elder Divines, to exercise long suffering, yea all long-suffering, in their Rebukes cujus contrarium we see. Some talk of having a Commission from all the Systematical Divines, as Antisozzo had; but I fear you have exceeded that, as well as the Apostle's Admonition, in your Rebuke to the Report.   

§. CX.  
Are all accounted, by the Rebuker, as Cannibals, that writ against Mr. Williams? How then shall I escape, who put my Mite into the Treasury of pleading for Free Grace? Every one hath not a Face of Brass, neither doth God say to all Contenders for the Truth, as he did to Ezekiel, in Ezek. 3.9. As an Adamant harder than a Flint have I made thy Forehead, therefore fear them not; and must we not therefore plead for Truth, for fear of being called Man-Eaters? I hope my Dear Kratiste will remember what Antisozzo saith, in his Preface, That Austin would have every Man, that can hold a Pen, writ against Pelagius, that sworn Enemy to free discriminating effectual Grace. And if so, why may not the Reporter, or any Penman, writ against Mr. Williams (and all those Forty Nine Vouchers) who declares, That a degree of our Gospel-Obedience to a Law that admits Sin, doth concur to our Justification quite contrary to the Scripture, which saith, We are justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus? Are we bound to contend earnestly for the Faith, and will you load with multiplied Sarcasms, those that cannot swallow such distasteful Morsels as he cuts out? Such as this, That our being found in Christ, Phil. 3.9. is principally meant of being found in our own Gospel-Holiness: Than which nothing is a greater misprision of Treason against the Righteousness of Christ imputed to Sinners for their Justification. O! that God would show, that such profane words do eat as doth a Gangreen. What bring in our Holiness to sit jig by joul with Christ's perfect Righteousness: And for opposing this, shall the Servants of the Lord be accounted Cannibals, to feed on Mr. William's his Flesh?   

§. CXI.  
The next hard word, bestowed on Freegrace maintainers, is calling them Bigots; nay, Bigots that never will forgive: That is, because they do and must contend for the Truth, therefore they are accounted implacable. Though I am bound to forgive all Injuries done to myself, am I ever bound to suffer the Truth to be invaded, and silently to sit down satisfied with it? Was not meek Moses in a Transport when Aaron made the Calf, yet not implacable? Must many whole Churches of our Lord Jesus, be called unforgiving Bigots, for holding fast the Faith once delivered to the Saints? Is not the Spirit to war against Fleshly Principles, as long as they war against the Spirit? O! that my Dear Kratiste might obtain to descend from his lofty strain, and follow our dear Lord who died for us, leaving us an Example that we should follow his steps, in being meek and lowly of Heart, and not fly into Astonishment and Indignation for being mildly opposed.   

§. CXII.  
O! how unlike is this treatment of this Rebuker, to the treatment our blessed Lord Jesus gave to his Disciples, when instead of watching with him, when he was under the dreadful conflict in his Agony, and instead of praying with him, they fell a snoring? Did he scour them off as our Rebuker has done? No, he sweetly, gently, mildly reproves them with an Excuse, The Spirit is willing, but the Flesh is weak. Nay, when they called for Fire from Heaven on the Samaritans, doth he call them wild Monsters, as our Rebuker? No, but tenderly reproves them, Ye know not what Spirit ye are of. He doth not cast Firebrands, Arrows and Death at them, calling them horrid Heretics, that fill with equal Astonishment and Indignation, as of late we see in the froth of my Dear Kratiste.   

§. CXIII.  
I now must write in Tears this next Paragraph, and O that my Head were Waters, and mine Eyes a Fountain of Tears over my Dear Kratiste, to see that a Good Man, and Eminent, should be guilty of the following Passage, which I fear hath been tragical and bloody. O what is poor Man, when the Lord leaves him to the exercise of his mere Wit and Reason? The Rebuker turns quick, and plays at sharp with the Manuscriptor, and accosts him for saying, What a Negative of the same import with an Affirmative? Whereby the Manuscriptor reflected on Mr. Williams for his former asserting, no Change of Persons between Christ and Believers, and saying afterwards, that he meant this, No Change doth allow that he was for a Change; on which the Manuscriptor saith, What, a Negative of the same import with an Affirmative? Upon which the Rebuker lets fly, and fastens his Talons on him, with this Answer, I make no question but he had heard of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Marriage and no Marriage, grating on his tender Conscience. Here we must take the word tender to be Ironically spoken by the Rebuker. O! how can he look on this Passage without blushing, and a few Tears, if the Lord graciously give a due Sense of the Uncharitableness of it, when he sees the direful Consequence of it; the Lord's taking the blessed, holy Servant of his, this object of your boasting over a repent of miscarriage, from this World to himself. And who knows but such a Reflection as this, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, might hasten his Death; to be wounded so in the House of his Friends, by a Brother in the Presbyterian Ministry? If the Righteous fall seven times a day, how can you look God in the Face with Peace, while you insult in 〈…〉 ●ner over one, you cannot but own, God had raised up a●●er his ●ail. and raised to a higher pitch of Zeal for the Glory of God, and for the publishing his Free Grace in the Gospel, through our Lord Jesus Christ? Is such a Retort like the moving of the Spirit of God in a Christian, who should in love, gentleness and meekness, do every Thing (especially when writing a Tract relating to the great and glorious Truths of the Gospel) to the Glory of God in the Name of the Lord Jesus? Was this in the Name of Jesus, who when reviled, reviled not again, to criminate a Servant of the Lord Jesus in the Ministry of the Gospel? We have heard of a Cham that discovered what he should have concealed, and of the Brand, yea, black Curse, that is upon all his Seed to this day, if the black Ethiopians be his Seed, as is most probable. O blessed Lord, let not the like be on the Seed of my Kratiste. The Apostle tells us, Ye have heard of the Patience of Job, but draws a Veil over his Passion, and saith farther upon it, and the end of the Lord, that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender Mercy. O that the Rebuker were like him: But the tender Mercies of some are cruel. What would, and it may be thereby kill, a Man whom God had both wounded and healed! The Lord give a due sense, and forgive.   

§. CXIV.  
Again, We have heard of the mocking of Ishmael, Gen. 21. of which the Apostle saith, He that was born after the Flesh, persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, Gal. 4. So that in God's sight, a mocking, fleering, jibing, taunting Spirit, though done with the smartest Wit, is accounted Persecution; and if it be to those born after the Spirit, it may issue in great Judgement. The Dragon was cast into a bottomless Pit, that cast water out of his Mouth to swallow the Woman, Rev. 12. & 20.3. I beseech the Lord, that such mocking may not be laid to the Charge of the Rebuker in the great day of the Lord, when he cometh to convince not only the ungodly of their ungodly Deeds, but of their hard Speeches. O that he might lay it to his own Soul now, that it may not be laid to his Charge then. God hath taken this aspersed Servant from the malevolent Aspersion of Man; and I hope the Blood of Jesus applied to, by Faith, with Repentance, may prevent this Man's Blood from crying for Vengeance: Which I pray his Adversaries may flee for, to the hope set before them; and that they take heed how they secretly, Joab like, stab, by vituperation, any of the Servants of the Lord for the time to come. O! how ill might it look, if any should return a worse Reflection than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on some that lift up their Heads very high, being held up by the Chin by mighty swimmers. But the Lord rebuke their uncharitable Spirit, is the best return I can make.   

§. CXV.  
I am amazed, or as in a Dream, to see the prevaricating of the Rebuker in Page 61, where speaking of Mr. Williams' Gospel-Truth stated, etc. he saith, Reader, thou hast heard much noise about that Book, and of the Subscription to it by some Ministers, I could wish thou wouldst be so just to the Subscribers, as to view with thine own Eyes, how far the Subscription extended— It was no more than this, They judged that he had, in all that was material, fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errors therein mentioned. I viewed this over and over, never suspecting a plain untruth in the Rebuker, but took it for granted that this was all that he had subscribed to, That he judged that Mr. Williams had, in all that was material, done as there is declared: But being provoked to be just to him, and see with my own Eyes, I turned to the Subscription, and to my amazement found the old saying useful, 'Tis good to tell Money after ones Father; for he fell far short of saying the Truth, and the whole Truth of the Subscription; for it extended far beyond what he saith it extended to: For there, to set off the Book, he styles Mr. Williams, our Reverend Brother; and such a Character to the Book, is no small extolling it, that he is by Forty Nine Divines called our Reverend Brother, whereof my Dear Kratiste is one of the first three. But looking forward with mine own Eyes, I found he went ten times farther in celebrating the excellency of that Piece, which made such a Noise; a Noise that hath sounded into the Low Countries to indamage the Truth, as I have heard, and that is this, We do account (say the Forty Nine) that he hath done considerable Service to the Church of Christ. And what could they say more of Calvin, Melancthon, Luther? Nay, very little more of St. Paul's Epistles; I wish they said as much of some passages therein, Christ made Sin and made a Curse.   

§. CXVI.  
But with mine own Eyes, with the help of Free Grace Spectacles, (not Arminian ones) I find his Subscription extends yet far higher, and is got near the Third Heavens; for to their Commendations of a Reverend Brother, and their celebrations of doing Service, they add their Supplications with expectations, saying, Adding our Prayers, that these Labours of his may, as we hope they will, be a means for the reclaiming of those that have been misled. Is not here a plain demonstration, of a great abuse put upon his Reader, and an open untruth in matter of fact, to say, that the Subscription was no more than this, They judged that he had, in all that was material, fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errors therein mentioned? Was his doing considerable Service to the Church nothing? Were their Prayers for the Success of the Book nothing? Is this a Faithful Rebuke to a False Report? Is it not rather a very False Report of his own Fact? What then may be expected of his Report concerning others? O how could he say, it is NO MORE, when 'tis visibly three times more, Proh Dolour!   

§. CXVII.  
It calls to my mind, that dear Equivocation of Saphira to Peter, Acts 5. when he asked her, whether she sold the Field for so much, she answered, Yea, for so much. This was not downright; for no more: Upon this Peter charges her to have tempted the Spirit of the Lord; and saith, Behold the feet of them that have buried thy Husband: Then she fell down strait-way-at his feet, and yielded up the ghost. There might have been some plea, by a Sophister, in her behalf; he might, with an Arminian Wit, have said, what Saphira said was true; she answered, Yea, for so much; so it was, but she did not say it was for no more, and yet she tempted the Holy Spirit, which cost her at least her Natural Life: But he must be a Gigantic Sophister, that can remove the Block our Rebuker has laid in the way of a true Relater. I don't see what Invention can save his Expression from being a solemn Untruth, for him to say, it was no more, when it was much more, a great deal; and so much more had they subscribed, in commendation of Mr. Williams' Book, as might well make his Head giddy and turn round, to be carried (I will not say by what Spirit) to so high a Mount, yea, to the Pinnacle of the Temple, as to have so many Ministers avouch to the World, That he had fully and rightly stated Truths and Errors, so as to do considerable Service to the Church of Christ.   

§. CXVIII.  
My Heart is troubled for exposing the Rebuker thus in this particular; but how should I be faithful to him in his Remarks, or better invalidate his supporting Mr. Williams' Errors, if I should not show what shifts some are driven to, that will justify him, or themselves, for being his upholder? And though this failure be discovered, in one accounted a great Master in our Israel, yet the Apostle advises, that when some Men sin, they should be rebuked before all, that others may fear, 1 Tim. 5.20. When the whole World must be told in Print so great an Untruth, 'tis necessary they should be undeceived, that the Author may retract it, and own himself to have erred. The Lord grant we may all learn, by this fall, to fear and tremble; lest being left by the Spirit of God, when we go to vindicate what we ought not, we fall before all. O that my Dear Kratiste might here see the fruit of a towering Spirit.   

§. CXIX.  
I would gladly contrive some Figure in speaking, or writing, to salve the Veracity of the Faithful Rebuke, in saying, the Subscription was no more, when in Truth it was abundantly more. I can find nothing but a far stretched Synecdoche, of a part for the whole, will do the feat; and so I may say, it was no more; that is, no more to be owned to the World, when we see how many Exceptions are against the Book we subscribed to. So a Man that owes him 100 l. may come to him, and say, Sir, I have brought you 20 l. and I own you no more. How, no more than 20 l. is not here your Bond for 100 l.? That's true; but I own you no more but 20 l. because I intent to pay you no more. So the Subscription was no more, because we intent now to own no more. But if his Apocryphal Tobias had been guilty of making such Figures, he would have been branded justly, with a wild monstrous Sense of Change of Persons. But my Kratiste may possibly be excused for haste; and I wish this were the greatest Fault in his Rebuke.   

§. CXX.  
One word to the trite and tart Conclusion, he saith, If these contenders go on to exact so much, and yield so little, for the sake of Union, they sell their own Innocency, and the Church's Peace, for nothing. This is smart and quick; pretty biting for a Conclusion. What nothing less than selling Innocency for nothing, and Peace for nothing? Is the Truth nothing? Half an Eye may see, that 'tis Truth is contended for. When Hezekiah had a Sentence of Death sent him, his Answer was, Isa. 39.8. Good is the Word of the Lord; for there shall be Peace and Truth in my days. He was not for a pretended Union, and a formal Peace, without the great Pillar of Truth to support the Building. Do not the Papists argue at the same rate for Peace? They are all for submitting to the dictates of their Antichristian State, for the sake of Peace and Unity; but the Apostle exhorts to contend for the Faith, and saith, We gave not place, no not for an hour, that the TRUTH of the Gospel might continue. When the Truth is opposed, oppugned, undermined, by bringing in Evangelical Obedience to a Law that avows some Sin, and this Obedience of ours, to have some share in our acceptance with God; and when the vindicating the Truth shall shake the Foundations of a patched up Peace, we are not long to question, which is to be preferred, the holding fast the Truth, or keeping such a Peace. But how can contending for the Truth, be said to sell Peace for nothing? Is the Change of Persons, between us and Christ, nothing, whereby he was made Sin for us, and we the Righteousness of God in him? I think this is something, though Mr. Williams once absolutely denied it. Is the bringing in a New Law, that admits of Sin in our Obedience, nothing? Is denying that Christ suffered the Idem of the Law for us, nothing? Is Mr. Williams' denying our Redemption, in a way of Justice, nothing? As he does, Fol. 15, of his Man made Righteous. I suppose those that see the Infinite Concernment of their Souls in these Points, will say, they are something; yea, Things of more value, than the Peace that all the Plenipotentiaries made at Ryswick; for that Peace is but finite, but these Truths are of infinite duration. The Wise Man bids us buy the Truth, and sell it not: And if not sell it at all, than not for Peace. But we are to contend earnestly for the Faith, once delivered to the Saints; which Faith seems to be taking wing, and leaving us under that sad word of our Lord, When the Son of Man cometh, shall he find Faith on the Earth? There being very little of it now; what with open Enemies scoffing at all Revealed Religion on one side, and seeming Friends, though as bad Enemies, on the other side, that join Man's Obedience with Christ's Righteousness, as concurrent causes or means of our Justification and Salvation, and so bringing in our Gospel-Holiness as copartner with our Lord Jesus, the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Author and Finisher of our Salvation: To whom with the Father and Blessed Spirit, even to him that sits on the Throne, and to the Lamb that was slain, and is alive in the midst of the Throne, and to the seven Spirits before the Throne, be Honour, Glory and Praise for ever.   

§. CXXI.  
Now that these plain Remarks, on some of the great Truths of the Gospel, which have been struck at, may be beneficial to the humble Peruser, to settle him on our Lord Jesus the only Foundation, in order to be built up in the most holy Faith, by him who buildeth all Things, who is God, Heb. 3.4. is the fervent Prayer of the unworthiest, I say, of the unworthiest in his own Eyes, of any that sincerely desires to cast in his Mite to the Treasury of the Testimony of Jesus, God blessed for ever.   

§. CXXII.  
Having taken the freedom, out of love to the Truth, and zeal for the Glory of God's Grace therein manifest, to be a little plain with my Dear Kratiste, hoping for a Blessing of the Lord thereby on his and others Souls, I find myself engaged to make some Remarks on the Reporter, the first occasioner of this thus-handled Debate. And first, I must and do own, that I humbly judge, that he hath done great and good Service to the Truth, by delivering his Report with much plainness and perspicuity, however it be censured by the Adversary; and I take it, that he deserves Thanks of Thousands (besides myself), who make the Truths of the Everlasting Gospel their daily Study, for his ingenious Vindication of his Report, from the Slander of its being called false by the Rebuker.   

§. CXXIII.  
But two Things, wherein I take him to have exceeded, I hope may be rectified; that is, his hard pressure on my Dear Kratiste, and his tart Passages on Dr. Crisp.  
As for the Rebuker, was it not enough, when the Reported had sufficiently foiled him, nay, and had laid him so flat on his Back, as to be for ever unable to stand upright again in that Cause, by clearing his Report from being false? But when he had him down, sure he should not have pressed him to Death, or worse, by his Printing such a Letter, as taxed him, not only with Buffonery, but with being by fits delirious, and to charge him with denying Christ's Satisfaction for our Sins.   

§. CXXIV.  
As for the first, I that have known him above Twenty Years, never heard before, or saw, the least Tendency to those unhappy Fits: Though upon inquiry of the ground of such a Charge, 'tis said, The Writer knew well what he said. But however, this I take to be too severe a Reprimand for his Rebuke, considering how terrible a blemish it is, to so eminent a Person's Ministry, to be taxed with being delirious. O how few can be free, if every Transport shall lay a Man under such a Censure! Therefore this I would advise the Reporter, to be humbled before the Lord, for considering how in many things we offend all.   

§. CXXV.  
As for the Reporter's Argument, That the Rebuker denies Christ's Satisfaction for Sin; because he saith, Christ's Death was for our good, and it was impossible it should be more; and that therein he Justifies the Socinians. I answer this Conclusion, That he denies Christ s Satisfaction hereby, looks like a strain upon the words, beyond the meaning of the Rebuker; for it seems apparent in this Rebuke, especial●y in his other Writings, That he expressly owns Christ's Satisfaction for Sin: Though in that Expression of his, in Fol. 37. he hath unhappily gratified the Socinians too far, by saying, It is impossible that Christ's dying in our place and stead, should signify any more, than for our Good. God forbidden that my dear Kratiste should mean by that word, only for our Good; as the Socinians do, That Christ's dying was only for our good, as an Example, or to confirm his good Doctrine only. No: He means (I hope) That Christ, by his Death, took away the Sins of all the Elect: That he bore their Sins, and bore them away into a Land of Forgetfulness, never to be remembered more, as our Escape goat: That he suffered for their Sins: That he washed them from their Sins in his Blood: And so he died for our Good, that we should have the Good and Benefit of his taking away our Sins, and of his becoming a Propitiation for us, a Sin-offering for us, a Ransom to the Father for us, and also himself to be ours, the Lord our Righteousness; for which let us ascribe Honour and Glory to him continually, for that he hath loved us, and washed us from our Sins in his Blood.   

§. CXXVI.  
Then for the Reporter's Tartness against Dr. Crisp, I am Amazed so florid a Person should so far blemish his Discourses, be so Disingenuous to the Doctor, as to say, He believes there is somewhat Dangerous in the Doctor's Writings, in Page 87. of his Vindication, and not to give one Instance of it: His words being these, If there is any thing Dangerous in the Doctor's Writings, as I believe there is. It would have been fair to have given one dangerous Passage at least, but for want of that, I turned to some of the most severe Passages of Mr. Williams' against the Doctor, and to Dr Chancy's Apology for the Doctor, to see what was so dangerous; and I found in P. 37. of Gospel Truth, Mr. Williams had loaded the Doctor thus, Reader, how horrid a sound must it have to a Christian Ear, to say, A Christ odious to God, abhorred by the Father. Here Mr. Williams speaks, as if Dr. Crisp had said these words, A Christ odious to God, abhorred by the Father. But Mr. Williams deals unjustly herein, for as to the word, A Christ odious, there is not such an Expression in the Doctor; and as for abhorred by the Father, the Doctor s words are, Christ is, as it were, abhorred by the Father. But suppose it were as Mr. Williams brings it in, How much more Horrid a Sound is it, to say, Christ is odious to God, than to say, Christ is made Sin by God himself? If we had due Thoughts of the Horridness of Sin, and that Christ was made Sin, that is, by Imputation; we should think it as much a Debasing of our Lord Jesus, to be made Sin by God, as to be accounted Odious or Abhorred of God. O these severe, great, tremendous Things! How should we revere them?   

§. CXXVII.  
This I find ingeniously and fully answered by Dr. Chancy, who asks Mr. Williams, What difference there is between God's wrathful Indignation, as Mr. Williams owns; and to be, as it were, abhorred of God, as Dr. Crisp mentions? But that I may more fully clear this, from being a dangerous Notion of Dr. crisps, I have recourse to the Scriptures of the Old Testament in the Original, to see what is there said, of Christ's being under the Father's Displeasure; and there I find, in Terminis, that our Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of, as abhorred of God, when made a Curse for us, bearing our Sins, and made Sin. The place is plain, in Psal. 89.38. there 'tis said, Thou hast cast off and abhorred, thou hast been wrath with thine anointed. And who is this anointed one, whom the Lord did cast off and abhor, and was wrath with, but our blessed Lord Jesus? So the whole Psalm shows, especially the 36th Verse, His Seed shall endure for ever; and Verse 51, Thine enemies have reproached the footsteps of thine anointed: And that these Reproaches are those that Christ bore, compare Psal. 69.9. with Rom. 15.3. The Reproaches of them that reproached thee, fell upon me, saith Christ. Hence 'tis plain, that these are the words of our Lord Jesus to his Father, Thou hast cast off and abhorred: The words are severe in the Hebrew, ve attah zanashta; and thou hast eloyned, or cast me far away; vat-timeas, and thou hast reprobated; so arius montanus at tu elongasti & reprobasti. Here he makes the word go higher than our Translators render it, he renders it, Thou hast reprobated thine anointed, thy Messiah; whereas our Translators do rather mollify, than exasperated, the word timeas, and say, Thou hast abhorred. This word timeas comes from maas in other Scriptures; by the due weighing whereof we may the better understand, and so be the more affected with the dreadful Sufferings of our Lord Jesus, and so love him the more for his being abhorred of the Father, as he was made Sin and a Curse for us, while at the same time he was in his own Person, the Holy, Spotless, Beloved, ●lessed Son of God.   

§. CXXVIII.  
As to this word maas, used in Psal. 89 of Christ; we find it used in Leu. 26.13. God speaking of the reason of his forsaking Israel, saith it is, be-mis●pata i maasu, because they despised my Judgements; so we render it; but Montanus renders it strictly thus, In Juditiis meis reprobaverunt, against my Judgements they had reprobated. The same Reprobation Job makes on himself, when he considered his former Passion, and saith, Job 42.6. Wherefore I abhor myself, yal cen emeas idcirco reprobabo, therefore I reprobate myself. So that in strictness, the Original Text, with Montanus, is, That God did account the Lord Jesus, as one that he had reprobated for a Season, in Psal. 89 38. For saith our Lord, attah zanachta vat-timeas, thou hast cast far away, and thou hast reprobated. And surely Christ Jesus, who felt the Bruises of God, the Pains of Hell that caught hold of him, when our Sins were on him, when he cried, yea, skreemed out upon the Cross, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Surely he could best tell how to express himself, as he did, in that place, Thou hast cast off, and abhorred, or reprobated.   

§. CXXIX.  
So again in Leu. 26.44. God in his infinite Mercy saith of his beloved People Israel, When they are in the Land of their Enemies, I will not abhor them; loa meastem non reprobavi, I will not reprobate them. O wonderful Love and Grace! Though our Lord Jesus said Reprobasti concerning himself, thou hast reprobated me. Yet God saith of his Israel, now in strange Lands, non reprobavi eos, I have not reprobated them. As much as to say, Therefore was our Dear Jesus reprobated, in that Sense, that we his People might not be reprobated for ever: For which, to him be everlasting Praise.   

§. CXXX.  
The same word is in Psal. 78.15 imeas meod be-israel, we render, He greatly abhorred Israel: Montanus, Et reprobavis valde in Israel, which is, And he reprobated exceedingly against Israel. And though our Translators have been very shy, of rendering that word maas for reprobating, yet in Jer. 6.30. there they take the word, as Montanus doth, for Reprobation; in that place the Hebrew is, ceseph nimas karen lafoy hem, which in Montanus is, Argentum reprobatum vocarunt eye; Silver Reprobate they shall call them; and we have it translated so word for word almost, Reprobate Silver shall Men call them; and if nimas is Reprobate here, 'tis the same when our Lord Jesus uses the word of himself, Psal. 89.38. where he calls himself as abhorred of God. Thus we have full Testimony of the high Displeasure of the Father against his beloved Son, as to Manifestation, when he, as our Surety, had our Sins laid on him.   

§. CXXXI.  
But Montanus his Version of maas, which we translate abhorred, being but one Witness for so great a word and thing, and by the Mouth of two Witnesses every Truth being to be confirmed, I therefore, (for the better ascertaining the Sense of that word, which so fully proves the Father's displeasure against Christ) I turned to the word maas, in the Incomparably Learned and Laborious Dr Edmund Castle's Polyglot Lexicon, of the seven Oriental Languages, of which my Dear Kratiste, I am sure, had one given him, to see what Collections he hath made on that word, it being of infinite Consequence, to see, and know, what our Lord Jesus suffered for us; most of which Sufferings being contained in that word maas, abhorred of the Father. This I thought the more worthy of diligent inquiry into, that we, seeing its import, might the more admire and adore the Infinite Love of the Father, so to treat his well beloved, his only begotten Son; and the equally Infinite Love of this blessed Son of God, manifested in his spontaneous free willing, accepting and undergoing that dreadful Punishment from the Hand of his Father for us, so as thereupon to skreem out upon the Cross, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? In turning to which word maas, there I find these renderings following given to it, maas, saith Dr. Castle, upon it signifies Sprevit, Respuit, reprobavit, abjecit, aspernatus, Aversatus est: All dreadful words to be attributed by our Lord Jesus to himself, as he doth that maas, in Psal. 89.38. saying to God, ve-attah timeas, which according to Dr. Castle is, and thou hast reprobated, and thou hast been averse against me, or thou hast spewed me out, or thou hast cast me away. Thus was our Blessed Lord under the Father's Wrath for our Sins, when it pleased the Father to Bruise him, that by his Stripes we might be healed. O was ever Love like this Godlike Love of our Lord, to bear this for us! For which, to him be Honour, Glory and Praise, for ever.   

§. CXXXII.  
Dr. Castle, to confirm the Version of maas to be reprobavit, he hath reprobated, he brings Proofs from Jer. 6.30. Isa. 35 15. Prov. 15.32. Ezek. 21.10, 13. Jer. 14 19 in which last Proof are these words, ha-maos maasta eth Jehudah, which in English is, in reprobating hast thou reprobated Judah; which Montanus renders, Nunquid reprobando reprobasti Jehudah; whether or no, in reprobating, hast thou reprobated Judah; which we translate only thus, Hast thou utterly rejected Judah? By the same Rule, what our Translation of maasta or timeas is, in Psal. 89.38. thou hast abhorred; Montanus renders it, thou hast reprobated thy Christ; which is proof sufficient to show his Father's Wrath, and abhorring of him.  
Dr. Castle goes on to Prov. 3.11. and Isa. 54.6. where is this word, The Lord hath called thee as a Woman forsaken and grieved in Spirit, and a Wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God: The word for when refused, is, ci timeas; which Montanus renders, quia reprobata fuisti, because thou wast reprobated.   

§. CXXXIII.  
O Blessed! thrice blessed word to us poor Gentiles; that when we were reprobated, when we were refused, that then our Lord Jesus should say, Thy Maker is thine Husband; and the Lord hath called thee as a Wife of Youth, when thou hadst been forsaken, and refused or reprobated; and in lieu of it, that he should say of himself to God, as Psal. 89.38. timeas meshi che-cha, thou hast reprobated or abhorred thine anointed one, That we poor Gentiles might become a Wife of Youth, the Lord Jesus stands in our place, as forsaken, as refused, as abhorred of the Lord; or as Montanus and Dr. Castle renders it, the I   

§. CXXXIV.  
A little farther in the Lexicon, the Chaldee word means, the Doctor renders Com●utruit, saetuit, faetor, Putor, Corruptio, faetens, most dreadful words all of them, to be used by our Lord Jesus concerning himself, when under the forsaking of God; and yet all this far short of his being made Sin for us, and a Curse. And if we, at any time, feel any thing of the Sting of Sin in our Consciences, to cry out with Heman, Psal. 88.6. Thou hast laid me in the lowest Pit, in Darkness, in the Deeps. Thy Wrath lieth hard upon me. We may thence think of the dreadful Horror on the Soul of our Lord Jesus, when all the Sins, of all the Elect, were stinging and gashing him, which made him Sweat great Clodders of Blood in a cold Night, upon the approach of that dreadful Hour and Power of Darkness upon him in the Garden, a little before he felt the weight of God's wrathful Indignation (as Mr. Williams calls it) when on the Cross he was made Sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him. O how should we, instead of quarrelling at the Expression, Prize and Adore our blessed Lord Jesus, who willingly underwent the being thus treated by his ever dear and tender Father, for our sakes; so as to be thus stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted; to be thus wounded, bruised and oppressed, and that, by the Pleasure of the Lord, for our Iniquities, for our Transgressions, and for our Sins, Isa. 53. laid on him by the Lord: O adorable Grace to us! in this thus punishing the Son of God for us.   

§. CXXXV.  
Lastly, I must make an Apology for my Dear Kratiste the Rebuker, to clear him of the Load that the Reporter has laid on him, accounting him an Ambidexter, one while for Dr. Crisp, and one while against him; for him, by affixing his Name to the Re-printing the Doctor's Sermons; and in his Argument, to vindicate him in his Preface to Mr. Flavel's Book; and now against him with a Vengeance (treating him as an Apocryphal wild Monster of Nonsense) in his Faithful or Frightful Rebuke, to which, in defence of the Rebuker, I may plead, That when he favoured Dr. C—, it was soon after he had been vindicating Dr. Owen, against the Charge of the Rector of St. George's, for which he had the deserved Applause of many Thousands: But he having lately fallen in with the Neonomian, or New-law Doctrine, from Mr. Williams; or rather lying under some unaccountable Engagements to him, after some severe Reprimands of him, now to the saddening his best Friends, he seems to discard his first Love, which seemed warm, to clear Gospel Free Grace, through the Blood of Jesus, to Justify and Save us; and to take up with Mr. William's his s●me Degrees of our Obedience, in the Matter of our Justification. Hence, let him that stands, take heed lest he fall, by looking to him that is able, and has promised, to settle, strengthen and establish.   

§. CXXXVI.  
Then my Dear Kratiste could own, in terminis, we work from Life, not for Life; but now this he Ranks among the Antinomian Heresies or Heterodoxies, though it is, in itself, a Nonsensical Contradiction, to say, a Man may work, and not do it from Life: Can a dead Man work? And dead we are, till quickened in Christ. Then he could say, in Antisozzo, Page 205. How God might be said to need Sins, to set forth the Persecution of that Blessed Attribute of God, his Sin pardoning Grace, which is as high a piece of Antinomianism, to say, God needs Sins, as any passage in Dr. Crisp's Sermons: But now he can vindicate that Popish Assertion in Mr. Williams, That Glory hath the same Connexion with Good Works, as the Building hath to the Foundation: That is, That our good Works are instead of Christ, who is the Foundation that our Glory is built on.  
Now the Apology I make, is, That then Dr. Owen, the Mirror of the Age for Learning, one honoured by all Christians hereabout, he was living, and it was the way for Antisozzo, then living in an obscure Village, to get a General Acceptation among the most refined Christians about the City, to write consonantly to the Doctor, when traduced as aforesaid. But now Mr. Williams hath, by 49 Vouchers, been set up for the great Champion of the New-Law Doctrine, bringing in our Obedience into our Justification, instead of being Justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus. This might be a Temptation to the Rebuker, to strain his Wit in the vindicating him; by casting Dirt on the Apocryphal Tobias; and thereby he might hope to exalt his own Name. But God hath let most of his Friends, and, I hope, himself too, see how much he has failed, to the Grief of all that love my Dear Kratiste as I do.   

§. CXXXVII.  
Wherefore I beseech the Lord he may seriously apply the Advice of our blessed Lord Jesus, to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, Rev. 2.2. I know (saith he) thy Works, and thy Labour, and for my Names sake thou hast laboured: (Witness Antisozzo, &c) Nevertheless, I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first Love. Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do thy first Works, So let Kratiste do, in putting forth the remainder of your Strength and Parts, in writing against such as called forth your Antisozzo, and not in calling it a Crispian Heresy, to say, A Believer is to work from Life, and not for Life; or a Crispian Heterodoxy, to say, Christ bore the Anomia of Sin; whereas the Scripture saith, He bore our Sins. And if you can separate Anomia from Sin, than it is not Sin; and then according to you, Christ did not bear Sin. But I hope, upon a sedate recollection, my Dear Kratiste will give Glory to God, and own his intemperate and unbecoming Heat against the Reporter, and his Apocryphal Tobias, or rather against the Truth, being under the violent hurry of a Temptation to exalt his Wit and Fancy, whereby he has grievously showed his weakness in trusting too much to his Parts.   

§. CXXXVIII.  
Now that the Lord would please graciously to make some of these Remarks useful, to some serious considering Servants of our blessed Lord Jesus, as they have been refreshing to the Composer, and that we may lay out all our Time and Strength, all our Parts and Estate, That Christ alone may be exalted; That all may honour the Son, as they honour the Father, for which end all Judgement is committed to the Son, and that thereby we may advance the Glory of the Free Grace of God to poor Sinners in Christ, and in him only; Our whole Salvation being of Grace, and not of Works, lest any Man should boast. And that through Faith in Jesus, we may daily, duly, humbly, and yet with holy boldness, wait, with our Loins girt with the girdle of Truth, for our Lord from Heaven in the ●lory of the Father, in his own Glory, and in the Glory of the Holy Angels, and all his Saints with him, is the Prayer of a very unworthy, and yet, in some sense, a happy Branch of him whom my Dear Kratiste hath unmercifully traduced.   

P. S. §. CXXXIX.  
FInding the Controversy maintained, concerning a Change of Persons between Christ and Believers, and Dr. Crisp much reflected on in a Letter, that Mr. Williams hath procured, from the Reverend Bishop of W— in order to justify himself from the Charge of his denying a Change, I cannot well avoid saying a word or two to the said Letter, with great deference to the Author. I commend Mr. Williams for fleeing for Refuge to Men of Name; but all the Names and Men in the World cannot help him in this Case, when he had absolutely denied a Change. Now to be thought to own a Change, unless he first plainly owns his Error in his flat denying a Change, he may not fairly shift it off, that he owned it in a Sense, but disowned it in the Doctor's Sense; when, without any distinction, he said plainly thus, Whether there be a Change, this the Doctor affirms, and I deny. Which is so manifest a denial of a Change in any Sense, as words can in general make it. 'Tis as if I should say, I went into Paul's Church to hear the Organs, and there was not a Man there. I saw a Singing-Boy, and he said, there was a Man there. The Boy affirmed there was a Man there. This the Boy said, and this I deny. Can I help myself, and say, there was a Man in a Surplice, but there was not a Bishop there, or a Doctor there? This is a sorry shift, with an untruth into the bargain, for me to say, there was not a Man there; and then shift it off with, I owned there was a Man in a Surplice there. So Mr. Williams, Whether there be a Change, this the Doctor affirms, and I deny. This, a Change, here must, in all ordinary acceptation of the words, be taken for any Change, without any sort of distinction. This I deny said Mr. Williams. Now to help him over this stile, he troubles the Bishop, whom I honour as a Person of great Worth and Learning, though I cannot admire that sort of Station, of Lord-Bishop, in the Church of the Living God, which very Station might occasion the Treatise of The Mischief of Separation, and produced my Dear Kratiste's Mischief of Imposition, yet I make bold to say, with Thanks to the Bishop, How warily soever he writes, as to clearness in the Point of Commutation, yet he writes with wonderful Modesty, and, in every Tittle, like a Gentleman, not be-heriticking, not bemonstring Dr. Crisp, as the Rebuker hath unaccountably done; but like a Christian Gentleman, and Scholar, saith mildly, This I take to be Dr. Crisp 's Sense of the Change of Persons, not with a ruff-hewen Pen, This is Dr. crisps Dreggy Antinomianism, 

This is his Heterodox Heresy,  
This is his Wild monstrous Sense,  
And this is his Apocryphal Story.     

§. CXL.  
But to the Bishop's Argument; he saith, This I take to be Dr. Crisp 's Sense of the Change of Persons; It is such a Sense as implies an Actual Translation of the Personal Gild of all the Sins of Believers on Christ, and his Personal Righteousness on them. But note, the Doctor mentioned not Personal Gild, nor Actual Translation, but kept himself firm on the Scripture Foundation, of Christ being made Sin for us, and we made the Righteousness of God in him. From whence he infers, If Christ was made Sin for us, he was as sinful as we, that is, by Imputation; and if we are made the Righteousness of God, we are as Righteous as he, that is, as Christ God-Man with his Mediatorial Righteousness wrought out for us, and imputed to us; than which, what can be a more clear Consequence, if we are the Righteousness of God? But to evade this, or to reflect on the Doctor, the Bishop saith, Concerning the Translation of Gild, which results from the Act of Sin committed, if this Gild be translated, Christ must become the very Person who committed the Sins; and so he must be looked on, not only as an Actual Sinner, but as the Person who committed all the Sins of those for whom he died? Which comes near to horrid Blasphemy. This is a strange Inference, for one of the Bishop's Learning. Can not Christ as our Surety, sustaining the Persons of Sinners, stand in their place and stead; and as their Sponsor, pay their Debts, and answer for their Sins laid on him, unless he become the very Person that committed the Sins? This takes away all Suretyship. Surely he may be in the place of David, and bear the Sin of his Murder and Adultery; and it being imputed to him, he may bear it away, and he may be reckoned as, and reputed as, the Murderer, and yet not be the Murderer; or else how could God, in Justice, punish him, and take pleasure to bruise him, as our old Protestant Divines argue all along from Isa. 53?   

§. CXLI.  
Well, what doth the Bishop own then? As far as I can see, not one Tittle of our Sins being by God laid on Christ, or of Christ's bearing our Sins, which is the Life and Soul of the Gospel, and of all Consolation to poor Sinners that flee for refuge to him; but only that Christ underwent the deserved Punishment of our Sins; that is, he was punished for nothing, in a manner: For if he did not bear our Sins, if they were not made his by God's laying them on him, why was he punished? His words are these, A Mediator was accepted so as, upon acceptance of his Sacrifice, the Offenders may be pardoned, and received into the Grace and Favour of God, on such terms as he has declared in the Gospel: And in this Sense (saith the Bishop) the Gild of our Sins was charged on Christ, as our Mediator, who was to bear the Punishment of our Sins. Here's a Sacrifice accepted, but no Sins done away by it. Here Offenders may be pardoned, but 'tis on their complying with the nameless Terms of the Gospel, which, at the bottom, is our sincere Holiness to the end of our Lives: Much like the Papists, Christ merited that our good Works should procure Salvation. Here is likewise the Sense on which the Gild of our Sins was charged on Christ, viz. If the Sinner complies with the Terms of the Gospel, than he may be pardoned and received into the Grace and Favour of God. This is so strange a Sense of the Gild of our Sins charged on Christ, that it is next door to Nonsense, to say, he did bear them 1600 Years ago, if we comply now: For either the Gild was laid on Christ, when he was on the Cross, when he bore our Sins, or it was never laid on him, and never shall be; for he suffered once for all. And if it was then laid on him, than we are not to merit Pardon, Grace and Favour now, by our complying with the Terms of the Gospel now? Which Gospel is taking the Waters of Life freely; but Pardon, Grace and Favour, is all merited by Christ's bearing our Sins, and the Gild, and the Punishment, he being all in all, the alone and complete Saviour, who saves his People from their Sins.   

§. CXLII.  
The Bishop hath by this account of Christ's bearing only the Punishment of our Sins, and the Gild, in a Sense, if we comply with Gospel-Terms, he hath evaded those Glorious Texts of Scripture, that are multiplied in the word of Salvation, that testify that our blessed Lord Jesus bore our very Sins, and carried them away. As for instance in a few: It is said in Isa. 53. he bore our Griefs: Our very Griefs, that were due to us, he bore them. Then 'tis said, he carried our Sorrows. As a Porter carries a Pack, so our Lord Jesus had this burden laid on his Back, and he carried away those very Sorrows that we should have groaned under to all Eternity. Then he was wounded for our Transgression; which could not be in Righteousness, unless he had our Transgression charged on him. Then he was bruised for our Iniquities: Ours by committing of them, but his when bruised for them; or else you make God unjust, to bruise one for the iniquity of another, if that other did not take them on himself. And in the next place, The Chastisement of our Peace was upon him: That Chastisement which effected and wrought out our Peace, without any work of ours, that Chastisement was upon him. Surely none will say now, that Christ bore the Chastisement which procured our Peace, and that God will lay Chastisements on his own Children, for that end, to procure their Peace with God: No, God's Chastisements are for another end, on his People, viz. to make them partakers of his Holiness; but their Peace was made before, when the Chastisement of our Peace was on Christ, which was when he was on the Cross. But how came all this on Christ, that he should bear our Griefs, our Sorrows, our Wounds, our Bruises, and our Chastisements? This he shows in ver. 6. because the Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all. Here, here, is the crowning Point, this dashes to pieces the Head of Leviathan, the Lord himself did this great Work, he caused the Iniquity of us all to meet on Christ; there the Lord fixed it, there the poisonous Dart, of the Iniquity of us all, stuck in the side of the Blessed Jesus, till he cried out, It is finished; and gave up the ghost. Sure here is more than bare Punishment in this great word, The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all. His bearing the Punishment was insisted on over and over before, when it was said, he was smitten, stricken and afflicted, he was wounded, bruised and chastised; but here the Lord brings in the Ground and Reason of all this, how he came to endure all this, the Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all: The word is, Vaihovah hiphgiya, and the Lord made to fall, or fall foul, on him the Iniquity of us all. So that our Iniquity, our very Iniquity, fell foul on Christ, and put him to that Punishment, to those Wounds and Scourges, that crowned him with Thorns, that nailed him to the Cross, that pierced his Side. The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, the Lord did this, I may allude to Saul, who sent Doeg the Edomite to fall foul on Abimelech, the Priest of Nob, Go thou, said Saul, 1 Sam. 22.18. do thou turn, and fall on the Priest. The word is the same as Isa. 53.6. do thou phegay, do thou rush on them. Then Doeg the Edomite, he did iphgay, the same word, he rushed on him, and slew in that day Eighty Five. So our Iniquity, the Lord made that to rush on Christ, and slay him; that was the Doeg, the Edomite, which the great King, the Lord God Almighty, caused to rush on Christ, and slay him. As much as to say, God could not justly punish, wound and bruise, his dearly beloved Son, he could not give him Grief, Sorrow and Stripes, for our Iniquity, unless our ve●y Iniquity was laid on Christ; the Prophet proceeds, because God knew all these Testimonies were not enough to silence the proud quarrelling Nature of Man, against Christ's bearing our very Sins; and saith in ver. 10. It pleased the Lord to bruise him. Jehovah chapetz dacce-o, the Lord took delight in pounding him, as Spice is pounded in a Mortar, or as the Israelites pounded the Manna in a Mortar, Numb. 11.8. it being the same word. Then he shows, why it pleased the Lord thus to pound him; for saith he, Thou shalt make his Soul an Offering for Sin; or thou shalt make his Soul a Gild Offering. Then in ver. 11. he shows what this making his Soul a Gild Offering consisted in, viz. bearing their Iniquities; for he saith expressly, He shall bear their Iniquities, Yavonoth-am hu isbal, their very Iniquities himself he shall bear, or carry, as a Porter carries away a pack. He don't mince the matter, or say with the Bishop, he shall only bear the Punishment due to their Iniquities, and in a Sense the Gild on the Offenders complying, but he saith roundly, He shall bear their Iniquities; that is, those very Iniquities which deserved the Punishment before mentioned. And the Scripture foreseeing what distinctions and evasions would be made, the Holy Ghost to fortify and complete the matter, sums up all in the last Verse, and saith, He poured out his Soul unto death, and he BORE the Sin of many. Here is another word for bearing, and the proper word it is for bearing away, Chete rabbim nasa, the Sin of many he bore. Now put all these together, and can the Wit of Man, or Wisdom of Angels, find out Words more plain and full, more clear and nervous, for Christ's bearing our Sins, our very Sins? The blessed Lord knowing what shifts, wind and turn, would be made to evacuate, to exinanitiate this great Point of Christ's being made Sin, and bearing our Sins, therefore in his Grace and Wisdom, to stop all mouths, he reiterates the Expression and delineates the matter with all the Flowery Varugation, to invite our attention and consent, that can be imagined, and so to obviate the Objections of Men, of corrupt Minds, that cannot endure this sound Doctrine, That Christ bore our very Sins; therefore the Lord saith, The Lo●d laid our Iniquity on him, Hiphgiya b-o yavon; and again, He shall bear their Iniquities, I●ball yavonoth am; and again, His Soul was made a Sin-Offering, and he bore the Sin of many: All full home to the Point. And that which makes it most conspicuous, is God's making Christ Asham, in ver. 10. we render it, When thou shalt make his ●oul an Offering for Sin: But the Bishop knows full well, that Asham. in the Hebrew, is the proper word for Gild. So that the strict rendering that which we make to be, Thou shalt make his Soul an Offering for Sin, which in Hebrew is, Tasim naphsh-o Asham) it is, Thou shalt constitute his Soul Gild, where Gild (we may easily see) is put for Guilt-Offering, but the very words are, Thou shalt constitute his Soul Gild; that is, God himself in laying our Sins, and our Iniquities, and our Transgressions, on his Dear Son, he therein did constitute, or make the Soul of Christ to be Gild, or a Guilt-Offering; which directly answers that direful word of the Apostle, God made him to be Sin for us. And now is all this, by our new sort of Divinity, dwindled to his bearing of Punishment only? Dr. Harris, of the Famous Assembly at Westminster, was very free in this Case, and saith, This would look like Injustice in God, to punish his Son as guilty, if he had not laid on him, or imputed to him, those Sins that deserved that Punishment.   

§. CXLIII.  
There are many other Scriptures, that show plainly that Christ bore the very Sins of the Elect; that's a famous one where God's Name is proclaimed, Exod. 34.6. there he styles himself Jehovah, God Merciful and Gracious, etc. forgiving Iniquity, Transgression and Sin. Here's the Name of the Blessed Jehovah at length; but it is to be noted, the word in the Hebrew, which is by our Translators rendered Forgiving, is nose, which is properly bearing, and so is used at least 100 times in Scripture, and is the same word as is in Isa. 53. last, he Bore the Sin of many 'tis, nasa chete Rabbim. And 'tis to be lamented, that our Translators should not as well translate it so here in Exod. 34. as in Isa. 53.12. so that the plain Name of God is among other glorious Titles, he is, nose yavon, etc. bearing Iniquity, Transgression and Sin, that is, our Lord Jesus, Jehovah, our Righteousness, he is Gracious and Merciful in this, that he hath borne away our Iniquity, Transgression and Sin: Here lies the transcendent ●ender Mercy, and the Riches of God's Grace, that the Lord Jesus hath ●orn, and born away our Iniquity, our very Iniquity; so saith the Blessed God; but this cannot go down in the shallow Reason of poor Man, till God shine with the glorious Light of the Spirit, to convince him, and enable him to believe it, because God faith it. The like Expression we have in Psal. 32 1. Blessed is the Man whose Transgression is forgiven; it is the same word for forgiven, 'tis nesu. O the Blessedness of the Man whose Transgressions are born away, that is, by Christ, who bore the Sin of many; so in Verse 5. I said, I will confess my Transgressions unto thee, and thou forgavest the Iniquity of my Sin; it is in Hebrew, ve attah nasatha yavon chattash-i, and thou hast born away the Iniquity of my Sin. He did not only bear the very Sin, but he bore also the Iniquity of it, all the Iniquity that was in his Sin, in his great and crying Sins, all the Gild and Obliquity in it; God saith of it, that it was borne away, let Man mince it as he pleases, God saith, It is borne away. So in many more Scriptures, nose is translated forgiving, whereas the proper rendering is, it is borne away. As for the proper word for forgive, that we have in 1 Kings 8.30 in Solomon's Prayer, salachta, When thou hearest, forgive; which in the Hebrew is, ve-shamayta ve-salachta; and thou hearest, and do thou forgive. Thus we have plenty of Testimonies in the Old Testament, that the very Sins of God's People were born away.   

§. CXLIV.  
The New Testament concurs in the same way of expressing Christ's taking away our very Sins, as in 1 John 3, 5. The Son of God was manifested to take away our Sins: He not only bare the Punishment, but he bore the very Sins; and he bore them so effectually, as to take them away; and therefore he is called, The Lamb of God, that taketh away the Sin of the World, John 1.29. How could he take them away, if he bore only the Punishment, upon account of the Gild laid on him on the Offenders compliance, whereas the Fault is denied to be laid on him: So that with our New Divinity, he took away Faultless Sin, which in most men's Opinions, must be no Sin at all: But the Scripture is plain, He took away Sin, he appeared to put away Sin, by the Sacrifice of himself, Heb. 9.26. So that to insist on Christ's bearing Punishment for Sin, and not bearing the Sin itself, is not Scripture Dialect; we shall lose the Gospel, and our Christian Religion, if we forsake Scripture Terms, especially in this great Case, of Christ's being made Sin, and bearing our Sin, and taking it quite away, so as never, by God, to be remembered more; for these are his words, their Sins, and their Iniquities, I will remember no more, Heb 9.22. and repeated, for the Confirmation of that which Flesh and Blood cannot receive, in Heb. 10.17. Now can any one imagine, that when our Lord Jesus took away Sin, by his Death and Oblation of himself on the Cross, that he left the Gild, or the Fault behind. This is Nonsense, to take away Faultless Sin, we should be but little the better for the Death of Christ. If he left the Gild or Fault for us to remove by Repentance, or any of our good Works, which at best are so far from helping to wash away the Gild or Fault, that they need to be washed in the Blood of Christ, to take away their own Gild and Fault; and the making one Debt for our Lord Jesus, to satisfy even that of the Fault in our best Works, is a strange way for our clearing ourselves from a former Debt or Fault.   

§. CXLV.  
I would humbly recommend to all that stagger in this Point, but especially to the Dignified Persons of the Church of England, to look again and again into the Sound Fundamental Doctrines of the Church, as they are exemplified in the Homilies, appointed, by several Acts of Parliament, to be read in the Churches, when there is no Sermon; which Acts have never been yet repealed; and I may say, are as necessary in this Degenerate Age, of the evacuating the great Truths of our Religion, as when first made. These Homilies speak home to the Point that the Bishop is upon, of Christ's bearing our Sins; Those Holy Servants of the Lord that composed them, soon after the Nations coming out of the Blind Popish Religion, they say, in the second Sermon of Man's Misery, thus, He (Christ) paid our Ransom to God with his own Blood, and with that he CLEANSED us from our Sin. They don't say he bore the Punishment only, but he by his Blood (shed on the Cross then at that time) he cleansed us from our Sins: How could that be, if our Sins, our very Sins, were not then translated to Christ? as Dr Crisp, from the Scripture, and these Homilies, saith. So that for Mr. Williams, or the Bishop, or any Man, to say, it is near Blasphemy, to say our very Sins were laid on Christ, is to run a Dagger to the Heart of the Doctrine of the Church of England, and to evade plain Scripture, as well as to make Dr Crisp an Antinomian for it; for the Doctor herein runs parallel to the Sound Orthodox Doctrine of the Church, for which, besides the main Bulwark of the Scripture, he hath many Acts of Parliament to back him from the Slanders of the Despisers of the Free Grace of God.   

§. CXLVI.  
I being now perusing these Homilies, and considering how the Reverend Bishop, in his Letter, insists so much on Conditions, required by God of Man, in order to God's Favour, I make bold to make a little Remark, how much the Bishop differs from those Ancient Doctors of the Church, and from himself, if he be true to his Subscription to the Doctrines of the Church. First, let us see what the Bishop saith; then, what the Homilies say. In Page 67, the Bishop saith, I could easily prove, that in all the Transactions between God and Mankind, some Conditions on our side were required in order to his Favour: So it was in the State of Innocency, (a tydy Argument) so it continued after Man's Fall— But I pass over these, and come to the Terms of Salvation, as declared by Christ himself— The main Business of his Preaching, was to put Men upon performing such Conditions as were necessary to their Salvation— Promising Blessedness to the Humble, Merciful, Pure in heart, Matt. 5.3, 4, etc. What do these things mean, if they be not Conditions on our parts, necessary in order to Happiness?— But (God) he still insists on our own endeavours, by striving to enter, &c Do not these note the necessity of the Performance of Conditions on our side? And therefore all Imaginary Notions, of such a Change of Persons as hath no regard to any Act of ours, is wholly repugnant to the main Scope and Design of the Gospel. Thus the Bishop. What is become here of the whole Tenor of the Gospel, we are Saved by Grace, being Justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus, not of Works, lest any boast, this is thrust quite out of doors; for what are these Conditions, and these Acts of ours, but Works, which though called for, and necessary to glorify God by way of Service and Thanks, yet not any way to Justify us, or Save us, For we are Saved by Grace, and not of Works, otherwise Grace is no more Grace. 'Tis for another end, that all our Holiness is called for, to Repent, be Humble, Pure of Heart, and Merciful: 'Tis to magnify God, that hath saved us by Christ: Saints shall be Holy, Humble, Pure of Heart in Heaven: Is that in order to get God's Favour? No; but to serve and glorify God for his Favour; and we are to do the Will of God, as near as we can, on Earth, as it is done in Heaven; not to get Heaven (which Christ alone hath bought for us) but to magnify God for giving himself, Son and Spirit to us; and for giving Heaven, and all Spiritual Blessings, with him, begun in this Life, and perfected above, to make our Works Conditions on our parts, to get Heaven, is to Rob our Lord Jesus of his Crown and Glory, and to set it on the Head of our sorry imperfect Works. But besides the whole Current of the Gospel, that we are saved by Grace, let us see what the Bishop hath signed to, and is dignified by, even the Doctrines of the Church of England, and they are clear for our Interest in Christ, and Salvation, to be all of Grace; they drive us from all Works of our own, and say, in that second Sermon of Man's Misery, No part of our Justification is of ourselves, no part, not the least dram of our Works is to come in for any share in our Justification. And in the next line they say, Our Justification cometh only by Jesus Christ: Here is not the least tittle of our Acts of Obedience insisted on, or Gospel-Conditions, to get Salvation, 'tis only by Christ; all they insist on, is to render Thanks to God for Free Salvation by Christ, as it follows, What Thanks, worthy and sufficient, can we render to him? Let us burst forth with joyful Voice, praising this Lord of Mercy. Then they reiterate our not being able to do any thing of ourselves, wholly to renounce ourselves, and say, very unlike the Bishop's Letter, In ourselves we may not glory, which of ourselves are NOTHING but Sinful; neither may we rejoice in any Works we do. How! nothing but Sinful; and no rejoicing in any Works we do; May we not Joy in performing the Conditions, and doing Acts to obtain God's Favour? No, no; there is no rejoicing in any thing, for we are nothing but Sinful: As for Conditions to get God's Favour, they knew none but Jesus Christ, he was the great Condition, he being the great, only, complete Saviour, the Alpha and Omega, first and last, in our Salvation. This Doctrine would be accounted Rank Antinomianism in Dr. Crisp, a dangerous Error, to take Men off from good Works, to tell them, we are nothing but Sinful, and we may not rejoice in any Works we do. But this is honest, good, sound Orthodox, yea, glorious Doctrine, in the Hearts of those that have tasted of Salvation by Free Grace; and is established, as I said, and need say again, over and over, by Parliament, and subscribed to by all the Bishops and Ministers of the Church of England, and that which, I conceive, they are bound still to read in their Parishes, when there is no Sermon, which is much neglected: And hence it is, that Men warp from their own avowed Doctrines, which they get their Living by: Which Neglect, the Governors of the Church would do well to see rectified, or rather His Majesty in Parliament, for the Defection from the true Doctrine of the Gospel is great. For which plain dealing, need I beg the Bishop's Pardon.   

§. CXLVII.  
They proceed to evacuate our doing good Works, in order to get Salvation by them, and say farther, When we were perished, he saved us: And all these heavenly Treasures are given us, not for our Deserts, or good Deeds, which of ourselves we have none (mark that we have none) but of his mere Mercy freely. Where do they leave room for Conditions, to make us meet for an Interest in Christ? Not a tittle of that; 'tis (they say) of mere Mercy freely. They proceed and say, If all this be freely, for whose sake is it? and answer roundly, Truly for Christ's sake; for whose sake God is ('tis already done, God is) fully satisfied, pacified, and set at one with Man; He is the Lamb of God, that taketh away the Sins of the World. They aver, that God is now already pacified with Man; nay, and set at one with Man: They also scruple not to say, That Christ took away our very Sins; and enforce it from that excellent Scripture, With that one Oblation he hath made perfect, for evermore, them that are Sanctified. And this excellent Sermon they conclude a passage, which is for the great abasing of Man, to take him off from trusting to his complying with the Terms of the Gospel, or expecting to get God's Favour, as the Bishop doth, by any thing that we can do. Thus they conclude, which I recommend to all that set up for doing so, as to expect acceptance with God for it, Let us learn to know ourselves (say they) without any cracking, and confess, that as of ourselves cometh all Evil and Damnation, so likewise of him cometh all Goodness and Salvation. This must sound harsh in our new Neonomian Divinity, nay, with some that pretend to go much nearer the Gospel strain, That nothing but Evil, nothing but Damnation, comes of ourselves: What is our Prayers, Tears, Alms, Fasting, nothing but Evil, nothing but Damnation? Sure you great and good Reformers, you mistake. No, we are sure we are in the right: We don't say, you must not do good Works; no, not for a World: But we say, all our best Righteousness, in point of Justification, or acceptance with God, as it is of ourselves, as it is defiled and tainted by our corrupt Natures, so it is nothing but Evil, and so it is nothing but Damning. Now we see (may our Modern Opposers of free Justification by Christ alone, without any Works or Conditions of ours, say) how you have tainted Dr. Crisp; we see 'tis you have helped him to be such an Antinomian, by putting such a slur on good Works, on our best Deeds, as to say, from us comes all Evil and Damnation, and nothing but Sinful. No, say they, if any have taught him, 'tis the same that taught us, and that is the Word of God, which saith, all our Righteousness is as filthy Rags. Nay, we learned it from the Apostle, who said, after his Conversion, his Righteousness was Dung. This we learned also from the Church of God of old, when she was in a sad pickle to gain God's Favour for an Interest in Christ, in Ezek. 16. When thou wast in thy blood, I said to thee, Live: That was the time of Love. Thus we see God sees not as Man sees; that which to Man would have been a time of Loathing, to God was a time of Love. The like case we have in the Apostle Paul, what good Deeds did God insist on with him (as the Bishop pleads) that he might gain God's Favour, when he was breathing out Blood and Slaughter against Christ in his Members, than it was our Blessed Lord Jesus made it a time of his Love: For which, to him be Honour and Glory in the Churches, for ever and ever.   

§. CXLVIII.  
But the Bishop insists on it, that it is but an Imaginary Change, because (saith he) it is not proved, that Christ is that Sinfulness that we were, by his being made Sin, and we are the same Righteousness as he is, we being made the Righteousness of God in him, the Bishop saith, Here is a Change supposed, but I do not find it proved. What, not proved, when it is backed with plain Scripture, That he was made Sin for us, and we made the Righteousness of God. Doth not this of necessity prove a Change? Can Christ possibly be made Sin for us, without taking on him our Persons? Would you have it, That Christ was made Sin for himself? That would be horrid Blasphemy: But to be made Sin for us, must infer, That he did truly bear, or sustain, our Persons, which is the Change argued for: Or if not, than he did not bear our Sins. And if so, What's become of the Gospel, and our eternal Salvation? For if Christ did not bear our sins, as our Surety and Representative, as our Head, and sustaining our Persons; then we are yet in our Sins, and there remains no more Sacrifice for sins; so we must die in our sins, and Christ died in vain, but Absit: So on the other hand, We are made the Righteousness of God, that is, of God-Man Jesus Christ: Is not here a Change of Persons? we Righteous in the Person of Christ, or in Christ, having his Righteousness put upon us, imputed to us by God, which is not an Imaginary, but a real Imputation, and putting it upon our Persons; the Righteousness of God being unto and upon all that believe, Rom. 3.22. And so we the blessed Ones, to whom the Lord imputes Righteousness without Works, or any Acts of ours, to get into God's Favour, Psal. 32.1. though this is strenuously argued against by the Bishop.   

§. CXLIX.  
The Bishop saith, This is no ground to build our Faith on, viz. This Change of Persons, that Christ was made Sin for us, and we the Righteousness of God in him. I say, God help us, if this be not good firm rocky Ground to build our Faith on, I am sure other Foundation can no Man nor Church lay, than Jesus Christ the Lord our Righteousness, to build on; That he was made Sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him; and that we might receive thereby, the Blessings of Abraham. from him, that in his Seed, which is Christ, all the Families of the Earth might be blessed with Believing Abraham.   

§. CL.  
I might refer the Bishop again to the Doctrines of the Church; (whereof he is an Honourable Presider), which, in this Case, run very clear Streams from the Fountain of Israel; and they (as I quoted before, out of the first part of the Sermon of Salvation) are wonderful clear, for such a Change as the Doctor affirms, and Mr. Williams denies, saying, So that Christ is now the Righteousness of all them that truly do believe in him. He for them paid their Ransom by his Death, he for them fulfilled the Law in his Life; so that now IN HIM, and BY HIM, every true Christian Man may be called a fulfiller of the Law. This Golden Sentence, which might be for an Ornament in Gold Letters, in every House in England, doth fully vindicate, to a Tittle, Dr. Crisp's Change of Persons, Christ himself is their Righteousness, he paid Ransom for them, they were fulfillers of the Law in him, and by him. What can be more full to the Point? I hope the Bishop will not charge these great Men, the Composers of this Sermon, as he has done the Doctor, with an imaginary unproved Change.   

§. CLI.  
One word more to the Bishop's Argument, to prove that it is but an imaginary Notion, to think that we are completely Righteous, by the Righteousness of Christ, without any act of ours; which Argument of his is in these words, I could easily prove, that in all the Transactions between God and Mankind, some Conditions were required on our side, in order to his favour: So it was in the State of Innocency, so it continued after Man's Fall; as it appears by those words of God to Cain, If thou dost well, shalt thou not be accepted; if thou dost not well, Sin lieth at the door? Gen. 4.7. 'Tis strange so great a Man should offer so weak an Argument, to argue from a state of Innocency, or from the state of Reprobate Cain, or from the Covenant of Works, what belongs to the Elect under the Covenant of Grace, and under the Gospel, where Works and Grace are made opposite Terms; If of Works, than no more of Grace, saith the Apostle. Was not Abel first accepted, and then his Offering? Is not the first Promise all of Grace, He (Christ) shall bruise thine (the Devil's) Head? And is not the last Promise the like, Whoever will, let him take of the Water of Life freely? But by the Bishop's Doctrine, a clever way is made to overthrow the whole Gospel, To you is born a Saviour, and to subvert the Orthodox Doctrine of the Church of England at once, by bringing from the Dead the Covenant of Works, to be saved by our doing well, and not by Christ's doing and dying for us: Whereas Abel's Sacrifice was accepted, he himself being first accepted, and his Sacrifice being offered in Faith; but Cain and his Sacrifice rejected, being not offered in Faith, not looking to Jesus alone for Salvation by him. The Bishop seems to run counter diametrically against the Apostle, who argues strenuously, Not of Works (of no sort, kind or degree,) lest any boast; and by the Deeds of the Law shall no Flesh he justified: He sums it up in Eph. 2. By Grace ye are saved, through Faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the Gift of God: Not of Works, lest any boast: And Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness, to every one that believeth. Thus the Scripture is plain against this Argument of the Bishop, That our performing of Conditions, must be in order to gain God's Favour.   

§. CLII  
Then for the Doctrine of the Church, see what that saith of Conditions, or of any Works of ours, to gain God's Favour. In the second Sermon of Salvation, the good Christians of those days, that were singed by the Popish Fires in Queen Mary's days, they tell us, So that the true understanding this Doctrine, That we be justified by Faith freely without Works, or that we be justified by Faith in Christ only, is not that this our own Act, to believe in Christ, or this our Faith in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us. A Sentence fit to be engraven in every Church in England, in order to take Men from trusting to their Repentance, or good Works. The like again is in the same Sermon, as followeth, We must renounce the Merit of Faith, Hope, Charity, and all other Virtues and good Deeds— And we must trust only in God's Mercy, and that Sacrifice, which our High Priest and Saviour, Christ Jesus, once offered— As great, and as goodly, a Virtue as lively Faith is, yet it putteth us from itself, and remitteth, and appointeth us unto Christ, for to have only by him Remission of our Sins. Observe these Eminent Stars, of the first Magnitude, in the Heaven of that Church of Old, they are so far from bringing in our Repentance, Charity and good Deeds, or any act of ours, to obtain Favour with God, which the Bishop pleads for, that they exclude Faith itself, as having any hand in justifying us, any farther than as it remitteth us to Christ. But alas! how is our Gold become Dross? How are our great Men fallen from the Pure, Primitive Doctrines of the Church of England? And though they live splendidly, by subscribing to these Doctrines, yet in their Preaching and Writing they miserably warp (as here in part) from them. Witness the setting up some Acts of ours to be done, in order to obtain God's Favour. And because God treated with Adam, on account of Do and live, therefore 'tis supposed monstrously, that Men, when dead in Sins, must work for Life; or as the Bishop, The Ministry of Reconciliation in St. Paul, is wholly founded on Conditions on our side, which he calls Acts of ours, and may as well be called our good Works: And all this because the Apostle prayed them to be reconciled to God, which cannot well be construed to be more, than to pray them to accept the Reconciliation which God had made of Sinners to himself, by Christ at his Death: For if, as the Apostle saith, God was in Christ, reconciling the World to himself, than the Work was done when Christ cried out on the Cross, It is finished. And if the word of Reconciliation was committed to the Apostles, to publish to the World the Reconciliation that God had made of Sinners to himself by Christ, what could his Ambassadors mean, in praying Sinners to be reconciled to God, but to accept of what he had mentioned before, of the act done long before, viz. That God had reconciled Sinners to himself by Christ; and to let them know, that they were some of the reconciled ones, if they would accept thereof, and take these Waters of Life freely, and so accept the Exhortation, as Titus did, 2 Cor. 8.17.   

§. CLIII.  
O! how sad is it to eclipse the glorious Gospel Truth, That our Sins were laid by God on Christ, as the Doctor insists on it, while the Bishop is pleased to load it with such very bad Consequences, as might deter the weak and unconsidering from believing the plainest Positions in the Scripture, viz. That the Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, and he bore the Sin of many, by the Bishop's saying, This makes us apt to lessen the Divine Perfections, and our just sense of the difference of Good and Evil, and our Obligations to all sorts of Duties. Cujus contrarium, Nothing more contrary: For what can honour more the Glory of God's Holiness, and the Infiniteness of his Grace and Goodness, than his sending his own Eternal Son to undergo that horrid Task, by his own consent, of bearing our Sins, that we might be free? And what greater Argument, of the difference of Good and Evil, than Christ's suffering so great an Evil, as the bearing our Sins, that we might have so great a Good as Reconciliation to God, Pardon and Eternal Salvation, thereby? And what greater spur, to all the Duties of Holiness, than our being delivered from all our Enemies, Sin, Death and Hell, by the precious Blood of his Dear Son? O! what an engagement is this to serve him, without fear, all the days of our Lives? And this Love of God in Christ, being shed abroad in our Hearts, will constrain us so to do, much more than all the thundering Terrors of the Law, which only work Condemnation. But this Grace of God bringing Salvation, this teaches effectually to deny ungodliness, and to live righteously, etc. Therefore I humbly conceive the Bishop is out, in saying, It makes us apt to lessen the Divine Perfections; whereas all the Torments in Hell, of all final Unbelievers to all Eternity, cannot so heighten and glorify the Justice and Holiness of God, as our Lord Jesus shedding his precious Blood, which is called the Blood of God, doth heighten and glorify both his Holiness and his Grace, to all that believe in this Lord Jesus, and accept of him, and this way of Salvation by him, and him alone.   

§. CLIU  
But the frightful Charge against Dr. Crisp, is, That this Change of Persons makes Christ the Sinner; then Christ is the Murderer, and the Adulterer, not David. I answer, Can not Christ bear the Sin, and be the reputed Criminal, without his being really, and personally, the Sinner? What more common, among Men, than for a Surety to bear the burden of that Debt which he never contracted a penny of, yet lies in Goal for the whole, and before he comes out pays the whole? So our Lord Jesus, standing in our place, paid the whole, as the voluntary Surety in our stead, and yet was no more the Murderer, than David was the Christ: But he took David's Person on him, and put himself on David to be his Righteousness, as David sweetly sings, O God my Righteousness, Psal. 4.1. But the great Jealousy is, That Men think, if Christ did really bear the Sins of the Elect, the very Murder and Adultery of David, etc. that this did defile and taint the Holy Nature of Jesus Christ; and so they would infer, that the Free Grace Teachers would be saved by a defiled, polluted Saviour: Whereas there is nothing more inconsistent; for there is none that believes the infinite, incomprehensible Holiness and Purity of our Lord Jesus, Holy with all the perfection of Holiness, as God his Eternal Father is Holy, but must conclude, it is impossible that his Holy Nature should be tainted or polluted by the Sins of the Elect, charged upon him, and lying upon him; for if instead of bearing the Sins only of all that the Father had given to him, he being God-Man, he had born the Sins of Ten Thousand Worlds full of Sinners, they could not have defiled his Holy Nature, there being an infinite disproportion between his infinite Holiness, and Man's finite Sins; so that they could no more defile him, than a Viper's, or a Toad's, spitting Poison against the Sun can defile the Sun: Therefore I say with boldness, If we believe our Lord Jesus to be true God, and consider the infinite Purity of this Holy God, our Lord Jesus Christ, in our Humane Nature, we cannot conceive that this Humane Nature could possibly be tainted or contaminated by his being made Sin for us, and by bearing our Sin; for the same Scripture that saith, God made him to be Sin for us, saith also, He knew no Sin; that is, so as to be in his Holy Person guilty of any Sin of his own, or to allow of any Sin to go unpunished.   

§. CLV.  
It would do well for all that stumble at our Sins, our very Sins being by God laid on Christ, and he, as our Surety, made Sin for us; and that think, that this will lessen the Divine Perfections, and our Sense, of the difference of Good and Evil; to consider that our Lord Jesus is called by the same Name as the Sacrifices of old were called, that had the Sins of the People laid on them, they were called Sin, so is our Lord Jesus. Nay, he compares himself to the Serpent; Was the Serpent cursed beyond all the Beasts of the Field? Christ is said to be made a Curse for us: Did the Brazen Serpent lifted up, heal all that looked to it, of their Stings of the Fiery Serpents? So saith our Lord Jesus, As the Serpent was lifted up, shall the Son of Man be, That whosoever believeth in him, (that being taken for looking to him and being Saved) he shall not perish, but have everlasting Life. Can any sober Christian think, that God himself would lessen the Divine Perfections of his Nature, or of his Son Jesus who is one with himself? Whom he charges all Men to Honour, as they Honour the Father, by his giving up his Son to Death for us all; and by putting our Sins on him, and giving the Name of Sin; and comparing him to the Serpent for being a Curse. We should rather, from hence, learn the Infinite Love of the Father and the Son, and his Infinite Hatred of Sin; insomuch as nothing could expiate it, or take out the Stain of it from us, but the Blood of him that was God.   

§. CLVI.  
And because our whole Concern, to all Eternity, depends on God's making Christ to be Sin for us, and thereby glorifying the Divine Perfections of his Wisdom, Holiness and Goodness, not lessening them (as is intimated.) I think it may, to some, be useful, to give an Instance or two of the Sacrifices, that had the Sins of the People laid on them, how they, as Types of Christ, were called Sin, they are in near 100 places called Sin and Gild, and yet at the same time they were called Most Holy; as in Leu. 6.17. it is said of the Meat-offering, It is most Holy as the Sin-offering and the Trespass-offering; and more plainly in v. 25. This is the Law of the sin-offering, it shall be killed before the Lord: It is most Holy. Nay, so Holy it was, that in Verse 27. it is said, Whosoever shall touch the flesh thereof, shall be holy. Now though these were so Holy, yet it is to be observed, that in both these places, the 17th and 25th Verses, that the word which we translate Sin-offering, is in the Original only Sin, the word being Chattath: So that when the People's Sins were laid, by God's appointment, on the Beast, than the Beast was, by God, called the Sin, as Christ was called Sin, or made, by God, Sin for us, by our Sins being laid on him; and yet notwithstanding that, the Goat had the Sins of the People laid on him, and therefore called Sin; yet at the same time it is most Holy, or Holiness of Holinesses, Kodesh Kadashim: In answer to which, when God made Christ to be Sin, he saith of him, That he knew no Sin, he being most Holy, Holiness of Holinesses, untainted, undefiled with our Sins; he was at the same time the Lamb of God, without Spot in himself, and need there was for it, for if he had not been Holy to the Extremity of Holiness, in his own Nature and Person, he had not been fit to be made a Sin offering for us: If he had had the least speck of Sin in him, or could have been tainted with our Sin, he had not then been a meet Sacrifice to take away our sin; Though he was made sin, yet it was our sin, he was made sin for us: Was the poor Beast made sin in itself, or for itself, when the sins of the People were laid typically on it? No sure; for if it were, the Scape-goat could not have been led into the Wilderness, but the sin would have sunk it down dead immediately: The sin it was made, was the People's sin, as the sin Christ was made, was our sin.   

§. CLVII.  
This may possibly be the better understood, and the more readily assented to, by seriously considering the Infinite Perfection of the Holy Nature of the Blessed Son of God, which was and is the same in the Man Christ Jesus, as in the Godhead of the Father; he and the Father being one in Essence, and in all the glorious Perfections of the Godhead. This Consideration may, by the Operation of the Holy Spirit, reconcile our Thoughts to this Truth, That though Christ was made Sin for us, and a Curse for us, by having our Sins laid on him, and by his hanging on the Tree for us, yet his Holy Immaculate Person was not in the least tainted or defiled thereby; nay, God so ordered it, that his holy Flesh, when dead, should not see the least Corruption. This appears clear, because the Infinite Holiness of the Godhead, in the Man Christ Jesus, was of such Infinite Perfection in him, that the Sins of Men falling on him, they being but Finite, must of necessity be evacuated, exinanitiated, expiated and purged away by Infinite Perfection. As a little for Illustration, Suppose a small drop of Water, out of a Smith's Trough, should fall on a glowing red-hot large piece of Iron, Can this defile or hurt the Iron? No; 'tis immediately evaporated in Smoak. 'Tis true, the Humanity of our Lord Jesus, might be, and was, affected with our sins, so as to cry out, My Soul is troubled, but he was not in the least infected with them, his Humanity being made perfectly Holy, by Union and Oneness with the Divine Nature in an ineffable manner (at his very first Conception, his Humane Nature being called that holy thing Luke 1.35.) so that he was untainted by our sins being laid on him, which he purged away by the offering up of himself in the Fire of God's Wrath upon him for sin.   

§. CLVIII.  
We will suppose again, That all the Gold in the World should be put into a vast Cauldron, and Ten hundred thousand load of Charcoal under it, and about it, melting the Gold; and while this vast Fire is glowing with an unconceivable heat, the Refiner should cast a small drop of Poison into the Furnace where this boiling Gold is, Would not this drop of Poison be consumed at its first falling into the Furnace, without defiling the Gold? So the sins of the Elect, though they deserve Hell Fire to all Eternity on the guilty Sinners, yet these sins, when laid on the Person of God-Man Jesus Christ, who hath infinitely more Holiness than our sins have of Deliquity or Malignity in them: When these sins were laid on our Lord Jesus, they could no more taint our Lord Jesus, than the drop of Poison could taint all the Gold in the Furnace. Wherefore it is said by the Holy Spirit, when he is giving an account of the glorious Perfection of the Divine Nature of Christ, in Heb. 1.3. calling him the Brightness (the Effulgency) of the Father's Glory, the express Image of his Person, the Upholder of all things by the Word of his Power: The very first, and next, effect of all this glorious Excellency in the Person of Christ is, when he had by himself purged our Sins: As much as to say, this great Character that is here given to Jesus Christ, which mortifies the Socinians, is given for this very purpose, to show us, how he, by himself, by his own glorious Perfection, as the Brightness of the Father's Glory, when our sins were laid on him, he by himself, without any assistance or Cooperation of us, or any Man or Angel, he by himself, saith the Holy Ghost, purged our sins, he made a perfect Expiation of them, the glowing Holiness of the Divine Nature purged them clear away, so as never to be remembered more; and that without any taint to himself, that being impossible, he being the brightness of the Father's Glory, so pure and Holy is our blessed Lord God, the Lord Jesus Christ God blessed for ever, to whom be glory for ever.   

§. CLIX  
By this I hope we may see, that the Consideration of the most adorable Holiness in our Lord Jesus, may reconcile us to such Passages as we find in the Scripture, of his bearing our sins, and his being made Sin and a Curse for us, without any ground of charging it with such bad Consequences as the Bishop intimates, That this tends to lessen our Reverence of the Divine Perfections, whereas nothing can heighten our Reverence more: for this shows, that his Divine Perfections were so Infinite, that by bearing our Sins in his Body on the Tree, and by offering himself, with our Sins on him, a Sacrifice to God for Sin, he thereby expiated and purged all the Sins of all the Elect; one of which, by reason of the infinitely Holy Nature and Law of God, would have sunk all the Angels in Heaven to Hell, if by God laid on them: Therefore, instead of diminishing our Esteem of the Divine Perfections, because Christ hath borne away our Sins for ever, freely, without any Conditions or Works of ours to induce him: Let us, by all means, endeavour to magnify them; and for the Riches of the Grace of God, and our Lord Jesus therein, Let us fall down and adore him that sits on the Throne, and the Lamb in the midst of the Throne, for that he, of his free Grace, hath loved us, and washed us from our Sins in his Blood; and sing with the four Beasts, and 24 Elders, with the People in the four parts of the World, and with the Ministers of our Lord Jesus, Thou art worthy, for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy Blood (without one word of Condition, but) with thy Blood, thy Blood, thy Blood. And let us say as that Number did, which was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, with a loud Voice, with highest Acclamations, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive Power, Riches, Wisdom, Strength, Honour, Glory, Blessing: And every Creature on the Earth, under the Earth, and in the Sea, heard I, saying, (saith St. John) Blessing, Honour, Glory and Power, be unto him that sits on the Throne, and the Lamb for ever. And the same saith he that begs Pardon of God for his Failings herein, and all other his Sins and Unworthinesses, and of any Person that thinks he is not candidly dealt with herein; with Thanks to the Bishop for his genteel treating the Root and Stock of the happy, though unworthy Branch of Dr. Crisp.  
July 23. 1698. Hananiel, Philalethes.   
FINIS.   

Heads handled in this DISCOURSE.  

A.  

ANtisozzo, for all to strive for the Truth §. 1  
— That many Clergymen are against their Doctrine §. 98  
— For a possibility of all to be saved §. 33  
— Antinomian li●e Dr. Crisp in §. 107, 108  
Altum Silentium of the Reprimand of William's §. 13  
Antinomianism called Heresies, Socinianism but Errors §. 19  
The Anomía of Sin Christ did not bear, saith the Rebuker §. 23  
Actual Remission at Christ's Death, Dr. Twiss §. 25  
Awake O Sword, shows Christ a reputed Sinner §. 24  
We apprehend that for which we are apprehended §. 26  
The Ass and Ox, of Works and Faith, not draw together §. 26  
Arminianism that our Faith, as a Work, justifies §. 28  
Atonement at Christ's Death, Pemble §. 29  
The Assembly say, the Debt paid at Christ's Death §. 31  
Actual Pardon before we had a Being, Pemble §. 32  
Adam's Sin we sinned not, said the Rebuker §. 33  
The Assembly say, only the Elect saved §. 33 & 72  
Abounding Sin makes Grace abound §. 38  
Angels Life differs from Saints §. 43  
Accursed to say, God allows Sin in his Law §. 50  
Allen, the Stage-player, the Devil appeared to §. 59  
Agars Humility condemns the Rebuker §. 74  
Apocryphal he calls the Change of Persons §. 75  
How his Antinomians call Christ a Sinner §. 77  
Adult and Infants saved the same way §. 81  
Accursed that brings another Gospel §. 83  
Apocryphal Tobias brought in §. 91  
Abhorred of God how Christ was §. 89, 104, 130, 131  
Apology for Mr. A— as if Ambidexter §. 135  
Abel first accepted, than his Offering §. 151  
Christ affected, not infected, by being made Sin §. 157    

B.  

The Bible called for again by the Rebuker §. 4  
Dr. Bates to Mr. Cole about Dr. Crisp §. 17  
Branches in Christ before Fruit §. 26  
'Tis betraying the Gospel, to deny Christ's being Sin for us §. 67  
Bald Head they called Elisha, and what followed §. 68  
Buried with Christ shows he sustained us §. 72  
Brainless Brains to set up a Law that allows sin §. 78  
The Barrier of the Rebuker §. 80  
The Blood of Christ the only Coin in Heaven §. 83  
The Bishop of Worcester's Modesty §. 139  
— His way of Christ's bearing Sin §. 140  
— His evading plain Scripture §. 142  
— His Arguments for Conditions §. 146 & 151  
Blood, Blood, Blood redeemed us §. 159    

C.  

Crispian Heresies and Heterodoxies §. 1 & 17  
Of the Change of Persons §. 6, 7 & 9  
Dr. Crisp's Works broke not the Union §. 10  
Mr. Cole's Character of Dr. Crisp's Works §. 17  
Dr. Chancy showed unfairness in Mr. William's §. 11  
Crimes charged on Mr. W— owned by Mr. A— §. 14  
Christ first receives us, and then gives Faith §. 22  
No Curse on Christ if he bore not the Fault §. 23  
The Call of Christ makes Sinners Saints §. 27  
No Change in God's Eternal Love, Pemble §. 39  
convictions before Faith to be Sin is called Heresy §. 40  
Coalescing into Christ another of their Heresies §. 46  
Christ and Believers one Mystical Person §. 46  
Christ made Sin, the ground of Charge of Antinomianism §. 53  
Calvin how Christ a Sinner §. 54  
Dr. crisps monstrous Sense cleared §. 55  
— He denies his Redeemer, saith the Rebuker §. 55  
The Church called Christ §. 66  
Commutation of Persons our Basis §. 69  
Coal spit in the Devil's Face at his Death §. 70  
Dr. Chancy proves a Change of Persons §. 73  
Christ could not sin §. 77  
Challenging all the World a Boldness §. 74  
In our Credenda to speak in the Person of Christ, as Paul §. 75, 76  
The Cassandrian way hath its Ten Thousands §. 79  
Coheirs and co-body with Christ §. 90  
Canonical Daniel and Tobias §. 91  
The Clergies subscribing what they recant §. 98  
Calvin that Christ bare Wrath and took our Person §. 102  
The Climax in Mr. A— Charge against Mr. Job §. 109  
Cannibals to write against Mr. Williams, saith the Rebuker §. 109  
Cham discovered Nakedness, so the Rebuker §. 113  
To contend for the Faith §. 110, 120  
Dr. Castle's Poliglot for maas abhorring §. 131  
The Chaldee meaus abhorred §. 131  
Christ cleansed us at his Death, the Homilies §. 145  
The Change a ground for Faith against the Bishop §. 149  
The Change proved from the Homilies §. 150  
Conditions argued for by the Bishop, and against by Homilies §. 151, 152    

D.  

The Elect Christ's Delight from Eternity §. 18  
Dead Sinners quickened by Christ §. 26  
The Dog Believers Faith, even when a Dog §. 27  
Christ's Death discharged our Debt, the Assembly §. 31  
The Spirit in form of a Dove no degradation to him §. 45  
No denying Christ Dr. crisps Change §. 55  
To deny Sin laid on Christ is to deny Christ §. 67  
David's slaying Goliath the Rebuker §. 72  
Degraders of God and Christ Socinians and Neonomians are §. 78  
The day of the Lord coming §. 79  
Millions made to be damned answered §. 80  
Damnati antequam nati, Austin §. 80  
Debt and Debtor not to be insisted on, saith Mr. A— §. 82  
Degrees of Obedience in being pardoned, Mr. William's §. 88  
The displeasure of God on Christ for Sin §. 102, 104  
The Rebuker not delirious, as is charged §. 124  
The dangerous Passage in Dr. Crisp what, and cleared §. 126  
Christ not defiled by our Sins explained §. 154  
A Drop of Poison not defile a Tun of melted Gold §. 158    

E.  

Epithets of Mr. Williams on Mr. Cole, etc. §. 11  
Exinanition called by Mr. William's Exaninition §. 12, 145  
Everlasting Love a sort of Justification §. 18  
Enemies reconciled by Christ's Death §. 27  
The Elect only saved, say the Assembly §. 33  
Elisha mocked at, so Dr. Crisp by the Rebuker §. 68  
Rotten Eggs of Mr. Williams' laying §. 98    

F.  

Faith not a Condition, but hand to receive Pardon §. 22  
Faith not before we have Christ, Pemble §. 32  
Faith necessary, but not to uncrown Christ §. 34  
What is not of Faith is sin §. 40  
Faith indispensably necessary §. 81  
Faith saith, I don't take away sin, the Homilies §. 88  
Faith sends to Christ only, the Homilies §. 152, 88  
Faultless sin is what Christ bore, with Mr. Williams, etc. §. 23  
Forgiveness before Faith, Twiss §. 25  
Freely justified by his Grace, not ours §. 28  
Foederal Union of Infants §. 47  
Faulty Obedience allowed by God's Law, Mr. William's §. 50  
Facile Representations, Christ's sufferings, William Penn §. 61  
Found in Christ shows a Commutation §. 72  
No Foundation but Christ §. 79  
We fulfilled the Law in Christ, the Homilies §. 85  
Fellow heirs with Christ, and fellow-body §. 90  
Of God's forsaking Christ §. 104  
Firebrands cast against Freegrace §. 105  
The Fault of Sin on Christ, or we bear it §. 106  
The Froth of Kratiste in his Rebuke §. 112  
His Falsity in saying, No more subscribed to §. 118    

G.  

Grapes not of the Rebuker's Thorns §. 2  
Gospel-Truth of Mr. William's embellished §. 11  
Life the Gift of God than not worked for §. 36  
Dr. Goodwin refused by the Rebuker, for saying the Spirit himself is in Believers §. 71  
Grasping all Councils by the Rebuker §. 74  
Gratis dictum non gratiose, to say, Dr. Crisp against Repentance §. 93  
The Gigantic Sophister §. 117  
The Gild of Sin how Christ bore it, Bishop of Worcester §. 141  
Golden Sentences in the Homilies §. 152  
Gold not tainted by Poison, nor Christ by Sin §. 158  
The Glowing holiness of Christ purged our Sin §. 158    

H.  

Dr. Harris of Christ's sustaining us §. 9  
Crispian Heterodoxies, Cole, etc. dipped in §. 17  
Mr. How said, If the Doctor be an Antinomian, so am I §. 17  
In what Men called Heresy, so Paul worshipped §. 26  
No Hurt of a Believer by Sin is called Heresy §. 38  
Holiness imperfect is Sin §. 41  
Hilary withstood a World, so Mr. Cole, etc. §. 72  
The Homilies against the Rebuker, and made Law §. 72, 86, 145, 146, 147  
The Homilies Antinomian as Dr. Crisp §. 147  
The Homilies Golden Sentences §. 152  
Horrid Opinions charged by the Rebuker on Mr. Cole, etc. §. 105  
Hard Speeches Christ will convince of §. 114  
Heman's Groans under Sin little to Christ §. 134  
To Honour the Son as the Father §. 155  
The Holiness of Christ purged our Sins §. 158    

J.  

Justified before called, is Heterodox they say §. 17  
Judgements for Scorners §. 17  
Justified in God's sight before called §. 18  
He Justifies the  §. 27  
— freely by his Grace §. 28  
— at Christ's Death, Pemble §. 30  
Justification, where settled before now §. 71  
— slid off from by the Rebuker §. 99  
— not by Faith, as our Act Homilies §. 152  
Injustice to punish Christ, if very Sin not on him §. 23  
Faith an Instrument of Justification §. 30  
The Ineffable Life of Christ in Saints §. 43  
The Incarnation of Christ, how no Humiliation §. 45  
Our Imperfect Obedience makes not accepted §. 49  
Imputation of Sin made Christ a Curse §. 54  
Judgement on Mockers of Elisha §. 68  
Jakin and Boaz Commutation is §. 70  
Jestingly to speak of Christ, forfeit 10 l. §. 89  
Ismael's hand against all, so the Rebuker §. 96  
Indignation of the Rebuker against Mr. Cole §. 105  
The Insult of the Rebuker against Mr. Cole §. 113  
Ismael's mocking like the Rebuker §. 114  
The Joab like Stab §. 114  
The Idem of the Law Christ suffered, denied by Mr. William's §. 120  
The Imaginary Change of the Bishop §. 148, 151  
No Infection to Christ by our Sin §. 157    

K.  

Kratiste Theophile, the Rebuker called §. 19  
Kicking against Pricks, to deny Christ made Sin for us §. 59    

L.  

Lips of Righteousness God's delight §. 17  
Land settled on Infants that know it not; so our Inheritance before Faith. Pemble §. 32  
Mr. Laurence took up the Rebuker at Pinner's-Hall §. 33  
To work from Life, not for Life, is called Heresy §. 36  
Love in God perpetually the same, Pemble §. 39  
The Life of Saints, how 'tis the eternal Life of God §. 43  
Of Legal Union to Christ before Faith §. 47  
A Law that allows Sin Mr. Williams is for §. 50  
Luther of Christ, a Curse, a sinner with our sinful Person §. 54  
Luther on the Change of Persons §. 75  
— of Christ bearing Wrath §. 102  
Little sins need Christ's Blood as great. §. 78    

M.  

Meek and lowly, learn of me §. 2  
They Mince Christ made sin for us §. 5  
Man made Righteous, Mr. Williams' Book §. 11  
Dr. Manton, Christ first apprehends us §. 26  
'Tis Monstrous to live without Union to Christ §. 26  
Manifestation of Pardon prayed for §. 35  
Mr. Mather of Christ's Incarnation §. 45  
Mess of Milk kicked down, of Christ's satisfaction §. 51  
Christ the Murderer falsely taxed §. 53  
The Monstrous Change taxed on the Doctor §. 55  
Michael durst not rail as the Rebuker §. 68  
The Moot point, if Socinians or Antinomians be worse §. 77  
Making Millions to Damn them denied §. 80  
Melius inquirendum of the Rebuker §. 96  
Meliora speramus of Mr. A— §. 108  
Christ called a Mask profanely by §. 89  
Misprision of Treason against Christ, Mr. William's §. 110  
The Mildness of Christ when they slept §. 113  
A Marriage and no Marriage, trumped up by A— §. 113  
The Mockers Judgement, and Ishmael s Mocking §. 17, 68, 114  
Money to be told after one's Father §. 125  
Maas in Hebrew, is reprobated, abhorred §. 127    

N.  

New Obedience not the substance of the Gospel §. 3  
Not New or Novel, that Christ took our Persons §. 9  
Neonomians for Faith procuring Pardon §. 35  
Neonomian for a Law that allows sin §. 50  
A Negative not an Affirmative §. 113  
'Tis not for Nothing to lose Peace for Truth §. 120  
How God Needs sin, Antisozzo §. 136  
Nothing but sinful in us, the Homilies §. 146, 147    

O.  

Objections against Mr. Williams not accounted for §. 15  
The Ox and Ass of Christ, and our Works, forbidden §. 26  
Old Wine of Election better than New §. 49  
Obedience imperfect what it doth §. 49  
Obedience not sinless Mr. Williams is for §. 50  
Orthodoxy in the Apostle, is Heterodoxy in the Doctor §. 76  
We Obeyed in Christ, saith Antisozzo §. 107  
Christ Odious to God, falsely charged §. 126    

P.  

Poor Presbyterian he calls himself §. 3  
Christ in our Place, jeered by the Rebuker §. 4  
The Punishment born by Christ only, is invented §. 5, 8  
Pinners-Hall left by three, and why §. 14  
Pardon before Faith, saith Dr. Twiss §. 24  
Pemble of Grace and Faith §. 29  
Pemble, that Christ made not God placable §. 32  
Prayer for Manifestation only of Pardon is denied §. 35  
Perpetual God's Love is, Pemble §. 39  
Plate of Gold of High Priests for Pardon §. 40  
Christ and Believers one Person §. 46  
Paul the Apostle, why not called an Antinomian §. 53  
— his differing with Barnabas §. 97  
Our Person taken by Christ, Mr. Calvin §. 54  
Mr. Pen's facile Representation, Christ's Sufferings were §. 61  
How we take Christ's Person §. 66  
Paul called Apocryphal, how by the Rebuker §. 75  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Philosophers to deny a Change §. 75  
I forgave in the Person of Christ §. 75  
A Pins head stolen, damning in itself §. 78  
The Potter's power over the Clay §. 80  
A Pother about Conditionality §. 81  
Proper satisfaction denied by the Rebuker §. 82  
The Parliament against jesting with Christ, as the Rebuker §. 89  
Paulting Mr. Williams in the Pillery with rotten Eggs §. 98  
Paper to be saved, saith the Rebuker, to avoid the great point §. 99  
Pelagius to be writ against by all §. 1 & 110  
Peace not to be purchased with loss of Truth §. 120  
When Perished we are saved without our Works, Homilies §. 147  
Poison spit at the Sun don't defile it §. 154  
The Perfections of God illustrated by Allegory §. 157  
Poison on Gold not defile it §. 158  
Christ by himself purged our sins §. 158    

Q.  

Quickened by Christ when dead §. 26  
Christ a Quickening Spirit §. 26    

R.  

The Righteousness of Christ only to be mentioned §. 16, 194  
Our Representative being in Christ from Eternity, Clark §. 18  
Christ Reputed a Criminnl, he calls Heresy §. 24  
Reconciliation before Faith, Pemble §. 29  
The Rebuker saying Christ's death made God placable §. 33  
We are Righteous as Christ, How §. 44, 57, 62  
Raised in Christ shows he sustained us §. 72  
Redintegration of the Rebuker to Mr. Williams, occasioned his Rebuke against Dr. Crisp §. 76  
A Rigid satisfaction denied by Mr. A— §. 82  
Christ a Ransom paid all §. 82  
So owned in the Homilies §. 85 & 150  
Rebuke before all, some that offend openly §. 118    

S.  

Sarcasms on Mr. Job, by Mr. A— §. 2  
Substance of the Gospel, that Christ came, etc. §. 3 & 6  
Socinus, as the Rebuker saith, Christ destitute of Righteousness, if, etc. §. 4  
Sin Christ was made for us all, over and §. 4  
Subscribing the Articles not sufficient §. 16  
Socinianism called but an Error by Mr. A— §. 19  
Sinless Sin Christ bare, if he bore not the Fault §. 23  
Our Sins owned by Christ to be his, Psal. 40. §. 24  
The Spirit in us before Faith, no Heresy §. 26  
Sin cast into the Sea, to show God sees it not §. 37  
Sin lessens not God's Love to Believers, Pemble §. 39  
All not of Faith is Sin §. 40  
Sinning Obedience allowed by God's Law, William's §. 50 & 78  
Sin the smallest is Damning, the Assembly §. 50  
Satisfaction owned by Williams, and soon spoiled §. 51  
Very Sin not laid on Christ, William's §. 51 & 61  
How Christ as Sinful as we §. 58  
Sin Glareing, what Terror it makes §. 61  
Christ made our Sinfulness, if made our Sin §. 63  
Christ as Surety sustains us, a Surety slighted §. 65, 82  
The Spirit himself in us, denied by the Rebuker §. 72  
Synods never dreamt of this Change, Mr. A— §. 72  
Stone in New England against Neonomians §. 73  
Scampering over Fathers, Councils, etc. by the Rebuker §. 75  
Christ could not, cannot Sin §. 77  
Socinians and Neonomians compared in allowing Sin §. 78  
Sins little passed by of Course, they say §. 78  
Stealing a Pins head is Sin and Damning §. 78  
Scotch Church saith, Christ paid thy Debt §. 85  
We Sustained in Christ, by doing the Law in him, Homilies §. 86  
A Stage-player Christ is, if he bore us, saith the Rebukes §. 89  
We are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Co-body with Christ §. 90  
A strange Strain of the Rebuker's Wrath §. 93  
Servant of the Lord not to strive as Rebuker §. 97  
Saphiras Equivocation exceeded by Rebuker §. 117  
Selling Innocency and Peace for nothing, Rebuker §. 120  
Satisfaction once owned by Antisozzo §. 125  
Scriptures to prove Christ bore our Sin §. 142  
Salvation by Grace, a Spur to Sanctity §. 153  
The Sun not defiled by Poison spit at it, so our Sin did not defile Christ §. 154  
The Serpent a Type of Christ §. 155  
The Sacrifices called Sin, as Christ was §. 156    

T.  

Dr. Twiss Forgiveness before Faith at Christ's death §. 25  
Turn, why die, called the Triumph of the Law §. 42  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, how the Rebuker so §. 48 & 55  
God a Tyrant, say Arminians. §. 80  
Tobias Canonical with a Crown §. 91  
— he had not a barking Dog §. 91  
Translation of Sin to Christ, Calvin §. 102  
Tears over Kratiste about the Marriage §. 113  
The Towering Spirit of the Rebuker §. 118  
Truth to be sought as well as Peace §. 120    

U.  

unintelligible to the Rebuker, for Christ to take our Persons §. 8  
Union before Faith called an Heresy §. 26  
The  Justified §. 27  
unconverted Justified at Christ's death, Pemble §. 30  
Very Sins not laid on Christ, saith Mr. William's §. 51 & 61  
A Vizor Christ wears, if bear us, Rebuker §. 89  
The Unpardonable Sin against Dr. Crisp, an Abuse §. 93  
The Untruth of the Rebuker, to say, no more subscribed to §. 115    

W.  

Wisdom Justified of her Children. §. 2  
Mr. Williams for Non-elect to be saved §. 33  
— for a Law that admits Sin §. 50  
— denies our very Sins on Christ §. 51  
— denies and undenies a Change §. 139  
Works before Faith, Sin §. 40  
Our best Works defiled, the Assembly §. 41  
A Wooden God only, for a Wooden Law to Sin §. 50  
Vessels of Wrath §. 80  
The Wish of the Rebuker answered §. 85  
Works necessary, saith Dr. Crisp §. 94  
Whaffling Whelps the Rebuker calls his Opposers §. 95  
Good Works our Foundation for Salvation, Mr. William's §. 98  
Waving the Doctrine of Justification by the Rebuker §. 99  
Wrath of God borne by Christ §. 102    
FINIS.